The Bay Parkade Redevelopment | 315, 271, 239m | 80, 69, 68fl | Proposed

[jollyburger]

They got rid of that pavilion on the Seymour/West Georgia corner and replaced it with a "stage"

[Feathered Friend]

I had wondered whether this was to comply with the ODP, and avoid a public hearing, but even after the 12 floor reduction this doesn't seem to comply with the site's Mixed-Use-Mid-Rise designation.

Ironically, the super tall complies with the ODP, and wouldn't have to undergo a hearing, if not for being packaged with the Abbott application.

https://council.vancouver.ca/20260331/documents/r1.pdf

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by Feathered Friend

I had wondered whether this was to comply with the ODP, and avoid a public hearing, but even after the 12 floor reduction this doesn't seem to comply with the site's Mixed-Use-Mid-Rise designation.

Ironically, the super tall complies with the ODP, and wouldn't have to undergo a hearing, if not for being packaged with the Abbott application.

https://council.vancouver.ca/20260331/documents/r1.pdf

Very interesting.

Am I missing something but isn't their lot designated Mixed-Use High Rise 1 on the ODP GLU map which allows up to 26 stories?



https://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/vancouver-official-development-plan.aspx

[Feathered Friend]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

Very interesting.

Am I missing something but isn't their lot designated Mixed-Use High Rise 1 on the ODP GLU map which allows up to 26 stories?



https://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/vancouver-official-development-plan.aspx

To my eyes the shade of red for the NE corner of E Hastings and Abbott is Mixed-Use-Mid-Rise, Mixed-Use-High-Rise 1 is Woodwards, and Mixed-Use-High-Rise 2 is the International Village.

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by Feathered Friend

To my eyes the shade of red for the NE corner of E Hastings and Abbott is Mixed-Use-Mid-Rise, Mixed-Use-High-Rise 1 is Woodwards, and Mixed-Use-High-Rise 2 is the International Village.

Sorry confused it with the other empty lot facing Pender. You're correct

[Feathered Friend]

https://council.vancouver.ca/20260714/documents/rr3.pdf


It came down to the wire, but with a motion to schedule a public hearing for these items going to council on Tuesday, we'll get a decision on Vancouver's first super tall, just before the summer / election break starts at the end of the month.

Based on the correspondence submitted during the Shape Your City process, it shouldn't face much trouble securing approval either, as the social housing tower in Gastown was the primary point of concern.

[officedweller]

Daily Hive story:

Proposal to build Western Canada's tallest tower, featuring a free public observation deck for Vancouver residents, heads to City Council
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/holborn-...wer-vancouver-city-council-consideration

Could form a nice cluster if the Hudson's Bay site and the Four Seasons site also go very tall (my highlights):


https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/holborn-...wer-vancouver-city-council-consideration

[griswold]

Disappointing to see half the public replies are opposed to this and the overwhelming majority are opposed to the social housing.

[jollyburger]

But it's 58 people so what does it even mean. They should be happy it's Holborn and they know it will never get built lol

 Overconcentration of social housing: Responses argue the DTES already has a large concentration of social housing and that adding more is inappropriate.
 Building height: Comments object to the tower’s extreme height and density as being out of scale with the surrounding neighbourhood.
 Livability: Respondents express concern that the project will worsen crime and public safety issues already present in the area.
 Neighbourhood character: Many highlight that the proposal conflicts with Gastown’s historic character.
 Lack of mixed-income / balanced development: Concerns that 100% social housing lacks the balance of mixed-income communities and undermines neighbourhood stability.
Developer distrust: Comments critique the developer claiming they are shifting social housing requirements from other sites to maximize profit and avoid obligations elsewhere.
 Economic impacts: Comments have concerns about harm to local businesses, tourism, and property values due to increased concentration of social housing.
 Alternative approaches: Comments suggest distributed housing, mixed-use projects, or lower-rise developments as better solutions.
 Lack of clarity and transparency: Respondents highlight insufficient information about what “social housing” entails, including tenant profiles and supports.
 Operational concerns: There are repeated questions about security, maintenance, staffing, and long-term management of the building.
 Infrastructure: Fear that infrastructure such as police, healthcare, and local services are already stressed and won’t be able to handle an increase in population.
 Construction impacts: Fear that noise and impacts on businesses from construction will negatively impact the neighbourhood.

https://council.vancouver.ca/20260714/documents/rr3.pdf

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

But it's 58 people so what does it even mean. They should be happy it's Holborn and they know it will never get built lol

I wonder how their sales at Little Mountain are doing? With their usual impeccable timing they timed that showroom opening perfectly to coincide with a huge condo downturn.

[GenWhy?]

Apparently Unite 40 (the hotel union group that is making its rounds in political activism) delivered on July 15 a 8,000 signature petition to cancel the development.

They call it " a two-week encampment to deliver a petition signed by thousands of local residents urging Council to postpone approval of the massive Holborn condo and hotel towers until after the October election and prioritize affordable housing instead."

https://www.uniteherelocal40.org/2026/07/media-advisory-day-2-of-city-hall-encampment/

Not sure what harassing city staff will accomplish but they are well funded so who knows.

[Bcasey25raptor]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

Apparently Unite 40 (the hotel union group that is making its rounds in political activism) delivered on July 15 a 8,000 signature petition to cancel the development.

They call it " a two-week encampment to deliver a petition signed by thousands of local residents urging Council to postpone approval of the massive Holborn condo and hotel towers until after the October election and prioritize affordable housing instead."

https://www.uniteherelocal40.org/2026/07/media-advisory-day-2-of-city-hall-encampment/

Not sure what harassing city staff will accomplish but they are well funded so who knows.

They tried to get me to sign that at robson square last month. I told them I supported the project and explained why.

The group is too black or white, they want social housing or no housing

[jollyburger]

Basically a rehash of the no new housing until every homeless person in Vancouver got into proper housing.

[s211]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

Apparently Unite 40 (the hotel union group that is making its rounds in political activism) delivered on July 15 a 8,000 signature petition to cancel the development.

They call it " a two-week encampment to deliver a petition signed by thousands of local residents urging Council to postpone approval of the massive Holborn condo and hotel towers until after the October election and prioritize affordable housing instead."

https://www.uniteherelocal40.org/2026/07/media-advisory-day-2-of-city-hall-encampment/

Not sure what harassing city staff will accomplish but they are well funded so who knows.

Another union hijacked by activists unassociated with the core labourers. Anybody surprised? Not I.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by s211

Another union hijacked by activists unassociated with the core labourers. Anybody surprised? Not I.

I don't believe this is the case. I actually do think the union is trying to do what is best for its members, society be damned. If hotel supply is artificially constrained and room rates go up, profits for the remaining hotels go up which is money the hotel union can go after for its members.

Unions are still generally pretty good at doing what's best for their members, but what's best isn't necessarily good for anyone else.

[Glow Fun City]

Originally Posted by chowhou

I don't believe this is the case. I actually do think the union is trying to do what is best for its members, society be damned. If hotel supply is artificially constrained and room rates go up, profits for the remaining hotels go up which is money the hotel union can go after for its members.

Unions are still generally pretty good at doing what's best for their members, but what's best isn't necessarily good for anyone else.

What really helps a union's bargaining ability is union density within their industry (percentage of workers who are union). Letting the hotels get built and then organizing them would yield better long term results for all of their members.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by Glow Fun City

What really helps a union's bargaining ability is union density within their industry (percentage of workers who are union). Letting the hotels get built and then organizing them would yield better long term results for all of their members.

Any new hotel built is potentially a hotel with non-union employees. If the hotel industry is already nearly 100% union, how does supporting new hotels increase the percentage of workers in a union?

The unions are in a great place in BC. There is no incentive for them to want the industry to grow. If the industry grows like I said, room revenue will decrease and their bargaining power will go down. Even if supply remains constrained and demand for hotel jobs goes up, they're union and hiring scabs is illegal so even if they go on strike they can't lose their jobs. There's no losing if they do what they can to block development of the hotel industry.

[privatejet]

Unfortunately agree

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

Basically a rehash of the no new housing until every homeless person in Vancouver got into proper housing.

Much ado about nothing anyway, given Holborn’s track record.

[Glow Fun City]

Originally Posted by chowhou

Any new hotel built is potentially a hotel with non-union employees. If the hotel industry is already nearly 100% union, how does supporting new hotels increase the percentage of workers in a union?

But it isn't… accommodation and food service workers in BC are only 5% union (as of 2021), compared with a private sector average of 14%:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/private-sector-unions-bc-1.6555734