Go Back

109 E 40th Ave rezoning application

Share 109 E 40th Ave rezoning application on Facebook Share 109 E 40th Ave rezoning application on Twitter Share 109 E 40th Ave rezoning application on Linkedin Email 109 E 40th Ave rezoning application link

This application was approved by Council at Public Hearing on June 29, 2023.


The City of Vancouver has received an application to rezone 109 E 40th Avenue, including the adjacent vacant lots to the east, from RS-1 (Residential) District to RR-3A (Residential Rental) District

The RR-3A district allows for:

  • A 4-storey mixed-use building where all units are secured as market rental;
  • Cultural, recreational, institutional, and commercial uses at grade; and
  • A floor space ratio (FSR) up to 2.5

The application is being considered under the Secured Rental Policy (Section 2.4 Rezonings in Low-Density Transition Areas).

If approved, this site's zoning will change to RR-3A. Any development on the site would have to conform to these zoning regulations and design guidelines. This approach differs from a site-specific Comprehensive Development (CD) District rezoning. It allows for a simplified rezoning process and provides greater clarity and consistency on the types of new secured rental buildings that may be built in eligible low-density areas.

The specific form of development (building design) will be reviewed through a future Development Permit process. Application drawings will be available for viewing and comment at that time.


Rezoning Policy Background

On December 14, 2021, Council approved amendments to the Secured Rental Policy (SRP) to allow simplified rezonings in low-density areas near shopping, public transportation and other amenities. This policy is intended to help:

  • Increase housing choice for renter households
  • Streamline processes and clarifying policy requirements'/
  • Diversify rental housing options
  • Respond to the City’s Climate Emergency
  • Help enhance local shopping areas
  • Improving livability of rental housing

Learn more about:


The City of Vancouver has received an application to rezone 109 E 40th Avenue, including the adjacent vacant lots to the east, from RS-1 (Residential) District to RR-3A (Residential Rental) District

The RR-3A district allows for:

  • A 4-storey mixed-use building where all units are secured as market rental;
  • Cultural, recreational, institutional, and commercial uses at grade; and
  • A floor space ratio (FSR) up to 2.5

The application is being considered under the Secured Rental Policy (Section 2.4 Rezonings in Low-Density Transition Areas).

If approved, this site's zoning will change to RR-3A. Any development on the site would have to conform to these zoning regulations and design guidelines. This approach differs from a site-specific Comprehensive Development (CD) District rezoning. It allows for a simplified rezoning process and provides greater clarity and consistency on the types of new secured rental buildings that may be built in eligible low-density areas.

The specific form of development (building design) will be reviewed through a future Development Permit process. Application drawings will be available for viewing and comment at that time.


Rezoning Policy Background

On December 14, 2021, Council approved amendments to the Secured Rental Policy (SRP) to allow simplified rezonings in low-density areas near shopping, public transportation and other amenities. This policy is intended to help:

  • Increase housing choice for renter households
  • Streamline processes and clarifying policy requirements'/
  • Diversify rental housing options
  • Respond to the City’s Climate Emergency
  • Help enhance local shopping areas
  • Improving livability of rental housing

Learn more about:

This application was approved by Council at Public Hearing on June 29, 2023.

The opportunity to ask questions through the Q&A is available from November 21 to December 11, 2022. 

We post all questions as-is and aim to respond within two business days. Some questions may require coordination with internal departments and additional time may be needed to post a response.

Please note that the comment form will remain open after the virtual open house time period. The Rezoning Planner can also be contacted directly for any further feedback or questions.

  • Share The original proposal was for 2 separate buildings - a church building and a rental building. Is this still possible under this proposed rezoning? on Facebook Share The original proposal was for 2 separate buildings - a church building and a rental building. Is this still possible under this proposed rezoning? on Twitter Share The original proposal was for 2 separate buildings - a church building and a rental building. Is this still possible under this proposed rezoning? on Linkedin Email The original proposal was for 2 separate buildings - a church building and a rental building. Is this still possible under this proposed rezoning? link

    The original proposal was for 2 separate buildings - a church building and a rental building. Is this still possible under this proposed rezoning?

    NAN asked about 2 years ago

    The Rezoning Application is being considered under the Secured Rental Policy which allows for rezoning to an existing zoning district at this location.

    The Rezoning Application proposes to rezone the site from a RS-1 (Residential) District to a RR-3A (Residential Rental) District, which can be referred to as a rezoning to an existing zoning district.

    If approved, any development on the site would be required to comply with the Zoning and Development By-law RR-3A District Schedule and Residential Rental Districts Schedules Design Guidelines.

    No specific form of development (building design) has been submitted for this zoning district change, this approach differs from a site-specific Comprehensive Development (CD) District rezoning.

    Rezoning to an existing zoning district, or a "zoning district change," requires fewer submission requirements than rezoning to a CD-1, more information on rezoning to an existing zoning district can be found here: Apply for a zoning district change | City of Vancouver

    If approved, any development on the site would be required to comply with the Zoning and Development By-law RR-3A District Schedule and Residential Rental Districts Schedules Design Guidelines, and the specific form of development (building design) would be reviewed through a future Development Permit Application process with application drawings available for viewing and commenting.

  • Share Would the church have strata bylaws in-place to screen, manage and control tenant occupants (commercial and residential) in the new building? on Facebook Share Would the church have strata bylaws in-place to screen, manage and control tenant occupants (commercial and residential) in the new building? on Twitter Share Would the church have strata bylaws in-place to screen, manage and control tenant occupants (commercial and residential) in the new building? on Linkedin Email Would the church have strata bylaws in-place to screen, manage and control tenant occupants (commercial and residential) in the new building? link

    Would the church have strata bylaws in-place to screen, manage and control tenant occupants (commercial and residential) in the new building?

    Denny asked about 2 years ago

    If approved, any development on the site would be required to comply with the Zoning and Development By-law RR-3A District Schedule and Residential Rental Districts Schedules Design Guidelines.

    The residential portion of the building would be secured as rental tenure per the RR-3A District Schedule and further by a Housing Agreement By-law and restrictive covenant registered on the title of the property, that would prevent stratification or separate sales of the residential units. The property owner would be responsible for tenanting the residential units in accordance with the Residential Tenancy Act.

    In addition, It would be up to the property owner whether they stratify and sell the commercial or non-residential components of the building or retain ownership and lease them out. 

  • Share Why is the site being considered for RR3A? It should be rezoned maximum RR2A. Being a church is very different from other commercial uses and the 3A zoning increases the FSR too much. The building would become bigger than anyone, even those supporting the SRP process, would have envisioned for a single family neighborhood. A FSR of 1.75 to 2 should be the maximum, not 2.5. Yes, this site technically fits the definition, but using a church as essentially a loophole to increase the FSR is not what should be allowed. on Facebook Share Why is the site being considered for RR3A? It should be rezoned maximum RR2A. Being a church is very different from other commercial uses and the 3A zoning increases the FSR too much. The building would become bigger than anyone, even those supporting the SRP process, would have envisioned for a single family neighborhood. A FSR of 1.75 to 2 should be the maximum, not 2.5. Yes, this site technically fits the definition, but using a church as essentially a loophole to increase the FSR is not what should be allowed. on Twitter Share Why is the site being considered for RR3A? It should be rezoned maximum RR2A. Being a church is very different from other commercial uses and the 3A zoning increases the FSR too much. The building would become bigger than anyone, even those supporting the SRP process, would have envisioned for a single family neighborhood. A FSR of 1.75 to 2 should be the maximum, not 2.5. Yes, this site technically fits the definition, but using a church as essentially a loophole to increase the FSR is not what should be allowed. on Linkedin Email Why is the site being considered for RR3A? It should be rezoned maximum RR2A. Being a church is very different from other commercial uses and the 3A zoning increases the FSR too much. The building would become bigger than anyone, even those supporting the SRP process, would have envisioned for a single family neighborhood. A FSR of 1.75 to 2 should be the maximum, not 2.5. Yes, this site technically fits the definition, but using a church as essentially a loophole to increase the FSR is not what should be allowed. link

    Why is the site being considered for RR3A? It should be rezoned maximum RR2A. Being a church is very different from other commercial uses and the 3A zoning increases the FSR too much. The building would become bigger than anyone, even those supporting the SRP process, would have envisioned for a single family neighborhood. A FSR of 1.75 to 2 should be the maximum, not 2.5. Yes, this site technically fits the definition, but using a church as essentially a loophole to increase the FSR is not what should be allowed.

    BW1 asked about 2 years ago

    As per the Secured Rental Policy, the subject site is located on an off-arterial street and contains an existing non-residential use. The Secured Rental Policy Table 2 allows for the consideration of the RR-3A District Schedule for off-arterial sites containing an existing non-residential use. 


    Thank you for your comment. Staff will include a summary of comments provided from the public in a Council report if the project proceeds for Council consideration.

  • Share It looks like the rezoning will include 7 lots but leave the 2 lots closest to the arterial not developed. How does this make sense in terms of future developments and density higher on/near arterials? According to city staff during a rental plan meeting, apartments will not be allowed due to size of the remaining lots and anything less than apartment density is not financially feasible for developers to build rentals. on Facebook Share It looks like the rezoning will include 7 lots but leave the 2 lots closest to the arterial not developed. How does this make sense in terms of future developments and density higher on/near arterials? According to city staff during a rental plan meeting, apartments will not be allowed due to size of the remaining lots and anything less than apartment density is not financially feasible for developers to build rentals. on Twitter Share It looks like the rezoning will include 7 lots but leave the 2 lots closest to the arterial not developed. How does this make sense in terms of future developments and density higher on/near arterials? According to city staff during a rental plan meeting, apartments will not be allowed due to size of the remaining lots and anything less than apartment density is not financially feasible for developers to build rentals. on Linkedin Email It looks like the rezoning will include 7 lots but leave the 2 lots closest to the arterial not developed. How does this make sense in terms of future developments and density higher on/near arterials? According to city staff during a rental plan meeting, apartments will not be allowed due to size of the remaining lots and anything less than apartment density is not financially feasible for developers to build rentals. link

    It looks like the rezoning will include 7 lots but leave the 2 lots closest to the arterial not developed. How does this make sense in terms of future developments and density higher on/near arterials? According to city staff during a rental plan meeting, apartments will not be allowed due to size of the remaining lots and anything less than apartment density is not financially feasible for developers to build rentals.

    Kaillie asked about 2 years ago

    Your question has already been asked. Here's a copy of the earlier response: I believe you are referring to the two adjacent lots to the east: 165 East 40th Avenue and 177 East 40th Avenue, whose combined frontage is approximately 68 feet (21 meters) and combined site area is approximately 7,955 square feet (739 square metres). As per the Secured Rental Policy in Low-density Transition Areas Rezoning Guide and the Residential Rental Districts Schedules Design Guidelines, a site fronting a local street containing a minimum frontage of 66 feet (20 metres) may be eligible to apply to rezone under the Secured Rental Policy, to the RR-1 or RR-2A District Schedule which would enable a 3-storey townhouse or 4-storey apartment building. Individually, both lots could also apply to rezone to the RR-1 District Schedule to enable a fourplex.

  • Share Would the approval of a rezoning on this property influence or increase the likelihood of a rezoning for other nearby residential properties (for example, on Ontario Street)? on Facebook Share Would the approval of a rezoning on this property influence or increase the likelihood of a rezoning for other nearby residential properties (for example, on Ontario Street)? on Twitter Share Would the approval of a rezoning on this property influence or increase the likelihood of a rezoning for other nearby residential properties (for example, on Ontario Street)? on Linkedin Email Would the approval of a rezoning on this property influence or increase the likelihood of a rezoning for other nearby residential properties (for example, on Ontario Street)? link

    Would the approval of a rezoning on this property influence or increase the likelihood of a rezoning for other nearby residential properties (for example, on Ontario Street)?

    KBergner asked about 2 years ago

    Property owners can apply to rezone sites according to Council-approved rezoning policies. Area specific rezoning policies enable change, setting out parameters within which the change can be considered. Most allow for change within a defined geographical area, often as a result of Council’s approval of an area-specific plan, such as the Cambie Corridor Plan. A few rezoning policies, such as the Secured Rental Policy, allow for change across the city. 

  • Share with the rezoning extending to <99ft from the lane behind main street, this would prevent eventual redevelopment of the lots up to the lane. According to the SRP, 4 story rental apartments can only be built on lots greater than 99ft frontage. Furthermore, as directly stated by city planners during the SRP discussion process, anything less than a 4 story apartment would be financially unfeasible for developers to purchase and develop. As the result, the block would remain incongruent, with development potential directly limited by the rezoning of this entire area. In essence, rezoning as per the diagram would result in "orphaned" lots, which is a policy the city has always tried to avoid. Should this be directly address to prevent this from happening to this block? on Facebook Share with the rezoning extending to <99ft from the lane behind main street, this would prevent eventual redevelopment of the lots up to the lane. According to the SRP, 4 story rental apartments can only be built on lots greater than 99ft frontage. Furthermore, as directly stated by city planners during the SRP discussion process, anything less than a 4 story apartment would be financially unfeasible for developers to purchase and develop. As the result, the block would remain incongruent, with development potential directly limited by the rezoning of this entire area. In essence, rezoning as per the diagram would result in "orphaned" lots, which is a policy the city has always tried to avoid. Should this be directly address to prevent this from happening to this block? on Twitter Share with the rezoning extending to <99ft from the lane behind main street, this would prevent eventual redevelopment of the lots up to the lane. According to the SRP, 4 story rental apartments can only be built on lots greater than 99ft frontage. Furthermore, as directly stated by city planners during the SRP discussion process, anything less than a 4 story apartment would be financially unfeasible for developers to purchase and develop. As the result, the block would remain incongruent, with development potential directly limited by the rezoning of this entire area. In essence, rezoning as per the diagram would result in "orphaned" lots, which is a policy the city has always tried to avoid. Should this be directly address to prevent this from happening to this block? on Linkedin Email with the rezoning extending to <99ft from the lane behind main street, this would prevent eventual redevelopment of the lots up to the lane. According to the SRP, 4 story rental apartments can only be built on lots greater than 99ft frontage. Furthermore, as directly stated by city planners during the SRP discussion process, anything less than a 4 story apartment would be financially unfeasible for developers to purchase and develop. As the result, the block would remain incongruent, with development potential directly limited by the rezoning of this entire area. In essence, rezoning as per the diagram would result in "orphaned" lots, which is a policy the city has always tried to avoid. Should this be directly address to prevent this from happening to this block? link

    with the rezoning extending to <99ft from the lane behind main street, this would prevent eventual redevelopment of the lots up to the lane. According to the SRP, 4 story rental apartments can only be built on lots greater than 99ft frontage. Furthermore, as directly stated by city planners during the SRP discussion process, anything less than a 4 story apartment would be financially unfeasible for developers to purchase and develop. As the result, the block would remain incongruent, with development potential directly limited by the rezoning of this entire area. In essence, rezoning as per the diagram would result in "orphaned" lots, which is a policy the city has always tried to avoid. Should this be directly address to prevent this from happening to this block?

    DavidT asked about 2 years ago

    I believe you are referring to the two adjacent lots to the east: 165 East 40th Avenue and 177 East 40th Avenue, whose combined frontage is approximately 68 feet (21 meters) and combined site area is approximately 7,955 square feet (739 square metres). As per the Secured Rental Policy in Low-density Transition Areas Rezoning Guide and the Residential Rental Districts Schedules Design Guidelines, a site fronting a local street containing a minimum frontage of 66 feet (20 metres) may be eligible to apply to rezone under the Secured Rental Policy, to the RR-1 or RR-2A District Schedule which would enable a 3-storey townhouse or 4-storey apartment building. Individually, both lots could also apply to rezone to the RR-1 District Schedule  to enable a fourplex

  • Share Looking at the eligibility map, it seems to me that the property in question is not in an area (dark blue on the map) that qualifies for the RR-3A zoning that is being requested. Am I wrong? on Facebook Share Looking at the eligibility map, it seems to me that the property in question is not in an area (dark blue on the map) that qualifies for the RR-3A zoning that is being requested. Am I wrong? on Twitter Share Looking at the eligibility map, it seems to me that the property in question is not in an area (dark blue on the map) that qualifies for the RR-3A zoning that is being requested. Am I wrong? on Linkedin Email Looking at the eligibility map, it seems to me that the property in question is not in an area (dark blue on the map) that qualifies for the RR-3A zoning that is being requested. Am I wrong? link

    Looking at the eligibility map, it seems to me that the property in question is not in an area (dark blue on the map) that qualifies for the RR-3A zoning that is being requested. Am I wrong?

    Scott asked about 2 years ago

    As per the Secured Rental Policy, the subject site is located on an off-arterial street (light blue on the eligibility map) and contains an existing non-residential use. The Secured Rental Policy Table 2 allows for the consideration of the RR-3A District Schedule for off-arterial sites containing an existing non-residential use. 

    Please also refer to the block eligibility diagrams on page three of the Secured Rental Policy in Low-density Transition Areas Rezoning Guide, the dark blue and light blue areas are a general indication of block depth, and the Secured Rental Policy applies to the entire block adjacent to the arterials.

  • Share 1) How many units are now being considered at 109 e 40th? 2) Is there a minimum of 1-2 parking spots per unit? 3) Will there be any retail on the main level? 4) What traffic calming measures will be implemented, especially at Quebec and 40th? 5) What will this development give back to the neighborhood? 6) A residential ownership bldg is preferred. on Facebook Share 1) How many units are now being considered at 109 e 40th? 2) Is there a minimum of 1-2 parking spots per unit? 3) Will there be any retail on the main level? 4) What traffic calming measures will be implemented, especially at Quebec and 40th? 5) What will this development give back to the neighborhood? 6) A residential ownership bldg is preferred. on Twitter Share 1) How many units are now being considered at 109 e 40th? 2) Is there a minimum of 1-2 parking spots per unit? 3) Will there be any retail on the main level? 4) What traffic calming measures will be implemented, especially at Quebec and 40th? 5) What will this development give back to the neighborhood? 6) A residential ownership bldg is preferred. on Linkedin Email 1) How many units are now being considered at 109 e 40th? 2) Is there a minimum of 1-2 parking spots per unit? 3) Will there be any retail on the main level? 4) What traffic calming measures will be implemented, especially at Quebec and 40th? 5) What will this development give back to the neighborhood? 6) A residential ownership bldg is preferred. link

    1) How many units are now being considered at 109 e 40th? 2) Is there a minimum of 1-2 parking spots per unit? 3) Will there be any retail on the main level? 4) What traffic calming measures will be implemented, especially at Quebec and 40th? 5) What will this development give back to the neighborhood? 6) A residential ownership bldg is preferred.

    CherylB asked about 2 years ago

    The exact number of units for this particular site will depend on the building form (i.e. double-loaded corridor, single-loaded corridor, courtyard design, etc.) and will reviewed at the time of development permit application when proposal drawings are submitted. Please refer to the Residential Rental Design Guidelines for more information.

    Parking, loading and bicycle spaces must be provided in accordance to the provisions of the Vancouver Parking By-law and will be reviewed at the time of development permit application when proposal drawings are submitted. The parking by-law, includes provisions for vehicle parking for both residents and visitors, and may also include requirements for passenger loading on-site.  


    The proposed RR-3A zoning allows for conditional approval uses, please refer to the RR-3A District Schedule for more information. Retail use on the ground floor may be proposed as a conditional approval use, the proposed uses for this site will be reviewed at the time of development permit application when proposal drawings are submitted.


    As part of the rezoning process, Engineering staff include a review of the application with respect to transportation impacts and, if identified, may include development conditions for off-site requirements to improve transportation operations and safety for pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists adjacent to the site.

     

    The Secured Rental Policy is part of the larger Housing Vancouver Strategy which identified the need for an additional 72,000 housing units over 10 years, of which 20,000 units are new purpose-built rental housing. Access to amenities was considered as part of the policy work on the Secured Rental Policy, and broadly the locational criteria intend to focus opportunities for new rental housing in areas served by existing amenities, shops and services as well as public transit that enables residents to access amenities elsewhere in the city (and region). As part of the Vancouver Plan, the City is taking a deeper look at how amenities are funded and delivered to meet the needs of a growing population, where additional amenities are needed most and where significant growth is occurring.