Go Back

396 E 2nd Ave rezoning application

Share 396 E 2nd Ave rezoning application on Facebook Share 396 E 2nd Ave rezoning application on Twitter Share 396 E 2nd Ave rezoning application on Linkedin Email 396 E 2nd Ave rezoning application link

The City of Vancouver has received an application to rezone the subject site from RM-4 (Residential) District to CD-1 (Comprehensive Development) District. The proposal is to allow for the development of a 22-storey residential rental building with a 6-storey podium and includes:

  • 273 units with 20% of the floor area for below-market units;
  • A floor space ratio (FSR) of 6.5; and
  • A building height of 65.2 m (214 ft.) with additional height for rooftop amenity space.

This application is being considered under the Broadway Plan.

Application drawings and statistics are posted as-submitted to the City. Following staff review, the final project statistics are documented within the referral report.

The City of Vancouver has received an application to rezone the subject site from RM-4 (Residential) District to CD-1 (Comprehensive Development) District. The proposal is to allow for the development of a 22-storey residential rental building with a 6-storey podium and includes:

  • 273 units with 20% of the floor area for below-market units;
  • A floor space ratio (FSR) of 6.5; and
  • A building height of 65.2 m (214 ft.) with additional height for rooftop amenity space.

This application is being considered under the Broadway Plan.

Application drawings and statistics are posted as-submitted to the City. Following staff review, the final project statistics are documented within the referral report.

​The Q&A period has concluded. Thank you for participating.

The opportunity to ask questions through the Q&A is available from July 17 to July 30, 2024. 

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 Q&A period. The Rezoning Planner can also be contacted directly for any further feedback or questions.

  • Share What POPS have been provided for / are likely to be provided for in developments under consideration in the Broadway Plan area ? Broadway plan: “Key Directions … Provide meaningful public spaces on private property.” (p 394);  “Privately Owned Public Spaces (POPS) are encouraged …” (p 297);  And “Explore opportunities to secure new POPS as part of the development process …”  (p 402 — for more on POPS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privately_owned_public_space ).   on Facebook Share What POPS have been provided for / are likely to be provided for in developments under consideration in the Broadway Plan area ? Broadway plan: “Key Directions … Provide meaningful public spaces on private property.” (p 394);  “Privately Owned Public Spaces (POPS) are encouraged …” (p 297);  And “Explore opportunities to secure new POPS as part of the development process …”  (p 402 — for more on POPS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privately_owned_public_space ).   on Twitter Share What POPS have been provided for / are likely to be provided for in developments under consideration in the Broadway Plan area ? Broadway plan: “Key Directions … Provide meaningful public spaces on private property.” (p 394);  “Privately Owned Public Spaces (POPS) are encouraged …” (p 297);  And “Explore opportunities to secure new POPS as part of the development process …”  (p 402 — for more on POPS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privately_owned_public_space ).   on Linkedin Email What POPS have been provided for / are likely to be provided for in developments under consideration in the Broadway Plan area ? Broadway plan: “Key Directions … Provide meaningful public spaces on private property.” (p 394);  “Privately Owned Public Spaces (POPS) are encouraged …” (p 297);  And “Explore opportunities to secure new POPS as part of the development process …”  (p 402 — for more on POPS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privately_owned_public_space ).   link

    What POPS have been provided for / are likely to be provided for in developments under consideration in the Broadway Plan area ? Broadway plan: “Key Directions … Provide meaningful public spaces on private property.” (p 394);  “Privately Owned Public Spaces (POPS) are encouraged …” (p 297);  And “Explore opportunities to secure new POPS as part of the development process …”  (p 402 — for more on POPS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privately_owned_public_space ).  

    ?? asked 4 months ago

    The Broadway plan identifies opportunities to incorporate POPS along Broadway. Refer to Figure 15.6, page 405. The subject site is not one of the identified sites. The applicant is encouraged to incorporate POPS in their proposal but is not required to do so under the policy. 

    As the Broadway Plan is still early in its implementation, there have been very few rezoning applications approved under the Plan. There is one approved rezoning application (130 West Broadway) that provides a large elevated POPS at the second level. It should be noted that this project is an example of a larger public space and not all POPS delivered as part of the Plan will be of this size and scale.

    Additionally, as part of Broadway Plan implementation, staff are currently working on a detailed public realm plan for the area. The public realm plan will provide more directions for new public spaces in the plan area, including POPS. You can find more information on our website: https://www.shapeyourcity.ca/broadway-public-realm.

  • Share Two indoor amenity spaces, one atop the tower, the other above the podium are proposed. Is the square footage of these spaces included or excluded in calculations of the proposal’s FSR (currently as calculated 6.5) ? Are the heights of these amenity spaces included or excluded when references are made to the number of stories in the tower and podium ? (The tower is described as being 21 storeys above the alley.) on Facebook Share Two indoor amenity spaces, one atop the tower, the other above the podium are proposed. Is the square footage of these spaces included or excluded in calculations of the proposal’s FSR (currently as calculated 6.5) ? Are the heights of these amenity spaces included or excluded when references are made to the number of stories in the tower and podium ? (The tower is described as being 21 storeys above the alley.) on Twitter Share Two indoor amenity spaces, one atop the tower, the other above the podium are proposed. Is the square footage of these spaces included or excluded in calculations of the proposal’s FSR (currently as calculated 6.5) ? Are the heights of these amenity spaces included or excluded when references are made to the number of stories in the tower and podium ? (The tower is described as being 21 storeys above the alley.) on Linkedin Email Two indoor amenity spaces, one atop the tower, the other above the podium are proposed. Is the square footage of these spaces included or excluded in calculations of the proposal’s FSR (currently as calculated 6.5) ? Are the heights of these amenity spaces included or excluded when references are made to the number of stories in the tower and podium ? (The tower is described as being 21 storeys above the alley.) link

    Two indoor amenity spaces, one atop the tower, the other above the podium are proposed. Is the square footage of these spaces included or excluded in calculations of the proposal’s FSR (currently as calculated 6.5) ? Are the heights of these amenity spaces included or excluded when references are made to the number of stories in the tower and podium ? (The tower is described as being 21 storeys above the alley.)

    ?? asked 4 months ago

    The square footage of the residential amenity space is typically excluded from Floor Space Ratio (FSR) calculations. As per the Zoning and Development By-law, height is calculated to the building parapet. A few types of additional structures are permitted on the roof and are excluded from the technical building height calculation. Excludable roof structures include common residential amenity area (indoor and outdoor) and mechanical equipment. The number of storeys is the number of floors below the roof parapet and does not include excludable roof structures as noted above. Additionally, on a sloping site, storeys are typically determined from the street frontage and may differ from the number of storeys as viewed from the lane. In this application, the tower is described as a “22-storey rental building with additional height for an amenity level”. Note that FSR and height calculations are reviewed at the development permit (DP) stage. At that time, the proposal must demonstrate compliance. Detailed statistical summaries of the FSR exclusions, including common and private amenity space, are required in the proposal’s DP submission.

  • Share Will the existence of a private child oriented amenity open space at ground level north of the middle of the alley restrict / influence future development of the 2150 Brunswick site south of the alley since any significant development on that lot could shadow this open space ? Similarly will possible shadowing of that amenity space be a consideration in planning approval for any major development on lots directly south of 2150 Brunswick across 6th Avenue ? on Facebook Share Will the existence of a private child oriented amenity open space at ground level north of the middle of the alley restrict / influence future development of the 2150 Brunswick site south of the alley since any significant development on that lot could shadow this open space ? Similarly will possible shadowing of that amenity space be a consideration in planning approval for any major development on lots directly south of 2150 Brunswick across 6th Avenue ? on Twitter Share Will the existence of a private child oriented amenity open space at ground level north of the middle of the alley restrict / influence future development of the 2150 Brunswick site south of the alley since any significant development on that lot could shadow this open space ? Similarly will possible shadowing of that amenity space be a consideration in planning approval for any major development on lots directly south of 2150 Brunswick across 6th Avenue ? on Linkedin Email Will the existence of a private child oriented amenity open space at ground level north of the middle of the alley restrict / influence future development of the 2150 Brunswick site south of the alley since any significant development on that lot could shadow this open space ? Similarly will possible shadowing of that amenity space be a consideration in planning approval for any major development on lots directly south of 2150 Brunswick across 6th Avenue ? link

    Will the existence of a private child oriented amenity open space at ground level north of the middle of the alley restrict / influence future development of the 2150 Brunswick site south of the alley since any significant development on that lot could shadow this open space ? Similarly will possible shadowing of that amenity space be a consideration in planning approval for any major development on lots directly south of 2150 Brunswick across 6th Avenue ?

    ?? asked 4 months ago

    Solar access to a children’s play area on a private amenity space is not protected under city policy and will not limit future development at 2150 Brunswick St.

  • Share South of the 396 E 2nd southern boundary and north of the end of the alley that enters the 2100 block of Prince Edward is a City owned small right angle triangle of green space containing a round concrete planter, and sometimes a parked car, and possibly trees. Its east-west border is about 30’ long and north-south about 25’. (The triangle is not, seemingly, a necessary part of the alley or street right of way — the western end of the same alley beside Brunswick street has no similar triangle of City owned land.) Will the trees in that triangle or just adjacent to that City property and within or on the border of the 396 property be saved or destroyed if the development goes ahead as planned ? on Facebook Share South of the 396 E 2nd southern boundary and north of the end of the alley that enters the 2100 block of Prince Edward is a City owned small right angle triangle of green space containing a round concrete planter, and sometimes a parked car, and possibly trees. Its east-west border is about 30’ long and north-south about 25’. (The triangle is not, seemingly, a necessary part of the alley or street right of way — the western end of the same alley beside Brunswick street has no similar triangle of City owned land.) Will the trees in that triangle or just adjacent to that City property and within or on the border of the 396 property be saved or destroyed if the development goes ahead as planned ? on Twitter Share South of the 396 E 2nd southern boundary and north of the end of the alley that enters the 2100 block of Prince Edward is a City owned small right angle triangle of green space containing a round concrete planter, and sometimes a parked car, and possibly trees. Its east-west border is about 30’ long and north-south about 25’. (The triangle is not, seemingly, a necessary part of the alley or street right of way — the western end of the same alley beside Brunswick street has no similar triangle of City owned land.) Will the trees in that triangle or just adjacent to that City property and within or on the border of the 396 property be saved or destroyed if the development goes ahead as planned ? on Linkedin Email South of the 396 E 2nd southern boundary and north of the end of the alley that enters the 2100 block of Prince Edward is a City owned small right angle triangle of green space containing a round concrete planter, and sometimes a parked car, and possibly trees. Its east-west border is about 30’ long and north-south about 25’. (The triangle is not, seemingly, a necessary part of the alley or street right of way — the western end of the same alley beside Brunswick street has no similar triangle of City owned land.) Will the trees in that triangle or just adjacent to that City property and within or on the border of the 396 property be saved or destroyed if the development goes ahead as planned ? link

    South of the 396 E 2nd southern boundary and north of the end of the alley that enters the 2100 block of Prince Edward is a City owned small right angle triangle of green space containing a round concrete planter, and sometimes a parked car, and possibly trees. Its east-west border is about 30’ long and north-south about 25’. (The triangle is not, seemingly, a necessary part of the alley or street right of way — the western end of the same alley beside Brunswick street has no similar triangle of City owned land.) Will the trees in that triangle or just adjacent to that City property and within or on the border of the 396 property be saved or destroyed if the development goes ahead as planned ?

    ?? asked 4 months ago

    The referenced trees are six Austrian Pines identified as Windrow #325, partly located on city property and partly on private property. As the trees are identified as 6 co-dependent stems they are treated as one entity which is considered to be of ‘shared ownership’. See excerpt from the arborist’s plan inserted below.  

     The project arborist is proposing ‘Removal’ due to ‘unresolvable grade-changes’ that will cause rootloss which will destabilize these trees. With the rezoning application approved, the trees would be removed.

       

  • Share The back alley shared with 398 East 2nd and 2150 Brunswick Street is narrow, and many cyclists and families with young children use it to cross Brunswick and continue onto Main Street. Would speed bumps be installed to prevent drivers from speeding down the alley? on Facebook Share The back alley shared with 398 East 2nd and 2150 Brunswick Street is narrow, and many cyclists and families with young children use it to cross Brunswick and continue onto Main Street. Would speed bumps be installed to prevent drivers from speeding down the alley? on Twitter Share The back alley shared with 398 East 2nd and 2150 Brunswick Street is narrow, and many cyclists and families with young children use it to cross Brunswick and continue onto Main Street. Would speed bumps be installed to prevent drivers from speeding down the alley? on Linkedin Email The back alley shared with 398 East 2nd and 2150 Brunswick Street is narrow, and many cyclists and families with young children use it to cross Brunswick and continue onto Main Street. Would speed bumps be installed to prevent drivers from speeding down the alley? link

    The back alley shared with 398 East 2nd and 2150 Brunswick Street is narrow, and many cyclists and families with young children use it to cross Brunswick and continue onto Main Street. Would speed bumps be installed to prevent drivers from speeding down the alley?

    Andrea 2150 asked 4 months ago

    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.

  • Share The back alley shared with 398 East 2nd and 2150 Brunswick Street is narrow and barely fits two cars. Would this new building further reduce the alley space? It's already tight, and I'm concerned that when cars park in the alley, it blocks traffic from entering the garage at 2150 Brunswick Street on Facebook Share The back alley shared with 398 East 2nd and 2150 Brunswick Street is narrow and barely fits two cars. Would this new building further reduce the alley space? It's already tight, and I'm concerned that when cars park in the alley, it blocks traffic from entering the garage at 2150 Brunswick Street on Twitter Share The back alley shared with 398 East 2nd and 2150 Brunswick Street is narrow and barely fits two cars. Would this new building further reduce the alley space? It's already tight, and I'm concerned that when cars park in the alley, it blocks traffic from entering the garage at 2150 Brunswick Street on Linkedin Email The back alley shared with 398 East 2nd and 2150 Brunswick Street is narrow and barely fits two cars. Would this new building further reduce the alley space? It's already tight, and I'm concerned that when cars park in the alley, it blocks traffic from entering the garage at 2150 Brunswick Street link

    The back alley shared with 398 East 2nd and 2150 Brunswick Street is narrow and barely fits two cars. Would this new building further reduce the alley space? It's already tight, and I'm concerned that when cars park in the alley, it blocks traffic from entering the garage at 2150 Brunswick Street

    Andrea 2150 asked 4 months ago

    The standard width for bi-directional travel within a City laneway is 6.1 m (20 ft). The existing laneway adjacent to the site will remain unchanged with this new development.

  • Share How will the shadow of such a tall building affect the sunlight on 2150 Brunswick St? on Facebook Share How will the shadow of such a tall building affect the sunlight on 2150 Brunswick St? on Twitter Share How will the shadow of such a tall building affect the sunlight on 2150 Brunswick St? on Linkedin Email How will the shadow of such a tall building affect the sunlight on 2150 Brunswick St? link

    How will the shadow of such a tall building affect the sunlight on 2150 Brunswick St?

    Andrea 2150 asked 4 months ago

    As 2150 Brunswick St is located to the south of the new development the shadow impact to this address will be minor. Refer to the shadow studies on page 76 in the rezoning booklet for detailed schedules. Linked here: https://rezoning.vancouver.ca/applications/396-e-2nd-ave/application-booklet.pdf

  • Share What « key public spaces » (as defined in the Plan, p 315) will be shadowed by the proposed tower ? How many minutes a day in a typical month will the proposed tower shadow « key public spaces » assuming no clouds ever in the sky ? (Or please rephrase the question and give me some kind of quantitative idea of how much daily shadowing is projected.) And assuming no shadow issues, could the proposed tower be higher under Broadway Plan regulations? And if the tower could be higher, and was three stories higher, what additional « key public spaces » would be reached by the tower’s shadow ? on Facebook Share What « key public spaces » (as defined in the Plan, p 315) will be shadowed by the proposed tower ? How many minutes a day in a typical month will the proposed tower shadow « key public spaces » assuming no clouds ever in the sky ? (Or please rephrase the question and give me some kind of quantitative idea of how much daily shadowing is projected.) And assuming no shadow issues, could the proposed tower be higher under Broadway Plan regulations? And if the tower could be higher, and was three stories higher, what additional « key public spaces » would be reached by the tower’s shadow ? on Twitter Share What « key public spaces » (as defined in the Plan, p 315) will be shadowed by the proposed tower ? How many minutes a day in a typical month will the proposed tower shadow « key public spaces » assuming no clouds ever in the sky ? (Or please rephrase the question and give me some kind of quantitative idea of how much daily shadowing is projected.) And assuming no shadow issues, could the proposed tower be higher under Broadway Plan regulations? And if the tower could be higher, and was three stories higher, what additional « key public spaces » would be reached by the tower’s shadow ? on Linkedin Email What « key public spaces » (as defined in the Plan, p 315) will be shadowed by the proposed tower ? How many minutes a day in a typical month will the proposed tower shadow « key public spaces » assuming no clouds ever in the sky ? (Or please rephrase the question and give me some kind of quantitative idea of how much daily shadowing is projected.) And assuming no shadow issues, could the proposed tower be higher under Broadway Plan regulations? And if the tower could be higher, and was three stories higher, what additional « key public spaces » would be reached by the tower’s shadow ? link

    What « key public spaces » (as defined in the Plan, p 315) will be shadowed by the proposed tower ? How many minutes a day in a typical month will the proposed tower shadow « key public spaces » assuming no clouds ever in the sky ? (Or please rephrase the question and give me some kind of quantitative idea of how much daily shadowing is projected.) And assuming no shadow issues, could the proposed tower be higher under Broadway Plan regulations? And if the tower could be higher, and was three stories higher, what additional « key public spaces » would be reached by the tower’s shadow ?

    Denise asked 4 months ago

    Planning staff have worked with the applicant to adapt the form of development to minimize shadowing impact on sites to the north. Particularly, the future plaza by the Great Northern Way-Emily Carr station and the school yard of the independent St. Francis Xavier School have been given special consideration to reduce shadowing between the spring and fall equinoxes. The amount of shadowing generated by the building depends on the time of year, with the most shadowing in winter and the least in summer. A taller tower would not be supported under existing Broadway Plan policy, and additional height would result  in increased shadowing on the future plaza and school. Refer to the shadow studies on page 76 in the rezoning booklet for detailed schedules. Linked here: https://rezoning.vancouver.ca/applications/396-e-2nd-ave/application-booklet.pdf

  • Share Per my understanding adjoining the tower and extending eastward is a podium averaging a bit under six stories in height.** A portion of the podium adjacent to the tower is held back from the alley for about 50’ accommodating an amenity space described as a children’s play area. The easterly approximate 80’ of the proposed podium is on average about 10’ away from the property’s boundary on the alley. Is this understanding correct ? And see below for more details of how I calculated the “bit under six stories.” ** Roughly half of the fifth storey of the proposed podium’s living space is topped by an indoor amenity space — effectively a sixth storey. A mechanical room projects higher than the amenity room. The alley slopes downhill: the podium’s ground floor eastern end is about equal to alley height but the podium’s western end is about 5 feet higher (or half a storey) than the alley — see p 13 and 66 of the application. on Facebook Share Per my understanding adjoining the tower and extending eastward is a podium averaging a bit under six stories in height.** A portion of the podium adjacent to the tower is held back from the alley for about 50’ accommodating an amenity space described as a children’s play area. The easterly approximate 80’ of the proposed podium is on average about 10’ away from the property’s boundary on the alley. Is this understanding correct ? And see below for more details of how I calculated the “bit under six stories.” ** Roughly half of the fifth storey of the proposed podium’s living space is topped by an indoor amenity space — effectively a sixth storey. A mechanical room projects higher than the amenity room. The alley slopes downhill: the podium’s ground floor eastern end is about equal to alley height but the podium’s western end is about 5 feet higher (or half a storey) than the alley — see p 13 and 66 of the application. on Twitter Share Per my understanding adjoining the tower and extending eastward is a podium averaging a bit under six stories in height.** A portion of the podium adjacent to the tower is held back from the alley for about 50’ accommodating an amenity space described as a children’s play area. The easterly approximate 80’ of the proposed podium is on average about 10’ away from the property’s boundary on the alley. Is this understanding correct ? And see below for more details of how I calculated the “bit under six stories.” ** Roughly half of the fifth storey of the proposed podium’s living space is topped by an indoor amenity space — effectively a sixth storey. A mechanical room projects higher than the amenity room. The alley slopes downhill: the podium’s ground floor eastern end is about equal to alley height but the podium’s western end is about 5 feet higher (or half a storey) than the alley — see p 13 and 66 of the application. on Linkedin Email Per my understanding adjoining the tower and extending eastward is a podium averaging a bit under six stories in height.** A portion of the podium adjacent to the tower is held back from the alley for about 50’ accommodating an amenity space described as a children’s play area. The easterly approximate 80’ of the proposed podium is on average about 10’ away from the property’s boundary on the alley. Is this understanding correct ? And see below for more details of how I calculated the “bit under six stories.” ** Roughly half of the fifth storey of the proposed podium’s living space is topped by an indoor amenity space — effectively a sixth storey. A mechanical room projects higher than the amenity room. The alley slopes downhill: the podium’s ground floor eastern end is about equal to alley height but the podium’s western end is about 5 feet higher (or half a storey) than the alley — see p 13 and 66 of the application. link

    Per my understanding adjoining the tower and extending eastward is a podium averaging a bit under six stories in height.** A portion of the podium adjacent to the tower is held back from the alley for about 50’ accommodating an amenity space described as a children’s play area. The easterly approximate 80’ of the proposed podium is on average about 10’ away from the property’s boundary on the alley. Is this understanding correct ? And see below for more details of how I calculated the “bit under six stories.” ** Roughly half of the fifth storey of the proposed podium’s living space is topped by an indoor amenity space — effectively a sixth storey. A mechanical room projects higher than the amenity room. The alley slopes downhill: the podium’s ground floor eastern end is about equal to alley height but the podium’s western end is about 5 feet higher (or half a storey) than the alley — see p 13 and 66 of the application.

    ?? asked 4 months ago

    In general terms this appears to be a correct description of the proposed development. As per the Plan, staff may consider a six-storey podium as a way to reduce overall shadowing on the public realm and the adjacent independent school. Zoning by-laws allow amenity space to be located on the roof of the podium and tower to maximize indoor and outdoor amenity space for future residents. For additional details on the proposed podium, refer to page 66 in the rezoning booklet (and additional context on subsequent pages up to page 74). Linked here: https://rezoning.vancouver.ca/applications/396-e-2nd-ave/application-booklet.pdf

  • Share Would you be able to walk us through what the 20% of units at 20% below market really means and how this is calculated? Have you considered pegging the rate at 20% below the median rent for the Eastside? Thank you. on Facebook Share Would you be able to walk us through what the 20% of units at 20% below market really means and how this is calculated? Have you considered pegging the rate at 20% below the median rent for the Eastside? Thank you. on Twitter Share Would you be able to walk us through what the 20% of units at 20% below market really means and how this is calculated? Have you considered pegging the rate at 20% below the median rent for the Eastside? Thank you. on Linkedin Email Would you be able to walk us through what the 20% of units at 20% below market really means and how this is calculated? Have you considered pegging the rate at 20% below the median rent for the Eastside? Thank you. link

    Would you be able to walk us through what the 20% of units at 20% below market really means and how this is calculated? Have you considered pegging the rate at 20% below the median rent for the Eastside? Thank you.

    MarxistAwakening asked 4 months ago

    20% of the total residential floor area in the new development will be secured as below-market rental units. 

    A ‘below-market rental unit” (BMR unit) means the rent is secured at 20% below city-wide average rents (per CMHC data) through a housing agreement with the city. At unit turnover, the rent may be re-indexed to the current city-wide average rent, less 20%, which allows rents to update over time as market conditions change while retaining the permanent below-market rent requirement.

    The definition setting below-market rents at 20% below city-wide average rents (per CMHC data) is defined in the Below-market Rental housing Policy for Rezonings and is a definition that is implemented city-wide. Refer to policy here.  

Page last updated: 31 Jul 2024, 08:34 AM