Go Back

3970-3998 Main St rezoning application

Share 3970-3998 Main St rezoning application on Facebook Share 3970-3998 Main St rezoning application on Twitter Share 3970-3998 Main St rezoning application on Linkedin Email 3970-3998 Main St rezoning application link

This application was approved by Council at Public Hearing on July 5, 2022

We would like your feedback on a rezoning application at 3970-3998 Main St. The proposal is to allow for the development of a six-storey mixed-use building. The zoning would change from C-2 (Commercial) District to CD-1 (Comprehensive Development) District. This proposal includes:

  • 60 secured market rental units
  • Commercial retail space at grade
  • A floor space ratio (FSR) of 3.97
  • A gross floor area of 4,898 sq. m (52,724 sq. ft.)
  • A building height of 22.6 m (74.1 ft.) with additional height for roof-top amenity up to 25.2 m (82.7 ft.)
  • 53 vehicle parking spaces and 128 bicycle parking spaces

The application is being considered under the Secured Rental Policy.

The medical clinic previously located at 3998 Main Street has relocated to a new building at 2205 Main Street.

In response to COVID-19 (Coronavirus), an extended online question and answer (Q&A) period was held in place of an in-person open house for this project.

We would like your feedback on a rezoning application at 3970-3998 Main St. The proposal is to allow for the development of a six-storey mixed-use building. The zoning would change from C-2 (Commercial) District to CD-1 (Comprehensive Development) District. This proposal includes:

  • 60 secured market rental units
  • Commercial retail space at grade
  • A floor space ratio (FSR) of 3.97
  • A gross floor area of 4,898 sq. m (52,724 sq. ft.)
  • A building height of 22.6 m (74.1 ft.) with additional height for roof-top amenity up to 25.2 m (82.7 ft.)
  • 53 vehicle parking spaces and 128 bicycle parking spaces

The application is being considered under the Secured Rental Policy.

The medical clinic previously located at 3998 Main Street has relocated to a new building at 2205 Main Street.

In response to COVID-19 (Coronavirus), an extended online question and answer (Q&A) period was held in place of an in-person open house for this project.

This application was approved by Council at Public Hearing on July 5, 2022

The opportunity to ask questions through the Q&A is available from October 25 to November 14, 2021.

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 Why is there no social housing affordable housing proposed to be in this building, in a city where tenants are facing a crisis of unaffordability, and in a neighbourhood that has seen increasing evictions of low-income residents in recent years? on Facebook Share Why is there no social housing affordable housing proposed to be in this building, in a city where tenants are facing a crisis of unaffordability, and in a neighbourhood that has seen increasing evictions of low-income residents in recent years? on Twitter Share Why is there no social housing affordable housing proposed to be in this building, in a city where tenants are facing a crisis of unaffordability, and in a neighbourhood that has seen increasing evictions of low-income residents in recent years? on Linkedin Email Why is there no social housing affordable housing proposed to be in this building, in a city where tenants are facing a crisis of unaffordability, and in a neighbourhood that has seen increasing evictions of low-income residents in recent years? link

    Why is there no social housing affordable housing proposed to be in this building, in a city where tenants are facing a crisis of unaffordability, and in a neighbourhood that has seen increasing evictions of low-income residents in recent years?

    Star456 asked about 3 years ago

    The application has been submitted under the Secured Rental Policy. This policy aims to increase the number of secured market rental units in Vancouver, but does not have requirements related to social housing. Opportunities for the development of social housing are possible through the SHORT program, and in various community plan areas.

  • Share This proposed building will displace a community health centre, as well as some popular, important businesses — what is being done to mitigate the loss of such a vital community space? on Facebook Share This proposed building will displace a community health centre, as well as some popular, important businesses — what is being done to mitigate the loss of such a vital community space? on Twitter Share This proposed building will displace a community health centre, as well as some popular, important businesses — what is being done to mitigate the loss of such a vital community space? on Linkedin Email This proposed building will displace a community health centre, as well as some popular, important businesses — what is being done to mitigate the loss of such a vital community space? link

    This proposed building will displace a community health centre, as well as some popular, important businesses — what is being done to mitigate the loss of such a vital community space?

    Thomas2 asked about 3 years ago

    The existing medical clinic will be relocating to a new building at 2205 Main Street in early 2022. The proposal includes commercial spaces at the ground floor, that would be suitable for smaller scale, community serving businesses.

  • Share Will pets be allowed in this building? If so, are there any restrictions? on Facebook Share Will pets be allowed in this building? If so, are there any restrictions? on Twitter Share Will pets be allowed in this building? If so, are there any restrictions? on Linkedin Email Will pets be allowed in this building? If so, are there any restrictions? link

    Will pets be allowed in this building? If so, are there any restrictions?

    Aners1 asked about 3 years ago

    Yes, tenants would be allowed to have pets in this building. There are no specific restrictions on pet ownership.

  • Share I notice that you reference the Mount Pleasant neighbourhood in one of your questions. The neighbourhood that this proposed development is in is actually the Riley Park Neighbourhood. I delivered flyers regarding this proposal to my neighbourhood and I noted a huge number of secondary suites in the single family homes in the area. I live on 24th Avenue between Main and Sophia and will be greatly affected by this proposed building. My street has 17 houses with their front door facing onto 24th Avenue. Of these 17 houses, 13 have basement suites or multiple suites, 1 has been a rental house with multiple roommates for the 29 years I have lived here, 1 is a duplex and 2 are single family homes. There is already a great number of rental on this street. Does the city consider existing rental housing in it's placement of rental buildings? Also, note that Riley Park neighbourhood is going to be the home to a huge number of rental units once the Queen Elizabeth site is developed at 33rd and Main. Will other rental building developments be taken into consideration in regards to this proposed building? Can this proposed building be turned down and or asked to be made to conform to the existing fabric of the street and stay with the C-2 zoning our community plan calls for? on Facebook Share I notice that you reference the Mount Pleasant neighbourhood in one of your questions. The neighbourhood that this proposed development is in is actually the Riley Park Neighbourhood. I delivered flyers regarding this proposal to my neighbourhood and I noted a huge number of secondary suites in the single family homes in the area. I live on 24th Avenue between Main and Sophia and will be greatly affected by this proposed building. My street has 17 houses with their front door facing onto 24th Avenue. Of these 17 houses, 13 have basement suites or multiple suites, 1 has been a rental house with multiple roommates for the 29 years I have lived here, 1 is a duplex and 2 are single family homes. There is already a great number of rental on this street. Does the city consider existing rental housing in it's placement of rental buildings? Also, note that Riley Park neighbourhood is going to be the home to a huge number of rental units once the Queen Elizabeth site is developed at 33rd and Main. Will other rental building developments be taken into consideration in regards to this proposed building? Can this proposed building be turned down and or asked to be made to conform to the existing fabric of the street and stay with the C-2 zoning our community plan calls for? on Twitter Share I notice that you reference the Mount Pleasant neighbourhood in one of your questions. The neighbourhood that this proposed development is in is actually the Riley Park Neighbourhood. I delivered flyers regarding this proposal to my neighbourhood and I noted a huge number of secondary suites in the single family homes in the area. I live on 24th Avenue between Main and Sophia and will be greatly affected by this proposed building. My street has 17 houses with their front door facing onto 24th Avenue. Of these 17 houses, 13 have basement suites or multiple suites, 1 has been a rental house with multiple roommates for the 29 years I have lived here, 1 is a duplex and 2 are single family homes. There is already a great number of rental on this street. Does the city consider existing rental housing in it's placement of rental buildings? Also, note that Riley Park neighbourhood is going to be the home to a huge number of rental units once the Queen Elizabeth site is developed at 33rd and Main. Will other rental building developments be taken into consideration in regards to this proposed building? Can this proposed building be turned down and or asked to be made to conform to the existing fabric of the street and stay with the C-2 zoning our community plan calls for? on Linkedin Email I notice that you reference the Mount Pleasant neighbourhood in one of your questions. The neighbourhood that this proposed development is in is actually the Riley Park Neighbourhood. I delivered flyers regarding this proposal to my neighbourhood and I noted a huge number of secondary suites in the single family homes in the area. I live on 24th Avenue between Main and Sophia and will be greatly affected by this proposed building. My street has 17 houses with their front door facing onto 24th Avenue. Of these 17 houses, 13 have basement suites or multiple suites, 1 has been a rental house with multiple roommates for the 29 years I have lived here, 1 is a duplex and 2 are single family homes. There is already a great number of rental on this street. Does the city consider existing rental housing in it's placement of rental buildings? Also, note that Riley Park neighbourhood is going to be the home to a huge number of rental units once the Queen Elizabeth site is developed at 33rd and Main. Will other rental building developments be taken into consideration in regards to this proposed building? Can this proposed building be turned down and or asked to be made to conform to the existing fabric of the street and stay with the C-2 zoning our community plan calls for? link

    I notice that you reference the Mount Pleasant neighbourhood in one of your questions. The neighbourhood that this proposed development is in is actually the Riley Park Neighbourhood. I delivered flyers regarding this proposal to my neighbourhood and I noted a huge number of secondary suites in the single family homes in the area. I live on 24th Avenue between Main and Sophia and will be greatly affected by this proposed building. My street has 17 houses with their front door facing onto 24th Avenue. Of these 17 houses, 13 have basement suites or multiple suites, 1 has been a rental house with multiple roommates for the 29 years I have lived here, 1 is a duplex and 2 are single family homes. There is already a great number of rental on this street. Does the city consider existing rental housing in it's placement of rental buildings? Also, note that Riley Park neighbourhood is going to be the home to a huge number of rental units once the Queen Elizabeth site is developed at 33rd and Main. Will other rental building developments be taken into consideration in regards to this proposed building? Can this proposed building be turned down and or asked to be made to conform to the existing fabric of the street and stay with the C-2 zoning our community plan calls for?

    jmhummel asked about 3 years ago

    The reference to Mt. Pleasant was related to the local vacancy rates, and is how the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation groups individual suburbs to collect data. You can find more information here. 

    The Housing Vancouver Strategy and the Secured Rental Policy seek to increase the number of secured rental units across Vancouver. There are no quotas for individual suburbs.

    If the proposal is referred to a public hearing, City Council will vote on the rezoning application. A summary of all community feedback will be presented in a report to Council. Once a hearing is scheduled, residents can also register to speak to Council directly. 

  • Share Within the “Applicant boards” Virtual open house materials (pgs. 5 and 23) the parking/loading entry is shown as existing in the middle of the block/lane. Would it not make more sense to have this vehicle access closer to 24th Ave to reduce the amount of vehicle traffic in the lane? on Facebook Share Within the “Applicant boards” Virtual open house materials (pgs. 5 and 23) the parking/loading entry is shown as existing in the middle of the block/lane. Would it not make more sense to have this vehicle access closer to 24th Ave to reduce the amount of vehicle traffic in the lane? on Twitter Share Within the “Applicant boards” Virtual open house materials (pgs. 5 and 23) the parking/loading entry is shown as existing in the middle of the block/lane. Would it not make more sense to have this vehicle access closer to 24th Ave to reduce the amount of vehicle traffic in the lane? on Linkedin Email Within the “Applicant boards” Virtual open house materials (pgs. 5 and 23) the parking/loading entry is shown as existing in the middle of the block/lane. Would it not make more sense to have this vehicle access closer to 24th Ave to reduce the amount of vehicle traffic in the lane? link

    Within the “Applicant boards” Virtual open house materials (pgs. 5 and 23) the parking/loading entry is shown as existing in the middle of the block/lane. Would it not make more sense to have this vehicle access closer to 24th Ave to reduce the amount of vehicle traffic in the lane?

    JIT asked about 3 years ago

    The loading bays and parking access have been located in the laneway to allow more active uses such as the restaurant to be located on the East 24th Avenue frontage. Locating the access at the corner can lead to increased hazards for vehicles and pedestrians. Engineering staff will assess the design of loading bays and the vehicle access in their review.

  • Share On the corner of Main and East 24th Avenue the 4 storey C-2 building with the Cafe Artigiano is 45 feet high, but this proposed 6 storey building is 83 feet high or 38 feet higher. What changes can the city ask to the applicant to make to reduce the height of this building so it is not so high and overwhelming to the street? For instance, can the commercial space have lower ceilings? Why does a rental building have to be 6 storeys? Can a rental building be lower? Does the city consider the existing urban fabric and design of the street before approving designs, even for rental buildings? What kind of design elements can the city ask to be changed so that a building will fits in better with the neighbourhood and streetscape and not be so overwhelming? on Facebook Share On the corner of Main and East 24th Avenue the 4 storey C-2 building with the Cafe Artigiano is 45 feet high, but this proposed 6 storey building is 83 feet high or 38 feet higher. What changes can the city ask to the applicant to make to reduce the height of this building so it is not so high and overwhelming to the street? For instance, can the commercial space have lower ceilings? Why does a rental building have to be 6 storeys? Can a rental building be lower? Does the city consider the existing urban fabric and design of the street before approving designs, even for rental buildings? What kind of design elements can the city ask to be changed so that a building will fits in better with the neighbourhood and streetscape and not be so overwhelming? on Twitter Share On the corner of Main and East 24th Avenue the 4 storey C-2 building with the Cafe Artigiano is 45 feet high, but this proposed 6 storey building is 83 feet high or 38 feet higher. What changes can the city ask to the applicant to make to reduce the height of this building so it is not so high and overwhelming to the street? For instance, can the commercial space have lower ceilings? Why does a rental building have to be 6 storeys? Can a rental building be lower? Does the city consider the existing urban fabric and design of the street before approving designs, even for rental buildings? What kind of design elements can the city ask to be changed so that a building will fits in better with the neighbourhood and streetscape and not be so overwhelming? on Linkedin Email On the corner of Main and East 24th Avenue the 4 storey C-2 building with the Cafe Artigiano is 45 feet high, but this proposed 6 storey building is 83 feet high or 38 feet higher. What changes can the city ask to the applicant to make to reduce the height of this building so it is not so high and overwhelming to the street? For instance, can the commercial space have lower ceilings? Why does a rental building have to be 6 storeys? Can a rental building be lower? Does the city consider the existing urban fabric and design of the street before approving designs, even for rental buildings? What kind of design elements can the city ask to be changed so that a building will fits in better with the neighbourhood and streetscape and not be so overwhelming? link

    On the corner of Main and East 24th Avenue the 4 storey C-2 building with the Cafe Artigiano is 45 feet high, but this proposed 6 storey building is 83 feet high or 38 feet higher. What changes can the city ask to the applicant to make to reduce the height of this building so it is not so high and overwhelming to the street? For instance, can the commercial space have lower ceilings? Why does a rental building have to be 6 storeys? Can a rental building be lower? Does the city consider the existing urban fabric and design of the street before approving designs, even for rental buildings? What kind of design elements can the city ask to be changed so that a building will fits in better with the neighbourhood and streetscape and not be so overwhelming?

    jmhummel asked about 3 years ago

    As part of the urban design review for this project, staff will consider the existing site and how the overall height of the building impacts the surrounding area. Yes, changes to ceiling heights could be considered as part of the conditions for this application. 

    In areas zoned C-2, The Secured Rental Policy allows rezoning applications to be submitted for six-storey rental buildings. Rental buildings can be lower or higher than six storeys depending on the zoning of the land and the planning policies that apply to this site. 

  • Share This building is called 6 stories and is 83 feet tall. The Lee building at Main and Broadway is 7 stories and is 23.77 meters or 77 feet. That is 6 feet lower than this proposed building. The 8 story Sylvia hotel in English Bay is an estimated 26.52 meters or 87 feet. That is only 4 feet higher than this proposed building. Why is this building, which is only supposed to be 6 floors, 38 feet taller than the 4 story C-2 building, which is 45 feet high, across the street? This building will be like a small skyscraper on a street that has a community plan allowing 4 story C-2 buildings. With such an extreme height, great shade and loss of light will occur. I live on 24th Avenue behind the C-2 building with the Cafe Artigiano in it. I really noticed the loss of afternoon light once that building went up and it is 38 feet lower than the proposed building. What considerations are giving to loss of light to nearby homes? I see the shade study and note the extreme shade the homes immediately next to this proposed building will experience, but what considerations are given to the rest of the homes on this street in regards to light? on Facebook Share This building is called 6 stories and is 83 feet tall. The Lee building at Main and Broadway is 7 stories and is 23.77 meters or 77 feet. That is 6 feet lower than this proposed building. The 8 story Sylvia hotel in English Bay is an estimated 26.52 meters or 87 feet. That is only 4 feet higher than this proposed building. Why is this building, which is only supposed to be 6 floors, 38 feet taller than the 4 story C-2 building, which is 45 feet high, across the street? This building will be like a small skyscraper on a street that has a community plan allowing 4 story C-2 buildings. With such an extreme height, great shade and loss of light will occur. I live on 24th Avenue behind the C-2 building with the Cafe Artigiano in it. I really noticed the loss of afternoon light once that building went up and it is 38 feet lower than the proposed building. What considerations are giving to loss of light to nearby homes? I see the shade study and note the extreme shade the homes immediately next to this proposed building will experience, but what considerations are given to the rest of the homes on this street in regards to light? on Twitter Share This building is called 6 stories and is 83 feet tall. The Lee building at Main and Broadway is 7 stories and is 23.77 meters or 77 feet. That is 6 feet lower than this proposed building. The 8 story Sylvia hotel in English Bay is an estimated 26.52 meters or 87 feet. That is only 4 feet higher than this proposed building. Why is this building, which is only supposed to be 6 floors, 38 feet taller than the 4 story C-2 building, which is 45 feet high, across the street? This building will be like a small skyscraper on a street that has a community plan allowing 4 story C-2 buildings. With such an extreme height, great shade and loss of light will occur. I live on 24th Avenue behind the C-2 building with the Cafe Artigiano in it. I really noticed the loss of afternoon light once that building went up and it is 38 feet lower than the proposed building. What considerations are giving to loss of light to nearby homes? I see the shade study and note the extreme shade the homes immediately next to this proposed building will experience, but what considerations are given to the rest of the homes on this street in regards to light? on Linkedin Email This building is called 6 stories and is 83 feet tall. The Lee building at Main and Broadway is 7 stories and is 23.77 meters or 77 feet. That is 6 feet lower than this proposed building. The 8 story Sylvia hotel in English Bay is an estimated 26.52 meters or 87 feet. That is only 4 feet higher than this proposed building. Why is this building, which is only supposed to be 6 floors, 38 feet taller than the 4 story C-2 building, which is 45 feet high, across the street? This building will be like a small skyscraper on a street that has a community plan allowing 4 story C-2 buildings. With such an extreme height, great shade and loss of light will occur. I live on 24th Avenue behind the C-2 building with the Cafe Artigiano in it. I really noticed the loss of afternoon light once that building went up and it is 38 feet lower than the proposed building. What considerations are giving to loss of light to nearby homes? I see the shade study and note the extreme shade the homes immediately next to this proposed building will experience, but what considerations are given to the rest of the homes on this street in regards to light? link

    This building is called 6 stories and is 83 feet tall. The Lee building at Main and Broadway is 7 stories and is 23.77 meters or 77 feet. That is 6 feet lower than this proposed building. The 8 story Sylvia hotel in English Bay is an estimated 26.52 meters or 87 feet. That is only 4 feet higher than this proposed building. Why is this building, which is only supposed to be 6 floors, 38 feet taller than the 4 story C-2 building, which is 45 feet high, across the street? This building will be like a small skyscraper on a street that has a community plan allowing 4 story C-2 buildings. With such an extreme height, great shade and loss of light will occur. I live on 24th Avenue behind the C-2 building with the Cafe Artigiano in it. I really noticed the loss of afternoon light once that building went up and it is 38 feet lower than the proposed building. What considerations are giving to loss of light to nearby homes? I see the shade study and note the extreme shade the homes immediately next to this proposed building will experience, but what considerations are given to the rest of the homes on this street in regards to light?

    jmhummel asked about 3 years ago

     The maximum building height of 83 ft. is measured to the top of the rooftop indoor amenity room. This amenity space has been set back from all of the site boundaries to reduce the impacts of shadowing on neighbouring properties. The height to the top of the sixth storey is approximately 73 ft., which is consistent with comparable six-storey rental buildings in the local area. The neighbouring building at 4010 Main Street does not have a rooftop amenity area and may have lower ceiling heights for each level when compared to this proposal. 

    The shadow studies will be assessed in the review for this application. As part of rezoning applications, a balance is sought between maintaining access to sunlight for existing residents and the delivery of much needed secured rental housing for future residents. 

  • Share I’m confused by the application for rezoning to CD-1 as CD-1 is described in the following way in the “City boards” virtual open house materials: “Consider redevelopment of sites where existing rental units do not currently exist and infill development on suitable sites where existing tenants are not displaced; height and density as appropriate to location and context” There are currently rental units in the properties destined to be torn down so how does this meet the CD-1 zone description “where rental units do not currently exist” and “where existing tenants are not displaced”? on Facebook Share I’m confused by the application for rezoning to CD-1 as CD-1 is described in the following way in the “City boards” virtual open house materials: “Consider redevelopment of sites where existing rental units do not currently exist and infill development on suitable sites where existing tenants are not displaced; height and density as appropriate to location and context” There are currently rental units in the properties destined to be torn down so how does this meet the CD-1 zone description “where rental units do not currently exist” and “where existing tenants are not displaced”? on Twitter Share I’m confused by the application for rezoning to CD-1 as CD-1 is described in the following way in the “City boards” virtual open house materials: “Consider redevelopment of sites where existing rental units do not currently exist and infill development on suitable sites where existing tenants are not displaced; height and density as appropriate to location and context” There are currently rental units in the properties destined to be torn down so how does this meet the CD-1 zone description “where rental units do not currently exist” and “where existing tenants are not displaced”? on Linkedin Email I’m confused by the application for rezoning to CD-1 as CD-1 is described in the following way in the “City boards” virtual open house materials: “Consider redevelopment of sites where existing rental units do not currently exist and infill development on suitable sites where existing tenants are not displaced; height and density as appropriate to location and context” There are currently rental units in the properties destined to be torn down so how does this meet the CD-1 zone description “where rental units do not currently exist” and “where existing tenants are not displaced”? link

    I’m confused by the application for rezoning to CD-1 as CD-1 is described in the following way in the “City boards” virtual open house materials: “Consider redevelopment of sites where existing rental units do not currently exist and infill development on suitable sites where existing tenants are not displaced; height and density as appropriate to location and context” There are currently rental units in the properties destined to be torn down so how does this meet the CD-1 zone description “where rental units do not currently exist” and “where existing tenants are not displaced”?

    JIT asked about 3 years ago

    Page 7 of the City Boards provides a table with development guidelines for various zones under the Secured Rental Policy. This site at 3970-3998 Main Street is zoned C-2 and the relevant guidelines for C-2 sites are highlighted by the yellow rectangle. The information you have listed below is for sites that are currently zoned CD-1 and are intending to amend the existing CD-1 by-law.

  • Share If these are rental units why do they have ceiling heights at 9', wouldn't 8' suffice? on Facebook Share If these are rental units why do they have ceiling heights at 9', wouldn't 8' suffice? on Twitter Share If these are rental units why do they have ceiling heights at 9', wouldn't 8' suffice? on Linkedin Email If these are rental units why do they have ceiling heights at 9', wouldn't 8' suffice? link

    If these are rental units why do they have ceiling heights at 9', wouldn't 8' suffice?

    AP123 asked about 3 years ago

    The proposed ceiling heights are intended to provide future residents with improved access to light and a more comfortable environment. All residential units should provide a quality indoor environment regardless of their status as a rental unit or a unit for sale. The ceiling heights, and the impacts of the overall building height will be assessed as part of the urban design review for this project.

  • Share Within the “Applicant boards” Virtual open house materials (pg. 5) the following is stated: “The commercial accessible stall is conveniently located off the lane.” This likely means that commercial vehicles will enter the lane off of Sophia St. as this will provide straight access to the commercial accessible stalls. This will surely lead to the further destruction of this laneway, one that is already in a very poor state. Would it be possible to require that the developers resurface this lane as part of the development or that they be directed to enter off of 23rd or 24th? on Facebook Share Within the “Applicant boards” Virtual open house materials (pg. 5) the following is stated: “The commercial accessible stall is conveniently located off the lane.” This likely means that commercial vehicles will enter the lane off of Sophia St. as this will provide straight access to the commercial accessible stalls. This will surely lead to the further destruction of this laneway, one that is already in a very poor state. Would it be possible to require that the developers resurface this lane as part of the development or that they be directed to enter off of 23rd or 24th? on Twitter Share Within the “Applicant boards” Virtual open house materials (pg. 5) the following is stated: “The commercial accessible stall is conveniently located off the lane.” This likely means that commercial vehicles will enter the lane off of Sophia St. as this will provide straight access to the commercial accessible stalls. This will surely lead to the further destruction of this laneway, one that is already in a very poor state. Would it be possible to require that the developers resurface this lane as part of the development or that they be directed to enter off of 23rd or 24th? on Linkedin Email Within the “Applicant boards” Virtual open house materials (pg. 5) the following is stated: “The commercial accessible stall is conveniently located off the lane.” This likely means that commercial vehicles will enter the lane off of Sophia St. as this will provide straight access to the commercial accessible stalls. This will surely lead to the further destruction of this laneway, one that is already in a very poor state. Would it be possible to require that the developers resurface this lane as part of the development or that they be directed to enter off of 23rd or 24th? link

    Within the “Applicant boards” Virtual open house materials (pg. 5) the following is stated: “The commercial accessible stall is conveniently located off the lane.” This likely means that commercial vehicles will enter the lane off of Sophia St. as this will provide straight access to the commercial accessible stalls. This will surely lead to the further destruction of this laneway, one that is already in a very poor state. Would it be possible to require that the developers resurface this lane as part of the development or that they be directed to enter off of 23rd or 24th?

    JIT asked about 3 years ago

     The commercial accessible stall is a single parking space that is reserved for use by people who require an accessible parking permit. It is not expected that this space will create significant vehicle movements. The applicants have proposed to set back the building by a minimum of 0.76 m (2.5 ft.) from the rear property boundary to improve vehicle movement through the laneway. 

    It is common for applicants to resurface roads and sidewalks adjacent to the development site where necessary. While Development Cost Levies charged by the City can also be directed to upgrade local infrastructure. The extent of any road or sidewalk reconstruction will be determined after Engineering staff have completed their review.