Court dismisses challenge to 229 rental homes approved near Cambie and 29th
A B.C. Supreme Court judge dismissed the Cambie Corridor Neighbourhood Association's challenge to a 229-unit rental project approved without below-market homes, and ordered the association to pay court costs.
Reported. A news outlet found this. voche.me names the outlet and links its report. Read the original report on dailyhive.com.
A B.C. Supreme Court judge dismissed a neighbourhood association's legal challenge to a 229-unit rental housing project approved for Vancouver's Cambie Corridor, Daily Hive Vancouver reported on September 24, 2026. Justice Morellato of the Supreme Court of British Columbia found the City of Vancouver's approval process was fair and City Council's decision was reasonable.
The ruling came in a case brought by the Cambie Corridor Neighbourhood Association against the City and developer Sightline Properties. The judge ordered the association to pay court costs to both parties.
What council approved
City Council unanimously approved the rezoning in July 2025 for 230 secured purpose-built rental homes on land at 520-590 West 29th Avenue and 4510-4550 Ash Street, about a 10-minute walk south of the King Edward Canada Line station. The total unit count was later reduced to 229 during the development permit process, which was approved and issued in December 2025.
Developer Sightline Properties had originally planned to build 46 upscale townhomes on the site, with anticipated sale prices of $2 million to $2.3 million each, according to the court ruling. The developer obtained permits in 2022, demolished the existing houses, and began excavation, but a weakening housing market left it without any pre-sales. Sightline then shifted to a rental housing proposal following provincial legislation that encouraged more density near SkyTrain stations.
The below-market housing question
The Cambie Corridor site sits in a transit-oriented area where City policy called for at least 20 per cent of net residential floor area to be provided as below-market rental housing, with rents at least 10 per cent below the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation's citywide average. Sightline initially included a below-market component in its proposal, but City staff later recommended approving the project as all market-rate rental housing.
City staff concluded that the rezoning would not generate enough additional land value to support below-market rents, because the site's existing zoning already allowed more density than many other properties in the transit-oriented area. The developer had also already paid a $1.2 million contribution tied to additional density from an earlier townhouse project.
The association argued that residents could not properly review the removal of below-market homes without access to the developer's financial projections and the City's detailed financial analysis. Justice Morellato rejected that argument. The judge found that residents had access to the same materials councillors considered, including a City staff report disclosed seven weeks before the public hearing. "Council's method and process of decision-making were transparent and fair," the ruling states.
The political element
According to the court ruling, the association's July 2025 fundraising letter described the legal challenge as designed to "align with the 2026 election cycle and allow for policy changes." Sightline cited that letter in court as evidence that the challenge aimed to delay construction.
Voters who want to compare how parties and candidates would approach housing decisions can read party platforms at /parties and find candidate profiles at /nominations. The municipal election is October 17, 2026.
Questions this story answers
What did the court decide about the Cambie Corridor rental project?
Justice Morellato of the Supreme Court of British Columbia dismissed the Cambie Corridor Neighbourhood Association's challenge against the City of Vancouver and developer Sightline Properties. The judge found the approval process was fair and that City Council's decision to approve 229 secured purpose-built rental homes was reasonable. The association was ordered to pay court costs to both the City and Sightline.
Why did the project not include any below-market rental homes?
Daily Hive Vancouver reported that city staff concluded the rezoning would not create enough additional land value to support below-market rents. The City's policy for the transit-oriented area around the nearby Canada Line station called for at least 20 per cent of the net residential floor area to be provided as below-market rental housing, with rents at least 10 per cent below the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation's citywide average. City staff recommended approving the project without that component, and City Council agreed.
When did City Council approve the Cambie Corridor rental project?
City Council unanimously approved the rezoning in July 2025 for 230 secured purpose-built rental homes. The total number was later reduced to 229 during the development permit process, which was approved and issued in December 2025. The site is at 520-590 West 29th Avenue and 4510-4550 Ash Street, about a 10-minute walk south of the King Edward Canada Line station.
What was the original plan for the site?
Developer Sightline Properties had originally planned to build 46 upscale townhomes on the site, with anticipated sale prices of $2 million to $2.3 million each, according to the court ruling as reported by Daily Hive Vancouver. The developer obtained permits in 2022, demolished the existing single-family homes, and began excavation, but a weakening housing market left it without any pre-sales. The developer then shifted to a rental housing proposal following provincial government legislation encouraging more residential density near SkyTrain stations.
What did the neighbourhood association argue in court?
The Cambie Corridor Neighbourhood Association argued that residents could not properly examine the removal of the below-market rental component without access to the developer's financial projections and the City's detailed financial analysis. The association also argued City Council failed to adequately justify departing from the City's housing policies. Justice Morellato rejected both arguments. The judge found residents had access to the same materials councillors considered, including a City staff report disclosed seven weeks before the public hearing.
Did the association's challenge have political motivations?
According to the court ruling as reported by Daily Hive Vancouver, the association's July 2025 fundraising letter stated that the legal challenge was designed to 'align with the 2026 election cycle and allow for policy changes.' Developer Sightline Properties cited this letter in court, arguing the challenge was an example of the attitude that has made it harder to approve rental developments. Justice Morellato ordered the association to pay costs to both the City and Sightline.
What did the judge say about City Council's decision-making process?
Justice Morellato wrote that 'Council's method and process of decision-making were transparent and fair.' The judge also concluded that city councillors were entitled to rely on the City staff report and public submissions without repeating the financial analysis themselves. The ruling noted that the transit-oriented rezoning policy did not legally bind City Council, and that the council had a reasonable basis to regard the increase in secured rental housing as a public benefit.
How does this court ruling relate to the October 17 election?
Housing supply and below-market housing are issues that every party in the October 17, 2026 Vancouver election has addressed in their platforms. The ruling confirms that the current City Council's July 2025 decision to approve 229 market-rate rental homes without a below-market component was lawful. Voters can compare how candidates and parties would handle similar decisions by reading the party platforms at /parties and candidate profiles at /nominations.
Sources
The pages this story draws on. Open one to check a claim yourself.
Found an error? Tell the editors with the corrections form. A correction is noted on the story it changes. Read our standards.
Topics
More from voche.me
