A legal challenge has been filed in the B.C. Supreme Court seeking to overturn the City of Vancouver's approval of a 250-room floating hotel proposed for Coal Harbour, directly in front of the Vancouver Convention Centre. The petition, brought by a hotel workers union, argues that the public was not given adequate time to review new information presented during the approval process.
Allegations of Misleading Renderings
The petition claims that the City of Vancouver and the Vancouver Harbour Flight Centre misrepresented how the floating hotel would affect public views. Before the public hearing on April 14, 2026, renderings depicted the hotel as positioned behind the convention centre, with minimal impact on waterfront views. However, at the hearing, different renderings were shown that revealed significant view obstructions, according to the petition.
Michelle Travis, research director at Unite Here Local 40, which represents hospitality workers in British Columbia, described the situation as a “bait and switch.” She stated, “That would be the best way to characterize this. It raises serious questions about the public consultation process.” Travis called for the project to be paused and for a new public hearing to ensure procedural fairness.
Details of the Proposal
The floating hotel, proposed by Sunborn International, would be a 131-metre by 18-metre, six-level vessel attached to the convention centre. The project required zoning changes that doubled the maximum height allowances, a point of contention for opponents. The petition also alleges that the renderings made the hotel appear smaller than its actual size.
Legal Precedent and Public Process
The court case cites a B.C. Court of Appeal precedent that mandates the public be given sufficient time to examine proposed bylaws, reports, and other documents before a public hearing. Travis emphasized, “We expected a fair hearing, and residents were denied that. The public needs to be meaningfully informed.”
She added that presenting different information at the hearing denied residents the opportunity to “meaningfully consider” all relevant materials. Travis questioned whether the public interest is being served, noting that the project has been rushed.
The legal challenge now awaits a court decision, which could halt the development and require a new public consultation process.
