Once seen as a transformative project, Woodward’s redevelopment promised to redefine Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside, blending social housing, high-end condos, and cultural spaces to bridge a deeply divided neighbourhood. Over a decade later, the building remains an icon—but not of revitalization fulfilled. Instead, it symbolizes a plan unravelling, with major tenants contemplating departure amid rising crime and persistent economic challenges. As the promise of gentrification falters, the question emerges: can such a vision realistically transform a community as complex and entrenched as DTES?
A Symbol of Gentrification
The Woodward’s Building redevelopment, completed in 2010, was heralded as a groundbreaking project for Vancouver’s DTES. Aiming to blend market-rate housing, social housing, commercial spaces, and cultural institutions, the project embodied a revitalization vision through inclusivity. Once a bustling department store and community landmark, the original Woodward’s Building had fallen into disrepair by the early 1990s, mirroring the decline of the surrounding area. Its redevelopment was seen as an opportunity to breathe new life into the neighbourhood, marrying urban renewal with social responsibility.
The redevelopment plan was ambitious, incorporating 536 market-rate condominiums, 200 affordable rental units, office spaces, and the Simon Fraser University School for Contemporary Arts. At its heart was an inspiring social experiment: to create a community that bridged socio-economic divides while revitalizing one of Canada’s most marginalized neighbourhoods. Public incentives like a decade-long property tax exemption for commercial tenants supported the project. It attracted high-profile retailers to anchor its commercial spaces. These businesses were meant to serve new residents and long-standing DTES inhabitants, creating a vibrant, sustainable ecosystem.
More than a decade later, however, Woodward’s redevelopment is often cited as emblematic of the challenges inherent in urban revitalization. Despite its initial promise, the project has faced mounting difficulties. Rising property values have exacerbated displacement, while safety concerns and crime have led to the closure of several key commercial tenants, including TD Bank and JJ Bean. London Drugs and Nesters Market, the last major retailers in the complex, have publicly questioned the feasibility of continuing operations there. These struggles have cast doubt on the effectiveness of the redevelopment as a blueprint for tackling the persistent economic and social disparities in the DTES.
As Woodward’s Building confronts these realities, its trajectory offers critical insights into the complexities of gentrification, revitalization, and urban development in vulnerable communities. Far from being a simple success story, the project’s outcomes reflect broader tensions in balancing economic growth with social equity in one of Canada’s most contentious urban landscapes.
The History of Woodward’s and Its Legacy
Founded in 1903 by Charles Woodward, Woodward’s department store quickly became a cornerstone of Vancouver’s commercial and cultural identity. Located at 101 West Hastings Street, the store drew shoppers from across the city and beyond, offering affordable goods in a grand setting. Woodward’s introduced the “$1.49 Day” concept, an iconic weekly sale that attracted bustling crowds and cemented its place in local lore. For much of the 20th century, the store served as a community hub, embodying the economic vitality of the DTES.
By the 1970s, however, Vancouver’s economic and social landscape began to shift. The decline of manufacturing jobs and suburban expansion drew wealthier residents and businesses out of the downtown core, leaving neighbourhoods like the DTES to face increasing poverty and marginalization. The Woodward’s department store struggled to maintain relevance amid changing consumer habits and mounting competition. In 1993, after 90 years of operation, the store shut its doors, leaving behind an empty building symbolizing the area’s economic downturn and social struggles.
Following its closure, the Woodward’s Building sat vacant for nearly a decade, becoming both an eyesore and a rallying point for community activism. In 2002, the building became the site of a significant squat organized by community groups and housing advocates demanding action on the DTES’s housing crisis. Over 100 homeless individuals and activists occupied the abandoned site, using the space to draw attention to the area’s lack of affordable housing and social services. This high-profile event pressured the City of Vancouver and the provincial government to prioritize the site’s redevelopment.
The squat marked a turning point in the building’s history, transforming it from a relic of economic decline into a symbol of the community’s ongoing fight for social equity. In response, the city purchased the site in 2003 and initiated plans for a mixed-use redevelopment project that aimed to address the neighbourhood’s challenges while honouring its historical significance. The redevelopment was envisioned as a solution to the growing divide between the area’s long-time residents and the influx of wealthier newcomers.
As much as the Woodward Building reflected Vancouver’s past, its eventual redevelopment embodied the city’s aspirations for the future. It became a test case for urban renewal in the DTES, balancing the preservation of historical elements—like the iconic “W” sign atop the building—with the promise of a revitalized, inclusive neighbourhood. However, as subsequent analysis will explore, the building’s journey from a thriving department store to a symbol of revitalization—and now uncertainty—mirrors the complexities and contradictions of gentrification.
The Struggle of Turning Ambitions into Reality
The redevelopment was made possible through a partnership between the City of Vancouver, private developers, and non-profit organizations. The city purchased the building for $5.5 million and played a key role in shaping the project, which Westbank Projects and the Peterson Group led. Government incentives, including a 10-year property tax exemption for commercial tenants, were critical in attracting businesses to the site. These measures aimed to offset the perceived risks of operating in a neighbourhood characterized by high levels of crime and poverty.
Despite its ambitious goals, the implementation of Woodward’s redevelopment faced significant challenges. Critics argued that the balance between social and market housing was insufficient to meet the needs of the DTES’s low-income population. While the project delivered two hundred affordable units, only a portion met the welfare shelter rate, leaving many residents priced out. Additionally, the reliance on commercial tenants to anchor the site’s retail spaces proved fraught. The redevelopment also highlighted tensions between revitalization and gentrification. While the mixed-use model was intended to integrate diverse groups, rising property values and rents in the surrounding area displaced long-standing residents and businesses.
As Woodward’s redevelopment enters its second decade, it finds itself at a crossroads, its legacy under scrutiny. What began as a celebrated prototype for inclusive urban revitalization now serves as a sobering reminder of the intricate challenges inherent in transforming disadvantaged neighbourhoods. The project’s achievements and missteps have become a focal point in the ongoing urban planning discourse, highlighting the delicate balance between fostering economic prosperity and ensuring social equity.
Gentrification and Its Discontents
The redevelopment of the Woodward’s Building acted as a catalyst for increased property values in the DTES. Between 2001 and 2013, property values in the area surged by 303%, reflecting the growing interest from developers and higher-income residents seeking to capitalize on the neighbourhood’s proximity to Vancouver’s financial and cultural hubs. While these changes were heralded as a sign of economic revitalization, they also deepened existing divides. Many long-time residents relied on social assistance and found themselves priced out as rents climbed beyond affordable levels. The influx of wealthier residents created tensions, as new developments prioritized market-driven objectives over the preservation of the neighbourhood’s historic and social character.
A sharp decline in affordable housing exacerbated the displacement of vulnerable populations. By 2010, only 12% of privately owned hotels in the DTES remained affordable to those on welfare shelter rates, compared to 29% a year earlier. The displacement of vulnerable populations in Vancouver’s DTES continues to escalate as the affordability crisis worsens. According to a 2023 survey, the number of Single Room Occupancy (SRO) units renting at the income assistance shelter rate—$375 per month—has plummeted to just 52 rooms across Vancouver, a sharp decline from 1,700 in 2003. This marks a catastrophic drop in accessible housing for the city’s most vulnerable residents as the market increasingly caters to higher-income tenants.
Rising rents for SROs further underscore the affordability gap. In 2023, the average rent for an SRO in Vancouver’s downtown core reached $681, a 21% increase from $561 in 2019. This trend has rendered even basic accommodations unattainable for low-income individuals reliant on income assistance or precarious work. The resulting displacement has left many residents either homeless or pushed into overcrowded and unsafe living conditions. Despite substantial investments and redevelopment efforts, the DTES remains one of Canada’s poorest urban neighbourhoods. It is argued that without addressing systemic problems such as mental health, addiction, and affordable housing, revitalization efforts will continue to fall short.
The Commercial Decline of Woodward’s
The Woodward’s now faces significant commercial challenges. Anchor tenants like London Drugs and Nesters Market, initially seen as vital to the building’s success, have openly expressed concerns about continuing operations. London Drugs, which has operated within the complex since its redevelopment, has cited safety concerns, high operational costs, and increasing crime as primary reasons for reconsidering its lease. Similarly, Nesters Market has struggled with declining profitability, reportedly due to theft, vandalism, and a dwindling customer base unwilling to frequent the area. The broader economic challenges of operating in a neighbourhood have only exacerbated these issues.
Rising crime rates and safety concerns are frequently cited as significant factors contributing to the exodus of businesses from the Woodward’s Building. Violent theft and property damage have escalated in recent years, with reports of retail theft increasing by 400% over two years in Vancouver. The Downtown Eastside has become a focal point for these challenges as repeat offenders exploit gaps in the justice system. For many local businesses, the “catch and release” dynamic of Canada’s bail policies compounds these challenges. Individuals accused of theft or vandalism often re-offend shortly after release. Business owners have noted that their operations remain vulnerable to continued losses without meaningful interventions, making withdrawal from the area an increasingly rational choice.
The Woodward’s Building now confronts another setback as Simon Fraser University announces the closure of several community engagement centres, including the Vancity Office of Community Engagement (VOCE) located within the complex. This decision, driven by financial constraints and consolidation efforts, has drawn sharp criticism from the university’s School for the Contemporary Arts (SCA), which expressed shock and disappointment at the move. The shuttering of VOCE follows the earlier closure of SFU Woodward’s Cultural Programs, a pillar of the local arts scene that had collaborated with numerous performing arts groups since the Goldcorp Centre for the Arts opened its doors in 2010.
The difficulties faced by Woodward’s commercial tenants reflect vast issues concerning the economic viability of the DTES. High vacancy rates and declining foot traffic have created a challenging environment for retail businesses. The city’s efforts, such as property tax incentives and grants for community-serving businesses, have had limited success in countering the economic instability in the neighbourhood. The departure of anchor tenants affects the immediate economic landscape and undermines the broader revitalization goals of Woodward’s redevelopment. With fewer businesses able to sustain operations, the mixed-use vision that balances commercial vitality with social inclusivity appears increasingly fragile.
Community Policing Centre: A Dystopian Reality?
Conceived as a groundbreaking mixed-use development that would blend affordable housing, social services, art, and retail, the complex was meant to epitomize the best intentions of urban revitalization. However, as the years have passed, the Woodward’s Building has seen a steady exodus of the elements that were supposed to breathe life into the community. In a twist that many see as a dystopian reality, the once-vibrant commercial spaces are now being converted into a community policing centre, a stark contrast to the original vision of inclusivity and renewal.
The policing centre is intended to be more than just a station for officers. It will serve as a base for patrolling the DTES while providing educational workshops and connecting residents with addiction treatment, mental health support, and housing services. The strategy addresses crime and its underlying causes, balancing enforcement and community engagement. However, this move has raised eyebrows among those who view it as a troubling indication of the complex’s failure to achieve its lofty goals. Many argue that repurposing retail space for policing, rather than fostering economic vitality, undermines the very essence of what the Woodward’s Building was meant to represent.
Reactions to the policing hub have been mixed. Many local business owners and residents support the initiative, viewing it as necessary to stabilize the area and curb crime. They believe the increased police presence will help prevent further economic deterioration in the DTES. At the same time, critics question whether a policing-first approach can effectively address the complex issues underlying the neighbourhood’s struggles. Community advocates warn that increased police visibility could alienate vulnerable populations, including those dealing with homelessness, addiction, and mental health issues. While the centre is designed to provide outreach resources alongside enforcement, some see this shift as emblematic of a broader failure to preserve the inclusive and supportive vision.
Mayor Ken Sim’s Vision for the DTES
Mayor Ken Sim’s recent announcement to promote mixed development in the DTES has reignited debates about the future of urban revitalization in the area. The plan proposes integrating market-rate housing, diverse commercial spaces, and dispersed supportive housing services to reshape the DTES’s socio-economic fabric. However, this vision comes amid signs of strain in the very type of mixed-use project meant to embody such ideals: Woodward’s redevelopment. These struggles raise questions about the feasibility of expanding mixed development models across the neighbourhood when their flagship example falters.
The Downtown Eastside Plan, adopted in 2014, emphasized affordability and protecting low-income residents through stringent zoning policies, including the requirements for Downtown Eastside Oppenheimer District (DEOD). The policy mandates a 60/40 split between social and rental housing for new developments and prohibits market condominiums in certain areas to curb gentrification. Sim’s proposal for mixed development, which includes increasing market-rate housing, appears to diverge from these goals. Critics argue that prioritizing market housing and relocating services could dilute the protections afforded by the DEOD zoning framework, potentially exacerbating displacement in an area already grappling with affordability crises. In light of Woodward’s redevelopment struggles, this shift raises concerns about whether dispersing services will resolve systemic issues or merely relocate them to other parts of the city.
The challenges Woodward’s redevelopment faces underscore the complexities of implementing mixed-use models in the area. The failure to retain anchor commercial tenants and the persistent disparities suggest that similar projects could face comparable obstacles. While Sim’s vision for mixed development aligns with the broader goal of diversifying the neighbourhood’s demographics and economy, the existing challenges at Woodward’s cast doubt on the sustainability of this strategy. The proposal to expand mixed development while Woodward struggles to fulfill its promises highlights a critical disconnect between theory and practice. If the foundational issues of safety, affordability, and economic viability remain unaddressed, future initiatives risk replicating the same outcomes. The success of Sim’s plan will likely depend on its ability to learn from these challenges and adapt its implementation to ensure that mixed development benefits all stakeholders in Downtown Eastside.
The Unfinished Experiment
The story of the Woodward’s Building serves as a poignant reminder of the fragility of even the most well-intentioned visions. In pursuing our most luminous ideals, birthed from the purest motives, we often find ourselves dazzled by the brilliance of our aspirations. Yet, in the blink of an eye, a sobering moment can descend upon us, tearing away the veil from our eyes and shattering the illusions we so carefully crafted. The euphoria that once buoyed our spirits is swiftly extinguished, leaving us face-to-face with the unyielding reality that surrounds us. In these moments of sobering clarity, we must summon the courage to pause, catch our breath, and reassess the feasibility of our grand designs. The path to progress is seldom a straight line, and the weight of our aspirations can often prove too heavy to bear alone.
Although the project introduced new housing stock and reinvigorated a historic landmark, its limitations have highlighted the difficulties of addressing deeply rooted socio-economic issues through redevelopment alone. By embracing the lessons of this experience, we can begin to chart a new course that recognizes the interdependence of social, economic, and public safety concerns. We can draw strength from the knowledge that our aspirations, however imperfect, have the power to inspire change and galvanize communities around a shared vision of a better future.
Woodward’s example demonstrates that urban renewal in marginalized communities requires more than physical transformation. It underscores the importance of integrating sustainable economic opportunities, accessible social supports, and inclusive policies to create meaningful and lasting change. The redevelopment remains an incomplete experiment that offers critical lessons for future projects in similarly vulnerable urban contexts.
Author’s Note:
This analysis of Woodward’s as an icon of gentrification and its role in the Downtown Eastside draws inspiration from Dan Fumano’s exceptional piece in the Vancouver Sun, “Downtown Eastside at ‘tipping point’ as London Drugs considers leaving Woodward’s building.“ It is a fantastic read and a prime example of outstanding journalism. We encourage everyone interested in understanding the complexities of this issue to read it.
Denise is a long-time advocate for affordable and dignified housing in the Downtown Eastside. Having lived in SROs and volunteered in homeless shelters, she brings a personal understanding of the housing crisis and its impact on the community. Her work reflects years of lived experience, frontline work, and commitment to creating better living conditions for DTES residents.
Leave a Comment