General Vancouver Development Updates II

[madog222]

2516 Commercial & 1705 E Broadway's rezoning was approved by council at one of the recent public hearings.
While, to the grief of many here, the rezoning design prevented any further station expansion westwards the developer, City, and Translink will study the possibly of reserving space to allow for a future platform.

From the rezoning referral report

The Commercial-Broadway SkyTrain Station is a critical interchange point in the transit system and one of the busiest stations in the region. As currently proposed, the development would block the ability to expand the station platform on the west side of the guideway. To protect for the potential future expansion of the SkyTrain platform, staff have included conditions in Appendix B to allow for further discussions and design development between staff, the applicant and Translink. This further review will be undertaken following Council's consideration of the project and may result in further modifications to the proposal which may warrant a further decision by Council.

...

Design development of the easterly portion of the site to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning and General Manager of Engineering Services, to accommodate future expansion of the Commercial-Broadway SkyTrain Station platform.

Note to Applicant: The Applicant and the City agree to engage TransLink regarding the future expansion of the Skytrain Station along the western edge of the existing guideway within a (12) twelve-month period from Council’s approval in principle of this rezoning application, all parties acting reasonably.
Accommodation of future platform may include, but is not limited to, volumetric space and structural supports for a future platform and walkway across Broadway, as well as emergency exit provisions. This design development effort will be undertaken with the understanding that overall project viability is maintained.
The spatial provision may house an interim use, until the spatial provision is outfitted and connected to the station at a timeline determined by the City of Vancouver and TransLink.

https://council.vancouver.ca/20260723/documents/phea3rr.pdf

[WarrenC12]

Commercial-Broadway should see less traffic when the M-Line extension opens, no? Some travelers at least will opt to change at the Canada Line based on their end destination downtown.

[Airboy]

Heard last night that the health Authority took possession of the New St Paul's Hospital this week. I think it will still be a while before opening.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Airboy

Heard last night that the health Authority took possession of the New St Paul's Hospital this week. I think it will still be a while before opening.

They were supposed to but it's not quite there yet. They did get City occupancy but there are a number of outstanding contractual items PCL has not yet completed. Should be soon and shouldn't impact opening in early 2027.

[madog222]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Commercial-Broadway should see less traffic when the M-Line extension opens, no? Some travelers at least will opt to change at the Canada Line based on their end destination downtown.

Certainly but I expect there will also be an increase in traffic simply from the increased connectivity.

[Migrant_Coconut]

There's also the Langley extension opening four years from now, plus UBCx and the Purple Line some decade or two after that. I'd definitely want a full Spanish solution rather than half of one.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by madog222

...
While, to the grief of many here, the rezoning design prevented any further station expansion westwards the developer, City, and Translink will study the possibly of reserving space to allow for a future platform.

From the rezoning referral report

https://council.vancouver.ca/20260723/documents/phea3rr.pdf

Nice, thanks!
There could be more inbound Expo Line commuter traffic to Central Broadway with the M-Line extension.
That would then have the reverse flow in the afternoon that would use a new west side platfiorm on the outbound track..
I suppose the argument is that return commutes are usually less concentrated than morning commutes.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

There's also the Langley extension opening four years from now, plus UBCx and the Purple Line some decade or two after that. I'd definitely want a full Spanish solution rather than half of one.

Was that the original plan?

The station is busy by Vancouver standards, but hardly by international standards. The doors on the the newer trainsets open wider too. I don't see any issue with the volume of people getting on/off or platform overcrowding.

[mcj]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

There's also the Langley extension opening four years from now, plus UBCx and the Purple Line some decade or two after that. I'd definitely want a full Spanish solution rather than half of one.

Plus much higher density around all of those stations being built + those already built in the coming decades. Glad to see Translink is actually planning for the future here rather than having tunnel vision and only seeing what is happening today.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Was that the original plan?

The station is busy by Vancouver standards, but hardly by international standards. The doors on the the newer trainsets open wider too. I don't see any issue with the volume of people getting on/off or platform overcrowding.

I believe it was a later plan, like the platform extensions.

Maybe. Twenty years ago, you could likely have made a similar argument against bigger trains; the Mark 2s were more or less handling things fine.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

I believe it was a later plan, like the platform extensions.

Maybe. Twenty years ago, you could likely have made a similar argument against bigger trains; the Mark 2s were more or less handling things fine.

And today I would argue for more transit lines and connection points, not focusing everything on a random spot in East Van.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

And today I would argue for more transit lines and connection points, not focusing everything on a random spot in East Van.

Like it or not, that "random spot" is one of the biggest bottlenecks in the network; even if all the relief lines arrived tomorrow (they won't), it's still going to be a busy interchange between two busy lines, and it'd still be preferable to have more capacity than less.

The tower might need a redesign. That's it, not a big deal.

[Feathered Friend]

https://www.shapeyourcity.ca/2315-w-4-ave

2315 W 4th Ave
368 market rental homes, above Safeway
Complaint with existing C-2B zone
Development application submitted - November 12, 2024
Building permit Issued - December 24, 2025
Photos taken - July 11, 2026

https://www.instagram.com/city_duo_yvr/p/DbepVyzGtjN/

[officedweller]

Prior Place

... has reached the bottom of its excavation.

https://www.instagram.com/p/Dbdu5ETG9_Z/?img_index=1

[jollyburger]

Surprised they are bringing this back right before the election.

17 stories facing the station/6 stories on the north side.

Development Partnership for Mixed-Use Rental Housing and Social Service Facility Project
2098 West 7th Avenue, Vancouver

Budget: Gross $101M Construction $65M

Component Plan / Assumptions
Plan Area Broadway Plan
Area above grade Approximately 140,000 sq. ft.
Area below grade 41,010 sq. ft.
Height 17-storey building
Residential 120,620 sq. ft.
Non-residential 1,500 sq. ft. (social service centre)
FSR 6.50
Parking TBD
Environmental Site Assessment ESA 1 was completed in 2020 and concluded that there
is low potential for soil, groundwater and soil vapour
contamination at the site.

https://bids.sciquest.com/apps/Router/PublicEvent?CustomerOrg=CityofVancouver

[madog222]

Perhaps notable they call it "Rental Housing and Social Service Facility" which suggests not supportive housing as previously proposed.

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by madog222

Perhaps notable they call it "Rental Housing and Social Service Facility" which suggests not supportive housing as previously proposed.

Ah it's even more limited in scope (from one of the attachments)

Delivery of purpose-built market rental housing with a portion of the rental housing dedicated to veterans, and a social service facility serving the veteran community

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by madog222

Perhaps notable they call it "Rental Housing and Social Service Facility" which suggests not supportive housing as previously proposed.

There seem to be several changes to the project, compared to the DP that was approved in 2024. The density has gone from 3.78 to 6.5, and there are 4 more floors.

It appears that the City referred to social housing in the DP, although the mayor said it was going to be supportive housing when he announced in May last year the City wouldn't be pursuing the original modular building.

Obviously his 'no new supportive housing ' policy still applies for now, so this can be social housing, and it will be interesting to see who steps forward to develop it, who manages it, and what the mix of units and rents will be.

It's a stroke of genius to limit the social services and social housing to be for veterans. How are those opposed to the project going to justify being against housing and services for veterans?

[mcj]

Originally Posted by Changing City

There seem to be several changes to the project, compared to the DP that was approved in 2024. The density has gone from 3.78 to 6.5, and there are 4 more floors.

Ah the old "NO MEGATOWERS AT SAFEWAY" treatment, love to see it.

[Glow Fun City]

Originally Posted by Changing City

It's a stroke of genius to limit the social services and social housing to be for veterans. How are those opposed to the project going to justify being against housing and services for veterans?

There is already a Royal Canadian Legion veterans' housing building basically right next to the site… (between 6th and 7th at Maple)