Burnaby City Council Rejects 1,400-Unit Student Housing Proposal

Burnaby City Council voted against a proposal for a large student housing complex near Simon Fraser University (SFU) last week, stating that not all locations are suitable for high-density residential use. The plan, submitted by Toronto-based Forum Asset Management, aimed to construct a privately owned and operated facility with approximately 1,400 units at the southeast base of Burnaby Mountain.

The proposed site at 9809-9998 Rathburn Drive is currently occupied by 16 single-family homes. It is strategically located near the intersection of Broadway and North Road, just a short walk from Burquitlam Station and a bus ride away from the SFU campus. The site falls within the provincial government’s designated 800-metre Transit Oriented Area radius around Burquitlam Station, which aims to promote residential developments near transit routes.

Details of the Proposal

The preliminary design, developed in collaboration with architectural firm Gensler and urban planning firm Urban Strategies, features four terraced buildings. Two of these buildings would rise to 16 storeys, while the other two would reach heights of 11 and 12 storeys. The project intended to provide 950 dedicated student housing units and 450 secured rental housing units, potentially accommodating several thousand residents.

The housing would cater primarily to “latter stage post-secondary students,” addressing SFU’s current lack of on-campus accommodation for this demographic. The plan included a variety of unit sizes, from small dormitory-style micro studios to larger three-bedroom apartments. City policies currently allow for small dormitory-style units near the campus, but there are ongoing discussions about citywide zoning regulations for privately-owned student housing.

City staff had recommended that the council continue discussions with the proponent to refine the proposal. They noted the pressing need for additional student housing in the area and highlighted the benefits of purpose-built student housing for overall housing affordability.

Despite the staff’s recommendation, the council ultimately rejected the proposal, with only Councillor Pietro Calendino supporting further consideration. During the deliberations, he pointed out the demand for off-campus housing expressed by students and emphasized the location’s suitability given its proximity to the university.

Environmental Concerns and Community Reactions

Opposition to the proposal largely stemmed from environmental concerns related to the site’s proximity to the forested area of Burnaby Mountain and Stoney Creek. Councillors raised alarms about potential ecological impacts, particularly after significant development in the area has already stressed the waterway, which supports endangered fish species.

Councillor Alison Gu voiced concerns about natural hazard risks such as wildfires and flooding, while Councillor Sav Dhaliwal warned that Stoney Creek is now “very fragile” following recent developments. The council received numerous appeals from the community regarding the environmental integrity of the creek, which has suffered from increased sediment and pollution.

In addition to ecological issues, councillors expressed reservations about the livability of the proposed micro units, particularly regarding their affordability, as the development would likely operate at market rates due to its private nature. Gu reiterated her support for student housing but emphasized that developments directly managed by educational institutions typically aim to meet affordability standards.

The proposal’s rejection reflects a broader trend in Burnaby, where high-density developments face increasing scrutiny due to environmental and livability considerations. As the city moves toward finalizing its Burnaby 2050 Official Community Plan, which includes provisions for residential developments of up to 12 storeys, this decision may signal a shift in how the council approaches future projects.

Burnaby’s ongoing dialogue about balancing development with environmental stewardship underscores the complexities involved in addressing the region’s housing needs while safeguarding its natural resources.