Metrotown Redevelopment Plans (Downtown Burnaby)

[teriyaki]

Love that all the towers have outdoor pools in the render

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Spr0ckets

You're conflating a lot of stuff, mixing up ownerships and over-simplifying things that are more complicated that you seem to suggest.

So, to get Oakridge out of the way, the developers/owners (Quadreal/Westbank) own everything within their property lines - which includes the current park above the plaza they are developing that will be partially open to the public.
So it's technically not a "public" park in the same sense that Bonsor or Central Park in Metrotown are.

How? The design isn't done in a matter they can just block people off from coming in that they don't want to. CoV lists it as a public park, so how does this affect things in a practical, day-to-day sense?

Which brings us to the tangled mess that is the mall at Metrotown and the surroundings.
The mall itself is owned by Ivanhoe Cambridge along with (through some weird rights-of-way mishmash situation) the bus loop even though they technically don't control what happens there, it's Translink.

Bonsor Park is city/public property run by the parks department, so they can't just pass over ownership or swap its location for a new location without some municipal acts.

And Concord doesn't own anything that isn't in or within their property lines (their current redevelopment area of the north side surface parking lot and the old Sears store), and their redeveloping anything out of that region would involve them buying it out just as with any real estate property (assuming it's actually available for purchase for private ownership.

To be able to achieve what you're proposing would involve a lot of deal-making and property changing hands - including public property - a lot of which would no doubt get public pushback (the Bonsor Park part, for obvious reasons) - enough to probably render it unfeasible.

One could (as Ivanhoe Cambridge are doing now) propose parts of all of it as part of a Master plan vision for redevelopment of the area with the clear understanding that major stakeholders are not necessarily or currently party to such a proposal and realizing that those parts of the proposal may never see fruition.
At the end of the day, what a private developer or owner chooses to do or not do with their site is their business and is not beholden to what a City's long-term planning vision may be (....although it helps to play nice.)
With exceptions.
(...see below)

Well, I proposed Concord building over that entire site because Ivanhoe doesn't do residential(at least not really- they have some investments in properties they didn't build), and building that many new office buildings there simply isn't viable. It would make sense for Concord, since they could market it as a single site like Concord Brentwood (I guess you can call it "SearsPlace". lol.)

I honestly doubt Ivanhoe will do most of the redevelopment themselves.

Public hearings on Oakridge Park were pretty positive, and doubling the size of Bonsor Park (presuming they keep the Community Center where it is instead of moving it closer to the park) should be good enough to make most people happy.

Keeping both the old and new sites means both compete against each other.

EDIT :

Incidentally, it's worth noting Ivanhoe Cambridge HAVE already prior proposed relocating the bus loop to south of Beresford as part of a plan to add a Metrotower IV, which was met with strong pushback and essentially a firm "No" by the City.

Remember that the bus loop is technically on their property, but that doesn't mean they can just up and decide to relocate it and plonk a tower on there.

That's just how complicated stuff is there.

I said to build it on *top* of the bus loop's airspace (see: Shops at New Westminister). They may need to move the bus loop to the South side of Bonsor temporarily, but they'd have to do that for any redevelopment of Metropolis anyways (the mall partially overhangs the bus loop.)

Originally Posted by Sheba

I remember that. I was at a stakeholder meeting for upgrading the BC Parkway (the pathway along the Expo Line) and there was a section they weren't going to plan due to the possibility of some sort of bus loop.

There are many 'owners' who have to play nice to make this all work. Anthem has it easy dealing with Station Square as it's a single owner dealing with a rectangular site (FYI I think they were happy with the idea of having the overhead walkway from the Skytrain aimed at their property).

But the Metropolis Mall site is two owners - Ivanhoe Cambridge for most of it, and then Sears (now Concord - who haven't wanted to play nice) for the section that's being redeveloped now. I don't blame IC for playing the long game here, as the mall is making them lots of money and Concord has likely given them headaches (just think back to the dueling lawsuits).

Then add in TransLink (who have some say in where the buses stop) and Burnaby (who want more density / amenities and have to answer to citizens).

We should be happy there's any action on the property due to all the moving pieces involved.

I think it's Ivanhoe that was unhappy at Concord, but still.


The issue with 'just wait' is the massive Metropolis site becomes increasingly more and more of a target, since it's so massive and central in Metrotown.
Also, the last major renovation of the mall was almost 20 years ago.

Basically every other mall (including Ivanhoe's other malls near SkyTrains and in urban areas) are giving up waiting and building up on their lands.
Some are being demolished and rebuilt.

That property tax bill is huge, and even successful malls like Lougheed and CF Richmond are being redeveloped (the latter not as entirely as the first, but still) despite the loss in sales revenue.

[Spr0ckets]

Originally Posted by fredinno

How? The design isn't done in a matter they can just block people off from coming in that they don't want to. CoV lists it as a public park, so how does this affect things in a practical, day-to-day sense?

Well, it's not sitting on public land for one thing. And it never was.
Bonsor park on the other hand is.
That land (along with the one the Rec. centre sit on) belong to the City of Burnaby.

The fact that Quadreal decided to make that plaza public (and probably through some agreement with the City and the parks department that I imagine manages it) allow public access to it to the degree that it's listed as a public park now doesn't change that fact or the difference from Bonsor park.

It was probably to their benefit that they did so in terms of fostering good relations with the city, but they just as easily would have been within their rights to develop it as a private outdoor amenity space for the residential towers, or as commerical plaza for the mall itself.

Originally Posted by fredinno

I said to build it on *top* of the bus loop's airspace (see: Shops at New Westminister). They may need to move the bus loop to the South side of Bonsor temporarily, but they'd have to do that for any redevelopment of Metropolis anyways (the mall partially overhangs the bus loop.)

Yes, and that's what the city wasn't amenable to.
They didn't want (and presumably still don't want) to relocate the bus loop - even temporarily to allow for any construction to occur where it sits whether to allow a tower on top of it or to replace it.
Translink are a party to a such a decision as well and in their view the bus loop is best served being as close to the skytrain station as possible (which obviously makes sense).
South of the skytrain guideway on Beresford (the other possible logical location) is a no for the city since they envision (or at least did before) Beresford as being a future pedestrian artwalk of sorts with limited vehicular access (public or private).

And that's where the city still stands on that situation.

And by the way, the tower they proposed to build over the bus loop would have been a Metrotower IV - i.e. an office tower extension to their current Metrotowers I - III
There was talk some time back of them also wanting to do a residential tower (or more) but they were looking at the north side of the mall parking lot adjacent to Kingsway for that (in front of the Superstore and Silvercity).

Originally Posted by fredinno

I think it's Ivanhoe that was unhappy at Concord, but still.


The issue with 'just wait' is the massive Metropolis site becomes increasingly more and more of a target, since it's so massive and central in Metrotown.
Also, the last major renovation of the mall was almost 20 years ago.

Basically every other mall (including Ivanhoe's other malls near SkyTrains and in urban areas) are giving up waiting and building up on their lands.
Some are being demolished and rebuilt.

That property tax bill is huge, and even successful malls like Lougheed and CF Richmond are being redeveloped (the latter not as entirely as the first, but still) despite the loss in sales revenue.

The thing is, most of those other malls are being redeveloped specifically because they had recently began to start losing revenue - even while property taxes remain high and continue to rise.

Certainly in the case of Lougheed mall and Brentwood, and although Oakridge wasn't necessarily in the same boat revenuestream-wise, Quadreal's vision (And Ivanhoe Cambridge prior to that, as the previous landlords and landowners) foresaw a complete re-do of the commercial plaza space anyway.

Metropolis isn't in the same situation and if anything a major reveldopment on the scale of an Oakridge or an Brentwood mall would almost certainly result in a steep fall in mall revenue for IC.
Its still one of the top revenue earning malls not just in western Canada but in all of Canada and I believe 2nd highest even per capita outside of Greater Toronto (behind only Pacific place).
They've had some vacancies in recent times - mostly the after-effects of the Pandemic - but they seem to have little to no trouble getting new tenants or having current tenants expand their spaces.

It's probably part of the reason why they have no problem with an 80 year build-out masterplan proposal and slow-walking it in a more phased style like Lougheed, rather than going for a one-shot redevelopment and complete re-do in on go ala Oakridge.

They can literally afford to sit it out and wait until they get an administration at city hall that is more amenable to what they have in mind with such an extended timeline because the golden goose is still laying them eggs in the time being.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Spr0ckets

The thing is, most of those other malls are being redeveloped specifically because they had recently began to start losing revenue - even while property taxes remain high and continue to rise.


Metropolis isn't in the same situation and if anything a major reveldopment on the scale of an Oakridge or an Brentwood mall would almost certainly result in a steep fall in mall revenue for IC.
Its still one of the top revenue earning malls not just in western Canada but in all of Canada and I believe 2nd highest even per capita outside of Greater Toronto (behind only Pacific place).
They've had some vacancies in recent times - mostly the after-effects of the Pandemic - but they seem to have little to no trouble getting new tenants or having current tenants expand their spaces.

It's probably part of the reason why they have no problem with an 80 year build-out masterplan proposal and slow-walking it in a more phased style like Lougheed, rather than going for a one-shot redevelopment and complete re-do in on go ala Oakridge.

They can literally afford to sit it out and wait until they get an administration at city hall that is more amenable to what they have in mind with such an extended timeline because the golden goose is still laying them eggs in the time being.

Exactly

Fantasy territory here. I wonder if they'd be able to have podiums with the upper levels connected, and then towers on top. That way the ground level could be opened up to pedestrian / bike / vehicle trasffic while the upper levels would still make it an enclosed mall.

I read in an article the other day that they plan to add a lot more trees to the site. I wonder how much of that would be at ground level vs on top of the podiums. If they could do most of it on the podiums that would make my fantasy idea a little more plausible.

Anyway beyond basic master planning we have little idea what they're going to do - just that they're not going to do much of anything anytime soon.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Sheba

Exactly

Fantasy territory here. I wonder if they'd be able to have podiums with the upper levels connected, and then towers on top. That way the ground level could be opened up to pedestrian / bike / vehicle trasffic while the upper levels would still make it an enclosed mall.

I read in an article the other day that they plan to add a lot more trees to the site. I wonder how much of that would be at ground level vs on top of the podiums. If they could do most of it on the podiums that would make my fantasy idea a little more plausible.

Anyway beyond basic master planning we have little idea what they're going to do - just that they're not going to do much of anything anytime soon.

The problem is that causes so much shadowing that it basically ruins a lot of the whole point of the idea of breaking up the mall.
Guildford already has mall above road, and the experience below isn't great.
Having it just be regular walkways means you're just creating a ton of Station Squares connected together by indoor walkways.

Originally Posted by Spr0ckets

Well, it's not sitting on public land for one thing. And it never was.
Bonsor park on the other hand is.
That land (along with the one the Rec. centre sit on) belong to the City of Burnaby.

The fact that Quadreal decided to make that plaza public (and probably through some agreement with the City and the parks department that I imagine manages it) allow public access to it to the degree that it's listed as a public park now doesn't change that fact or the difference from Bonsor park.

It was probably to their benefit that they did so in terms of fostering good relations with the city, but they just as easily would have been within their rights to develop it as a private outdoor amenity space for the residential towers, or as commerical plaza for the mall itself.

And that's bad for its users because...?

The City may not like not having full control over what they do on top of the land, but that's still better than the current situation of having a park that is busy now and will be over-capacity in 20-30 years.

Yes, and that's what the city wasn't amenable to.
They didn't want (and presumably still don't want) to relocate the bus loop - even temporarily to allow for any construction to occur where it sits whether to allow a tower on top of it or to replace it.
Translink are a party to a such a decision as well and in their view the bus loop is best served being as close to the skytrain station as possible (which obviously makes sense).
South of the skytrain guideway on Beresford (the other possible logical location) is a no for the city since they envision (or at least did before) Beresford as being a future pedestrian artwalk of sorts with limited vehicular access (public or private).

And that's where the city still stands on that situation.

And by the way, the tower they proposed to build over the bus loop would have been a Metrotower IV - i.e. an office tower extension to their current Metrotowers I - III
There was talk some time back of them also wanting to do a residential tower (or more) but they were looking at the north side of the mall parking lot adjacent to Kingsway for that (in front of the Superstore and Silvercity).

The Burnaby City Plan for the Metropolis site shows them demolishing the entire mall to make streets, which by necessity would require shutting down and temporarily relocating the bus loop, as the mall overhangs the bus loop.

The thing is, most of those other malls are being redeveloped specifically because they had recently began to start losing revenue - even while property taxes remain high and continue to rise.

Certainly in the case of Lougheed mall and Brentwood, and although Oakridge wasn't necessarily in the same boat revenuestream-wise, Quadreal's vision (And Ivanhoe Cambridge prior to that, as the previous landlords and landowners) foresaw a complete re-do of the commercial plaza space anyway.

Metropolis isn't in the same situation and if anything a major reveldopment on the scale of an Oakridge or an Brentwood mall would almost certainly result in a steep fall in mall revenue for IC.
Its still one of the top revenue earning malls not just in western Canada but in all of Canada and I believe 2nd highest even per capita outside of Greater Toronto (behind only Pacific place).
They've had some vacancies in recent times - mostly the after-effects of the Pandemic - but they seem to have little to no trouble getting new tenants or having current tenants expand their spaces.

It's probably part of the reason why they have no problem with an 80 year build-out masterplan proposal and slow-walking it in a more phased style like Lougheed, rather than going for a one-shot redevelopment and complete re-do in on go ala Oakridge.

They can literally afford to sit it out and wait until they get an administration at city hall that is more amenable to what they have in mind with such an extended timeline because the golden goose is still laying them eggs in the time being.

Richmond Center is also a top-tier Canadian Mall, and they're redeveloping the site to just short of complete demolition and reconstruction (no idea how they plan on adding the 'public' concourse through the mall without major, disruptive renovations, and the southern section and Sportscheck are going to end up being demolished and rebuilt.)

The only exceptions to the trend of low density malls being redeveloped near Skytrain are Coquitlam Centre (which is behind the rest on planning), International Village (no one wants to buy and demolish it...yet - probably too expensive), Henderson Place (same story), and Metropolis at Metrotown (minus Sears, which arguably was never part of the mall.)


And yeah, this sort of thing would be a phased process over several decades so the shops can be moved around as each section of the mall is demolished instead of in 1 piece. The site is too big for that anyways.

The current plan post-Phase 2 would also be phased demolition.


Again, how long can you keep a mall on top with no renovations?
Just sitting there and collecting money without making major investments isn't a good strategy to ensure Metropolis remains a 'golden goose'.


Also, Lougheed wasn't really 'struggling'.
It's not a top-tier, but it was more on the lines of Willowbrook Mall (mid-tier, making money, but not really a destination) vs something like International Village (how is that thing still open).

Shape just decided they could make more money by building towers a decade ago:
https://www.burnabynow.com/local-new...stages-2975426

"Lougheed is very exciting because, I think, for a number of reasons," he told the NOW. "One is we purchased a property which had been allowed to decline. It occupies a fantastic location as far as greater Vancouver and the various town centres that are identified in the Metro Vancouver core strategy."

Although sales have held up over the years, they're flat and average, and Kwiatkowski believes the mall has more potential.

"Right now, we see a bunch of vacancies, but it will soon fill up with a conditional deal with another major fashion tenant," he added, mentioning Tommy Hilfiger took a spot in the mall recently, and the Steve Nash Fitness World gym will be opening soon, as well.

Also, anecdote, but Lougheed was always full before they started the construction. It wasn't exactly 'struggling.'

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

Deserves it's own thread probably.

Three round blue things are Metrotower 1, 2, 3







https://metropolismasterplan.com/sec...olis-overview/

From Burnaby Updates

[Spr0ckets]

Immediate quick thoughts and observations:-

- That phasing plan makes logical sense, from the standpoint of them seemingly wanting to develop the areas around the mall itself -
i.e. the surface parking to the northwest which I predict will be the first to undergo redevelopment in concert with, or just following Concord Pacific's own phase II development of their next door parking lot and the Old Sears store section of the mall. Also the parking structure to the Southeast and the loading bay area just to the east of the Metrotower office towers (more on them in a bit), as well as the area where Walmart currently sits (and T & T below it) and the parking structure to their east as well.
That one's probably going to be the first of several which are dependant on anchor tenant's leases expiration dates determining when those phases are actually able to kick off.

The one that I'm stil not sold on as one that will be a straightforward shot is the bus loop area which falls under one of those seven parcels.
While Ivanhoe Cambridge might own that land, I'm guessing Translink might have some right-of-way rights or say-so in any redevelopment plans as would involve uprooting or relocating the Bus loop - which is part of the Metrotown Transit hub system (including the Skytrain station) and are the second-most trafficked transit hubs in the GVA after Waterfront station.
I would guess this will be the last of the seven redeveloped before they begin the breakup of the mall "proper" in the 2050's/2060's (It's crazy even phrasing it that way)

As to the other parcel (the Northeast parcel where the Bay currently sits) I guess that will also depend on when that particular lease expires, but given that it would probably see the Food Court getting torn down as well, I'm guessing they might wait on that one too.
Though the proximity to Concord's phase I (which should be complete by then) might also be a mark in favour of redeveloping it sooner rather than later.......I think.

- I just noticed from the colour coding scheme and the presence of that blue tower in addition to the 3 other blue Metrotowers, that it seems the plan is to still build a Metrotower IV. Only unlike the original plans of doing it over where the bus loop currently sits, it would be in the mall are just north of the Metrotowers.
But since that's located in the main mall redevelopment area and phase, it seems like that won't happen anytime soon.

Good thing too I suppose - with the office market in the slump it currently is in.

- Some of those towers seem like they'll be pretty tall if the scale of those massings relative to the under-construction Concord Metrotown phase I towers and the proposed Anthem 66-storey Citizen Tower to the north are anything to go by (although I notice they seem to show a massive height difference between the Citizen Tower massing and the Concord Metrotown Tower 1, when the two towers should roughly around the same heights.)

In any case, it seems like they are proposing towers in the 70-80 storey ranges.

But we all know how it goes,... from proposed tower heights in master plans, to actual built forms.
Still, those are some pretty ambitious tower height proposals.

Since they say "2025 (as the starting point) to 2054", I wonder if we'll be able to see some applications started by years end to kick things off with a couple of phases next year.

Should be interesting.

[gaviscon]

Why are we turning it into a condo town

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by Spr0ckets

I just noticed from the colour coding scheme and the presence of that blue tower in addition to the 3 other blue Metrotowers, that it seems the plan is to still build a Metrotower IV. Only unlike the original plans of doing it over where the bus loop currently sits, it would be in the mall are just north of the Metrotowers.
But since that's located in the main mall redevelopment area and phase, it seems like that won't happen anytime soon.

Good thing too I suppose - with the office market in the slump it currently is in.

Originally Posted by gaviscon

Why are we turning it into a condo town

Given the 30-year time horizon for these first phases, and the more extended timeline for the core parcels, I would say specific land uses in the master plan should be taken with a grain of salt. If there's a significant recovery in office markets and better connectivity with Metro Vancouver's other town centres thanks to the construction of the Purple Line by, say, 2045, we could easily see more office space added to this redevelopment. I would guess those parcels on the southeast could be especially attractive to office tenants given their proximity to the Skytrain.

[Spr0ckets]

The Daily Hive has a more extensive write-up and some more images and renderings of the proposed plan by Ivanhoe C.

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/metr...a-e204890bedf6

[Vin]

I am happy that the owner is not following the City's master plan 100% with smaller rectangular grid-style lots per typical boring downtown format, ie. bringing all retail to the streetfront. Instead, they are creating a larger block smack in the middle for a larger future indoor mall development: something I have been advocating and am glad someone has the same idea.

Again, Metrotown will never be the same without its large indoor mall.

[griswold]

I hope they dont tear down the entire mall. I personally like Metrotown the way it is. It would be a shame to lose it. It has so much.

[Spr0ckets]

Originally Posted by griswold

I hope they dont tear down the entire mall. I personally like Metrotown the way it is. It would be a shame to lose it. It has so much.

If it's any sort of consolation, if it happens, it likely won't be within your lifetime

(I'm not sure how much of a consolation that is).

Given the timeline of how they plan to proceed with the phasing of this, it looks like they want to build the phases sitting on parking lots or parking structures (i.e. the ones outside the main mall building) as part of the first few phases of the project from possibly late 2025 running through to 2054.

The phases that would involve the actual break up of the main mall itself are likely to begin after that (probably the late 2050's/early 2060's) and probably won't be complete for the next decade or two after that, which would put the whole development in line with the originally mooted 2080's completion date and timeline.

To state the obvious, unless there are any highschoolers among us reading the forums, it's safe to say that most of us won't be around to see that completion.

It's even questionable if this plan will survive as is, through the next several Burnaby city councils and administrations that may have different priorites as they come into power.

[BaddieB]

The timeline for this project seems a little too far out. Completion in the 2080's?

[Spr0ckets]

Originally Posted by BaddieB

The timeline for this project seems a little too far out. Completion in the 2080's?

Based on the information that they had given in the initial public information session back in 2019 at the mall, they estimated it would be fully built out in the 2080's.

Now all that was pre-pandemic, and a lot may have changed since then and the webpages they had put up showing some of that information are no longer active. But some of the images from then are still available in the first couple of pages of this thread.

But the 2070's/2080's completion makes sense for a couple of reasons.

They can't begin the phases that cover the main part of the mall until the 2050's because that's when the leases for the main anchor tenants start to run out.
(I'm guessing the Walmarts, the T&T's, the Superstores and such).

Furthermore, the phase that's scheduled to go last is the north-eastern most one where the Hudson's Bay currently sits, and that's not a coincidence or by accident since the Hudson's Bay lease ends in 2086.

Now a lot can change between now and then obviously (like the fact that a lot of Bay brick and mortar locations have since been forced to close up shop, partly due to changing retail habits of shoppers, and this location could face the same fate earlier rather than later).


EDIT:

Okay I did find an article that sorta confirms the timeline:

From the Hive:-

"Four redevelopment phases, with each phase its own precinct, are envisioned. Depending on existing tenant leases, the phasing of each precinct will extend from 2021 to 2086."

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/metr...ent-principles


Obvously that's based on the public information session from 2019 and as mentioned it was right before the pandemic lockdown and clearly a lot has changed since then - their timeline then was starting from 2021.

The most current information they've posted gives a start date of 2025.

I'd take both (the start date and even the prospective build-out end date of the 2080's) with a huge grain of salt as we've seen what can happen even in the space of 5 short years.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Meh, Metrotown's starting to get lame... and becoming an obstacle to walkability. Losing the climate control will suck, but shrinking of the main mall is inevitable.

Although Ivanhoe's a little optimistic in thinking TransLink will give up the bus loop without at least a 1:1 replacement - and no, an on-street "interchange" does not count.

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Although Ivanhoe's a little optimistic in thinking TransLink will give up the bus loop without at least a 1:1 replacement - and no, an on-street "interchange" does not count.

Just wondering why not? Most of the high traffic routes already use Central Boulevard and a BRT/Purple Line might eliminate the use of some bays (?)

[Spr0ckets]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

Why not?

Not to speak for him, but in my own view, looking at their proposal, the combination of eliminating the bus loop and seemingly narrowing Central Blvd. at the same time (i.e. getting rid of a lane each side if those renders are to be read correctly), is what won't work, I think.
Or at least, I don't see how.

Bear in mind that in addition to the bus loop just south of the mall right now, you also have a dedicated bus lane with stops just north of the skytrain as part of Central Blvd. just to the east and to the west of skytrain station, and presumably those will go as well.

So how will Translink be expected to cope with that much traffic diversion on the one hand, and on the other hand, would the City (specifically, the City engineers) even be amenable to that much of a radical reduction in car traffic capacity on Central Blvd. of all places by reducing it to a two lane road and bottlenecking at that section?
And that's even if they were somehow successfully able to replace the loop or move it somewhere not too far from the skytrain station (which is part of why it is where it currently is), that is.

I could potentially see them building those south towers proposed for the current bus loop location on top of stilts and keeping the loop where it is - but with towers and some sort of plaza on top of it, but even then you'd still need to relocate it somewhere for the duration of the construction period of the towers, no?

EDIT (after your edit) :
And a Purple line extension as a means of easing congestion on Central Blvd. isn't likely or on the horizon for at least over a decade or a decade and a half, I think.
(since there are no plans for any movement on that until the Langley extension itself gets done.)
Which would likely put it potentially into construction at around the same time the phase with the bus loop section is also taking place or getting constructed.

That means a window when you don't have a bus loop and don't have a purple line (yet) to take some of that traffic away and save you on some bus bays.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

Just wondering why not? Most of the high traffic routes already use Central Boulevard and a BRT/Purple Line might eliminate the use of some bays (?)

The Purple Line will make the 222 redundant (not the 130, Willingdon still needs a local bus), but that still leaves twelve feeder bus routes including the 19 and 49 - a little too many for one traffic-calmed street to handle.

Yes, there's a stop at the SkyTrain, and then a stop at the loop for mallgoers. I suspect that one unified stop would be overcapacity yesterday.

Edit: ninja'ed.

[Spr0ckets]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

The Purple Line will make the 222 redundant (not the 130, Willingdon still needs a local bus), but that still leaves twelve feeder bus routes including the 19 and 49 - a little too many for one traffic-calmed street to handle.

Yes, there's a stop at the SkyTrain, and then a stop at the loop for mallgoers. I suspect that one unified stop would be overcapacity yesterday.

Edit: ninja'ed.

Not to mention the fact that you're proposing to build 7-10 more towers with all the residents/employees that that will to the area (by the time of the bus loop area phase).

That alone will bring (even) more bus-rider traffic that will overload any semblance of a re-modfied or relocated bus loop without major adjustments that their current plan doesn't seem to show.