Burnaby Updates

[Changing City]

As I understand Burnaby's current Capital Plan, the whole of the current five year program (including the new RCMP Facility Redevelopment, Confederation Park Community Centre, Cameron Recreation Centre, Pool and Library) is already funded. In 2024 just over half the expenditure of $365m is from the Community Benefit Bonus Reserve, and just under half from other sources, including taxes.

Burnaby has already collected the money they're planning to spend, so it's come from developments over the past 20 or 30 years (in a period when Burnaby saved almost everything it received, and didn't spend much on new facilities, or anything on affordable housing for example).

The money can't be spent on operations - only on capital items, so the current Council are committed to 'nice things' - ($2.5bn worth over the next 5 years) - rather than sitting counting the money.

At the end of 2023 Burnaby was sitting on assets of $5.7bn, up $241m from 2022. The City’s reserve funds are $2,16bn, 10% operating reserves (for things like snow removal) and 90% of them for capital projects, both new and renewal. They would have been even higher, but CACs only paid "$62.2 million compared to both budget and prior years (2022 - $250.7 million)". Nevertheless, in 2022 Burnaby’s reserves were the largest in the province by more than $1 billion.

We know some development projects that will pay CACs are paused, and unless the entire market for new housing stays depressed for a long time, the CACs associated with the anticipated, but stalled, projects will show up in future.

The new provincial legislation may limit the amount Burnaby can collect from CACs in future, but they should have less need to renew many of their facilities as several Community Centres are being upgraded significantly. There's going to be discussion about whether Burnaby should count on CACs as much going forward, and whether taxes will have to climb, or future capital projects (like the New City Hall, which isn't in the 2024-28 plan) reduced in scope, but the current projects aren't impacted by future revenue from development.

[Lexus]

Originally Posted by Spr0ckets

It'll probably be more cost effective/less expensive to simply build a new one from the ground up rather than try to retrofit and upgrade the existing building that's at the end of its life span (actually over a decade past), to modern standards and requirements.

But let's not pick at that old wound again.

The current plan is the replace the exisitng building at its current location with a new building built to modern standards and specifications and also expanded to consolidate most city hall functions and staff.

And all of this does indeed count as "expansion" of services, and obviously the cost has to be shared by all residents rather than being lumped primarily on just newcomers.

But that’s the way this country functions as a whole. Starting with immigration…most immigrants starts at the bottom, including myself…

What Burnaby does is what elected politicians want and that’s what gets them re-elected. To me - that’s simple as that. And if people continue to buy units for the price that there is - it means that it works for both parties, whether you like it or not.

[A320]

Concord Metrotown is now above grade on the central and eastern sites. West tower seems to be still a few levels beneath the ground.

Strangely enough, Concord Pacific is still advertising a March 2026 move-in for these towers.

It will certainly be a landmark on this side of the mall, and Citizen across the road will complement it nicely.

[Klazu]

Lougheed and Burquitlam look pretty epic from distance.

[officedweller]

Deleted

[Lexus]

2024, May 29

BCIT

Untitled by Lexus LX, on Flickr

Untitled by Lexus LX, on Flickr

Lake City Way, this thing is HUGE

Untitled by Lexus LX, on Flickr

Untitled by Lexus LX, on Flickr

Untitled by Lexus LX, on Flickr

Untitled by Lexus LX, on Flickr

[Burquitlaman]

What is that? ^

[madog222]

Bridge Studios Lake City, mostly sound stages.

[Architype]

This is my current view of Metrotown from East Van taken today.

Can anyone help identify the buildings under construction?


my photo

[madog222]

The perspective is confusing me a bit, I believe cranes from left to right:
Artesia
Concord Metrotown (peaking out fron behind Station Square 6)
Central Park House (white)
Nuvo (orange)
The Standard
5055 Joyce

[Architype]

Originally Posted by madog222

The perspective is confusing me a bit, I believe cranes from left to right:
Artesia
Concord Metrotown (peaking out fron behind Station Square 6)
Central Park House (white)
Nuvo (orange)
The Standard
5055 Joyce

Thanks, the line of sight is parallel to Kingsway, from NW to SE, and it's about 4.5 miles away. I thought I knew some of them, but I'm not really that familiar.
There are probably about 10 stories, or even more, hidden by the trees that I can't see. Anyway, this is a view that I can easily keep track of, so it will be interesting to see it change.

[Vin]

Even the electrical grid can't keep up with the building boom. Go, Burnaby, go!

Burnaby's building boom triggers $1.25 billion of new BC Hydro substation projects
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/bc-h...-building-boom

With the City of Burnaby leading Metro Vancouver’s residential building boom, BC Hydro is now planning to make a historic investment in the municipality’s electrical infrastructure to significantly boost capacity.

[Migrant_Coconut]

NIMBYs: We don't have the infrastructure for new housing!

BC Hydro: Okay, here you go.

NIMBYs: Hey waitaminute -

With the City of Burnaby leading Metro Vancouver’s residential building boom...

(citation needed)

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

NIMBYs: We don't have the infrastructure for new housing!

BC Hydro: Okay, here you go.

NIMBYs: Hey waitaminute -

(citation needed)

Might be what they have in the pipeline rather than starts.


Starts by year
_________________2013_ 2014_2015_2016_ 2017 2018 _2019 2020 _2021 _2022 _2023
BURNABY CY______ 2,298 1,674 1,918 4,172 4,173 2,576 _4,411 3,914 3,875 3,037 5,204
VANCOUVER CY_____6,071 4,648 4,616 9,759 5,617 6,522 6,823 3,625 5,464 5,911 7,932

[Migrant_Coconut]

Which still has Burnaby in third - Surrey's catching up fast and might be in front one day, but for now, it's the CoV "leading."

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

Might be what they have in the pipeline rather than starts.


Starts by year
_________________2013_ 2014_2015_2016_ 2017 2018 _2019 2020 _2021 _2022 _2023
BURNABY CY______ 2,298 1,674 1,918 4,172 4,173 2,576 _4,411 3,914 3,875 3,037 5,204
VANCOUVER CY_____6,071 4,648 4,616 9,759 5,617 6,522 6,823 3,625 5,464 5,911 7,932

It would be interesting to know whether Vancouver could give Burnaby a run for their money on the development pipeline. Until Burnaby adopt new policy, their capacity is mostly in towers in four centres, and two Urban Villages.

The Broadway Plan is now past 8,000 proposed units on the City's website, (which is a small percentage of the proposals submitted).

There are new plans in the works for Rupert and Renfrew.

There are already 6,000 more submitted or approved units in the West End pipeline, and 8,600 in the Downtown pipeline (including NEFC), with plenty more to add with sites like St Paul's. There area also DTES projects, and developments along East Hastings and in Grandview (beyond the Broadway Plan).

There are thousands more yet to be started in the Cambie Corridor, including the Grosvenor bus barns site, the Heather Lands and Langara Gardens. There are also Marpole Plan projects being built.

There will be thousands of units in Jericho, (and no doubt more potential once there are confirmed station locations west of Arbutus).

There are several thousand more units to come in Mount Pleasant in SEFC (outside the Broadway Corridor).

There are already over two thousand secured rental units proposed under the rental policy, with more to come.

That's off the top of my head - you might think of more. (like I just did - River District still going, and Skeena Terrace and Little Mountain still to come).

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by Changing City

It would be interesting to know whether Vancouver could give Burnaby a run for their money on the development pipeline. Until Burnaby adopt new policy, their capacity is mostly in towers in four centres, and two Urban Villages.

I think Burnaby having higher starts than Vancouver it would mostly be a result of land economics, like for the Southgate development / other as they mostly replace commercial / industrial.

[ecbin]

Originally Posted by Changing City

It would be interesting to know whether Vancouver could give Burnaby a run for their money on the development pipeline. Until Burnaby adopt new policy, their capacity is mostly in towers in four centres, and two Urban Villages.

I'm speaking from ignorance here but does pipeline really matter that much in the sense that a lot of stuff ends up getting abandoned anyways so the real numbers we care about are starts and completions? Granted, bigger pipeline should lead to more starts and completions but even if Burnaby might have more pipeline (unproven) what matters is that housing is actually getting built.

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

I think Burnaby having higher starts than Vancouver it would mostly be a result of land economics, like for the Southgate development / other as they mostly replace commercial / industrial.

I give shit to Burnaby a lot on Reddit b/c despite all their advantages (lower density, lots more open space, terrific transportation infrastructure, location) they have done a terrible job in building housing compared to Vancouver. Their leaders are vocally opposed to more density as well even though they have the most progressive SSMUH policy so far (with excessive ACC/DCCs though).

I'd be really curious to see how the SSMUH economics work out in both cities though - Vancouver has excessively low FSR for SSMUH but charge fewer fees than Burnaby which has comparably high FSR but high fees.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by ecbin

I'm speaking from ignorance here but does pipeline really matter that much in the sense that a lot of stuff ends up getting abandoned anyways so the real numbers we care about are starts and completions? Granted, bigger pipeline should lead to more starts and completions but even if Burnaby might have more pipeline (unproven) what matters is that housing is actually getting built.

I'm not sure much development gets abandoned, but a certain amount gets postponed, although there's probably no difference between Burnaby and Vancouver in that respect. The pipeline is important, in the sense that there has to be one for starts to happen. So West Vancouver (I'm guessing) doesn't have 20 years of identified but undeveloped projects.

I was responding to GenWhy's wondering whether the Daily Hive statement that the City of Burnaby was leading Metro Vancouver’s residential building boom was true in terms of the pipeline, rather than in terms of starts . (Or, a few years later, completions, as they're the same units counted at different times.)

Vancouver probably has over 100,000 units where a developer owns a site for future construction, and Burnaby probably has the same, or maybe a little less. Either way they each have the theoretical capacity for 15 to 20 years or more of development at current rates, and Vancouver has been ahead of Burnaby almost every year for housing starts in the past decade. The pipeline in both municipalities suggests there's no reason to believe that will change in the future.

[officedweller]

June 12, 2024
Stantec designing master plan for Metropolis at Metrotown
https://www.stantec.com/en/news/2024...olis-metrotown


https://www.stantec.com/en/news/2024...olis-metrotown


https://www.stantec.com/en/news/2024...olis-metrotown