The figures you posted and which appear in the table below
are the result of the height averaging (sawtooth averaged out).
But they are different than the storeys in Figure 6 for the 3 green shaded towers,
so they must be the theoretical maximum after conditional height increase?
It seems like they are trying to transition to the new Burnaby height-based development framework.
Quote:
Transitioning approved master plans into the height-based development framework is
also proposed to ensure consistency in the processing of future phases of development
and application of contemporary zoning provisions. Master plans are inherently a form
based planning process, with density permitted to shift across the site to create a variety
of forms and building heights. To achieve this, unlike regular rezonings, master plans
generally undergo a guideline rezoning to establish land uses, general form and public
realm, density, subdivision, and servicing requirements, with subsequent site-specific
rezoning’s advanced for each phase of development to establish the detailed design.
Density allocation covenants are typically established as part of a master plan to assign
the permitted FAR across the site. Due to the scale of many master plans, they are
hased over multiple years and in some cases decades. To avoid the need to carry
across historical zoning provisions into the new zoning bylaw, it is recommended that
each master plan be transitioned into the height-based development framework as
follows:
• for adopted master planned sites with existing density allocation covenants and
where future site-specific rezoning applications are required, the density
allocation covenant would be discharged with the next applicable new rezoning
application that is submitted. Active site-specific rezoning applications within
master planned sites will have the option to be processed as in-stream site
specific applications based on density allocation covenants and currently
proposed zoning districts. The permitted building heights would remain
consistent with those set out in the master plan program unless otherwise
approved by Council as part of a comprehensive update to the master plan.
Opportunities for height variances specific to approved master plans would be
detailed in the Zoning Bylaw to facilitate approved building heights.
• future site-specific rezoning applications would fall under the height-based
framework, and would comply with updated inclusionary requirements, and be
subject to applicable amenity and development cost charges.
• for those applications that deferred density bonus obligations, rental use
obligations, or other land use commitments to benefit the community to later
phases that are yet to be approved through a site-specific rezoning, staff would
work with applicants to make up for the value or carry that obligation forward,
including the potential to secure on-site amenities as part of an updated
approach to density bonus or have rental use zoning requirements beyond the
minimum prescribed in this report.
I was at Brentwood yesterday. It's strange that everything closes at 7 p.m., other than the few restaurants. London Drugs' new location opens on May 5. It has lots of stock. The old story feels half empty; many products are just not available.
Suit Supply has signage on the outside of its space. You can catch bits of it behind the hoarding. It does look like you can see store fixtures inside from peeking behind the hoarding. Rogers will open next to it. DQ is still open, but it will close next week, I guess, since the signage says the mall will close, blah, blah, blah.
there really is no retail space left over for all the old phone places that were inside the old mall. The dentist moved into the new part.
Thanks!
For Tower 6, is the space below the transfer slab, office space? If so interesting that it has operable windows and are not floor to ceiling glass.
Within the first two levels, the building will contain about 12,000 square feet (1,114 square meters) of retail and restaurant space — activating the northward extension of Brentwood Boulevard and Willingdon Linear Park — and approximately 20,400 square feet (1,895 square meters) of office space.
Thanks.
I think that reference is below the first transfer slab.
I meant the 2 floors between the 2 transfer slabs (Levels 3 and 4).
It's depicted in the rendering, though, looking a bit harsh, including operable windows!
I was watching some of the real estate YouTubers who go to the showrooms and some of them actually give some good detailed views of the models or presentations from the developers on things like the new solariums at the latest Concord Metrotown tower.
This whole thing has been a total disappointment. I remember there was a time where this was supposed to be a new regional mall with connections between each complex with over 250 shops. In fact, some previous plans had some consideration to renovate a portion of the existing mall to keep a larger retail footprint.
It's now looking like the most of the retail portion has been built with phase 3 and 4 being mostly condo development.
This whole thing has been a total disappointment. I remember there was a time where this was supposed to be a new regional mall with connections between each complex with over 250 shops. In fact, some previous plans had some consideration to renovate a portion of the existing mall to keep a larger retail footprint.
It's now looking like the most of the retail portion has been built with phase 3 and 4 being mostly condo development.
Once the provincial government introduced the Transit Oriented Development designations and mandated municipalities to adjust zoning, the developers hopped on that opportunity to make amendments to the Brentwood development. It's unfortunate the mall couldn't be saved - it'd be nice to have more indoor retail/amenities.
This whole thing has been a total disappointment. I remember there was a time where this was supposed to be a new regional mall with connections between each complex with over 250 shops. In fact, some previous plans had some consideration to renovate a portion of the existing mall to keep a larger retail footprint.
It's now looking like the most of the retail portion has been built with phase 3 and 4 being mostly condo development.
I mean with their request to increase the density of the site it seems a bit premature to dump on it.
If they end up adding another 4.7-8+ million square feet of residential it will probably improve the ability for them to attract a supermarket and whatever more retail they stick under the new towers.
Last edited by jollyburger; May 5, 2025 at 7:42 PM.
Once the provincial government introduced the Transit Oriented Development designations and mandated municipalities to adjust zoning, the developers hopped on that opportunity to make amendments to the Brentwood development. It's unfortunate the mall couldn't be saved - it'd be nice to have more indoor retail/amenities.
It's the same situation at Lougheed Mall. They removed the indoor mall from their scope and are doing a covered-outdoor portion.
Once the provincial government introduced the Transit Oriented Development designations and mandated municipalities to adjust zoning, the developers hopped on that opportunity to make amendments to the Brentwood development. It's unfortunate the mall couldn't be saved - it'd be nice to have more indoor retail/amenities.
The tower heights and densities are well outside of the minimums required by Provincial legislation. This is entirely on the developer/City of Burnaby for eliminating the mall/retail components.
I think it's probably the result of failing to attract the high end retail tenants Shape was originally aiming for (i.e. they all went to Oakridge).
At one time they were hoping for a Holt Renfrew, with floorplans even showing a high end department store.
I wonder whether the reduction in retail at Amazing Brentwood will spur additional retail when the Carter GM site is eventually redeveloped?
i.e. A smaller Amazing Brentwood won't suck the life out of the other developments on adjacent street corners.
The tower heights and densities are well outside of the minimums required by Provincial legislation. This is entirely on the developer/City of Burnaby for eliminating the mall/retail components.
I think you are mispoken about the provincial policy.
Quote:
In Type 1A (SkyTrain stations) in Metro Vancouver, it is intended that municipalities will be expected to permit residential developments in TOD Areas using the following density criteria:
prescribed distance of 200 metres or less from a rapid-transit hub – minimum density up to 5.0 FAR, minimum height up to 20 storeys.
prescribed distance of 201 metres to 400 metres from a rapid-transit hub – minimum density up to 4.0 FAR, minimum height up to 12 storeys.
prescribed distance of 401 metres to 800 metres from a rapid-transit hub – minimum density up to 3.0 FAR, minimum height up to eight storeys.
On November 30, 2023, the BC Legislature granted Royal Assent to Bill 47- 2023 Housing Statutes (Transit-Oriented Areas) Amendment Act 2023. Bill 47 enables the Province to mandate specific densities, size, and/or dimensions of buildings within transit-oriented areas (TOAs) based on specific distances to current and planned transit stations (including designated bus stops, bus exchanges, passenger rail station or other transit facilities), and restrictions on residential off-street requirements within these TOAs. This legislation requires municipalities to designate TOA’s within 800m of rapid transit hubs, such as SkyTrain stations, and within 400m of bus exchange locations.
The amount of density that is permitted within a TOA depends on a site’s proximity to the transit hub. Within 200m of a rapid transit hub, municipalities are required to permit residential density of 5.0 FAR; within 201m – 400m of a rapid transit hub a residential density of 4.0 FAR should be permitted; and within 401-800m of a rapid transit hub 3.0 FAR residential density is permitted. Due to the proximity of the Brentwood SkyTrain Station, the three lots that comprise the subject site is within the 200m TOA; therefore, a minimum residential density of 5.0 FAR would be permitted across the entire Site.
I think it's probably the result of failing to attract the high end retail tenants Shape was originally aiming for (i.e. they all went to Oakridge).
At one time they were hoping for a Holt Renfrew, with floorplans even showing a high end department store.
I wonder whether the reduction in retail at Amazing Brentwood will spur additional retail when the Carter GM site is eventually redeveloped?
i.e. A smaller Amazing Brentwood won't suck the life out of the other developments on adjacent street corners.
I mean that's the question. How many stores do you need for a regional town centre like Brentwood. And how confident you are as a developer to fill those CRUs. There's no way they have enough retail demand if they doubled the retail space (it's around 500K now?)
I don't think I misspoke, the "existing masterplan" in the document you linked exceeded the minimums already with an FAR of 6.6 (and well over 20 storey towers), the proposed density increase brings that up to 10.53 FAR. This is well within the discretion of the City of Burnaby and not required in any way by the Province, as you've noted the minimum required by the Province is 5.0 FAR.
Prev
Linear Mode
