[Surrey] Park Avenue | 124m & 118m | 36 & 40 Floors | Complete

[GMasterAres]

Optimal was cancelled well over a year ago now. They were going to be modular constructed towers.

[metroXpress]

Who's taking over now?

[whalley13]

Interesting, the property is now marked as sold>>>does anyone know who bought it?

[Whalleyboy]

i'd bet concord

[metroXpress]

Originally Posted by whalley13

Interesting, the property is now marked as sold>>>does anyone know who bought it?

Yea, saw it the other day...must be Concord, which is not a bad thing because we
won't have to wait for the plot of land to sit there for another 10 years

[Ronnie Yau]

Can someone change the status to
"Cancelled"?

[invisibleairwaves]

*bump*

Actually, it should probably get changed to "proposed" now. Looks like Concord Pacific (I think?) wants to get this one done. There's been an application sign up on the site for a week or two now.

Development permit to construct two towers over five levels of underground parking. To be built in two phases. Phase 1 - 38 storey tower with 427 apt units plus 3 townhouse units. Phase 2 - 40 storey tower with 468 apt units plus 5 townhouse units. The stand alone townhouses and an amenity building are at grade enclosing a landscape courtyard between two towers. Total of 903 units.

No idea if it's any different from the original proposal. Would be nice to see some retail on a busy road so close to the Skytrain, but I guess it's not going to happen. Hmm.

[Millennium2002]

5 levels of parking? You're kidding me. =O How many parking spaces are they thinking of squeezing in there? If its one or two per unit, they should slash it by a quarter due to its proximity to transit, unless it's more economical to do otherwise. =S

Also agree about the lack of shopping spaces... That's surely not going to make the place any more pedestrian-friendly than it is right now... hopefully Surrey can demand something like what they've done before in Yaletown.

[invisibleairwaves]

Well, proximity to transit in Surrey isn't the same thing as proximity to transit in Vancouver or Burnaby. I wouldn't want to live anywhere in this city without a parking space, even "downtown" Whalley.

[Diet Butcher]

The City Planning Document Here http://www.surrey.ca/files/current_major_projects_in_scc_(May_2011).pdf

Shows:

Application No. 7910-0258-00
Address: 13718 – 100 Avenue
Developer: Concord Pacific
Description of Project: One 39-storey apartment tower containing 430 units
and one 42-storey apartment tower containing 449
units and 7 ground-oriented townhouses.
Date of Application: October 14, 2010
Status: Project Review

[geoff's two cents]

Originally Posted by invisibleairwaves

Would be nice to see some retail on a busy road so close to the Skytrain, but I guess it's not going to happen. Hmm.

This worries me as well. 104th would be an obvious shoo-in for some kind of street-wall, but that new building on the corner of 104th and University Dr. has none, nor does the first Infinity building, Quattro for some reason does, and Citygate's is apparently limited to the corner. It's hard to escape the suspicion that Surrey's idea of "downtown" involves a bunch of towers around a mall and a few neighbourhood corner stores. Hope that's not the case. Does anyone know if at least 102ave west of Univ. Dr. is slated for streetwall?

Edit: Just realized my question is slightly off topic.

[officedweller]

If you go to the City Cnetre thread, I think the renders and videos in there show streetwall podiums in the "core" west of King George Boulevard - but I agree that's very suburban (or Metrotown-like) thinking.

[Whalleyboy]

Originally Posted by allan_kuan

5 levels of parking? You're kidding me. =O How many parking spaces are they thinking of squeezing in there? If its one or two per unit, they should slash it by a quarter due to its proximity to transit, unless it's more economical to do otherwise. =S

Also agree about the lack of shopping spaces... That's surely not going to make the place any more pedestrian-friendly than it is right now... hopefully Surrey can demand something like what they've done before in Yaletown.

Surrey has been working on cuting back its parking spot bylaw for sites that site close to transit. Only thing is Like already said you can't really live in Surrey with out a car. Sure in central you can get to dt Vancouver easy but you can't get to any where in your own city using the transit easily.

[Whalleyboy]

Originally Posted by geoff's two cents

This worries me as well. 104th would be an obvious shoo-in for some kind of street-wall, but that new building on the corner of 104th and University Dr. has none, nor does the first Infinity building, Quattro for some reason does, and Citygate's is apparently limited to the corner. It's hard to escape the suspicion that Surrey's idea of "downtown" involves a bunch of towers around a mall and a few neighbourhood corner stores. Hope that's not the case. Does anyone know if at least 102ave west of Univ. Dr. is slated for streetwall?

Edit: Just realized my question is slightly off topic.

I know they want to work on pushing street front stores along king george from 100th onwards. Also city park way i believe in long term goals will be a more street fronting store road too.
Also your wrong about city point it actually has retail on all sides.

[whalley13]

There are lots of buildings in yaletown and d/t vancouver that don't have ground floor retail....give it time the density in d/t surrey has to catch up thats, all

[GMasterAres]

Not to mention most of the West End doesn't have street level retail once you get off the main strips aka Davie or Robson or something. Move 1 block in and it is all residential buildings. People seem to forget that there aren't stores under every single building on every single block in downtown Vancouver.

You're most likely going to see a redevelopment of the Surrey Central mall to get rid of all the surface parking and then build a core or high rise buildings there with retail under. The focus seems to be on the ring roads from 102 -> 108th then KGB from 96th -> 108th. You'll probably find the bulk of developments on those stretches with retail street level. For side streets 100th is still the edge of downtown and really a small sliver not to mention this proposal fronts 100th ave more than anything as you start up the hill towards Guildford.

There will be more retail consentrations around 102, 104, 106, and 108th I'd imagine. Less beyond those ranges. Then again things can change quickly. But as I and a few others have said, not every development in downtown has ground level retail. It would be nice to see it in this development but Concord has never been outstanding at building commercial space based properties anyway. Good to see them build though and it seems like the buildings are a bit taller than the original development.

36 and 40 storey -> 39 and 42 storey.

[SpongeG]

Originally Posted by geoff's two cents

This worries me as well. 104th would be an obvious shoo-in for some kind of street-wall, but that new building on the corner of 104th and University Dr. has none, nor does the first Infinity building, Quattro for some reason does, and Citygate's is apparently limited to the corner. It's hard to escape the suspicion that Surrey's idea of "downtown" involves a bunch of towers around a mall and a few neighbourhood corner stores. Hope that's not the case. Does anyone know if at least 102ave west of Univ. Dr. is slated for streetwall?

Edit: Just realized my question is slightly off topic.

sounds a lot like bellevue

[golog]

Originally Posted by whalley13

There are lots of buildings in yaletown and d/t vancouver that don't have ground floor retail....give it time the density in d/t surrey has to catch up thats, all

I don't think density is the single solution. Jane & Finch in Toronto is a dense area of commie block apartments.

You have the harness the potential with walkability. Most people in Yaletown walk a lot. Foot traffic provides a ready market for storefronts, and provides a deterrence to crime among other things like making public transit feasible.

The thing I think we all are reaching for is a city form which shows maturity. One that makes sense at every scale, and throughout the lifetime of its residents or economic cycles. Something that has grown one step at a time where areas not only make sense introspectively, but in their connections to neighbouring areas.

You can't force the virtuous cycle from either the supply side (open a bunch of storefronts) or the demand side (build a bunch of apartments without parking stalls) without first optimizing the path geometry for the scale of walking to minimize distance and maximize potential destinations from any given point in the area under study. Smaller block sizes -- less developable land, more costs for road/sidewalk construction & maintenance, greater potential, serves a larger demographic market...

Until road congestion takes over or the market demand is exhausted, building to the car's scale is the most profitable option and gives the quickest growth for both the City of Surrey and developers. It's logical to expect a continuation of the policy to pocket the easy money, and then blame others for the predictable consequences for as long as the option of easy money lasts.

[Millennium2002]

The more I think about it the more I feel like if Surrey's "Downtown" ambitions are just too lofty or even worse... a conspiracy to garner more funds for things like SkyTrain / LRT that it really doesn't deserve at this point. =S Sort of like trying to "jump the queue". I dunno... maybe I'm expecting the scale of change to be not intensive or fast enough as I thought it would seem given the forceful nature of mayor Dianne Watts.

[GMasterAres]

What happens in a downtown core is that as people move in and don't need to go long distances for things, the walkability goes up. Also as things densify and traffic increases, walkability again goes up.

I'll give you an example of the last one. Yesterday I went downtown to meet up with some friends for a pint and some wings. The pub we were going to is basically Davie and Denman so in the west end near Stanley Park. I took the Canadaline downtown and jumped off on Yaletown.

Even though it was raining I decided "hey I'm going to walk for a bit of exercise since I'm going for a pint and wings it will do me good!" and started along Davie Street. As soon as I crossed from Yaletown I noticed a pickup truck driving up Davie Street with loud exhaust. He got stuck at the red light as I kept walking. All the way a good 16 blocks and about 2km from the sky train to Denman.

To my surprise when I got to the Super Valu near Jervis, the pickup truck passed me. So that means WALKING I got from Yaletown all the way to Jervis in the same amount of time as the pickup. I then continued on my way and finally got to Denman. Guess who was turning right onto Denman street?

Yes that same pickup. So that means I walked 2km and 16 blocks in Downtown Vancouver just as quickly as it took people to drive that distance in their cars. Technically since it is a 1 lane road that means I was also quicker than taking the bus.

This happens a lot in downtown Vancouver where you can easily walk places faster (remember the car getting there at the same time is actually slower since they have to still park!) than driving. And that's often throughout all of downtown Vancouver.

So the very nature of densification and bringing up car traffic can often result in a place becoming more walkable. The fact there are retail all over the place made no difference to me. That wasn't why I chose to walk instead of drive. I chose to walk instead of drive because 1) I wanted the exercise, 2) I knew it would be faster, and 3) it just made more sense to me. Same thing will happen as density pushes higher in Downtown Surrey and things are there meaning you don't have to go anywhere else. Give us some transit options to get there and I think you'll find more and more people walking just naturally.

Keep in mind though, from tip to tip, Downtown Vancouver is less distance than Downtown Surrey. Downtown Surrey isn't quite as wide as DVan but it is longer so there is a reasonability factor. However that gets removed by the fact Skytrain in Downtown Surrey goes lengthwise where in Vancouver it goes width wise (Canada Line and Expo) consentrating pedestrians a bit differently.

Higher density = higher land prices = more traffic = higher parking costs = slower driving = more walkability. People don't walk in downtown Vancouver because there are retail under every single building. They walk because it is faster than driving PARTLY because there is retail at their finger tips. It isn't the main reason though for sure.

The above poster did point out a major issue for Surrey though, land size. Vancouver is out of space. Burnaby is out of space. There aren't very many areas left to build "out" on. Same with New West. Surrey doesn't have that issue though. If I'm Joe developer I can just as easily go buy a nice 1 acre chunk of land out in Clayton or Cloverdale and slam 100 townhouse units in there for way cheaper than building a nice high-rise tower in central Surrey. So Surrey does have an issue and I think is dealing with it fine recently with trying to balance densification with affordability.

Developers don't care what they build. Developers care how much money they make. It's as simple as that.When there is no room to build townhouses or single family units, then you're forces to make money through densification. Thus why most development in Vancouver is in the form of higher density. They have no choice.