Surrey Updates

[Whalleyboy]

well there still hope that a little pub could go on the other side where the houses are currently sitting

[geoff's two cents]

It would appear a new hotel/convention centre/office/condominium complex is in the works for Surrey City Centre, in addition to the long-rumoured SFU dormitory just to the south. I didn't read the documents too closely, but it would appear that SFU is somehow involved. There are repeated references to the MOU between the two parties. If this actually happens, SFU would benefit from the conference facilities, and the city would benefit enormously from having a downtown hotel that isn't an eyesore.

It's nice to see some height here (33 floors), as well as the fact that the city is going for a mixed-use model - i.e. using the more profitable residential component to help pay for the (less profitable) office and (riskier) hotel components.

If this progresses, this will also be worth watching to see if the city's modus operandi of intervening directly in the market by developing a profit-oriented building (as opposed to the civic facilities) actually pays dividends. Since the city itself is involved, I'd also expect some higher-quality architecture in later renderings - though I do like the fact that what's there at present at least appears to meet the street nicely.

Anyone familiar with this project who can weigh in on how far along it is, the chances of it going forward, etc.? I'm looking at you, paradigm4 and whalleyboy.

Concept rendering:

Project Summary:

The project in question is distinguished here from the proposed SFU dorm:

Site photo:

Site map:

Schedule:

Rendering of proposed SFU student dormitory just to the south you've likely already seen:

Note: The document is entitled "SFU Redidence," so it's a little hard to take 100% seriously. I'm guessing the project is in a very early planning stage.

There's some other stuff of interest here as well. Here's a shot I think I've seen elsewhere of the city-owned property on 104th:




Source: http://www.scribd.com/doc/59218393/Sfu-Residence-Project-Eng

[paradigm4]

Well I just read through the document and it seems more like an information package outlining some offshore investment/development opportunities than any solid project. The City doesn't own that land to the best of my knowledge and in fact is looking at extending 103 Ave through those properties. This doesn't seem connected to the SFU residences either and the overall text seems confused about the development process. I wouldn't put much weight into it.

[Whalleyboy]

I havent seen that one myself. The only hotel I jnew of that was in planning a while back for central area was the 9 storey one on whalley blvd right by the canadian tire.

Looking at this project it does look to get in the way of where the city plans build it roads. Although i wonder if this might be the second phase of the SFU buildings since the orginal plan was to have both a 13 storey and 24 storey building. They've already increase the 13 storey building to 15. so maybe they want to change their 24 to a bigger building and try and get more use out of it adding hotel and office space.

[geoff's two cents]

Originally Posted by paradigm4

Well I just read through the document and it seems more like an information package outlining some offshore investment/development opportunities than any solid project. The City doesn't own that land to the best of my knowledge and in fact is looking at extending 103 Ave through those properties. This doesn't seem connected to the SFU residences either and the overall text seems confused about the development process. I wouldn't put much weight into it.

I'm sure you're right about it being simply a preliminary outline for investors (that might account for the rather unprofessional formatting, as well as the bolded "Investment Attraction" on the "project schedule").

However, based on the "site map" I posted from the documents, I don't see how extending 103 Ave here would impact this property at all. After all, the block sits at the corner of Uni Blvd and 103A Ave. It doesn't stand in the way of any road extensions I'm aware of - unless of course the city is planning on shifting 103A Ave 10m to the south.

[Diet Butcher]

On that note, does anyone have an update on the SFU Residence? It seems like we haven't heard anything on it in awhile?

[Whalleyboy]

So i just noticed service canada for where you apply for EI has also moved to the city centre from newton.

[SpongeG]

nice, I heard that they are trying to get all EI and employment related services under one roof, but still maintaining separate offices, it includes outside agencies like wage subsidy and case workers etc. so they probably needed a bigger space

[CoryHolmes]

So I just finally noticed that the 7-11 and Rogers Video in the 102/KGB minimall closed down. I have no idea when, but seeing both close down at the same time makes me wonder if any project or building is going up there. Anyone have any clue or am I just raving like a madman again?

[WaxItYourself]

Originally Posted by CoryHolmes

So I just finally noticed that the 7-11 and Rogers Video in the 102/KGB minimall closed down. I have no idea when, but seeing both close down at the same time makes me wonder if any project or building is going up there. Anyone have any clue or am I just raving like a madman again?

They closed because the owner raised the rent too much. I'm not sure how much or what they raised it too though. There are plans to build a tower there with a CIBC at the bottom.

http://www.bozyk.com/HTML/CtrofSurrey.html

[CoryHolmes]

Originally Posted by WaxItYourself

There are plans to build a tower there with a CIBC at the bottom.

http://www.bozyk.com/HTML/CtrofSurrey.html

Much of the woot.

[red-paladin]

Originally Posted by WaxItYourself

They closed because the owner, CIBC, raised the rent too much. I'm not sure how much or what they raised it too though. There are plans to build a tower there with a CIBC at the bottom.

http://www.bozyk.com/HTML/CtrofSurrey.html

(From the site above)

That is actually, surprisingly nice!

[Diet Butcher]

Do we know what the current status of this building is? Have they submitted anything to the City?

[Whalleyboy]

I've yet to see anything proposed to the city yet. But they probably where waiting for 7/11 and rogers to clear out of the area. I am hoping next central development map they put out it will be on it. But if i see anything on council reports i'll make sure to say soemthing

[Whalleyboy]

So looking at there maps of surrey from july 25 2011 i came across where they plan on having mix used buildings....i have to say i am very displease they are trying to us king george and 104 as there main retail roads. They dont even touch city park way. I sent them a message saying they should real look into using city park way over king george as its a calmer street and more likely will get people to walk along it

anyways heres the maps they've for the city centre aproved on july 2011
Surrey City Centre Land Use and Density Concept
http://www.surrey.ca/files/City_Centre_Land_Use_Concept_Appendix_I.pdf
Surrey City Centre Building Height Concept
http://www.surrey.ca/files/City_Centre_Building_Heights_Concept_Appendix_II.pdf
Surrey City Centre Road Width Concept
http://www.surrey.ca/files/CityCentre_Road_Width_Concept_Appendix_III.pdf
Surrey City Centre Road Network Concept
http://www.surrey.ca/files/CityCentre_Road_Network_Appendix_V.pdf

[GMasterAres]

Originally Posted by Whalleyboy

So looking at there maps of surrey from july 25 2011 i came across where they plan on having mix used buildings....i have to say i am very displease they are trying to us king george and 104 as there main roads. They dont even touch city park way. I sent them a message saying they should real look into using city park way over king george as its a calmer street and more likely will get people to walk along it

anyways heres the maps they've for the city centre aproved on july 2011
Surrey City Centre Land Use and Density Concept
http://www.surrey.ca/files/City_Centre_Land_Use_Concept_Appendix_I.pdf
Surrey City Centre Building Height Concept
http://www.surrey.ca/files/City_Centre_Building_Heights_Concept_Appendix_II.pdf
Surrey City Centre Road Width Concept
http://www.surrey.ca/files/CityCentre_Road_Width_Concept_Appendix_III.pdf
Surrey City Centre Road Network Concept
http://www.surrey.ca/files/CityCentre_Road_Network_Appendix_V.pdf

Remember downtown Surrey isn't just for downtown Surrey. They have to also consider the main routes to get into downtown Surrey in selecting major roads. 104th and KGB just make sense.

A vast majority of traffic to the city come long these routes. Fraser Highway is another major route in. 96th is on the very edge so while it is the last major route in it isn't a major road for downtown (being on the edge and all).

So we come back to KGB and 104th. KGB is the major north-south route. It connects all the way to the border through Newton and South Surrey then North via the Patullo to New West and beyond.

104th is the major east-west route. To the west it will connect directly to the SFPR at Tannery Road (look for a 104th upgrade from city center through to Tannery Road when the SFPR is completed). And east it cuts straight through Guildford connecting to HWY1 and Fraser Heights.

96th is your main connection to Golden Ears. And Fraser Highway your main connection to Langley via Fleetwood and East Clayton.

But if you're looking just for downtown Surrey major routes it has to be KGB and 104th. They're no brainers. Will they be the major pedestrian roads? Probably not. Just like in downtown Vancouver you have more people walking on Robson than you do Georgia yet Georgia is a "major road". Same thing on Granville where most people walk that yet traffic wise it is Seymour and Howe for cars. Same thing here. Look at all the 'major roads' designated in downtown Vancouver and see if they are pedestrian roads. Howe, Seymour, Georgia, Dunsmuir, Smithe, Nelson, Burrard, and Pacific. Where do most people walk? Davie, Denman, Robson, Granville, Mainland, etc.

Most likely you'll see 104th and KGB maintaining as major roads for cars and other vehicular traffic but City Parkway, University Blvd., and Walley Blvd. will become more major pedestrian traffic routes. 102 vs 104 same deal.

[Whalleyboy]

I ment to add main retail roads to my thing there. I know thee gonna stay major traffic roads which i have no problem with and its obvious why they both are major roads. What i mean is i'm displease to see is that they are putting all there mixed use building on what has to be is central to busy car routes. They should be looking to build retail streets of these roads and on roads beside them like city park way. But instead they build along them thinking the pedistrians will want to walk along them which they wont as there to busy with traffic. you need calmer area for people to want to walk along.

[GMasterAres]

Have to agree with you there. There is a difference between Highway Retail and Pedestrian Retail. Surrey has been built on Highway Retail since the beginning. This new notion of Pedestrian Retail may be throwing them a bit for a loop.

I agree though retail streets should not be car centric. Again Robson and Davie as examples in Vancouver. They are hardly car friendly but that's where a lot of retail is located. Same with Denman. Driving Denman sucks big time so most people avoid it and use Burrard to get to Georgia.

But the retail is on Denman.

[Whalleyboy]

I actually messaged them saying they should relook into there map and look into using city park way since there is already retail along it there gonna strech it past the mall. plus the fact that it has skytrain stations all along it so there stops at both ends and easy access. I think more should message them telling themt to look into it so they get the point

[officedweller]

Yeah, that's the difference between Richmond, which is trying to "tame" No. 3 Rd. and Burnaby, which @ Brentwood Town Centre, is focussing retail on Dawson St., one block over from Lougheed Highway.

Also akin to Georgia St. and Robson st. - each serves a different function.