Burnaby Updates

[logan5]

Originally Posted by Vin

Burnaby should not kill a golden goose. Break up Metrotown mall? Insane to say the least. Just build the grid downtown part of Metrotown a little bit away from the mall area. Bulldoze the entire area south of the skytrain guideway, yes, meaning the walk-ups. There should be plenty of space there to develop Metrotown's fledgling new downtown.

Maybe the golden goose for the mall owners. While the mall provides a huge selection of shops on the inside, on the outside it is a major blight. It bogs Metrotown down with a 2 km long perimeter of parking lots and blank walls, and it walls Kingsway (Metrotowns primary street) off from a major transit station. The mall is a giant anchor on Metrotown's evolution as a regional centre.

[officedweller]

I think the City is looking at Shape's willingness to demolish Lougheed Mall (or Lansdowne Mall in Richmond) - which are in a completely different economic situation - and importing the concept to Metropolis.

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Map and legend from VancouverMarket.ca:


http://www.vancouvermarket.ca/2016/1...raft-released/


http://www.vancouvermarket.ca/2016/1...raft-released/

Wow, Burnaby's got to be insane if they want to destroy the mall. That mall is the only reason people have to come to the Metrotown area. I don't see Ivanhoe Cambridge/Concord going along with this either.

The ideal situation is to keep the mall as the office/retail podium and build towers on top. I don't get the obsession with making people suffer by being outside in the rainy weather.

[LeftCoaster]

Originally Posted by Spr0ckets

How would that work anyway with rights-of-way and easement issues?

Wouldn't Ivanhoe Cambridge have to be fully on board with this plan as the Mall's landlords, in terms of breaking up their property to facilitate this?
And I don't even see what the incentive or upside would be for them to agree to this.

There isn't any. This is classic planning department procedure, create a long term neighbourhood plan that is nearly impossible to implement. Just take a look at what Richmond has planned for Richmond Centre, same thing. Mall is gone, full of grid streets.

While it hits all the planning principles on the head in terms of walkable streets, streetfront retail etc... it neglects the ownership and has no recommendations on implementation. It only creates headaches and potential for friction down the road as the mall in question is in contravention of the OCP.

Originally Posted by logan5

Maybe the golden goose for the mall owners.

No it's a huge golden goose for the city too. The tax revenue they pull out of Metrotown is probably equivalent to a huge portion of the entire residential tax revenues they collect.

[Spr0ckets]

Originally Posted by officedweller

I think the City is looking at Shape's willingness to demolish Lougheed Mall (or Lansdowne Mall in Richmond) - which are in a completely different economic situation - and importing the concept to Metropolis.

Yeah, but as you pointed out with the difference in economic circumstances, Lougheed Mall is or was dying though.
The only thing worth visiting there of note was the Walmart, and maybe the London Drugs. anywhere between half to three quarters of the stores are empty and closed down, and it isn't even a situation like you have at Brentwood where they're just running down their leases in anticipation of their mall redevelopment with the wider Amazing Brentwood redevelopment.

Metropolis is the second or third highest earner (in terms of revenue to floor area, or per square foot ratio) in GVA after Pacific Center and Oakridge, and it's the second highest trafficked (people traffic) mall in all of Canada after West Edmonton.
Even putting aside the tax revenue it earns for the city itself, the incentive or upside that would be necessary for Ivanhoe Cambridge to consider altering that dynamic would have to be pretty damn high.
It's really not like Shape at Lougheed who are pretty much starting from scratch (in essence) with their redevelopment and don't have as much at stake to lose.

It's a nice plan. Perhaps a visionary and forward-looking one even.
But any realistic plan has to deal with the reality of the mall being here and still being here whenever such a plan would ever be implemented.

[BodomReaper]

These 5.0 residential FSR caps are insane. Anyone know why Burnaby planners are so married to the idea?

[Spr0ckets]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

There isn't any. This is classic planning department procedure, create a long term neighbourhood plan that is nearly impossible to implement. Just take a look at what Richmond has planned for Richmond Centre, same thing. Mall is gone, full of grid streets.

While it hits all the planning principles on the head in terms of walkable streets, streetfront retail etc... it neglects the ownership and has no recommendations on implementation. It only creates headaches and potential for friction down the road as the mall in question is in contravention of the OCP.

.......

But it looks so pretty, ........with all the shapes and colors

[logan5]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

No it's a huge golden goose for the city too. The tax revenue they pull out of Metrotown is probably equivalent to a huge portion of the entire residential tax revenues they collect.

It sounds to me like Burnaby wants to emulate Pacific Centre. It would be a safe presumption that Pacific Centre and all the buildings above it rake in far more tax revenue than Metrotown.

The City of Burnaby is not content with having an above ground shopping mall sitting on prime land. They want to keep progressing (as they should).

In your estimation, what would make it worth it for the mall owners to redevelop their mall? I don't know the business, so what would the threshold be? In a previous post I used big round numbers; 1 billion to rebuild, 2 billion for property development above the mall - net gain 1 billion.

It's a huge project, but far from impossible. If Ivanhoe-Cambridge comes out 100's of millions or even a billion ahead, that would seem worth it to me.

[Spr0ckets]

Originally Posted by logan5

It sounds to me like Burnaby wants to emulate Pacific Centre. It would be a safe presumption that Pacific Centre and all the buildings above it rake in far more tax revenue than Metrotown.

That's because they have higher annual sales numbers (revenue per floor square ratio) compared to Metropolis and they pay higher property taxes (Location!! Location!! Location!!.)

Two conditions you're unlikely to replicate in the Metrotown area regardless of whatever city concept grid or vision you come up with, much less implement.

Particularly given the disparity in the average or median household income for the two areas and the types of shoppers they each respectively get.

Originally Posted by logan5

The City of Burnaby is not content with having an above ground shopping mall sitting on prime land. They want to keep progressing (as they should).

In your estimation, what would make it worth it for the mall owners to redevelop their mall? I don't know the business, so what would the threshold be? In a previous post I used big round numbers; 1 billion to rebuild, 2 billion for property development above the mall - net gain 1 billion.

It's a huge project, but far from impossible. If Ivanhoe-Cambridge comes out 100's of millions or even a billion ahead, that would seem worth it to me.

Ambition is all well and good, it just has to be tempered within the realms of feasibility and well,......reality.

The Pacific Center didn't just happen overnight.
It took a while to evolve into what it is today and you simply can't discount it's location as a factor for what it generates in terms of revenue.
Metropolis likewise evolved into what it is today (from three separate malls), and the reality right now is there's simply no way (that I can see anyway) that they could do a wholesale and large scale reconfigure of the entire mall to this degree and not end up losing a whole hell of a lot, before it begins making it all back (if ever).
At the end of the day, Ivanhoe Cambridge are primarily an investment company not a mall company per se, and the Return-On-Investment for such an undertaking simply wouldn't justify undergoing it in the first place.

[logan5]

Originally Posted by Spr0ckets

At the end of the day, Ivanhoe Cambridge are primarily an investment company not a mall company per se, and the Return-On-Investment for such an undertaking simply wouldn't justify undergoing it in the first place.

Taking into consideration the value of the land, what would Ivanhoe Cambridge be left with if they did a wholesale redevelopment of the mall?

[jlousa]

I agree, I don't see the financial benefit out weighing the risk for Ivanhoe. The area is what is it today because of Metrotown. Without the mall this would be another Royal Oak. Expecting the mall to be broken up just isn't going to happen. I imagine some of the leases are pretty long term as well. Perhaps something is possible 20+yrs out but even then I'm not so sure.

[Metro-One]

Another big difference between Pacific Centre and Metrotown is that around Pacific Centre both skytrain lines feeding into are underground. This makes having a major shopping centre underground much more feasible and logical.

In Metrotown the major train station is elevated.

Therefore, the only logical way to do this is to slowly divide up the mall a block at a time, but retain the new podiums as a shopping mall connected by skywalks.

In the end though this plan reeks of fantasy Vision Vancouver style social engineering.

I wish the plan was more realistic and focused on how to implement the mall and station area better into the expanding urban fabric and the densification of the Kingsway corridor. The one aspect of Metropolis that can be redeveloped quite easily is the surface parking lots along Kinsway, and this would do a lot to help urbanize the area without taking away the mall.

PS, I use to live in Metrotown and during shopping hours actually enjoyed walking through the mall instead of outside. Just think of it as a nice retail street with climate control!

The only thing that really needs to be worked out (and i am sure can be done without destruction) is nigh time access from one side of the mall to the other.

[Anorak]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Another big difference between Pacific Centre and Metrotown is that around Pacific Centre both skytrain lines feeding into are underground. This makes having a major shopping centre underground much more feasible and logical.

In Metrotown the major train station is elevated.

Therefore, the only logical way to do this is to slowly divide up the mall a block at a time, but retain the new podiums as a shopping mall connected by skywalks.

In the end though this plan reeks of fantasy Vision Vancouver style social engineering.

I wish the plan was more realistic and focused on how to implement the mall and station area better into the expanding urban fabric and the densification of the Kingsway corridor. The one aspect of Metropolis that can be redeveloped quite easily is the surface parking lots along Kinsway, and this would do a lot to help urbanize the area without taking away the mall.

PS, I use to live in Metrotown and during shopping hours actually enjoyed walking through the mall instead of outside. Just think of it as a nice retail street with climate control!

The only thing that really needs to be worked out (and i am sure can be done without destruction) is nigh time access from one side of the mall to the other.

Or could there just be an escalator directly into the downtown mall?

[Metro-One]

Actually, things are not that simple. It may seem trivial but such factors can have big consequences on the success of a development.

Having a subterranean mall surrounded by subterranean transit is a huge psychological factor. It makes the mall seem that much more purposeful and gives the subterranean realm that much more critical flow.

Simply having escalators from an above grade station to a subterranean mall may not actually help all that much, because it is counter to the established habitual flow and suggested elevated development of the area.

Why do you think losing the skywalk during the renovations has become such a big deal?

If Metrotown is going to become layered, due to the already established built forms of the transit system and elevated walkways, a surface and elevated layered system will work far better than a subterranean and surface system.

[BobLoblawsLawBlog]

Or there can be an entrance from the underground mall to Metrotown Station.

[Metro-One]

You can build all the entrances you want, but it is still going against the natural built synergy of an elevated transit system and already existing habitual passenger flows.

Not saying it is impossible, but given the circumstances unlike downtown and PC and above grade solution is far more natural in Metrotown.

[urbancanadian]

A new underground mall is just never going to happen. For one, the cost of putting everything underground is very expensive - just look at the cost per stall of underground parking. Second, retailers are very hesitant to lease space in those types of places. Pacific Centre just completed an underground expansion where they had a lot of difficulty attracting the retailers they wanted specifically because the space was underground. So the risk would be too high.

Modern malls want to be big and airy, with high ceilings and tons of natural light (mimicking the outdoors). Look at Yorkdale in Toronto (or the original plans for Oakridge) as an example of the direction modern malls are taking. Richmond Centre's new food court is another example.

I don't predict anything remotely like the city is "proposing" for a long time to come. Remember, IC spoke about the different stages of malls, and that Oakridge had reached its "final" stage. Metrotown hasn't reached that point yet, so you won't see any large scale redevelopment until that point (not anytime soon).

-------------------------

Overall this plan is just making official the types of developments we've been seeing recently. Developers were running out of space to build, so this document simply gives them more land to do more of the same. Nothing to see here really, in my opinion.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Simply having escalators from an above grade station to a subterranean mall may not actually help all that much, because it is counter to the established habitual flow and suggested elevated development of the area.

Originally Posted by Metro-One

You can build all the entrances you want, but it is still going against the natural built synergy of an elevated transit system and already existing habitual passenger flows.

Having people travel between an above ground station and an underground mall isn't going to work.

[Anorak]

I wonder if Ivanhoe Cambridge would be willing to pay or help pay to re-build that section of the skytrain underground? I know translink is just finishing upgrading the station above ground, but I could see it feasible in 20 or so years when the platform lengths may have to be extended anyway due to demand.

[BobLoblawsLawBlog]

Oooorrrr, another solution would be having the mall inside the podiums of residential buildings, connected over the streets by bridges.