Burnaby Updates

[Migrant_Coconut]

Six. And that's the point - some towers need more parking than the rules require, and some need less. Either way, they're stupid rules.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by fredinno

TBF, it seems many developers in DT Vancouver are going far over the minimums already anyways in areas more accessible than here:
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/1477...i-developments

So maybe not 12 floors. Maybe 10 or 8.

1477 W Broadway has exactly the minimum number of spaces required, 288 in total. That's for 226 rental apartments, 100,000 sq ft of office and 29,400 sq ft of retail, including the second floor grocery, and 3 spaces for TransLink. They require six underground floors because the SkyTrain station takes up some of the underground space.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Changing City

1477 W Broadway has exactly the minimum number of spaces required, 288 in total. That's for 226 rental apartments, 100,000 sq ft of office and 29,400 sq ft of retail, including the second floor grocery, and 3 spaces for TransLink. They require six underground floors because the SkyTrain station takes up some of the underground space.

I thought Broadway was exempt from those, same as Downtown?

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by fredinno

I thought Broadway was exempt from those, same as Downtown?

Not yet. And certainly not when 1477 W Broadway was submitted. Which isn't in Burnaby (as we seem to have forgotten what thread this is).

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

but not building parking will NOT change the price point. the real estate market is based on the market rates; not the costs to build.

personally, i am pro off-street parking. no one here can tell me they like how the west end works. people can drive around for 15mins looking for parking. there are SO many cars on the streets. the west end has a parking issue due to the lack of off-street parking.

i dont know how people can look at that and think "see it works!" because it doesn't. it never did. and still doesn't. streets should be used for transportation. off-street should be used for parking. we waste so much street space on parking. it should all be off-street. either below grade or above grade.

Maybe you don't realize it, but what you're saying is an indictment of parking minimums. If the price of a residence with a parking spot included vs. one without is not higher, either the market does not value parking spaces at all or there is an over-supply. If everyone was desperate to park their one or two cars they would be willing to pay a premium for that. Instead, I frequently saw signs in my last building desperately trying to rent an unused parking space for a few bucks per month. Let's make parking a little more scarce and then we can see market forces go to work.

Originally Posted by Changing City

The West End has parking problems because tenants try not to pay the average $50 a month additional parking rental that's the average in parkades, so look for on street parking. There's more than enough parking available in most buildings. That's why a parking permit in the area is now $360 a year - staff recommended $600 originally, and the price could still be increased (although that seems likely under the current makeup on Council). Parking minimums were only removed Downtown, not in the West End. There haven't been many condo projects Downtown since the change, but certainly recent rental projects have been taking advantage of the changed requirements. 430 W Pender is proposing 80 new apartments and 3 parking spaces.

Parking for visitors to the West End can seem challenging, but there are actually a number of surface lots that have always had space when I've needed them.

As for residents, I parked my car on the street in the West End for a year and never had an issue finding a spot. More often than not I could park my car right across the street from my front door (and that is a block off Robson, so it's not like its a secluded part of the neighbourhood). At most I had to park one block away from my building.

I actually like the parking situation in the West End. The parking permits are priced properly where many people decide leaving a car undriven for weeks on end is too expensive a proposition, so they just ditch the car. I think the West End has the perfect mix of alternatives (walking, biking, and transit) and market forces to encourage fewer cars. And thank goodness, because could you imagine the carmageddon on Robson, Davie, Denman, or Nelson if the mode share in the West End was closer to the city-wide mode share? It would be enough to give some people on this forum a heart attack!

[Spr0ckets]

....and all I can say is, dang!!!!








Source:-
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/telu...rental-housing


Talk about dwarfing both the Boot and the residential development across the road.

It creates a nice western gateway to Burnaby (that the city might have issues with, in terms of such a tall tower so far from the "Core") while acting as a framing bookend to the singular and only viewcone in Burnaby preserving the view between Central Park and Brentwood.

The designs are obviously a bit too mimick-ey of the Boot, but since this are early proposals, they likely will change as they go through the process.

Lots of density for such a tight site - especially with the intent to preserve the Boot (although they're getting rid of the northern podium or "foot" of the Boot for the taller towers).
Again, I see this one getting a lot of pushback from the City (and the usual Nimby brigade) over the height and density, but possibly also completely crowding out the Boot, which is in some sense a landmark(?) at this point.
But on the flip side, how can they refuse all that rental housing (almost 1000 purpose built).

It's pretty awfully close to the Skytrain line, though.
It should be interesting to see this one as it progresses through the process.

To quickly summarize a sampling of what some of the responses will likely be....


Klazu : "Look at that vertical ghetto. I don't like that tower spacing"
(he has a point in this case)

Vin : "58 and 63 Storeys!!!! YAY!!! Fantastic!! I hope it has a mall and lots of commercial and retail!!!"

Metro-One : "58 and 63 Storeys!!! Awesome! I can't wait to update my list"

[Metro-One]

You don’t like the list??

I need official heights first!

Happy to see the Boot itself being retained. Would hate to lose that tower.

Also isn’t there a “ghost” station there? Could that actually be done now with so much development in that area? Or was that just a preliminary plan long ago and the guideway was never actually built for such an addition?

[ecbin]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

You don’t like the list??

I need official heights first!

Happy to see the Boot itself being retained. Would hate to lose that tower.

Also isn’t there a “ghost” station there? Could that actually be done now with so much development in that area? Or was that just a preliminary plan long ago and the guideway was never actually built for such an addition?

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/telu...rental-housing

Daily Hive article says there is a provision for it but that they are not considering pursuing it at this point.

It should also be noted that when SkyTrain Expo Line was built in the 1980s, the elevated guideway segment immediately north of the Boot was designed in a way to enable the future construction of a potential Boundary Road Station. Such a complex investment involving TransLink and many other entities is not being considered at this time.

I'd hope that the Burnaby collects a fee that would go towards a station in the future though. Also hope Burnaby rezones the areas north of the track to allow for some towers as well so that area can become a hub (and maybe there's a real grocery store there - it would be busy for sure).

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

You don’t like the list??

I need official heights first!

Happy to see the Boot itself being retained. Would hate to lose that tower.

Also isn’t there a “ghost” station there? Could that actually be done now with so much development in that area? Or was that just a preliminary plan long ago and the guideway was never actually built for such an addition?

From the article:

The Boot’s existing pedestrian overpass over Kingsway will be retained and upgraded. Using the pedestrian overpass and the BC Parkway pathway, the site is about a 13-minute walk to SkyTrain Patterson Station in the east. As well, SkyTrain Joyce-Collingwood Station is about a 15-minute walk to the west, and the location is served by frequent bus routes.

It should also be noted that when SkyTrain Expo Line was built in the 1980s, the elevated guideway segment immediately north of the Boot was designed in a way to enable the future construction of a potential Boundary Road Station. Such a complex investment involving TransLink and many other entities is not being considered at this time.

[jollyburger]

Yeah that just looks tacky. And you know it's going to be some gawdy metal cladding.

[Metro-One]

Okay, thanks, just reading the article now.

I guess it’s not that far of a walk to Patterson, especially with the walkway over Kingsway.

[NetMapel]

Seems like unnecessarily massive towers that are surrounded by mostly single family houses. Especially so as it’s not immediately besides a skytrain station. I would rather see more larger spread of mid-size developments.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

i would like to see the BC Parkway get a bridge over Boundary Rd. using the old railway bridge embankments.

would be nice to not have a major road crossing on a parkway.

[madog222]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

isn’t there a “ghost” station there? Could that actually be done now with so much development in that area? Or was that just a preliminary plan long ago and the guideway was never actually built for such an addition?

The station location was moved to Patterson but the guideway was still built to allow a station. https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/sho...postcount=3645

[osirisboy]

Originally Posted by NetMapel

Seems like unnecessarily massive towers that are surrounded by mostly single family houses. Especially so as it’s not immediately besides a skytrain station. I would rather see more larger spread of mid-size developments.

Right. But I think those houses days are numbered.

I like it. It’s on two major streets and right across from the park. Always good to have more people easily access that.

[madog222]

Originally Posted by Sheba

REZ #17-10008: High-rise apartment building with a low-rise market rental apartment building
5777 Willingdon Avenue and 4475 Grange Street
Initial Report 2020.10.05

A new proposal has been submitted for the site as Rez #23-07, 37 storey strata tower with a 6 storey rental.

[logan5]

You can clearly see a progression towards Collingwood and Metrotown merging to become one big high density area. The skyline from Joyce Statin to Nelson Street in Burnaby will be over 3 km's long. Would like to see more prominent towers on the Collingwood side though, and eventually high density towers down the the Boundary Road corridor to 49th Ave. Mimicking Central Park in NY a bit.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by logan5

You can clearly see a progression towards Collingwood and Metrotown merging to become one big high density area. The skyline from Joyce Statin to Nelson Street in Burnaby will be over 3 km's long. Would like to see more prominent towers on the Collingwood side though, and eventually high density towers down the the Boundary Road corridor to 49th Ave. Mimicking Central Park in NY a bit.

Collingwood needs more density amended into its plan.

---
They should 'reserve' the CACs from all sites West of Patterson in Burnaby for a station here.

Even if the alignment doesn't exist, or it's far out into the future, it's still a good location to build a station (it would require building out new track, though.)

We don't want another Southlands situation, where any new station would need to wait another 30 years.

[Spr0ckets]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

You don’t like the list??

I need official heights first!

Happy to see the Boot itself being retained. Would hate to lose that tower.

Also isn’t there a “ghost” station there? Could that actually be done now with so much development in that area? Or was that just a preliminary plan long ago and the guideway was never actually built for such an addition?

No, actually I love your list.

I was just poking some fun at what people tend to fixate on when project proposals and information like this tends to be released.

In the grand scheme of things, if there was anything there to be fixated about, at least your list serves a useful and informative purpose.

I believe there once was a notion of having a interregnum station between Patterson and Joyce Collingwood, but for the longest time there simply hasn't been the density and foot traffic in that area to justify having such a station there.

Most of the potential foot traffic would be cannibalized by Patterson and Joyce-Collingwood and Patterson (whose own traffic is likewise cannibalized by Metrotown's much bigger Transit hub station), anyway.

I guess the argument could be made that the combination of this development bringing 2,500 homes with the next door residential complex along with the lowrise homes north of Kingsway and the Park, would eventually give the sort of numbers that could justify it, but I don't know the logistics and feasibility of adding a station to an already existing line and in between two stations - as opposed to at the end of a terminus station as an extension - and whether it would even be financially viable to do so.

I could see Transllink and the cities instead pushing for a bus transfer loop instead - but again,......there's already a transfer loop at Joyce Collingwood and a major loop and hub at Metrotown just a couple of stops away.

I think they'll just add a couple more bus/shuttle lines in the Boundary road and Kingsway routes to deal with any increase in density, but I don't see a station being added there.
But that's just me.

[Spr0ckets]

Originally Posted by ecbin

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/telu...rental-housing

Daily Hive article says there is a provision for it but that they are not considering pursuing it at this point.



I'd hope that the Burnaby collects a fee that would go towards a station in the future though. Also hope Burnaby rezones the areas north of the track to allow for some towers as well so that area can become a hub (and maybe there's a real grocery store there - it would be busy for sure).

Most of that area will likely never have any towers - at least on the Burnaby side of the boundary.

That's the singular part of the entire Burnaby municipality that has a viewcone restriction protecting the view to Central Park, and I don't see them getting rid of it even for more residential development - especially when there's still quite a lot more developable lots to the East of that, north of Kingsway.

But Administrations change, and so do cities' priorities along with them, so who knows?