Burnaby Updates

[SpongeG]

Burnaby's '100-year' plan to replace Metrotown mall with a downtown core

A developer wants to turn Metropolis at Metrotown "inside out"

Kelvin Gawley / Burnaby Now OCTOBER 25, 2019


Canada's third-busiest mall, Metropolis at Metrotown, will be replaced with a new downtown core, if a developer's plans go ahead.
Photograph By CITY OF BURNABY

The City of Burnaby is forging ahead with a plan to create a downtown core from scratch. The process will eventually see many new highrises, plazas, parks and streets built to replace the Metropolis at Metrotown shopping centre – but Canada’s third-busiest mall isn’t going anywhere anytime soon.

On Monday, Burnaby council will consider giving city staff approval to start working on a master plan for the 46-acre lot, currently home to some 1.7 million square feet of retail space. If approved, planning staff will begin working with developer Ivanhoe Cambridge on a plan that could take 80 years or longer to fully implement.

The master plan will provide more detail to the city’s existing 2017 Metrotown Downtown Plan, which laid out a vision for a densely populated urban core with commercial, residential, institutional and public amenities in close proximity.

The plan calls for the existing mall site to be bisected by several new streets lined with new buildings of various heights with street-facing podiums that would essentially turn the mall “inside out,” according to Burnaby’s director of planning and building Ed Kozak.

As for what, exactly, the area will look like years down the road, Kozak said he had few details he could share but said, “There will be many buildings and they will be tall.”

The site subjected to the new master plan includes a portion of the former Sears site next to the mall. Concord has already submitted plans to build six residential towers on the adjacent site ranging from 35 to 65 storeys.

The plan follows a recent trend in urban planning that does away with traditional “fortress-like” malls, he said.

“There's this move away from the exclusively internalized mall model to one that's more outwardly oriented and one that has a relationship to the streets that are around it,” Kozak said.

The master plan will put pedestrian-oriented public spaces first and “the buildings get the leftover spaces,” he said.

And the city’s head planner said the plazas and parks will be truly public despite being on private property. “People can enjoy the site and the many amenities that will come to it without having to spend a dollar,” Kozak said.

Once complete, he said, Burnaby will have a vibrant urban core, a central gathering place and a symbolic centre.

But that day is long off.

Over the next 10 years, relatively little will change, says Graeme Silvera, Ivanhoe’s vice president of development and retail.

Residents will see a new road built parallel to Kingsway, with some of the retail within the malls re-oriented to face it, he said. Starting in the 2030s, Silvera said, new residential towers will start to break ground but the mall will likely remain.

...

https://www.burnabynow.com/news/burn...ore-1.23988651

[Spr0ckets]

Originally Posted by osirisboy

I'm guessing it's relative to developments like Gilmore station or Brentwood that are basically attached to the station. Or relative to the person. If you are senior with mobility issues trying to walk home with groceries they may consider it "far away" and who are you to tell them that their personal perception is wrong?! Hence the term "relative"


I'm still puzzled why people are still talking about this

Yes of course, if you are a senior with mobility issues it would be considered "far away", and I literally pointed that out in my own comment that you quoted - you virtually repeated what I said.


But that's an exception - not the norm.
And who's this project being designed, geared and primarily marketed towards?
Seniors with mobility issues?
Or families that typically have cars and young professionals (who can walk and can drive)?

If it's the latter then how does the notion that living 2 blocks away from the 2nd largest mall in the region (when it's complete) is "far away" begin to compute?

And if it's the former, then you're talking about designing a seniors' residential home - which typically tend to have amenities and services that take things like this into consideration (such as the fact that the mall commercial business can provide home delivery to save the residents the trip, or the residence itself providing chauffeured drive service for seniors who want to visit it.). And guess what you won't find a lot of in the podium levels of such buildings? Lots and lots of commercial and retail units mostly because they have to use that space to provide even MORE amenities and services for their seniors and health-afflicted residents.
So even in the exception case (of residents who have mobility issues since they are seniors) you still wouldn't do that (i.e add an unnecessarily higher than usual amount of retail to the podiums or the projects writ large).

The original person I responded to (Vin) phrased it to make it seem like "relatively far away" was a general condition applying to everyone who would live in those residences.
Fact of the matter is that it's not.
Fact of the matter is that for the primary and target demographic that the developers will likely be gearing this project towards and marketing to, it most certainly is not.

And to come back with a literal exception to the rule (or exceptional case from the norm for the intended target marketbase) as if it proves anything makes even less sense.

The project will almost certainly have some retail component on the podium levels, but certainly nothing matching what's at the mall, and that's almost likely what Vin was suggesting, and that close to the mall, it makes no sense (financial or otherwise) to try to create a "mini-mall" or bigger than usual retail complex that will only end up trying (and failing) to compete with the mall rather than providing a convenience for their own residences.

[Alex Mackinnon]

Originally Posted by scryer

That's cool.... Metro Van's own Cistern Basilica . Too bad that Burnaby is choosing to demolish something great like this. It just needs a little paint and it could actually be a historical integration... Speaking of which, where all of the heritage protectionists fighting tooth and nail to retain character in their neighbourhoods during all of this?

It's probably is classified as a confined space.

See the park.

I grew up not too far from there, and frankly I'd bet they just want the park to be expanded instead of creating an odd bunker space that can't be easily used or accessed.

[osirisboy]

@sprockets. This is painful. I really don't care.

[owenhujb]

100 years for redevelopment. Too bad none of us will be around to see this finished.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by owenhujb

100 years for redevelopment. Too bad none of us will be around to see this finished.

I'm trying for immortality and I don't want to be around to see this finished. What they've shown / suggested so far hasn't impressed me at all. If anyone wants to donate to my tropical paradise fund so I can get away from it all...

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Sheba

I'm trying for immortality and I don't want to be around to see this finished. What they've shown / suggested so far hasn't impressed me at all. If anyone wants to donate to my tropical paradise fund so I can get away from it all...

Yeah, where's Vin when you need him? Can't we at least keep the new indoor mall the same size as the old one?

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by fredinno

Yeah, where's Vin when you need him? Can't we at least keep the new indoor mall the same size as the old one?

The city doesn't want an indoor mall (after approving and expanding it... ). To quote the article above: The plan calls for the existing mall site to be bisected by several new streets lined with new buildings of various heights with street-facing podiums that would essentially turn the mall “inside out,” according to Burnaby’s director of planning and building Ed Kozak.

Can't we keep one indoor mall? Street front retail isn't doing so well that all stores need to change into it.

[slurrey]

Sounds like a great idea for a location where it rains half the year

[SpongeG]

they could cover the streets like some of them are in Tokyo

Tokyo May 2019 by snub_you, on Flickr

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by SpongeG

they could cover the streets like some of them are in Tokyo

Tokyo May 2019 by snub_you, on Flickr

It’s not just Tokyo, it’s every city in Japan that has those.

Even my town with the same population as Kamloops has two of those streets.

I don’t know why it always has to be an either / or scenario with urban planning in Metro Van.

The mall could easily be retained while adding streets through the property. You could either do it the Japanese way shown (and PS, those are pedestrian only streets! Though in Japan they don’t have the drugged up homeless problem to destroy such areas, they would need to be at least semi-private to work in BC) or, as I have suggested before, have a continuous mall system in the tower podiums of 3 or 4 blocks or so with skywalks connecting the mall podiums on the 2nd or 3rd levels. Hell, you could even do cool things such as having part of the foodcourt suspended over one of the streets. Then you would have both a major indoor mall and public through streets with street front retail and you could even through in a little bit of an arcade (Japanese style) for one portion.

Metrotown will actually become worse if they just want to be another Yaletown IMO. The commercial aspect of the area has long been a huge part of its defining identity. We can definitely make it better, but we don’t need more carbon copy current fad urban resort plan.

[Migrant_Coconut]

^ That's probably the best option in the case of a single-floor Metrotown rebuild: enclosed stores, open-air pedestrian street, big glass roof. Not much point in looking like every other rained-out streetfront in the metro.

Of course, it's all predicated on IC selling in the first place, instead of just developing the parking lots; they're probably looking at Oakridge and thinking "maybe not a good idea..."

[SpongeG]

Well whatever they do the earliest anything will start to change is in the 2030's, we could live completely differently by then. Look how different things are to 10 years ago, Social Media and aps have had a huge inpact on daily life in this last decade. The whole project will be complete in 80 years! we will all be long gone and dead so really whatever they do has no impact on the current generations.

[phesto]

Preliminary proposal for 82-storey tower at Lougheed Station.

Iconic Landmark Project Proposed for Burnaby

An “iconic landmark project” has been put forward by Pinnacle International for a 6.2 acre site in the Lougheed Town Centre area of Burnaby. Based on the preliminary design details, including towers up to 82-storeys in height outlined in the preliminary rezoning application, the towers may become the tallest in B.C..

Preliminary details for the proposed project include:

• Three residential towers (82-storeys, 67-storeys & 62-storeys);
• up to 1.9 Million SF of market residential (11.91 FAR);
• 20% rental housing (2.16 FAR);
• estimated 430,000 SF of office, retail & hotel uses;
• relocation of Gatineau Place to align with the new north-south Grand Promenade road, as
• new covered transit plaza adjacent to the SkyTrain station and bus loop;
• a new pedestrian bridge over Austin Road to connect the covered transit plaza and subject site with the Lougheed Mall site to the north.

Source: http://www.vancouvermarket.ca/2019/1...d-for-burnaby/

[Spr0ckets]

Originally Posted by phesto

Preliminary proposal for 82-storey tower at Lougheed Station.

.....
Source: http://www.vancouvermarket.ca/2019/1...d-for-burnaby/

Talk about stealing Shape's thunder.

Though I highly doubt those tower heights will stick all the way through to construction and completion.
Pinnacle are a major developer, so I don't think this might suffer the same fate as the GEC center in Surrey eventually did, but still.....
Pretty ambitious.

[SpongeG]

That would be great

[Migrant_Coconut]

Yeah, remember the Big Bend in New York a couple years ago? I'm going to wait until this actually passes the proposal stage.

[logan5]

At 82 stories, it would potentially be the tallest outside of Toronto, assuming Alldritt in Edmonton doesn't happen.

The height wars in Burnaby are escalating fast. How long til tallest in Canada?

Aura in Toronto is the tallest residential tower in Canada - 78 stories/892 ft. This tower proposal is 82 stories, so we are looking at a 900' plus tower probably.

[Klazu]

Burnaby, WHERE ELSE!!

I just love this city and how proposal heights just keep going up! 40 floors is already so commonplace in Burnaby that it is almost boring. With all the projects underway, 50 floors will not feel that special soon as well and I like it! At the same time, these projects would be massive in Downtown Vancouver...

I have to say that 82 floors at this location is bordering madness. Let's face it, Lougheed is a rather far-flung neighborhood and the number three town center inside Burnaby. It is crazy that such projects have been proposed there. Honestly, 82 floors would feel (almost) too tall even in Brentwood, even on the legendary Carter lot. Talking about it, I cannot even think what may get built there one day...

The lot in Lougheed was always slated for really tall towers in the master plan. I think the plan had 70+ towers go there, but I thought that had quietly died, but apparently not! Only in Burnaby...

[rickvug]

If Burnaby is considering 82 floors at Lougheed then what kind of heights might be expected on the Metrotown mall site that will be the core of Burnaby's Downtown area? My initial thought is that 100 floors wouldn't be out of the question, at least from a planning perspective. No clue about the economics of it all as you get up to these heights.

Crazy times. The core inner "suburbs" are going to feel pretty different in a few decades time as heights go taller and these centres become built out.