Burnaby Updates

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Site plan showing no separate amenity building on Goring, so it's all park and greenspace on the south side.


https://storeys.com/keltic-development-5502-lougheed-burnaby-revs-bowling/

So a typical ravine amenity, sad to see it.

[Spr0ckets]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Site plan showing no separate amenity building on Goring, so it's all park and greenspace on the south side.


https://storeys.com/keltic-development-5502-lougheed-burnaby-revs-bowling/

It would have been impossible to have a separate substantial amenity building along most of Goring since most of the southern part of the lot (as well as the western side) is riparian protected area for the creek passing through the site.

Maybe they could have had a small outcrop on the southern most tower at the south-east most corner of the site, but something tells me that that space was too small to give you a usable amenity building.

Even the amenity building they did endup with fronting the creek, ended up getting all carved up by the riparian setback boundary.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by Spr0ckets

It would have been impossible to have a separate substantial amenity building along most of Goring since most of the southern part of the lot (as well as the western side) is riparian protected area for the creek passing through the site.

Maybe they could have had a small outcrop on the southern most tower at the south-east most corner of the site, but something tells me that that space was too small to give you a usable amenity building.

Even the amenity building they did endup with fronting the creek, ended up getting all carved up by the riparian setback boundary.

The "riparian protected area" currently has a bowling alley built on top of it. Any creek that will potentially be here will be an engineered landscape, not pristine wilderness. There's no rational reason to ruin a perfectly good streetscape with a ravine this way.

[jollyburger]

FWIW I think the original area plan said they can build to the full density of the entire parcel including the park/creek land.

[vanman]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

Speaking of Telus (BC Tel)... :0



https://storeys.com/anthem-crestpoint-telus-boot-burnaby/

Fencing is up along Boundary and Kingsway. Vegetation is being removed along the northwest side of the site. I'm wondering if both phases are going ahead simultaneously or just demolition work for phase 2 along with phase 1 construction.

[idunno]

I was wondering whether that was actually this development, or just some other early works. It's a big project!

[jollyburger]

They said they wanted to do site prep in the fall 2024 if they received approval on Phase 1 rezoning.

https://www.globenewswire.com/news-relea...-Site-at-Western-Gateway-to-Burnaby.html

Here's the development plan

https://burnaby.widen.net/s/l9fgnc5jjd/development-plan---rez-20-09

Not sure if this is new



https://centralparkcommons.ca/

It seems like third reading was supposed to happen in November 2024?

The site seems so tight demolition is probably a logical step just for room for construction workers/materials.

I wonder if they're leaving the Boot so they can magically down the road tear it down and do a larger tower on that corner?

[Spr0ckets]

Originally Posted by chowhou

The "riparian protected area" currently has a bowling alley built on top of it. Any creek that will potentially be here will be an engineered landscape, not pristine wilderness. There's no rational reason to ruin a perfectly good streetscape with a ravine this way.

There's nothing unusual about this.

Lots of riparian protected areas are established even after structures are built on them, with the structures grandfathered into the protection area.

Any redevelopment going forward would then be bound to respect the riparian setbacks, and that's probably what happened here.

And yes, you can even have a riparian protected area for a man-made creek or a re-established creek or river that was rebuilt to re-establish waterflow or facilitate controlled drainage into a natural major river.

The "rational" reason for their existence and establishments would be to give the delicate flora and fauna species that would live there a chance to flourish and actual take hold. Some of these are species are actually useful in naturally "cleaning" some of our waste water that passes through these creeks - rather than us having to resort to expensive and oftentimes dangerous chemical methods of doing so.

Just because you don't understand why something exists doesn't mean there isn't a good reason for it to exist.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by Spr0ckets

The "rational" reason for their existence and establishments would be to give the delicate flora and fauna species that would live there a chance to flourish and actual take hold. Some of these are species are actually useful in naturally "cleaning" some of our waste water that passes through these creeks - rather than us having to resort to expensive and oftentimes dangerous chemical methods of doing so.

Just because you don't understand why something exists doesn't mean there isn't a good reason for it to exist.

If that's the case, why on earth would we ever allow these towers to be built? We should require the entire lot to be returned to nature in order to have more delicate flora and fauna established. Human activity will only introduce more waste water, so it only makes sense to prevent all human activity instead of some of it.

Perhaps one day we'll return to living in trees and caves as nature intended. That's only rational.

[Spr0ckets]

Originally Posted by vanman

Fencing is up along Boundary and Kingsway. Vegetation is being removed along the northwest side of the site. I'm wondering if both phases are going ahead simultaneously or just demolition work for phase 2 along with phase 1 construction.

......

I'm actually impressed and stoked that this one seems to be moving forward with some pace right now.

I was worried it would get stuck in development permit application hell for several years like a lot of projects of this ambitous nature are wont to.

I would guess they're only going to do phase 1 first since - in addition to its larger scale - Phase 2 is probably also the phase that will be tied to a possible establishment of a new skytrain station there that the developers are also proposing, and which it seems the city is open to, or at least amenable to considering.

Doing the rental towers first (which is what the city would prefer) would theoretically sweeten the pot for the city to look kindly on greenlighting a Phase 2 with a skytrain station (...again, with Translink's approval, if they give their blessing).
Also, If you're proposing a new skytrain station you want to be able to make the argument for it existence with the backing of already existing ridership in the area (and with more to come in the phase two towers), which they'll theoretically have in the form of the phase 1 rental tower occupants (....along with the next door Wall Centre Central Park development occupants and other residents in the surrounding area).

It also gives them time to wait out a more stronger recovery of the condo and office markets - which is what phase 2 mostly consists of.

The possibility of that new skytrain station is what's making this one of the most interesting projects to come being proposed in the Metrotown/Boundary Rd area in the coming years for me.

[Spr0ckets]

Originally Posted by chowhou

If that's the case, why on earth would we ever allow these towers to be built? We should require the entire lot to be returned to nature in order to have more delicate flora and fauna established. Human activity will only introduce more waste water, so it only makes sense to prevent all human activity instead of some of it.

Perhaps one day we'll return to living in trees and caves as nature intended. That's only rational.

We still have to live in, and with nature, whether you or we like it or not.

How we choose to preserve it or use it both to our benefit and to the enrichment of where we live goes a large way in determining what quality of life we're actually building for ourselves.

And water treatment and management with nature has been a pivotal part of human civilization going back literally thousands of years since we first established societies and cities, and also paid heavy prices in the literal millions of lives to find out what happens when you don't do so responsibly.

One would have thought that it didn't need pointing out or emphasizing the importance of a healthy natural water cycle - especially living where we live in BC.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by Spr0ckets

We still have to live in, and with nature, whether you or we like it or not.

How we choose to preserve it or use it both to our benefit and to the enrichment of where we live goes a large way in determining what quality of life we're actually building for ourselves.

And water treatment and management with nature has been a pivotal part of human civilization going back literally thousands of years since we first established societies and cities, and also paid heavy prices in the literal millions of lives to find out what happens when you don't do so responsibly.

One would have thought that it didn't need pointing out or emphasizing the importance of a healthy natural water cycle - especially living where we live in BC.

Kind of weird how the REVs lot seems to be doing quite fine today then, don't you think? Unless of course you believe that REVs is poisoning the poor New Westminster and Surrey residents downstream.

It's so ironic how we wouldn't dare remove Goring street which I'm sure sends an immeasurable amount of brake dust and tire rubber and oil into Still Creek, but heaven forbid there's a cafe! That'll stop the salmon from coming back! Cars good! Pedestrians bad!

[vanman]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

I wonder if they're leaving the Boot so they can magically down the road tear it down and do a larger tower on that corner?

Please no. The Boot is basically heritage for Burnaby standards.

[vanman]

Also noticed fencing is up around Metrotown station presumably for the BC Parkway Enhancement Project.

[BaddieB]

Are people actually complaining about there being more usable greenspace in Brentwood?

[Migrant_Coconut]

Seems that way.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by BaddieB

Are people actually complaining about there being more usable greenspace in Brentwood?

If it was usable I wouldn't be complaining. Instead it's a 15m human exclusion zone killing the streetfront.

I'm all ears if you consider this or perhaps this usable greenspace. Imagine this expanded to 15m setback from the creek and parallel to the street instead of perpendicular. (This is Beecher Creek north and south of REVs.)

Build parks, not ravines.

[mcj]

Originally Posted by chowhou

If it was usable I wouldn't be complaining. Instead it's a 15m human exclusion zone killing the streetfront.

I'm all ears if you consider this usable greenspace. Imagine this expanded to 15m setback from the creek and parallel to the street instead of perpendicular. (This is Beecher Creek north of REVs.)

Build parks, not ravines.

Yeah agree with you on this one. ~50m of this creek being in a manufactured landscape isn't going to kill this stream, especially with modern methods of construction. At the very least there should be a plaza of some sort over the creek at this location, and it doesn't need to be the whole property, even a 20 metre setback plaza from Goring street would improve this project spectacularly.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by mcj

Yeah agree with you on this one. ~50m of this creek being in a manufactured landscape isn't going to kill this stream, especially with modern methods of construction. At the very least there should be a plaza of some sort over the creek at this location, and it doesn't need to be the whole property, even a 20 metre setback plaza from Goring street would improve this project spectacularly.

Not to mention that Goring is staying no matter what. As I said above, it's sad to me that we're not questioning keeping infrastructure for cars at all, but heaven forbid we have some infrastructure and amenities for people at street level.

[Spr0ckets]

Originally Posted by chowhou

If it was usable I wouldn't be complaining. Instead it's a 15m human exclusion zone killing the streetfront.

I'm all ears if you consider this or perhaps this usable greenspace. Imagine this expanded to 15m setback from the creek and parallel to the street instead of perpendicular. (This is Beecher Creek north and south of REVs.)

Build parks, not ravines.

Just to be clear, the riparian setback doesn't "exclude" humans from encroaching into the creek area.

It's prohibits construction within the riparian area.

Human beings can still go and enjoy the nature in that creekside, which is kind of part of the point.