[Richmond] Richmond Centre Mall | 27 acres | 12 towers | 45m | U/C

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by scryer

I'm pretty sure that increasing density is what this proposal will do and the same with the Lansdowne mall proposal. I get that Richmond can't go tall no matter what but they get fairly dense for a suburban-city their size, honestly speaking. And if the city (and the Metro Vancouver mayoral council) was gravely concerned about Richmond's vulnerable position then they would not be approving these large-scale projects without upgrading safety measures.

Agreed. From my un-professional speculations, even double tracking the Richmond segments would do a lot for the Canada line as they could run more trains more frequently. Again, if someone knows better, please correct me if I'm wrong.

The original MetroVancouver strategy called for minimal growth in Richmond exactly because it was on a vulnerable floodplain. Of course Richmond squawked loudly and the rest is history. Given that Surrey has publicly said it will abandon Crescent Beach in the face of sea level rise, I can't imagine how Richmond thinks it can keep outrunning the problem by raising the dykes.

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by officedweller

The part owned by the City may have been an old road RoW between the 2 malls when they were separate?

Here's a Global Air Photo from 1985:

February 1985
The Sears store is at the north end of the south mall below the word "Photos".
I can't quite recall, but one mall was called "Richmond Centre" (maybe the Bay side)
and the other may have been called "Richmond Place" (maybe the Sears side).

They detail it in these public information boards. It was originally called Richmond Square in 1964. The Bay opened to the north in 1966 (as Richmond Centre?) and the two combined in 1989.

https://www.letstalkrichmond.ca/rich...velopment-plan

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by whatnext

The original MetroVancouver strategy called for minimal growth in Richmond exactly because it was on a vulnerable floodplain. Of course Richmond squawked loudly and the rest is history. Given that Surrey has publicly said it will abandon Crescent Beach in the face of sea level rise, I can't imagine how Richmond thinks it can keep outrunning the problem by raising the dykes.

Can you give me a source to the original one?

[Aroundtheworld]

Originally Posted by scryer

Agreed. From my un-professional speculations, even double tracking the Richmond segments would do a lot for the Canada line as they could run more trains more frequently. Again, if someone knows better, please correct me if I'm wrong.

The Canada Line can go up to 1m30s frequencies on the main section, which means 3m on the Richmond led. The single track section can handle this increase in frequency.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Aroundtheworld

The Canada Line can go up to 1m30s frequencies on the main section, which means 3m on the Richmond led. The single track section can handle this increase in frequency.

But upgrading the Canada would funnel more people into and out of Richmond.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by fredinno

Can you give me a source to the original one?

Looking quickly the best I could find was the GVRD Official Regional Plan from 1980. Richmond was not listed as one of the regional town centres, that came later. The original intent was to limit development on the floodplain but Richmond bitched so much about it they added it mid-Eighties. From the original:

...Within the metropolitan area of Greater Vancouver, special attention
must be paid to the major centres in areas expected to accommodate
growing populations. These are the regional town centres of Burnaby
Metrotown, Downtown New Westminster, Coquitlam and Whalley-Guildford.
These centres are intended to provide a broad range of employment
opportunities, community and cultural facilities, housing and other
services. They will be linked together and with the metropolitan core
by a rapid transit system. Regional town centres will resemble the
downtown of a small city and play a similar role in the lives of the
people in their part of the metropolitan area...

FLOODPLAIN POLICIES
GENERAL POLICIES
ENSURE
-new development on the floodplain is adequately floodproofed .
LIMIT
- further urban development on the floodplain .
- further industrial development on the floodplain .
- further subdivision on the floodplain .

http://www.metrovancouver.org/about/...umbia_1980.pdf

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Looking quickly the best I could find was the GVRD Official Regional Plan from 1980. Richmond was not listed as one of the regional town centres, that came later. The original intent was to limit development on the floodplain but Richmond bitched so much about it they added it mid-Eighties. From the original:

...Within the metropolitan area of Greater Vancouver, special attention
must be paid to the major centres in areas expected to accommodate
growing populations. These are the regional town centres of Burnaby
Metrotown, Downtown New Westminster, Coquitlam and Whalley-Guildford.
These centres are intended to provide a broad range of employment
opportunities, community and cultural facilities, housing and other
services. They will be linked together and with the metropolitan core
by a rapid transit system. Regional town centres will resemble the
downtown of a small city and play a similar role in the lives of the
people in their part of the metropolitan area...

FLOODPLAIN POLICIES
GENERAL POLICIES
ENSURE
-new development on the floodplain is adequately floodproofed .
LIMIT
- further urban development on the floodplain .
- further industrial development on the floodplain .
- further subdivision on the floodplain .

http://www.metrovancouver.org/about/...umbia_1980.pdf

Thanks. Richmond is still designated as a 'regional center' (page 29)- which is not too far off from what it is now. Also interesting how Lander was designated as a regional centre back then, and today. Somehow. I'm getting mixed signals... :/

Let's hope that Richmond's dikes can continue to hold for the next century, otherwise, we'll have a in-city refugee crisis on our hands...

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

They detail it in these public information boards. It was originally called Richmond Square in 1964. The Bay opened to the north in 1966 (as Richmond Centre?) and the two combined in 1989.

https://www.letstalkrichmond.ca/rich...velopment-plan

Cool, thanks!

Originally Posted by whatnext

Looking quickly the best I could find was the GVRD Official Regional Plan from 1980. Richmond was not listed as one of the regional town centres, that came later. The original intent was to limit development on the floodplain but Richmond bitched so much about it they added it mid-Eighties.

Yup - that's why Richmond was excluded from the Livable Region Strategic Plan's "Growth Concentration Area":


http://www.metrovancouver.org/servic...tions/LRSP.pdf

[Phoenix88]

Any updates on this project? Think they maybe gearing up soon.

[LeftCoaster]

Originally Posted by Phoenix88

Any updates on this project? Think they maybe gearing up soon.

They sure are, sales launch this month.

Be sure to register:
https://everythingatrc.com/?utm_sour...xoCTOQQAvD_BwE

[Phoenix88]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

They sure are, sales launch this month.

Be sure to register:
https://everythingatrc.com/?utm_sour...xoCTOQQAvD_BwE

Thanks Leftcoaster. I've heard the units are fairly expensive. Maybe because of the location and finishing?

What are your thoughts on this project? Seems pretty unique and desirable.

I wonder if demand is as high as I think it maybe.

[LeftCoaster]

Well I think it's great, but that's just my "totally unbiassed opinion".

Good news is this project is selling very well, continued signs that after a lull of a few years the presale market in Vancouver seems to be alive and well.

[LeftCoaster]

Sales have been well beyond expectations, and preparations for construction are beginning now.

Several more cranes to the crane count soon!

[BodomReaper]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Sales have been well beyond expectations, and preparations for construction are beginning now.

Several more cranes to the crane count soon!

Excellent to hear! Hoping for some good news on the retail front too - downtown Richmond desperately needs better pedestrian-oriented street retail.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Sales have been well beyond expectations, and preparations for construction are beginning now.

Several more cranes to the crane count soon!

Would be even better when the Lansdowne development starts going too. Would be a sea of cranes.

[jollyburger]

New video from Axiom

3200m3 concrete pour in July

https://www.instagram.com/p/CfrhQbYJJPz/

First of seven cranes also went up

https://www.instagram.com/p/Cgh9m9csh8O/

Overview of the site from March

https://www.instagram.com/p/CbtK7r8PByR/

[LeftCoaster]

Crane 2 of 7 is now up.

[Lexus]

2022, October 22

4 cranes 🏗

Untitled by Lexus LX600, on Flickr

Untitled by Lexus LX600, on Flickr

Untitled by Lexus LX600, on Flickr

Untitled by Lexus LX600, on Flickr

Untitled by Lexus LX600, on Flickr

[officedweller]

Cool, thanks for the update!

[SkytrainCar026]

All photos are mine.

From Minoru Blvd:


From parkade: first tower has gained a few stories since Lexus's update in October, and it looks like they're pouring the final part of the foundation in the distance.


Different angle: