Joyce-Collingwood Station review - Page 3

Vin · #41 Posted **Feb 10, 2016, 12:43 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlousa

You do realize that the Joyce area is denser then Metrotown right even after all their towers complete... Even if taken as a whole Joyce/Collingwood today is denser then a good chuck of downtown. After the upzoning it'll carry it's own.
You should've shown up to the openhouses and voiced your gospel to city staff instead of your constant rambling on here.

Joyce area is only denser because it is a primarily residential neighbourhood, and you don't even count the single family homes surrounding the condo zone! (You should increase the boundary to match Metrotown's area).

Metrotown has a large shopping mall, grocery stores and office towers in the vicinity, and they are commercial spaces churning in revenue for the City of Burnaby. If we only consider all the residential lots of Metrotown, I'm pretty sure the density is way higher than those of the Joyce-Collingwood neighbourhood.

I'm not in the business of going to every single open houses. If I can make it, I would definitely go: no need to guilt-trip me here.

jlousa · #42 Posted **Feb 10, 2016, 1:23 AM**

Go ahead and crunch the numbers I'll wait, I assure you even if you exclude the mall, the area around Metrotown are not even in the same ballpark as Joyce Station including those sfhs that all hold 2 basement suites.
Don't worry I'm not guilt tripping you into attending open houses, The open houses have enough fanatics as is.

urbancanadian · #43 Posted **Feb 10, 2016, 3:42 AM**

I have to say I'm happy with the plan. I also agree with jlousa that they could have extended it out a bit to provide for a more gradual transition to the surrounding neighbourhood. I'm of the opinion that we are in need of a massive supply of new ground oriented housing (ie. townhomes/rowhomes). I'd also like to see a new plan along the Expo Line between this area and the Nanaimo Station area. It could be a pretty cool area.

Also Vin, you do realize that the rental building currently proposed next to the station is literally denser than anything ever built in Burnaby...

Spork · #44 Posted **Feb 10, 2016, 4:55 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlousa

You do realize that the Joyce area is denser then Metrotown right even after all their towers complete... Even if taken as a whole Joyce/Collingwood today is denser then a good chuck of downtown. After the upzoning it'll carry it's own.
You should've shown up to the openhouses and voiced your gospel to city staff instead of your constant rambling on here.

I was there.

Back your statements up with some research and I would be happy to engage in a reasoned debate. I haven't seen an ounce of research or even well-reasoned opinion from you apart from "it's plenty dense".

Ramble ramble ramble.

jlousa · #45 Posted **Feb 10, 2016, 5:17 AM**

My comment wasn't even directed at you... are you seriously asking for proof of the density numbers for the Joyce area? The least dense areas of Joyce are already posted in this very thread and even those are very dense, then there is the fact the single densest census tract for the whole region is also within Joyce-Collingwood.

Here is a density map to drive home the point. Note that the areas that aren't dark purple are the very areas that are being upzoned to become dark purple.

Source: Healthycitymaps http://healthycitymaps.blogspot.ca/

Sorry for the original post, couldn't figure out how to resize the image. Here is a link to the full size map
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...n_Density2.jpg

squeezied · #46 Posted **Feb 10, 2016, 5:45 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlousa

Don't worry I'm not guilt tripping you into attending open houses, The open houses have enough fanatics as is.

Vin, perhaps you should divert your energy from your constant opinionated ramblings towards fewer but more researched and concrete posts. Maybe then you'll have some credibility.

WarrenC12 · #47 Posted **Feb 10, 2016, 5:51 AM**

Thanks for the link to that site jlousa, some amazing maps on there. No surprise Joyce is extremely dense, all you have to do is look out the skytrain as you are going by.

Infrequent Poster · #48 Posted **Feb 10, 2016, 6:13 AM**

I couldnt help but notice looking at both the areas side by side. Metrotown looks denser to me. Or the actual area of the highest density seems to be larger in the metrotown region. Just saying....

see for yourself.

logan5 · #49 Posted **Feb 10, 2016, 6:14 AM**

Metrotown carries fairly high densities over a much larger area than Joyce, where the census tract mentioned is probly .2 sq km's. Outside of that particular census tract, Joyce falls off a cliff.

Infrequent Poster · #50 Posted **Feb 10, 2016, 6:27 AM**

[QUOTE=squeezied;7330303]

nevermind.

Spork · #51 Posted **Feb 10, 2016, 6:35 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlousa

My comment wasn't even directed at you... are you seriously asking for proof of the density numbers for the Joyce area? The least dense areas of Joyce are already posted in this very thread and even those are very dense, then there is the fact the single densest census tract for the whole region is also within Joyce-Collingwood.

Here is a density map to drive home the point. Note that the areas that aren't dark purple are the very areas that are being upzoned to become dark purple.http://healthycitymaps.blogspot.ca/

That map is pretty selective by using 10k/sqkm as the upper limit, considering that some of the purple area is upwards of 30k/sqkm. In any case, if we assume that 10k/sqkm is some sort of optimal density target (rather than the 30k or so that the current set of towers East of the station brings), my point is that much more should be in scope of the plan.

I diagrammed on top of that map, indicating in red where the incremental density to 10k would occur. I've added yellow where I think that additional density should have been considered. Again, if we want to pursue "livable density" that excludes towers, we have to get a bit more comfortable with increasing the scope of these plans to include a larger area.

Source: Me + http://healthycitymaps.blogspot.ca/

My concern is this: You don't build housing for 1m additional people by 2040 by transforming 330 small areas like this across the Metro Vancouver (1m/3,000 incremental housing capacity) - 80 of which could be in the City of Vancouver (330 x 24% of existing population). 2040 is 25 years away - the same amount of time that this neighbourhood has increased its population by 10,000.

TourOdeon · #52 Posted **Feb 10, 2016, 7:55 AM**

Why aren't we seeing any residential developments near Renfrew & Nanaimo stations?

trofirhen · #53 Posted **Feb 10, 2016, 8:21 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlousa

My comment wasn't even directed at you... are you seriously asking for proof of the density numbers for the Joyce area? The least dense areas of Joyce are already posted in this very thread and even those are very dense, then there is the fact the single densest census tract for the whole region is also within Joyce-Collingwood.Here is a density map to drive home the point. Note that the areas that aren't dark purple are the very areas that are being upzoned to become dark purple.
Source: Healthycitymaps http://healthycitymaps.blogspot.ca/

Sorry for the original post, couldn't figure out how to resize the image. Here is a link to the full size map
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...n_Density2.jpg

In your post with the map displayed, it was good to see the Grandview Cut put to effective good use, presumably with commuter rail, à la WCE.

twism · #54 Posted **Feb 12, 2016, 4:57 PM**

http://www.straight.com/news/635946/...-neighbourhood

officedweller · #55 Posted **Feb 12, 2016, 7:14 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by twism

http://www.straight.com/news/635946/...-neighbourhood

Funny headline - Collingwood already has towers.
The new ones will just be taller.

LeftCoaster · #56 Posted **Feb 12, 2016, 7:31 PM**

Not surprising, the straight isn't exactly pro-development...

Vin · #57 Posted **Feb 13, 2016, 1:30 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Infrequent Poster

I couldnt help but notice looking at both the areas side by side. Metrotown looks denser to me. Or the actual area of the highest density seems to be larger in the metrotown region. Just saying....

see for yourself.

Thanks, Infrequent Poster, that map looks much better.

High density nodes at the Burnaby side of Boundary definitely promotes more green areas to be preserved. Joyce-Collingwood should go as high as possible since there aren't a lot of lands around there to be re-developed, unlike Metrotown. The existing parking lots and strip malls around Metro will definitely see further density increases in the near future.

casper · #58 Posted **Feb 16, 2016, 6:17 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlousa

My comment wasn't even directed at you... are you seriously asking for proof of the density numbers for the Joyce area? The least dense areas of Joyce are already posted in this very thread and even those are very dense, then there is the fact the single densest census tract for the whole region is also within Joyce-Collingwood.

Here is a density map to drive home the point. Note that the areas that aren't dark purple are the very areas that are being upzoned to become dark purple.

Source: Healthycitymaps http://healthycitymaps.blogspot.ca/

Sorry for the original post, couldn't figure out how to resize the image. Here is a link to the full size map
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...n_Density2.jpg

I always thought of Main St as an artificial dividing line between the city. What ever reason housing on one side were always worth just a little bit more. However what that plot clearly shows is density is consistently higher on the east vrs west side of city. It is an interesting difference, and will become more pronounced if we end up with a strategy like Joyce of focusing on increased density around skystrain stations.

Start with Joyce buy we should also do the same at stations that currently are predominately single family like 29th and Nanaimo. 29th would be an interesting one. There is already a small low-rise townhouse development next to the station and the old interurban generating plant building that was converted to apartments. Beyond that it is all single family. I could see the area around the park being zoned to high risk. Connects nicely with Kingsway also being upzoned.

jlousa · #59 Posted **Mar 4, 2016, 5:08 AM**

Hoping to get this one back on track and keep it there, Deadline for public submissions is tomorrow, so for anyone that hasn't voiced their opinion to the city yet, here's your chance.

http://vancouver.ca/home-property-de...ct-review.aspx

Vonny · #60 Posted **Mar 26, 2016, 7:21 PM**

for info:

Quote:

Plan Talk
Wednesday, April 6, 7 - 9 pm
Collingwood Neighbourhood House (5288 Joyce Street)
This is a learning session that will include an overview of the plan and an opportunity to discuss the following topics in depth:
· Transportation and pedestrian connections
· Housing affordability
· Amenities
· Building types and heights
Due to limited room capacity, registration is required. To register, please visit: http://www.eventbrite.com/e/plan-tal...ts-24035971237 or sign up at Collingwood Neighbourhood House’s Reception.

The above aerial rendering was with an early version (Precinct option 3). Now the St Mary parish has applied to replace the Columbus tower (on the left in the forefront) by a tower which height is in line with the Tower on the other side of the skytrain line (the represented skytrain station is the new one under construction)