[Burnaby] Highline | 177 m | 48 fl | U/C

[Spr0ckets]

Originally Posted by owenhujb

Cannot agree more. Doesn’t Burnaby have a plan to slowly taper down the heights of the buildings in this area? That’s a huge jump from height (53 -> 14)

It might have something to do with the fact that that second tower is the non-market/rental portion of the project and is being partially funded or financed in partnership with BC Housing.

So I guess a lot depends, or depended on how much they wanted to do and build (or were able to).

The city of Burnaby, probably only cared about replacing the housing in the walkups in those two lots that were demolished in order to build this project (which I think we can agree that even this small tower completely covers); while the developer probably only cares about the market portion of this project (i.e the 53 storey tower) which is what's making them money - , while BC Housing on the other hand, are only working within the bounds of whatever funding they're able to get and thus provide.

Probably the city could have (and should have) pushed for more on the non-market portion and have that smaller tower be bigger, but then again this project was approved while the previous administration was in power and the pressure to deal with the housing crisis and demovictions wasn't so pronounced (even if it was there) as it is now.

[Galaxy]

It would have been so awesome to have them build the second tower the same height as the first with the top portion mostly market while maintaining the bottom portion affordable rentals even if they had created a separate entry and exit spaces etc.

[Klazu]

While something taller than 14 floor would have been nice here, I think that will create some nice height variation for the area. There is likely going to be much taller towers on all sides of that lot and the main tower will be massive, so I am fine with it. I also like that it will be slightly different shape than all the pointy towers in the area (more wide).

[officedweller]

15 storeys of office space - nice!

Originally Posted by Spr0ckets

That's Vancouver.
This is Burnaby.
Different cities and municipalities have different requirements and processes.
And in that case, as you pointed out yourself, the height of the tower (and therefore the form of the building) changed as a result of that change. So it's not surprising that they would have had to amend the development permit.

We've added floors to various projects we've done without affecting the overall form or height (or really design) of the project, and not had to re-apply for development or design permits.

It depends on where your project is getting built (and how).
Perhaps you're right in that they would need to re-apply for development permit in this case (again, I don't know the extent of the changes beyond the change of floors or usage, if that).
But that's never been my experience.

We're currently working on a project right now that's changing configuration of unit types (adding more 2 and 3 bedroom units) and even sections of the project changing from Office usage to residential (as in this case) - and it already has a building permit. Though that project is in Richmond.
The key there being that the tower forms and design aren't radically changing from what the original design permits showed.

Interesting, thanks.
Vancouver is under the Vancouver Charter whereas others are uner the Local Government Act, so that's probably the source of the difference.

[officedweller]

Pics by City of Rain Sept 29th:

Originally Posted by City Of Rain, post: 1490264, member: 70034

DSC04006 by Hung Lam, on Flickr
DSC04006 by Hung Lam, on Flickr
DSC04011 by Hung Lam, on Flickr
DSC04013 by Hung Lam, on Flickr
DSC04014 by Hung Lam, on Flickr
DSC04015 by Hung Lam, on Flickr
DSC04016 by Hung Lam, on Flickr
DSC04019 by Hung Lam, on Flickr
DSC04020 by Hung Lam, on Flickr

[Metro-One]

Well the fact that they have increased the office floor count makes it pretty likely that the overall height of the tower has been increased as well.

[Prometheus]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Well the fact that they have increased the office floor count makes it pretty likely that the overall height of the tower has been increased as well.

If the 158 metres was in fact the height of the project when it only had 10 office floors, the addition of five more office floors should raise the height very roughly to 176 metres.

[Spr0ckets]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Pics by City of Rain Sept 29th:

That's one hell of a deep pit.

Someone earlier mentioned it was 8 storeys deep of underground parking, but I could swear in that first photo in particular it looks much deeper than that.


It's like something you would see in a Downtown Vancouver development with their constrained limited footprints and squeezed lots.

[Spr0ckets]

Originally Posted by Prometheus

If the 158 metres was in fact the height of the project when it only had 10 office floors, the addition of five more office floors should raise the height very roughly to 176 metres.

If that's true then that would make it the tallest in Metrotown outright (currently under construction) and taller than Station Square's Tower #5.

Also it would seem like the reason for the storey height change from 48 floors to 53 floors is simply because of 5 additional office floors, and not the conversion of some office into residential.

Which would also mean that Officedweller was correct, and they may have had to re-apply for a development permit to get the extra floors and change in form.
(it might also explain the delay by almost a year in their expected completion date from the original projection).

In either case, it's not too shabby.

Still, like everyone else here, I would liked to see the second tower get some more floors as part of any redesign but I suppose that wasn't just down to the developer since BC Housing is also involved in that part of the project.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by Spr0ckets

That's one hell of a deep pit.

Someone earlier mentioned it was 8 storeys deep of underground parking, but I could swear in that first photo in particular it looks much deeper than that.

It's like something you would see in a Downtown Vancouver development with their constrained limited footprints and squeezed lots.

Could be deeper to accommodate more office parking (?), but I count 16 "bands" of shotcrete (2 bands per level?)

[Spr0ckets]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Could be deeper to accommodate more office parking (?), but I count 16 "bands" of shotcrete (2 bands per level?)

You could be right.
The person that said it was 8 storeys earlier on this thread seemed like they were working on the project or knew more about it than we do.

But they also made it before this floor level increase change was made so maybe it was in reference to the 48 floor previous height?
In which case then they might go a bit deeper to accommodate those extra floors (or alternatively the pit will be equally deep all throughout the lot now whereas before it might have only been as deep beneath the tall tower and shallower below the smaller non-market tower).

But the might also have been referring to an 8 storey deep pit knowing that the floor height change had already been made and it was an accurate correct figure for the project as is.

[Klazu]

This tower is right next to SkyTrain so I would think parking needs are minimal. Also, do below-market housing projects normally come with any parking or can the tall tower utilize all the parkade space for itself?

[prime1960]

Hi everyone, new member here been following along for years though, excuse me if I’m being naive.. but can’t someone just ask one of the workers on site what the floor count is
Or can one not get close enough .. or are they sworn to secrecy?

[LeftCoaster]

Workers generally don't know that kind of info. A super or PM probably would, but even then they would likely not know off the top of their head the floor to floor so it's kind of irrelevant without that info.

You could email the developer directly, they have no reason not to share the info with you if you ask nicely enough.

Or a guy in an orange vest, always reliable.

[logan5]

It's just a matter of looking at the architectural drawings, which are available to anyone who works on site. They aren't top secret. Even a guy in an orange vest can pull that off.

[jlousa]

The average orange vest guy doesn't have access to the drawings. Not because they are top secret but because they don't have the need to see them. They do as they are told and thats it. that's how it works on a job site.

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by jlousa

The average orange vest guy doesn't have access to the drawings. Not because they are top secret but because they don't have the need to see them. They do as they are told and thats it. that's how it works on a job site.

They are usually openly available in the site office though (sometimes posted right on the wall). At least on all the active work sites I visited years ago for my old job.

If I was still living in Van I would be hounding these sites for the height info, haha.

I tried sending emails to a couple developers, but have never received a response.

[logan5]

Originally Posted by jlousa

The average orange vest guy doesn't have access to the drawings. Not because they are top secret but because they don't have the need to see them. They do as they are told and thats it. that's how it works on a job site.

You don't know what the fuck you are talking about. Every trade on that job site is given a copy of those drawings. Whether they are drywallers, electricians, glazers, architects, engineers, you name it.You have no idea how a job site works.

[Cypherus]

Originally Posted by logan5

You don't know what the fuck you are talking about. Every trade on that job site is given a copy of those drawings. Whether they are drywallers, electricians, glazers, architects, engineers, you name it.You have no idea how a job site works.

If you have to repeat yourself, that indicates doubt about what you actually know.

[jlousa]

Do you have any idea how much a full set of drawings cost? You really think they are given out like that? They are broken into sections, mechanical, electrical, structural etc and even then there are limited copies. And then you lump in architect and engineer when we are talking about "average" orange vester... yes it's obvious who doesn't know what they are talking about. But hey feel free to come to one of my job sites and set me right.