[Burnaby] Concord Brentwood | U/C and Proposed

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by Klazu

You have recently been commenting this to few of my questions, but perhaps LEED requirements are also the reason there? I recall there having been a thread about how much heat balconies emitted (or absorbed, can't remember)... Just a guess.

I think there may be a couple of factors at play -
- the balconies shade the interior which would prevent solar gain
- the balconies, as constructed in Vancouver without a "thermal break", means that they emit heat from the building acting like a radiator fin

I like the look of the wrap around balconies, because it adds uniformity to the building and you can't see the spandrel.

[Klazu]

Originally Posted by officedweller

I like the look of the wrap around balconies, because it adds uniformity to the building and you can't see the spandrel.

That's true, but if overused, they make all buildings look quite similar. Well, perhaps better than all buildings similarly clad with spandrel.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by retro_orange

Why do they keep referencing Yaletown for these suburban developments. Yaletown was built around a historical industrial neighborhood that is the driving force of it's popularity. There's not a single aspect of these developments that maintains any sort of historical context to the areas past.

The Yaletown BIA should copyright the name so they can get royalties from all these other developments that overuse the concept of 'Yaletown living'. Seriously.

Other than the teaser video that was initially released that drew the parallels of Yaletown's Urban fare market and David Lam park to this new development, nowhere else has Concord said that this Brentwood development is just like Yaletown, and they have certainly not been comparing Yaletown's historical district to this Burnaby development. In fact, if you guys look at their website, they describe more on the strengths of living in Burnaby (eg. they pointed out that Burnaby was selected as the best managed city, etc.).

[Shift]

Liking this. It looks similar to, and maybe even better, than Concord City Place in Toronto.

Concord seems to have established itself as a developer with signature parks and open space integrated into their developments, so the towers in the park make sense. It also makes sense given that Brentwood is a regional town centre, not a downtown (as officedweller already mentioned). Ample park and green space is appealing to people who don't want to feel like they are living downtown, and like the open space.

The architecture is nice and clean. I don't think this area needs any iconic eye catching towers. There are enough going up in the area already. Simplistic and timeless is often better. Also boxy massing with sharp edges is still a new look in Metro Van. The pillar base is also a good look. Very neo-modernist.

[JamesOwnz]

I grew up in the Burnaby heights/brentwood area.

Hard to believe all the changes going on.. so this new project is going to be going where the car dealership is?

[Spr0ckets]

Originally Posted by Jebby

The location of the bathroom in this floorplan really sucks. You have to go through the living and dining areas and past the kitchen to the to the shower from your bedroom and vice versa.

Logically, there's no other way to design that bathroom in a unit of that size and layout.

Since it doubles as a powder room, it obviously can't be an ensuite and only accessible from the bedroom (which would be ideal).


And at the same time you can't locate the door any other way, because an entry to the bathroom facing your kitchen/dining area is bad design (and bad Feng Shui for those so culturally inclined).
And alternative design (if the unit had more space) would have been to have the bathroom with two doors or access points - one to the bedroom directly and the other to the hallway.
But doors eat up a lot of area for one thing, and for another they typically diminish the ability to use the bathroom walls as a plumbing wall (to run your water pipes through) - of which you ideally want to have at least one to place your tub, toilet and vanity against.


It's tough, and it's not ideal but for a single person living in a unit like that it's less of a bother I suppose ( than for, say, a couple).

[Vin]

Originally Posted by JamesOwnz

I grew up in the Burnaby heights/brentwood area.

Hard to believe all the changes going on.. so this new project is going to be going where the car dealership is?

All these growths coming to Burnaby, and pretty much all other suburbs , because of the reluctance of Vancouver to grow up. But yeah I'm happy to see that. For the Concord Brentwood development, I haven't heard any massive protests from people around. Imagine if this were Vancouver.

Loving the scale of this project, and the heights of towers, even though I agree they can put more emphasis on the design and overall aesthetics, plus retail spaces.

[GilmoreStation]

So there will only be one fitness centre shared between two towers. Concord is so cheap..

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by Vin

All these growths coming to Burnaby, and pretty much all other suburbs , because of the reluctance of Vancouver to grow up.

You do realize that there probably still is more square feet of new builds coming on the market every year in Vancouver than in nay of the suburbs?

There's probably more new square feet being built in Vancouver than in all the suburbs, excluding Burnaby, combined.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by GilmoreStation

So there will only be one fitness centre shared between two towers. Concord is so cheap..

Probbaly one fitness centre shared by the 4 towers along Lougheed.
It allows a wider range of equipment since there's more funding for operation from strata fees.
i.e. one centre per tower - each dinky and cookie cutter, or one large shared facility.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by Jebby

You do realize that there probably still is more square feet of new builds coming on the market every year in Vancouver than in nay of the suburbs?

There's probably more new square feet being built in Vancouver than in all the suburbs, excluding Burnaby, combined.

Read what I said again: all the rapid growth would not go to Brentwood if Vancouver had wanted to grow more.

Other than downtown Vancouver, where else is producing more square feet of new builds every year? And why exclude Burnaby, of which Brentwood is situated? I'm quite sure the suburbs produce way more square footage of new builds than Vancouver, the major employment centre in the region.

Originally Posted by GilmoreStation

So there will only be one fitness centre shared between two towers. Concord is so cheap..

Sometimes that's a better idea as they can put in nicer amenities when these are shared between more strata units, as can be seen from the rendering of the gym facility in this development. The Spectrum towers (above Costco) downtown share their amenities, and that's how they can have a swimming pool, gym, mini bowling alley and other frills.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Vin

Read what I said again: all the rapid growth would not go to Brentwood if Vancouver had wanted to grow more.

Other than downtown Vancouver, where else is producing more square feet of new builds every year? And why exclude Burnaby, of which Brentwood is situated? I'm quite sure the suburbs produce way more square footage of new builds than Vancouver, the major employment centre in the region.

Take a drive down West 2nd near Olympic Village, Main St, Cambie, Marine, Kingsway, Oak, and around Marpole. Then head over to SE Marine/River District Area.

[trofirhen]

I wonder, given this is their 'hood, what improvents Concord will make on Lougheed, upgrading it from Highway to Parkway? Sure, it's divided, planted a little, but will it be, in fact?

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Jebby

Not looking good. It seems they're going for towers in a park concept instead of urban streetwall. Very disappointing.

I like the sleek urban streetwall effect, too, but I wonder if it would work here (along Lougheed, presumably) Apparently, there's a slope there and the buildings would not meet the street.
Does that matter? I'm asking, not stating.

[Klazu]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

I wonder, given this is their 'hood, what improvents Concord will make on Lougheed, upgrading it from Highway to Parkway? Sure, it's divided, planted a little, but will it be, in fact?

I find it stupid that they have already narrowed Lougheed Highway at its busiest section across Brentwood from 3+3 lanes to basically 2+2 lanes. The result is long line-ups in the traffic lights and having to stop at every light.

[GilmoreStation]

Originally Posted by Klazu

I find it stupid that they have already narrowed Lougheed Highway at its busiest section across Brentwood from 3+3 lanes to basically 2+2 lanes. The result is long line-ups in the traffic lights and having to stop at every light.

This is actually a very good thing... We don't want Lougheed Highway to turn into a Highway 1. Highway 1 already got expanded by additional two lanes anyways.

[GeeCee]

Given that there's going to be a city community centre just down the street at Brentwood Mall, Concord probably doesn't need to spring in a huge way for that sort of amenities.

[Klazu]

Originally Posted by GilmoreStation

This is actually a very good thing... We don't want Lougheed Highway to turn into a Highway 1. Highway 1 already got expanded by additional two lanes anyways.

One cannot limit the amount of traffic flowing though Brentwood by reducing lanes. All it does it makes the cars idle more in intersections, in between all residential.

Lougheed Hwy has always been a major thoroughfare and should be kept us such. The new super mall will also introduce lots of car traffic, which will require 3 lanes to merge in and out.

On other topic I am 100% of the mind that they under-built the new Highway 1 through Burnaby. It should have been built to be 10 lanes from Day One, as traffic crawls in direction of rush hour every day. It should be 10 lanes from Willington Avenue all the way to Brunette Avenue.

[urbancanadian]

The City of Burnaby's most recent plans are for Lougheed to have 3+3 lanes from Boundary through to Holdom (ie. through the Brentwood Town Centre area, and the gap between Vancouver/Gilmore). The problem is that Burnaby won't widen the road/install sidewalks/upgrade anything unless a developer is paying for it (ie. upon completing a development).

That's why you have lanes dropping or being added every other block. Here is where the road widens just west of Willingdon. Note the wider section was recently completed with the adjacent development (Citi), while the strip mall/gas station next door still have asphalt sidewalks.


Street View

Here is the part of Lougheed just east of Douglas, where the Affinity towers went up, but since the portion of the property along Lougheed is so short, the road widens for a few metres but there are no lanes added (basically a random huge shoulder).


Street View

And then now there are new street design standards which incorporate bike lanes and rain gardens, so it's really hard to tell how they are going to address this. Here's a pic where the road has been widened for the Renaissance Towers (nearer to the camera). Then after Vantage was built (new standard, further away), you can see that the road was widened, but this time with a bike lane. There looks to be enough room for a third lane, since the current lanes are quite wide.



Here's an aerial showing the difference between the previous "complete" street standard, and the current one. The north side of Lougheed is the Madison Centre development, and Renaissance (SW), and Vantage (SE) are on the south side. I should note that the new standard is probably the most impressive suburban design I've ever seen, and easily the best in the country. The one shown was effectively just a "test" and has been improved upon.


Aerial image.

So, yes, Burnaby is planning three lanes each way on Lougheed (or at least they were), but while that's great and all, it could be decades before the entire stretch is complete...

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by Jebby

That seems to be the new normal in developments these days. Since the units are pathetically small, they increase the perceived floor space by including the balcony area.

This is a smoke-and-mirrors trick. The balcony area is NOT legally part of the enclosed space in the zoning bylaws. So giving a total including the outdoor space is misleading. You're not getting a 1369sq foot condo, you're getting a 2 bedroom 977 sq foot condo, when it should really be 1200 sq feet of interior space. What a bloody waste.

Portch/balcony's are for smokers. Strata bylaws usually prohibit barbeques and hot-tubs, so the only thing these are useful for is storing trash.