Burnaby Lake Arena should be twinned

The City of Burnaby has recently approved its Proposed Priority Community Amenity Projects.  In my opinion, it is welcome news for city residents as community centre capacity will significantly increase for the Brentwood area with the replacement of the Willingdon Community Centre and the expansion of amenity space at Confederation Park replacing the previously torn down Willingdon Heights Community Centre and the North Burnaby Gym.

Also among the priorities is the replacement of Burnaby Lake Arena and CG Brown Memorial Pool.  Anyone familiar with arena scheduling will tell you that there is an extremely greater demand for arena ice and floor time than the capacity that currently exists between Burnaby Lake, Bill Copeland and Kensington arenas.  Between Burnaby Minor Hockey, Burnaby New West Ringette, skating groups,  Burnaby Minor Lacrosse, and Metro Minor Ball Hockey Association, not to mention public skating programs and events, there is not enough time to fully meet the demand that currently exists for arena space.  Burnaby Minor Hockey Association is one of the largest minor hockey associations in the region with kids ending up on a waitlist to play.  The association is also required to rent private ice from Burnaby 8 Rinks to meet practice and game requirements for the players that are able to play.  Metro Minor Ball Hockey Association turns away a larger number of kids every year as there is not enough floor time for ball hockey in the spring and summer.

Even the upcoming addition of 2 more sheets of ice near Byrne Creek Secondary School will not meet demand for ice and floor time.  Furthermore, population growth projections suggest that even a twinning of Burnaby Lake Arena will not be adequate.  Building one rink versus 2 attached rinks may cost more in the short term,  but the average building and maintenance cost per rink is significantly lower when considering that the arena cooling system is a major cost that is capable of freezing two or more ice sheets and would be a financial waste to install a system for merely one new sheet of ice.

Looking at the size of the property at Kensington Ave between Sprott Street and Joe Sakic Way,  there is more than enough room to accommodate more than two new sheets of ice and provide the same or more amount of parking spaces.

With Burnaby 8 Rinks, Fortius Centre, the Burnaby Lake Sports Complex soccer fields and the proposed future Tennis Canada Training facility adjacent to the soccer fields, the area north of Hwy 1 on Kensington Ave is developing  into a major sports destination.  The City of Burnaby already has a Div 2 NCAA hockey team playing out of Bill Copeland Arena (SFU Hockey). The City is hosting an IIHF World Junior Hockey Championship exhibition game between Russia and Switzerland this month and will host the World Ringette Championships in 2019.  The addition of more arena capacity will give the City of Burnaby a greater profile as a potential host city for more events int the future and bringing spin-off tourism revenue.  With a steadily increasing demand for arena ice and floor time not showing signs of abating, it would be a wise decision if the City of Burnaby studies the feasibility of twinning Burnaby Lake Arena instead of merely replacing it and looking to maximize the potential future economic benefits of such an expansion.

Perhaps real estate prices should be legally capped off too

The following article highlights how corporations pressure governments to make decisions that negatively impact ordinary citizens.  I've mentioned how density bonuses or community amenity contributions (CACs) work in Burnaby where developers pay a fee in exchange for being allowed greater heights and more density for their projects.  The fees go into City funds that allow for amenities in the local area where the greater density has been allowed.

The provincial government has created guidelines for fee structures that cities can charge developers in exchange for the tremendous benefit that developers achieve in the form of greater profits.  The guidelines are merely that; guidelines.  Cities have been able to charge developers more than the guidelines for allowing greater density and developers have been paying the higher CACs because it is profitable to do so.

But the "poor" developers want protections with detailed limits on how much they have to pay for the benefit of increased profits...because they want to make even more profits than the hundred of millions that they already do.


It's amazing that corporations want the benefits of a free market economy where they can tremendously profit from a "free market economy" that has been Vancouver's real estate market over the past 20 years, but don't want the free market conditions to apply to them in the form the costs of participating in that real estate market.  Ordinary citizens are required to deal with the same type of free market conditions which has led to inflated real estate prices that have benefited who else but corporations.  If developers want "protections" from the free market, perhaps citizens should have the same protections to keep real estate affordable as well.  Let's cap real estate costs.  Not in the free market spirit?  Then forget about limiting CACs for developers.  Let's let market conditions apply to developers as well.  After all, what's fair is fair.

The question should be asked; if the BC Government places a cap on what municipalities can demand for CACs, how many people and who in the current BC Government will end up with jobs with the very real estate development companies that they will have helped as legislators?

Business inVancouver article below

Court could be the only recourse for property developers in fight with municipalities over CACs

Province lays ground rules for community amenity contributions, lacks enforcement measures

Peter MithamMon Apr 28, 2014 12:01am PST

Developers might have no option but to sue municipalities that don’t respect provincial guidelines governing community amenity contributions (CACs).

The province’s Ministry of Community, Sport and Cultural Development recently released new guidelines following a two-year study of municipal practice with respect to CACs, which are charged at rezoning.

But consultant Alan Osborne – who drafted the guidelines – told the Urban Development Institute (UDI) last week that there’s no resolution process in place if municipalities ignore the rules.

“Someone has to take them to court,” Osborne said, in response to questions from Anne McMullin, president and CEO of the Urban Development Institute. “There isn’t an appeal board you can go to, the minister can slap them on the wrist, the minister can send letters, but ultimately, in British Columbia, the system is that somebody goes to court.”

While the province might consider entrenching the guidelines in legislation, Osborne said that would be a decision for the politicians if it’s clear that the guidelines haven’t achieved the change in municipal behaviour the province aims to effect with the new ground rules.

“The decision was to produce guidelines; obviously the next step is to monitor the use of guidelines by local governments. Then it’s a political decision about the next steps,” he said. “It’s now very clear what the province thinks about CACs; that foreshadows the next steps if they want to go that far.”

CACs have become a contentious issue for developers over the past decade as municipalities have seen the charges as a lucrative source of revenue for funding public amenities such as child-care facilities, affordable housing and space for community groups.

The charges are typically based on the projected change in a property’s improved value following rezoning.

Between 2000 and 2010, CACs charged to B.C. developers jumped to $720 million from $100 million.

The increase is a function not just of the upswing in rezonings and property values during the period, but funding cutbacks by senior levels of government that forced municipalities to seek alternative revenue sources.

“Somebody’s going to have to pick up that tab,” said Burnaby Coun. Nick Volkow, speaking in lieu of Mayor Derek Corrigan. “That’s why the development community has now got a bull’s eye on their foreheads.”

Vancouver staff have sought to establish fixed rates for CACs to give developers certainty, but it was one of several municipalities, including Richmond and West Vancouver, singled out for harsh criticism during the UDI discussion.

Whether developers act on their ongoing discontent with CACs – which can add millions of dollars to the cost of developments – is another question.

McMullin told Business in Vancouver that litigation is hardly a positive or profitable way to do business.

The industry would most likely ask the province’s attorney general to intervene if municipalities don’t bring CACs in line with the guidelines, and potentially create new legislation to avoid unleashing costly court battles.

“I think if we can bring in legislation based on these guidelines, then we will avoid court cases,” McMullin said. “I don’t think anybody finds any value in going to court.” •