To "Jen in Burnaby-Edmonds"

The expected population growth of Burnaby toward 345,000 by 2041 is a pillar in the City of Burnaby's argument for the development of Burnaby's remaining non-park designated areas in its four town centers. After all, as Mayor Corrigan likes to say, 'where should these people go if not into municipalities such as Burnaby'. Let me add a few of my notes to your comment on this subject.

You correctly quote the City of Burnaby's planned average annual growth rate to the tune of ~1.0% between 2031 and 2041, but you do not mention their planned average annual growth rate of ~2.1% between 2011 and 2021, and ~1.6% between 2021 and 2031 [1]. This amounts to a planned growth of ~55% over the 30-year timeframe between 2011 and 2041. Lougheed is expected to grow by 46%, Edmonds by 85%, Metrotown by 159%, and Brentwood by a whopping 401% [1]. Note, though, City officials work with slightly different data in different presentations. Corrigan/Pelletier and their teams more often than not speak of a growth of 125,000 additional people over the next 25 years. Such growth, over just one human generation, I do consider "crazed." Also, that Burnaby 2041 with ~345,000 people will not mark the end of that growth stands to reason. If you look at Burnaby's town center layout, you can easily discern the corridors along which the next wave of Burnaby's growth will occur, leading up to 500,000 people by perhaps 2081 ... unless the overdue Richter 8-9 quake hits us by then, which will likely reverse that growth overnight.

Unfortunately, Corrigan/Pelletier's pitch presentations of their Burnaby 2041 development plan are full with distortions and mis-characterizations of realities. For one, they keep telling us that the City of Burnaby mainly reacts to housing demand. They argue that population growth planning is primarily the responsiblity of higher levels of government, and municipalties such as Burnaby have very limited powers to manage that flow. People come to Burnaby because it is a livable place, and the City of Burnaby has to deal with that demand. So writes Pelettier in his 2017 Housing Profile Update:

"... Population Growth: Metro Vancouver is a desirable place to live. People come to BC for economic opportunities, educational opportunities, lifestyle, climate, and many other reasons. Metro Vancouver is estimated to accommodate an additional 1 million people by year 2041 — that's an additional 36,000 people per year. This projected growth will require approximately half a million additional homes. Of that growth, Burnaby is forecasted to grow by 125,000 people, which would require approximately 50,000 new dwelling units (2,000 per year) by 2041. Population growth can increase housing prices if supply doesn't keep up with demand. ..." [2]

And this is Corrigan's stronger version in his response to this petition:

"... As expected and planned for, we now must develop more land to accommodate the additional estimated 40,000 residents who we know will choose to make Burnaby their home by 2021. Burnaby's growth projections are captured in the regional planning document and growth strategy, Metro Vancouver 2040 Shapping the Future, a document to which the City of Burnaby is a signatory. ..." [3]

Let us delve just a bit into those statements of Corrigan/Pelletier and see why this is so. The undeniable housing demand in Burnaby exists because the City of Burnaby has generated that demand in the first place. Over the past 15 years, the City of Burnaby has spread the word to developers and land speculators that most lands of Burnaby's four town centers would be rezoned for high density. Land speculation broke loose as a consequence, with parcels selling for more than $15 million - even long before the City of Burnaby will rezone those parcels, in full expectation that the City of Burnaby will ultimately deliver. Unlike what Corrigan/Pelletier want us to believe, the housing demand in Burnaby is driven primarily by the City of Burnaby's own supply marketing, and now Corrigan tells us that we "must develop more land to accommodate the additional estimated 40,000 residents who we know will choose to make Burnaby their home by 2021." [3]. 

You refer to the City's Official Community Plan (OCP) for information on Burnaby's growth projections. I encourage you to trace the references between the OCP (Official Community Plan), the RCS (Regional Context Statement), and the RGS (Regional Growth Strategy) to find out more about who and how they came up with this population growth in the first place. If you cannot find a way out of the circle of references, pushing the puck of population growth planning back and forth, I encourage you to go the Burnaby Housing Profile 2016 (p. 94) [4]. The growth justification you will find there is a farce, plain and simple. (I can provide you with more details if you wish.) It is a tortured attempt to explain away that Burnaby's growth of ~125,000 people by 2041 is a mere committment of Corrigan/Pelletier to Metro Vancouver, and this committment is based primarily on the housing supply the City of Buranby desires to develop in Burnaby. The population growth itself is a consequence of this sell-out plan.

You also say you can imagine that Burnaby's Mayor and Council understand that "the people of Burnaby need the sanctuary of Byrne Creek Forest East." The initial responses of Mayor Corrigan and Councilor Jordan certainly did not suggest such an understanding. Like clockwork, they counter opposition with the same line of argument referring to growth, just as Councilor Jordan did in her own response to this petition in the Burnaby NOW:

"... “We have people coming and they want a place to live, and one of the things we’ve been criticized for is, ‘OK, all these towers. Where are families supposed to live?’ Now we say, ‘OK, well we have some property available and let’s make it available for families.’ ...” [5]

Here, again, Jordan alludes to a situation where people may come with no place to go if municipalities like Burnaby did not create housing for them. Reality is the vast majority of those people are not refugees. They will not show up with no place to go. Reality, too, is that the people who will come to live in what is now Byrne Creek Forest East will come because the City of Burnaby's development initiative opens up that market for them in the first place. Housing marketing drives housing demand.

I fear this is one of those cases where Burnabians just can't have their cake and eat it, too.

References:

[1] City of Burnaby. About Burnaby - Growth Projections 2021-2041.
[2] City of Burnaby. Housing Profile Update.
[3] Petitions.com. Save Byrne Creek Forest East.
[4] City of Burnaby. Burnaby Housing Profile 2016.
[5] Burnaby Now. Woman launches petition to save Burnaby forest.

Although not all sites can accommodate a new stream, the idea of bringing nature back with new development is not a new one in Burnaby. As new areas are developed, we can expect to see more ‘green’ features like native plants, street trees, raingardens, and, in the right place, new and restored habitats like streams and wetlands. - City of Burnaby webpage » Home »City Services » Planning » Environmental Planning » Ecosystem Restoration and Enhancement » Byrne Creek

I signed this petition in hopes of protecting Byrne Creek Forest East's flora and fauna. Regardless, of any projected population growth, we must strongly defend the sanctuary of Byrne Creek Forest East. 

Burnabites need houses and homes. This is true. Just, not at the cost of our precious forest and salmon-bearing creek. 

Thank you, Jack, for your research. I appreciate your argument. I can't emphasize strongly enough, the need to protect and defend Byrne Creek Forest East, from development and housing. May this petition not fall on deaf ears.