Poor Riley Park Hillcrest community centre — now in the middle of a custody dispute by two boards, one led by Jesse Johl, another led by residents who got fed up with the lack of financial statements, strange new rules for electing board members, and more. They were in court last week and the latest word I had was that they would be back this week to try to resolve who is legally in charge.
In the meantime, the association’s bank account (which at one time in the not too distant past held a quarter million dollars) is frozen and the park board is having to pay the instructors who are technically the employees of the association.
My story here tried to explain some of this. Also had a reference to the out-of-left-field news that the City of Vancouver is considering allowing a new aquatic centre to be built as one of the community amenities on land it plans to sell next to the Granville Bridge. The aquatic centre of is of a long list of amenities the city suggested that developers consider offering, as part of the land purchase, including the Qmunity centre, social housing, and other stuff.
Oddly, no one ran this by the park-board commissioners, but so far the reps from both sides (Vision and NPA) are taking it calmly, saying it’s a chance to see whether there are any potential wins out of any of the developer offers.
As I mentioned in tweets over the past week, I had heard talk the last couple of years about replacing the Aquatic Centre. There was some suggestion, during the planning for Northeast False Creek, that some of the community-amenity contributions from developers go towards that. In the end, Fern Jeffries from the area told me, residents asked for that CAC money to go to parks closer to the area instead.
I had always imagined the new aquatic centre would go in the same general area as the old one — only this time, one would hope, with windows to take advantage of the gorgeous setting. It was a bit of a surprise to hear the city would entertain having it move so far south and east, which would mean 40,000 people from the West End and the 10,000 or so at Coal Harbour would have to trek a bit further, though it would be more convenient for the new Yaletown, Downtown South and Concord residents.
27 responses so far ↓
1 IanS // Aug 6, 2014 at 11:43 am
It would be a real shame if the Aquatic Centre was moved from its present location. I wouldn’t object to a new building with a few windows, though.
2 canadianveggie // Aug 6, 2014 at 12:51 pm
Interesting how this story shows the pitfalls of having independent community centre associations, but the previous article (Roundhouse Radio) shows the potential upside.
3 westygrrl // Aug 6, 2014 at 3:29 pm
I believe the recently-approved West End Community Plan included a line item about the VAC’s eventual replacement, though no specs on the where or when per se. Personally, I like its current location quite a bit, and agree that windows should be a definite design requirement. It will certainly be interesting to see how this all plays out, but location is only one important aspect to this issue.
The VAC is an important city facility, and not only for the West End. The VAC is a destination aquatic facility for many users from outside the downtown & beyond. The VAC is the only aquatic facility in the city capable of hosting swimming & other aquatic sporting meets (diving, water-polo), of which there are quite a few throughout the year. (These meets also make the City money, as the weekend facility rental is substantial).
Swimming is a life-long sport that transcends just lessons and aqua-arobics, as important as they are. More kids swim in some capacity (lessons, competitively) than any other sport in the country. Check out Hillcrest at 6 AM on a weekday and see the number of seniors swimming. Proper aquatic facilities that can offer the full array of activities are required to foster healthy lifestyles for life.
4 westygrrl // Aug 6, 2014 at 3:35 pm
Follow-up note: Re: the VAC is the only facility in the city that can handle swim-sport meets, I meant in the city, run by the City (Park Board). Yes, UBC can handle meets et al, but its administration looks at its user groups very differently. It prioritizes (and will prioritize, at its new facility) users to; students, athletes, UBC residents, National Team members, and then Vancouver folk and user groups.
Imho, it is different from the Park Board managed (and funded) facilities.
5 John Geddes // Aug 6, 2014 at 8:42 pm
The VAC situation is a good demonstration of what is wrong with the City using CACs as the basis of funding City infrastructure. Instead of a debate centred on the needs/desires of citizens re the future of the VAC, we turn this over to whatever developer is willing to propose as a “community kickback” to get a rezoning approved.
See Peter Ladner’s recent article for a summary of UBC’s Patrick Condon more thoughtful arguments: http://www.biv.com/article/20140729/BIV0319/307299960/-1/BIV/vancouver-citys-cac-revenue-stream-a-debilitating-addiction
6 West Vanman // Aug 7, 2014 at 6:58 am
I saw Senor Johl sitting at the Cactus Club downtown the other night. Perhaps a post court beverage.
A new aquatic centre is an excellent idea, but it already exists: it’s called Hillcrest. One of the problems with that facility is they don’t run the pool at 50 metres very often. Beach Avenue could stand a renovation to be sure, but the loss of a 50 metre pool downtown would be a Very Bad Thing.
7 False Creep // Aug 7, 2014 at 7:16 am
My worry is that we would get a Canada-Line-standard pool out of the deal. That is it to say, a basically functional pool that just barely meets their contractual obligations. Even Hillcrest, which is beautiful, is rarely configured as 50 m and has very little extra pool deck space for lessons. The CAC pool might be even leaner (like Canada line stations). Unless the we’re getting better at P3/CAC type deals, which is certainly possible.
8 Stuart Mackinnon // Aug 7, 2014 at 10:24 am
Planning for a new Aquatic Centre was part of the aquatics review when I was a Commissioner. A model could be the (relatively) new Killarney pool which has wonderful windows and an ozone system. The problem is new money to build it. If it is to be moved, there must be (at least) one condition: that the present location be turned over to the Park Board for use as a park.
9 Fern Jeffries // Aug 7, 2014 at 10:31 am
Frances, I doubt I said residents wanted the CAC money to go to NEFC parks. The park money is CAC money that has been committed since the original contract was struck between the City, the Province, and Concord Pacific in 1990. I doubt I wanted to let Concord off the hook. It would be most uncharacteristic. In any event, at that point, 2009, the discussion was around “refurbishing” the Aquatic Centre, not replacing.
10 Fern Jeffries // Aug 7, 2014 at 10:44 am
I have to say that while the False Creek Residents Association has participated in a NEFC Working Group with the City for the past 6 or 7 years, we can count the number of times the City has responded favourably to residents’ suggestions on one finger. We believe that first and foremost, CACs should go to ensure livability for the residents who are most directly impacted by creased density.
Childcare should be a given. In the recent approval of over 1300 units, the city didn’t get one more day care space.
Green space is crucial in high density areas. Again, the COV rarely gets increased green space. Instead recent focus has been on increasing the already higher density with social housing. While we value social housing, putting added pressure on already stressed public amenities makes no sense to us. There needs to be a comprehensive public review of the whole CAC business.
11 Brilliant // Aug 7, 2014 at 11:58 am
@Stuart Makinnon 7 -Don’t you think Frau Ballem should have had the courtesy to keep. Current Parks commissioners in the loop?
12 Silly Season // Aug 7, 2014 at 1:43 pm
@False Creep 36
Precisely. Hillcrest is the prime example of how NOT to configure a community centre pool. A nice idea that is already outmoded, overcrowded and useless for people who want to swim lengths. Ridiculous narrow lanes and too few of them.
In fact, let’s go a step further. Vancouver, a port city for gawd’s sake, really should have a FINA standard pool. This would be a facility that is a training pool for clubs, Master’s, etc. As well, it can be PROPERLY reconfigured for amateur and casual swimmers each and every day. Sure, have a slide/kiddie pool, a deep tank for divers, etc.
My fear is that they will will make any new facility so tiny that it will be useless for everyone.
It’s a shame that the decrepit but incredible spaciousness of the UBC and Aquatic Centres may soon be memories. Now, if they could figure out a way to keep Kits Pool open, year round…;-)
13 Silly Season // Aug 7, 2014 at 1:45 pm
PS If space is the issue—and oh, how a developer would love to get hands on the Aquatic Centre site– here’s an idea:
A double decker pool, since ya’all just LOVE to build up. One level for casual swimmer and a second level for clubs, lengths swimmers, and other masochists.
You’re welcome. 🙂
14 Silly Season // Aug 7, 2014 at 1:46 pm
PPS Hey, I’ll even take a roof top pool, with take down cover for winter.
We lengths swimmers don’t mind the weather. 🙂
15 Frances Bula // Aug 7, 2014 at 2:25 pm
@Fern. Sorry if there was some misunderstanding. When I asked what your groups had negotiated for CACs instead of anything for the Aquatic Centre, I definitely thought you said parks. Of course Concord has already committed its CACs for parks, but I guess I thought that you were saying the community wanted additional money to go into parks for the whole area. Certainly didn’t hear anything about childcare spaces. Anyway, a small point. Funny that you think it was only for refurbishment of the AC, not replacement, because I sure remember hearing replacement at the time. A couple of people at least talked about how the centre was old, outmoded and really needed a complete rebuild.
16 Frances Bula // Aug 7, 2014 at 2:31 pm
@Silly Season, You’ll be amused to know that the staff at Hillcrest now call it Hellcrest because it is so jammed and over-booked all the time. The big open space for everything, plus the crowding, means an incredible noise level. Plus the lanes get booked constantly for special activities, adding to the mayhem.
17 Frances Bula // Aug 7, 2014 at 2:33 pm
To all — another smoke bomb to throw into this thread. Someone who is extremely interested in making sure the new Aquatic Centre stays as a competition-level pool? Chip Wilson. He and his wife were both competitive swimmers and now their kids are. In a recent profile I did on him in Vancouver magazine, he mentioned that he’d like to contribute to a new Aquatic Centre. And he’s got Malcolm Bromley’s cell number
18 boohoo // Aug 7, 2014 at 3:30 pm
Or head out to Surrey in under a year…
http://www.surrey.ca/culture-recreation/14315.aspx
19 rph // Aug 7, 2014 at 4:38 pm
Nice looking complex being built in Surrey. Now that is a destination aquatic facility.
20 westygrrl // Aug 7, 2014 at 5:09 pm
@SillySeason 12
Indeed, Hillcrest (Percy Norman pool replacement) is over-subscribed. It was specifically designed as a destination, recreational pool, and it has succeeded/failed wonderfully, depending on who you talk to. But, no holes in the deck for racing blocks to be found there. They didn’t want them as it would take away from recreational use.
As per Frances, if Mr. Wilson wishes to gift the city with a FINA level swim facility – bring it on. We’ll be breaking the doors down in gratitude.
Maybe then those yoga pants would fit me properly. 😉
21 Brilliant // Aug 7, 2014 at 7:04 pm
No doubt adding to the Hillcrest crowding is the broken Vision promise to keep the Mt Pleasant pool open.
22 Threadkiller. // Aug 8, 2014 at 1:44 pm
Could someone please identify the exact location of the proposed new site for a/the aquatic centre? Perhaps I haven’t being paying attention, but my understanding is that it’s supposed to somehow be incorporated into a new tower development to be erected (no pun intended) on the site of the Granville Bridge north end off-ramp. Besides being an asinine location, it strikes me that, given the size of the current facility, there is absolutely no room for such a massive structure– and a residential tower– on that (very unappealing) site. But perhaps I’m labouring under a misapprehension. I do like to to be precise about what I’m opposing, however. Clarification, please.
23 Silly Season // Aug 8, 2014 at 5:52 pm
@Frances #16
Yep. Went there 3 times at 3 different times of day, including 6:30am. Crazy. Cannot go back. It creates agoraphobia.
#17
POOL PARTY AT CHIP’S!! 😉 LOL!
If he helps fund something of that magnitude, I will consider it major payment towards karmic communications debts incurred!
And, if he creates a foundation fund for operating costs, more kudos for him putting his own money towards something that benefits everyone.
And if he does all that, that should put all other extremely wealthy people in Vancouver on notice.
private donations is how they kickstart really GREAT sports and cultural facilities in other cities. This could be a wonderful start to something we always have seemed to lack in Vancouver.
24 Silly Season // Aug 8, 2014 at 5:58 pm
@Westgy #20
Yes, noticed absence of blocks. And when I first saw the facility I was shocked at how tiny the acrual swimming pool area was. A design that was too clever, by ‘1/2’. 🙂
@Frances. Yes, the open area concept is just ridic. There’s more room where all those common area lockers are, in front of the damn pool!
Design by committee, shurely…
25 Jenables // Aug 9, 2014 at 8:08 pm
I really couldn’t figure out the locker room setup there. From the outside looking in I could see people going to their lockers and then all sorts of people walking in front. Very confusing. I gather that section is the family section, but at any rate it is weird to see people going into their lockers after swimming when you are outside in the cold. And no, I wasn’t standing there spying.. I had to walk past that huge windowed area to get in the door
26 kclear // Aug 15, 2014 at 10:41 pm
If you want to see the best in aquatic facility design you only need travel to north Langley where the Walnut Grove centre awaits. 50M pool, diving platforms, wave/kids pool and jet baths combined with a massive removable glass wall for that open air feeling in summer and lovely natural light all year round. It’s brilliant and was built by a little town in the ‘burbs. Come on Vancouver—we can do it!!!
27 IanS // Aug 25, 2014 at 12:37 pm
The court’s decision on the Riley Park dispute has now been issued:
http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/jdb-txt/SC/14/16/2014BCSC1605.htm