Doug sent me this photo and message about the (incendiary) Hornby bike lane today, which I’m posting somewhat against my better judgment, as every cycling post here seems to reignite the cyclical and never-resolved Hundred Years War.

About noon on Halloween day, the last concrete was poured for the separated Hornby St bikeway lane.  I happened to be passing by when I overheard the workers announcing it to one other… so I snapped this pic for you Francis.
 
Interesting that the lane extends to the very last block of Hornby at False Creek… obviously to tie in with both the Seawall bike path and the Aquabus bike ferry that crosses from Granville Island to the foot of Hornby.
 
Doug

I also was on Hornby today and saw planters starting to go in on top of the concrete dividers. I’m not surprised it’s finishing so quickly. I always thought when the original estimate of 10 weeks for construction was given that that was to paint the most dire scenario, so that anything less than that would look good.

BTW, if I can offer this information without negating any complaints about process or choice of street for the lane, I’ve had many people fume to me that pouring concrete is “proof” that the rabid Vision council is installing these lanes permanently.  (It all seems to be part of a lot of pent-up rage about the new bike lanes in general, which inevitably come up as the first item people mention when I ask them what they don’t like about the Vision Vancouver council. And even when I don’t.)

So I asked the city’s head of engineering, Peter Judd, recently why the city didn’t just put in concrete barriers or something more temporary.

He said it was because one of the main complaints they had from businesses along Hornby and Dunsmuir — you know, the people the city is trying to keep happy — is that they didn’t want something ugly on the street like the concrete barriers they saw on Burrard Bridge and the Dunsmuir Viaduct. Thus the poured concrete curbs with planters.

Apparently those curbs can be chipped off with a backhoe in no time at all, while the planters, which are all plastic, can always be picked up and moved anywhere else they’re needed.

One question answered. Several dozen more to go.

Didn’t put this up yesterday, but here’s my story on the announcement about the big tower development for Burrard on the current Pattison Toyota site.

As I note in my story, although the development is mostly condo, it also has 200,000 square feet of office space because the developers (Pattison, who owns part of the block, and Jon Stovell at Reliance, who owns another part) believe there’s a market for that these days.

That’s something commercial brokers have been noticing, too, with the result that there are many plans afoot for new office buildings in downtown Vancouver. A relief for those who fear that downtown Vancouver is turning into the bedroom community for people working in Burnaby, Richmond, Surrey office parks.

Rob Ford, the un-PC guy from the burbs, is the new mayor of Toronto, in case you didn’t know. Start reading here.

In the meantime, the party that is hoping to shake Vision Vancouver and Gregor Robertson off their perches in Vancouver are looking for who should lead them into battle. They have no one yet, but I don’t hear anyone suggesting a Rob Ford-style candidate is what they want here.

While everyone is fighting over towers in the West End and in Marpole, I discovered almost by accident last week that there’s a significant new development planned for Main and Kingsway when I dropped in to the urban design panel.

Unbeknownst to I think many people, the much-praised firm of Acton Ostry has been designing a huge development for the entire block that includes the former strip of stores on Broadway that burned down on Christmas Day last year and the Cantu/Living Space/Midland Appliances cluster in the former Jantzen building on Kingsway.

That will all come down (surprised me to hear the Jantzen building has no heritage protection but apparently not) for a 26-storey tower with townhouses and retail wrapped around the base, along with 10,000 square feet of artists’ spaces that will run along the 10th Avenue (bike lane) side. The Watson Street/back alley will be the parking entrance.

In total: 206 market units and 62 rental units under the city’s sometimes-controversial program to encourage rental housing by giving developers density. It looks as though there will be a large courtyard in the middle. I’d like to show designs but there aren’t any on the city’s list of development projects or on Acton Ostry’s. All that’s available publicly is this.

You might think the community would be up in arms over this. STIR projects have been generating backlash in the West End. And this is blocks away from the site of the social-housing tower that prompted huge neighbourhood resistance — enough that council lopped off three floors.

But not a word.  It sounds as though it’s partly because city planners have been working with the Mount Pleasant community on this. Mount Pleasant did get, three years ago, the much-coveted chance for a re-visioning of the whole neighbourhood — the kind of thing that the West End and Marpole have been asking for as they resist towers there.

The planners and architects noted, for instance, that they took four storeys off the tower already in order to respond to community reaction and so were reluctant to make the tower any higher. (They made that comment when various people on the design panel suggested the tower height should be raised to make it feel more vertical, less blocky, and to remove some bulk from the lower levels.)

That may bring positive changes — perhaps even to Kingsgate Mall, the strange little replica of a mall in Trail or Cranbrook that across the street from the project in this prime location. As architect Scott Romses said, “it’s going to be a seed for this neighbourhood, a catalyst for everything around it.”

(Thanks to J3 to pointing me to some renderings of the buildings. Here’s one link.

I have to say the project startled me. Although it looks as though it’s been designed imaginatively, it’s very different from everything else around there. There’s a lot of development at Main and Broadway these days, but it’s mainly matched the shape, height and even the dark-red brick of the famous Lee Building at the intersection. This is a big tower that will rise over everything around.

An object lesson for the 2011 election here in Vancouver (and elsewhere) is what Naheed Nenshi promised Calgary voters that swept them off their feet:

Fiscal responsibility, a good business climate, and safety, plus bike lanes, transit, basement suites, sustainability, walkability, culture, libraries, and more. You can check it out here.

That’s actually what everyone seems to be promising these days. So how do political parties or mayoral candidates differentiate themselves? The NPA’s dilemma in Vancouver, the left’s dilemma in Surrey, and so on.

First, before any analysis whatsoever of the Non-Partisan Association dinner last night — the gathering of the faithful who support Vancouver’s venerable centre-right party — I have to ask this. Look at this picture below and tell me who you think this person — currently involved in Canadian civic politics — is.

No, not the new mayor of Calgary, Naheed Nenshi. Nenshi looks like this.

But the similarity caused great hilarity at the NPA dinner last where where Nenshi’s apparent stunt double, Manjot Hallen, is a board member. Blogger Jonathan Ross promoted the idea of Hallen as a mayoral candidate in this city that has never managed to elect an Indo-Canadian candidate to council. Might have seemed laughable a few years ago, but after Nenshi’s win in Calgary? Hmmm.

Anyway, on to the dinner, which wasn’t quite as exciting as the Calgary election.

[Read more →]

The Non-Partisan Association is getting into gear this week for next year’s election with a fundraising dinner — an event they used to hold every year but which was noticeable by its absence last year.

The event, starting at 6 p.m. Wednesday at the Italian Cultural Centre (see you there!), should be a good sign of how many of the faithful are still out there. The NPA is feeling cheerier about all this these days, after a run of self-inflicted Vision bloopers combined with an improved batting average from both citycaucus.com and Suzanne Anton in getting the media to focus on negative stories about Vision.

The association aimed to bring together as many mayors and mayoral candidates as they could for the meeting. Unfortunately for them, Philip Owen and Bill Vander Zalm are both out of town, while Gordon Campbell first bowed in then bowed out, according to current president John Moonen. But former mayor Sam Sullivan will be the keynote speaker, and also present will be Jennifer Clarke, Peter Ladner and Jonathan Baker.

The fundraiser comes a month before a Nov. 20 nomination meeting the NPA has set. Also according to John, they will be nominating for the following: two council positions, one park board, one school board. As I understand it, the current NPA councillors/trustees/commissioners won’t run for these. They’re intended for new people who will help “lighten the load” for the elected reps, especially lone voices Suzanne Anton at council and Ian Robertson at park board.

No word yet on who might be running for those positions. Certain Visionistas were spreading the rumour that Laura Jones, vp of the Canadian Federation of Independent Business and vocal opponent of the city’s choice of Hornby as a bike lane, might be considering it. Laura laughed when I asked her and said I was the first person she’d heard that from. No, she’s not considering it.

Just to keep us up to date on nomination news with the ruling party, Vision has not set a date or rules yet, says ED Ian Baillie. Will it be an open nomination? No decision yet. When will it be? No decision yet. (Really, people, I need to plan my miserable few weeks of holidays. Can you not get on the ball and schedule this?)

Is there any truth to the rumour I’ve heard that the party might ask candidates to sign commitments that they won’t bail partway through their terms to run provincially? (Could be tempting for lefties if Gordon Campbell’s current poll numbers stay at the same abysmal levels.)

“That’s the first I’ve heard of it,” says Baillie. “But I wouldn’t take that off the table.”

I didn’t ask about whether there’s any agreement between COPE and Vision re an agreement on splitting seats. As others have reported, that’s all up in the air and will continue to be for a long time, I suspect.

Remember back in 2005 when the Non-Partisan Association made killing the Burrard Bridge bike lane one of its major campaign planks?

It loooked last week as though NPA councillor Suzanne Anton was gearing up for a repeat of that, when she rescinded her vote on the Hornby bike lane. But is that really what’s happening? It’s not that clear, as I found out when I talked to Suzanne and others about this issue. She’s not going to be heading up the party of anti-bike people, she says. Peter Ladner isn’t so sure.

This just out.

 
The City of Vancouver today announced the selection of Amanda Pitre-Hayes as its new Director of Sustainability.
 
With 18 years of experience in leadership roles at the Pembina Institute, Vancity, Citizens Bank of Canada and the Body Shop Canada, Ms. Pitre-Hayes brings to the City innovative environmental and business practices that address the root causes of climate change. In addition, her experience with businesses such as Accenture will help guide the City’s green business and long-term sustainability objectives.
 
As Director of Climate Change Consulting with the Pembina Institute, Ms. Pitre-Hayes worked with large organizations such as Mountain Equipment Co-op and the Business Development Bank of Canada to become greener by measuring and managing carbon dioxide emissions.
 
At Vancity, Ms. Pitre-Hayes managed the organization’s climate change strategy, led its successful effort to be the first carbon neutral financial institution in North America, and developed the first carbon offset grant program in Canada.
Ms. Pitre-Hayes’ environmental expertise is complemented by solid business acumen. At Accenture, she managed multi-million dollar projects for major North American government, energy, telecom and financial services organizations. At Roberts Enterprise Development Fund, she helped social entrepreneurs grow profitable businesses that employed at-risk youth. She holds a Masters of Business Administration degree with a focus on sustainability.
 
The Director of Sustainability works with staff on Council initiatives that help the City realize its Greenest City Action Team targets and its goal of becoming the world’s greenest city by 2020.
 
Ms. Pitre-Hayes was selected by a panel of seven City staff including directors and managers, the Deputy City Manager and a representative from Human Resources. Over 100 applications were received for the position.
 
Having recently completed Ironman Canada, Amanda is looking forward to the relatively short cycle commute to City Hall from her home in Vancouver’s eastside. She begins work with the City on November 1.

A knowledgeable analysis of the Olympic village problems by developer Rob Macdonald in the Sun on the weekend. Although Rob doesn’t make it totally clear in the story, the original delay he’s talking about in the story was during the Larry Campbell administration.

If you can cast your mind back that far, you’ll recall that the city voted in favour of the Olympics in February 2003. The city was awarded the Games in July. There was a longstanding decision, not ever challenged by the new COPE council, that the city should build the athlete’s village. Presumably, once that July vote happened, the city should have kicked into high gear to get proposals from developers and get started.

But the RFP didn’t go until just before the election. It was issued so late that the new NPA council was abile to come in in 2005 and re-do the RFP, eliminating the requirement for affordable, middle-income housing to be one-third of the units.

I would add one comment to this. Many people have been critical of the city for imposing high standards on the village developers to build green, higher than any other development in town. But that requirement was set out in the city’s request for proposals: All developers knew, going in, that they would be asked to build a model sustainable project. So presumably that consideration would have been built into the money they offered for the land.

What drove up the costs and complexity, though, was the fact that those new green standards had to be designed and approved on an exceptionally short timeline.