I had noticed a few months ago that I was starting to see a different kind of development pop up on the city’s rezoning and development-permit lists: small buildings, slivers almost, carefully shoehorned into the streetscapes of Chinatown and the Downtown Eastside.
Kerry Gold wrote about one of them for the Globe back in February, foreshadowing the public tussle about gentrification that was going to erupt publicly (and finally did this week, as you can see here and here.)
That building is part of a small trend, though, among developers willing to wrestle with the difficult building conditions, the possible anti-gentrification backlash, and the challenge of fitting into the existing social conditions of those areas. My story on that here.
20 responses so far ↓
1 Raingurl // Mar 27, 2013 at 4:24 pm
This topic is always rendered silent………..I personally can’t wait for the area to be swept (and not under the rug)
2 Trish French // Mar 27, 2013 at 5:24 pm
It took a lot of work on the part of the Planning Department to create and zone for innovative types of buildings on the narrow lots available in Chinatown. Thanks are due to Jessica Chen, Helen Ma (neither with the P Dept anymore) and consultants Inge Roecker and Sandra Moore, among others.
3 Andrew Browne // Mar 27, 2013 at 10:47 pm
Looking forward to seeing these projects completed and people moving in.
4 Lewis N. Villegas // Mar 28, 2013 at 5:23 am
The way I look at it, half of the problem is that we are trying to get the market to build social housing. The 20% requirement skims profit right off the top and developers have to find ways of getting that from the project. Canada should get into the business of building, owning, and partnering with non-profits for the provision of social housing with supports. A roof over the head is simply not enough.
The other half of the problem is that we have created the DEOD as a kind of welfare ghetto. If you run into mental health and addiction problems, then you end up here and good luck to you. Zoning is not the right tool. It has concentrated one group in one place away from the rest of society. As a result there is just not enough mix in the economy to support the things that are commonplace everywhere else in the city: groceries, restaurants, parks, and jobs.
http://wp.me/p1mj4z-yX
The revolving door of emergency room help, short term hospitalization, shelters, federal and provincial incarceration is costing us more per capita, in property damage, and having a neighbourhood as a skid row, than if as a society we were to provide housing with supports for anyone living on the street.
5 Bill Lee // Mar 28, 2013 at 12:44 pm
I commented on the Boffo block and Kerry Gold’s promotional story in the Globe
francesbula.com/uncategorized/more-waldorf-former-senior-planner-notes-that-there-is-strong-protection-already-to-prevent-rampant-condo-development-on-waldorf-site/#comment-515848
Thursday The Vancouver Sun’s Pete McMartin: Change is frightening to everyone, but it’s on its way to the Downtown Eastside
If there was any doubt — and there shouldn’t be, given the massive social welfare structure in the Downtown Eastside — it is not the goal of Brian Jackson’s staff to formulate policies that will utterly change the character of the neighbourhood.
“They don’t want gentrification,” Jackson said of the poverty activists who have made representations to him, “they want revitalization, and that certainly is the goal of the OCP (Official Community Plan). Gentrification is when it all switches over to high- or middle-income residences, and that definitely is not the goal of the city.
“The housing goal of the city in the Downtown Eastside is to make sure that it’s home for a significant number of low-income people. But we can’t do it on our own. We need input from other levels of government, but we also need private development.”
Read more: vancouversun.com/business/Pete+McMartin+Change+frightening+everyone+Downtown+Eastside/8161578/story.html
Boffo also got mentioned in
francesbula.com/uncategorized/private-hotels-in-downtown-eastside-becoming-increasingly-unaffordable-for-those-on-welfare-says-report/
And while the Vancouver Parks Board (which hates both parks and community centres ) has destroyed Oppenheimer Park for sports, activities and other things, this new 537 (or 555 for marketing) East Cordova speculative building is only 15 seconds from the park, and should be seen in the context with the CCAP gentrification map.
And noted where its location on the CCAP map
http://ccapvancouver.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/2012-dtes-hotel-gentrification_map_web_full.jpg
and the special DEOD district, a subdivision of the Downtown Eastside.
Meanwhile I think that Ivan Drury wrote a trenchant 1710 word column in TheMainlander (THEMainlander.com as someone already has Mainlander.com)
themainlander.com/2013/03/24/proposed-condos-next-door-to-oppenheimer-park-already-hurting-low-income-residents/
….”Why the DEOD is special,\
“The DEOD is a 16-square block area in the heart of the Downtown Eastside which was identified by planners in the early 1980s as a protected area for low-income people, a refuge from real estate investors. These planners employed a provision seldom used in Canada called “inclusionary zoning;” setting rules that any development in the area must include at least 20% social housing. They came up with the 20% number specifically because at that time 20% of people in the city were in “core need” of housing, meaning they were paying more than 30% of their incomes to rent and living in poor conditions.”
See Drury’s link and quoting from a Collier’s realty pitch for the area.
[ By the way, the Mainlander style of web page means that links in the text are not highlighted or distinguished in many web browsers.
I generally use simpler tools for web browsing like Lynx Portable (doesn’t use Register in Windows, therefore can be put anywhere including on a plug-in USB key)
See: portableapps.com/news/2012-08-03–lynx-portable-2.8.7-released
And check Blynx at:
leb.net/blinux/blynx/
to make the “K)eypad as arrows or Numbered links” field option into “links are numbered”
which allows links to really stand out.
‘Printing’ can send page with links, and a list of links appended, to your email or attached printer.
Gooder. ]
6 Bill Lee // Mar 28, 2013 at 12:52 pm
Meanwhile in a small village to the south of here….
Tuesday, March 26, 2013 – Page updated at 04:00 p.m.
City Council doesn’t fear fees will freeze development boom
http://seattletimes.com/text/2020640634.html
By Bob Young, Seattle Times staff reporter
Barring a reversal, the Seattle City Council aims to raise affordable-housing fees along with building heights in South Lake Union, going against intense pressure from business interests.
Business leaders and property owners, including The Seattle Times, have lobbied the council not to tie fee increases to a proposal allowing much taller buildings. That could “shock” the market, as one letter delivered to the council Monday said, and discourage development.
….Evidence that the city is undercharging is persuasive, according to council members. A council consultant reported that the city could charge much more and developers could still make enough profit to proceed with projects.
….City officials want to use those fees to create housing in South Lake Union affordable to moderate-income workers. That way, they reason, the area’s population would be diverse and workers wouldn’t have to commute from suburbs, adding traffic and pollution.
The city’s goal is for roughly one-third of new housing in South Lake Union to be affordable to a single person making less than $45,000, or a three-person household with an income under $58,000. As it stands, current fees would leave the city about 4,000 apartments short of its affordability goal in 20 years. [ more ]
7 tf // Mar 28, 2013 at 7:06 pm
Lewis #4 – “As a result there is just not enough mix in the economy to support the things that are commonplace everywhere else in the city: groceries, restaurants, parks, and jobs.”
I hear you but there’s something people don’t understand –
With new condos, property values & property tax goes up, which raises the cost of rent and doing business, which closes down the shops where low-income people buy their supplies. People buy samples of shampoo on the street because they can’t afford bottles of shampoo for $20.
With the new retail shops and restaurants come higher prices – thus the complaint of “$15 bowls of soup, $3 donuts, $5 cups of coffee, $50 haircuts”. For a person on fixed-income, be it BC Benefits, disability or pension, they can not afford those prices so you see little senior ladies join the food lines at missions or soup lines at Oppenheimer.
I can buy cheese at Sunrise but can only afford to smell the cheese at Les amis du Fromage; I will eventually be priced out of my home neighbourhood.
All we’re trying to do in the Downtown Eastside is slow down the real estate development so that we can grow organically. We’re asking the City to support that by adjusting their policies and regulations. Right now it’s an uncontrolled tidal wave of gentrification and people drown in tidal waves.
8 InsiderDoug // Mar 29, 2013 at 8:30 pm
To Trish #2 – well said, and you should include yourself, Edelson, Jenkins and Toderian in that list of thanks. All of you led at different times in making this happen.
9 Lewis N. Villegas // Mar 29, 2013 at 10:38 pm
All we’re trying to do in the Downtown Eastside is slow down the real estate development so that we can grow organically. We’re asking the City to support that by adjusting their policies and regulations. Right now it’s an uncontrolled tidal wave of gentrification and people drown in tidal waves.
tf 7
I hear you tf… We’re asking the City to draft community plans that will allow neighbourhoods to grow organically—which in my books includes social housing and supports.
I’m questioning the success of 25 years of “inclusionary zoning” versus… let’s say… 25 years of Canada building social housing with supports.
We’re raising the bar, aren’t we? If Canadians need housing, we don’t zone to try to force the marketplace to deliver non-profit housing. That seems counter-intuitive. The market sector is going to provide non-market value?
No. Canadians should simply build as much housing as is needed for at risk populations. Period. And not just in 16 square blocks in the cradle of our city. EVERY neighbourhood should build social housing close to transit, support services, parks, etc.
As far as the cost of foods, I would think that we could easily mobilize to support at risk citizens.
In all of these calculations I factor in my supposition that in the end it will cost tax payers less to support people at risk than risk them being able to go it alone.
It’s not rocket science. But it isn’t conservative politics either, is it?
10 Ned // Mar 30, 2013 at 5:01 pm
InsiderDoug #8
Agreed with one exception… Toderian. What’s with this guy? I’ve been following him since he got fired, and it seems that he’s always ready to kiss Vision/Ballem/Robertson behinds on all occasions, now even more than when he was working for them. My message to him… show some dignity man. You’re not going to get that job back! At least you could come up with something good, like dirt, on these punks. You must have a lot of scribbled notes in your black book… LOL!
11 InsiderDoug // Mar 30, 2013 at 7:39 pm
Ned #10 – Toderian led planning while the key work was done, with Chen, Ma, French, etc etc, and as far as I heard was instrumental in the new thinking we’re actually talking about in this stream. So my comment was relevant to the discussion. Yours, Ned, was random and childish.
From what we’ve seen from City Hall (and this gets discussed lots round here – I’m not in Planning, but work with them lots), Toderian is still doing what he did while he was here. Call things like he sees them. Man’s got integrity. Love what he’s been doing out there, didnt go quietly. I for one, miss that around here. Not a toadie, nor a vindictive child. Pro.
I’ve seen him be critical to Vision – http://www.vancouversun.com/Former+Vancouver+planning+directors+city+prepared+deal+with+growth/6942551/story.html and I’m seen him compliment good things, in ways that were consistent with what he was saying before.
You have a funny definition of the word dignity. What, you’d rather he be childish, unprofessional and vindictive to the people who screwed him, and us taxpayers too? Be the smaller guy? Just to amuse you? Get over yourself.
Perhaps you don’t understand what a professional is. Toderain does, as do many of the people who have left city hall or been pushed (too many to name, but named them many times), and staff still respect him and them for it.
12 Higgins // Mar 31, 2013 at 1:26 pm
Wow.
insiderDoug @11
For someone who thinks that the previous administration could do no wrong you are a little bit partisan. Say it ain’t so.
Here’s one question for you my friend: If you are right and all these people let go/ fired/ “retired”/ left… were excellent people, how come none of them didn’t squeal, not even a little “ouch” when they were forced out?
Like it or not the reality is this: IF (and I know they are) Vision vancouver, gregor and their handpicked hack Ballem are a bunch of jerks that pushed out the “creme de la creme” of the Hall, all of them carrying a good amount of bounty (in the form of generous severance packages) in their backpacks, that means that they are also thieves; Taxpayers lost. Period. Are we good so far?
I think Ned brought up a good point. None of the people that left City Hall were visibly critical of this ballem dictatorship (that link of yours is pathetic). If they were, I would know about it.
The moment they(all) accepted to go out quietly they are all in the same boat. Money is too good to leave on the table, correct? 🙂
That’s why they still need to show some … dignity!
“You have a funny definition of the word dignity. What, you’d rather he be childish, unprofessional and vindictive to the people who screwed him, and us taxpayers too? Be the smaller guy?”
In this paragraph you really contradicted yourself, InsiderDoug. We are not in church you know. Turn the other cheek is outdated in today’s corporate world. Your guy IS the smaller guy (like all the other) exactly because he went quietly not the other way around.
Whistle-blowers and people who stand up to tyranny, have dignity my friend.
Heroes. LOL, only in cartoons you’ll find them InsiderDoug.
13 West End Gal // Mar 31, 2013 at 3:33 pm
Insider doug #11
Wouldn’t be interesting to find out from the source aka the “victims” what really happened inside the city hall? Wouldn’t make sense for all the “victims” to come forward and therefore have enough evidence to “go after” and “prosecute” the baddies?
But as others have mentioned before me, all were paid to shut up and go away quietly.
I see no spine in any of them either. Yes, that’s commendable! Not!
14 InsiderDoug // Mar 31, 2013 at 4:46 pm
Higgins #10 – to say I think any administration has “done no wrong” is to prove you haven’t actually been following my comments. I respect people who call it like they see it, good or bad, and I try to do the same thing. Just cause you and I may not agree, doesnt mean I’m partisan. That kind of black and white, really bores me, and i have better things to do than be a part of it on-line. I’ve shared what I think because I feel it needs to be said. Period.
I do believe Ballem has pushed out excellent people. I do believe it has cost the taxpayers lots of money, and even more from the city hall talent pool – plenty. Do I think the previous admin could do no wrong? They did lots of things wrong, but they didn’t do that.
Do I think the people who left showed dignity and integrity? Yes, generally, and I like that Toderian has said more than ANY of the rest of them. I knew them all to varying degrees. They have both dignity and integrity. I don’t know you from Adam. Did you know them? Do you have a track record of being right about anything? Of doing the right thing? So… enjoy your opinion.
And by the way, as I said before, Toderian didn’t go quietly. He’s out there, speaking up on important things. Not anonymously like you or I. What he’s not being, is a partisan whiny child. By all means, point out something that he’s said, that you disagree with, and have a discussion about that. But random character shots? Whatever.
I’m more interested in the fact that MANY reporters in town, Frances included, do know whats been going on, but I haven’t seen much interest in writing about it.
West End Gal #13 – Leaving City Hall in a professional way isnt the same as being payed to stay silent. Be careful what you are accusing people of. Being professional and not looking like a ” I’m taking you all down with me” person, isnt the same as being paid to be quiet. Toderian for example, was paid based on his contract becuase he was fired for no reason at all… without cause. No secrecy clause.
Very easy for anonymous people like all of us, to talk tough about what we would do in similar places. Blah blah blah.
15 jenables // Mar 31, 2013 at 9:19 pm
I assumed that most are under a gag order, and I’d tend to think their lawyers urged them to take the payout and sign the gag order. easier for them, right? we live in a society of apathy, and as much as I want no part of it, you may be surprised to see how quickly YOU become the villain if and when you speak out or ask questions.. so my sincere thanks to those who do. the responsibility lies on the rest of us not to judge or persecute people who want answers, and to stop protecting those who would thwart the free exchange of information.
16 Lewis N. Villegas // Mar 31, 2013 at 11:20 pm
There is a historical dimension missing in the last five-or-so posts. There has been a way of managing/designing cities growing in the U.S and Europe that has not got traction in Canada.
I see it as a sea change in planning and urbanism.
Others may not agree. But, if you follow my line of thinking, then ‘partisan politics’ is what usually takes place in any municipality or region. However, a change of paradigm is something that only comes around every few generations or four or five or six.
What I see today is paradigm shift. I see it out there in the street and in the marketplace. I do not see it in the previous several posts. But I do see it and hear it in the voices of the most dedicated neighbourhood advocates.
17 Roger Kemble // Apr 1, 2013 at 9:54 am
Lewis @ #16
“However, a change of paradigm is something that only comes around every few generations or four or five or six.”
http://members.shaw.ca/urbanismo/DTES/DTES.charrette.html
18 Ned // Apr 2, 2013 at 9:49 am
InsiderDoug #10
Ok. Maybe I was too harsh. But…
Going back to the moment when Judy Rogers was fired… to now, not one, let me repeat this, not one came back publicly from under their rocks to vilify this administration. As for the anonymity, boo-hoo, look at what happens when you speak up against this gang. That’s why you are InsiderDoug and I’m Ned. But these guys?
They had nothing to lose. They’ve already been kicked out. At least speak now and end the suffering going on inside Vancouver’s city hall.
Something is not right and you know it, I know it, why can’t they talk about it?
19 Raingurl // Apr 2, 2013 at 4:25 pm
Excuse me…..This post is about the DTES and NOT the polititians of today/yesterday and/or tomorrow. Typical of all us to forget about the little guy and the topic at hand.
20 Lewis N. Villegas // Apr 4, 2013 at 8:31 am
This website summarizes an approach to planning five neighbourhoods in the so-called DTES:
http://sunnvancouver.wordpress.com
The approach can be used there, and in every other neighbourhood in our city.