Continuing to catch up on posts here. (Sorry, as many of you know, I was camped out at the Vancouver Folk Festival all weekend, though without a “structure,” so no park rangers came to chase me out. As a result, I fell behind in alerting you to all of my brilliant recent pieces of journalistic prose.)
I filed this one on Sunday from the festival, re Mayor Gregor Robertson’s initiatives to guarantee some local control for Granville Island, either by having the city buy or lease the island, and to preserve the Arbutus rail corridor as it is now.
We, the taxpayers aka residents, don’t know what the price tags on these would be exactly. My guess is that the city would only be interested in Granville Island if the federal government transferred it for a nominal fee, since it probably takes some federal money now to subsidize rents and maintain the place. That’s currently paid for by everyone in Canada. If the city had control, guess who would be covering those costs?
As well, with the Arbutus corridor, the city’s “fair-market assessment” probably is based on it being zoned as a transportation corridor, which would make it a lot less valuable than if it were zoned for condos.
Richmond recently got a big chunk of old CP rail line for its 3.7-kilometre greenway for, apparently, $5 million in 2010. So that would indicate the price for Vancouver for 11 kilometres might be around, say, $20-30 million. On the other hand, Mayor Philip Owen and the city paid CP $9 million for a 1.5-kilometre section near Granville Island back in 1996. Based on that price of $6 million per kilometre and using the old Bank of Canada inflation calculator, the current price for 11 kilometres would be $93 million.
All of this, of course, is just fun imaginary math, as CMHC, the current managing body for Granville Island, says it’s not even clear in legislation whether the government has the power to sell this piece of Crown land. And, given the current state of animosity between CP and the city, hard to see an amicable and reasonably priced sale any time soon.
81 responses so far ↓
1 boohoo // Jul 27, 2014 at 3:38 pm
@47
lol.
2 Jeff Leigh // Jul 27, 2014 at 3:44 pm
My regular route goes from Ontario and 1st around the seawall to Pacific and Homer. First choice is the seawall; for most of this length it is separated from pedestrians, although in some areas near the casino and at Marinaside it doesn’t even have a painted line. None of it is appropriate as a high speed route, but it is pleasant. Just need to moderate one’s speed, watch for pedestrians, and enjoy the ride. Taking Quebec and Expo Blvd to Pacific Blvd is slightly longer, has ten or so lights with right turning cars, and several bus stops that take the painted bike lane. It is separated and safer for a portion from Quebec to Abbot. I take the seawall more than 90% of the time.
3 Alex // Jul 27, 2014 at 4:48 pm
If the city is serious about using the corridor for LRT/Trolley maybe the smart (Machiavellian?) thing to do is to just let CP go ahead and clear the corridor of the crème de la crème’s gardens. And then once the city is actually ready to run transit on it, go ahead and take over.
Say the city buys the right of way this year for whatever price. Future transit use gets mentioned (maybe). Now fast forward two or three decades.
Because if you think the crème de la crème are going berserk now, lets see what happens then!
When CP is long forgotten, and the only thing people see is a 100 (?) million dollar public garden and bike-path.
Yeah, let CP be the heavy. Let them clear the right of way, and park their non-in-service rail-cars. Then when the city is ready, the crème de la crème will welcome the occasional trolley going by with open arms.
4 spartikus // Jul 27, 2014 at 6:55 pm
According to Daphne Bramham in the Sun, CP wants $100m while the City has offered $20m
I suspect the final amount will be somewhere in the middle 🙂
5 Alan Layton // Jul 27, 2014 at 7:44 pm
Robertson has said a couple of times now in interviews that he eventually wants light rail transit along the corridor (to connect to the proposed subway that will terminate at Arbutus). So it’ll probably stay zoned for transportation, for the most part.
6 Alex // Jul 27, 2014 at 8:17 pm
$100 million? It’s crazy. Actually even $20 million is crazy! Let CP huff and puff. Let them clear the right of way. In the end who else are they going to sell it to?
And unless it is super clear that the $$$ is for an LRT and not so that the 1% can grow carrots there is going to be some hell to pay.
At least put up some future “LRT right of way” signs along the way so there is no “What? But this is a bikepath/Garden/Greenway!!” Protests.
Even so, I still think the best bet is to let CP clear it and park its’ unused cars there until the city is ready to put some shovels in the ground for the LRT.
7 Chris Keam // Jul 27, 2014 at 8:46 pm
“With all the references to Haddon Park.”
I always get a giggle when fear mongers aren’t familiar with the place they are trying to make out as unsuitable for whatever activity they dislike.
I rode past today and it was as empty as ever, even on a beautiful Sunday. Plenty of room to picnic and pedal in harmony. Too bad so many people let themselves get played by a few with deep pockets and good strategy. As usual, trying to ride through the parking lot at Kits Park and the adjacent street as motorists look for parking was the usual gong show.
Flickr set of 9 photos demonstrating the empty greenspace this afternoon:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/47412806@N02/sets/72157645571651240/
8 Alan Layton // Jul 27, 2014 at 8:49 pm
@Alex 56
I’ve spent years riding along the corridor and I can assure you that it does not go through 1% territory. Generally speaking, rail lines are not the place that people build mansions and The 1% don’t live along this corridor, not even close.
Most of the line is devoid of gardens and those who have plots are generally renters from the neighbourhood who don’t have a yard and want to grow food. All of the gardens are based in neighbourhoods with older apartment complexes (some are low income) and Kits also has some newer condos.
I really wish critics of the corridor would just spend some time there. It really is an oasis and there’s nothing wrong with that. Everyone can go enjoy it.
9 Richard // Jul 27, 2014 at 8:57 pm
@Brilly
Seriously? Do you ever both to do any research before you post?
The collision on the Stanley Park Seawall was because the cyclist was on the walking path instead of the bike path. If he stayed on the bike path like he was supposed to, the crash would not have happened.
Now, back to Kits. People walking and cycling are using the same path. The crash in Stanley Park shows the problem with this which is exactly why the Park Board wanted to build a separated path.
So let’s find a way to do that and cut the nonsense. It is really tiresome.
10 Threadkiller // Jul 28, 2014 at 1:20 am
Reportedly the cyclist who caused the accident in Stanley Park was an inexperienced rider, riding a rental bike, and lost control. That does not excuse the incident, but it helps to explain it; and in any case, mixing pedestrians and cyclists anywhere creates a potentially lethal situation.
For anyone seeking a truly terrifying experience I highly recommend a stroll along the False Creek South seawall between Granville Island and the Cambie Bridge any fine summer evening, but especially on fireworks nights (this past Saturday, for instance), when the number of cyclists increases exponentially. Dozens of riders, often in groups of ten or more, hurtle past pedestrians at dangerous speeds. After dark, many ride with no lights. They all have one thing in common: They all ride far too fast, in open defiance of the signing urging them to adopt a sensible speed. It is a daily miracle that no one is injured or worse. I would like to be able to speculate that once someone is seriously injured on this stretch, as happened in Stanley Park, that the powers that be will decisively move to address the situation, but a couple of years ago a five-year-old girl was knocked down near Ironwork Passage, resulting in a broken arm. The incident was evidently seen as acceptable, as nothing has changed. Perhaps if she had been killed, as she easily could have been, that might have provided sufficient motivation.
In fairness, I will mention that in summer 2013 the city was conducting studies of ways to mitigate this dangerous conflict of usage on the seawall, but a year later no conclusions have been forthcoming. Meanwhile, those of us who walk the seawall nightly will continue to exercise extreme caution and sometimes verbally reprimand the most egregious offenders. A raised middle finger (the universal cyclist’s salute to vocal pedestrians), will be the expected response but that is still preferable to broken limbs. My wife has osteoporosis and damaged vertebrae in her neck. A simple fall could be disastrous for her. And yet some might wonder why I’m so concerned…
11 Roger Kemble // Jul 28, 2014 at 8:59 am
Of course all conversation on Frances Bula‘s blog eventually defaults to bicycles. What would we do without Chris Keam: passim?
“I rode past today and it was as empty as ever, even on a beautiful Sunday.”
I lived on Whyte, one door away. My attic suite windows faced the park for fifteen years. Maybe when you show Chris everyone takes another route. Trust me its busy all day light hours winter, summer: basket ball, picnics, frizbies!
Just in case no one has noticed there is a big world out there.
To wit: the city purchase of Granville Island and The Arbutus corridor.
As for the former, now that ECU is planning to move to the desolate waste lands in the vicinity of the Clarke Station mud flats EC students are sure going to miss the amenities GI has to offer close by.
Of course student amenity is the last thing cluttering the minds of those disconnected boards of decision-making big shots.
As for Vancouver’s bureaucracy managing yet more potential empty suite investments for anonymous offshore billionaires who wouldn’t know where Granville Island, or indeed Vancouver, is if you gave them there own sextant!
What else do we have for sale?
Then why would the city buy the Arbutus corridor? It has full control over what is built, or not, on the land and it will have a steady flow of free cash in the form of abundant Development Cost Levies: manna from heaven and ever flowing.
Trust me, unless you are on the take, it doesn’t matter who gets in come November: a pretty face here, a smile there and that’s democracy luvies . . .
12 Chris Keam // Jul 28, 2014 at 9:19 am
@Roger
A beautiful Sunday afternoon. The pictures tell the story. Try not to make it personal. It’s not about me.
13 teririch // Jul 28, 2014 at 10:15 am
@Threadkiller #60:
The fact that the ‘City’ or some form of government constantly has to intervene and provide people with guidelines, rules and laws because too many people can’t seem to exercise any type of common sense, is just sad.
I’ve been to a couple of the car free days that have been packed with people, kids and dogs and you will still see a cyclist or two trying to work their way through the crowds on bike rather than pushing it.
No common sense.
14 teririch // Jul 28, 2014 at 4:06 pm
I’m posting this just because I can’t decide if Baillie is confused as to ‘whose team’ Commish de Genova plays for or if it is a failed attempt at a snarky pot shot directed at ‘NPA’s’ Melissa De Genova for taking a vacay.
From Twitter – Ian Baillie (Vision)
Ian Baillie @BaillieIan: 2 hours
Vision commissioner working hard “Melissa de Genova talked to the Courier by cell phone from Paris where she is vacationing” Van courier
15 Everyman // Jul 28, 2014 at 6:14 pm
@teririch 64
That does seem a bit hypocritical of Baillie. Gregor was hardly born on the wrong side of the tracks.
16 F.H.Leghorn // Jul 28, 2014 at 11:07 pm
Sheesh. You’d think it was Mr. Rogers, not Mayor Robertson. A generation raised on public TV. The train to the Kingdom of Make Believe. I can almost see it: a cheery trolley (free, naturally) ringing the bell at intersections, weaving between community gardens, bike paths and greenways. Maybe the odd food truck or mobile medical marijuana dispensary. Screw the East side. They’ve got the PNE. That should be enough park for anyone.
Weather forecast for election season: heavy showers of pie-in-the-sky and a political vortex of hot air and cold calculations.
My advice? Who cares who sits in Council? They’re all the same. Vote no on the Capital Plan and you cut them off at the knees.
17 Threadkiller // Jul 28, 2014 at 11:54 pm
teririch#63:
Government-proclaimed laws and codes of behaviour have been with us since the days of Hammurabi and probably existed in some form long before that (Hammurabi was merely the first to set them in stone, literally and figuratively). Human nature is such that we don’t seem to be able to function without them, and yes, the general lack of “common sense”, so frequently apparent, is lamentable. As drawn as I am sometimes to the idea of anarchism, I simply have too little faith in the human animal to believe that a society could even function, let alone thrive, in a state of anarchy. Cyclists, most of them being anarchists by nature, might disagree with that point, but it’s been a very long time since I was that idealistic/naive– if indeed I ever was.
18 Threadkiller // Jul 29, 2014 at 12:49 am
Some comments on Granville Island:
Way back in this thread someone speculated that the Island might be subject to First Nations land claims. To the best of my knowledge the Squamish and Musqueam do include Granville Island in their list of ancestral territories, since the sandbar which it replaced was once a productive fishing/birding ground for these bands when they still lived in the village of Snauq, where Vanier Park is now located. Snauq was occupied until its residents were forced to relocate in the late 19th century. A 2001 court decision returned rights to nearly 12 acres around the south end of the Burrard Bridge to the Squamish Nation. The impending major development of those lands, planned by the Squamish, will set off a major controversy when its form and scale are finally made known.
Whether the two bands have formalized the claim to the Island, or are likely to, I don’t know; the site has undergone such extensive physical change during the past century that defining the original borders of the sandbar might prove impossible.
Re the impact of the Emily Carr closure on the Island: The issue is not, as some people seem to think, “Where will those poor relocated Emily Carr students go for lunch?” Rather, it’s the reverse. The several thousand EC students and staff are a welcome source of daily income for many Market merchants. Moreover, 65% of part-time workers in the Market are EC students. That will likely not continue post-move. A number of businesses in the Market are already running close to the edge, financially speaking, and the impending departure of such a large resident customer base may be the final straw that pushes them under. Some of the major leaseholders on the island, as well as many businesspeople, are extremely concerned about the financial impact the EC closure will have on the Island, the Market, and on their lessees. Unless EC is replaced with another major institution of some kind with an equally large population, that impact may well prove to be permanent, unless new, hitherto untapped customer bases can somehow be developed.
Further complicating things is CMHC’s newly intransigent attitude when it comes to some of their own leaseholders. Some business that have been in operation on the island for 25 years or more and whose leases are due to expire, are being told they can only renew their leases for a year or two at a time, rather than the customary 7-10 years. This is farcical from a business point of view; how is a business owner supposed to draw up a business plan for the next five or ten years in the face of such uncertainty? How can they, for instance, apply for a bank loan to expand or redesign their business if there is no certainty that they will have a secure lease for the term of the loan? CMHC has effectively folded its arms and refuses to budge on the matter. The new, additional uncertainty brought about by the possible takeover by Port Metro Vancouver, or possibly even the City, has only exacerbated the situation.
Granville Island, as has been reported in the media, and particularly the Market, both face challenging times. The Market will soon face new competition from what is being called “Granville Island North”, a large Market-like development that will be an adjunct to the ghastly, hideously overbuilt Vancouver House project.
Vancouverites often seem to take Granville Island and the Market for granted. They shouldn’t. Even with ten million person-visits a year, the Island and the Market are still vulnerable– especially in the tourist-deprived winter months– and there are absolutely no guarantees that they will last in their present form. After all, in Parvenuver, now more than ever before, everybody’s ass is up for grabs.
19 Chris Keam // Jul 29, 2014 at 9:01 am
“A generation raised on public TV”
– Leghorn
“Cyclists, most of them anarchists by nature”
– Threadkiller
“What are you trying to say, I’m crazy?
When I went to your schools, I went to your churches, I went to your institutional learning facilities?! So how can you say I’m crazy?”
– Suicidal Tendencies (from the song ‘Institutionalized’)
20 rph // Jul 29, 2014 at 11:03 am
@Threadkiller #68 – Thanks for the insight into Granville Island.
It is presently a good mix, with just enough retail, parking, ambience, location, and a touch of je ne sais quoi. The quick fix to lack of bodies would be to add a residential component, and this may even be something merchants would support. Sadly I think this will eventually happen as there does not seem to be any space left that we won’t condo-fy.
21 Tiktaalik // Jul 29, 2014 at 11:17 am
We have to be very careful about residential on Granville Island, as we don’t want to ruin the currently successful atmosphere, but residential may be the only way to inject the foot traffic that will dramatically drop off post Emily Carr.
I can not think of an organization that could take over the Emily Carr space that is capable of replacing what Emily Carr brings to the island.
As Threadkiller describes, Granville Island is entering a uncertain phase of its life. A successful future Granville Island may have to be substantially different than what exists now and I think there’s a danger that the future steward of Granville Island will not be bold enough to make the big changes that may be needed to preserve the viability of the Island.
22 Threadkiller // Jul 29, 2014 at 11:58 am
rph & Tiktaalik:
People tend to forget that there is already a substantial residential population close to the Island. I live literally five minutes’ walk away (the Market is our neighbourhood grocer) and there’s a population base numbering in the several thousands within 20 minutes’ walk. Foot traffic also comes from the West End and Yaletown, but not in the numbers it once did (especially since the Urban Fare and Choices stores opened in Yaletown)– and that will likely be impacted by the new “G.I. north” development I spoke of.
As I have reminded several CMHC administrations (they tend to have short memories) in face-to-face meetings, we’re the customer base that helps the Market get through the winter, and they should reach out to us much more than they do. Putting condos on the Island would do nothing to improve its economic viability, unless perhaps there were a substantial number, in which case its ambience would be disastrously changed, evoking that classic bit of Vietnam-era militaryspeak: “It became necessary to destroy the village in order to save it”. Residential development is one “big change” that should be removed from the table immediately, if in fact it ever actually slithers onto said table (CMHC firmly denies that it will)… it would be both wrong and redundant. But who knows what a new administration may come up with?
23 Bill Lee // Jul 29, 2014 at 12:05 pm
re: Threadkiller // Jul 29, 2014 at 12:49 am #68
Some numbers to put the daytime population in perspective.
Statistics (2013/14)
http://www.ecuad.ca/about/facts
Full Time Students: 1,990
International Students (incl. in FT #): 353 from 50 countries
Exchange Students (incl. in FT #): 25 to 10 countries
[Night School/ Part-time ]Continuing Studies Students: 3,508
Faculty (both continuing + sessional): 179
Staff: 103
Administrators (incl. excl. positions): 45
Campus Facilities
Two buildings located on Granville Island in Vancouver, BC: 198,692 sq. ft. (includes Intersections Digital Studio + Aboriginal Gathering Place)
Satellite campuses at 1535 W 3rd Avenue: 8070 sq. ft. | 1706 W 1st Avenue (Mitchell Press Building): 11,499 sq. ft.
“Formerly known as the Vancouver School of Applied and Decorative Arts, the institution was established in 1925. In 1978, it was designated a provincial institute before moving to Granville Island in 1980….”
24 Tiktaalik // Jul 29, 2014 at 1:32 pm
One of the best case scenarios I can imagine is that a major part of Emily Carr is taken up by some local company that would interact with the Granville Island community. A less ideal option is to fill the space with any company. Unfortunately it seems that recently major tech companies in Vancouver that may be big enough to be interested in the Emily Carr space (eg. Microsoft, Amazon) are locking into big spaces downtown (Old Sears, Telus Garden respectively).
Fortunately there’s a few years before the old Emily Carr building needs a new tenant. Maybe by then HootSuite will be looking for even more office space and will be the perfect fit.
In my mind adding more residential would be a last resort option should there be no other reasonable options for how to maintain the daily population that Emily Carr brought to the Island.
25 teririch // Jul 29, 2014 at 1:53 pm
Interesting:
Aquatic Centre / Granville Bridge Demolition Sale Plans Discovered
http://www.scribd.com/doc/235386173/Aquatic-Centre-Granville-Bridge-Demolition-Sale-Plans-Discovered
26 Brilliant // Jul 29, 2014 at 10:41 pm
@Chris Keam great when I snap a pic showing not a cyclist in sight on Point Grey Rd we can all agree it was a colossal waste of money then?
27 Chris Keam // Jul 29, 2014 at 11:07 pm
@Brilliant:
I’m not sure what you mean by your comment. I think if you consider your remark more carefully you’ll find little parallel between the situation pictured in my link, and a theoretical state of emptiness on Point Grey Road. Maybe your riposte needs a rewrite.
28 Threadkiller // Jul 30, 2014 at 12:23 am
teririch:
I’ve always thought that the Aquatic Centre was an appalling piece of architecture. Externally it resembles an enormous pile of gravel, and inside there is an ambience of unrelieved gloom thanks to the total lack of windows. This insularity is utterly inexplicable in a building erected on one of the most scenic sites in the country. Of course, the building itself was quite shoddily constructed in the first place– when I frequented the facility during my West End days, back in the late 70s and early 80s (not long after its 1974 opening), it was common for ceiling tiles to come loose and plummet fifty feet into the pool, often, but not always, narrowly missing swimmers. I do hope they finally got around to fixing that; it was a bit unnerving to nearly get nailed by a falling tile when one was trying to swim lengths. However, this does not mean that I would like to see it demolished and replaced by yet another massively overbuilt, “iconic” high-rise.
Particularly not if plans in fact call for its resurrection at the north end of the Granville Bridge. It’s difficult to think of a site for an aquatic centre that’s more idiotic– almost as idiotic, in fact, as the impending demolition of the on-and off-ramps themselves, which will create a traffic nightmare as drivers try to find alternate routes from the bridge to Pacific and vice versa. Get ready for ongoing tie-ups during busy times on Drake, Howe, Richards and Davie, no doubt exacerbated by assorted turn restrictions and the like that will be conjured up by the great (and punitive) minds in Traffic Engineering.
29 Everyman // Jul 30, 2014 at 7:49 am
@teririch 76
Interesting. I hope the mainstream media does some digging into this.
I agree with Threadkiller that the current building is awful, but I also agree locating it up near the Granville Street Bridge loops is preposterous. Better to rebuild it in the current site with something that takes full adavtnage of the spectacular setting.
30 Craig // Jul 30, 2014 at 12:33 pm
Gregor must be buying property down there for a quick flip (just like Pt Grey). If he says anything about “recusing” himself from the discussion I’m jumping in with both feet!
31 teririch // Jul 30, 2014 at 3:20 pm
@Threadkiller #78:
Speaking of ugly architecture, any chance you have seen the new towers being resurrected by Metrotown – the ones the look like a bunch of legos threw up, landed and were kept as a building?
New West on the other hand have put up some very nice (optically pleasing) low to mid-rise units. Why Vancouver is stuck on the ugly box like buildings with a stupid stripe of purple or whatever color ‘decorating’ the outside of the building is beyond me. They already look old and dated and they haven’t even been completed in may cases.