NPA Mayor rivals Suzanne Anton and Ian Robertson battle it out over media attention.
Before I delve into the issue of Northeast False Creek (NEFC), I want to indicate that the concept of density, which was at the heart of former Mayor Sam Sullivan’s EcoDensity initiative, is not what ruffled feathers about his proposals. Density is something that needs to be widely embraced to ensure a sustainable future, particularly in the way in which Vancouver is growing.
Rather, it was the former Mayor’s approach that created such a backlash against the idea. Whether it was registering his own personal trademark for the EcoDensity label, or the manner in which he dictated to neighbourhoods without the slightest attempt at compromise, to the way that the concept always revolved around a one-man show in its presentation, the means of marketing or communicating the idea, fell flat (this view is in fact echoed by urban planner, architect and former NPA candidate Michael Geller in this comment on Frances Bula’s site).
Now, in moving onto the current debate going on about NEFC, the comments offered by lone NPA Councillor Suzanne Anton and lone NPA Park Board Commissioner in this story are completely disingenuous
“There’s going to be a lot of people living in the area; there has to be a place for kids to take swimming lessons or skating lessons. I’m worried about the lack of public facilities there.” – Suzanne Anton
“We’re constantly looking at all quadrants and regions in the city where we’re park-deficient. Certainly this is good for the developer, but not necessarily for residents of this neighbourhood.” – Ian Robertson
Oh really? Let’s take a look back to a City Council meeting that took place on October 16, 2008.
It was at that point a motion moved by Councillor Anton was voted upon, where the vote was split down party lines (Vision Vancouver Councillors voted against 3 out of 4 sections of the motion).
The most salient of these sections opposed by Vision is the following:
“THAT the City Manager or the Deputy City Manager be authorized to finalize, execute and deliver an Upgrade Commitment Agreement with BC Pavilion Corporation (PavCo), generally in accordance with the terms set out below, which commits PavCo to undertaking and completing the Stadium upgrade and to bearing the direct and indirect costs for any services associated with the upgrade and adjacent development on Stadium lands while also confirming that the City will not anticipate any Community Amenity Contributions from the development beyond the Stadium upgrade itself, all subject to termination if the proposed FCN ODP amendments are not enacted by a specified outside date.”
Now, if Anton and her NPA colleague Robertson were so concerned about public amenities, and more specifically parks, why were they so supportive of PAVCO offering nothing more than a stadium roof upgrade as its community contribution?
BC Place is not a public space. It isn’t a community centre in which families can take their children to a swimming pool or for a dance class.
The motion proposed and passed by Anton et al. was about upgrading a stadium that only caters to those who can pay to get into events.
Residents can take solace in the fact that there are three other owners of the NEFC lands – Aquilini Development, Canadian Metropolitan Properties and Concord Pacific – from which the area can ensure real amenities.
This past Tuesday, Council voted to endorse a set of general principles for development moving forward, complete with a rash of amendments that made aware their demands for affordable housing, park space and other community benefits.
As described in this Georgia Straight article, Concord Pacific, which owns 37 percent of the land at Northeast False Creek, has “expressed concern that it is being asked to provide new public space while others are removing open space from their sites.”
This is a valid objection in consideration of the sweetheart deal that that previous Council approved with PAVCO.
Thank goodness we now have a Council that is going to fight for real benefits for residents instead of a roof owned by a Crown Corporation that is not widely accessible to the general public.
First, I appreciate it that you are giving some focus to northeast false creek as the redevelopment of these lands as this will complete the planning and development of the false creek basin and we must get it right.
The provincial government is a partner in the development of these lands through its ownership of the 10 acre stadium site and its involvement in the development of a new art gallery which could go in nefc or somewhere else in the downtown. Both these facilities are important elements in our downtown and Vancouver has to look to the Province to be investing in them. I suggest the stadium is important to keep downtown and the roof is nearing the end of its life. I was impressed that the cost of just demolishing the stadium was well over 100 milliion dollars and the cost to redevelop a similar 60,000 seat facility elsewhere was problematic, likely not as close to as much public transit and the cost approaching almost a billion dollars, including the public infrastructure to support it. Even in a 3P, a substantial amount of taxpayers money would have to be spent. When the stadium rezoning was approved, Council concluded that a region of our size benefits from having a covered facility of this size.
As for parks, the park ratio of 2.75 acres per thousand residents was established in the 80’s and I recollect it was the average for the city. It was the hoped that with the development of brownfield and other major sites we could obtain enough public open space that was close to that standard. In Coal Harbour on the former CP Marathon lands we almost met the target, but with the introduction of additonal housing on the Shaw Tower and Fairmont sites, we missed it, but did achieve 2.6 ac per thousand. Currently, the ratio on the Concord and International Village lands is at about 2 ac per thousand. Interestingly, with the ultimate delivery of the Creekside Park extension and the additional approximately 5 ac of publicly owned open space proposed in the nefc directions, including a new civic plaza to replace the plaza of nations and the projected 7200 residents living nefc the ratio will remain at about 2 ac/1000. By the way, the park ratio in Downtown South will ultimately be 0.16 ac/1000 because the land costs were just too high to get close to the standard due to the density in the area. Enough about the metrics, this is an important issue for vancouver residents because our green space is one of the key defining elements of our city.
The compatibility of housing with indoor and outdoor event venues is a big focus of the nefc directions and I believe an important issue to be considering. The unique challenge of having a vibrant area with about 200 events a year in amongst housing The livability issue is also an important matter to consider in planning the area. It is notable that the decision of Council was unanimous on the issue of adding housing to the area around these venues. It is also interesting to note that downtown south has emerged as a dense and noisy mixed residential area and there continues to be interest among many people to live here.
So thanks for raising this topic. There is alot to consider here and with several rezoning applications anticipated next year, more there will be more to consider and commment on. As I noted before, lets work on getting this right.