Parks and Greenspace in Grandview Woodland

.

The next regular meeting of the Grandview Woodland Area Council (GWAC) is at 7:00pm on Monday, 3rd April. The subject is parks and greenspace in our neighbourhood. As they note in their notice of meeting:

“With a growing population in Grandview, we have no new plans for parks or greenspace on the horizon. Join us for a conversation with UBC Landscape Architect Daniel Roehr and our Vancouver Park Board Commissioners.

Come share with us what you need from greenspace – play, calm, sport, relief from the heat. How should new greenspace take shape in Grandview Woodland?”

It will be a ZOOM meeting and the address is: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/89991400541?pwd=bmNleEpMVVduVGRmOXRJZEVDeU44QT09

Where Are Our Parks?

.

Vancouver City Council today received and approved a report on parks in the city. The report included a 37-page listing of all the permanent and designated parks (see here: https://council.vancouver.ca/20220301/documents/r8.pdf).

I read the report with interest but noted that two important Grandview parks (Salsbury Park at Salsbury & Adanac, and Mosiac Creek Park on Charles Street) were missing from the inventory.

Given the historical rapacity with which CoV Planning and their developer buddies treat our neighbourhood, the absence of these parks from an official inventory is worrying, to say the least. I have written to Parks Board for their comments but have yet to hear from them.

New Rules For Restaurant Eating

Thanks to Scout Magazine, we have a first look at Worksafe BC’s dining in protocols for restaurants.

We’ll get used to them, I am sure.

Dandelions and Blossoms, Shadows and Sunshine

Today Salsbury Park was resplendent with the beauty of late spring.

Select image for a much better view.

A Socially Distant Gathering

A group of us (average age about 70) decided that for the good of our mental health we would gather for a rendezvous at Salsbury Park this morning.

 

We are used to meeting quite often, and this was an excuse to break out of our social isolation for an hour, chat, gossip, run with the dogs. We were all very disciplined about staying a decent step apart from each other. It was a gorgeous day and I am certain it did us good.

This could become a habit if we continue to be house-bound for a few weeks.

Today In Salsbury Park

 

I don’t often see seagulls in Salsbury Park; it is generally dominated by crows and squirrels. However the usual suspects must have been at home, keeping warm from the snow.  Their absence allowed a pair of seagulls to walk around to their heart’s content, snapping up whatever they could find.

Today In Salsbury Park

 

It was a really beautiful fall day today.  Bright sunshine, a pleasant chill, no wind.

After a long walk, I rested a while in Salsbury Park which was looking at its autumn finest.  I noticed as I always do that a wide range of children’s toys are left for anyone to play with in the playground area. It is a small but tangible indication of the trusting and friendly community we have surrounding this little oasis of green.

Select image for a much better view.

GWAC Meeting: September

The next meeting of the Grandview Woodland Area Council (GWAC) is next Monday, 9th, at 7:00pm at the Learning Resource Centre under the Britannia Library.  The main item on the agenda is the proposed development on Grant Street.

Quoting GWAC’s mailer:

“After almost 2 years in the planning process, and multiple rejections, the public hearing for the final version of this project, a 5-storey building at 1535-1557 Grant Street, will go before  City Council on September 12th. This proposal has caused significant local push back  and you can find out more about why at the upcoming GWAC meeting, Monday September 9th.  Guest speakers will provide background and analysis on the proposal and its implications; there will be lots of time for questions and discussion.

This project offers neither affordable rental nor social housing yet the developer is asking for a full waiver of Development Cost Levies (DCLs) and Community Amenity Contributions (CACs).  If approved, this rezoning has the potential to set a precedent for similar large scale proposals in GW. 

The proposal itself calls for a 5 storey building on a narrow street with no back lane, which will dwarf the adjacent homes.  Some of the concerns expressed by neighbors include: 

• It is a narrow, single lane street, on a steep hill 
• it is unsafe for regular traffic & emergency vehicles
• It won’t accomodate fire trucks or garbage trucks
• It’s not affordable rental even on a living wage
• It’s inconsistent with the promise of the Grandview-Woodland Community Plan
• It has inadequate parking 
• And it has been rejected in its appearances in front of the Planning department’s own advisory board

…..Yet the developers & the City planning department have continued to push it through.

 
If it passes, this building and the approval process it’s gone through will set a precedent for future development around the Drive & throughout Grandview Woodland.

 
We agree the City needs housing, but do we need unaffordable, unsafe and unsuitable housing in an already dense location?”

At the time of the project’s public meeting a year ago, I wrote my own views on the project.  The GWAC meeting is open to everyone, so come along and have your own say.

Vision (And Reimer) Still Debasing Grandview’s Community

The Napier Greenway, that short section of non-road leading from Commercial to Britannia, is one of the joys of our neighbourhood.  It is a restful oasis of trees, plants and benches in the heart of our concrete jungle. It is maintained that way through the hard work of the volunteers of the Britannia Neighbours group who tend to the gardens and organize litter removal.

We understand, thanks to ILiveInEastVancouver, that during its dying moments, the last Vision Vancouver Council voted — in a secret in camera meeting — to change the name of Napier Greenway to Margaret Mitchell Plaza.  Apparently led by Andrea Reimer — famous for disparaging and ignoring local community groups, and probably the worst Councillor ever to pretend to represent us — Vision’s majority took this step without any consultation with Britannia Neighbours or anyone else that I am aware of.

(Let me hasten to say that Margaret Mitchell, long our MP, deserves all the recognition we can pile on her. This complaint has nothing to do with our fond memories of her).

We should all be upset that they took this step without consultation.  We should also wonder how or why the Vision Council decided to make this change in an in camera meeting.  I just re-read sections 165.1 and 165.2 of the Vancouver Charter which states that all meetings should be open and public except for very specific matters to do with legalities, personnel, and similar stuff. I would love to know from the City Solicitor how this change was allowed to be made in secret.

More importantly, I hope that the current batch of Councillors will reverse this decision and actually ask the residents of Grandview what they think.  By doing so they can prove themselves a lot more democratic than Reimer and Vision ever were.

 

Slacklining In The Park

 

I love it when slackliners come to practice at Salsbury Park.

In Salsbury Park Today

 

I think all the neighbourhood kids were here this afternoon; they were all over the park, just loving the snow and the slope.

Select the image for a closer view.

Hanging Around At Salsbury Park

 

The apartment building that edges the east end of Salsbury Park is covered in a pebbledash stucco. The bumps and crevices apparently give enough grip for a squirrel to go climbing straight up and down.  I sat on the bench in the glorious winter sunshine for quite some time fascinated as this clever animal played with gravity. I think she was concerned about something on the ground, a cat perhaps; but eventually she climbed down and got on with her day.

Grant Street Development: Open House

The major development proposal for 1535-1557 Grant will have an Open House this coming Tuesday, 11th September, between 5 and 8pm at Britannia Secondary School.

 

I reported on this from the February GWAC meeting, and tried to be free of editorializing at that time:

I attended the February meeting of the Grandview Woodland Area Council last night. There was a full house and a lot of intelligent community discussion … three neighbours of a proposed development on Grant Street, two of whom are professional architects, gave a presentation in opposition to the project as currently designed.

The developer has purchased four lots — 1535, 1545, 1549, and 1557 Grant — and proposes to demolish the 1½ -3 storey heritage houses on those lots and to build a 6-storey secured rental apartment complex of 40 units. Four of the units will be 3-bedroom, 12 of two bedroom, and 24 with one-bedroom.  They claim that this will be a “family-oriented” development even though the majority of units are unsuitable for families with children.

The zoning under the Community Plan allows for a 6-storey apartment building (although formal approval and a public hearing is still required) but the developer will be seeking a number of zoning changes including a significant reduction in parking requirements. They wish to supply just 19 automobile spaces for the 40 apartments.

This proposal is one of the five allowed under the Pace of Change regulations in the first three years of the Community Plan. Because it will be secured rental, the developer will have the Community Amenity Charges (CACs) waived, saving considerable expense.

The presenters have written to the Planning Department with their concerns. They explained that a large 6-storey building in the middle of this block of 2-3 storey houses would be out of place, especially as there is no planned transition between the smaller houses and the apartment building. They note that there are considerable slopes both east-west and north-south, and no lane, making access to the new building and along the narrow Grant Street very difficult, especially for emergency vehicles.  The shadowing of the neighbouring houses is expected to be extreme. There are also issues of noise and the loss of heritage trees.

It was noted that these will be market rentals (one-bedroom suites starting at about $1,800 a month) and so will add nothing to affordability in the neighbourhood.  The four houses being demolished are all currently rentals and most have basement or other additional suites.  It was pointed out by several members of the audience that in Grandview there are virtually no “single family houses”; most so-called SFHs have additional suites and are therefore twice or more as dense as some might think.

Several other audience members called the project a “block buster” which will inevitably lead to more such projects in similar low-rise streets and blocks.

This is a difficult one for me. I approve of the concept because we need a lot more purpose built rentals in Grandview; I have no problem with the size; and I have no issue with heritage problems as the street being redeveloped is not even close to being a pristine example of our Edwardian past — the houses are old rather than worthy.

 

However, this development is a typical Vision Vancouver giveaway, where the developer is to gain an enormous financial advantage for building units the rents of which 75% of the working population in the city cannot afford. So, as keen as I am to see rentals built, I have to list myself on the opposition side in the hope that something more affordable can be developed on the site.

There is more information in the this recent article in the Vancouver Courier.

The Evolution of a Wall

Way back in 1964, Roy Babic erected a modern building to house Babic Electric, the electrical and lighting store he and his wife ran at 952-956 Commercial.  It had a double storefront facing the Drive, with two apartment suites above; one with an entrance from the lane, and the other on Parker Street.

The southside wall of the structure running along Parker to the lane was a plain utilitarian painted wall. More recently, the wall has received a few coats of, usually, green paint that often reflects as shallow blue.  About five years ago, I began a series of photographs — the Greenspace series — that have illustrated the changes to the wall and the foliage over the years.

Earlier this summer, the wellness therapy clinic that has taken over the storefront decided their wall needed a mural. My quiet greenspace is no more — and the plants don’t seem to have come through it well.

Select image for a closer view.

Requiem For A Tree

My personal favourite tree in the entire neighbourhood has been cut down.

This magnificent tree stood at the south east corner of Commercial & Adanac.  Its majestic dome of a canopy was a wonder to behold.  I used to see it just about every day as I waited for the #20 going south, and I would day dream about the photographs I could take of shapes and patterns.

But no more.  That wonderful tree is now a pile of lumber surrounding a stump.

I guess the tree was on city land. I wonder if they have to go through the same rigorous processes that they quite rightly enforce on property owners seeking to remove a tree.  Somehow I doubt it.

Sr. Francis of Assisi School

During the first half of last year, we reported on efforts by St. Francis of Assisi church to rebuild their school. They had wanted to build it on Semlin, but community pressure obliged them to rethink and to consider redeveloping the school site they already operate on Victoria Drive. They have now released the first draft ideas of what such a school might look like.

 

These are presumably just drafts at this stage, but they give us a good idea of what might be proposed.

Select any image for a larger view.

Now That’s Blue!

I took a walk around the neighbourhood today, taking advantage of the splendid weather. I have been sedentary most of the winter, so it was a lovely feeling to catch up with the streets and buildings once again.

Perhaps it was the startlingly clear bright light, after so many months of grey and gloom, but I really hadn’t noticed before just how blue the house on the corner really is.  I love it!

 

Nor how yellow this block on Salsbury:

That’s the way to brighten up a neighbourhood!

Grant Street Development: The Neighbours Speak

I attended the February meeting of the Grandview Woodland Area Council last night. There was a full house and a lot of intelligent community discussion.

The scheduled speaker was Malcolm Bromley, general manager of Vancouver Parks. However, for the second month in a row he cancelled his appearance at the last minute.  It is as if Grandview and the east side doesn’t count for anything in his mind. I doubt he will be invited again.

In Bromley’s place, three neighbours of a proposed development on Grant Street, two of whom are professional architects, gave a presentation in opposition to the project as currently designed.

The developer has purchased four lots — 1535, 1545, 1549, and 1557 Grant — and proposes to demolish the 1½ -3 storey heritage houses on those lots and to build a 6-storey secured rental apartment complex of 40 units. Four of the units will be 3-bedroom, 12 of two bedroom, and 24 with one-bedroom.  They claim that this will be a “family-oriented” development even though the majority of units are unsuitable for families with children.

The zoning under the Community Plan allows for a 6-storey apartment building (although formal approval and a public hearing is still required) but the developer will be seeking a number of zoning changes including a significant reduction in parking requirements. They wish to supply just 19 automobile spaces for the 40 apartments.

This proposal is one of the five allowed under the Pace of Change regulations in the first three years of the Community Plan. Because it will be secured rental, the developer will have the Community Amenity Charges (CACs) waived, saving considerable expense.

The presenters have written to the Planning Department with their concerns. They explained that a large 6-storey building in the middle of this block of 2-3 storey houses would be out of place, especially as there is no planned transition between the smaller houses and the apartment building. They note that there are considerable slopes both east-west and north-south, and no lane, making access to the new building and along the narrow Grant Street very difficult, especially for emergency vehicles.  The shadowing of the neighbouring houses is expected to be extreme. There are also issues of noise and the loss of heritage trees.

It was noted that these will be market rentals (one-bedroom suites starting at about $1,800 a month) and so will add nothing to affordability in the neighbourhood.  The four houses being demolished are all currently rentals and most have basement or other additional suites.  It was pointed out by several members of the audience that in Grandview there are virtually no “single family houses”; most so-called SFHs have additional suites and are therefore twice or more as dense as some might think.

Several other audience members called the project a “block buster” which will inevitably lead to more such projects in similar low-rise streets and blocks.

The neighbours are now awaiting the developer to make a formal application to the city for rezoning. The GWAC Board will consider their position on the development.

 

Victoria & Adanac: A City Response

Further to my question the other day regarding the safety of the new intersection design at Victoria Drive & Adanac Street, I have received a response from Ross Kenny, Senior Transportation Design Engineer, City of Vancouver.

“There is a plan for a painted crosswalk and yellow paint on the median, however, we are waiting for the weather to improve before our crews are able to go out and do the painting.  We have heard a handful of complaints regarding the visibility of the median and we are following up with the installation of reflectors on the widest part of the median to make it more visible for drivers.  There was also a short period of time after installation that the street light at the intersection was out, which has now been fixed.

The design of the center median is based on a median design that was implemented 5 years ago at the intersection of Kaslo and Dundas Streets.  There are a number of center medians that were installed on Dundas Street which is similar in character to Victoria.  Generally we hear that the medians have made it easier to cross the street as pedestrians and cyclists only have to ensure that 1 direction of traffic has stopped before they are able to enter the road.  They also cost significantly less than a traffic signal and have the added benefit of slowing traffic, which has been a long-standing request on Victoria Drive.

We will be reviewing the design and making changes to reflect the feedback we receive and using this knowledge on future projects.”

I’ll be passing this on to the residents who wrote to me about this issue.  Anyone who wants to respond directly to Mr. Kenny should write to him at Ross.Kenny@vancouver.ca. I will also keep a watching brief on this and please let me know of any further incidents.

Is The Adanac/Victoria Median Dangerous?

Yesterday I received an email from a local resident. She had found me after googling my earlier comments on the new bike-friendly traffic arrangement at Victoria Drive and Adanac Street.

Victoria Drive looking south from just north of Adanac Street which crosses east to west.

My correspondent’s email described an accident she had had at this median:

“My car was ripped apart by the median on Thursday night – dark, raining – I was looking straight at it and didn’t see the curb jutting out. I live in the neighbourhood and have driven by before. I went back today to take pictures. What I think happened was the curb jutting out is so sharp that it immediately shredded my front left tire down to the rim so that the rim broke and caused damage to other parts connecting the axle as I drove by.”

She went on to say that her regular auto shop thought a similar accident had occurred at the same median. Another resident, a near neighbour of the first, told her she had had to swerve more than once when approaching that intersection.

Being neither a car owner nor a bike rider I have no dog in this fight over functional priority. However, I can attest to the dislike of the new arrangement by taxis and Handy Dart drivers, many of whom, coming from the south, now have to perform a four block loop to park near my house.

I have also heard from driver friends of mine: “road is not wide enough”, “never designed for this stupid hazard”, “poorly lit”, and “hard to see,” are the typical comments.

I guess this looked good on the maps to the bikeophiles at City Hall; but evidence on the ground seems to suggest this needs a more detailed look.  How often are these decisions reviewed to see whether practice met theory?