Frances Bula header image 2

Arts groups struggle to stay on Main Street as development booms ahead of creation of new city spaces

September 2nd, 2013 · 40 Comments

Vancouver actually has a plan to try to create new cultural spaces in Mount Pleasant out of the money it will extract from developers for new projects.

And, from the look of things, it will have a fair amount to play with, as projects start rolling up the street from the Olympic Village construction-crane festival.

But that’s small comfort to arts venues like VIVO, which are being evicted now in advance of re-development, as their executive director told me last week.

 

Published Monday, Aug. 26, 2013 10:50PM EDT

 

Last updated Monday, Aug. 26, 2013 10:53PM EDT

 

Three forces – the growing aura of hipsterism, a new city plan, and the success of condo projects around the Olympic village – are converging to turn Vancouver’s lower Main Street into the city’s latest development hotspot.

And that threatens to push out one of the street’s main arts centres, even though the recently developed Mount Pleasant plan said the area should be strengthened as an arts and culture hub.

VIVO Media Arts Centre, a mostly publicly funded organization that helps local filmmakers, musicians and community activists produce video and music, has to leave its home of 20 years by May, 2014, after an unknown buyer purchased the building recently.

But rents in Mount Pleasant have steadily risen as Main has become home to more restaurants, hip bike and clothing stores and breweries.

“Now there’s a scramble because everybody’s being pushed out,” VIVO general manager Emma Hendrix said. “City staff in cultural services have been working hard to do what they can, but the community plan didn’t say anything about how to preserve cultural space” even though it talked in general about creating an arts hub.

VIVO, founded in 1973 and known for years as Video In, is not the only site on Main facing imminent development, as new and old owners look to take advantage of the zoning changes along the street.

The area used to be all light industrial, and has been a mix of businesses, from auto repair to upholstery to secondhand furniture, for years.

But the new community plan will allow a mix of commercial and residential in the half block between Main Street and the alley behind it in that stretch. The land west of the alley will remain light industrial, as part of the city’s goal of preserving it for job space.

The plan was approved in November, 2010, and as condo buildings continue to go up and sell out around the Olympic village a couple blocks away, several parcels in the area between Second and Seventh on Main seem poised for change.

“It really started with the Olympic village development, and then, when the community plan was approved, there was a bit of a frenzy,” Mr. Hendrix said.

Besides the VIVO site, there have been constant rumours the past couple of months that the City Centre Motor Hotel has been sold to someone wanting to build a condo project. City staff say there has also been an inquiry about that site, and three others on the stretch. As well, Aquilini Development owns the block between Second and Third.

And a project at Main and Seventh, by developer Arno Matis, has already been approved.

City Centre owner Polo Yang said it is not true that he has sold the site, but he does acknowledge that he gets constant inquiries from realtors and that the potential for rezoning the land as made him consider what he could do with it.

“Maybe a joint venture with a developer. Because now the hotel business, there are too many hotels in the downtown. We cannot make it,” said Mr. Yang, who has owned the motel since 1989.

As a result of all the activity, city planner Matt Shillito is going to city council this fall with a more detailed framework for the area.

That framework will have more specifics about heights – likely six stories for most of the street, with bookends of nine stories in the south and 11 in the north.

It is also going to include a plan for how to use money from developer fees in the area. Ideally, some would go to creating cultural facilities – the kind that an organization like VIVO could use.

“The plan gives us some encouragement to retain arts spaces,” Mr. Shillito said. The question is what happens to VIVO between the time it has to move and the years until new arts spaces are created.

 

 

Categories: Uncategorized

  • Randy Chatterjee

    Nice work seeking comment for the article from the REST of the Mount Pleasant Community: all of the other small businesses feeling the squeeze, the BIA, the thousands of residents around Main, the Resident Association, and the city-chartered liaison group that is overseeing the implementation of the 2010 Mount Pleasant Community Plan.

    Oh, and about “condo buildings continue to go up and sell out around the Olympic village”…what’s your data on this one? MLS, realtors, and developers are telling a far different story, and sales in the Village itself are proof of the pudding. Almost every new project is in slow motion, waiting for the market to turn, and even the Rize rezoning has never been enacted.

  • LER

    Maybe when the facility at Fraser & Broadway is finished and the DTES people move into the Biltmore and major crime comes back into the area because of the new lowlifes and the crime that they will certainly bring back to the area then the developers will stay away and leave Mt. Pleasant alone. WHAT WILL IT TAKE TO SAVE MT. PLEASANT?

  • Julia

    take this story and lay it over every commercial district that is coming up in transit, planing, density conversations. How to transition to the brave new world has received zero consideration. I think it is views as collateral damage.

  • Roger Kemble

    Vancouver actually has a plan to try to create new cultural spaces in Mount Pleasant out of the money it will extract from developers for new projects.” That is indeed a positive sign.

    But . . . if what “Randy @ #1” says that, “Almost every new project is in slow motion, waiting for the market to turn, and even the Rize rezoning has never been enacted” is true then that is a good sign: a planning re-thinq is just what the city needs in the early part of the twentieth century!

    Rize, and indeed, all recent local architecture, if indeed it can be called that, is firmly fixed in the Honey Boo Boo style, (obese, bloated, ugly, self-trivializing), I include Marine Gateway and the Oakridge elevated, gated horror among that category too.

    Those locals that claim to practice, what the dictionary still terms architecture, are unworthy of appellation architect and should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves for dragging a once noble art into such disrepute.

    WHAT WILL IT TAKE TO SAVE MT. PLEASANT?LER @ #2. Certainly not a pack of local thugs blasting mindlessly against anything higher than six floors (does that included churches and clock towers?).

    And unfortunately because of the lack of local respect for the art of architecture we have these gangs of anti-urbanists flouting any semblance of good urban design . . .

    http://members.shaw.ca/theyorkshirelad72/working.mount.pleasant.html

    . . . obsessing against towers and the transit thugs who believe every urban problem can be solved with more tunnels and shiny trinkets.

    So far as the tinketeers are concerned may I refer them to the Khanacademy (click above) that may awaken the slumbering, corpulence UBC to alternatives rather than dragging the hoards out to the Point every time some creature wants to sound off; and SFU may well heed that advice except at least it has the good grace to diversify downtown.

    But then we have ignorant thugs still shrill over AGW which makes hope for a twenty-first century Vancouver pretty remote!

  • teririch

    Vision Cllr Kerry Jang and his definition of affordable housing:

    http://www.straight.com/news/418221/vision-vancouver-accused-misleading-residents-use-term-affordable-housing

  • Ms Jones

    Wow, terririch… #5
    That’s the true face of a… Vision Vancouver Jang!

  • jenables

    Affordability is something someone can afford. Riight. What a great way to justify everything you’ve done – who cares what effect it has as long as SOMEONE can afford to buy it! Because people BUYING things is what really matters, right? Well, at least he isn’t being deceitful about what an uncaring jerk he is, I’ll give him that.

  • Roger Kemble

    The term “affordability” came into general use in Vancouver in the early ’70’s with the advent of the co-ops. One of the first was the Alder Bay co-op in Alder Bay area of False Creek next to Granville Island.

    It was a great deal especially for families. Supposedly when the kids grew up and moved out the occupants were expected to down size or move out.

    I have personal knowledge that some people weaseled themselves on to the co-op council and stayed way beyond their welcome. That level of quasi-corruption has become the norm.

    I don’t know what the situation is now: I have lost touch.

    As for Jang he is typical: probably not corrupt but a sharp shooter nevertheless. He has not experienced the effects of unaffordability, lacks the imagination to empathize and probably couldn’t care less if he could.

    Twenty-first century is replete in such well-dressed, coddled, inexperienced little minds who, for some reason or another, have never had to scrape for a meal.

    Of course, Jang is a Jerk! But we allow such organisms to wield power to over us. He is not alone!

  • teririch

    @Roger Kemble #8:

    I guess when you are pulling in over $200 K/ year it is hard to understand why someone making $30K stuggles to find decent accomodation in this city.

    (Personally, I am bewildered as to why anyone would sit through one of his courses unless hog tied and no choice)

    I am truly curious as to who can afford to pay $1,200+ for a studio or $2,600 for a one bedroom. Most working people in this city don’t take home $2600/month.

    And we wonder why the population growth, especially for families is heading to Surrey, Port Moody, Coquitlam, Maple Ridge, etc. The last bastions of true affordability.

    Jang just proved he is so out of touch with the realities the vast majority face – which beggs the question- if he cannot wrap his mind around it, then how can he ‘work’ to impove it.

    It also make you wonder if the balance of the Vision brigade feel the same, as they all work/think and vote lcok step.

    No wonder the developers love them. They are making millions off those that cannot afford….rent.

    This also should also be a real wake-up call for the DTES residents.

  • West End Gal

    teri #9
    “Jang just proved he is so out of touch with the realities the vast majority face”
    He was always like that. It’s only now after 5 years of sucking up at the trough that he shows his real face. Like all of the others (Vision Vancouver Councillors/ commissioners/ trustees)

  • Roger Kemble

    Talking of artist groups struggling, I see the VAG are at it again: these people are relentless and will keep at it until all of someone else’s money is spent . . .

    What is all this about an RFQ: request for qualifications? Is this a twist on the old RFP: request for for proposals?

    In any event it’s a long cry for the days of good architecture: Toronto City Hall awarded by open competition to Finnish architect Viljo Revell in 1964: arguably still Canada’s finest city hall, if not finest building period! 



    Some of the world’s great buildings started by open competition: Sidney Opera House, Liverpool Cathedral.

    The selection committee’s personnel disturb me: Terry Hui is just another spec builder. Michael Audain is nothing more than a Gerry-builder from the suburbs whose chosen architect is so noncommittal he may not fit the appellation Honey Boo Boo but, nevertheless, is so cool, his head so swollen, he floats inches above the ground oblivious and with absolutely nothing architectural to say, 



    And that is not art! 



    Honey Boo Boo is the over indulged child of a notorious television family of no particular character: obese, bloated, ugly, and self-trivializing!

    That characterizes recent Vancouver architecture to a tee: the proposed Marine Gateway, Oakridge and the completed big W: all bland, obese! 



    I purposely accuse those who have pretensions to build this recent city. They may like to call it architecture but it is not architecture. It is obese, bloated, ugly, and self-trivializing: Honey Boo Boo.

    And that is where the VAG RFQ selection committee is now.

    It needs to be brought down a peg or two with a resounding bump. Go home and find a useful place for yourselves! 



    The sooner the public rises to stop these arrogant self-appointed paper shufflers the sooner real artists, real architects and real builders will be able get on with what they do best: building a real city. 



    In the mean time we are stuck with Honey Boo Boos. 



    PS VPL main branch was selected by a very suspicious (Gordon Campbell) public vote: that is why it is a national joke!

    These are my views of the VAG situation as published in the G&M yesterday. Emphasis: give real artists a chance!

  • Roger Kemble

    All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident.
    Arthur Schopenhauer, Philosopher, 1788-1860

  • Randy Chatterjee

    One thing is now clear.

    A week after my initial posting and request for clarification, there is not one peep again about this article’s false and misleading assertion “condo buildings continue to go up and sell out around the Olympic village.”

    So, we can now take it as truthful–as reported by the REBGV–that condo sales continue their 19-month unremitting plummet against 10-year sales volumes, and the False Village Up a Creek is no exception in the total collapse of the LM condo market.

    The US condo market sales peaked in 2006, but prices did not go into free fall until 2008. Sales started sliding here in February 2012. Just saying.

  • Lewis N. Villegas

    Affordability is something someone can afford.
    Jenables

    Wrong (which is what Jenables is saying too). Affordability is something that EVERYONE can afford. That feeling of largess, expansion ins, we can go on forever because our economy is strong and our government knows how to keep it that way!

    The came the 1980s… Regan, Thatcher and Mulroney. Oh Boy! Corporate profits for every corporation no matter what. No matter that our neighbourhoods are being put on the sales block and chopped to death for off-shore investors.

    Stop. We can doiuble the population of the city and build nothing higher than 4-storey on the arterials.

    Why the arterials?

    Because that is where we need to reinvent transit sot hat EVERYONE rides transit to work, rather than drive.

    And Because that is where we need to prove that we can build walkable neighbourhoods, livable (arterial) streets and affordable cities.

    Duh…

  • brilliant

    Yet another sad legacy of Vision Vancouver’s bending over for every developer in town.

  • Roger Kemble

    We can double the population of the city” Wow, Lewis @ #14, that is so yesterday!

    You may not have noticed, the so 1950’s pop projections have tanked.

    The bloom is off the rose for Honey Boo Boo land.

    There are no jobs!

    From sea to shining sea its Tim Hortons all the way and still you have to keep old has-beens like me in luxury and fun ten floors up.

    There is much more to urban living than line-ups on arterials . . .

    http://members.shaw.ca/aguaflor/The.Urban.Village.html

    . . . but it it’ll need a bit of plat-tweeking.
    District of North Vancouver’s erstwhile planner Martin Chesworth, spent the better part of the sixties re-platting.

    There were some pretty weird plots but it can be done.

  • teririch

    @Lewis N. Villegas:

    That quote, ” Affordability is something someone can afford” was not jenables but a direct quote from Cllr. Kerry Jang.

    It is listed in the article that I attached in my #5 comment.

    He also goes on to say that if you can’t afford to buy then you rent. (Doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure that one out).

    But what happens when you can’t afford to rent a $1200 studio or $2600 one bedroom? Like I said, Jang is so out of touch with the realities that the average person faces on a day to day basis.

    They cannot continue the destruction of ‘affordable’ units in order to replace them with towers that are out of reach, rent wise, for the many.

  • jenables

    Teri look at which communities they want to radically change – the ones you can still get cheap rent in. I’m surprised they didn’t make a killarney community plan! Next year, right…

  • teririch

    @jenables #18:

    I know, and I just don’t get it.

    It is like Vision wants to force families and or low income persons out of the city and leave it to the ‘rich (investors) and famous’.

    If you are paying $2600/month in rent – that means you would need to be pulling in somewhere around $45K gross. Now that is just rent and not your living expenses on top of it.

    I was past that monolithic monstrosity being built on Main and about 5th or 6th (?? not sure)

    What a complete eyesore.

    Holy crap. Is this the best designers can come up with? They, along with what is being banged up at the Oly Village remind me of the old BC box houses – gone condo.

  • jenables

    Yes, I was in one of these newer buildings last night. Noticed a lot of things such as bathroom tile beautifully laid and sealed…right up to the top ledge where it was totally second rate. Wondered if it was on purpose! Also, crappy laminate flooring was already bubbling around the edges..a consequence of spilling “even a tiny amount of water” … I can’t imagine how these are going to look in twenty years. Do you think it is too expensive to build properly, or do you think it could be done with less profit? I’m curious… and wanting Vancouver to retain its buildings from another time more than ever.

  • teririch

    @jenables #20

    I would go with ‘profit’ and perhaps labour costs factor into it – materials not so much.

  • rph

    About a year or so back, and I cannot recall what developer quoted this, but they stated that their project was built with affordability in mind, so they have responded to the wishes of the market by using materials such as laminate, less expensive light fixtures and tiling, and open cupboards/shelving. I think they were even not putting a door on the den/second bedroom so buyers could later ‘customize”.

    You have to applaud their chutzpah. You asked for it, we delivered! Small cheap and perishable!

    All I could think at the time was wow, I wonder what else was skimped on behind the scenes, and what are these units going to look like in a dozen years.

    I can hardly wait (j/k) for the first project to be built which includes just one open space, and roughed in plumbing. I can even envision the marketing campaign. “You asked for a home where you could gradually design your own personal space, and again we have delivered!”

  • jenables

    Hey rph, they have those pretty much, first thing that comes to mind is lofts in gastown? Yes they have a bathroom and kitchen but the rest is all”industrial soul” haha

  • teririch

    @jenables & rph#22&23;

    Most people refer to it as renovations not ‘customizing’, and it costs more for better quality.

  • teririch

    This just out:

    Drop in housing starts in Vancouver and across Canada

    CMHC points to fewer condo starts

    Richard DettmanSeptember 10, 2013 7:16 am

    VANCOUVER (NEWS1130) – Housing starts fell in August, both nationwide and in Vancouver, as the market cooled.

    A federal agency says construction began on 1,530 homes in the Vancouver area, down 240 units or 14 per cent from a year earlier. The drop was entirely due to fewer condo starts, according to Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation.

    Multi-unit starts fell by 296 or 21 per cent, whereas single-detached homes rose by 56 units to 409.

    The picture is similar for BC cities overall for the first eight months of the year, with starts falling 1,198 to 17,479.

    Nationwide, housing starts in August posted their biggest drop in

  • waltyss

    As the stats show, developers are sensitive to the market. They don’t develop if they don’t think they can sell their units. Very simple really.
    The old housing stock that jenables is so fond of will remain for the time being until more money can be made converting it to structures with greater density.
    If you want cheaper units, you are going to see laminate floors and no crown mouldings, maybe even no dishwasher. What is your problem? Will it deteriorate? Yes, but people will renovate it as they can afford to.
    All I hear from jenables and teririch is keep up the old three story walkups because they are cheap. That there may not be enough of them does not seem to be a concern. Talk about nimbyism.

  • teririch

    @waltyss:

    Not cheap.

    Affordable and roomy. I know, you don’t get it – but ‘new’ doesn’t necessarily mean better.

    LOL on the nimbyism snark. Rich coming from the person who got out of sorts when the suggestion of thin streets be placed in their hood.

  • jenables

    Haha, I call it NITBY – not in their backyard! Seems the ones saying nimby! Against progress! don’t personally live in neighborhoods that already meet the definition for TOD such as mine. I read the greatest quote yesterday. Evil eye, I don’t know who you are but this sums it up so well.
    Evil EyeJUL 10, 2013 at 7:45 AMThe densification cult as practiced by Vision(less) Vancouver, developers and SkyTrain adherents is a false science. What is more damning that the “science of densification smacks of Lysenkoism.Lysenkoism is used metaphorically to describe the manipulation or distortion of the scientific process as a way to reach a predetermined conclusion as dictated by an ideological bias, often related to social or political objectives.

  • jenables

    Sort of like the oh so vague and oft quoted “a million people will be coming to live in metro Vancouver in the coming decades” yes, and a million people will die as well in the coming decades.. something I can say with certainly due to the loose definition of coming decades. Yet for some reason we need to make sure the city is rezoned and built out right now. Hmmmn.

  • jenables

    Waltyss, don’t you ever get tired of doggedly defending everything a govt does and believing everything they tell you? Haven’t you tried to think critically or follow the money when their promises are not fulfilled and the problems they pledged to fix worsen?

  • Brian

    @rph #22

    I know you were being sarcastic, but somehow that seems like a great idea to me. As in, a buyer can get a condo space for cheap, then build to suit their tastes and budget, and over time to defray the costs. Have we stumbled on a new model?

  • Roger Kemble

    http://www.mwardmusic.com/video.html

  • rph

    @Brian #31. The ultimate in starter homes! Yes, I can see the benefit of being able to buy cheap (or cheaper) and then upgrading as you go along.

    Of course the big problem with that is you would end up with ongoing construction projects in the building, replete with noise, dust, and trades traffic.

    @waltyss #26. I worry that developers who put in the cheapest possible building materials with short best-before dates, are constructing future ghettos. Simply to maximize developer profit, are we moving towards cheap is the new norm? There is a line between “market sensitive” and constructing the quick, the bad, and the shoddy.

    Are we allowing (or encouraging) developers to cross that line under the guise of selling affordable housing? If we keep going down that slope then we will have a mass of 300 sq ft shells with shared bathrooms.

    And maybe that is what the future holds in unaffordable Vancouver. Still a bit sad though.

  • teririch

    @jenables #29:

    ‘Metro Vancouver’ includes the surrounding areas, like North Vancouver, Surrey, Delta, Maple Ridge etc.

    Surrey will out grow Vancouver in the very near future, not just in population, but constuction and jobs.

    We only have around 600K people in ‘Vancouver proper’. That 1 million people influx will be spread out.

  • teririch

    @rph #33:

    Good example of cheap materials – the Oly Village social housing units.

    And they have had ongoing issues because of it.

  • Kenji

    @29

    Uh, why wouldn’t you plan for population growth? Have you seen any projections that the Earth population is going down?

    Seems to me like thinking about rational ways to handle more folks, and then doing zoning, is just prudent groundwork. Sprawl is fine in places like Kelowna which has pretty well no urban feel to begin with, so the endless strip malls off hwy 17 don’t bother me much.

    But Vancouver is relatively tiny, hemmed in by the water and mountains that are so much part of our appeal to incoming residents. With a relative dearth of land, it would be appalling if any Vancouver govt just said, “hm, well, if they show up we’ll deal with it then, maybe” and then returned to perusing the sports page.

  • brilliant

    @Kenji 36-given that the media is full of stories about millennia trapped in dead end jobs why arecwe even thinking of importing a million people in the first place?

  • Kenji

    @brilliant

    Believe me, I would be happy if no one moved to Vancouver ever again. I had to drive the Knight Street bridge to get to a job appointment – like, 2 km? took over 45 minutes. Then there was that time I forgot it was a weekday (vacation brain) and came back to town from Seattle at 330 pm and was stuck on the freeway for 2 hours.

    Not to mention wondering how much capacity we actually have to give a million more people water to drink, electricity to power their toothbrushes, and capacity to flush their poops.

    But, you know, I am not a fantasist. If Metro Vancouver commissions a report and that report says that there are a million people coming here by 2040, what am I supposed to do, ask them why they are thinking of doing that?

    They are going to come here because it has the least horrible winters in Canada, and because Canada is less horrible than the United States or Mexico, and because people (worldwide, not Canadians) are still emitting babies like goddamn lawn sprinklers and they are going to want to live somewhere.

    If only, say, half a million people come by 2040, well, then we’re way ahead of the game.

  • Kirk

    Kind of an interesting topic on population projections. Maybe Detroit predicted during the 50’s that they’d have 50 million people living there now. The economy changed and now you can buy a house for a hundred bucks.

    I wonder what data our population estimates are based on. As China modernizes, I’d think less Chinese would come here. What are the growth industries that young people are getting into? Will Calgary eventually surpass Vancouver? Remember the brain drain?

  • jenables

    I wonder too, what development mogul funded that study. A million people. Doesn’t sound very scientific to me. Still, last time I checked there was no shortage of things to buy. If we keep this up it will be a ghost town anyways, a snapshot of ugly, hastily built, overpriced architecture of the early twenty first century.