Frances Bula header image 2

Brigade of academics petition city hall not to raise heights in DTES, Chinatown

January 19th, 2011 · 56 Comments

Never seen anything like this before. A large group of profs, many with in-depth knowledge of gentrification and housing dynamics, have mobilized to oppose allowing taller new buildings in the Downtown Eastside and Chinatown.

Dear Mayor Robertson and Councillors:

Re: January 20, 2011 Council Meeting on the Historic Area Height Review Update.

We, the undersigned, are professors at Simon Fraser University and the University of British Columbia with an interest in the fate and well being of Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside neighbourhood.

We therefore note with concern the recommendation before Council to change the allowable heights in the ‘Historic Area’, which includes much of the Downtown Eastside. The effect of this will be to increase permitted heights on several sites. Assuming, as seems inevitable, that this facilitates market housing, we fear that this will lead to a further reduction of affordable housing in the surrounding area, particularly that of the residential hotels. This will have a devastating effect on low-income residents and the continued vitality and viability of the neighbourhood as a whole. We believe that planning in the Downtown Eastside should have at its centre the interests of the most vulnerable, rather than risk further destabilizing a community that is already facing intensifying pressures.

Market development, if wisely managed with the insights of the low-income community, can bring benefits to the Downtown Eastside. However, it can, and has, also led to increasing rents, conversions and displacement. We encourage Council not to proceed with the Height Review until a more thorough community based planning process is conducted, a cornerstone of which should be the improvement and protection of the affordable housing stock of the Downtown Eastside.

Yours sincerely,

Nicholas Blomley, Ph.D.

Professor, Geography, SFU

Elvin Wyly, Ph.D.

Associate Professor, Geography;

Chair, Urban Studies Program, UBC

David Ley, Ph.D.

Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada,

Canada Research Chair,

Professor and Head of Department, Geography, UBC

Samir Gandesha, Ph.D.

Assistant Professor, Humanities, SFU

Eugene McCann, Ph.D.,

Associate Professor, Geography, SFU

Jeff Derksen, Ph.D.

Associate Professor, English, SFU

Nicolas Kenny, Ph.D.

Assistant Professor, History, SFU

Dara Culhane, Ph.D.

Associate Professor, Anthropology, UBC

Jamie Peck, Ph.D.

Canada Research Chair in Urban & Regional Economy

Professor, Geography, UBC

Donald Grayston, PhD, former director, Institute for the Humanities, SFU; theologian and public educator

Derek Gregory, Ph.D., Professor, Geography, UBC

Fellow of the British Academy; Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada; Dr. h.c (Heidelberg); Dr. h.c. (Roskilde)

Steve Collis, Ph.D.,

Associate Professor; Associate Chair, English, SFU

Mónica Escudero, Ph.D., Senior Lecturer

Spanish Language Program, Language Training Institute

Humanities Department SFU

Graham Riches, Ph.D.,

Emeritus Professor, Social Work, UBC

Elise Chenier, Ph.D.

Associate Professor, History, SFU

Janice Matsumura, Ph.D.,

Associate Professor, History, SFU

Paige Raibmon, Ph.D.,

Associate Professor, History, UBC

Endar Brophy, Ph.D.

Assistant Professor, Communications, SFU

Gary Teeple, Ph.D,

Professor, Sociology;

Director of Labour Studies, Morgan Centre for Labour Studies.

Clint Burnham, Ph.D.

Associate Professor, English, SFU

Thomas Kemple, Ph.D.

Associate Professor, Sociology, UBC

Sunera Thobani, Ph.D.,

Associate Professor, Women’s and Gender Studies, UBC

Willeen Keough, Ph.D.

Associate Professor, Department of History, SFU

Karen Ferguson, Ph.D.,

Associate Professor, Urban Studies/History, SFU

Pilar Riano-Alcala

Associate Professor, Liu Institute/Social Work, UBC

Mark Leier, Ph.D.,

Professor, History, SFU

Valerie Raoul, Ph.D.,

Emerita Professor, Women’s Studies and French, UBC

Catherine Murray, Ph.D.,

Professor, Chair, Gender, Sexuality & Women’s Studies, SFU

Shauna Butterwick, Ph.D.,

Associate Professor, Department of Educational Studies, UBC

Categories: Uncategorized

  • Tom

    Sean #46…..Mother Theresa you are not, so please save us the lecture.

    The fact of the matter is that you and Anton think you know what’s best for people, and having formed your opinions, have no real desire to listen to others, as you like to claim you would, if you were in power.

    That in and of itself is brutally pathetic.

    So, here you are attempting to lecture, instead of to listen…..and you expect people to vote for you in November.

    As I said in my previous post, Vision-Lite.

    Disgusting.

  • Tom

    TFH @48

    Re (2):

    What I find amazing with Pattison is how untouchable he is is every sense. The recent building announcement is just the icing on the cake btw.

    The guy operates in BC which may have more eco-environmental pain in the ass lobby groups than any other place on earth, but yet:

    1) he is a majority owner of one of the largest coal shipping terminals in the Western Hemisphere.

    2) he is a majority shareholder of one of the largest tree-cutting operations in the hemisphere…which he was the architect of creating by merging 2 companies several years ago.

    3) he owns Ripley’s Believe It or Not, which features America’s #1 Aquarium….and may or may not still acquire sea creatures, that would never fly in Vancouver…

    …take that all of those who oppose the Vancouver Aquarium.

    4) He owns multiple packaging companies which make all that stuff that continues to pile up in our landfills.

    And not one of these so-called groups is camped outside of his office on a daily basis.

    Then….our mayor and council, supposedly the greenest on earth, let Lord Jimmy, of wealth derived from the very things they supposedly despise, build whatever the hell he wants, without any real consultation.

    Go figure.

  • Bill McCreery

    @ Mac 50.

    Not correct. It was TEAM in 1973 to 74 that

    “…established [the policy and initiated the 1st of a series of] community development plans for every community in Vancouver based in part on consultation with the communities and development that would not destroy the culture and flavor of these communities”.

    Mike was a TEAM Alderman then. He continued this process, as I recall, during his term as Mayor.

  • Ron

    Gassy Jack’s Ghost @#20
    Thanks for the figure. One question would be how much of that 5,500 units would be reserved for future social housing? Would that reflect the current ration of non-market to market housing in the neighbourhood? (I’m not sure what that is). Presumably there won’t be a moratorium on new social housing in the DTES – so whatever proportion of marketing housing would offset the impact of social housing (economically) to the neighbourhood will always be playing “catch-up”.

    If the debate is really about “architectural style” and streetwalls, then that should be the issue – but it doesn’t seem to be tha case. I just hear about the poor being pushed out or the rents rising, etc….
    I hear about diversifying the mix in the neighbourhood, etc., I don’t hear the proponents speaking against Disneyfying heritage or making streets look “faux heritage” or touting how London is allowing tall towers in The City amid the heritage buildings there.

    I suppose that one “problem” is that is you are to introduce diversity within the exitsing parameters, then you may have to introduce restrictions on the exitsing uses (i.e. restrict future social housing). That you be setting yourself up for a bigger battle than adding additional density to the neighbourhood.

  • tf

    Sean #46
    I quote – “And so the tragedy continues, with those most comfortable condemning the least fortunate to live in Calcutta-like conditions right in our downtown, without hope of change or rescue.”
    Who are you to speak for the “least fortunate”?
    You speak of what you don’t know –
    From your messages, I can turn it around and say that you sound like one of the comfortable speaking oh-so-highly about the least fortunate. Until you can say that you’ve worked with, talked with, walked with any of those “least fortunate” and can actually report back on what “they” say, all your words are coming from ideology and not reality.
    Take direction from Emery Barnes – live for a month on the street at the welfare rate and then get back to us with some actual experience.
    Attend a Downtown Eastside Neighbourhood Council meeting and you’ll see what the term “community activist” truly means.
    Thanks.

  • David

    tf – a bit simplistic: go one one month on welfare and we turn into a philosopher-leader like Emery Barnes stature – um I don’t think so. IF a society is measured by how they treat those less fortunate (ie dual diagnosed: mental illness/addiction or whatever combo is most prevalent in the DTES) then what they need is someone like Bickerton to say what he says so that adequate supports can be put into place to assist those that are ill. Since I have HIV and Hep C and use too many drugs (as determined by me) does that make me an expert on building heights and community development? I like what Bickerton says.