Frances Bula header image 2

Community finally rises up to protest imminent destruction of bowling alley, Ridge Theatre on Arbutus

October 13th, 2012 · 117 Comments

I’ve been wondering if anyone cared about the plans to raze the corner of 16th and Arbutus, home for decades to the Ridge Theatre and theVarsity Ridge Bowling Centre.

It got sold to Cressey Developments in June 2011 for $15,584,701, in a move that surprised some, since it seemed as though the theatre and bowling alley were safe when Meinhardt’s grocery store signed a 25-year lease a few years before. But Meinhardt’s shut down under strange circumstances, and owner Sondra Green (who had bought the property in 1971, as far as I can tell) sold it shortly after to Cressey, which promptly announced plans for condos.

It’s been hard to get anyone at council interested in this issue. I’ve asked about it a couple of times and always been told there’s “nothing we can do.” Given the lack of apparent community concern, it seemed as though there were only a few nostalgia cranks who took an interest in this.

I guess I and others were wrong on this, to judge from the letter below that I received yesterday.

Dear Mayor Robertson and Councillors:

On the evening of October 9 I attended the meeting of the Development Permit Board at City Hall from 3:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. on behalf of the Kitsilano Arbutus Residents Association (KARA) where I sit on the Steering Committee for the Arbutus Ridge development.  Along with many others I was registered to speak to the Arbutus Ridge Cressey Developments application on behalf of KARA, to raise my concerns about the impact of the project on our neighbourhood, both in terms of the flaws of the building and the process by which it arrived at the Development Permit Board for approval on October 9.

In doing so I received the extraordinary gift of an education I would like to share with you.

As the Vancouver Sun, CTV, Global Television and other media outlets reported, about 50 bowlers from age 10 to people in their 80s walked from the bowling alley at 15th and Arbutus several kilometres to City Hall.  There they were joined by about 30 others who could not walk that distance, including several in wheelchairs, who had come by bus or were driven by others.  The audience included the legally blind accompanied by guide dog, and others who were developmentally and physically challenged.  A 93 year old bowler was sitting in front of me.  Some were so physically challenged they had to almost crawl up City Hall steps, but were determined to be there.


Also present were at least 40 pre-registered speakers, signed up to address the serious flaws both in the process of how the City planning department excluded citizen input to arrive at a completed project, and in the proposal itself, asking for discretionary approval to build a fifth storey making it by far  the highest building on the Arbutus corridor since it also sits on the high point of the ridge.

As the bowlers arrived they also signed up to speak and by 3:00 p.m. 100 speakers were on the list.  By 4:00 p.m, after several additional stacks of chairs were brought in, there was still standing room only in the meeting room and in the overflow room behind it. The Chair of the meeting asked the younger people who could to give up their chairs for those who needed them more, as City Hall’s supply of chairs was exhausted.  After 5:00 p.m. there was another infusion of people into the overflow room.

Why would all these elderly and physically challenged and mentally challenged people join the able bodied, the youth, the children, the residents of Kitsilano, many business people and professionals to spend hours in the hot and crowded meeting room at City Hall?

The answer was displayed at the meeting with such passion, with such raw emotion and distress as any I have seen in my professional life of more than 30 years as a psychologist.

The first speaker signalled the reason. He said the flawed process at City Hall failed to understand how deeply wounded the citizens of Kitsilano were by the actions of City Hall by both the planning staff and the politicians who had ignored the community, and by the actions of Cressey Developments.

For four hours the speakers poured their hearts out into the room.  In an extraordinarily moving way that could not help but touch even hearts of stone, they told how the bowling alley community had literally saved their lives.  It had provided a safe, welcoming healthy social environment to newcomers; to the elderly for whom it was their only social contact and outing; to the young girl who bonded with her grandfather who came to watch her bowl every week ( and how the people at the bowling alley supported her when her beloved grandpa had a stroke); to young children, including a 10 year old who got up to speak; to mums who knew their children were safe in the bowling alley; to university students who brought their dates to bowl; to the physically challenged, some of them middle aged, who got up and began their presentation with the words, “I am a Special Olympian, and the Varsity Ridge Bowling Alley is my home and my family.”

One of these Special Olympians had a big poster of stick figures of David and Goliath and explained in his own effective way how the bowlers were David and the City and Cressey were Goliath, who needed to be slain so the people could win.  A director of a pre-school held up a poster on “Saving the Bowling Alley” made by her 3 and 4 year old charges and told how central the bowling alley was to her little ones.

We learned that 12,000 school children use the bowling alley as part of the curriculum and that millions of dollars for the CKNW Orphans Fund, for breast cancer and many other charities are raised through the bowling alley.

People who were afraid to speak in public got up shaking and made their pleas.

Interspersed with all that were the architects, engineers, lawyers and business people from the community who got up to rationally express their distress with the actions of Cressey and City Hall. They expressed how the City was giving away the farm of City taxpayer owned property to Cressey and were achieving nothing in return.  These pleas were heartfelt and full of passion coming from long term residents who had paid up to five decades of taxes only to see their neighbourhood diminished for profit to the developer.

Most egregious of all were the actions in the room of the City planners who had worked with the developer for over a year without consultation with neighbours and then presented a fully blown project that allowed huge discretionary relaxation at the expense of the neighbourhood for zero returns.  They then had the audacity to claim that other conditions they were imposing on the project for cosmetic changes to the building were meeting the needs of “neighbourliness.”  These City planners have zero concept of what neighbourliness means.

But, if these City planners had the eyes to see, and the ears to hear it, and the heart to feel it, neighbourliness was in the room at City Hall from 3:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.  What was in the room was community, alive, deep, profound—the kind of social cohesion and intergenerational compassion all leaders in Canada are looking for in a 21st century big city that is tending towards alienation.

The response of the City Hall planners (and some of their advisors around the table) to this human and priceless example of what all of us want our communities to be, was instructive.  When asked by an advisor to the Board whether the idea of including a bowling alley in the plans of the current building was considered, the clear and unequivocal answer was that it was “uneconomic” and so it was dismissed as irrelevant to the task at hand, namely, to give the developer maximum economic benefit from the site.

The question hanging in the room was: “Uneconomic to whom and by how much?”

The planners who had spent their presentation time in addressing how hard they had worked at “neighbourliness” by increasing setbacks and other minimal tinkering such as a dispute about whether  privacy barriers should be 24 inches or 36 inches high, repeatedly praised themselves for their hard work.  They had no concept of how their insensitive posturing was being heard by the audience.  Every time the word “neighbourliness” was repeated, laughter and tears broke out among the people who had come out in such great numbers on their own time to see how their City staff represented them.

The planners were speaking of cement, of plants, of setbacks into a room full of people who were a community filled with deeply felt emotion about losing the one thing that made their lives meaningful.  It was truly a failure of human compassion in the face of an extraordinary slice of Canadian excellence  in exactly that—human compassion.  They were breaking the hearts of Canadians who again and again referred to Ken and Judy Hagen, the owners of the Varsity Ridge Bowling Centre, as surrogate parents, and their angels, deserving of the Order of Canada for what they did.

When the advisors spoke they all acknowledged that they were moved by what they had heard, but then most of them pushed that aside to say they were here to represent their particular constituency and as such they supported approval of the application.  They could not see beyond their own narrow specialization to recognize that approval that night meant demolition of the bowling alley and the destruction of the dreams and hopes of so many who had spoken.  They were doing their job, but it was their humanity that was on the table, and they walked away from it.  Fortunately there were a few advisors who said they could not approve the proposal and suggested deferral.  Hopefully, this meant giving time for thoughtful consideration of what they had heard, but some of us wondered whether it was just a way of making a decision outside that room, where people had made it so clear the project should not go ahead until wiser, fairer, consideration had been brought to bear.

When it came time for Board members to speak, hope for reasoned consideration was rekindled.  One member called himself “cranky,” by which he seemed to mean he saw through what was going on between the City planning staff and the developer, and said he felt the developer “had not earned” the right for discretionary approval of a fifth storey.  He was not, however, ready to reject the application and suggested deferral.  Another agreed that the case for approval had not been made, and he, too, suggested deferral.  The third Board member said he needed more information from staff about the height of other C-2 developments along the Arbutus corridor.  So they voted unanimously to defer the decision to the next regular meeting of the Board on October 22.

People walked away hopeful but confused.  Does this mean they’ll just approve it when we are not allowed to speak again?  When the developer has had time to use his influence to get the votes he needs?  When people who have invested so much energy in a flawed process work behind closed doors from the public to get the outcome they want?

So the issue comes back to the leaders of our City.  Regardless that the way the structure of the development approval process is set up so that people like the bowlers and their interests are shunted aside, the question of your humanity remains.

Can you ignore the people who put you in office and allow their priceless institution at the heart of your community to be destroyed, now that you know it is for ECONOMIC reasons.  Or are you prepared to speak up with courage for these people, for the 10 year olds to the 93 year olds?  Are you going to pay attention to a petition with 10,000 names on it, or dismiss it as the planning department has done by saying that they can’t tell a developer whose project they have finessed whom he should have as a tenant?  Are you prepared to intervene to find a creative solution to solve this problem by engaging with the citizens where the real wealth of creative ideas resides as shown by what they said at the meeting, and in the hundreds of letters they sent in?

Mr. Robertson, as our Mayor and our representative, we need you to speak with courage, with decency, and for right action.  We are not willing to hear you quote the rules in the face of your people’s deep human and profound distress.  We need you to defend and promote the excellence of a vibrant, cohesive, compassionate neighbourhood that will be the envy of all Canadians, full of vigorous and successful citizens, as well as the most vulnerable among us, as was displayed at this meeting, just as readily  as you support the homeless and others who need your help.

City Councillors, are you, too, prepared to stand up for what is right rather than what is bureaucratically expedient?

Are you willing?  We are waiting for your answer.

Respectfully,

Geraldine Schwartz

Member of the Steering Committee
Kitsilano Arbutus Residents Association

Categories: Uncategorized

  • Jay

    There is a contingent here that would be happy with no population growth in the CoV. I’m wondering if that’s possible. Would the city be able to sustain itself financially if there were no new development and very little new sources of income for the city?

  • spartikus

    London boroughs aren’t neighbourhoods, but akin to municipalities here.

    Point being central London, which has a much higher population than Greater Vancouver let alone the City of Vancouver, has higher density.

    I agree that suburbs here would also benefit greatly by density.

  • gmgw

    Having said what I said earlier about the impending and likely inevitable tragedy that will be the loss of the Ridge Theatre, I must in all honesty acknowledge that what is killing the Ridge and the Granville 7, and killed the Hollywood, and is killing single-screen mom-and-pop theatres all across North America, is technological change. The big changeover to digital projection in movie theatres, forced by the studios and distribution companies, in turn forces theatre owners to adapt or die, in a sense. Conversion to digital represents a substantial outlay of cash, enough that only the chains can really afford it. For small operations like the Hollywood it represents a near-insurmountable obstacle. So one could argue that a Darwinian process is taking place in the film exhibition industry that will leave no theatre untouched.

    It thus becomes necessary to have a discussion about the inherent worth of the single-screen theatre concept and whether it is still a valid cultural institution. Further to that discussion is another discussion re possible funding models. In other words, do movie theatres — small operations retain enough cultural/artistic worth that there might be a valid argument for government funding of certain theatres (or perhaps at least funding for technological upgrades, if the theatre can be proven to be important to the micrccosmic or macrocosmic community which it serves), be it local, provincial, or federal? Is there a public will to validate this concept? This sort of funding model is already in place for non-profits like the Cinemathque and the VanCity. Or should we just let another cultural institution fade away, or simply die off, along with the aging generation that still values going to the movies as a valid cultural activity (as opposed to mere mindless entertainment)?

    Here in London (and the UK as a whole) (no, I’m not back yet) the digitization tsunami appears to have not yet struck with the same force it has in North America. In the same way e-books have not yet caught on to the same extent they have in N.A. and many small independent bookstores are still operating; some are even thriving (though by no means all). I have no knowledge of arts-funding models in the UK, although one of the big knocks on the UK’s current more-austerity-for-the-poor-but-don’t-tax-the-rich Tory government is its determination to reduce funding for everything that doesn’t jibe with core Tory values. But it’s only a question of time till the same scale of digital change begins to happen here in the UK as well. One thing is certain– in Vancouver and Canada we are light-years away from a consideration of some of the ideas I’ve outlined here. But as a lifelong lover of cinematic art I think it’s a discussion that needs to happen.

    One last note– it’s a pity that it wasn’t Frances who wrote the Globe stories outlining the impending closure of the Granville 7 and the threat that poses to the VIFF, because I think that’s the biggest arts story of the year and that’s a discussion that urgently needs to be held. The loss of the VIFF would leave a huge rent in this city’s cultural fabric. What does that say about us, and about the future of the arts in this city? Hello? Frances?
    gmgw

  • waltyss

    gmgw: I appreciate your thoughtful comments but at the same time there is a King Canute element to what you suggest.
    I can just imagine the reaction if the CofV were suggest that it take over and subsidize a movie theatre, at least one that is showing commercial movies. As it is now, there is a certain contingent that is bashing them for being either the second coming of the Soviet Gulag or in the pocket of developers or both.
    The King Canute aspect comes from the fact that technogical change drives many changes that some of us older folk do not appreciate. While I like going to movies, at $12.50 a pop, I am also content with my Apple TV and 40″ HD screen (and popcorn that costs about $1.50 for a packet of Orville Redenbacher).
    While movies can be a great art form, so is the theatre. But in Vancouver in the last year we saw the demise of the Vancouver Playhouse Theatre company. Some of it had to do with what was on offer, some to do with theatre scheduling and some to do with really uncomfortable seats at the Playhouse (and the QE Theatre, for that matter).
    We are also a city on the edge of the rainforest and at the foot of the mountains where people are more likely to take a hike than go to the movies or theatre.
    Nevertheless, something has gotten a number of people riled up from the loss of the bowling alley and the theatre. In both cases, the problem is that what some people want to save does not fall within the range of amenities that most of us, I suspect, would agree the City should get involved in.

  • Everyman

    @gmgw 103
    I believe the Park and the Dunbar are converted to digital and 3-D, so it is possible for independent operators.

    @waltyss 104
    The city could offer tax breaks for theatres. As I mentioned earlier, they do it for religious buildings (which is a slap in the face to atheists IMHO).

  • Terry M

    Everyman 105
    Read Ms Jones 19 comment

    “What a interesting concept.
    Transforming every amenity/ community centre/ theatre/ bowling alley into a … church. The only way a neighborhood may afford anything in the future. No tax, sanctuary from developers… and Vision and Green Gregor. Just saying!”

    Essentially what you’re saying!

  • Jay

    Glissy, you are the last person here that I can understand, so that makes you the smartest person on this blog. Would the city be able to sustain itself financially if there were no new development and very little new sources of income for the city? And is there an optimum density for a city to sustain itself financially.

  • gmgw

    @waltyss ~104:
    I’m not talking about having the city take over and operate the Ridge or any other theatre. I think they’d make a botch of it if they did, and there’s no structure in pace to allow such a thing. What I’m saying is that some distinctive movie theatres– eg. the Ridge and the Hollywood, although it could also mean the last little theatre in a small Prairie town– should be recognized as valuable cultural amenities, important to the cultural fabric of a community, and as such eligible for some kind of funding help from one or more levels of government– be it operating/technological improvement grants, tax breaks or what-have-you– that enable it to continue as a viable operation.
    There are obvious problems with this idea. Funding is in place for non-profits like the Cinematheque, but I’m talking here about providing aid of some kind to for-profit businesses, however small, and there is no precedent for that as far as I know. In Paris, independent bookstores are eligible for aid from the city government, which recognizes that they provide intangible yet invaluable benefits to the community as a whole. But in North America and especially Canada we’re nowhere near that enlightened. Movie theatres are not thought of by most people in this country as cultural assets. They’re seen only as places you go on Friday night to see the latest Hollywood blockbuster while munching your popcorn. And big operators like Cineplex would probably cry foul if the little guys were given a helping hand– unfair subsidizing of the competition, you see.

    I don’t know. If I was Gregor Robertson I’d be on the phone right now with Alan Franey, saying “The VIFF is invaluable to this city and must be saved. How can we help?” Perhaps a deal could be worked out to keep the Granville 7 open, or even buy or lease it for use as a film exhibition centre for the VIFF and and the Cinematheque. Dream on. That kind of vision simply doesn’t exist in Vancouver, where the arts are subject to the same Darwinian analysis as gas stations and department stores. If a movie theatre is mean to survive it will. Period. Well, think what the Canadian publishing industry, for instance, would be like if the Canada Council played no role in its sustenance. And think what this city will be like without VIFF and Videomatica (another invaluable cultural asset that was allowed to quietly die) and independnt movie theatres. These discussions urgently need to happen. But I’m not holding my breath waiting for them to start. Welcome to Vancouver, the city that just keeps getting more and more ignorant.
    gmgw

  • Roger Kemble

    GMGW @ #103 y passim

    There is much, much more to community than a movie house and a bowling alley and we had better find out how to do it before thu man takes us over.

    There are dozens of ways to entertain the family out doors and in. But most important we must wrest our living habits from our preoccupation with gadgetry.

    A movie house is a movie house is a movie house is a movie house! A bowling alley is a bowling alley is a bowling alley is a bowling alley.

    If TCM has got us by the shorts at home then we had better do something about it pronto . . . usually it takes a dedicated few: i.e. KARA and back in the ’60’s I was a member of KARA when it was Kitsilano Area Resource Association and we stopped towers on the slopes despite D of P Bill Graham telling us how pretty they would look from a sail boat in the harbor.

    So hi-tech gossip aside we can take over the destiny of our communities if we have the will!

    Here in London (and the UK as a whole) (no, I’m not back yet)” Ooooooh haaaaa, wowee gmgw, how’z ya belly off for spots matie?

  • Joe Just Joe

    The city came close to leasing Storyeum for use as a bowling alley a couple of years ago. Instead it chose to go with an Eco fitness company that fell thru before it ever got off the ground. They’ve now leased the space to the VFS at a basement price of $7.50psf and provided out a built out allowance of $20psf.
    Heck the Playhouse is pratically sitting empty these days, they could convert it to a movie theatre, at least it would lose less money then it does now.

  • ThinkOutsideABox

    gmgw, there is precedent for that…

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2012/10/12/viff-granville-7.html

    “If we think about the future of quality cinema and we define that as being more than just Hollywood films, we all need to take note of these closures of cinemas. It is a concern,” he said, adding that other large cities with high real estate values provide incentives to keep screens open, because it can contribute to quality of life.

    On another note, I’m a little astonished by some of the small minded comments above such as the one suggesting people opt for outdoor physical activity instead of going to the movies. Since when are those mutually exclusive interests?

    The VIFF remains, it was well attended this year, over 300 films were screened and theaters were full. The opening gala party at the Salt building was also packed with people from a variety of social circles in the city – filled not just by filmmakers, or film-goers but a variety of everyone in the city who came to experience and share in culture. This year it was themed after Toronto based indo-Canadian director Deepa Mehta’s styling. I even recognized some firmly entrenched Vision Vancouver members at the opening gala, and the mayor even paid lip service to the closing of the theater at the closing gala. Besides free flowing drinks and food, partygoers were treated to live performances of Bhangra dance and music – aka CULTURE, something some here have little exposure to.

    What the closing of the Granville 7 means is that the festival won’t be hosting the films on downtown screens, having to go farther out.

    Also, all levels of government incentivize all sorts of different types of private enterprise all the time that only benefit some – take the STIR program for example; why would anyone on this thread want to suggest otherwise?

  • waltyss

    @Thinkoutsideabox #111. If you were referring to my comment about outdoor physical activity, reread what I said. I was not advocating what people should do, I was observing what they do do.The only point I was making was that people in this town are more likely to go hiking or skiing or go to a hockey game for that matter than go to the theatre, the symphony and for that matter, movies (although this last one still gets a lot of attraction but more of the movie blockbuster sort. So even the Fifth Avenue which is the (only) West Side movie multiplex has increasingly shown Hollywood blockbusters at the expense often of foreign or more arty films.

  • Roger Kemble

    The problem with a general discussion here is that a narrow coterie of obsessed fanatics who ultimately take over, be it bike lanes, transport technology or, apparently here, movies, and if you don’t fit in you are austracised.

    Currently the fear that a local neighborhood is about to loose its recreational facilities to a development has degenerated into the usual fanatics taking over: movie gedgetry.

    In the end these fanatics have virtually no influence on the general polity, due to their narrow obsessions and few numbers, but it does make mature conversations difficult.

    waltyss @ #112The only point I was making was that people in this town are more likely to go hiking or skiing or go to a hockey game for that matter than go to the theatre, the symphony and for that matter, movies . . .

    Your point is well taken. I’m happy the VIFF was a resounding success, I’m happy Point Grey will get its reduced traffic speed and bike lanes but I’d rather be sailing any day of the week!

  • Silly Season

    Besides the Rio, are there any other movie houses (those that that remain) that are looking at operating as “multi-functional” venues?

    Why not concerts, salons (whatever the hell those are! ;-), ArbutusRidgeX, book (what dat?!) readings, lectures, etc.

    Is there amarket in neighborhoods for this type of things—especially if the offerings are structured properly. Maybe differnet nights for Youth, Seniors, Hipsters, Boomers, etc?

  • Silly Season

    Reprieve for the bowling alley?!

    http://www.globaltvbc.com/vancouver+bowling+alley+spared+as+developers+bid+rejected+by+city/6442738753/story.html

  • Joe Just Joe

    We’ll have to see what the developer choses to do, they are still able to proceed with 4 storeys.

    http://www.vancouversun.com/sports/Vancouver+City+Hall+approves+condo+development+that+will/7429890/story.html

  • Silly Season

    Thanks, JJJ. Looks like it’s “not”.