Frances Bula header image 2
← →

News glut in last week before holidays: Shannon Mews, fuel tax, homeless plan,more

July 29th, 2011 · 10 Comments

Happy camping, all you municipal councillors who are fleeing this weekend for your annual break after having waded through an unusually large dumpster-load of city business. I couldn’t keep up. For those of you trying to so, a brief summary.

– Councillors voted 6-4 to approve the Wall company’s plans for Shannon Mews on the west side. Kind of stunning. No downscaling of plans, as some other developers have been forced to do so council could pass without having community in full revolt. Shaughnessy-Kerrisdale voters perhaps not so crucial to Vision Vancouver? (Charlie Smith seems to be the only one of us ancient boomers who managed to stay there til 2 a.m. His comprehensive report here.)

– Metro Van still slugging it out in Burnaby as I speak, okaying regional growth plan, fretting over TransLink plan that would include new fuel tax and two years of increased property tax.

– Homelessness/housing plan in Vancouver, which got attacked by both very left and somewhat right for not having enough social housing. Sets the stage for Vision’s campaign platform aimed at talking about affordable housing for the below-median income earners in the city.

– Toronto has a 72-hour hearing that includes singing, sock puppets, and more as citizens come out to plead for their libraries, pools, parks, garbage, etc., not to be decimated. Many across Canada follow by tweet.

Categories: Uncategorized

  • ThinkOutsideABox

    In contrast to Toronto, it’s clear how the public got “dumped” on this week that there were more important things for Vancouver city council to do than hear out the public.

    In the middle of day 2 of the Shannon Mews public hearing with a long list of people to speak, Gregor comes out and announces that it’s no longer appropriate for proxies to read statements on behalf of people who could not attend in person, and would instead accept the submissions for council to read behind closed doors. The reason given was because council didn’t have the opportunity to ask questions in person.

    That was an incredibly stupid excuse demonstrating again a shallow glib opinion for the public who should be able to hear those statements, and don’t get the chance when they are supposedly read behind closed doors, but how are we even confident that happens?

    Nevermind also that council stayed mostly silent through the numerous speakers, and neither can they pose questions to a piece of paper.

    Further on day 3, if speakers wanted to come back on a 3rd time to present new information it had to be in the form of a written submission, changing the process again while things are already proceeding.

    Gregor took cover by stating the city’s legal department was consulted about it, but this certainly didn’t demonstrate a transparent and accountable process. And no word if China was consulted this time as well.

  • Lari

    The city manager stripped all the detail out of the report as she has consistently done through her tenure. Staff aren’t permitted to write anything but sound bites and platitudes. Her motivation is protection of the Mayor and the Vision team, presumably on their orders. Hopefully some good candidates will emerge over the summer and the electorate will not be so cynical and disenfranchised that they stay home come November.

  • Everyman

    Vision Vancouver appears to be running roughshod over neighbourhoods in exactly the same way they lament Tom Campbell did when the viaducts bulldozed the inconsequential “Hogans Alley”. Holding kangaroo consultations doesn’t mean squat, if the outcome is a foregone conclusion. Sadly, who do Vancouverites have to turn to defend their neighbourhoods? Definitely not COPE who have sold themsleves into slavery to Vision.

  • UnagiDon

    I grew up in Vancouver. Left for 10 years, picked up graduate degrees in the US, had kids. Thought it would be nice to raise the kids in Vancouver, so moved back into town.

    Boy was I wrong. I’m appalled at the current state of this city.
    – Massive real estate bubble
    – Overdependence of the economy on construction/finance/real estate (one third of GDP)
    – Excessive immigration (>60% ESL in Richmond public schools)
    – Rampant drug use all around the city
    – Low salaries
    – No innovative jobs

    I see a poor quality of life for myself here and no future for my kids here. We’ll be heading back down to the US where the schools are better, the jobs are more interesting, the income is better, goods are cheaper, taxes are lower, and houses are affordable. I’m pretty sure Seattle has nice mountains and water too.

  • Westender1

    Odd that so few outlets are mentioning the decision by Council to proceed with $2 million worth of community plan work (for three neighbourhoods). This could be very positive for these three neighbourhood provided the terms of reference for the plans are crafted appropriately. But it doesn’t bode well when Councillor Louie moved quickly to protect development interests (Prima properties – the group currently receiving a tax break for the “gas station garden” at the corner of Davie and Burrard) by amending the “no rezonings during the plan process” to read “no rezonings except those that fulfill Vision Vancouver’s broader municipal and developer objectives.”

  • Bill McCreery

    2:15 AM Friday @ City Hall was a sad nite for Shannon Mews neigbourhood, Vancouver, sustainable, healthy neighbourhood planning, heritage, transit, congestion, etc… Vision Council’s 6 to 4 (Anton Cope, Chow) vote betrayed voters.

    It was also the culmination of Vision ramming through their last minute agenda, including 8 major reports and 3 other significant spot re-zonings as well as the above. Wednesday during the afternoon Council session, what VV refers to as the ‘sustainable neighbourhood’ planning item was passed over the objections of a number of speakers including myself. Mayor Greg and his Vision cohorts once again expose themselves. Saying one feel good sounding thing, and then, turning their backs on Vancouver citizens and doing the opposite.

    The Planning Commission’s “Sustainable Nieghbourhoods Report concludes:

    “… it seems very clear that the most important investments for the City to make in neighbourhoods are those that strengthen and extend connections among people and groups in ways that BUILD TRUST.”

    I asked Council, how can you hope to “build trust” when you repeatedly subvert the democratic process of “open and transparent” government you promised? The Vision Council’s latest effort Wednesday night at 10 PM after the media had gone home was to get an ‘opinion’ from their legal council saying the proxy method of delivering citizens views on the Shannon Mews spot rezoning was unacceptable. My understanding is the proxy method had been pre-cleared through the City Clerk’s office and a form was created to document of who was speaking for who, which they signed. Then Thursday night, poof, they suddenly fund that is was OK to accept proxies once again.

    You then added further insult to further injury by extending the time for the hearing from the scheduled 10 PM ending to midnight on Wednesday and for as long as it takes on Thursday. This was done over the objections of Councillor Anton and those in the gallery. As well the Councillors’ and the presenters were exhausted after three consecutive late nights and having to get up early to go to work the next day.

    It is the opinion of many that they have gone way over the boundary of treating citizens with respect in these late July maneuvers designed to stifle public dialogue.

  • Lari

    Did anybody else notice the director of planning using his Blackberry to communicate with a certain councilor during the public hearing? it appeared to be with Raymond Louie judging by his use of his Blackberry. Didn’t that used to be against protocol? all questions used to be required to be open to public scrutiny and all councilors hearing the same answer.

  • brilliant

    Louie is full hooey with his gobbldeygook about “future residents”. Future residents did not vote for you Raymond. Unfortunately I did, but as the Who said “Won’t get fooled again”.

  • A Dave

    “Shaughnessy-Kerrisdale voters perhaps not so crucial to Vision Vancouver?”

    Apparently, judging by the spot re-zonings generating massive negative community responses, West End, DTES, Mt. Pleasant, Arbutus, etc. voters are also not crucial to Vision either…

    Interesting to see George Chow breaking ranks and voting against this proposal, now that he doesn’t care about re-election, and isn’t beholden to the Vision caucus whip. This speaks volumes.

  • Bill McCreery

    Agreed A Dave 9. And a part of those “volumes” is that, in addition to George not running again civically, I understand he lives in Shaughnessy. It’s his ‘hood and I guess he decided it was better to get along with his neighbours, sort of, than tow the ideolog line.

    He did say at the Shannon Mews Town Hall, 13 May that if voters didn’t like what Vision is doing, they should vote them out. He said that twice.

    My conclusion is that since he wants to run provincially, he has decided he’d better saddle up to the neighbourhoods. A bit late and disingenuous.