One of the most popular posts on this blog has been the Strata Warning we published in 2007. http://mtpleaseaunt.blogspot.com/2007/09/strata-warning.html?showComment=1328977060937#c8167787538068464884
This article from the Vancouver Courier Feb. 10 2012 explains changes made by the Province in Bill 8, the Strata Property Amendments Act. http://www.vancourier.com/travel/Strata+Properties+explained/6131926/story.html
Basically it says that every 3 years the strata needs to have a professional assessment of upkeep needs, file a report on it, and choose a plan for how to pay for the work. If actually carried out properly, that could help eliminate or ease the worst of the ugly financial surprises that new buyers or current owners may suddenly face.
It still doesn't change the fact that when you buy a strata you are buying into the infrastructure and not getting much of a share in the land. Land appreciates; infrastructure tends to depreciate. Upkeep will definitely help, however, in retaining the value of your strata apartment for longer.
Saturday, February 11, 2012
Monday, September 5, 2011
Missed Garbage Pickups - Old Problem, New Hassle
Previously, if your garbage was not picked up you could call directly to the responsible department. They would send a truck that afternoon or in the morning. Now, however, with the city's implementation of the "convenient" 3-1-1 number, things have gotten inconvenient.
Here's what the city says about this situation on its web site:
That is the information we've always been asked, and seems completely reasonable. However, the website doesn't mention that the 311 operators will also interrogate you intensely and try to give you a scolding.
On August 31, the garbage was not picked up on our block, when we got home it was too late to call. The morning of September 1, I gave the man who answered the 311 line my name, address, phone number, and the information that I had set my garbage out the night before the pickup date and that it was the whole block that was skipped - seven cans. He then asked me if the lid of my can was closed, if it was overfilled, and if there a metre (3 feet) of space on each side of my cans. I went out to look at the can placement, and when I came back he asked me if there was also a meter in front and in back of the can. I said that there were cans all up and down the block placed just as they were every week and that nobody's can had been picked up - wasn't that enough information already? He said no, it wasn't. I said I was sorry, but I couldn't answer any more questions, that I had to go to work now. The garbage on the block wasn't picked up that day, and when I called back the next morning the woman who answered said there was no record of his ever having put in my request.
She asked me the questions again, and at last told me that I couldn't expect the garbage to be picked up that day or the next, because the city had three working days from the date the report was filed to pick up missed collections. Because of the statutory holiday coming up, three working days from the date she accepted the request would have been six days from the date it should have been picked up.
This is no small inconvenience, I explained, because our block doesn't have back laneways, the cans sit on the other side of parked cars, in the middle of the street, where they are vulnerable to being hit by speeders and have to be moved for people to park and to drive away. She said that possibly the city might pick up the garbage sooner, but it might not, that they had three working days, so we should keep putting the cans out every day that was not a holiday, just in case.
I talked to other neighbours and at least two of them also called 311. One of them was told that the garbage "might" be picked up the next morning (only two days late). It was.
This incident would have been way less frustrating if 311 operators were not standing in the way of our discussion with someone actually at the responsible department. Our block often gets skipped for garbage pickup for some reason, and the dispatchers at the department certainly know that. In the past, they were always able to give us a specific pickup time for correcting that mistake. Loading the 311 operators up with the mandate to teach a catechism and a rigid attitude about it is not helpful - it just feels like giving the ratepayers a hard time. According to one auntie, "Nowadays, they are always making everything be your fault."
Here's what the city says about this situation on its web site:
My garbage (or recycling) wasn't picked up on my regular collection day - who should I call? Call 3-1-1 (or 604.873.7000 from outside Vancouver) to report any missed pickups. Please provide your address, a daytime phone number, what time your recycling was set out, and whether it was just your home or the entire block that was missed.
That is the information we've always been asked, and seems completely reasonable. However, the website doesn't mention that the 311 operators will also interrogate you intensely and try to give you a scolding.
On August 31, the garbage was not picked up on our block, when we got home it was too late to call. The morning of September 1, I gave the man who answered the 311 line my name, address, phone number, and the information that I had set my garbage out the night before the pickup date and that it was the whole block that was skipped - seven cans. He then asked me if the lid of my can was closed, if it was overfilled, and if there a metre (3 feet) of space on each side of my cans. I went out to look at the can placement, and when I came back he asked me if there was also a meter in front and in back of the can. I said that there were cans all up and down the block placed just as they were every week and that nobody's can had been picked up - wasn't that enough information already? He said no, it wasn't. I said I was sorry, but I couldn't answer any more questions, that I had to go to work now. The garbage on the block wasn't picked up that day, and when I called back the next morning the woman who answered said there was no record of his ever having put in my request.
She asked me the questions again, and at last told me that I couldn't expect the garbage to be picked up that day or the next, because the city had three working days from the date the report was filed to pick up missed collections. Because of the statutory holiday coming up, three working days from the date she accepted the request would have been six days from the date it should have been picked up.
This is no small inconvenience, I explained, because our block doesn't have back laneways, the cans sit on the other side of parked cars, in the middle of the street, where they are vulnerable to being hit by speeders and have to be moved for people to park and to drive away. She said that possibly the city might pick up the garbage sooner, but it might not, that they had three working days, so we should keep putting the cans out every day that was not a holiday, just in case.
I talked to other neighbours and at least two of them also called 311. One of them was told that the garbage "might" be picked up the next morning (only two days late). It was.
This incident would have been way less frustrating if 311 operators were not standing in the way of our discussion with someone actually at the responsible department. Our block often gets skipped for garbage pickup for some reason, and the dispatchers at the department certainly know that. In the past, they were always able to give us a specific pickup time for correcting that mistake. Loading the 311 operators up with the mandate to teach a catechism and a rigid attitude about it is not helpful - it just feels like giving the ratepayers a hard time. According to one auntie, "Nowadays, they are always making everything be your fault."
Mattress, TV and Computer Dumping
The laneways in Mt. Pleasant have become chronic dumping sites for old televisions, mattresses, other electronics, and broken furniture and clothes.
The city has washed its hands of picking up bulky items from residents, so there's currently no help there. Personally, I think the health and environmental needs of the city would warrant having these large and fairly dangerous items picked up as part of city service. Having regular pickup dates by the city would also be the most efficient way to deal with them. However, if we want that kind of service restored, it will presumably require a householders' campaign directed at city council.
At present, there is a patchwork of drop-off points where we are supposed to take different kinds of items. For mattresses, the city has now imposed a $20 per mattress drop-off fee. According to Vancouver's solid waste website:
Dropping off mattresses will of course require use of a truck - something not too many people have these days. This has opened up a private sector recycling opportunity for people who do have trucks. Canadian Mattress Recycling on Annacis Island in Delta only charges $12 per mattress recycling fee, but they charge $60 pickup in the lower mainland. The pickup fee covers up to ten mattresses at a time.
If you'd like to keep a mattress that is suspected to have bedbugs instead of throwing it in the lane, you can buy a bedbug-proof mattress cover. In Mt. Pleasant, Parker's Mattress Factory Store sells both the bug-proof covers and new mattresses.
Televisions are an especially obnoxious thing to find in the lane. Often after they sit there a week or more, someone will find it irresistible to kick or batter them to pieces, leaving not only glass debris but also Electronic circuit boards, batteries and color cathode ray tubes (CRTs) that can contain lead, mercury, and hexavalent chromium. If properly recycled, they can yield a harvest of plastic, steel, glass, and even precious metals.
In Mt. Pleasant, our nearest electronics recycling location for both televisions and all kinds of computers and computer accessories is the Salvation Army's 12th Avenue Thrift Store: 261 E. 12th Avenue. http://maps.google.ca/maps?q=261+e+12th+ave+vancouver+bc&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hq=&hnear=0x548673e241b15faf:0x5c46504036992150,261+E+12th+Ave,+Vancouver,+BC+V5T+3L1&gl=ca&ei=XxtlTrCRAs7diALo3PTKCg&sa=X&oi=geocode_result&ct=title&resnum=1&ved=0CBcQ8gEwAA
This Salvation Army Thrift Store electronics recycling centre is tricky to get to - it's actually behind the Vancouver Recovery Club, and you have to go through the laneway north of 12th to get to the drop-off location.
However, the good news is that you can drive a vehicle into a paved area inside the fence, so it's not far to carry your items. There is a separate bay for electronics recycling drop-off, and the caretaker there tends to be irritable if you don't put your own drop-off items in the correct pile or bin. TVs were going into a bin when I was there last time.
The city has washed its hands of picking up bulky items from residents, so there's currently no help there. Personally, I think the health and environmental needs of the city would warrant having these large and fairly dangerous items picked up as part of city service. Having regular pickup dates by the city would also be the most efficient way to deal with them. However, if we want that kind of service restored, it will presumably require a householders' campaign directed at city council.
At present, there is a patchwork of drop-off points where we are supposed to take different kinds of items. For mattresses, the city has now imposed a $20 per mattress drop-off fee. According to Vancouver's solid waste website:
The City will NOT pick up your old mattress or appliance. Vancouver residents can drop off a maximum of 4 mattresses and boxsprings at the Vancouver Transfer Station at 377 West Kent Avenue North. A $20 per unit piece applies to cover the cost of recycling. Residents may also drop off up to 8 mattresses and box spring at the Vancouver Landfill in Delta, where the same $20 per piece fee applies.
Dropping off mattresses will of course require use of a truck - something not too many people have these days. This has opened up a private sector recycling opportunity for people who do have trucks. Canadian Mattress Recycling on Annacis Island in Delta only charges $12 per mattress recycling fee, but they charge $60 pickup in the lower mainland. The pickup fee covers up to ten mattresses at a time.
If you'd like to keep a mattress that is suspected to have bedbugs instead of throwing it in the lane, you can buy a bedbug-proof mattress cover. In Mt. Pleasant, Parker's Mattress Factory Store sells both the bug-proof covers and new mattresses.
Televisions are an especially obnoxious thing to find in the lane. Often after they sit there a week or more, someone will find it irresistible to kick or batter them to pieces, leaving not only glass debris but also Electronic circuit boards, batteries and color cathode ray tubes (CRTs) that can contain lead, mercury, and hexavalent chromium. If properly recycled, they can yield a harvest of plastic, steel, glass, and even precious metals.
In Mt. Pleasant, our nearest electronics recycling location for both televisions and all kinds of computers and computer accessories is the Salvation Army's 12th Avenue Thrift Store: 261 E. 12th Avenue. http://maps.google.ca/maps?q=261+e+12th+ave+vancouver+bc&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hq=&hnear=0x548673e241b15faf:0x5c46504036992150,261+E+12th+Ave,+Vancouver,+BC+V5T+3L1&gl=ca&ei=XxtlTrCRAs7diALo3PTKCg&sa=X&oi=geocode_result&ct=title&resnum=1&ved=0CBcQ8gEwAA
This Salvation Army Thrift Store electronics recycling centre is tricky to get to - it's actually behind the Vancouver Recovery Club, and you have to go through the laneway north of 12th to get to the drop-off location.
However, the good news is that you can drive a vehicle into a paved area inside the fence, so it's not far to carry your items. There is a separate bay for electronics recycling drop-off, and the caretaker there tends to be irritable if you don't put your own drop-off items in the correct pile or bin. TVs were going into a bin when I was there last time.
Thursday, August 25, 2011
Why aren't we getting our mail?
For weeks, our block in Mt. Pleasant has had almost no mail delivery. Last week, we only got mail one day. The week before, we got mail two days. The week before that, we got a stack of letters, some of which had been mailed weeks before.
I thought Canada Post must have followed through on a plan to cut mail delivery to two or three times a week. However, on Tuesday at Trout Lake Park posties from Victoria were practicing driving mail trucks, and I asked one if deliveries had been cut. He said that Canada Post still does five day a week delivery.
Today, I had a chance to talk with a postal insider, who gave me more information. He says our postal depot is called Mountain View, that the Mountain View depot has reduced its workforce by about nine carrier positions, that the mail delivery for those positions is being laid on the shoulders of the remaining carriers, that the carriers tell management they don't have time to finish their whole route in the workday, and the management says to leave it for tomorrow. But when tomorrow comes, the amount of mail that couldn't be delivered doubles.
Among the items due weeks ago that have never been delivered was my credit card statement. This resulted in my owing late fees and interest charges.
I phoned in a complaint to Canada Post at 1-800-267-1177. The fellow who answered said he didn't believe that these carrier cuts had happened, or that mail was piling up, and asserted that Canada Post does everything they can to insure prompt delivery of the mail. However, he said an inquiry would be sent to the depot.
If you live in Mt. Pleasant and are not getting regular mail service, please voice your complaint now. If this is a common problem in our neighbourhood, more squeaky wheels might help us get this situation improved.
I thought Canada Post must have followed through on a plan to cut mail delivery to two or three times a week. However, on Tuesday at Trout Lake Park posties from Victoria were practicing driving mail trucks, and I asked one if deliveries had been cut. He said that Canada Post still does five day a week delivery.
Today, I had a chance to talk with a postal insider, who gave me more information. He says our postal depot is called Mountain View, that the Mountain View depot has reduced its workforce by about nine carrier positions, that the mail delivery for those positions is being laid on the shoulders of the remaining carriers, that the carriers tell management they don't have time to finish their whole route in the workday, and the management says to leave it for tomorrow. But when tomorrow comes, the amount of mail that couldn't be delivered doubles.
Among the items due weeks ago that have never been delivered was my credit card statement. This resulted in my owing late fees and interest charges.
I phoned in a complaint to Canada Post at 1-800-267-1177. The fellow who answered said he didn't believe that these carrier cuts had happened, or that mail was piling up, and asserted that Canada Post does everything they can to insure prompt delivery of the mail. However, he said an inquiry would be sent to the depot.
If you live in Mt. Pleasant and are not getting regular mail service, please voice your complaint now. If this is a common problem in our neighbourhood, more squeaky wheels might help us get this situation improved.
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
Broadway/Kingsway Rezoning - Workshop Venue Change
Broadway/Kingsway Rezoning - Workshop Venue Change
Dear Registrant:
Thank you for your interest in and registration for the Community Workshop being held on Sunday, March 20, 11:30 am to 4:30 pm, to discuss the Rize Alliance rezoning application for the site at Main, Broadway, Kingsway, and Watson St.
Please note that due to the tremendous public response to this workshop - we currently have 136 people registered and registration is not yet closed - we have had to change venue. The workshop will now be held at:
The Salt Building
85 West 1st Ave. (at Manitoba)
Parking is available along 1st Ave. A light lunch will be provided for participants. Please find attached a map setting out the location of the Salt Building.
Also, please find attached the Community Workshop agenda and a description of the workshop objectives and group process. We remind everyone that the doors to the Salt Building will open at 11:30 AM so you can preview the presentation materials and talk with the proposal proponents and City staff. This will be followed by brief presentations and then group discussion.
I am also including a link to the Mount Pleasant Community Plan http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/planning/cpp/mountpleasant/pdf/MPcommunityplan.pdf which will inform much of the discussion on Sunday. Of particular importance are the 'Overarching Principles" and the sections on the 'Uptown Shopping Area' and the 'Rize Alliance Development site".
Thanks so much for your interest in this event, and I'm looking forward to seeing you on Sunday.
Yours truly,
Peter Burch
Planner
Mount Pleasant Community Planning Program
Community Planning Division
Vancouver Planning Department
604.873.7486 (phone)
604.873.7898 (fax)
peter.burch@vancouver.ca
Nancy Wormald
Planning Analyst
Planning Department
City of Vancouver
604.873.7388
Dear Registrant:
Thank you for your interest in and registration for the Community Workshop being held on Sunday, March 20, 11:30 am to 4:30 pm, to discuss the Rize Alliance rezoning application for the site at Main, Broadway, Kingsway, and Watson St.
Please note that due to the tremendous public response to this workshop - we currently have 136 people registered and registration is not yet closed - we have had to change venue. The workshop will now be held at:
The Salt Building
85 West 1st Ave. (at Manitoba)
Parking is available along 1st Ave. A light lunch will be provided for participants. Please find attached a map setting out the location of the Salt Building.
Also, please find attached the Community Workshop agenda and a description of the workshop objectives and group process. We remind everyone that the doors to the Salt Building will open at 11:30 AM so you can preview the presentation materials and talk with the proposal proponents and City staff. This will be followed by brief presentations and then group discussion.
I am also including a link to the Mount Pleasant Community Plan http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/planning/cpp/mountpleasant/pdf/MPcommunityplan.pdf which will inform much of the discussion on Sunday. Of particular importance are the 'Overarching Principles" and the sections on the 'Uptown Shopping Area' and the 'Rize Alliance Development site".
Thanks so much for your interest in this event, and I'm looking forward to seeing you on Sunday.
Yours truly,
Peter Burch
Planner
Mount Pleasant Community Planning Program
Community Planning Division
Vancouver Planning Department
604.873.7486 (phone)
604.873.7898 (fax)
peter.burch@vancouver.ca
Nancy Wormald
Planning Analyst
Planning Department
City of Vancouver
604.873.7388
Friday, March 4, 2011
26-Story Building aimed at Broadway at Kingsway - Have your say
The aunties have been saying ever since they happened in late 2009 that the two three-alarm fires at Broadway and Main and Broadway and Kingsway seemed to be property-owner arson to clear the lots for development. Now one of those properties is being proposed for a 26-story building!
"The City of Vancouver has received an application from Acton Ostry Architects Inc. to rezone the block bounded by Broadway, Kingsway, 10th Avenue, and Watson Street from C-3A (Commercial) District to a CD-1 "
Quite apart from the question of whether these owners are arsonists who should not profit from their crimes, such a building would be quite a travesty on that corner, since the next tallest building anywhere near there is only nine stories. It would grossly overshadow and shade the neighbourhood. It would cram a huge amount of mostly wealthy single and childless people into what is still basically a working-class family neighbourhood, and the people in the tower will be literally looking down on everyone and tend to be socially disconnected from the rest of the community. Plus, they will all be trying to find parking places on the street (and at Kingsgate Mall).
Yes, property owners will be supposed to provide a quota of parking spaces; however, conversations with property managers, people who live in apartments, and their neighbours reveal that apartment dwellers in Vancouver prefer not to pay the stall rent and the very considerable tax on such spaces, preferring to drive around and around poaching places wherever they can. In most cases there are not nearly enough spaces for all the cars anyway.
A further objection to a 26-story building is that if one tower is allowed to be built then the zoning will be broken in for additional towers of that magnitude. That will throw the longtime Mt. Pleasant Community Plan the city and neighbourhood have been developing - featuring three-to-six-story dwellings above stores - into the ashcan. Chinatown just went through a battle to prevent this invasion of the giants there, and now Mt. Pleasant will have to fend them off with our activism if we don't want them.
Here's what the Mt. Pleasant Community Plan says about what's supposed to happen to Main street - just to the west of this corner:
5.1 Uptown Shopping Area
Overall Concept Plan
• Retain the existing scale and character of Main Street (from 7th to
11th Avenue).
• Ensure that Main Street be kept more local in scale with smaller
frontages. Retain the ‘high and low’ rhythm of building heights
along Main Street. Retain older more affordable housing (e.g., 3
storey walk-ups) for low income families and individuals.
• Create an improved pedestrian environment linking important sites
along Main (e.g., IGA site, Heritage Hall).
• Allow additional density and height for mixed-use buildings of up
to 6 storeys to increase housing opportunities along South Main
One nearby precedent for neighbours resisting height was the change in plan for Broadway and Fraser, where the city intends to build a building for the hard-to-house. Through a series of planning and zoning hearings, those plans were reduced from 12 stories to 11 stories to finally 9 stories. The proposed 26-story building sits right in between Broaday and Fraser and Broadway and Main - how long can we keep heights in human scale around there if we allow the first oversized erection?
Now the city planning department has just announced "community workshops" to test the waters about the zoning hearing on the Broadway and Kingsway location. Here's the text of the letter they sent out to parties who had registered as interested (sans the pictures - :
COMMUNITY SERVICES GROUP Planning
Current Planning - RezoningMar
March 4, 2011
NOTICE OF REZONING APPLICATION AND INVITATION TO COMMUNITY WORKSHOP
Dear Sir and/or Madam:
RE: Proposed Rezoning of 228, 236 and 246 East Broadway and 180 Kingsway
(Broadway, Kingsway, 10th Avenue and Watson Street - See Map on Reverse)
The City of Vancouver has received an application from Acton Ostry Architects Inc. to rezone the block bounded by Broadway, Kingsway, 10th Avenue, and Watson Street from C-3A (Commercial) District to a CD-
1 (Comprehensive Development) District to allow development with a mixed-use commercial and residential project, including the following components:
• a 6- and 7-storey base with retail and commercial uses at grade on the Broadway, Watson Street, and
Kingsway frontages and residential units above;
• a 26-storey residential tower at the 10th Avenue and Kingsway corner;
• 62 rental dwelling units and 206 market dwelling units (total 268 units);
• a 9,200 sq. ft. artist production space at the 10th Avenue and Watson Street corner;
• 6,600 sq. ft. of additional public open space at street level through additional sidewalk widths;
• 362 bicycle parking stalls;
• three levels of underground parking for 319 vehicles; and
• access to parking and loading facilities on the Watson Street frontage.
A facilitated Community Workshop will be held to discuss the project. The details are as follows:
Date: March 20, 2011
Time: 12:00 Noon – 4:30 p.m.
(Doors open at 11:30 for viewing the proposal)
Place: Native Education College, 285 East 5th Avenue
RSVP REQUIRED – Please contact us as soon as you can to confirm your attendance at the Workshop. We need to know the number of participants in order to properly plan the event. RSVP to:
Nancy Wormald - (604) 873-7388 nancy.wormald@vancouver.ca
The workshop will begin with brief presentations regarding the City’s rezoning process, an overview of the recently approved Mount Pleasant Community Plan as it relates specifically to this site, and a description of the rezoning application that has been submitted. During the workshop we intend to collect neighbourhood input on several different aspects of the project through small group discussions and reporting out.
A follow-up Open House event is planned for April 12 at Heritage Hall, 3102 Main Street. This will be a drop-in event so that the community can view the response made by the project design team to the input provided at the March 20th workshop, and provide additional comments. The Open House will run from
4:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
If you are unable to attend the March 20th workshop, please consider sharing your comments via letter, email or online at vancouver.ca/rezapps. The drawings and information about the project are posted there.
All community input will be taken into account in our analysis of the application and ultimately staff’s recommendations to City Council. Council will consider policies, the public interest and staff recommendations when making its decision to approve or deny the rezoning application.
If you would like to view the plans which have been submitted with the application, please enquire at the Planning Department reception desk on the Third Floor, in the East Wing of City Hall, at 2675 Yukon Street. For additional information you can also contact the applicant, Alan Davies, Acton Ostry Architects Inc. at
604.739.3344.
The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act deems any response to this notification to be public information. If you have contracted to sell or lease all or part of your property to any person, firm, or corporation, we strongly urge you to deliver this courtesy notification letter, as soon as possible, to the prospective buyer or tenant.
If you have any questions or would like to discuss the application, please call me at 604.873.7727. You may also send written comments to me at the address below, by fax to 604.873.7060, by E-mail to alison.higginson@vancouver.ca, or online through www.vancouver.ca/rezapps.
Yours truly,
Alison Higginson Rezoning Planner alison.higginson@vancouver.ca Phone: 604.873.7727
AH/ws
F:\VanDocs Offline Records\Offline Records (VP)\236 E ~ Land Administration and Planning - Rezoning - Rezoning Case Files\236 E Broadway - Notification
& Community Workshop - March 5th - 2011-02-23.DOC(09 IA)
City Hall 453 West 12th Avenue Vancouver BC V5Y 1V4 vancouver.ca
Current Planning - Rezoning tel: 604.873.7038 fax: 604.873.7060
The plan is artfully written to include six stories on one side, as if that would hide the tower looming over it. It also includes an artist's studio space - perhaps a tribute to the artist whose studio burned at that site and who lost 500 paintings, though she might not be able to afford this one. And it includes a larger than average number of rental units. However, how often have we seen these amenities peeled off one by one as the developers run crying to the city that they hadn't foreseen the inevitable cost overruns?
-FW
Thursday, November 4, 2010
Shaw Snoops on Subscribers to Sell
Shaw Cable told one of the aunties that they have 17 "auditors" going around town right now looking to see if anyone has renters living with them in their homes. They send people around to snoop on your property and talk to unsuspecting people who are at your house. If they think that you are not just a single-family unit, Shaw will leave you a note signed by a "technician," threatening to disconnect the cable to that part of the house the very next day unless you sign up for a whole second subscription. According to offers they are sending out in the mail right now, the introductory offer on a subscription is about $75 a month.
When you call Shaw up to dispute the disconnect order, they say that you have to let them send an "auditor" into your house to "inspect" who is living in there. One man who answered the phone in the residential department that takes new and changed subscriptions at Shaw said that "legally" you have to have a separate subscription if you take any money from anyone who lives in your house, even if you rent out a room temporarily.
The auntie advises not to let anyone from Shaw inspect your house, as this is a company getting waaay too intrusive into their customers' lives!
The company may be getting desperate as so many people are watching TV on the internet instead of getting premium cable subscriptions. But what is happening is that they are getting formerly satisfied, regular-paying customers in an uproar and now starting to look around for other options for not only their cable television but also their phone and internet services.
When you call Shaw up to dispute the disconnect order, they say that you have to let them send an "auditor" into your house to "inspect" who is living in there. One man who answered the phone in the residential department that takes new and changed subscriptions at Shaw said that "legally" you have to have a separate subscription if you take any money from anyone who lives in your house, even if you rent out a room temporarily.
The auntie advises not to let anyone from Shaw inspect your house, as this is a company getting waaay too intrusive into their customers' lives!
The company may be getting desperate as so many people are watching TV on the internet instead of getting premium cable subscriptions. But what is happening is that they are getting formerly satisfied, regular-paying customers in an uproar and now starting to look around for other options for not only their cable television but also their phone and internet services.
Friday, October 8, 2010
Red-light District Proposed by Council
Actually, this was in the Flashback column in the BC section of today's Globe & Mail - an article about something that happened in October 1985. It says that the Harcourt-led Vancouver City Council created a red light district in response to complaints about "rampant prostitution" in Mt. Pleasant. The council spent $36,000 on street lighting and wooden barricades in the area between Alberta and Ontario on the west and east and Second and Fifth avenues on the north and south. This designation of an old warehouse district as "red light" was supposed to keep prostitution activity off the streets of Mt. Pleasant, where residents were complaining. The article quotes Marie Arrington, from the Alliance for the Safety of Prostitutes, as saying that the designated area was too deserted and that the lights wouldn't make it safe.
Now that that Main between 2nd and 5th is being subjected to a city development project, those 12 square blocks are likely to be more in demand and much less deserted soon. I wonder if it is still officially on the books as a Red Light Area.
One of the things not mentioned in the Globe piece is that 1985 was also the year that Federal Bill C-49 "expanded the definition of soliciting to include the act of stopping or attempting to stop a person to communicate for the purpose of engaging in prostitution." ( http://www.statcan.gc.ca/kits-trousses/justice/8104309-eng.pdf )
According to the Rape Relief Files on prostitution, "On April 10, 1986, because a prostitute challenged the new law, a Vancouver provincial court judge ruled that C-49 was unconstitutional. The police put 67 cases on hold; women continued to work the streets." However, they add that
http://www.rapereliefshelter.bc.ca/herstory/rr_files86.html
The Statscan page I cited earlier http://www.statcan.gc.ca/kits-trousses/justice/8104309-eng.pdf graphs reported prostitution-related "incidents" between 1981 and 1997. Among the comments on the page is a note that reporting varies with trends in police enforcement practices, and that as of 1997, 89% of the incidents were about communication - only a few about pimping or bawdyhouses.
The Rape Relief prostitution pages document that after C-49 passed the numbers of "escort services" and "massage parlours" openly advertising increased dramatically. Also that police charged to arrest men beating women generally failed to arrest if the woman was a prostitute.
So one might infer that pretty much from day one, the federal anti-prostitution law was used primarily against street prostitution, not against pimps, bawdyhouses, and prostitution outcall services "living off the avails."
On September 28, 2010, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice ruled that all three provisions of the federal anti-prostitution law violated the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and called on parliament to write new legislation to prevent the proliferation of "unlicensed brothels." http://jurist.org/paperchase/2010/09/ontario-court-strikes-down-anti-prostitution-laws.php
If that were to happen, perhaps Vancouver's Red Light District (or another so designated) might become a site of licensed sex trade. It should be noted that both major strains of feminist opinion on prostitution/sex work support some form of decriminalization and neither has shown support for licensed brothels. For more on this split, I refer you to my previous post: http://mtpleaseaunt.blogspot.com/2008/10/libby-davies-work-on-sex-worker-issues.html
Now that that Main between 2nd and 5th is being subjected to a city development project, those 12 square blocks are likely to be more in demand and much less deserted soon. I wonder if it is still officially on the books as a Red Light Area.
One of the things not mentioned in the Globe piece is that 1985 was also the year that Federal Bill C-49 "expanded the definition of soliciting to include the act of stopping or attempting to stop a person to communicate for the purpose of engaging in prostitution." ( http://www.statcan.gc.ca/kits-trousses/justice/8104309-eng.pdf )
According to the Rape Relief Files on prostitution, "On April 10, 1986, because a prostitute challenged the new law, a Vancouver provincial court judge ruled that C-49 was unconstitutional. The police put 67 cases on hold; women continued to work the streets." However, they add that
May 7, 1986. The B.C. Supreme Court ruled that the law was not unconstitutional and overturned a lower court ruling. Since then, 341 arrests have been made. The police are back at the entrapment, harassment and brutal treatment of prostitutes and so are the courts. The convictions since the Supreme Court ruling in May now include probation restrictions to stay out of particular named areas of cities, and one woman was confined to her home between the hours of 6 pm and 6 am. The courts have been forced by women's necessity and women's defiance to use the injunction tactic again, in addition to fining and holding without trial.
http://www.rapereliefshelter.bc.ca/herstory/rr_files86.html
The Statscan page I cited earlier http://www.statcan.gc.ca/kits-trousses/justice/8104309-eng.pdf graphs reported prostitution-related "incidents" between 1981 and 1997. Among the comments on the page is a note that reporting varies with trends in police enforcement practices, and that as of 1997, 89% of the incidents were about communication - only a few about pimping or bawdyhouses.
The Rape Relief prostitution pages document that after C-49 passed the numbers of "escort services" and "massage parlours" openly advertising increased dramatically. Also that police charged to arrest men beating women generally failed to arrest if the woman was a prostitute.
So one might infer that pretty much from day one, the federal anti-prostitution law was used primarily against street prostitution, not against pimps, bawdyhouses, and prostitution outcall services "living off the avails."
On September 28, 2010, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice ruled that all three provisions of the federal anti-prostitution law violated the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and called on parliament to write new legislation to prevent the proliferation of "unlicensed brothels." http://jurist.org/paperchase/2010/09/ontario-court-strikes-down-anti-prostitution-laws.php
If that were to happen, perhaps Vancouver's Red Light District (or another so designated) might become a site of licensed sex trade. It should be noted that both major strains of feminist opinion on prostitution/sex work support some form of decriminalization and neither has shown support for licensed brothels. For more on this split, I refer you to my previous post: http://mtpleaseaunt.blogspot.com/2008/10/libby-davies-work-on-sex-worker-issues.html
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
What's being built by the VCC Clark Skytrain Station
Remember the very active volleyball area that used to be right beside the VCC Clark Skytrain station? As you came down the escalator you could watch a bunch of games going on at once. Then nearly a year ago the games left and construction started. For months, we were treated to the noise of pile drivers from early in the morning until evening. I was hoping that this might be construction of a link between the two sky train lines, Millennium and Expo, which come so close to each other at this point you could almost sail a paper airplane across.
But no. Today, looking from the top of North China Park to where the yellow crane was towering, I could see the skeleton of a building coming up there. As someone sensitive to the loss of public views, I feared another Hong Kong style skyscraper could be rising between the park and the mountains; so I walked the dogs down the hill and along the sidewalk between the fish plant and the Shaw service truck parking-lot, to see if there was any identifying sign. (The dogs loved the whiff of rotten fish.)
Thanks to Harper's obsession with signage on federally-funded projects, there certainly is a sign. Two signs, actually - one of the infamous ones about your federal dollars creating economic stimulus, and one that states simply "Police Property Office and Forensic Storage Facility." I repeated that all the way home until I could make a note of it and check the internet.
Search result: despite the sign touting federal money, the project is actually being funded with $10 million from the fed, $10 million from the province, and $10.3 million from the city for a total of $30.3 million. Of course, all three are our tax dollars. Ottawa has said it will only pay invoices for work completed by March 31, 2011. Since the province and city also have funds in this project, hopefully they are presenting Ottawa with the first $10 million (probably just about enough to cover the rebar already in place). Since the other levels are capping their contributions at $10 million each, if there are cost overruns, the city will presumably end up paying that bill.
The scope of this project, as found in a backgrounder online is that it will be a new, consolidated facility of 65,000 square feet "for receiving, storage and safekeeping of found and seized property and evidence, and the construction of vehicle forensic laboratories and associated storage." While "forensic" sounds like a morgue, I don't see any evidence that people bodies will be there - just auto bodies. I wonder if the proximity to the railroad tracks is intended to be useful for bringing vehicles in and out.
Given the square footage listed and the dimensions of the building, I think that the steel skeleton you can see now is likely pretty close to its full height - so, not a view-blocker. And there may yet be room in that railroad corridor to join the two Skytrain lines, giving a direct way from VCC Clark to downtown.
But no. Today, looking from the top of North China Park to where the yellow crane was towering, I could see the skeleton of a building coming up there. As someone sensitive to the loss of public views, I feared another Hong Kong style skyscraper could be rising between the park and the mountains; so I walked the dogs down the hill and along the sidewalk between the fish plant and the Shaw service truck parking-lot, to see if there was any identifying sign. (The dogs loved the whiff of rotten fish.)
Thanks to Harper's obsession with signage on federally-funded projects, there certainly is a sign. Two signs, actually - one of the infamous ones about your federal dollars creating economic stimulus, and one that states simply "Police Property Office and Forensic Storage Facility." I repeated that all the way home until I could make a note of it and check the internet.
Search result: despite the sign touting federal money, the project is actually being funded with $10 million from the fed, $10 million from the province, and $10.3 million from the city for a total of $30.3 million. Of course, all three are our tax dollars. Ottawa has said it will only pay invoices for work completed by March 31, 2011. Since the province and city also have funds in this project, hopefully they are presenting Ottawa with the first $10 million (probably just about enough to cover the rebar already in place). Since the other levels are capping their contributions at $10 million each, if there are cost overruns, the city will presumably end up paying that bill.
The scope of this project, as found in a backgrounder online is that it will be a new, consolidated facility of 65,000 square feet "for receiving, storage and safekeeping of found and seized property and evidence, and the construction of vehicle forensic laboratories and associated storage." While "forensic" sounds like a morgue, I don't see any evidence that people bodies will be there - just auto bodies. I wonder if the proximity to the railroad tracks is intended to be useful for bringing vehicles in and out.
Given the square footage listed and the dimensions of the building, I think that the steel skeleton you can see now is likely pretty close to its full height - so, not a view-blocker. And there may yet be room in that railroad corridor to join the two Skytrain lines, giving a direct way from VCC Clark to downtown.
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
Mt. Pleasant Neighbourhood House AGM & Bylaw Changes
Mt. Pleasant Neighbourhood house held their AGM today. It has now been moved from October to July. Despite summer doldrums, about 50 people were in attendance.
The chair explained that while the neighbourhood houses are required to hold individual AGMs they are not in fact autonomous legal entities but are actually branches of the Association of Neighbourhood Houses of British Columbia. The chair emphasized several times that this was not a "legal meeting."
Highlights of the event: A new website has just been rolled out. It's mpnh.org
The daycare has a waiting list of about 50 children, an increase because of the closure of other daycares in the neighbourhood.
Repairs and upgrades were dwelt on lovingly with before and after pictures. Most changes related to new flooring and more environmentally efficient lightbulbs and appliances.
Sad news: Broadway Connection has had its funds eliminated by Coastal Health and the program may end in October unless reinstated. It's a therapeutic peer to peer self-help group for disabled adults that has been funded by Vancouver Coastal Health for twenty-five years. The previous beneficiaries mounted a publicity campaign but have so far been unable to get those funds restored.
Bylaws* changes that had been decided by the board were ratified by those assembled.
A major change allows persons to serve on the Community Board [formerly called the Board of Managers] who do not live in the neighbourhood.
There were several changes around membership. One was that those who take out a family membership will only be allowed to have one adult vote per family at the AGM, unless they take out an additional adult membership. (Adult memberships are now $4 and family memberships $6. Not including a now-voluntary $2 ANHBC membership.) The most surprising change was that free memberships will be given to children 12 to 18 and that these will be voting memberships.
As the meetings are conducted, however, voting doesn't mean very much. In the interim between the previous AGM last October and this one, the board and staff made their own decision about filling all but 2 of the previously vacant board seats. They presented a "slate" nominee at this AGM for one of the remaining seats and announced that unlike in the past there would be no nominations from the floor. They say they are holding the last open seat vacant for a youth member.
Mt. Pleasant Neighbourhood House's activities are primarily aimed at programs for low-income and immigrant residents of this neighbourhood area, so it's rather a contrast to see who is on their now-self-appointing community board. The new board member - approved, of course - is a nurse with a masters in public health. Nearly every other member of the board also has a master's degree, and/or is a business owner or an administrator.
With such a highly educated and well-connected board, one would hope for some high-powered fundraising. This past year, donations and fundraising accounted for only $34,000 of the more than $1.5 million dollars in revenue - an increase over previous years of about $11,000. A "business fundraiser" was described as having been "controversial" and therefore a financial failure. There was no time allowed for questions to clear up what this meant. Fundraisers initiated by members were not mentioned.
For fiscal year 2009-10 (which ended March 31) there was about $200,000 more income than the previous year, but MPNH still ended up more than $63,000 in the hole. The treasurer said staff hours have now been cut. (Salaries & benefits had increased by about $200,000, to $1,249,645. The number of staff this covered was not reported.)
If you want to know more about Mt. Pleasant Neighbourhood House, it's at the corner of Prince Albert & Broadway. Check it out.
------------------------
*One change was to rename the house's Operating Guide to the Bylaws. As MPNH is not in itself a legal entity, there is some question about whether these are legally binding bylaws; and some of the things in the bylaws, such as who may drive the house's cars, seem more appropriate for Rules and Procedures than for bylaws.
The chair explained that while the neighbourhood houses are required to hold individual AGMs they are not in fact autonomous legal entities but are actually branches of the Association of Neighbourhood Houses of British Columbia. The chair emphasized several times that this was not a "legal meeting."
Highlights of the event: A new website has just been rolled out. It's mpnh.org
The daycare has a waiting list of about 50 children, an increase because of the closure of other daycares in the neighbourhood.
Repairs and upgrades were dwelt on lovingly with before and after pictures. Most changes related to new flooring and more environmentally efficient lightbulbs and appliances.
Sad news: Broadway Connection has had its funds eliminated by Coastal Health and the program may end in October unless reinstated. It's a therapeutic peer to peer self-help group for disabled adults that has been funded by Vancouver Coastal Health for twenty-five years. The previous beneficiaries mounted a publicity campaign but have so far been unable to get those funds restored.
Bylaws* changes that had been decided by the board were ratified by those assembled.
A major change allows persons to serve on the Community Board [formerly called the Board of Managers] who do not live in the neighbourhood.
There were several changes around membership. One was that those who take out a family membership will only be allowed to have one adult vote per family at the AGM, unless they take out an additional adult membership. (Adult memberships are now $4 and family memberships $6. Not including a now-voluntary $2 ANHBC membership.) The most surprising change was that free memberships will be given to children 12 to 18 and that these will be voting memberships.
As the meetings are conducted, however, voting doesn't mean very much. In the interim between the previous AGM last October and this one, the board and staff made their own decision about filling all but 2 of the previously vacant board seats. They presented a "slate" nominee at this AGM for one of the remaining seats and announced that unlike in the past there would be no nominations from the floor. They say they are holding the last open seat vacant for a youth member.
Mt. Pleasant Neighbourhood House's activities are primarily aimed at programs for low-income and immigrant residents of this neighbourhood area, so it's rather a contrast to see who is on their now-self-appointing community board. The new board member - approved, of course - is a nurse with a masters in public health. Nearly every other member of the board also has a master's degree, and/or is a business owner or an administrator.
With such a highly educated and well-connected board, one would hope for some high-powered fundraising. This past year, donations and fundraising accounted for only $34,000 of the more than $1.5 million dollars in revenue - an increase over previous years of about $11,000. A "business fundraiser" was described as having been "controversial" and therefore a financial failure. There was no time allowed for questions to clear up what this meant. Fundraisers initiated by members were not mentioned.
For fiscal year 2009-10 (which ended March 31) there was about $200,000 more income than the previous year, but MPNH still ended up more than $63,000 in the hole. The treasurer said staff hours have now been cut. (Salaries & benefits had increased by about $200,000, to $1,249,645. The number of staff this covered was not reported.)
If you want to know more about Mt. Pleasant Neighbourhood House, it's at the corner of Prince Albert & Broadway. Check it out.
------------------------
*One change was to rename the house's Operating Guide to the Bylaws. As MPNH is not in itself a legal entity, there is some question about whether these are legally binding bylaws; and some of the things in the bylaws, such as who may drive the house's cars, seem more appropriate for Rules and Procedures than for bylaws.
Monday, July 5, 2010
Willow Blight in Area
On a trip today to Trout Lake, we observed many weeping willows looking seriously blighted on both sides of the lake. A similar blight seems to have affected a curly willow in our yard. Leaves blacken, curl up and die. The stems look as if burnt.
I googled "willow blight" to read more about this disease, and apparently it has been moving steadily from the East Coast for decades, and had been observed in Vancouver as early as the late 1970s. It's fungal - actually, a combination of two fungi - and there really is no treatment, as the fungus hides inside the tree. According to one article, the blight flourishes during wet summers, and not only rain but also mist or fog can worsen it. Planting trees too close together also helps it spread.
Trout lake has a great many willows that add a lot to its beauty - I'm sad to see that we may be losing so many. The large willows that are farther away from the lake and on higher ground seemed to be healthy, but most of the trees that are closer, and close to the other undergrowth, are not. The new growth on the recently constructed willow fence looks fine, so far.
I googled "willow blight" to read more about this disease, and apparently it has been moving steadily from the East Coast for decades, and had been observed in Vancouver as early as the late 1970s. It's fungal - actually, a combination of two fungi - and there really is no treatment, as the fungus hides inside the tree. According to one article, the blight flourishes during wet summers, and not only rain but also mist or fog can worsen it. Planting trees too close together also helps it spread.
Trout lake has a great many willows that add a lot to its beauty - I'm sad to see that we may be losing so many. The large willows that are farther away from the lake and on higher ground seemed to be healthy, but most of the trees that are closer, and close to the other undergrowth, are not. The new growth on the recently constructed willow fence looks fine, so far.
Friday, May 21, 2010
Daylighting Mount Pleasant's Stream: A Conversation on June 6
This looks really interesting!
From: Rita Wong [mailto:rwong@ecuad.ca]
Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2010 11:43 PM
To: undisclosed-recipients
Subject: Daylighting Mount Pleasant's Stream: A Conversation on June 6
Please forward this invitation to people who might be interested in participating. Thanks!
Daylighting Mount Pleasant’s Streams: A Conversation
Native Education College
285 East 5th Ave
Vancouver/Coast Salish territories
Sunday, June 6, 1 to 4 pm
Have you heard water gurgling under the manhole covers as you walk around Mount Pleasant? Maybe you heard Brewery Creek, St. George Creek, and China Creek, which flowed into False Creek when its water used to reach all the way to Clark Drive.
Many streams have been paved over.
Why and how would we bring them back to daylight?
We invite you to join Bruce Macdonald and Bryn Davidson for a conversation about daylighting neighbourhood streams. We will begin with an opening song led by Russell Wallace, in honour of the neighbourhood streams. The conversation will be facilitated by writer and Mount Pleasant resident, Rita Wong.
Bruce Macdonald is the author of Vancouver: A Visual History and worked closely with the Brewery Creek Historical Society.
Bryn Davidson is a Mount Pleasant resident, and a designer and sustainability consultant who has proposed a plan to daylight St. George Creek.
Russell Wallace is a composer and musician who sings with the groups Tzo’kam and Tiqilap (whose first CD will be launched at the NEC on June 18).
This event is free. It is organized by Mount Pleasant residents. Anyone who cares about Mount Pleasant and its streams is invited to participate.
All are welcome. Please email rwong@ecuad.ca to RSVP so we have a sense of how many people to bring snacks for.
We would like to acknowledge the support of the Neighbourhood Small Grants Project and the Vancouver Foundation.
From: Rita Wong [mailto:rwong@ecuad.ca]
Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2010 11:43 PM
To: undisclosed-recipients
Subject: Daylighting Mount Pleasant's Stream: A Conversation on June 6
Please forward this invitation to people who might be interested in participating. Thanks!
Daylighting Mount Pleasant’s Streams: A Conversation
Native Education College
285 East 5th Ave
Vancouver/Coast Salish territories
Sunday, June 6, 1 to 4 pm
Have you heard water gurgling under the manhole covers as you walk around Mount Pleasant? Maybe you heard Brewery Creek, St. George Creek, and China Creek, which flowed into False Creek when its water used to reach all the way to Clark Drive.
Many streams have been paved over.
Why and how would we bring them back to daylight?
We invite you to join Bruce Macdonald and Bryn Davidson for a conversation about daylighting neighbourhood streams. We will begin with an opening song led by Russell Wallace, in honour of the neighbourhood streams. The conversation will be facilitated by writer and Mount Pleasant resident, Rita Wong.
Bruce Macdonald is the author of Vancouver: A Visual History and worked closely with the Brewery Creek Historical Society.
Bryn Davidson is a Mount Pleasant resident, and a designer and sustainability consultant who has proposed a plan to daylight St. George Creek.
Russell Wallace is a composer and musician who sings with the groups Tzo’kam and Tiqilap (whose first CD will be launched at the NEC on June 18).
This event is free. It is organized by Mount Pleasant residents. Anyone who cares about Mount Pleasant and its streams is invited to participate.
All are welcome. Please email rwong@ecuad.ca to RSVP so we have a sense of how many people to bring snacks for.
We would like to acknowledge the support of the Neighbourhood Small Grants Project and the Vancouver Foundation.
Thursday, April 15, 2010
April 21-29: Last chances to comment on Mt. Pleasant planning draft
The Mount Pleasant Community Planning Program is nearing completion. Over the last two years residents and City staff have worked together top develop a new Community Plan for Mount Pleasant. Come to an open house to comment on draft policy for Mount Pleasant's shopping areas (Uptown, Broadway East, Broadway West and Main from 2nd to 7th Avenues) and residential neighbourhoods (topics include housing, parks and open spaces, heritage, culture, transportation, safety, services, laneways, and character).
There are five open houses scheduled for you to drop in, view the proposals, talk to staff and to complete a comment form. Cantonese Mandarin, Tagalog and Vietnamese speaking volunteers will be available to assist in the translation of the presentation materials. Child minding is available while you are at the open house.
Please pass the word around, forward to your friends, neighbours, colleagues. Thank you in advance.
Wednesday, April 21, 4 - 8 pm
Mount Pleasant Neighbourhood House
800 E. Broadway
Thursday, April 22, 4 - 8 pm
Tenth Church, 11 W. 10th Avenue
(access from Ontario Street)
Saturday, April 24, 11 am - 4 pm
Kingsgate Mall, 370 E. Broadway
Tuesday, April 27, 4 - 8 pm
Heritage Hall, 3102 Main Street
Thursday, April 29, 4 - 8 pm
Native Education College, 285 E. 5th Avenue
Beverly Chew
City of Vancouver
Community Planning Department
604-871-6683
beverly.chew@vancouver.ca
There are five open houses scheduled for you to drop in, view the proposals, talk to staff and to complete a comment form. Cantonese Mandarin, Tagalog and Vietnamese speaking volunteers will be available to assist in the translation of the presentation materials. Child minding is available while you are at the open house.
Please pass the word around, forward to your friends, neighbours, colleagues. Thank you in advance.
Wednesday, April 21, 4 - 8 pm
Mount Pleasant Neighbourhood House
800 E. Broadway
Thursday, April 22, 4 - 8 pm
Tenth Church, 11 W. 10th Avenue
(access from Ontario Street)
Saturday, April 24, 11 am - 4 pm
Kingsgate Mall, 370 E. Broadway
Tuesday, April 27, 4 - 8 pm
Heritage Hall, 3102 Main Street
Thursday, April 29, 4 - 8 pm
Native Education College, 285 E. 5th Avenue
Beverly Chew
City of Vancouver
Community Planning Department
604-871-6683
beverly.chew@vancouver.ca
Saturday, January 30, 2010
Giant Cross Is Gang Symbol
Researching online for other views about the giant cross at VCC Clark Sky Train, I found out that it is copied from a gang symbol that guys in the neighbourhood used to write on walls and get tattooed on their arms back before tattoos were chic. You can read the article at this site, written by someone who approves of it - but also, read the comments below it:
http://www.citycaucus.com/2010/01/east-van-no-rules
Apparently there was an article about the plan for this cross last November in the Vancouver Sun.
I looked up the guy who designed it, Ken Lum - here he is on Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Lum
He has tons of honors and has done tons of public art projects previously, but some of his other projects have also been "controversial."
The Wikipedia article says he was born in 1956 and grew up in Strathcona, and that "his art is conceptually oriented, and generally concerned with issues of identity."
Perhaps he has put this gang symbol up in East Van as a way of claiming it for the gang-bangers (probably some other term was used back then) of his generation. I wonder if he was a member, or a wanna-be. At the time this mark was invented, it must have been intended to create a sense of belonging for some and strike fear into those who didn't belong. It's still doing it.
I don't like it. But if it could scare off the yuppies...
http://www.citycaucus.com/2010/01/east-van-no-rules
Apparently there was an article about the plan for this cross last November in the Vancouver Sun.
I looked up the guy who designed it, Ken Lum - here he is on Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Lum
He has tons of honors and has done tons of public art projects previously, but some of his other projects have also been "controversial."
The Wikipedia article says he was born in 1956 and grew up in Strathcona, and that "his art is conceptually oriented, and generally concerned with issues of identity."
Perhaps he has put this gang symbol up in East Van as a way of claiming it for the gang-bangers (probably some other term was used back then) of his generation. I wonder if he was a member, or a wanna-be. At the time this mark was invented, it must have been intended to create a sense of belonging for some and strike fear into those who didn't belong. It's still doing it.
I don't like it. But if it could scare off the yuppies...
Friday, January 29, 2010
The Crucifixion of East Van
If you would like to complain about the giant cross now dominating the VCC-Clark Skytrain station, I think this could be a good place to do it. http://tripplanning.translink.ca/hiwire?.a=cCustomerComplaint
Here's what I posted.
-FW
Here's what I posted.
Incident: Please quickly remove the giant cross with "East Van" written on the back that has suddenly appeared towering over the VCC-Clark Skytrain station. I gather that this is intended to be a work of public art, however, to me it is distressing and offensive. Having spoken to other residents of this neighbourhood, I believe this to be a general sentiment. There was no consultation to my knowledge, and if there had been, the opinion would surely have been against it. We are a highly multicultural neighbourhood, and this monstrous secular installation of a symbol sacred to one religion is insulting to non-Christians and Christians alike. I think we would be happier with some nice flowers on this spot, but if we have to have art, please give us the giant raindrop that was removed from another stop at the behest of TV crews. Unlike the Cross, rain is a universal symbol for Vancouverites.
-FW
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
Petition for Off-Leash Area in Guelph Park
Message received:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Hi,
>
> We really need an off leash area for dogs in the Mount Pleasant neighbourhood, I wanted to draw your attention to this important petition that I recently signed:
>
> "Petition for OFF LEASH Dog Area in Guelph Park"
> http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/offleash/
>
> I really think this is an important cause, and I'd like to encourage you to add your signature, too. It's free and takes just a few seconds of your time.
>
> Thanks for your support !
> ------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Hi,
>
> We really need an off leash area for dogs in the Mount Pleasant neighbourhood, I wanted to draw your attention to this important petition that I recently signed:
>
> "Petition for OFF LEASH Dog Area in Guelph Park"
> http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/offleash/
>
> I really think this is an important cause, and I'd like to encourage you to add your signature, too. It's free and takes just a few seconds of your time.
>
> Thanks for your support !
> ------------------------------
Thursday, December 24, 2009
Dope-growers must be homeowners?
While I was on the bus last week I met a man who is an immigrant from the US who said he loves Canada. I asked why, and he said he loves it because he has a license to grow medical marijuana here. He uses the stuff for arthritis pain and his contract with the government allows him to grow for himself and for compassion clubs.
I didn't ask him if he owns his own home, but according to an article by Matthew Burrows in the Georgia Straight recently, the Conservatives' new Bill C-15 will criminalize tenants who grow the weed, even for legitimate purposes. Here's the link: http://www.straight.com/article-276202/vancouver/bill-c15-nails-tenants-growing-medicinal-pot
I went to look for the bill to see if Burrows' conclusion might be correct, and I'm still not entirely sure if he's right or not. I was reading the Legislative Summary and I have to admit it made me crosseyed because there are so many variables, but it looks as if, depending on some of the variables, a person could get up to 14 years in jail for growing cannabis in someone else's property (I suppose this is where renting comes in), compared with only 7 or maybe even 5 years maximum if that and some other qualifiers are avoided. Sounds like a lot until you realize that the bill provides a maximum of life in prison for dealing in other drugs.
Here's the section about mandatory minimum sentences, from the Lebislative Summary of the bill written last January, 2009 (the summary has a disclaimer saying it doesn't assert that it is really accurate about the content of the bill itself - it's not ). I put sections that seemed relevant to marihuana sentencing in bold, in case you want to try to unravel it yourself.
Sections 5 to 7 of the CDSA deal with, respectively, the offences of trafficking in a controlled substance, importing and exporting such a substance, and the production of a controlled substance. Clauses 1 to 3 of Bill C-15 amend each of these sections.
The current section 5(3)(a) of the CDSA makes trafficking in a substance included in Schedule I or II an indictable offence. The maximum punishment for this offence is imprisonment for life. This measure reflects the seriousness with which these substances are viewed, particularly the opiates and coca and its derivatives found in Schedule I. One exception is found in section 5(4) of the Act and concerns trafficking in Schedule II substances, mainly cannabis and its derivatives. Should the amount trafficked not exceed the amounts set out in Schedule VII to the Act (3 kg of cannabis resin or cannabis [marihuana]), the maximum possible punishment is imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years less a day.
Clause 1 of Bill C-15 amends section 5(3)(a) of the CDSA to provide in certain circumstances for mandatory minimum terms of imprisonment for the offence of trafficking in a substance included in Schedule I or in Schedule II if the amount of the Schedule II substance exceeds the amount for that substance set out in Schedule VII. There will be a minimum punishment of imprisonment for one year if certain aggravating factors apply: the offence was committed for a criminal organization, as that term is defined in section 467.1(1) of the Criminal Code (a group of three or more people whose purpose is to commit serious offences for material benefit); there was the use or threat of the use of violence in the commission of the offence; a weapon was carried, used or threatened to be used in the commission of the offence; or the offender was convicted of a designated substance offence, or had served a term of imprisonment for a designated substance offence, within the previous 10 years. A “designated substance offence” is defined in section 2 of the CDSA to mean any of the offences in sections 4 to 10 of the CDSA, except the offence of possession of a substance found in Schedule I, II, or III to the Act, as set out in subsection 4(1).
Clause 1 amends the CDSA to impose a minimum punishment of imprisonment for a term of two years if certain other aggravating factors apply, including that the offence was committed in or near a school, on or near school grounds, or in or near any other public place usually frequented by persons under the age of 18 years. Defining such places may prove to be difficult. The use of the term “community centre” in former subsection 810.1(3)(b) as a restriction on the movements of those who may commit a sexual offence against a child was found to be overly broad and, therefore, a violation of section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.(59) The minimum two-year punishment will also be imposed if the offender used the services of a person who is under 18 years of age, or involved such a person, in committing the offence or committed the offence in a prison, or on its grounds. The term “prison” is defined in section 2 of the Criminal Code to include a penitentiary, common jail, public or reformatory prison, lock-up, guard-room or other place in which persons who are charged with or convicted of offences are usually kept in custody.
New section 5(3)(a.1) of the CDSA reenacts the current section 5(4) of the CDSA and imposes a maximum punishment of imprisonment for five years less a day if the trafficking offence is for a small amount of cannabis or its derivatives, as listed in Schedule II.
The current section 6(3)(a) of the CDSA makes the importing into Canada or exporting from Canada of a substance included in Schedule I or II of the Act or the possession of such a substance for the purpose of exporting it from Canada an indictable offence. The maximum punishment for this offence is imprisonment for life. Lesser maximum punishments apply if the offence is committed in relation to substances in the other schedules.
Clause 2 of Bill C-15 imposes a mandatory minimum punishment of imprisonment for one year if the offence is committed for the purpose of trafficking and the substance involved is included in Schedule I and is in an amount that does not exceed one kilogram, or is listed in Schedule II. The minimum punishment will also apply if the offender, while committing the offence, abused a position of trust or authority or had access to an area that is restricted to authorized persons (such as in an airport) and used that access to commit the offence.(60) As in clauses 1 and 3, the maximum punishment of imprisonment for life is retained. Under new section 6(3)(a.1), the mandatory minimum punishment increases to two years’ imprisonment if the Schedule I substance that is trafficked is in an amount that exceeds one kilogram.
The current section 7(2)(a) of the CDSA makes the production of a substance included in Schedule I or II of the Act, other than cannabis (marihuana), an indictable offence with a maximum punishment of imprisonment for life. Subsection 7(2)(b) of the CDSA makes the production of cannabis (marihuana) an indictable offence with a maximum punishment of seven years’ imprisonment.
Clause 3 of Bill C-15 imposes a mandatory minimum punishment of imprisonment for two years if the subject matter of the production offence is a substance included in Schedule I, with a maximum punishment of imprisonment for life. The mandatory minimum punishment is increased to three years if any of the health and safety factors listed in new section 7(3) apply. These health and safety factors are:
■the offender used real property that belongs to a third party to commit the offence;
■the production constituted a potential security, health or safety hazard to persons under the age of 18 years who were in the location where the offence was committed or in the immediate area;
■the production constituted a potential public safety hazard in a residential area; or
■the accused placed or set a trap that is likely to cause death or bodily harm to another person in the location where the offence was committed.
If the substance produced is one listed in Schedule II, other than cannabis (marihuana), new section 7(2)(a.1) imposes a mandatory minimum punishment of imprisonment for one year if the production is for the purpose of trafficking, or for a term of 18 months if the production is for the purpose of trafficking and any of the health and safety factors listed above apply. If the subject matter of the production offence is cannabis (marihuana), subsection 7(2)(b) will double the maximum possible term of imprisonment from 7 to 14 years.
Mandatory minimum punishments will also be introduced for the production of cannabis (marihuana), with their length depending upon the number of marihuana plants produced. The term of imprisonment will be at least six months if the number of plants produced is more than 5(61) and fewer than 201 and the production is for the purpose of trafficking. The minimum penalty increases to nine months where the number of plants produced is fewer than 201, the production is for the purpose of trafficking, and any of the health and safety factors also apply. If the number of plants produced is more than 200 and fewer than 501, the minimum term of imprisonment is one year, which increases to 18 months if any of the health and safety factors apply. The minimum term of imprisonment will be two years if the number of plants produced is more than 500, which will increase to three years if any of the health and safety factors apply. There is no mention of the production being for the purposes of trafficking when the number of plants is more than 200.
You can read more about this bill at: http://www2.parl.gc.ca/Sites/LOP/LEGISINFO/index.asp?List=ls&Query=5739&Session=22&Language=e#aclauses1to3 The summary includes some things about the debate over mandatory minimum sentences, and yet it also refers to the establishment of Drug Treatment Courts.
Don't rely on any of this as legal advice. I'm not a lawyer and am only skimming the surface in looking at this bill.
All of the bill except sections 10 and 11 are apparently awaiting a date announcement about when they go into force. [There is no description of any section 10 or 11 in the legislative summary, so perhaps they are sections expunged in previous revisions].
There was one section of the summary that suggested that growers of medical marijuana are being limited by law to growing only enough for themselves and one other patient. Here's that section:
I didn't ask him if he owns his own home, but according to an article by Matthew Burrows in the Georgia Straight recently, the Conservatives' new Bill C-15 will criminalize tenants who grow the weed, even for legitimate purposes. Here's the link: http://www.straight.com/article-276202/vancouver/bill-c15-nails-tenants-growing-medicinal-pot
I went to look for the bill to see if Burrows' conclusion might be correct, and I'm still not entirely sure if he's right or not. I was reading the Legislative Summary and I have to admit it made me crosseyed because there are so many variables, but it looks as if, depending on some of the variables, a person could get up to 14 years in jail for growing cannabis in someone else's property (I suppose this is where renting comes in), compared with only 7 or maybe even 5 years maximum if that and some other qualifiers are avoided. Sounds like a lot until you realize that the bill provides a maximum of life in prison for dealing in other drugs.
Here's the section about mandatory minimum sentences, from the Lebislative Summary of the bill written last January, 2009 (the summary has a disclaimer saying it doesn't assert that it is really accurate about the content of the bill itself - it's not ). I put sections that seemed relevant to marihuana sentencing in bold, in case you want to try to unravel it yourself.
A. Clauses 1 to 3: Mandatory Minimum Sentences
Sections 5 to 7 of the CDSA deal with, respectively, the offences of trafficking in a controlled substance, importing and exporting such a substance, and the production of a controlled substance. Clauses 1 to 3 of Bill C-15 amend each of these sections.
The current section 5(3)(a) of the CDSA makes trafficking in a substance included in Schedule I or II an indictable offence. The maximum punishment for this offence is imprisonment for life. This measure reflects the seriousness with which these substances are viewed, particularly the opiates and coca and its derivatives found in Schedule I. One exception is found in section 5(4) of the Act and concerns trafficking in Schedule II substances, mainly cannabis and its derivatives. Should the amount trafficked not exceed the amounts set out in Schedule VII to the Act (3 kg of cannabis resin or cannabis [marihuana]), the maximum possible punishment is imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years less a day.
Clause 1 of Bill C-15 amends section 5(3)(a) of the CDSA to provide in certain circumstances for mandatory minimum terms of imprisonment for the offence of trafficking in a substance included in Schedule I or in Schedule II if the amount of the Schedule II substance exceeds the amount for that substance set out in Schedule VII. There will be a minimum punishment of imprisonment for one year if certain aggravating factors apply: the offence was committed for a criminal organization, as that term is defined in section 467.1(1) of the Criminal Code (a group of three or more people whose purpose is to commit serious offences for material benefit); there was the use or threat of the use of violence in the commission of the offence; a weapon was carried, used or threatened to be used in the commission of the offence; or the offender was convicted of a designated substance offence, or had served a term of imprisonment for a designated substance offence, within the previous 10 years. A “designated substance offence” is defined in section 2 of the CDSA to mean any of the offences in sections 4 to 10 of the CDSA, except the offence of possession of a substance found in Schedule I, II, or III to the Act, as set out in subsection 4(1).
Clause 1 amends the CDSA to impose a minimum punishment of imprisonment for a term of two years if certain other aggravating factors apply, including that the offence was committed in or near a school, on or near school grounds, or in or near any other public place usually frequented by persons under the age of 18 years. Defining such places may prove to be difficult. The use of the term “community centre” in former subsection 810.1(3)(b) as a restriction on the movements of those who may commit a sexual offence against a child was found to be overly broad and, therefore, a violation of section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.(59) The minimum two-year punishment will also be imposed if the offender used the services of a person who is under 18 years of age, or involved such a person, in committing the offence or committed the offence in a prison, or on its grounds. The term “prison” is defined in section 2 of the Criminal Code to include a penitentiary, common jail, public or reformatory prison, lock-up, guard-room or other place in which persons who are charged with or convicted of offences are usually kept in custody.
New section 5(3)(a.1) of the CDSA reenacts the current section 5(4) of the CDSA and imposes a maximum punishment of imprisonment for five years less a day if the trafficking offence is for a small amount of cannabis or its derivatives, as listed in Schedule II.
The current section 6(3)(a) of the CDSA makes the importing into Canada or exporting from Canada of a substance included in Schedule I or II of the Act or the possession of such a substance for the purpose of exporting it from Canada an indictable offence. The maximum punishment for this offence is imprisonment for life. Lesser maximum punishments apply if the offence is committed in relation to substances in the other schedules.
Clause 2 of Bill C-15 imposes a mandatory minimum punishment of imprisonment for one year if the offence is committed for the purpose of trafficking and the substance involved is included in Schedule I and is in an amount that does not exceed one kilogram, or is listed in Schedule II. The minimum punishment will also apply if the offender, while committing the offence, abused a position of trust or authority or had access to an area that is restricted to authorized persons (such as in an airport) and used that access to commit the offence.(60) As in clauses 1 and 3, the maximum punishment of imprisonment for life is retained. Under new section 6(3)(a.1), the mandatory minimum punishment increases to two years’ imprisonment if the Schedule I substance that is trafficked is in an amount that exceeds one kilogram.
The current section 7(2)(a) of the CDSA makes the production of a substance included in Schedule I or II of the Act, other than cannabis (marihuana), an indictable offence with a maximum punishment of imprisonment for life. Subsection 7(2)(b) of the CDSA makes the production of cannabis (marihuana) an indictable offence with a maximum punishment of seven years’ imprisonment.
Clause 3 of Bill C-15 imposes a mandatory minimum punishment of imprisonment for two years if the subject matter of the production offence is a substance included in Schedule I, with a maximum punishment of imprisonment for life. The mandatory minimum punishment is increased to three years if any of the health and safety factors listed in new section 7(3) apply. These health and safety factors are:
■the offender used real property that belongs to a third party to commit the offence;
■the production constituted a potential security, health or safety hazard to persons under the age of 18 years who were in the location where the offence was committed or in the immediate area;
■the production constituted a potential public safety hazard in a residential area; or
■the accused placed or set a trap that is likely to cause death or bodily harm to another person in the location where the offence was committed.
If the substance produced is one listed in Schedule II, other than cannabis (marihuana), new section 7(2)(a.1) imposes a mandatory minimum punishment of imprisonment for one year if the production is for the purpose of trafficking, or for a term of 18 months if the production is for the purpose of trafficking and any of the health and safety factors listed above apply. If the subject matter of the production offence is cannabis (marihuana), subsection 7(2)(b) will double the maximum possible term of imprisonment from 7 to 14 years.
Mandatory minimum punishments will also be introduced for the production of cannabis (marihuana), with their length depending upon the number of marihuana plants produced. The term of imprisonment will be at least six months if the number of plants produced is more than 5(61) and fewer than 201 and the production is for the purpose of trafficking. The minimum penalty increases to nine months where the number of plants produced is fewer than 201, the production is for the purpose of trafficking, and any of the health and safety factors also apply. If the number of plants produced is more than 200 and fewer than 501, the minimum term of imprisonment is one year, which increases to 18 months if any of the health and safety factors apply. The minimum term of imprisonment will be two years if the number of plants produced is more than 500, which will increase to three years if any of the health and safety factors apply. There is no mention of the production being for the purposes of trafficking when the number of plants is more than 200.
You can read more about this bill at: http://www2.parl.gc.ca/Sites/LOP/LEGISINFO/index.asp?List=ls&Query=5739&Session=22&Language=e#aclauses1to3 The summary includes some things about the debate over mandatory minimum sentences, and yet it also refers to the establishment of Drug Treatment Courts.
Don't rely on any of this as legal advice. I'm not a lawyer and am only skimming the surface in looking at this bill.
All of the bill except sections 10 and 11 are apparently awaiting a date announcement about when they go into force. [There is no description of any section 10 or 11 in the legislative summary, so perhaps they are sections expunged in previous revisions].
There was one section of the summary that suggested that growers of medical marijuana are being limited by law to growing only enough for themselves and one other patient. Here's that section:
In addition, the Marihuana Medical Access Regulations(23) allow for authorizations to possess marihuana to be issued to those persons who can prove a medical need for it. A holder of a personal-use production licence is also authorized to produce and keep marihuana for the medical purpose of the holder.(24) A specific limitation on the lawful source of supply of dried marihuana was declared invalid as contrary to section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in 2008.(25) The one-grower-to-one-user ratio was held to unjustifiably limit the ability of authorized persons to access their marihuana for medical purposes. This decision was confirmed by the Federal Court of Appeal.(26) In response, the government published in the Canada Gazette on 27 May 2009 Regulations Amending the Marihuana Medical Access Regulations.(27) These proposed changes will double the current ratio, making it one grower to two users. The explanation accompanying the proposed amendments states that a full review of the access to medical marihuana is required given that the program was never intended to facilitate the widespread, potentially large-scale production of marihuana for medical purposes.
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
New Mt. Pleasant Library Now Open
After some delay past the announced date, the new Mt. Pleasant Branch libary at the new Mt. Pleasant Community Centre is finally open. The address is 1 Kingsway. Here's the web page that has the hours, buses that stop there, etc., on it. http://www.vpl.vancouver.bc.ca/branches/details/mount_pleasant_branch
Unlike when the branch was in Kingsgate Mall, it's now going to be open 7 days a week, 9-9. except 9-6 on Sunday. However, it will be closed Dec. 24-26, New Year's Eve, and New Year's Day.
After a few trips just looking into the windows(including on the announced opening date when it didn't actually open), I finally went inside.
It seemed to me quite an oddly shaped space and a pretty tight fit to maneuver in some areas. The entranceway is narrow and the checkout desk is right by the door. This would theoretically allow the librarian there to stop anyone who set off the alarm at the entranceway, but I noticed that with long lines and only one checkout clerk they didn't actually have enough staff behind the desk to enforce that.
There are a LOT of computer terminals there, in more than one room, and most of them were busy when I went, not just with people looking up books but also doing other kinds of communication.
I suspect it may not actually have more shelf space than the original Mt. Pleasant Library in Kingsgate Mall had - but of course it has more shelves than the temporary, transitional library in the mall (except paperback racks, which seem to be fewer and are also way in the back). They also don't yet have any racks of used books for sale there. I had brought a bagful of paperbacks to donate, so I hope they will be able to put them out soon.
One of the aunties thought it very convenient that there is a display of new books and fast reads face-out just at the entrance. The face-out shelves should help them make the most of the few new books they can afford in this era of library cuts.
One of the strangest things in this library is a gas-burning fake fireplace, in the back where there are also a few comfortable chairs for sitting in to read. Although the fireplace is completely enclosed in glass, seeing actual flames in a room full of paper seems a bit disturbing.
There are a lot of large windows in the library, but one of the aunties commented she thought it seemed rather dark inside. It will be even darker after the multi-storey condo developments planned for the surrounding properties go up.
The landscaping around the outside is not finished yet. One of the aunties commented that the city must have spent several thousand dollars apiece for the tall trees with root-balls they bought to plant alongside. Some medium-sized trees with root-balls were left on the ground unplanted and unguarded over a weekend and we noticed they had gotten damaged by someone or something.
Despite my minor complaints, I expect to walk over there often. My next request will be for hitching posts where you can tie up your dogs while you go in.
Unlike when the branch was in Kingsgate Mall, it's now going to be open 7 days a week, 9-9. except 9-6 on Sunday. However, it will be closed Dec. 24-26, New Year's Eve, and New Year's Day.
After a few trips just looking into the windows(including on the announced opening date when it didn't actually open), I finally went inside.
It seemed to me quite an oddly shaped space and a pretty tight fit to maneuver in some areas. The entranceway is narrow and the checkout desk is right by the door. This would theoretically allow the librarian there to stop anyone who set off the alarm at the entranceway, but I noticed that with long lines and only one checkout clerk they didn't actually have enough staff behind the desk to enforce that.
There are a LOT of computer terminals there, in more than one room, and most of them were busy when I went, not just with people looking up books but also doing other kinds of communication.
I suspect it may not actually have more shelf space than the original Mt. Pleasant Library in Kingsgate Mall had - but of course it has more shelves than the temporary, transitional library in the mall (except paperback racks, which seem to be fewer and are also way in the back). They also don't yet have any racks of used books for sale there. I had brought a bagful of paperbacks to donate, so I hope they will be able to put them out soon.
One of the aunties thought it very convenient that there is a display of new books and fast reads face-out just at the entrance. The face-out shelves should help them make the most of the few new books they can afford in this era of library cuts.
One of the strangest things in this library is a gas-burning fake fireplace, in the back where there are also a few comfortable chairs for sitting in to read. Although the fireplace is completely enclosed in glass, seeing actual flames in a room full of paper seems a bit disturbing.
There are a lot of large windows in the library, but one of the aunties commented she thought it seemed rather dark inside. It will be even darker after the multi-storey condo developments planned for the surrounding properties go up.
The landscaping around the outside is not finished yet. One of the aunties commented that the city must have spent several thousand dollars apiece for the tall trees with root-balls they bought to plant alongside. Some medium-sized trees with root-balls were left on the ground unplanted and unguarded over a weekend and we noticed they had gotten damaged by someone or something.
Despite my minor complaints, I expect to walk over there often. My next request will be for hitching posts where you can tie up your dogs while you go in.
The #99 bus now stops at Fraser
At long last, the #99 express bus to UBC is making stops at Broadway & Fraser. Previously it went straight from Clark to Main (and vice versa).
The first time I rode the 99 to that stop, last week, I commented to the bus driver that a lot of us had been trying for years to get that stop added to the route. He said that the new stop was creating havoc in the schedule, because it added three minutes to the route but the extra time had not been added in to the schedule. (One stop doesn't really take 3 minutes, but there was another new stop added to the route as well, farther west, and of course each stop occurs in each direction.)
One of the aunties raised the issue of the #99 bus not stopping at Fraser at one of the city planning consultations, where they were talking about development of the two blocks of Broadway just west of Fraser. Wanting the 99 to stop there was one suggestion everybody at the meeting strongly favoured. The planner told us that maybe getting the 99 to stop there would be the tradeoff for accepting 12-story building development along that stretch of Broadway.
The first time I rode the 99 to that stop, last week, I commented to the bus driver that a lot of us had been trying for years to get that stop added to the route. He said that the new stop was creating havoc in the schedule, because it added three minutes to the route but the extra time had not been added in to the schedule. (One stop doesn't really take 3 minutes, but there was another new stop added to the route as well, farther west, and of course each stop occurs in each direction.)
One of the aunties raised the issue of the #99 bus not stopping at Fraser at one of the city planning consultations, where they were talking about development of the two blocks of Broadway just west of Fraser. Wanting the 99 to stop there was one suggestion everybody at the meeting strongly favoured. The planner told us that maybe getting the 99 to stop there would be the tradeoff for accepting 12-story building development along that stretch of Broadway.
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Winter Homeless Shelter in Mt. Pleasant Open House Jan 13
A temporary winter homeless shelter was announced today - its opening day - in Mt. Pleasant at 677 East Broadway. It is scheduled to be open until "no later than April 2010."
The shelter will be holding an open house on January 13, from 5 to 7 pm, if you want to see inside.
The shelter is one of several being provincially funded just from now until April 2010.
City staff was ordered to issue permits "on an expedited basis."
The location is the same piece of city property where the 12-story building for homesless and "hard to house" is being planned. It's right by the westbound Broadway & Fraser bus stop where the #9, #8, and now also the #99 buses stop.
I post below the letter I received in email from city housing planner Andrea.Gillman@vancouver.ca . The letter came with two attachments, but as they are in .pdf I can't post them to the blog. Email her if you want to receive them.
One attachment states that city staff has been ordered to issue permits on an expedited basis so that provincial funds can be spent for temporary winter shelters around the city. The one is Mt. Pleasant is listed as 677 East Broadway - development permit #DE413544.
Here's the letter:
The shelter will be holding an open house on January 13, from 5 to 7 pm, if you want to see inside.
The shelter is one of several being provincially funded just from now until April 2010.
City staff was ordered to issue permits "on an expedited basis."
The location is the same piece of city property where the 12-story building for homesless and "hard to house" is being planned. It's right by the westbound Broadway & Fraser bus stop where the #9, #8, and now also the #99 buses stop.
I post below the letter I received in email from city housing planner Andrea.Gillman@vancouver.ca . The letter came with two attachments, but as they are in .pdf I can't post them to the blog. Email her if you want to receive them.
One attachment states that city staff has been ordered to issue permits on an expedited basis so that provincial funds can be spent for temporary winter shelters around the city. The one is Mt. Pleasant is listed as 677 East Broadway - development permit #DE413544.
Here's the letter:
The Mount Pleasant Community Planning Team wishes to advise you of the following:
The City of Vancouver and the Province of BC are working with local non-profit operators in implementing a Winter Response to provide additional shelter capacity during the winter months. All shelters will be in neighbourhoods that have been identified as having a substantial homeless population but lacking adequate shelter resources. Shelter locations may include Mount Pleasant, Kitsilano, Downtown and Grandview-Woodlands.
On December 15th, council allocated $500,000 towards the Winter Response. Together with a $1.2 million contribution from the Province, funds will be used for renovations and shelter operations. All shelters opened as part of the 2010 Winter Response will operate for the winter months, closing no later than April 30th, 2010.
The first of these shelters will open tonight in the Mount Pleasant area at 677 East Broadway. The shelter will provide space for up to 40 homeless individuals each night. The shelter will be open 24/7 and will be operated by Raincity Housing and Support Society. An Open House will take place at the shelter on Wednesday January 13th, 2010 from 5 PM - 7 PM.
Please find attached a copy of the information letter sent out to neighbours of the shelter in addition to the Operations Management Plan provided by Raincity Housing. For more information please contact me via email or phone (noted below). You can also contact the shelter operator directly, contact information is provided in the attached letter.
<> < >
Thank you,
Andrea Gillman
Andrea Gillman
Housing Planner
City of Vancouver
phone: 604-873-7542
fax: 604-871-6488
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)