Darah Hansen and Heather Travis
Sun

The Whitecaps were still in the game Tuesday with a proposal to build a $65-million waterfront soccer stadium in Gastown after winning unanimous — though heavily conditional — support for the concept from Vancouver city councillors.

Council’s decision came after four nights of public meetings on the proposal, with more than 100 speakers stepping up to give their opinions for and against.

On Tuesday, council agreed that concerns voiced at those meetings — including road access around the stadium and the impact of noise and crowds on neighbouring residents and businesses — must be adequately addressed before the proposal could move forward in the rezoning and permit process.

To ensure this happens, stadium proponents have been directed to conduct a one-year formal study of the issues outlined. The rezoning process would add another year to that.

Stadium proponents must also resolve potential risk and liability issues associated with dangerous goods being transported in the CPR rail yard, over which the 15,000-seat facility would be constructed. They must also reconfigure the stadium’s design to ensure a better fit with its surrounding heritage neighbourhood between Granville Square and the foot of Cambie Street in downtown Vancouver.

Resolving all the identified concerns could delay the start of the project by two years or more.

Still, Bob Lenarduzzi, Whitecaps director of soccer operations, said his organization was “delighted” with Tuesday’s outcome.

“The public demonstrated their interest in the project and council endorsed that interest unanimously, and, so, we’re looking forward to moving ahead with the project and addressing the requirements that the staff had put forward to council,” he said in an interview outside council chambers.

Lenarduzzi said he’s optimistic the fundamental issues facing the proposal can be resolved within 24 months, and he played down opposition to the stadium by some residents and merchants in Gastown and the Downtown Eastside. Many said their neighbourhood was already too fragile because of surrounding poverty and open drug use to support the noise and rowdy crowds associated with a major sports facility.

“I think what is important to note is that the city, the Whitecaps, and the Port [Authority] — all the main stakeholders — all agree to resolve them . . . and that’s a pretty good starting point,” Lenarduzzi said.

Coun. Suzanne Anton said the city will make sure residents’ concerns are not overlooked.

“We’re going to make sure that doesn’t happen,” she said in an interview. “It’s very important for the Whitecaps to work with the residents to make sure that does not happen.”

But some Gastown residents said they aren’t comforted by council’s promises.

“I’m just devastated by this decision,” said Wendy Pedersen, whose home at the Four Sisters Co-op would overlook the new stadium.

“We already have bad things happening in our neighbourhood and it [the stadium] is going to bring more,” she said.

Neighbour Caryn Duncan was also disappointed with Tuesday’s outcome, but vowed to keep up the fight to find an alternate location for the project.

“We are not going away. We are in it for the long haul,” she said, referring to support from members of the loosely knit citizens group, called the Central Waterfront Coalition, of which both she and Pedersen are members.

“The Downtown Eastside and Gastown is our neighbourhood and we are not going away. We are not visitors … We’ve lived here for years and we do not support the stadium,” Duncan said.

Council had no answers Tuesday on how much money — if any — the approval process for the project will cost city taxpayers. A staff report outlining what it will take to expedite the project as a planning priority is expected back before council in September. The report will address issues of staff time, and just who will pay for it, Anton said.

Staff has also been asked to report to council on a quarterly basis on the proposal’s progress over the next two years.

At Tuesday’s meeting, Coun. Raymond Louie suggested council spend the next six months studying alternative locations for the proposed stadium, in case the waterfront location proved unworkable. He also called for an expanded study of the entire waterfront area, with future planning in mind should the railway tracks be relocated.

Louie argued the city has no planning in place for the land, and councillors “should not be rushed to make hasty decisions when somebody comes before us with a seeming gift,” he said, in reference to the privately funded stadium proposal.

“This is not about soccer for me. This is about land use,” he said.

But Louie’s ideas were shot down by the majority of councillors, who felt they would distract the city’s focus from the current proposal and cause even further delays.

“I think we have to keep moving, and not use planning as a means to stop this,” said Coun. Peter Ladner.

Ladner said Tuesday’s decision does not necessarily mean the project would go ahead.

“There is still a lot to be taken into consideration,” he said, adding he felt council should make an “extra effort” to see the proposal work, calling it a “huge social contribution” to Vancouver.

“We aren’t paying a penny for this stadium,” he said, adding Toronto is putting up $10 million for a similar structure.

The proposed Whitecaps stadium would span more than seven hectares of rail lands east of the Waterfront Seabus terminal in the Gastown area. The cost of the project is estimated at $65 million, including land purchasing costs of about $17 million.

After the two-year study and rezoning process is complete, council will decide whether to allow building to proceed.

“If we want this stadium in Vancouver, we need a way for these subjective issues to be addressed,” said Coun. Kim Capri.

STADIUM TIMELINE

For more than three years, Vancouver has been kicking around plans to build a $65-million waterfront soccer stadium in Gastown. The process is far from over.

January 2003 — Former Vancouver Mayor Larry Campbell approaches the Whitecaps about building a downtown stadium.

July 2004 — The city decides against using Main Street and Terminal Avenue for a stadium site.

December 2004 — The Whitecaps make a formal inquiry to the city planning department about a waterfront site, north of Gastown.

July 2005 — Whitecaps purchase land at a waterfront site.

October 20, 2005 — City council approves a high-level review of the proposed stadium to determine the level of public support and technical issues of concern.

May 2006 — City staff complete high-level review.

July 11, 2006 — The proposed stadium concept wins unanimous — though heavily conditional — support from Vancouver city council.

September 2006 — Survey of Gastown neighbourhood and businesses to begin.

September 2007 — Rezoning application and stadium design process to begin.

2009 — Under the former Vancouver city timeline, construction was to be completed.

Sources: www.whitecapsnewstadium.com, Bob Lenarduzzi, director of soccer operations for the Whitecaps

© The Vancouver Sun 2006

Council had a chance to scrap the plan, but instead decided to make it a priority.

Peter Severinson
Province

Vancouver city council voted unanimously yesterday to keep working with the Vancouver Whitecaps on a plan to build a downtown soccer stadium on the city’s waterfront.

Council had a chance to scrap the plan yesterday, but instead decided to make it a priority for the city even though many fear that building a stadium on a platform above the rail yard north of Gastown will be impossible.

Council debated the issue for almost four hours, rejecting a proposal to do an extended study of the waterfront before considering the stadium proposal.

“We don’t have planning in place for these lands,” said Coun. Raymond Louie, who brought forward the proposal. “We should not be rushed to make a decision when someone comes to us with what seems like a gift.”

Louie also proposed the city start looking for other possible stadium sites in case the current one fails.

Council voted not to start looking for other sites right away and see what kind of progress the Whitecaps can make on the waterfront site.

Coun. Heather Deal said she was disappointed by the decision not to look for other sites, saying the soccer club should have a back-up plan.

“Success is not a guarantee,” she said. “We have a lot of potential points where this plan will not succeed.”

More than 80 people spoke out on the plan in several days of public hearings, with about half supporting and half opposing it.

Coun. Tim Stevenson said voting on the project was one of the hardest decisions he’s ever had to make as a councillor.

“I’ve almost changed my mind every day,” he said.

Stevenson said he seriously doubts the Whitecaps will be able to overcome the huge challenges to building on the site — but they should get the chance to try.

Bob Lenarduzzi, the Whitecaps’ director of soccer operations, said he was pleased with the decision, although admitting there still a lot of work to be done.

“The public demonstrated their interest in the project and the council endorsed that interest unanimously,” he said. “All of the issues that need to be resolved can be resolved.”

Lenarduzzi said the Whitecaps have no plans to build the stadium anywhere else if the waterfront site doesn’t work.

Opponents of the plan said they weren’t surprised by council’s decision, but still feel the stadium won’t be built because of the tough obstacles, said Jon Stovell, spokesman for the Gastown Neighbourhood Coalition.

“We wished [council] had exercised more caution because we don’t believe the Whitecaps can solve these problems,” he said.

Stovell said building a stadium goes against the city’s work to make Gastown a comfortable residential and shopping neighbourhood.

© The Vancouver Province 2006

 

Proposed upgrade would complete the recreational seawall loop around downtown and Stanley Park

Gwen Preston
Sun

VANCOUVER – Wider sidewalks, more trees, less parking and revamped parks are proposed for the Carrall Street heritage thoroughfare in the Downtown Eastside, according to a report released by the city’s planning department.

The plan will also include developing Maple Tree Square, at the north end of Carrall, into a spacious area using the same traditional red paving stones seen in Gastown.

“The main theme of the design is to strengthen Maple Tree Square as a ‘destination’ rather than a place to simpy travel through,” reads the report written by Brigid Kudzius and Jenny Chen-Adams.

The report also detailed the increased operating costs for the greenway. Annual maintenance are pegged at $76,500, plus $63,700 in pay and benefits for a full-time landscape designer. Construction costs are estimated as $5 million.

The revitalization of Carrall Street — which connects Chinatown, the Hastings Street corridor and Gastown — is intended to attract visitors and private investors, stimulate business opportunities and provide improved neighbourhood areas for Downtown Eastside residents.

Chen-Adams, a city planner working on the project, said the changes will be “a major city investment in the area.

“We are hoping the project will bring more positive activity back to the street. It goes beyond the brick and mortar component,” she said.

The street would be transformed into a greenway linking False Creek and Burrard Inlet, completing the recreational seawall loop around downtown Vancouver and Stanley Park.

Kudzius, assistant engineer for the project, details some of the proposals.

“In the design, the roadway is narrowed, parking is removed from one side of the street, sidewalks on both sides are expanded and recreational paths are provided on each side of the street for cyclists, skateboarders, and inline skaters,” said Kudzius.

Pigeon Park, at the corner of Hastings and Carrall, would get a facelift designed by the community members who use the areas. A granite channel to collect rainwater would run the length of the greenway, watering the trees and symbolizing the water-to-water connection the street represents.

The city has been working on the design since 2002.

Vancouver city council will vote on the plan July 13.

“It’s been quite complicated in terms of how to accommodate everything in a relatively narrow street,” Kudzius said.

The other major obstacle was attracting community support and involvement in the project, said Chen-Adams.

“That’s why the discussions for this greenway have taken so long,” she said. “Different people have different ideas of how this project should be designed. That’s the nature of this community — it’s very diverse.”

A group of local businesses and residents called the Stewardship Group participated significantly in designing the greenway.

“From the very beginning we’ve been looking at the challenge of integrating a very complex social structure,” said Roger Bayley, who chaired the community group. “We wanted to bring resources to the community and use them to create employment opportunities for Downtown Eastside residents. That’s been the driving force behind the whole thing.”

Bayley is especially encouraged by the greenway’s focus on the arts, such as a rotating streetside art demonstration.

“It’s about bringing dignity to the community,” said Bayley. “Build it and they will come.”

CARRALL STREET PROPOSAL

A look at some of the key recommendations in the city of Vancouver planning document for a proposed $5-million facelift for Carrall Street.

Road narrowed: “The [Carrall Street] roadway is narrowed and parking is removed from one side of the street. This allows the sidewalks to be expanded and dedicated recreational paths to be provided for cyclists, skateboards and inline-skaters on both sides of the street.”

Trees added: Three to four rows of trees, depending on location, will be planted to give the street a tree canopy and ensure the greenway concept extends the length of the corridor.

Pedestrian-friendly square: A redesign of Maple Tree Square — the intersection of Carrall and Water Street where the statue of Gassy jack stands — will narrow the roads and add significantly to the already wide sidewalks to make a space “to be owned and enjoyed by the community” as a “destination” square.

New life for drug-dealing central: Tiny Pigeon Park, now better known for drug dealers and discarded needles, would get a complete makeover.

© The Vancouver Sun 2006

Sun

The lack of affordable housing receives a lot of attention in Canada’s least affordable city.

Often overlooked is the scarcity of industrial land. Its neglect is understandable: Residential real estate is something we can all relate to; a site for a plant or warehouse seems to have no human dimension.

But mixed land use — residential, commercial and industrial — is crucial to the city and the region. Without places to work, people have little reason to stay here and, in any case, would have no income to do so. Vancouver would be wholly dependent on the kindness of strangers, tourists visiting a hollowed-out resort town.

Industry is a prerequisite for a diversified economy, the lifeblood of any major metropolis. Not only is it a job generator and taxpayer, but some businesses need suppliers close at hand to deliver goods, such as perishables, several times a day.

In 1973, Vancouver had about 2,400 acres of industrial-zoned land. By 1995, the figure had dropped to about 1,700 acres, prompting city council to adopt policies to preserve what was left. As a result, the amount of industrial land has changed little in the past decade, totalling about 21.5 million square feet of floor space in Vancouver’s industrial areas. However, the latest inventory revealed that only 89 acres designated for industrial uses remain undeveloped, leaving little room for industry to expand.

In all of the Greater Vancouver Regional District, comprising 21 municipalities, there are just 26,089 acres of industrial land, of which 6,859 are vacant. Of that, 700 acres are under federal jurisdiction (specifically, the port authorities and Vancouver International Airport).

According to a GVRD study, approximately one-third of the vacant land could be developed within a year, another third over two to 10 years and the balance, 1,960 acres, beyond 10 years. About 90 per cent of the longer-term land availability is within Surrey’s city limits.

Much of the available land is divided into small parcels, poorly located or vulnerable to traffic congestion, and these limitations have driven some businesses out the region. Kal Tire, for example, recently built a 230,000-square-foot tire retreading plant and distribution centre in Chilliwack, largely because it couldn’t find a suitable site in the GVRD.

The shortage of industrial land has driven up the cost, but it still trails the price of residential property by a wide margin, creating economic and political pressure to build housing instead. Although business pays a higher tax rate, municipal revenue from 100 condo units would be greater than that from a single factory occupying the same space.

Preserving industrial land has become a priority for some municipal councils, but they have few tools to prevent the encroachment of competing demands.

For this reason, there is growing interest in creating something akin to the agricultural land reserve, a regulatory system established by provincial legislation in 1973 to preserve scarce agricultural land in the province. In fact, a report by the B.C. Competition Council last week, recommended that industrial land and transportation corridors be protected using a similar structure to the ALR.

We must exercise great caution in taking away regulatory powers of municipalities and handing them to the province. But ensuring what little industrial land remains is preserved might be a compelling enough reason to do so.

© The Vancouver Sun 2006