Idea is exciting but proposal’s scale is inappropriate for Gastown, consultants hired by the city say in report

Frances Bula
Sun

VANCOUVER – Go back to the drawing board because there are serious problems with your stadium plans, Whitecaps.

That’s the conclusion of an independent consultant team hired by Vancouver to do a preliminary technical assessment of the Whitecaps unusual proposal to build a soccer stadium over the rail yards that run between Gastown and the waterfront.

The report, which forms part of the material city staff will use to decide on what to recommend about the stadium in June, says the idea of a downtown stadium on the waterfront and close to transit is exciting.

But it goes on to say that the preliminary plans for the stadium are “inappropriate and unworkable.”

The scale of the building is out of keeping with the heritage of Gastown, there aren’t enough exits, it doesn’t help create a link between Gastown and the waterfront, and it doesn’t take into account the residential development that may be coming to the port area, says the report, which was done by a team led by the architecture firm of Hotson Bakker.

It suggests that the Whitecaps won’t be able to resolve any of those problems if it doesn’t change the proposed location, which is now on a tight six-acre parcel that lies between Seymour and Cambie.

The report also says the economic benefit is likely not as great as the Whitecaps have suggested, since any spending done by soccer fans will mostly be taken out of other downtown activities.

A second consultants’ report, on community reaction, concludes that about two-thirds of people in the region support the idea of the stadium downtown, but that both business owners and residents in the immediate vicinity have considerable doubts.

Both reports emphasize that people want to see a plan developed for the whole area, rather than just trying to decide on the stadium by itself, especially since Whitecaps owner Greg Kerfoot has bought all of the rail yard land from Canada Place to Main Street.

That has led to marked concern about what Kerfoot’s plans are for the rest of the property.

Whitecaps president John Rocha said the organization is pleased about the level of public support and he isn’t surprised to hear there are technical problems.

“We knew there were those issues right from the beginning. Any of the feedback is great because we haven’t done a design yet.

“Now we will look forward to developing a design that’s a landmark for Vancouver and integrates with Gastown.”

But opponents, which include groups that have not traditionally been allies, such as Gastown businesses and Downtown Eastside community groups, aren’t sure that a better design is going to solve the serious problems they believe are there and that the report appears to have confirmed.

If the Whitecaps’ proposal is meshed with a much larger city planning process for the whole waterfront, as the Hotson report suggests it should be, that could delay construction beyond the 2009 date the Whitecaps had been aiming for.

Councillors from all parties say they like the idea of a soccer stadium in Vancouver, but they all acknowledge there are significant problems that have to be resolved with the Whitecaps’ proposal.

© The Vancouver Sun 2006

But 55% of area residents oppose new soccer stadium

John Bermingham
Province

A consultants’ report shows strong support for the

proposed 15,000-seat Whitecaps soccer stadium among Lower Mainland and Vancouver residents.

But people who live in the immediate vicinity — Gastown and the Downtown Eastside — are narrowly opposed.

The consultants found that, overall, 67 per cent of people responding to questionnaires support the stadium and 27 per cent are opposed.

While 82 per cent of Lower Mainland residents and 75 per cent of Vancouverites give it the thumbs-up, 55 per cent of nearby residents give it the thumbs-down.

Whitecaps president John Rocha said it confirms the strong support he found in previous polling.

“It continues to be very supportive,” said Rocha. “Obviously, in the specific Gastown/Downtown Eastside area, it’s more split.”

Jon Stovell, spokesman for the Gastown Neighbourhood Coalition, said stadium supporters don’t realize the negative impacts on the neighbourhood.

“They’re really just signing on for a motherhood thing about a downtown stadium,” he said.

In a separate technical review of the stadium proposal, consultants had concerns about the location over CP Rail tracks, and the negative impact on surrounding areas. They also had design and heritage concerns, but concluded the project could work with major changes.

“Every project has issues,” said Rocha. “We feel that those issues can be addressed. The project can work.”

Stovell said the review shows the waterfront stadium just doesn’t work on the current site.

“All the people clustered around it are seeing major issues with the urban design,” he said.

“As long as the stadium is built on decking over the tracks, it’s got fundamental flaws.”

The coalition is to present an alternative plan for the area to city planners on Friday, suggesting a mixed-use condo development.

City of Vancouver planner Kevin McNaney said about 1,500 people have given their views on the stadium.

“The response rate was extremely good, especially given this was a pre-application process,” said McNaney.

“I think there’s a lot of interest.”

City staff are working on the final report, which will be released this month.

McNaney said the two technical reports only provide technical background.

“They do help to inform where staff are going with things,” he said.

The $100,000 cost for the consultants was fronted by the Whitecaps.

The initial review goes before council in mid-June.

© The Vancouver Province 2006

 

Tuscany of Canada stands on its own as premier producer in the country

Julia Necheff
Province

It’s been described as the Tuscany or Provence of Canada, but the Okanagan Valley stands on its own as a scenic vacation destination and producer of fine wine.

The Okanagan wine industry is young — the first winery opened in 1932 — but it didn’t start coming into its own until the 1990s.

The industry is booming these days and new wineries are springing up all over. At last count, the number of wineries in the Okanagan had grown to 125. Many boast world-class views.

Given the number and variety of wineries and the distances involved, Okanagan wine country is best savoured slowly, for it is by no means compact. From Salmon Arm and Vernon at the north end to Osoyoos near the U.S. border, it stretches about 200 kilometres.

As well, because of climate variations, the grape-growing regions can be divided into three distinct parts — north, central and south — each with its own characteristics.

Experts agree you have to be strategic about how you go about drinking it all in.

To do it justice, it should be covered in stages over several days to a week, advises noted wine writer John Schreiner, whose 10th book, John Schreiner’s Okanagan Wine Tour Guide, was released recently.

“The first thing that people have to realize is that this is a very large region, so you’ve got to make up your mind how to break it up for purposes of touring,” Schreiner says in an interview.

Kelowna makes a good base for exploring the north and central wineries, several of which are major, well-established producers.

Then it’s a good idea to head down the highway and stay somewhere in the Naramata-Penticton-Oliver area, where the heaviest concentration of wineries is located.

The next big question is whether to take advantage of organized wine tours or do it yourself.

Catherine Callary of Tourism Kelowna says there are advantages to both.

The wine route is well marked with burgundy-and-white signs showing a cluster of grapes. Maps are available at the tourism office located at 544 Harvey Ave. in downtown Kelowna.

Or there are several tour companies that cover the whole Okanagan. There are the standard winery-and-lunch tours, while others combine activities. One company has a golf-wine package; another combines hiking with a visit to a winery.

The biggest advantage to taking an organized tour, of course, is that you don’t have to drive after doing a lot of wine-tasting.

Schreiner would rather see visitors strike out on their own, but he agrees organized tours have their place. Even though it’s perfectly acceptable to spit out the wine during a tasting and spittoons are supplied for that purpose, people often don’t want to or find it embarrassing, he notes.

If you like taking your own vehicle so you have the freedom to explore the back roads, make sure there’s a designated driver and that you have a map and some kind of guide to the wineries.

And don’t cram in too many visits. The palate gets tired after a while so three to four wineries in a day is plenty, Callary says.

For Schreiner, much of the charm comes from taking the time to learn about the wineries and the people who run them. His new book is full of interesting bits about each winery and its owners, and also includes wine recommendations.

“I think it’s a tragedy or a waste of time if you stumble from winery to winery without having any idea of who the people are,” he says. “I’m fascinated by meeting some of the people and getting their stories and talking beyond wine.”

PICK OF THE CROP

Asked for his pick of must-see wineries, Schreiner names about a dozen, for their interest as well as their wine.

Coming from the north, there’s Grey Monk.

“It’s a beautiful setting. The winery has been there about 25 years. The owners are very hospitable, it’s a very popular place,” Schreiner says.

Just east of Kelowna are CedarCreek, St. Hubertus and Summerhill, all within minutes of each other.

“CedarCreek has been (named) winery of the year in Canada twice now, so obviously the wines are very good and the tour program is outstanding,” Schreiner says. It’s owned by a Liberal senator, Ross Fitzpatrick.

St. Hubertus was destroyed by a forest fire in 2003, but the winery has been rebuilt.

Stephen Cipes, owner of the Summerhill Pyramid Winery, built a replica of the Great Pyramid of Egypt. He firmly believes that harnessing pyramid energy is the key to making fine wine. Summerhill is also the only certified organic winery in the Okanagan.

In Westbank is the most lavish winery in B.C., Mission Hill Family Estate — which Schreiner describes as a “jaw-dropper.”

Proprietor Anthony von Mandl spared no expense in building a large, Tuscan-style winery atop Mission Hill overlooking Lake Okanagan, complete with a spacious courtyard, terrace restaurant, loggia and a 12-storey bell tower with bronze bells imported from France.

“It’s absolutely spectacular,” says Schreiner.

Just down the hill, Quail’s Gate is another fine winery with a lovely patio and a gorgeous view.

Farther south, Schreiner says he’s a huge fan of the numerous wineries on the Naramata Bench near Penticton. You can devote two days there alone, he says.

Near Okanagan Falls, south of Penticton, there’s Blasted Church winery — named after a church that was dynamited in 1929 — and the Wild Goose winery has, in his opinion, the best riesling and gewurztraminer bar none.

Also near Okanagan Falls, Hawthorn Mountain Vineyards was established by a dog-loving military man, Maj. Hugh Fraser. One of its wines is named Ping, after Fraser’s favourite dog.

On the so-called Golden Mile near the town of Oliver, Schreiner singles out Tinhorn Creek and Gehringer Brothers. The Gehringers have kept their prices down and have the best value wines in the Okanagan, he says.

Schreiner raves about the wine from Burrowing Owl winery on Black Sage Road near Oliver.

In the far south, one should not miss Nk’Mip Cellars near Osoyoos, the first aboriginal-owned winery in North America.

In the Similkameen valley to the west, Schreiner says he’s impressed by the wine from the new Orofino Vineyards, the first B.C. winery constructed with straw bales.

© The Vancouver Province 2006

 

Several other options may be available

Inez Dyer
Province

One of the hardest decisions is whether to declare personal bankruptcy.

There’s not only the emotional toll but also the long-term damage it does to one’s credit rating. While the bankruptcy is discharged in as little as nine months, the hit to your credit lasts seven agonizing years.

During that time, no bank, credit-card or finance company will be willing to extend you credit. If you happen to find a lender, your interest rate could reach 25 per cent or more.

If you have no savings and are behind on your monthly obligations, using credit to pay for basic needs and receiving frequent calls from collection agencies, declaring personal bankruptcy is only one of the choices available to you.

– One possibility is an orderly payment of debts, a formal arrangement made through credit-counselling services. Your creditors are contacted and, if they agree, your interest stops accruing on that date.

Once accepted, you must pay 100 per cent of what you owe plus five-per-cent interest over the next 48 months. Your credit rating immediately drops to an “R7” (the lowest possible rating) until your obligations are met in full.

– With help from a credit-counselling service or on your own, you can try to negotiate a settlement offer with creditors. By outlining the reasons for your financial disarray and proposing a one-time payment to settle your debt — based on a reasonable percentage of the amount owing — creditors may be willing to take it and cut their losses.

Of course, your credit rating will reflect the writeoff.

– With a consumer proposal, which is organized through a bankruptcy trustee, your unsecured creditors are contacted and you make a proposal to repay a certain percentage of your total debt. It may be as little as 20 per cent.

If your creditors agree, the interest stops accruing on that date and you must pay the agreed amount over a maximum of five years. Again, your credit rating becomes an R7 and the consumer proposal will stay on your credit history for the five years you’re making payments plus an additional three years.

A consumer proposal has advantages over a bankruptcy. It allows you to repay only a percentage of your total unsecured debts without interest and retain all your personal belongings.

During the time you are in a consumer proposal, you are protected from legal proceedings, including wage garnishments and seizure of assets. You are also provided with free budget counselling.

– If you are at least 18 years old, owe $1,000 or more, are unable to meet your required payments and don’t own enough property to pay all your unsecured debts, you can declare personal bankruptcy. It must be done through a bankruptcy trustee for a flat fee of $1,800.

You are still responsible for paying alimony, child support, maintenance, fines, debts arising from fraud and all student loans less than 10 years old. You will also be required to continue paying all secured loans, such as your mortgage.

And if someone has co-signed a loan with you prior to your bankruptcy, then that person will be responsible for the repayment of that debt.

All of your unsecured creditors are contacted. Once your assets are seized and sold, you will no longer be responsible for any repayment of your unsecured debt.

You remain in bankruptcy for nine months, after which you receive a court document called a “discharge of bankruptcy” that must be filed with both national credit agencies (Equifax and Transunion). Your credit rating will once again become R7 and the bankruptcy will remain on your file for seven years.

© The Vancouver Province 2006

Maurice Bridge
Sun

VANCOUVER – With references to the Berlin Wall and Vancouver’s rejected waterfront freeway project from the 1960s, opponents of the proposed Whitecaps stadium in Gastown launched their counter-offensive Wednesday.

The Gastown Neighbourhood Coalition, made up of area businesses and residents, held a news conference to outline its objections to plans for a 16,000-seat outdoor soccer stadium on a seven-hectare parcel of railway property.

The stadium would extend north along the waterfront roughly between Richards and Cambie Streets on a platform above the railyard north of Water Street

“Gastown’s revitalization is well under way,” said coalition spokesman Jon Stovell, a longtime Gastown redeveloper. “We see this stadium in its form and its massing and its development on top of a table over the tracks — I call it big-box waterfront — as totally incompatible with . . . Gastown.”

Stovell said the stadium would be twice the height of the largest local buildings, which are capped at 22.8 metres, and would cut off much of Gastown from the rest of the city. “It’s going to form a sort of Berlin Wall, cutting the eastern parts of Gastown off from the city and off from the waterfront.”

Anthony Norfolk of the Gastown historic area planning committee, which advises city hall on the area, said placing the stadium on a platform over the tracks would present neighbouring buildings with a view of concrete pillars or a wall to cover them. “That would be horribly destructive.”

© The Vancouver Sun 2006

It was six months so packed with shows of every stripe and colour that tourists were often outnumbered by the locals

Peter Birnie
Sun

When the world’s most famous opera company comes calling, you’d better sing its tune. But the tables were turned when La Scala arrived at Expo 86 from Milan to perform Verdi’s I Lombardi. Hamilton McClymont was Expo’s entertainment director and recalls his astonishment that the celebrated troupe was willing to meet some strange new demands.

“They agreed to play in a hockey rink [Pacific Coliseum], which they’d never done before,” says McClymont. “They agreed to surtitles [a projection of lyrics in English], which they’d never done before, and they agreed to sound reinforcement.”

Which, it turns out, they’d also never done before. Such was the mood of magic in the air at Expo 86 that La Scala not only played by B.C.’s rules, but came out a winner for it. When word spread after opening night that the production was a success, weak ticket sales were turned around the next day and all remaining performances sold out.

Entertainment at Expo 86 covered every part of the fair’s enormous site and spilled offsite as well. Chris Wootten was instrumental in shaping the world fair’s cultural side before being fired, just five months before events began. He says a strong commitment to live entertainment at the fair by Expo president Mike Bartlett, who came from the world of theme parks and would also be fired, was key to the event’s enormous success.

“I was able to take Bartlett’s realization that entertainment was fundamentally important to an exhibition,” says Wootten, “and convert that from theme-park entertainment, which is like white trousers and white shoes, into quality entertainment. It couldn’t have been done without somebody who believed in entertainment the way Mike Bartlett did.”

The result of the work by Wootten and then McClymont, and their teams, saw six months so packed with shows of every stripe and colour that tourists were often outnumbered by the locals who kept coming back, again and again.

“Because people could buy passes through the Royal Bank relatively cheaply,” says McClymont, “they made it a point to drop down after work on a regular basis, two or three times a week. We wanted the entire program to be rolling, different stuff from week to week and sometimes even day to day, so that there was always something new to appeal to our own market.”

That meant classical presentations from dozens of orchestras and choirs, jazz and folk and pop concerts by virtually all the era’s leading artists, comedy from such greats as Red Skelton and Bob Hope, and dance ranging from the ballet of Baryshnikov to the leggy offerings of Mitzi Gaynor. A Royal Bank World Festival offered music, dance and drums from around the world, specially made movies like Rainbow Wars packed in the crowds and the visual arts were represented by everything from the wild and wacky, such as Bill Lishman’s

30-metre-tall Transcending the Traffic (the top figure was inspired by the legs of Tina Turner) and the frozen-in-motion freeway of Highway 86, to the sublime beauty of Egyptian artifacts in a pavilion fronted by gigantic columns echoing the ancient Hypostyle Hall at Karnak on the Nile.

Many of the fair’s roving buskers proved so popular that their presence near a line-up for a pavilion could result in congestion. A policy was developed to keep them far enough from bottlenecks to prevent gridlock on the often-packed fairgrounds. Each nation participating at Expo 86 received its own special day to celebrate; organizer Shel Piercy remembers a bit of a brouhaha over Japan’s day.

“As part of a traditional Japanese ceremony they would break these massive barrels of sake,” Piercy recalls. “We of course had to go to the liquor control board and tell them that what we intended to do was break these barrels of sake, which would then spill all over the place, then serve people a little cup of sake as part of the ritual.

“They were absolutely aghast at the idea. There were six or seven thousand people in the Plaza of Nations that day, and we were forced to have scores of staff there to keep children from diving into the spilled sake and make sure that anyone who was served a cup was actually 19 or older.”

The effect of Expo’s massive entertainment package on Vancouver’s arts scene was mixed. The Alliance for Arts and Culture was founded before the fair to address its impact on local presenters, and co-creator Paddy Macleod says the organization’s advocacy (which it still performs today) helped a great deal.

“My eternal view is that there’s power in unity,” says Macleod. “We were very anxious about being obliterated during that period; in my view we got a fair crack at performing at Expo.”

But while Vancouver Opera, the Vancouver Symphony Orchestra, the Vancouver Bach Choir and many other local organizations enjoyed a successful liaison with Expo 86, some other groups suffered for their disconnection from the fair. Poor ticket sales led to cancellation of the last two weeks of a Vancouver Playhouse production of Noises Off, followed by even worse box-office figures for A Chorus Line. At the Arts Club Theatre, artistic director Bill Millerd planned ahead and scheduled remounts of his already popular shows Ain’t Misbehavin’ and Sex Tips for Modern Girls.

“I felt it would be very difficult in the midst of Expo to try to run something different or unusual,” he told the Montreal Gazette at the time. “The best thing we could do to survive would be to put on things people recognized or had heard about.”

While Wootten mourns the loss of the Expo Theatre, a 4,000-seat facility built to be dismantled but instead was destroyed after the fair, he says there’s a bigger legacy.

“It’s in the city’s sense of confidence. The way it put Vancouver on the map in terms of tourism had a huge impact. Expo really was a turning point for Vancouver, and I’m proud that I was part of that.”

In 1983, McClymont had organized the enormous event at B.C. Place (budget: $600,000, performers: 7,000) where Queen Elizabeth II invited the world to Expo. And on four weeks’ notice he and his team whipped up a memorable closing ceremony for the fair. But his proudest moment came on Expo’s opening day, when the Prince and Princess of Wales stepped ashore at False Creek, then took the time to speak to each member of a first nations dance troupe.

“I never saw such proud people in my life,” McClymont recalls, “and it made me think that all the work we did with the Musqueam band paid off at that moment.”

 

© The Vancouver Sun 2006

Pick three candidates and ask them these questions

Kevin Greenard and Keith Greenard
Province

VICTORIA — Choosing a financial institution and adviser has become an increasingly difficult decision for many individuals to make.

Finding the right adviser was not always this complicated. Before the deregulation of the financial-services industry in the early ’80s, there were four distinct business units: banking, trusts, insurance, and investment dealers.

Today, each of these business units may offer multiple services overlapping into the other pillars — the clear distinction is gone.

Adding to the complexity is the sheer growth in the number of investment dealers and advisers.

Spending the time to find the right financial adviser based on your needs may be one of the most important investment decisions you will make.

We recommend that individuals looking for a financial adviser visit at least three different financial institutions.

The more time you spend at this stage, the more likely you will find an adviser who is most suitable for you. When you meet with each adviser, we suggest that you are prepared with a list of questions. By obtaining answers to these questions from at least three advisers, you can make a better comparison.

The following are suggested questions that you may want to ask a financial adviser before entering into a relationship:

Experience/education

– What is your educational background?

– What professional designations do you have?

– How long have you been in the financial-services industry?

– When do you plan to retire?

– Are you licensed as a securities dealer?

– Are you licensed as a mutual-fund dealer?

– Are you licensed to sell insurance products?

Service overview

– How many clients do you have?

– Do you have a minimum account size?

– How often do you contact your clients?

– Do you have support staff?

– What are the types of services you provide?

– What makes your service offering unique?

– Do you work with other professionals, such as lawyers and accountants?

Investment process

– What is your investment selection process?

– Do you sell proprietary products?

– What type of products do you primarily sell (individual equities, mutual funds, bonds)?

– Are there any restrictions on the types of investments you may offer?

– How liquid are the investments you are recommending?

– How do you monitor the investments?

Compensation

– How is the firm compensated?

– What are the fees to sell and buy the investments you recommend?

– What portion of the fee paid to the firm is paid to you as the

adviser?

– Do you offer fee-based options?

– Do you offer managed accounts?

– Do you offer commission-only accounts?

References

– Do you have clients willing to speak with me about your services?

– Do you have professionals who may be willing to speak with me about your services?

– Have you ever had a complaint filed against you with a securities commission, IDA or any other professional or regulatory body?

– Have you ever been disciplined by a professional or regulatory body?

We recommend that you call any references provided and that you visit the B.C. Securities Commission website at www.bcsc.bc.ca.

For a nominal fee you can conduct a background check through the website and search for any

disciplinary action since 1987.

The decision to select the right financial adviser is an important one. Doing your due diligence could prevent an unfavourable outcome.

Kevin and Keith Greenard are members of the Greenard Group at ScotiaMcLeod Victoria.

© The Vancouver Province 2006

Ashley Ford
Province

How long does it take to fix a leak — as in leaky condominiums?

Well, over $500,000,000 later in reconstruction loans and tax rebates, and seven years down the road, the “fix” is well and truly on, but still a long way from completion.

Ken Cameron, the CEO and registrar of the Homeowner Protection Office (HPO), the Crown corporation formed to deal with the crisis and oversee residential building licensing, is proud of the progress made to repair a sorry and shoddy chapter in B.C. residential construction history.

“This has been a real success story for our society,” he said in an interview. “It’s a story of industry and society taking responsibility for a problem, [which] has enabled people to deal with terrible problems.”

“The problem is under control and we are well under way to solving the existing situation. We have the best construction-defect protection in Canada,” he added.

In raw numbers, 14,484 units or co-op units have been helped by loans and 600 applications for Social Service Tax relief grants have been made, with 589 being approved and only 11 being rejected.

Some $550.7 million in reconstruction loans have been approved and more than $16 million in provincial sales tax rebates have been made.

(The reconstruction loan program provides no-interest loans to owners of leaky condominiums, leaky housing co-operatives and other homes who are not able to finance or pay for repairs related to premature building envelope failures).

Approximately 65,000 units faced leaky or substandard building problems, and HPO says that between 45,000 and 48,000 owners have made contact with it.

The buoyant state of the real-estate market has been of huge help to owners hit with leaky condos.

“The vast majority of affected properties have recovered more than 90 per cent of their original value,” Cameron says.

He is the first to admit there is still a long way to go but says, “No one has had to lose their home because of an inability to pay for repairs.”

Repair costs keep climbing, especially for high-rise concrete buildings. He said the problems in high rises are much more complex and the per-unit costs of restoration and repair are now between $80,000 and $85,000.

The average repair cost of a frame unit is $31,700, up from $21,000 five years ago, he said.

Some strata councils have ignored their problems or did not act on them early enough and thus have made repairs more expensive.

Tony Gioventu, executive director of the 65,000-member Condominium Home Owners Association of B.C., agrees with Cameron’s assessment.

“We started at point zero and, as of now, we are 85 per cent of the way there,” he says.

“The leaky-condo problem is still going to go on for another 10 to 15 years and it was a horrible thing.

“But people are being helped to work through it. The warranty and licensing programs have resulted in an overwhelming improvement in developing new building envelope standards and there has been a huge improvement in research and education,” he said.

Despite the added consumer protection, both say consumers must take responsibility and closely examine everything, including the strata council minutes before buying.

Gioventu says the biggest problem now is consumers themselves. Strata councils are either not repairing or not concentrating enough on regular inspections, he says.

“The protection that is there is self-enforcing and the most chronic worry is consumers themselves not taking responsibilities for themselves,” he said.

The crisis has not gone away, says Carmen Maretic, president of the Consumer Advocacy and Support for Homeowners Society.

“We are still being called by people who are either going into bankruptcy or foreclosures,” she said.

Maretic said she had no numbers on how many were facing bankruptcy or foreclosure.

While she agrees there has been some recovery in housing prices, she said the downside is there has been a huge escalation in construction costs.

“The average per-unit repair cost in March 2000 was $20,000. As of March 2006 it had risen to $60,000 per unit,” she says.

Maretic says the HPO’s own numbers clearly show the leaky-condo crisis is not over and there is a clear need for a political response.

“We want government and elected officials to implement proper consumer protection and timely and effective dispute-resolution mechanisms,” she says.

The non-profit housing-advocacy group says “many innocent, hardworking citizens have been abandoned by the current system.”

A HELPING HAND

The Homeowner Protection Office is a provincial Crown corporation that was created by the Homeowner Protection Act.

HPO is responsible for:

– residential builder licensing and establishing the framework for and monitoring of a mandatory third-party home warranty insurance;

– administering a no-interest repair-loan program and PST Relief Grant for owners of leaky homes;

– research and eduction function designed to benefit the residential construction industry and consumers.

– Online contact: www.hpo.bc.ca

© The Vancouver Province 2006

WATERFRONT WHITECAPS: Gastown coalition against new structure

John Bermingham
Province

It’s got the buildup of a World Cup, but all the play will be off the field.

Both sides in the campaign for — and against — building the proposed Whitecaps Stadium are gearing up for an intense fight over the 15,000-seat venue planned for Vancouver’s waterfront.

Tuesday, a coalition launches its opposition campaign, seven weeks before the matter goes to Vancouver City Council.

The Gastown Neighbourhood Coalition, a business and land-owner group, is joining hands with a pair of newly minted groups, the Central Waterfront Coalition and the Gastown Residents Association.

The waterfront coalition is a loose alliance of Downtown Eastside and Gastown residents, non-profit groups and retailers. The Gastown association was recently founded by three Gastown residents, and is currently on a membership drive.

On the pro-stadium side, the Whitecaps have been courting the business community and key individuals such as Bruce Allen. Their supporters are organizing among the wider soccer community.

Both groups are sure to be out in force at city hall in mid-June, when council decides whether to take the stadium proposal to the next planning stage.

Next week, city staff will release two consultants’ reports: one a technical review, the other the results of its community consultation.

After a $160,000 review of the proposal, funded by the Whitecaps, city planner Kevin McNaney is drafting a report that’s due out in late May.

Staff met about 1,000 people at open houses and interviewed property owners, business groups and community groups.

Central Waterfront Coalition founding member Ian Armitage lives a soccer-ball’s kick away from the edge of the proposed stadium.

“This mega-structure would essentially entomb about 22 residents in our building,” said Armitage, who lives on the water side of Water Street.

“I think it should be shelved until they at least come up with a more coherent and cohesive plan for the [waterfront] land.”

Jon Stovell, spokesman for the Gastown Neighbourhood Coalition, said Gastown is becoming a heritage precinct and the stadium would be like a monster in its back yard.

GNC has hired two urban designers to come up with an alternative vision for the central waterfront.

GRA founding member Claudia Schulz said residents don’t want thousands of soccer fans with cars coming into Gastown.

“What we would like to see is a Soho-style urban residential area, with coffee shops and small businesses,” said Schulz.

Meantime, Whitecaps president John Rocha is encouraging supporters to write letters to city hall.

“There are specific groups that have objections to our project, but what we find is the broad support for our project is quite strong,” said Rocha.

A Whitecaps-funded poll last October showed 71 per cent of Vancouverites support the stadium, with 15 per cent opposed.

And there’s John Knox of the Vancouver Southsiders, a group of Whitecaps season-ticket holders, who says soccer fans all over B.C. are busy networking.

“I really have to laugh at what really is a concerted effort to paint the fans of the Whitecaps, by these opponents of the stadium, as being drunken yahoos, who are going to be marauding through the neighbourhood.

“It’s absolutely unfair and unfounded. We like to sing. We like to have a pint or two, but we don’t cause problems — and we’ve absolutely no interest in hassling people downtown.”

© The Vancouver Province 2006

 

Bob Ransford
Sun

It’s little wonder the Woodward’s project sold so successfully last Saturday — 536 homes, 536 contracts signed in one day of selling. Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside may be the last Vancouver neighbourhood in which development that ensures urban livability in the Lower Mainland can be created.

Signs are already pointing to the pending failure of all attempts at bringing downtown livability to the city’s first-ring suburbs.

These early signs are alarming. They seem to indicate Vancouver is prepared to abandon many of the opportunities that were supposed to flow from a deliberate collective decision to invest significant taxpayer dollars in improved public transit infrastructure.

Build SkyTrain and they will come. These rail transit lines were to link regional town centres that would intensify with mixed-use developments where people could live, work and play. Along the line there would be a series of stations where nodes of high density development would feed riders to the transit system.

That was the mantra behind the original Expo line running diagonally across Vancouver and Burnaby to New Westminster and Surrey. It was also the rationale for its twin, the Millennium line.

The RAV project, now expected by most to exceed $2 billion, was supposed to link Richmond’s rapidly growing town centre with Vancouver’s downtown and create all kinds of new development opportunities not just in Richmond, but at various nodes along the under-populated Cambie corridor.

These nodes and corridors are the places where Greater Vancouver can accommodate the next million people that will flock to this region over the next 30 to 40 years.

Densification at these nodes and along these corridors can provide the housing supply that will help to temper rising housing costs.

For a number of reasons though, reality is falling short of expectations.

Central Surrey is struggling to become a downtown. New Westminster has seen limited success, but that city’s downtown certainly hasn’t yet realized its full potential. There have been some good examples of transit-oriented nodal development around a number of Burnaby’s SkyTrain stations, like Metrotown and Edmonds stations.

But, with the exception of the area around the Joyce Street station, Vancouver hasn’t seen the kind of density that should have developed around the SkyTrain lines.

Neighbourhoods around the Nanaimo station, the 29th Avenue station, Rupert station, Renfrew station, Broadway station and Main Street station continue to be primarily singe-family neighbourhoods where the potential for in-fill density hasn’t been realized.

Most alarming is what is already unfolding in the planning along the new RAV line.

The RAV route was deliberately aligned not along the higher populated Arbutus corridor — largely for political reasons — but instead along Cambie Street where supposedly more potential riders would come from the job centres along the line.

But the RAV project promises to be a disaster in terms of cost-benefit if what is unfolding around one of the line’s best opportunities for higher density suburban renewal – Oakridge – is an indication.

Plans for re-development of Oakridge have been limited to the existing 28-acre shopping centre, instead of encompassing the larger neighbourhood within walking distance of the planned RAV station at Cambie and 41st Avenue.

The preliminary concept plan for re-development of the shopping centre, drafted after a number of meetings with neighbouring residents over the last year and a half, falls far short in terms of over-all density for a major first-ring suburban transit node like Oakridge.

Five mid-rise and a few low-rise buildings are proposed — bringing about 1,300 to 1,500 new apartments to the Oakridge node. This plan appears to reflect the influence of existing residents in the surrounding neighbourhood who have expressed opposition to the form of higher density development, opposing higher towers and fearing increased traffic.

City council won’t see the plan until later this year. But if the current draft is the benchmark for the intensity of re-development along the RAV line, then RAV will be a failure.

Meanwhile, in Richmond, planners and politicians seem to have missed the whole point of investing in rapid transit infrastructure. On the one hand, Richmond is willing to accommodate densities in the town centre slightly higher than those currently proposed for Oakridge. But Richmond is also penalizing developers wanting to take advantage of this density potential.

It is charging developers $4 per square foot for every new home they build to pay for what the city calls “transit-oriented improvements” in the downtown. This cost is in addition to the $2 billion plus spent on RAV by taxpayer. The city is willing to trade payment of this levy for a reduction of parking that a developer must build as part of a new residential development.

However, instead of automatically reducing parking to encourage transit ridership in a new transit node and make housing more affordable in a more location-efficient area, the city is penalizing land owners by charging an additional fee.

When are we going to learn?

Bob Ransford is a public affairs consultant with COUNTERPOINT Communications Inc. He is a former real estate developer who specializes in urban land use issues. Email: [email protected]

© The Vancouver Sun 2006