Wednesday 7 December 2011

Hey! While you're up, get me another planet / Ray Cole and Jack Diamond on rethinking our cities

Two architects, one speaking to our capacity crowd at the final "Big Bench Session", the second writing in the Globe and Mail, outlined the ways in which the form of our cities run counter to sustainability in terms of natural, social and financial systems.
In his presentation "We Make Buildings/Buildings Make Us: Looking Beyond Green", UBC's Dr. Ray Cole outlined the ways that our current building forms and zoning bylaws waste precious energy, lessen productivity and promote social alienation.
Ranging from the macro aspects of climate change affecting Inuit hunting traditions, to the need for  local systems that re-establish natural resiliency, Dr. Cole illustrated the unbalanced consumption of world resources fostered by the western lifestyle. 

Writing in the Dec. 2nd Globe & Mail, Jack Diamond's "The gravy in land use and density" reveals the underlying problem of low density housing that we in the District of North Vancouver have come to recognize: "...municipalities in which the predominant land use is that of single families or other low-density forms of accommodation find that real-estate taxes simply con't meet the cost of providing hard (street lighting, garbage pickup etc.) and soft (libraries, parks etc.) services,  To continue building cities in this way can only plunge municipalities even deeper into debt."

In tackling the financial deficiencies underpinning our suburban form, Diamond arrives at a similar solution to Dr. Cole: the need for breaking the rigid stranglehold of zoning bylaws.  Integrating work, commercial and residential activities will lead to a lower carbon footprint, an improved and more efficient infrastructure, more healthy people walking and opportunities for people to shed their automobiles. 

Coming from two different perspectives, Diamond and Cole illuminate the need for change and show why, in fact, there is no alternative if we are to retain any long term viability and vibrancy for our urban and suburban spaces: "Besides increasing debt, there'll be more sprawl and needless consumption of agricultural, recreational and conservation land, yet longer commuting times, lower productivity, less efficient emergency services, more pollution and a diminished quality of life."


 - excerpt from Strong Towns Blog
"Since the end of World War II, we've been so wealthy and had so much growth that, for most parts of the country, the productivity of our places did not matter much. If it created a job, it was good. If it brought in a new business, it was good. We didn't ever pause to worry about what happens when the maintenance bill comes due.

Those bills are due now, and more are arriving each day. We don't have anywhere near the money to maintain so many unproductive places. What we face is a choice between a chaotic reset or a strategic contraction -- one where we intentionally divert our limited resources into those endeavors that are most productive while we seek -- block by block and neighborhood by neighborhood -- to improve the productivity of our places."

Monday 7 November 2011

The inconvenient truth lying at the bottom of our aging population

An article by Jeffrey Simpson in the Nov. 5th Globe and Mail (Link here) outlines the problem intrinsic to Canada's aging population: costs will increase, while revenue growth will decline.

Aging will drive up costs for health care (already the greatest financial obligation of government budgets) and income support for the elderly.  At the same time national income will slow as a vast number of baby boomers slip into retirement.

The problem is carefully explained in a study by Christopher Ragan, a public policy economist at McGill University.  If taxes remain the same while spending rises there will be "an ever-widening yearly gap" between revenues and expenditures from today until at least 2040.

The choices become either raising taxes or reducing spending or borrow the money.  Borrowing will burden future generations and is the least responsible, although the easiest political option.

Given the inconvenient truth lying at the base of the problem there are only two remedies at hand; raising taxes or significantly changing the scope and structure of public programs and policy.  There is in actuality no other option.

This knowledge is essential for DNV Council (and other levels of government) to retain as a central point of reference as we enter this critical confluence of a rising aging population and declining revenues.

This knowledge is also an essential point of departure for DNV residents to retain in setting priorities for their communities' viability and their expectations of DNV politicians' abilities to deliver amenities and services at an affordable price.

Sunday 25 September 2011

Video highlights of "Building a Healthy Community: The Essential Ingredients"

View highlights from Brian O'Connor's "Building a Healthy Community" presentation at our opening evening event.



Please make plans to attend our next evening "Creating the Community Living Room", October 26, 7:30PM with Paula Carr.  Internationally recognized for her community building,  Paula will reveal the ideas and steps that create a "community living room" that strengthen neighbourhood health, well-being and social capital.

All events take place 7:30PM
Capilano Rugby Clubhouse
Klahanie Park, West Vancouver
Snacks and refreshments provided, as well as a cash bar for your enjoyment

Here are some comments from the audience at our Sept 21 event.
  • "Thanks for a wonderful and inspiring evening...very professional and yet at the same time informal and comfortable."
  • "We've had great feedback on your event.  Well done!"
  • "Great job last night.  Looking forward to the next one"
  • "Oh, that was so, so good!"
See the previous post (below) for more details of the CGA's "Building a Better Community" series.

Tuesday 13 September 2011

The Big Bench Sessions / Workable ideas for the Gateway

"Building a Better Community"

With the adoption of the 2030 Official Community Plan and the Village Centre concept, we have the opportunity to revitalize our neighbourhood, making it more human-scale, sustainable and an interconnected community.

The Capilano Gateway Association has brought together a group of dedicated professionals of international recognition, with backgrounds in social health, community development and building design, to share their experiences on how to shape an inclusive community for a better future in a changing world.

Join us for these three evening events of ideas and insights that will prepare our neighbourhood for the challenges and opportunities awaiting.

   Event Dates:     September 21    -    October 26     -    November 30




Capilano Rugby Clubhouse
Klahanie Park
West Vancouver

All Events begin at 7:30 PM





Funding for this series of community events has come from the Lower Capilano Community Service Enhancement Initiative Grants, through the North Vancouver Recreation Commission, the Corporation of the District of North Vancouver, with the generous facility support of the Capilano Rugby Club.


How Do We Build a Better Community?  3 Special Evening Events

"Building a Healthy Community: The Essential Ingredients"
  Dr. Brian O'Connor, Medical Health Officer, Vancouver Coastal Health
September 21,  7:30 PM   Capilano Rugby Club
 As Medical Health Officer for Vancouver Coastal Health, Dr. O?Connor has stated that municipal authorities have the potential - through thoughtful design and public policy - to do more for the broad general health of the population than can the medical profession.  The design and form of our community affects how we live, recreate, and socialize.
In this opening event for our series, Dr. O?Connor reveals the ways an interdisciplinary approach to community planning and public policy improves our physical and mental health in essential and profound ways.

-  With Renee Strong, Executive Director, Capilano Community Services Society.  Renee will offer insights into the coming critical and increasing demand for services requested of Capservices.

Following the speakers presentations a Q&A session will provide an opportunity for further discussion.  Snacks and refreshments will be provided as well as a cash bar.


"Creating the Community Living Room"
  Paula Carr, former Executive Director, Collingwood Neighbourhood House
  October 26,  7:30 PM   Capilano Rugby Club
Recognized across the world, Collingwood Neighbourhood House began, says Paula Carr, "with a group of five people sitting around a kitchen table, wanting to create a caring community."  Twenty-three years later, that dream has become an ever-evolving reality, a multi-service community centre that is intercultural and intergenerational.

Collingwood Neighbourhood House's success comes from its shared values of respect, diversity and capacity-building through it's strong focus on family, community collaboration and leadership.

Impressed by the operation of Collingwood Neighbourhood House, UBC Professor Leonie Sandercock produced a documentary on the centre titled "Where Strangers Become Neighbours".  In addition to her commentary, Paula will screen a 20 minute version of this NFB-produced documentary.


  "We Make Buildings / Buildings Make Us: Looking beyond Green"
  Dr. Ray Cole, Professor, UBC School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture
  November 30,  7:30 PM  Capilano Rugby Club
Dr. Ray Cole has taught environmental issues in building design for the past thirty years and was co-founder of the Green Building Challenge - an international collaborative effort to benchmark progress in green building performance and environmental assessment.  Designated as a UBC Distinguished University Scholar, Dr. Cole has served on numerous national and international committees related to buildings and the environment.

His current work in "Regenerative Design" goes beyond the purely technical aspects of green building to bridge the physical and functional, emotional and spiritual attributes of nature.  This emerging approach to architectural design offers new insight for constructed projects that can increase, rather than diminish, social and natural capital.

For further information:  604-985-5621 / 604-904-7581       Email: capgatewayassoc@gmail.com

Tuesday 16 August 2011

Complexities & Insights / Planning a Community Centre for Lower Capilano

 What essential components of design and programming are needed for a Lower Capilano community centre that engenders community identity, better community health and well being?  

 How do the facility design considerations serve a broad user base in the most inclusive manner? 
 
Why services –beyond sport and fitness - need to be provided in a multi-functional environment to successfully serve a wide range of community ages, abilities and needs.
Fitness gym at Mt. Pleasant Community Centre, Vancouver
These and other planning concerns formed the basis of the recent August 4th Community Centres Bus Tour, organized by DNV Planning Dept. with Annie Mauboules and Tom Lancaster.  Framed with an eye to creating community awareness of the complex considerations that go into creating a modern community centre, the tour covered four facilities, ranging from the suburban environment of Parkgate on the  North Shore, to the changing urban demographic of Mt. Pleasant.
The experience and insights gained on the tour deepened the knowledge base for tour participants on a number of fronts, for example: 
  •      Essential consideration for the role of storage immediately adjacent to multi-purpose rooms was noted by each facility manager.  Without sufficient storage, users are unable to efficiently re-purpose spaces in ways that guarantee successful programming.
  •      Social and community services function most efficiently and to greater benefit when they are combined in a manner that provides ‘one-stop shopping’ for users, integrating community health care centers and other population health initiatives.
  •       Governance models for community centres need to evolve to ensure appropriate community involvement that is accountable and flexible.
  •       The critical need for a variety of room size options and use of glass to promote cohesive and open interior spaces that invite participation and convey a sense of security and activity.            
    Senior's exercise classes / Activity room at John Braithwaite Centre
    Visiting the four sites gave participants practical knowledge of the range of facility size and planning requirements needed to successfully create an informed vision for  Lower Capilano community centre within a cohesive Village Centre plan.  
    Tour participants at John Braithwaite Centre meeting with centre manager.

     These planning perspectives will also inform the October 26  “Building a Community Living Room” event, part of the Big Bench Sessions series of community planning events organized by the CGA.
     Further details for this upcoming series of community events will be circulated in early September.

    Saturday 16 July 2011

    CGA Projects and Initiatives - A Progress Report

    The Curling to Belle Isle pedestrian/cycle path; soon to be the site for the Gateway Mural project

    The Capilano Gateway Association continues its efforts and community engagement with a range of projects and information dedicated to building the community and enhancing the overall livability and responsible sustainability of Lower Capilano neighbourhood.

    The installed park bench for Belle Isle Park has become a favourite resting spot for many residents, as well as the focal point for informal community discussions.  The May 5, 2011 addition of the handicap-accessible picnic table, and park garbage receptacle, has encouraged many people,  families and children to come the safe play environment of the park. 

    In the immediate future, the Curling Road to Belle Isle pathway will see the installation of a drop curb pan to allow further and safe use of the path by cyclists, pedestrians and those with mobility scooters and wheelchairs.  This work is slated for completion in July, along with other grading improvements to the path.

    Working with the DNV Parks department, the CGA has arranged for similar handicap drop ramps to be installed on Belle Isle Park to ensure full disabled access to the park for everyone.  This priority item is contingent on 2012 budget allocations to be voted on by DNV Council.

    Recently the CGA was awarded funds under the Neighbourhood Enhancement Program to implement a mural project along the Belle Isle pathway.  The project will proceed in conjunction with local youth service organizations and business partners to create a neighbourhood focal point.

    Beginning in September, "The Big Bench Sessions" will see a variety of resource professionals present their insights and experience to a series of themed community discussions dedicated to create awareness and a collective vision for "Building a Healthy Community". 

    This series of three meetings, will explore the essential elements required to form a more livable, sustainable community that embraces people of all ages.  Out of these sessions the community can create a positive vision of the opportunities available through the implementation of the Lower Capilano - Marine Local Plan of the OCP.  Further information and flyers on this will be circulated later this summer.

    As always, the CGA blog site continues to be a source of information and community connection, with an expanding local and international readership.
    www.capilanogatewayassociation.blogspot.com

    We look forward to additional initiatives in the coming year and welcome your feedback and participation.

    sincerely

    Kim, Jai, Wayne, Elaine, Doug  
    The CGA Executive Board

    Tuesday 28 June 2011

    Getting back to the Big Picture / Why the Big Bench Sessions - Fall 2011

    The comments below were penned by a Lower Capilano resident, following the March 30 OCP meeting held at the Grouse Inn.  Through the writer's compassionate awareness for managing a changing world, we find the same recognized need to embrace the greater public good that will inform and drive the CGA's "Big Bench Sessions" planned for this fall. 

    More information on this series of public meetings will be circulated in the area over the coming month.  Stay tuned and consider the following thoughts of a neighbour.

    After leaving last night's meeting I decided to put in writing some of my thoughts and perhaps offer some advice based on an historical perspective that may help direct future development in our area.  I am afraid that a  community spirit we all would like to believe in is really just a myth. A community spirit exists when all are pulling in the same direction and unite around common interests, benefits and even sacrifices.  Unfortunately, the history of the Lower Capilano neighbourhoods proved once again last night that the communities are still fractured, terribly entrenched in Not-in-My-Back-Yard approach to life and have limited vision as to how we are all impacted by global politics and economical affairs. Not even one word was uttered that perhaps we may all need to use public transportation anyway since fuel charges may be too expensive or even not available given the Middle East situation. Of course there is plenty of other energy resources in North America, but those need to be developed yet. OK, here we go:

    1.       The most vulnerable residents are those living on the boundaries next to the suggested changes. History of the community shows that the more the resident is removed geographically from the affected areas, he or she will less likely to resist, assist or show compassion to the affected residents. Not only that, neighbours and whole streets within the same community will fight each other to maintain their way of life and habits. You may find a person here and there ready to protect a vulnerable resident but that is rare. As a planner, you must protect those vulnerable residents since they are in minority.  In the name of democracy, the majority of the community is ready to sacrifice a street or two in order to protect themselves from the inevitable changes.

    2.       The big picture is lost. We heard one person mentioning the younger population and another person mentioning the aging population. The fact is that the North Shore attracts older residents for various reasons and yet there is a resistance to accommodate their needs. I still remember the fights we had when the development for seniors’ housing in Norgate community was initiated. Talking about mean spirited attitudes and lack of compassion.

    3.       I like very much the idea of a Village Centre. Our area needs it desperately. Maybe if we had those social gathering places people would feel more connected and a true community spirit would be then reborn. Again, those living next to the suggested centres will need extra special attention as to meaningfully and truly create a strong link between the adjacent residents and the centre.  If the rest of the community wants vehicle access to the village centre, let them drive around to get there. The idea is to let the community have a safe pedestrian access to the Village Centre. I guess it is hard to kill old habits.  There are many successful examples of town centres around the world that limit vehicle access. It may be limited during the day while allowing supply vehicles during the night or with special permits. Yet, neighbouring streets and adjacent communities demand vehicle access to every inch of the land, as if it was a God’s given right. We should ask ourselves: What would make this place a desired place to live in, raise children and grow older? We already have beautiful scenery (mountains, river, beaches), proximity to downtown Vancouver, flat geography and improving pedestrian access to shopping malls. What do we need to make it work better is to protect residential streets facing the village centres and provide safe pedestrian access to the centres.

    4.       Larco site.  What a waste of potential land. It is sitting empty for so many years while it could answer many needs I raised above.  The site  sits undeveloped because of deep disagreements between the various communities over its future,  add to it a greedy developer who is being dragged by his ears to be more socially responsible,  not to forget a reluctant District management to invest financially even when they could afford it.  I just feel so sorry for people living around that area. I think the old guards need to disappear and perhaps a new generation would be more visionary. I was really hoping I would still be able to enjoy a community centre there, a library, a pool, a child care facility a place to drink coffee with friends. Now, my children are grown and moved away, and I am considering selling my house [in Lower Capilano] since none of the potential great ideas would benefit me while I am here.

    5.       Because of the divided communities, streets and neighbours, I suggest strongly to solicit each household and get an objective feel for what people really want. History proved that the community associations not always represent the full spectrum of ideas, some are self appointed, some shun away opposition.  By knowing what each household wants, the District can then stay away from local politics that may shut down great ideas for developments.       

     I wish you all the best. May the forces be with you.

    All the best

    Tuesday 7 June 2011

    Momentum and Looking at the Next Steps / The 2030 OCP as a reality

    With the passing of the 2030 Official Community Plan, our community now has the opportunity to shift focus from general visioning for the future of the area, to co-developing constructive, realistic and widely-accepted options for building a healthy community.

     The challenge is creating an inclusive neighbourhood and village centre that will accommodate a truly diverse population and grounding this ambition in the ideal of the greater public good 
    We are standing at the edge of a great opportunity to make this corner of the District of North Vancouver the "gateway location".  We have already engaged, and had positive feedback from youth, seniors and others representing marginalized populations in our area. 
    Over the coming months the CGA executive board is planning to facilitate the "Big Bench Sessions" to promote a broad community imaginative vision.  Building on the popular open-air bench sessions conducted in Belle Isle Park, The "Big Bench Sessions" will provide a forum to articulate and explore ideas  that the community desires as a result of redevelopment of the Lionsgate/Lower Capilano commercial properties into a Village Centre.  A variety of experienced resource personnel are available to help residents create viable plans developed from broad community input.

    We value ideas from the community and CGA members to make this a community success.

    Over the summer months a number of announcements about this project will be circulated to the community as this innovative program takes shape.
    Email us:  capgatewayassoc@gmail.com

    best regards,  
    Elaine, Doug, Jai, Kim, Wayne
    CGA Executive Board

    Tuesday 31 May 2011

    Watching the second hand of a clock / Letters to the North Shore News

    Ben Hecht,  a highly-regarded screen writer ("Some Like it Hot", "The Front Page") and former Chicago newspaper reporter, once observed that, "Trying to determine what is going on in the world by reading newspapers is like trying to tell the time by watching the second hand of a clock."

    Recently some have been given pause by articles in the North Shore News surrounding aspects of the OCP process.  Here are two 'Letters to the Editor' of the NS News that point to significant aspects of local stories where the NSN reporters and editors overlooked the essential core to the story.
     
    To the Editor, North Shore News, May 25
    RE: Missing the number on OCP reporting / Denisty, housing dominate OCP meeting / May 22

    Dear Editor,
    RE: Density, housing dominate OCP meeting, May 22, page A10

    In reporting on the OCP Public Hearings your reporter missed the most significant and demonstrated aspect of public support.  By stating that "more than half of the speakers expressed general support for the OCP", the reporter implies that there was only slightly more support "for" than "against".  

    A more factual basis is easily obtainable from the DNV's sign up sheets for the hearings.  Of the 69 speakers, 8 made general comments, while 46 spoke in favour, while 15 opposed. 

    These numbers clearly demonstrate that the OCP meets with overwhelming support from those who have engaged in the process from across the District.  The majority of those speaking for the OCP couched their remarks in terms of achieving outcomes that direct action towards a more viable and livable community for the greater good.
    These wide-ranging aspects of public endorsement were largely missing from your article.

    sincerely,
    Doug Curran      dougcurran@shaw.ca
     
    To the Editor, North Shore News, May 30
     RE: Some other perspectives on LAPs / "Open Space", May 25
    NB:  This letter was edited by NS News.  The edited portions of the original are included here in blue italics
    Dear Editor,

    Your recent May 25th "Open Space" article commented on the diminishing weight given to the "direct democracy" experiment of neighbourhood-developed LAPs within the OCP process.  What has become apparent is that in their narrow local focus, many LAPs are both out-of-date and have become impediments to the broad cohesive perspectives required for effective planning on a district-wide level.

    The local activism of LAPs through neighbourhood planning as endorsed in your article, has serious drawbacks when decision-makers mistake activism for democratic involvement.  What arose from many of the LAPs was actually a disguised agenda of local interest groups intent on forcing their own vision on the LAP with little appetite for fully engaging the broader community . 

    Overall the LAPs are of varying uneven quality; some are quite good, founded in well-researched goals, while others have resulted in virtual private community fiefdoms that prevent appropriate change and adaptation for the affected neighbourhoods, leading to their eventual stasis and decline.  
    This patchwork of LAPs has left the DNV with an uncoordinated set of local ambitions which thwart effective overall planning objectives that would meaningfully deal with the District-wide problems of transit, sustainability and housing diversity that we suffer from now and will become more pronounced over the next ten years.

    In the case of Lower Capilano, a number of those involved in the years-long (1996-2006) LAP process fought vigorously against housing policy initiatives within the OCP that they themselves had written into the original LAP.  This calls into question either the understanding behind the original policies, or the commitment to these ideas when the possibility of implementation arises, as now, through the revised OCP.
    As many of these LAPs contain irreconcilable inconsistencies, the full acceptance of LAPs into the new OCP would hamstring the DNV in both legal and practical terms. It would enshrine the problems we have at present, not engage them.  It is sufficient that these LAPs will be attached as historical footnotes to the OCP, but they can be nothing more.
    sincerely, 
    Doug Curran         dougcurran@shaw.ca

    Thursday 26 May 2011

    Lynn Valley Farmers Market at Library Square

    Lynn Valley's Library Square continues to expand its public use with the opening of its regular Thursday "Farmer's Market", running every Thursday until October 25th.  Home baked goods, plants, deli foods, and a wide variety of other offerings allow the community to relax and enjoy some music and a coffee in the midst of shopping and mingling.  Activities such as the Farmers Market help support the overall mixed-use concept behind Library Square, bringing additional customers that support other businesses located there.   http://lvca.ca/2011/05/farmers-market/

    Below are a few images from the season's first market on May 18.  The prospect begins to open for a similar Lower Capilano opportunity with a Village Centre as planned under the recent OCP Conceptual Plan.


    Friday 20 May 2011

    Unhealthy neighbourhoods play big role in obesity, diabetes epidemic

    May 17, Lisa Rochon The Globe and Mail 
    The Globe and Mail published a 4 part series on neighbourhoods and personal health (May 16, 17, 18 & 19).  The series portrays the ways in which poorly planned and integrated neighbourhoods promote isolation, obesity and health problems such as diabetes.
    Here is an excerpt from Tuesday's article,  "Isolation on the outskirts."


    This is the new crisis of cities: Badly designed neighbourhoods are literally sapping people of their ability to live fully.
    If, as a newly arrived immigrant, poverty has driven you to the inner or outer suburbs, where you live in a basement apartment or high above the concrete ground in a residential tower, you are far more likely to suffer from type 2 diabetes and its related consequences such as blindness and amputation...

    ...That’s why some medical researchers and health offices are joining forces with urban planners to design neighbourhoods that are more conducive to activity. Healthy eating combined with increases in physical exercise – walking with the kids to school or biking to the cinema – would help to mitigate the rise in the prevalence of obesity over the last two decades. They say that Canadians need to embrace the Danish model of urban wellness, or suffer a health disaster...

    ...Given the crisis of deadening urbanity, medical health officers such as Peel Region’s David Mowat are not only dealing with water fluoridation and smoke-free zones, but also the crucial need to design better-connected, more walkable neighbourhoods with access to healthy food at grocery stores and restaurants.
    Read more and related articles:
    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/time-to-lead/unhealthy-neighbourhoods-play-big-role-in-obesity-diabetes-epidemic/article2024476/page2/

    Monday 16 May 2011

    It's not that I'm passionate, it's more that I'm scared...

    A few people have wondered why and how is it, that I have taken on a job that no one asked me to do, to devote so much time and energy over the past year engaged with community issues.  The answer is disarmingly simple, but for those who revel in conspiracies and are suspicious the simple answer will never suffice.  
    At different points in my life I have stopped to reassess and reevaluate my life and ambitions.  It has usually turned out to be a fruitful exercise.  Several years ago I began to question how I myself wanted to live in the coming 15 years.  That thinking eventually brought me to the point that i am at today, and the comments below that will be read at the OCP Public hearings.  The surprising thing was, when I actually arrived at this point, I found out I wasn't alone...

    Go to the "Gateway Voices" page on this site to read additional letters from some of your neighbours.

    May 16, 2011  Comments for OCP Public  Hearings
    Comments to Mayor Walton and District of North Vancouver Council

    Dear Mayor and Council,
    RE: Public Hearings / Bylaw 7900 / 2030 Revised OCP / May 16, 2011

    For many years, I like most of my neighbours living in the Lions Gate neighbourhood, stalwartly fought against any development proposal for the former Capwest site.  These proposals, invariably presented to us by sombre men in expensive suits, felt off.  The plans seemed to beckon more to something appropriate to Surrey or Delta.  Exactly what we did want I was never quite sure of myself – it was largely sufficient just to be against something.

    As the years have gone by there has been a change in thinking – a change of context and awareness cutting across all levels of stakeholders, planners, municipal officials and administrators, and to a varying degree, residents.  The current OCP process has brought the awareness and opportunities of this thinking right down into our neighbourhood. 

    From my personal perspective, this change coincided with changes in how I began to view my immediate life, the manner in which I lived and to what extent I was prepared to do anything about it.   
    It has been an extraordinary and at times difficult journey for me.  It has immersed me in a wider understanding of the complexities of building a workable community that works for people across a wide range of ages, and economic backgrounds.

     It has been infinitely rewarding to the degree that many people have joined together to embrace the prospect of a renewed neighbourhood.   It is tantalizing to contemplate an integrated neighbourhood that allows neighbours to celebrate where they live and extend an emotional investment into that place.

    These promises of renewal also come with the awareness that we cannot continue to blithely move into the next 30 years in the same manner as we did the past 30 or 50 years.  There is a bill coming – a bill not just for the hard economics of sewer pipe and road repair, but a larger bill for the planet and the social fabric of our urban life.

    I for one, do not want to be asked, at some time in the future, what I did to help change some of what we know we need to begin doing and offer nothing but a mumbled shrug.  This OCP plan is a first step to start doing something and even this is the very least we should be asking ourselves to do.

    I ask you to take on the role of true leadership and pass the OCP into bylaw.
    Thank you.

    Douglas Curran                                



    Tuesday 3 May 2011

    "Age-friendly is friendly to all ages" / an inclusive place for Lower Capilano

    Recently in conversation with a dedicated resident engaged in community services, the comment was made, "People have no idea what is coming along, the numbers of aged, the need for services and for facilities."
    These above remarks lie at the heart of the CGA's goals, but also, as the letter below from Viv Christison of the Lionsview Seniors' Planning Society makes clear, "age friendly is friendly to all ages".
    As always, the focus of the CGA is on promoting viable, realistic and socially responsible plans for our community and the greater public good.

    Capilano Gateway Association                                                                                       May 2, 2011
    C/o 2046 Curling Road
    North Vancouver BC V7P 1X4

    Dear Doug Curran,

    I am writing on behalf of Lionsview Seniors Planning Society, Housing Committee to thank you and your Association members for working so hard toward the creation of an inclusive, accessible and age friendly neighbourhood in Lower Capilano/Marine Village.   Lionsview Seniors Planning Society works to ensure that seniors can continue to live and age well in their own communities and so we wanted to express our appreciation that so many age friendly features have been included in the proposal for the new Village Centre.  

     In particular, we are very pleased to see the inclusion of the following:
    ·      Services are situated together and are accessible
    ·      There will be ground oriented shops [and we hope ground oriented medical offices]
    ·      Pleasant public spaces, green walkways and seating areas are planned
    ·       Safety through passive surveillance is considered
    ·      There will be reliable and frequent public transit with transit stops that are conveniently located
    ·      There is an intention to enable a variety of affordable housing options in areas close to services and the rest of the community
    ·      The plan includes provision of housing for frail and disabled older people 
    ·      There will be a centre for affordable community events and recreation activities that can be attended alone or with a companion
    ·      Employment opportunities are considered
    ·      Provision of an adult day centre will be explored
    In looking over the list of community benefits, only two of the preceding ten are exclusive to seniors.  So, although we speak for seniors, Lionsview believes that a senior friendly neighbourhood is friendly to all ages. 

    Lionsview is looking forward to the completion of its seniors’ survey in July 2011.  The survey will provide information on perceptions of the age friendliness of the North Shore.  Perhaps Lionsview and the Capilano Gateway Association could arrange for neighbourhood seniors to review and respond to survey results.   This may be useful feedback to have when you and the District move forward with anticipated community building.

    Yours sincerely,

    Viv Christison
    Viv Christison
    Chair, Housing Committee
    Lionsview Seniors Planning Society

    Copy to Mayor Walton and Council Members

    Sunday 24 April 2011

    So, a surveyor walks into a bar... / A questionable survey

    A central part of my job is to ensure that studies are conducted with rigorous methods.  When, for example designing a survey, it is crucial to ensure that one does not use leading questions or tacitly seek to ensure a specific outcome.  This is a challenging task and one of the reasons it takes education and professional training to carry out credible surveys and not simply obtain a predetermined outcome.

    A survey is presently being circulated in our neighborhood, in at least three different versions. Sadly, it meets none of the criteria for a well-designed, open-ended survey.  On the contrary it is very poorly designed.

    It seems as if those who designed this survey are not aware that the results will be misleading, by nature of its design. Nor do they seem aware that it is deeply problematic to inject a poorly designed and biased survey into the community dialogue. It is troubling since:

     - no name or organization is attached to the survey, it is unclear who is behind it
     - the questions are leading.
     - the language used to describe the OCP process is colored, and contains factual errors
     - the context is poorly developed
     - the survey does not seek to determine the knowledge level of the interviewees with regards to the
       OCP

    The distributed survey reads as a blatant attempt to rally community members against a village centre; for exclusion of Lower Capilano from the OCP; and for a district wide referendum of the OCP.  If those who designed this study wish to convince community members of these three issues, they should explicitly spell this out, rather than tacitly invoking their opinions through a purportedly 'objective' survey.

    It would be inexcusable if such a poorly designed, and heavily lop-sided survey was allowed to influence the decision making process on minor issues, let alone matters that are so significant to the community.

    Gunilla Öberg
    2046 Curling Rd
    http://www.ires.ubc.ca/gunilla_oberg/

    Revisited / Making ourselves aware

    Background to this post
    This posting below has been revised following objections from one community leader that my original blog post focused on personality and in doing so diverted dialogue from the key-issues. My original post was written in response to an email distributed community-wide March 29th.
    The author of the e-mail has requested that their name be withheld and that their e-mail be posted alongside this posting, such that readers are provided full disclosure and context.


    The broadly distributed email of March 29 (purple text below), encouraging residents to attend a Lower Capilano OCP Presentation, contained a number of misleading terms or inaccurate statements, which deflects and averts balanced discussion of the community-developed plans.   As it is essential to clarify and develop context for residents to formulate realistic approaches to the community’s future, the points below touch upon comments or terms from the March 29 e-mail that require examination or clarification:

     “...our single family area”
     This is not functionally accurate. We do not live in a single family neighbourhood.  We live in a mixed form, multi-family neighbourhood that contains high-rise apartments, duplexes, secondary suites and single-family homes.

    At least 30% of homes on McLallen Court are functionally "up & down" duplexes.  40% of the homes on Sandown Place are some form of duplex, either Vancouver Specials, or "side-by-side".   Numerous secondary suites exist within the area, with the possible exception of the North Glenaire cul-de-sac, due to the number of slab foundation homes there and 90% of the community presently lives in highrise multi-family buildings.

     “…an additional 1,000 residential units”
    With complete redevelopment of the Lower Capilano commercial properties (not just the former Capwest site), the conceptual plan anticipates approximately 40% of new units as replacement for the existing 387 hotel/motel units.   This is for a long range plan that anticipates a 20 year span.  Nor would all replacement units be residential units.  A number of units would consist of single-occupancy seniors rentals and market rental units that would not be sold, but would be used to replenish the dwindling supply of scarce rental accommodation on the North Shore.

    “A quick calculation tells us…well over 2000 parking spaces”
    No development guidelines anywhere stipulate this level of parking ratios. The “quick calculation” of parking ratios is a little too quick.

    Normally the parking ratio near  transit is 1.25 stalls per residential unit, whereas Larco’s 2009 application provided for 1.4 stalls per dwelling unit.  For comparison purposes, the City of Vancouver requirement is 0.9 stalls per unit and West Vancouver is 1.0 stalls per unit. For the community centre, the ratio is 1 stall per 35 sqm. GFA (gross floor area) which equates to 41 stalls and Larco’s application detailed 44 stalls.  Seniors housing, of which Larco planned 45 units, is 0.33 per unit or 15 stalls (seniors tending to not be drivers).

    Presently there are over 700 surface parking spaces to service the Lower Capilano commercial properties.  With redevelopment the greatest amount of parking would be underground, not on the surface.  As was pointed out in Tom Lancaster’s March 23rd presentation, this opens up vast amounts of NEW available surface area for parks and public space for the use and benefit of the community.

    From these facts it is difficult to imagine how it is possible to reach a figure of 2,000 parking spaces being required, much less to imagine that these would be situated as surface parking stalls.  This is not a reality.

    “…score…big tax dollars for their coffers”
    As DNV Council tries to prudently struggle with rising resident needs, they attempt to balance demands with the ability/willingness of residents to pay commensurately higher tax property rates.

    Financial forecasts from DNV Finance indicate that the single-family homes do not pay their full and actual cost of services.  This burden is largely and disproportionately borne by business – which drives many businesses to look for other jurisdictions that offer lower tax rates.  This drives away much needed jobs for the North Shore.

    How would one begin to rebalance the tax base in the future, seeing as the growing segment of the DNV population will consist mainly of seniors, many of them on limited or fixed incomes?  How would one develop a vibrant, demographically-diverse and working age population that supports and services businesses and the local economy?

    Why are the tax rates for the City of North Vancouver so much lower than for the DNV?   In large part because it has a more compact footprint, with higher density, fewer kilometers/person of sewer, roads and water to maintain, not to mention the creeks, woodlands and parks.  Why will NV City never want to merge with DNV? Simple. They don’t want the costs and headaches of this widely-dispersed, low population municipality!

    If anyone feel that they pay too much in tax now, have a look at the prospects of an aging population of suburban single-family dwellers who can no longer drive or have sufficient density to create viable transit service.  The DNV Finance Dept. will be glad to supply some scenarios based on indepth data on exactly these conditions.

    “...those who are hoping for huge benefits ($$) are making themselves heard…”
    Being one of those who often speak to these issues,  I assume I am included somewhere in the estimation of those engaged in an imagined “dollars for density” scheme.  For the majority of residents this comment is as insulting as it is erroneous.

    What suggestions are there for those who want to create a fully functioning community that allows for local services, or life without the possibility of an automobile?  Or for those whose slab foundation is cracked and are limited to redevelopment of a home that must conform to building form created 60 years ago?

    The claim of prospects for “huge benefits” seems to come from people who have very little experience with the economics of small building development.  At the Sept. 1, 2010 meeting of the Lions Gate Neighbourhood Association, an opponent from one end of the room heckled me as I spoke, charging that I was only trying to get "filthy rich", while from the opposite end, someone loudly objectioned that our plans for modest low density development options made no financial sense at all.

    Those opposing any change in the neighbourhood are yet to articulate their vision for the future of this community.  The circulated e-mail (below) is yet another illustration of a document that lacks a realistic vision of how to navigate into the future of a changing world. The message seems to be “We don't know what we want, but we know we don't want what we don’t know."

    Just saying “No!” to everything will not help us transform our neighbourhood towards a more livable and sustainable community for present and future generations.
    Doug Curran

     Original email received March 29:
    REMINDER - Important Meeting this Wednesday

    Attached is the District notice for the meeting last week, and the one coming up this Wednesday evening, March 30th, at the Grouse Inn.
    People should make themselves aware of what's being proposed by the District for our neighbourhood!   At this point, we're looking at an additional 1000 residential units,
    100,000 square feet of new retail and commercial space, etc. etc.  A quick calculation tells us that all this new development will require well over 2000 parking spaces - that should tell you how massive this
    plan really is.  This is what the District Planning Department has the audacity to call their "village" concept!
    In addition to this - there is a push by some residents to upzone their properties - we could have several triplex and townhouse complexes within what is now our single family area. 
    For those of us who value this quiet enclave in this corner of North Vancouver - massive changes could be on our doorstep - and soon.  Larco is ready to go with their plans - the District Planning department
    is ready to take what little they can get, in exchange for a way to score big tax dollars for their coffers.  The District sees our neighbourhood as one that can give them the money to keep doing what they have done
    for years in the District - spend, spend, spend, for the benefit of residents, but not usually those living in Lower Capilano!  When you look at all the facilities, parks, and other infrastructure other areas have, it's easy to wonder why the District is looking hard at our area as a cash cow, and expecting us to take all this density, with all the headaches that come along with it.
    The District will do what they have always done - spend the newfound tax revenue everywhere else but in our area!
    There were many new boards and displays at last Wednesday's meeting.  After reminding them on Monday that I had been told everything would be up on the District website, some of the material has now been posted.  Take a look, read through some of it, and come with your questions and concerns on Wednesday night.  You can be sure those who are hoping for huge benefits ($$) for themselves are making themselves heard at these meetings.   The District Planners have focused on these residents' support of major redevelopment, to advance their notion of what our neighbourhood should become.  Those of us who hope to stay have a lot to consider.  This is your time to get your point of view known to the District!

    Go to the DNV website for the latest available information.  http://dnv.org/article.asp?a=484

    As always - give me a call if you wish.


     

    Monday 18 April 2011

    Delivering the OCP / Comments for April 18 DNV Council meeting


    Earlier today a resident sent me an email asking, “Doug, what is the answer on density, is less better, is more better?”
    The question is not as simple as  less is better …. more is better?   What needs does the community have?  What are effective strategies for countering these needs/deficiencies?  What is realistic in terms of financial viability, or of the growing number of seniors, combined with the lack of people of working and family-raising age?

    There is some density required in order to make a number of things actually work.  If we can't build more or bigger roads (not an option), then we have to develop better rapid transit services (these are part of the plans).  In order to make transit work we need to alter some of the road paths and width (this requires the cooperation of adjacent businesses).  
    Any plan has to be financially viable for a developer to begin and requires that they build to certain density in order to obtain the additional amenities that residents need and want.  If we don 't want to raise taxes then developer offsets are the only means to extract these components for the community.
    The existing motels are all aged, losing customers and operating below their level of profitability (break even point is 65-70% occupancy and currently they are operating at 60%).  What will we do with these motel sites if they close and sit derelict?  How will this affect our area?  

    One of the central issues with regard to the residential area is this simple fact: None of the four homes that have come up for sale on Belle Isle over the past four years have not been bought by people wanting to live here themselves.  All the people with sufficient money to buy a home for themselves chose to buy elsewhere.  Give this some thought and you will quickly see that the question is more complex than more density or less.

    DNV Council, along with a large number of community residents have set themselves to the hard work and realities of creating a viable future for the District of North Vancouver.  All environmental, economic and demographic projections require that DNV Council grapple meaningfully with major issues of infrastructure, sustainability and services for its population in the coming years.   They, and we, have an obligation to do this.  It is not merely a matter of choice.

    Failing to do so would be like continuing to charge purchases on your credit cards with absolutely no idea on how to pay them off.  There will come a day of reckoning.

    How long into the future would some prefer that DNV Council and planners keep the world and its complexities at bay? 

    Sunday 17 April 2011

    Myopic thinking on preserving the natural world / a letter to the editor of the North Shore News



    Letter to the Editor / North Shore News                                                April 9, 2011


    In his April 7th Letter to the Editor, Jerome Irwin presents the idea of an “ever-diminishing iconic North Shore way of life” and presumably its “character”.  The character outlined by Mr. Irwin seems to consist solely of single-family neighbourhoods and traffic-calmed streets.

    What is being described is in fact, an artifact of the post-war baby-boom automobile culture, all of it fuelled and made possible by cheap and plentiful petroleum. What of the previous character of the ‘30s that included streetcars, walkable neighbourhoods with corner stores?  Why is there no call for the return of that character, or the character that existed here prior to European settlement?

    There is a hard contradiction in Mr. Irwin’s bombastic cry for a “pristine natural world” and the fact that what he seeks to “protect and preserve” is the same unsustainable suburban model widely recognized as the cause of many of  the problems Mr. Irwin himself seeks refuge from, in his “quiet, traffic-calmed streets”.

    While the “hopeful dreamers” of the North Shore prepare their mourning suits, DNV Council, along with a large number of community residents are setting themselves to the hard work and realities of creating a viable future for the District of North Vancouver.  All environmental, economic and demographic projections require that DNV Council grapple meaningfully with major issues of infrastructure, sustainability and services for its population in the coming years.   They, and we, have an obligation to do this.  It is not merely a matter of choice.

    Critical issues of a swelling, aged population, spread out across the single-family neighbourhoods, will experience increasing difficulties (including costs) in maintaining their lives and homes.  Young people are choosing to live in other parts of the Lower Mainland, shunning the high cost suburban landscape for a more urban lifestyle.  A recent indepth Globe & Mail article outlined this trend, “Those new suburbanites are demanding better transit.  They want cafes, shops and schools within walking distance.”

    How long into the future would Mr. Irwin prefer that DNV Council and planners keep the world and its complexities at bay? 

    Douglas Curran                  

    Monday 4 April 2011

    15 Issues that won't go away & notions about the greater public good...

    Some time back, the question was asked of me, "Doug, Why are you so passionate about this?" Some have sought to impugn the motives, primarily of myself, but also many of those in the community who desire a more vibrant, sustainable and demographically diverse neighbourhood.  

    One resident (themselves living in a 20 storey high-rise) questioned me as to why, given that I live beside the vacant Capwest site, could I  "be for a 12 storey tower?".  The inference was that no one of right mind would possibly accept such a thing.  I explained that there is a big difference between being '"for" something, and being able to "accept" something.  I accept that a 12 storey tower may well be the density offset that provides for a community centre - short of property tax increases - that most people appear to desire.
    While I don't feel that much urge for it myself, I can accept it on balance of the greater good.  It is a decision made in light of all other criteria, and ultimately, something I can live with.  It promises a better future for the public good.

    Given the demographic changes coming to the general DNV population we need to anticipate and prepare for some undeniable facts.  With the surge of an aging population, do we not have a social, not to mention moral, obligation to create places so those with mobility constraints are able to live, shop and access transit in a reasonable fashion?  Where will you want to live if/when you yourself are unable to drive?

    Here (excerpted from a DNV "Identity 2030" brochure, are 15 issues that will not go away simply because we may want them to.  These are not notions or preferences.  They are real and will affect all of our lives.  Our only choice is to begin to channel them into opportunities.  



                        "You may not be interested in change - but change is very interested in you!"



            kbelcher@shaw.ca                                                                    dougcurran@shaw.ca

    Friday 25 March 2011

    Clarifying the parks space policy under the OCP

    For many years a number of truisms about Lower Capilano have been promoted and repeated to the point where they were broadly accepted as fact.  These 'facts' have assumed a life of their own and served to deflect and obscure examination of key aspects of our community, reinforcing set opinions and the status quo.  

    As a result of the OCP process, many of these previously unchallenged 'facts' have come under scrutiny and found to be lacking.  One of the consistent platforms for discouraging any redevelopment of the community has been the belief that lower Capilano lacked sufficient park space for the population.  As we begin to parse out this situation, we find that there is actually more than adequate park space.  For the proponents of the status quo however,  these large and available green spaces are not legitimately considered to be parks as they are not wholly owned by the District of NorthVancouver.  To paraphrase Shakespeare, "A park by any other owner would not smell as sweet."

    Below is my recent letter to Tom Lancaster, DNV's urban planner responsible for the Lower Capilano Conceptual Plan.  The refined conceptual plan and redevelopment for Lower Capilano envisages an additional 15,000 sq. metres/1.5 hectares of public parks and green space as a result of the rebuilding of this "gateway" to the North Shore.  

    For more background and design sketches of this conceptual plan please go to the March 16th posting,   "Distortion and Evasions/Unhelpful comments thrown at the community"

    March 24, 2011
    To:  Tom Lancaster   email: LancasterT@dnv.org     

    Tom,

    I was astonished at last night's Lower Cap meeting to hear the position (again/still) being advanced by a member of the community that our neighbourhood is deficient in park space.  The rubric of the DNV Parks Department's policy of 2 hectares of park/1,000 residents as written is poorly framed and presented without context.  Although well-intentioned, this policy fails to adequately define significant terms of reference that would make this policy appropriate and meaningful.

    For example, the policy fails to state that this 2 hectares/1,000 is an average of park space across the district, or to define any criteria of access or adjacency to this goal of park space. 

    What is confusing to many of us living in Lower Capilano, is to hear the specious position of "lack of park space"  being promoted under the banner of the 2 hectares policy.  Proponents of the "no/little park space" maintain that existing park or green space within the community should not considered "park" if the land is not all fully owned by the DNV.

    Under this scenario, the Capilano Regional Park (approx. 16,000 sq. metres) is not regarded as available park space, despite the fact that it lies less than a 30 second walk from the door of a good number of North of Fullerton residents. 

    Similarly, the west side of the Capilano river, extending south from Woodcroft, is disregarded as available park space.  This long, wooded and benched riverside path is used extensively by many Woodcroft residents, local residents and hikers heading up to the Capilano Watershed.  Calculating this pathway on the basis of a modest 12 metre width along its length, yields an additional 8,000+ sq. metres of green space, readily accessible to all ambulatory residents.

    Taken at face value, the "2 hectares" policy is used to promote an idea that every resident be entitled to their share of park space, not at the end of a 5 minute walk on a connecting trail, but is to be located beside every door step. 

    This "2 hectares/1,000" policy is deeply flawed as stated, not to mention unrealistic in the very narrow sense being advanced by many of its advocates.  The wording and terms of definition of this policy need to be re-framed within the OCP in a way that gives constructive and appropriate direction to planners and residents.

    sincerely,
    Doug Curran