Gentrification, affordable housing and homelessness in Vancouver's DTES

299 posts / 0 new
Last post
epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

What is poverty costing us in BC?

video

Think we can't afford to end poverty? Actually, we can't afford not to. Help change the conversation about poverty: SHARE this video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pd_nkCi-pVo

arborman

Catchfire wrote:

Their landlord doubled their rent from $1200 to $2400. Rhizome announced they were closing last week too.

I guess there's always Chapters and White Spot if we need a book and a good burger.

 

Oh no!  I loved Rhizome, and their breakfast burrito was unmatched. 

onlinediscountanvils

arborman wrote:

Catchfire wrote:

Their landlord doubled their rent from $1200 to $2400. Rhizome announced they were closing last week too.

I guess there's always Chapters and White Spot if we need a book and a good burger.

 

Oh no!  I loved Rhizome, and their breakfast burrito was unmatched.

 

They're not actually closing. They're just relocating (maybe, eventually) 3500 km east, as the crow flies.

Left Turn Left Turn's picture

onlinediscountanvils wrote:

arborman wrote:

Catchfire wrote:

Their landlord doubled their rent from $1200 to $2400. Rhizome announced they were closing last week too.

I guess there's always Chapters and White Spot if we need a book and a good burger.

Oh no!  I loved Rhizome, and their breakfast burrito was unmatched.

They're not actually closing. They're just relocating (maybe, eventually) 3500 km east, as the crow flies.

The Rhizome relocating to Toronto is still a huge loss for Vancouver.Frown

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

New rights card aims to make private security more accountable

This morning, we gathered with dozens of Downtown Eastside residents at the corner of Hastings Street and Dunlvey Avenue, in the Downtown Eastside to launch a new rights card aimed at private security guards.

We choose that location for the launch because it is a stretch of public sidewalk where many residents (particularly women) have reported having negative interactions with guards, but the issue is bigger than that corner. In 2006, the private security industry employed over 102,000 people across Canada. By  2011 that number had increased to approximately 140,000. While the industry has grown rapidly over the past decade, there has been little public discussion or debate about the role these private companies are playing in policing our neighbourhoods....

http://www.pivotlegal.org/new_rights_card_aim_to_make_private_security_m...

 

onlinediscountanvils

That's a great initiative, epaulo13.

@Left Turn - Yes, I realize it's a loss for Vancouver. The understatment was deliberate. Wink

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Swearing & Rudeness @ Pidgin DTES Gentrification Picket

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzYPHmS2BVU&feature=youtu.be

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..that was my thinking as well oda. there's nothing like good legal information to counter intimidation.

Pivot questions Vancouver police warning to PiDGiN protesters

quote:

In a letter to police chief Jim Chu dated April 17, Pivot lawyer Douglas King argues the latter definition is “inaccurate” and too broadly defines the section of the Criminal Code. 

“There’s been legal cases that have looked at this section of the Criminal Code and said that it needs to be a physical obstruction for it to amount to criminal mischief,” King explained in a phone interview with the Straight. “So we thought by the VPD saying any kind of behaviour that would just be disturbing people could amount to criminal mischief was not actually correct in the sense that the courts have said it has to be something more than that.”...

http://www.straight.com/news/373996/pivot-questions-vancouver-police-war...

 

Roystonbones

If I remeber correctly, when the restaurant was first opened the owner said he named it Pidgin because that was a language that enabled  disparate peoples to be able to communicate. It looks like he forgot the meaning.

Catchfire Catchfire's picture

Yes, but of course Pidgin is actually a colonialist language that allowed imperial nations to speak to the natives. It is by definition asymmetrical and invested in power. Not to mention the fact that it literally enacts colonialism by renaming the park across the street (Pigeon Park) which has special significance for locals.

6079_Smith_W

He named it after the park, the spelling notwithstanding. Would it have made any sense for him to name his restaurant Gullah? I expect the spelling was him trying to act sophisticated, but in fact being a smartass.

 

 

Catchfire Catchfire's picture

Yes, which is exactly what a colonialist would do. Cf Apache helicopters, The Atlanta Braves, etc. the spelling notwithstanding.

6079_Smith_W

CF, I'm actually agreeing with you here. My point was that the name was in reference to the park , and that it was a stupid move on his part.

 

 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

I think it is a little more complicated than that Catchfire. The local pidgen language was Chinook Jargon and linguists debate which was the dominant language with many thinking it was the Nootkan language.

Your post basically presumed that the FN's had no agency and where just pawns to the Europeans. That is a very euro centric view of BC's history.

Quote:

In her article Chinook Jargon: Arguments for a Pre-contact Origin, Barbara Harris supports the educated guess expressed by Swan with some compelling evidence rooted in modern linguistic theory:

In general, pidgin languages and presumably pre-pidgin jargons, have characteristics of both the substrate (subordinate) and superstrate (dominant) languages. Usually the basic lexicon is contributed by the superstratum and the syntactic features by the substrata... All the basic verbs [in CJ], many of the nouns and adjectives, the entire pronomial system, the two negatives and the one all-purpose preposition are from either Chinookan or Nootkan languages... The syntax of the historical [CJ] is esentially Subject-Verb- Object or Indo-European, while the typical structure of the local languages is Verb-Subject. By these criteria, then, CJ follows the usual pidgin structural pattern, as in the pre- contact days and for some time after, the Chinookan speakers and their trading partners were definitely the superstrata to the [European] substrata.

Harris goes on to offer further examples in the areas of the phonology and syntax of CJ that tend to support the idea of pre- contact origin from a perspective of theoretical linguistics (7).

http://carriagehousebandb.ca/Chinook%20Jargon.html

Roystonbones

Grossutti did not name it after Pigeon Park

The owner chose the name bceause

[ Quote]

"it represents two different cultures coming  together to communicate with each other."

 from website CBC News Feb 18, 2013

(Sorry cannot cut and paste for some reason)

I do think it is a bad name for the restaurant because depite the words or the language origins it  seemed to me to be patronizing even if the owner had good intetnions.



 

Halq’emeylem

Catchfire wrote:
Yes, which is exactly what a colonialist would do. Cf Apache helicopters, The Atlanta Braves, etc. the spelling notwithstanding.

 

It's named after pidgin language, which is how FNs and settlers first communicated. Get your facts straight, settler.

onlinediscountanvils

Roystonbones wrote:
Grossutti did not name it after Pigeon Park

The owner chose the name bceause

Quote:
"it represents two different cultures coming  together to communicate with each other."

 

He's being selective with his explanation. It's not like the two ideas are mutually exclusive. In marketing it's usually good to come up with things that work on multiple levels. I somehow doubt that he would have settled on that name if his restaurant were located in Kits or Little Mountain.

Catchfire Catchfire's picture

The restaurant faces Pigeon Park, folks. It is definitely named for the park.

@kropotkin, my point is that Pidgin is not a politically neutral language, but colonialism is its precondition. And of course, who dictates the parameters of discourse? It's Pidgin English, not Pidgin Chinese.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

And my point was that on this coast many FN's scholars and linguists believe that Chinook Jargon predated the European invasion and both the European and Chinese settlers adapted themselves to the existing 'pidgin' language that was used by speakers from various FN's. 

Catchfire Catchfire's picture

I see. So you think naming the restaurant a Pidgin is a tribute to FN linguistic ingenuity rather than a reflection of how 99% of the population uses the word...

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Catchfire wrote:

I see. So you think naming the restaurant a Pidgin is a tribute to FN linguistic ingenuity rather than a reflection of how 99% of the population uses the word...

Catchfire that kind of disingenuous putting of words in my mouth is beneath you. Get back to respectful dialogue and quit trying to score cheap shots.  When moderators descend to that kind of petty debating tactics its no wonder this board is often hostile.

 

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

The Role of The State in Gentrification, the Housing Crisis, and its Ability to Relieve or Maintain the Current Situation

Pidgin, a new fine-dining restaurant located on Vancouver’s Downtown East Side, moved in to the neighbourhood on February 1 of this year, prompting plenty of controversy. It’s located right off of East Hastings on Carrall Street, directly across from the notorious Pigeon Park. Many who do not live in the neighbourhood regard Pigeon Park as a drug haven, however for many residents the park is known as a gathering spot that hosts various festivals and street markets organized by the community. Pidgin is just one of many establishments actively contributing to the current gentrification squeeze. Although many regard gentrification as a good thing, it is ultimately contributing to the life and death situation that is the housing crisis in British Columbia. The idea that money accrued from business will trickle down to the poor through tax revenue is a common one. So is the idea that British Columbia simply does not have the money to put into social housing to address the needs of residents of the neighbourhood. In reality the priorities of this government, and the resulting hegemony seen in the majority of citizens, leaves the state with plenty of cash to be funneled to corporations as well as the military, in addition to funding coercion and repression tactics that maintain the status quo....

http://politicsrespun.org/2013/03/the-pidgin-picket-the-housing-crisis-a...

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Another round of evictions in Vancouver: COPE, The Junction, VIVO and Spartacus among groups evicted in May

Several non-profit organizations across Vancouver have received eviction notices this month. Evictions include COPE in Chinatown, VIVO Media Arts in Mount Pleasant, Spartacus Books in Strathcona and The Junction in Gastown. The high-profile evictions point to the deteriorating security of tenure for renters in Vancouver, including non-profits and cultural organizations renting in commercial spaces.

This month’s evictions come as part of a long trajectory of art and social spaces evicted in the city, particularly for organizations with roots in low-income areas facing rapid gentrification. Spartacus Books, based in the DTES area for 40 years, was pushed out from its previous location across from Victory Square due to “staggeringly high rent.” Spartacus was only one of a number of groups pushed out and evicted from the one-block radius of the Woodward’s mega-project, including W2, Red Gate, Dynamo and “151 E Hastings.”....

http://themainlander.com/2013/05/08/another-round-of-evictions-in-vancou...

Slumberjack

Anarchists take credit for arson

Quote:
"Last night, we burned down a yuppie development on 1st Ave. near Victoria,” the posting says. “We wish and will create fear for developers in East Vancouver."

Kaitlin McNabb Kaitlin McNabb's picture

groan, these "Anarchists" are giving a bad rep for social housing activists actually trying to do something.

Catchfire Catchfire's picture

The CBC is being incredibly irresponsible in representing this act as representative of the larger resistance to gentrification. Stephen Quinn now refers to "so-called" gentrification.

Btw. Spartacus books has been unevicted. Yay!

Slumberjack

Activism in general has a bad rep with the way it's often depicted in the media and in the commentariat.  It does begs the question of what one is supposed to do when certain activist expressions are sought after by the police state for a sound thrashing on the one hand, or ignored entirely on the other.

Kaitlin McNabb Kaitlin McNabb's picture

Yes that's a good point Slumberjack -- the mainstream media are completely ignoring (or misrepresenting) the efforts of the "good activists", and allowing those not so good ones to represent the entire movement.

Save On Meats seems to group them all together -- hell Carnegie can't even tell who is doing what.

Guess it comes down to ethics -- ethics in a shitty non-ethical situation?

Kaitlin McNabb Kaitlin McNabb's picture

I thought Cam Reed, who campaigned hard for Gregor, had a funny tweet about the whole debacle. To paraphrase "sometimes you pick a horse, and that horse shuts down all your arts institutions."

6079_Smith_W

Slumberjack wrote:

Activism in general has a bad rep with the way it's often depicted in the media and in the commentariat.  It does begs the question of what one is supposed to do when certain activist expressions are sought after by the police state for a sound thrashing on the one hand, or ignored entirely on the other.

Please.

While I'm sure vandalism and theft is being done to get a reaction (and of course to serve the philosophy some hold that it is the ONLY tactic), I think they discredit an already juvenile response by vastly inflating their own self-importance.

Strike fear in the development community? I read about how the attempt to strike fear in the signboard-owning community got turned into offering the public photo ops with the new sign for donations  (obviously inspired by their online trophy pic).

As far as developers are concerned this is an insurance claim, and unless these idiots wind up killing a squatter, a firefighter or one of their own, it is going to mean paperwork, some extra cops, and not much else.

... and, as mentioned above, turning a lot of potential allies against those who have some legitimate grievances here.

Slumberjack

Yeah, strike fear into the insurers more likely, at least until they pass the increased costs down to the developers and ultimately to the homebuyers.  The juveniles and everyone else being displaced are already discredited by society.  There doesn't appear to be much more that can be accomplished in that regard to worsen their public image.  With the exception of the arsonists, it's to be fully expected that no one will stand in line to claim ownership of this level of frustration, not the city, the developers, the society at large, or the roundly ignored forms of activism that by and large haven't been able to prevent anything.  It's seems evident that offering up such a convenient scapegoat, as these self described anarchists have done, inadvertently represents their contribution to societal progress such that it is.

6079_Smith_W

Scapegoat? Nobody is doing that to them. According to what they say they are in fact the ones who burned down the house and stole the sign for their photo shoot. I think some are reasonably concerned that others will be scapegoated for their crimes.

And we have had discussion about these tactics before. This isn't a riot or some other case of people being driven to the boiling point. This is a calculated tactic that is in black bloc literature for heaven's sake. You see them acting out the frustrations others don't express in the same way? I could speculate that they just see an opportunity to hijack  an existing  struggle for their political ends.

 

Catchfire Catchfire's picture
Mikal Sergov

 

Better to have actual homes for people than some yuppy resturant. People can get get better food, and a cheaper price, at Safeway, so why all the tears for some yuppy restaurant?

6079_Smith_W

Except that retail zoned space is unlikely to be rezoned or used as residential, and having small, local, family-oriented businesses for services and employment (rather than big box everything that they have to drive to) is as crucial a part of a thriving neighbourhood as housing.

Also, the reason why the rent is being hiked is to bring in those "yuppie" upscale businesses, which are less likely to accomodate kids, or any street life at all that they think might be bad for their business.

As for Safeway, I have always found it to be one of the more needlessly expensive options, and avoid it like the plague.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safeway_Inc.

Catchfire Catchfire's picture

I'm interested in hearing how doubling the rent of a restaurant will result in affordable housing in its place. I am also interested in hearing more of how Safeway is a friend of the working class.

Mikal Sergov

Catchfire wrote:
I am also interested in hearing more of how Safeway is a friend of the working class.

We could start with the fact that Safeway workers are unionized. United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Union Local 1518, UFCW Local 247, and the Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers International Union Local 468 to be exact. There are 10,000 people or so in BC alone who are earning a decent living wage because they have negotiated fair agreements with the company.

 

6079_Smith_W

@ Mikal Sergov

So what? So is Costco, which makes them a better option than WalMart, but not nearly as good as supporting the smaller grocers who don't send their profits down to the states. It's not like their workers' decision to unionize means that we owe them our business, and it's unlikely they are hurting for shoppers.

My point is that considering a small community-owned business "yuppy", and one of the largest grocery chains in the world a progressive option that is going to help the neighbourhood seems a bit backwards to me.

And when is the last time you did a price comparison? Safeway is not cheap.

Mikal Sergov

6079_Smith_W wrote:

when is the last time you did a price comparison? Safeway is not cheap.

Fuck, that kind of thinking of yours (cheap = better) leads DIRECTLY to workers in Bangladesh dying by the thousands. Yeah, Cheerios at Safeway cost more than at Walmart. However Safeway pays and treats their workers better than Walmart, which locks theirs in at night (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/18/us/workers-assail-night-lock-ins-by-wa...).

 

So back to tpic at hand. Why should we care about a locally-owned yuppy restaurant being closed, if the result is housing for people who need it? Do people in Vancouver really need another yuppy restaurant?

 

6079_Smith_W

My sister works at Safeway, so your good will is noted. Prices are still cheaper at SuperValu, which is also unionized.

And your attempt to frame it that way notwithstanding, I don't think that's the topic at hand, Mikal.

The rent on that place wasn't hiked to make room for a housing co-op.

Mikal Sergov

6079_Smith_W wrote:

My sister works at Safeway, so your good will is noted. Prices are still cheaper at SuperValu, which is also unionized.

And your attempt to frame it that way notwithstanding, I don't think that's the topic at hand, Mikal.

The rent on that place wasn't hiked to make room for a housing co-op.

 

I worked at a Safeway in a lower mainland community as a shelf stocker from 1985-1987. We were paid decent coin compared to the other teenagers at McDonalds or Esso. What sort of bugged us was that the other major grocery store at that time, Overwaitea, would match our wage increases without the risk of strike action.

The reason the rent on the yuppy restaurant is going up is so that the property becomes vacant, then the building and land will be converted to condos. Condos are now a part of the social housing mix (http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2013/05/21/condos_becoming_part_of_toron...); the old-style dedicated social housing complex is on its way out.

 

Catchfire Catchfire's picture

Mikal, I applaud your support of unionized workers, which I of course support as well. But your urban class displacement analysis is severely lacking. I agree that Little Nest is bourgeois -- you can see that in my post above -- but it's astonishingly naive to think that anything but corporate restaurants or services will replace it. And of course, Condos are the avant garde of class warfare in Vancouver, so I can't really understand how you would think that replacing LN with condos is beneicial to anyone except for developers.

As for Safeway, they may be unionized, but of course they are guilty of all the worst offences every major grocery chain is guilty of. Unionized or no, I've never considered them friends of the working class, but rather allies of capitalist exploitation and growth.

Mikal Sergov

Catchfire wrote:

Mikal, I applaud your support of unionized workers, which I of course support as well. [cut]

As for Safeway, they may be unionized, but of course they are guilty of all the worst offences every major grocery chain is guilty of. Unionized or no, I've never considered them friends of the working class, but rather allies of capitalist exploitation and growth.

 

Mike, you offer support to unionized workers except actually shopping at the companies that employ them, so really you don't support them at all; you leave the heavy lifting to other people while you keep yourself ideologically clean. I live in the real world. It's not enough to just "applaud" unionized workers, you need to support the businesses they work at otherwise... What do you think the fate of the workers will be if no one shops there because they think they're "stickin' it to the man"? Fewer unionized workers and a rush to the bottom is what.

6079_Smith_W

Mikal Sergov wrote:

 It's not enough to just "applaud" unionized workers, you need to support the businesses they work at otherwise..

What. I'm obliged to go buy a mercedes benz now to show my solidarity? Spend my entire paycheque going to every union shop in town buying stuff? Sorry but, that is absurd. Safeway is not hurting for customers; it is one of the largest grocers in the world, and we don't owe them anything just because of the wise choice of their workers.

Small and local is more important for me, even if it is family owned, not unionized. And that says nothing about my support for the principle of unionized workplaces. It says that I support my local community first.

I applaud Costco's workers for being unionized. I still don't shop there because I strongly dislike their business model (plus anyone who does a price comparison will see that most things there aren't cheaper at all).

Can we get back on topic?

 

Catchfire Catchfire's picture

Mikal Sergov wrote:
you offer support to unionized workers except actually shopping at the companies that employ them, so really you don't support them at all; you leave the heavy lifting to other people while you keep yourself ideologically clean.

I suppose I should resign from the executive position of my union then, and retire my organizing efforts, given my ideologically clean, practically dirty support of unions.

I find this discussion bizarre, since from my first post about Little Nest you can see that what I find notable about the story is that now missle-distance gentrifiers are being gentrified (cf also The Waldorf, above). Sparatacus Books is also, of course, not unionized. Neither is Rhizome, VIVO Media Arts and so on. This conversation is about predatory developers and real estate speculation and how it is transforming the land of the city in the interests of capital rather than people -- of which, of course, doubling the rent of even a bougie little brunch diner like Little Nest, is an emblematic example. I didn't bring unions into the conversation, but I do notice their lack of involvement with this struggle in Vancouver, which is, in my opinion, the most crucial struggle happening on the ground which targets working people, low-income people, marginalized people and racialized people. So I find your intervention regarding Safeway (!) to be a non-sequitur at best, troubling at worst.

Mikal Sergov

Catchfire wrote:

I suppose I should resign from the executive position of my union then, and retire my organizing efforts, given my ideologically clean, practically dirty support of unions.

 

No, don't resign, you probably do good work there.

But, honestly now, would you be happy if everybody stopped using the services of the workers your union represents and instead switched to a non-union supplier? Do you think that would be good for you in particular, or unions in general?

I'll sum up by saying that if people don't support unionized businesses wherever and whenever they can, then the end result is a race to bottom.

Catchfire Catchfire's picture

lol @ Vancouver

At Ground Zero for Vancouver's Towering Debate

News of the towers rippled through my neighbourhood in early June, at garage sales and block parties, at Micro Footie games and the Trout Lake Farmers Market. The city's freshly minted draft Grandview-Woodland Community Plan calls for a radical remake of the area around the Broadway SkyTrain station: a possible 36-storey building on the Safeway site behind the station, towers up to 22 storeys in "transitional" zones including the area between 11th and 12th avenues near Commercial Drive, and more high-rises up to 26 storeys between Broadway and 7th towards Woodland.

Many people were gobsmacked. "Really?" neighbours would say when I told them. "Really?" An elderly lady leaving Safeway reacted to news of a 36-storey tower with a curt and conversation-ending "They're nuts." Others, such as Morna McLeod, a resident who advised the city on creating an open consultation process for the plan, were more measured. "I was kind of startled," she said of the high-rises at Broadway. "We had talked about greening laneways and gentle densification. It looks like some other office wrote it and it was stuck in."

 

I asked several city planners who attended a June 6 open house at the Princeton Café on Powell St. -- the last of three open houses in early June to reveal the plan -- where the tower heights came from. "It was a collective decision of the planning department," they said repeatedly. The event that felt vaguely like a public flogging, and the carefully worded answer had the faint whiff of something prearranged. I rephrased the question: "Can you introduce me to one person, in the community or at city hall, who thinks towers at these heights are a good idea, and will tell me why they are a good idea?" The preponderant silence that generally followed was a little uncomfortable.

Several people familiar with Vancouver planning told me they believe there's not a lot of support for tall towers along Commercial Drive among city planning staff. So I asked the City of Vancouver's department of corporate communications for an interview with the boss, general manager of planning and development Brian Jackson. He wasn't available in the 48-hour window I proposed.

Instead, I was directed to Matt Shillito, the assistant director of community planning who got such a browbeating at the open houses. He offered a game defense of the development proposed around SkyTrain, and again insisted it was a collective decision. "Existing and future rapid transit development is a major factor," he said. "My view is that it should have some height to mark it as a regionally important transit station." Shillito acknowledged, however, the depth of opposition in the community. "The clear majority of opinion is against these building heights."

 

The stakes create a huge imbalance when it comes to community input. So does the structure of the conversation. Did the form or density of development on the key Safeway site come up much in the community consultation? Well, no. How specific has the city's conversation been with Safeway and its agents? Keep in mind here that with this month's purchase of Safeway by Sobey's, it became part of a company with $25 billion in annual sales, and it's linked to a large real-estate trust. Safeway owns three more key underdeveloped sites along the Broadway corridor. Have Safeway's people talked to the city's people? Of course they have. How specific has the city's conversation been with individual developers? "We get calls from a lot of developers interested in buying that property!" Jackson said in a brief email, when I asked him about one prospective purchaser.

Ian Gillespie, the developer of the Woodward's project and the Oakridge site with architect Gregory Henriquez, spoke in January to a San Francisco audience about how he's dealt with Vancouver's senior planners in the past. According to Easy as Pie, a participant in the online SkyscraperPage Forum, he described it as freewheeling: "Gillespie said that he'd never once built a project in Vancouver that fit within existing zoning -- a huge laugh line for the SF audience -- and he described a somewhat astonishing development process for the Shangri-La, which basically consisted of a few lunches to get height and lot coverage settled before even acquiring the land."

Only then, wrote Pie, did Gillespie finish a co-venture deal with the property owner "on the back of 'a Tim Hortons napkin'... There were also plenty of other stories that reinforce the 'discretionary' nature of discretionary planning in Vancouver, but none so powerful as Gillespie's flat-out admission that you get what you want as long as you buy the city off with daycare space or whatever they want."

6079_Smith_W

Funny that they would target that already-dense spot, when you consider how much space there is on that same road within a kilometer east of there. I know quite a few people who would be seriously affected by that.

And I guess it's Sobeys' problem now. I wonder if that had anything to do with the idea.

Ripple

Tangentially related ... The WISE Hall has been getting noise complaints from their new neighbours:

http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/keep-the-wise-alive?browse_v=new

Kaspar Hauser

There's a "workshop" being held on July 6 from 10-2pm at an as-yet undisclosed location to explore diversification options at Broadway and Commercial.  You have to register to get a spot--the seats are limited, and only some of those who register will get a spot.  So, register and, regardless of whether or not you get a spot, show up on July 6th and make some noise.

 

Here's the link: http://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/grandview-woodland-community-plan.aspx 

 

Pages