Published monthly by the University Neighbourhoods Association Published monthly by the University Neighbourhoods Association
Volume 2, Issue 11
NOVEMBER 22, 2011
Late Iva Mann was Force behind Creation of Pacific Spirit Park
Governors Get Set To Approve Doubling Population of Wesbrook Neighbourhood Concerned residents are seeking review of proposed densification: quality of life in Wesbrook may be adversely affected, says UNA Expect the UBC board of governors to vote December 1 for an amended Wesbrook Place neighbourhood plan that will least double the projected population of residents living there. The UBC property and planning committee made clear November 22 it is in favour of the plan, and the full board invariably follows the direction of its committees. This sets back the hopes of Wesbrook Place residents who feel the projected population of their neighbourhood should not exceed the figure of 5,000 cited in the original Wesbrook Place Neighbourhood Plan of 2005. They argue they bought homes on the strength of the original figures, and they feel UBC has no right to double the density of housing there to the point that its projection population in 1015 years will be 12,500. WESBROOK continued on Page 9.
Friends and relatives of the late Iva Mann walk in Pacific Spirit Park following church service commemorating life of Ms Mann and her 38 years work campaigning for creation of the park. Daughter Shelley Page, front row left, kneeling, led the walk. Please turn to Page 6 for story.
Special Report on Rates UBC Residents Pay For Metro Water
Second - and Larger - Surcharge Surfaces in UBC Water Story First surcharge of 10% was reported in October issue of The Campus Resident; further surcharge of 20% is reported here The mysterious story of water rates at the University of British Columbia has deepened in a month. In October, The Campus Resident reported a 10% mark-up on the rate at which the University Endowment Lands (UEL) sells water to UBC, and since Oc-
tober, we have learned of a 20% mark-up on the rate at which the Greater Vancouver Water District, an arm of Metro Vancouver, sells its water to the UEL in the first place. The 20% mark-up in favour of Metro Vancouver has existed—unchanged and unchallenged—for 62 years. The 10% mark-up in favour of the UEL has existed at least since the first residents moved to UBC to live in the early 1990s—and as far as UBC as an institution is concerned, it has probably existed longer. The origin of the 20% surcharge on the rate at which Metro Vancouver sells its water to the UEL lies in a letter agreement dated 1949 between the two organizations. While The Campus Resident has not yet obtained a copy of this letter agreement, Metro Vancouver staff members have assured us of its contents, and have promised to deliver a copy of the letter in due course. WATER continued on Page 12.
Residents to Get More Face Time With UNA, Says New Chair Prod Laquian, of Hampton Place, is acclaimed UNA Chair at November meeting; retired professor is expert in community and regional planning
Spillway at Seymour Falls Dam (Photo Metro Vancouver)
Maria Harris Re-elected November 19 Election. Results Page 5
Prod Laquian, new chair and president of the University Neighbourhoods Association, says residents will have more opportunity to express concerns about their community under his leadership. “I am looking forward to the residents suggesting certain measures that we can try out to improve our community,” Mr. Laquian says. “We will hold more town hall meetings and community events where the residents can clearly voice their concerns.”
RESIDENTS continued on Page 5.
THE CAMPUS RESIDENT NOVEMBER 22, 2011
Profile: Marie Engelbert Ms. Engelbert, who introduces herself here, is new manager of the University Endowment Lands (UEL), home to over 5,000 neighbours of campus residents I’m very happy to introduce myself as Manager, University Endowment Lands. My career background is in public service in London, UK, where I have held posts in a variety of Ministries, including HM Treasury, and have led the central policy function at the Audit Commission for England, the independent watchdog for local public services. As part of the firm KPMG’s public advisory practice, I have also worked extensively as an advisor to public sector organizations on their strategic and operational challenges. This experience spans work with national government, local government and police forces. My academic background is in economics at the University of Cambridge, UK. I am excited at the prospect of applying this varied experience to the operations of the UEL. Before taking up the post of Manager, I attended the Union of British Columbia Municipalities annual convention, framed around its “new 3 Rs: rethink; replace; rejuvenate.” I was struck by the commonality of the challenges faced by local government of all shapes and sizes and particularly by how these themes reflect the strategic challenges that we face here at the UEL; to take just a few ex-
amples: • rethinking our approach on garbage, with the introduction of curbside recycling in area C (one of four areas in the UEL), and the commitment to do more; • replacement of our aging capital infrastructure, fundamental to the basic services provided by the UEL; and • rejuvenating (or at least reviewing) the UEL’s policies (as set out in the 2005 Official Community Plan) and Bylaw. My arrival as new Manager, coinciding as it does with elections to the Community Advisory Council (CAC) and Advisory Design Panel (ADP), also presents an opportunity for a fourth R: reflect. A brief period of reflection will be important in setting the agenda for the future work of the UEL administration. I look forward to discussing the strategic priorities of the UEL with the CAC, and to continuing the productive discussions that have been initiated between the CAC and UEL staff on the development of the annual budget. In recent years the UEL has seen significant levels of development activity, within the framework set by relevant Bylaws. I expect to see these levels of development applications continue, making the role set out for the ADP—providing advice, recommendations and comments on land use planning issues; development permit applications and the associated Bylaw—an important one. Again, I look forward to working with the Panel on these issues. On a personal note, I view myself as very fortunate in relocating to the Lower Mainland and having the opportunity to contribute to public service in the UEL. I look forward to getting to know the community and its residents.
Marie Engelbert, manager, University Endowment Lands
Successful taekwondo team from The Old Barn Community Centre
Taekwondo Team Takes Big Crop of Medals Team of 14 from Old Barn Community Centre at UBC is entered; 2011 Taekwondo championships are held Oct 29 at Capilano U A team of seven children from the Old Barn Community Centre at UBC competed in 14 different events at the 2011 B.C Taekwondo Masters Cup Championships October 29 at Capilano University, and achieved the enviable goal of bringing home 14 medals. The team consisted of Aidan Murphy
Rao, HaiNuo Xu, Juliet Feng, Yike Ma, Rebeca Dong, Tony Yu and William Lin. Yike Ma, Aidan Murphy Rao and HaiNuo Xu won gold medals in Gyoroogi (sparring), while Yike Ma and Rebeca Dong won gold medals in Poomsae (patterns). Rebeca Dong won a silver medal in Gyoroogi, while William Lin, Aidan Murphy Rao, Juliet Feng, Tony Yu and HaiNuo Xu won silver medals in Poomsae. William Lin, Juliet Feng and Tony Yu won bronze medals in Gyoroogi. Coach Nathan Ma said, “We were also still the only community centre there; all of the rest were from Taekwondo specific schools.”
THE CAMPUS RESIDENT NOVEMBER 22, 2011
page 3 Published by: University Neighbourhoods Association #202-5923 Berton Avenue, Vancouver, BC V6S OB3
Editorial Page A Good Year for Elections The election season has concluded at UBC and the University Endowment Lands (UEL). We note it was the best season on record for both local governance bodies and regional government. Maria Harris won re-election to the Metro Vancouver board seat for Electoral Area A (which includes both UBC and the UEL). Though still a painfully low turnout, at least 900 local people showed up to vote November 19 for either Ms. Harris (who got 50% of the votes) or one of the four candidates who ran against her—a voter turnout double what it was three years ago; as well, the fact that five candidates ran for this position in regional government in 2011 speaks well for community engagement in the political process for only six years ago, Gary Gibson had no opposition in becoming Electoral Area A director on the Metro board In the UEL, where they vote only once every three years for two local governance bodies, the Community Advisory Council (CAC) and the Advisory Design Panel (ADO), both the number of CAC
Letters to the Editor & Opinions Include name, address and telephone number. Maximum lengths: Letters 400 words. Opinions 750 words. We may edit or decline to publish any submission.
and ADP candidates running and the number of people who turned out November 19 to vote for them far exceeded the numbers in 2008 and 2005. UEL resident John O’Donnell—who has won each of the three times he has run for a CAC seat—says elsewhere in this issue that “this was the best election” in the field of UEL local governance ever. Not be outdone by either the Metro Vancouver election in Electoral Area A election or the CAC and ADP elections in the UEL, the University Neighbourhoods Association (UNA) election scored well on the UBC campus. This election takes place annually, and in the September 28 election, an unprecedented six candidates ran for two seats on the UNA board, and voters cast an unprecedented 1,000-plus votes for one or other candidate. To be clear, the voter turn-out in none of these elections broke any records other than their own poor records in the past, and unfortunately, poor records persisted in some areas. Take for example the multi-family area of the UEL—one of four UEL areas, the other three areas being restricted to single-family homes. The number of residences in this multi-family area (UEL Area D) approximates 956. Alas, only 18 Area D voters turned out to vote in person or send in their votes by mail for eitehre CAC or ADP candidates. Over-all, however, the message comes across clearly that a measure of interest has grown in both local governance and regional government in the UBC and UEL lands. Good men and women living in the area will seek to encourage the furtherance of this interest.
Editor & Business Manager John Tompkins 604.827.3502 JTompkins@myuna.ca
Letter to the Editor Engineer Urges Use of ‘Greywater’, Rooftop Rainwater to Cut Water Bill UBC long-term residents, as well as other campus users, are justified in concerns about water usage on the campus. Water is one of the critical resources for a sustainable community. However I suggest that spending money for another study of water rates, name-calling our UEL neighbours, or considering installation of an expensive new supply pipeline are not the most constructive solutions. Moving forward to implement sustainable water management is the most constructive solution. The Comprehensive Community Plan (CCP) in the year 2000 identified 1.5 million cubic metres of potential rooftop rainwater collection for use in toilets and irrigation. The CCP also identified greywater* recycling and conservation measures such as suite meters as viable options to further reduce purchases and consumption. The CCP was in effect for a full decade and I know of no performance measurements of CCP sustainability targets. But I am reasonably certain that less than 0.1% of the rooftop rainwater potential was implemented. Other than CK Choi (built in 1996) and the new Centre for Interactive Research on Sustainability building, there are no known greywater recycling systems at UBC, and it’s unknown to what extent metering of individual residents has been implemented. UBC purchases roughly 5 to 6 million cubic metres of water annually (it’s difficult to find the current figure). If even one-third of just the rooftop rainwater potential alone was realized
over the past decade, the reduced annual water purchases would offset the annual mark-up fees by UEL. The past cannot be undone. Under the new Land Use Plan, I suggest that UBC Campus Planning as the sole authority exercising full control over development has the responsibility to take leadership and ensure water management moves forward in a constructive, real, and sustainable manner. Eric Mazzi, Vancouver Mr. Eric Mazzi is PowerSmart Instructor at the UBC Clean Energy Research Centre, while from 1998-2004, he was senior engineer and operations manager for the UBC water distribution, storm-water, and sanitary system. *Greywater is wastewater generated from domestic activities such as laundry, dishwashing, and bathing. Greywater differs from water from the toilets which is designated sewage or ‘black-water’ to indicate it contains human waste.
Letter to the Editor Amendments Amount to Violation of Public Trust, Says Wesbrook Home-Buyer I attended the University planning meeting at the MBA house November 1. It is clear that the UBC Planning Committee is intending to proceed with the revised community plan for Wesbrook Place. To do so in the face of growing public opposition to this plan is, in my estimation, a serious violation of public trust in the University. We need to mount a much more diligent and well-organized opposition to this proposed development plan. We purchased a residential suite in this development area after due diligence. We were assured by the representatives of UBC planning that their plan for development of the area was based upon the initial agreed-upon plan of development.
This included only five high-rises. Westbrook was then under development. Currently, under the new proposed development, much greater densification of the area is proposed. Some 15 or so highrises are proposed in this new submission allowing for much greater densification. There are a number of reasons why we, as residents who purchased properties in the UBC development area, should resist this new proposed development. 1. With the increased density, land values will decrease. The entire area will become less attractive to potential buyers as it becomes a concrete jungle rather than a beautiful area with winding paths, beautiful trees and open areas. As residents who have purchased here because of its environmentally-friendly nature, we will be faced with concrete structures rising high into the sky, blacktop roads, high traffic volumes and noise. 2. The high-rises will cast shadows over
the adjacent properties. 3. The spectacular views provided by the existing high-rises will be obstructed by the new construction despite assurances by the representatives of the University planning department that this would not happen. 4. The beautiful walkways at the perimeter of the forests will be destroyed as new concrete high-rises are constructed. This will not only be unattractive for potential purchasers but also be a severe hardship on local residents who purchased in good faith and trust. 5. It could be anticipated that small changes in the zoning of the affected area would be undertaken. The current proposed development is a gigantic change in the future of our properties and neglects entirely the promises made by the University planning consortium. To proceed with this proposed development is a serious violation of the trust and goodwill
between the residents and the University. It is a violation of the commitments to the owners of these properties. John Friesen, Hampton Place Resident
Editor’s Note Due to an error on the part of The Campus Resident, a notice advertising the November 1st Open House and Q&A on the revised amendments to the South Campus (Wesbrook Place) Neighbourhood Plan did not run in the October 24th edition. The Campus Resident apologizes for any inconvenience this may have caused our Readers.
THE CAMPUS RESIDENT NOVEMBER 22, 2011
OP-ED PAGE The South Campus Neighbourhood Plan is not Carved in Stone By Pat Carney, PC, CM, Hampton Place UBC’s vision in developing South Campus was to create a “village in the woods,” featuring Wesbrook Mall as a pedestrian-friendly village street with cobble stone-type road surface. So far this vision is being achieved with the existing plan except that existing traffic is creating noise and pollution problems for seniors resident in Tapestry complex which should be addressed. 1. Campus Planning argues that the proposed changes to the Plan does not change the overall density of South Campus but would relocate it in a smaller area. But density equates to the number of people. More people in an area create more traffic. So while the overall density may be the same, there will be more traffic in the “village street” of Wesbrook Mall, including more buses. That is the impact of the proposed changes in the plan. If the village vision of Wesbrook Mall is to be maintained, there are several options: • discouraging through traffic by posting Local Traffic Only at the intersection of Southwest Marine and Wesbrook Mall and again at 16th and Wesbrook Mall by the round about and adding speed bumps: • closing that portion of the Mall to all traffic; • diverting the increased traffic created by the increased density by opening other roads to either Southwest Marine, in the old BC Research area which has been added to the plan or by opening up another road on West 16th opposite Hampton Place. • Campus Planning’s suggestion of paving over the cobblestone-type road with asphalt is self defeating and inappropriate and must be rejected. 2. Building as many as 15 high rise
buildings to accommodate increased densities in Wesbrook Place, as the proposed changes indicate, is not the only solution. This approach should be balanced against the probable costs of the planned development. Infrastructure and services for the high rise buildings will be very high. If these costs exceed the expected value of the developments, the project will not be economically viable. It may be more cost effective to reduce the number of units relocated in South Campus to offset the probable increased costs. Campus Planning suggests the changes in density will make the development more energy efficient. But the increased cost of traffic and the impact on the natural environment of the “village in the woods” have not been reflected in the proposed changes. 3. The quality of life envisioned for the Wesbrook Place neighbourhood reflects the rich natural environment. If the human-made structures will grossly overshadow the natural environment, potential buyers may not want to buy units there. Thus, instead of the Plan indicating the maximum number of units that can be built in the community and then reducing the number of units as the marketability of the units goes down, it may be better to reduce the number of planned units at this early stage. As improvements to the traffic and development are made and the marketability of units in Wesbrook Place increases, the Plan may be amended to increase the number of units. After all, the plan is only a framework at this stage -- it can be adjusted over time to balance benefits to residents against development costs. The neighbourhood plan is not carved in stone. UBC Campus and Community Planning should listen to residents and make changes as needed. We live and love it here.
Ancient Chinese Curse Comes Timely to Mind By Prod Laquian Recent events in the UNA remind one of the ancient Chinese curse “May you live in interesting times.” At the last UNA annual general meeting, residents complained about higher taxes, spiking water bills and delays in passing parking, noise and animal control bylaws. The September election for Board members attracted six candidates for the first time in UNA history. The UNA leadership election saw a 3-3 tie, the use of secret ballots and took a month to finally resolve. In the neighbourhoods, there are renewed mutterings about a “democracy deficit, “taxation without representation,” and a characterization of UBC as an “18th century monarchy”. Wesbrook Place residents are questioning amendments to the neighbourhood plan and in Chancellor Place, there is impatience at the lack of parking controls. A group calling itself “Residents for Change” has even launched a campaign to “Reform the UNA.” Perhaps, the restiveness in the UNA communities may just be a stage in the exciting evolutionary development of UTown. The UNA is now almost ten years old. The UTown population has grown to about 16,500, made up of 8,000 residents in five neighbourhoods and 8,500 students in dorms and other accommodations. It is probably only natural for this larger population to generate demands and complaints about how things are run in the community. On one side, the larger UTown population is making it possible for positive developments to occur. UTown now has a big grocery store, coffee shops and other services that are becoming economically viable because of the larger demand. It has been rapidly shifting from a commuter campus to a vibrant community combining elements of town and gown. Residents, students and UBC faculty and staff are increasingly interested and involved in creating a sustainable life style on campus. The UBC Land Use Plan for the whole campus approved last year envisions the development of mixed use “hubs” or “commons” where students, residents and
faculty and staff can interact as involved stakeholders in thriving and vibrant communities. The development of Gage South as the “gateway” to the university is being planned with the collaboration of students, UBC and residents. UBC Farm is being developed as an integral part of the UTown community even as the density transferred from it is upsetting some residents of Wesbrook Place. Ironically, these positive developments are also generating the “interesting times” that now confront us. Change, after all, no matter how positive, can be upsetting. So what can the UNA do to cope with issues that are percolating in these interesting times? One obvious option is to move away from griping, complaining and finger pointing. Residents, students and UBC can collaboratively strive to find pragmatic solutions. The new leadership at UNA needs to reach out to residents, listen to them and understand what they are unhappy about. Then, the residents, UBC and UNA officials can calmly go about solving problems. Some of the issues facing our community are easier to solve (implementation of interim regulations on parking, improving communication by augmenting e-mail blasts with articles in The Campus Resident and talking directly to groups of stakeholders). Others are more complicated (how to encourage residents to participate in UNA affairs, integrating new Canadians into the community, getting more residents to volunteer in UNA activities, increasing voting turnout in elections). We can either allow the more difficult issues to increase tensions and upset developments in UTown or take them as a challenge that will inspire us to strive harder. Surely, with residents, UBC and the UNA joining forces, it should be possible for the community to get through these interesting times. Together, we can effectively deal with the issues confronting us in a neighbourly, respectful and cooperative manner that will make it possible for us to build a community that enhances our quality of life. Prod Laquian is the newly elected board chair and president of the UNA
THE CAMPUS RESIDENT NOVEMBER 22, 2011
Re-elected in Electoral Area A, Maria Harris Hits Work Trail Running My first comment is to thank the voters in Electoral Area A for re-electing me as their representative at Metro Vancouver for another three years. I know what this job entails, and consequently, I have been able to hit the ground running: the inaugural Metro Vancouver Board meeting is scheduled for December 16th and I look forward to continuing to work hard on your behalf. Ours is a diverse and stimulating community, and together, we can make this place we call home the very best that it can be. At every opportunity throughout this campaign, students and residents alike expressed concern about transit to UBC, and my initial priority as Director is to work towards resolving these problems. We need transit improvements and a clear strategy as to how these will be funded.
We in Electoral Area A also require full voting representation on the Mayors’ Council for Regional Transportation, and I expect that the necessary legislative change will occur in the coming year. I also heard a wide range of views concerning water rates, governance, affordable housing for UBC students, staff and faculty, and non-academic development in the UBC area, and indeed, the role that I can play as the elected representative at Metro Vancouver. To this end, I would like to build on the momentum established during this campaign, and I welcome opportunities to meet with as many individuals and groups as possible. Finally, I extend my sincere thanks to my fellow candidates and to the many volunteers who shared their time and talents with me on my re-election campaign
ELECTORAL AREA A ELECTION RESULTS CANDIDATE
RESIDENTS continued from Page 1. A resident of Hampton Place since 1993, a retired professor of community and regional planning at UBC, and a former official of the United Nations, Mr. Laquian—acclaimed new leader of the UNA at the November meeting of directors—has served as a director of the UNA since September, 2008. At the start of his tenure as chair, Mr. Laquian has put forward a fourpoint plan of action he feels will improve the community. To start with, he says the highest priority in the UNA is involving residents in the affairs of the association. “A situation
where less than half of residents eligible for membership are registered UNA members is not acceptable. A voting turnout of 21% is a poor indicator of a democratic system. The UNA officials have to reach out and meet people face to face to engage them in community activities.” Beyond that, the new chair says the UNA should have more authority. “For the past ten years, it has been saddled with responsibilities to deliver municipal-like services and manage local affairs without commensurate authority. We should be able to pass parking, noise, animal control and other bylaws as soon as possible.” Beyond that again, he points to the grow-
UEL Neighbours Notch “Best Election” Under Ward System Elections are held every three years Residents are entitled to vote for candidates in two local governance bodies Local governance elections on the University Endowment Lands (UEL) don’t look much like their counterparts at UBC, but just as the campus-based University Neighbourhoods Association enjoyed its most successful election September 28, so did the UEL on November 19. More candidates ran for office in the UEL (which borders UBC to the north and east) and more voters turned out to vote for them than ever before. John O’Donnell, a veteran of three successful local governance campaigns in the UEL, offered a possible explanation of why more voters turned out this year than in 2005 when local governance elections started on the UEL, and the second set of elections in 2008. “This could be attributed to our ward system, unique in British Columbia,” he said. In the UEL, everyone enjoys the right to vote every three years for candidates running for two local governance bodies, the Community Advisory Committee (CAC) and Advisory Design Panel. Candidates run in four areas. Mr. O’Donnell said, “The candidates have a smaller area to campaign for and can realistically try to reach all their voters.”
ing population of the residential community on campus and the concerns of its residents. “The University Town population is now about 16,500, and it is not surprising that the residents are loudly raising concerns about how things are being run. The UNA—and for that matter, UBC—should listen more and consult with residents. At the same time, the UNA has to be more pro-active; it should anticipate emerging issues and form strategies to deal with these.” Before joining UBC in 1991 as a tenured full professor at the School of Community and Regional Planning (SCARP) and Director of the UBC Centre for Human Set-
Of the recent, vigorous campaign which resulted in five candidates being elected or acclaimed to the seven-member CAC and eight members being elected or acclaimed to the ADP (which consists of a maximum of eight elected or acclaimed candidates plus several professional members), he said, “All the door knocking, increased signage and phone calls brought out more voters.” “The increased number of ADP candidates is likely due to the fact that the UEL is reviewing and planning to update our zoning and building bylaw. A number of meetings were held in the last 18 months and this likely increased the awareness of the CAC and ADP.” In e-mail correspondence with The Campus Resident, Mr. O’Connell explained that what prompted a number of candidates to run for CAC was the desire to change how the ADP functions. “A few of the current ADP members believed that the elected ADP members should have a veto over the professional panel members, and they ran for CAC to work for a change since the CAC Bylaws set out how the ADP functions.” Meanwhile, Mr. O’Donnell—who was elected to the CAC in one of three singlefamily residence areas—recounted that the fourth UEL area in which all multifamily residences re located again provided meager turn out of voters. With 1,593 residences in UEL and 956 in this area, “it is surprising that we cannot elicit interest,” he said.
tlements, Mr. Laquian—born in the Philippines—worked with the United Nations in the South Pacific, China and New York. After retiring from UBC, he became a visiting scholar and acting director of Special Programs in Urban and Regional Studies (SPURS), at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge, MA. The following year, the Woodrow Wilson Center for International Scholars in Washington, DC awarded him a fellowship to write a book on the planning and governance of the 14 largest cities in Asia. In 2007-2008, he was a consultant with the Asian Development Bank on the delivery of urban services (water, sewerage, transport, waste management, and housing) in China and India. As the chair of the Board’s standing committee on governance, he focused on the UNA’s complex relationships with UBC, its students (through the Alma Mater Society) and—until its departure from the UBC scene a year ago—Metro Vancouver. He is chair of the UNA animal control bylaws development committee and a member of the noise bylaw development committee and the parking bylaw development committee. In a final point in his four-point plan of action, Mr. Laquian says, “These are exciting times to be in UTown, a ‘living lab’, where the ‘guinea pigs’ themselves and not scientists are doing the experimenting. We in the UNA communities have the opportunity to craft a local governance system that suits our unique situation.” Also by acclamation at the November meeting of the UNA board, Thomas Beyer became UNA vice-chair and Ian Burgess became treasurer. Directors may serve for up to six years. (Please turn to Page 4 for article by Mr. Laquian on UNA)
page 6 IVA MANN continued from Page 1.
Relatives and friends of the late Iva Mann gathered at St. Anselm’s Church in the University Endowment Lands on Saturday, November 12 to recall the life of someone without whose work Pacific Spirit Park might not have come into being. Following a well-attended morning service in the church, a group led by Shelley Page, daughter of Ms. Mann, set out to walk in part the Iva Mann Trail, a series of trails officially designated in honour of Ms. Mann to recognize the pivotal role she played in the establishment of Pacific Spirit Park. Users of the 50 kilometres of park trails
Walk in Park
THE CAMPUS RESIDENT NOVEMBER 22, 2011 have Ms. Mann—who died a few weeks before her 96th birthday—to thank for the opportunity for had she not persevered in her relentless goal of creating the park, it might have become an upscale housing estate twice the size of the University of British Columbia. Under the jurisdiction of Metro Vancouver, the park—almost twice as big as Stanley Park—greets hundreds of thousands of visitors annually, and provides habitat for numerous species of wildlife. Ms. Mann came out to British Columbia with husband Ken—a physicist heading to UBC to teach—from Ontario shortly after the end of the Second World War, and the couple built one of the first houses on Acadia Road. Among many
contributions to the then-nascent University Endowment Lands (UEL) community, Ms. Mann raised funds and planted the original flowering cherry trees on Acadia Road. The provincial government had launched the UEL in the 1920s in the hopes that profit from land sales there would finance development of UBC. However, the Great Depression first and then the war had severely hampered this development with the result that when the Manns arrived from Ontario, a few thousands acres of forest—mostly neglected—lay virtually abandoned around them. Ms. Mann had ideas for it, and 38 years after she began campaigning for it to be designated a park, the government consented. Politicians from Victoria to Ottawa publicly acknowledged the role Ms. Mann had played in fetching about this significant contribution to the quality of outdoor life in the Lower Mainland. In pursuit of her goal of turning abandoned forest into a nature park, Ms. Mann ran for Greater Vancouver Regional District director for Electoral Area A (which includes both UBC and the UEL). She would serve on the GVRD board and
the GVRD parks committee for 17 years until her goal of seeing the park created was achieved. Daughter Shelley says of her mother that she lived a long and fulfilling life, rich with adventure and purpose. “She was flying an airplane long before she learned to drive a car. She was generous with her time and resources and never missed an opportunity to help a friend or stranger in need. She had a strong sense of what needed to be done, and she took the lead on many initiatives in service of her community. She never shied away from tackling even the most daunting of projects or facing the most difficult of circumstances. Despite her petite stature, Iva was a giant. She was almost unstoppable. “ Assisted by a band of followers, Ms. Mann helped clear many of the trails that are so popular in the park today. Shelley says, “Iva had a beautiful smile and a great sense of humour. She was a loving and dedicated wife and mother. She was a champion of social justice; she loved all living creatures; she was an avid horticulturalist and a strong advocate for protection of the environment.”
Iva Mann and supporters celebrate government decision to establish and name Pacific Spirit Park in 1989
THE CAMPUS RESIDENT NOVEMBER 22, 2011
Residents Respond Well to Card Use in Accessing Garden Campus residents are allowed free access to UBC Botanical Garden using community service cards; number of these visits is up 40% in a year The community services card issued by the University Neighbourhoods Association to campus residents appears en route to turning the world-class UBC Botanical Garden into a community garden as well. Patrick Lewis, director of the UBC Biodiversity Collections, told a meeting of UNA directors in November that the number of visits by residents using their community services cards to access the UBC Botanical Garden (and its associated Nitobe Memorial Garden) is projected to jump 40% this year over last. Mr. Lewis provided the directors with what they hope is quantifiable proof a funding agreement between the UNA and UBC is working. Under the terms of this agreement, the UNA provides the gardens with financial support, and in return UBC Botanical Garden allows residents—using their community services cards—to access the gardens for free as many times a year as they want. Mr. Lewis said that while the number of visits by campus residents “having their cards swiped” in fiscal 20102012 was 1,094 (790 at the main garden and 304 at Nitobe), it is projected to be 1,440 in fiscal 2011-12. He said to October 31, the total number of visits ran to 1,203 (758 in the
main garden and 445 in Nitobe); he added the totals do not include the numbers of campus residents with UNA-issued cards who use the UBC Botanical Garden in the evenings. The director of the newly formed UBC Biodiversity Collections (which oversees administration of both the UBC Botanical Garden, Nitobe Garden and Beaty Biodiversity Museum) also produced encouraging figures for community involvement in his facilities on the special events front. He referred to three family-oriented events in recent months: Magic from the Land of Hogwarts at the Botanical Garden on August 16 which attracted 50 families; Pumpkin-Carving at the Botanical Garden on October 25 which attracted 40 families; and Halloween at the Beaty Museum which attracted about 450 people. The UNA-issued community services cards - to which all residents living in UNA Neighbourhoods are entitled covers community access not only to the UBC Botanical Garden. The UNA has similar funding agreements with the Vancouver Public Library and UBC Athletics. About 8,000 people live on campus. UBC and the UNA have a joint policy of combining community use of facilities with institutional use wherever possible. (Please turn to inaugural column ‘Biodiversity in Your Backyard’ by Patrick Lewis on Page 12.)
Look for a copy in your mailbox, pick one up from the Community Centre or visit our website to view online
Glendon Scott, UNA Operations Manager and Jan Fialkowski, UNA Executive Director get into the spirit of Halloween, dressed to the theme of Davy Jones’ locker at the UNA presented Halloween Party, which was held at The Beaty Biodiversity Museum on October 31, 2011.
THE CAMPUS RESIDENT NOVEMBER 22, 2011
UNA Community News Sustainability Corner A Sustainable UNA Christmas In anticipation of the Christmas season which will soon be upon us, I thought I’d focus on ideas for making your Christmas joyful and more sustainable. A simple Google search will lead you to many great ideas, but I was particularly struck by a list of tips created by Carlye Malchuk and available on the homemakers.com website. I’ve thought I’d share some ideas for a sustainable Christmas inspired in part by Carlye’s list, but with a local twist. Consider using a live tree service for your Christmas tree. Evergrow Christmas Trees (evergrowchristmastrees.ca) is a local business started by UBC students that will deliver a tree to you and then pick it up and ensure that it’s planted or keep it live for use next year. A cut tree can be a sustainable choice too, since the re-grown trees will sequester green house gases. If you use a cut tree be sure to take it to the UBC Botanical Gardens after Christmas for free chipping, so that your tree becomes a locally used landscaping resource instead of waste. Make a Christmas wreath using fallen branches and pinecones from our local parks. I know of a group of residents who did this last year, they had a great time, and ended up with very attractive wreaths for home and gifts. Local craft stores will sell frames and wiring for this and a Google search will provide helpful instructions. Afterwards, you can return unpainted branches or pinecones to the forest floor where you found them. Gift choices that provide experiences (such as tickets to a show) will leave a gift of memories instead of waste. Christmas baking in re-usable gift tins are another great choice. Our family recently found Christmas gift bags from a previous generation (when Christmas wrapping was considered a luxury). We use them for family gifts and treasure their heirloom value. LED Christmas lights are highly energy efficient, attractive, long lasting and durable, making them a very sustainable and cost effective choice. On the topic of electronics, consider giving rechargeable batteries along with your electronic gift. This will reduce waste, and save a great deal of money, since rechargeable
A Christmas wreath made from fallen materials found locally on the forest floor
Co-op Keeps Donations of Old Bikes Rolling in
Ralph Wells, UNA Sustainability Manager
batteries can be used up to 2500 times, depending on model. As well, new powerbars can reduce ‘vampire loads’, by ensuring your device is truly off instead of drawing standby power. If you are moving out old electronics to make way for the new, be sure to use the UNA e-waste program to ensure proper recycling of your old device (find out more at www.myuna.ca/service/recycling). Finally, as you enjoy your great holiday meals, be sure to use the UNA composting program when you’re cleaning up, if your building has this service (if not, find out how your building can participate at www.myuna.ca/service/recycling). However you choose to prepare for the holidays, I hope everyone has a happy (and sustainable) holiday season!
UNA residents donated old bikes at a bike drop organized with the student run UBC Bike Co-op in October. Residents are reminded they can donate bikes anytime and get bike supplies, repairs and advice at the Bike Kitchen at UBC Student Union Building (find out more at bikecoop.ca)
Settlement Introduction services NOW AT THE OLD BARN COMMUNITY CENTRE! SUCCESS Settlement, Languages, and Community (SLC) Services Division provide services for new immigrants from diverse cultural backgrounds. The comprehensive settlement services help immigrants gain the knowledge and resources necessary to adapt to the Canadian way of life. We provide: One on one enquiries (drop in/appointment) on immigration, citizenship, housing, customs, medical and health, education, legal, family, employment, social benefit, transportation, and travel documents… etc. Assistance in form filling, making referrals and connecting to services and resources in the community. Conduct new immigrant orientation sessions, workshops, and welcoming parties. Outreach program at the Old Barn Community Centre start on November 7, every Monday. 1.) By appointment: 10:00am - 1:00pm; and, 4:00 - 5:00pm. To make an appointment, please call 604-408-7274 ext 2072, or, Email: firstname.lastname@example.org 2.) Drop-in: 2:00 – 4:00pm.
中侨社区、语言与安顿服务部的专业工作人员为不同文化 背景的人提供移民安顿服务。广泛的移民安顿服务让移民 获得所需的知识和资源，得以适应加拿大的生活方式。 通过电话预约或者亲自前往，我们将对您提供一对一的协 助。服务包括: 提供有关房屋，医疗，教育，考车牌，税制，加国福 利, 就业市场介绍，具体行业分析等信息和转介服务。 填写新移民所需申请的表格：医疗卡，牛奶金，成人 英语学习（ELSA）等； 定期开办新移民讲习班，讲座，以及联欢会。 从11月7日起，中侨互助会社会外展辅导员会在每周一 Old Barn社区中心办公室办公。 全天服务分两个时段： 1.） 预约时段：早上10点 - 下午1点； 以及下午4点 5点，欢迎预先致电预约。 电话： 604-408-7274分机 2072 ，或者电邮到： email@example.com 2.） 自由时段：下午2点 4点，无需预约。
THE CAMPUS RESIDENT NOVEMBER 22, 2011 WESBROOK continued from Page 1.
Claire Robson, chair of the Keenleyside strata council, told The Campus Resident before the November 22 committee meeting, “We are asking that members of the UBC board place the November 2011 amended Wesbrook Place Neighbour Land Use Plan under further review. The residents need more time to understand the impact and discuss their concerns with Campus & Community Planning. Meanwhile, on November 17, the University Neighbourhood Association (UNA) advised UBC in its strongest official note yet that the University risks negatively affecting the quality of life of Wesbrook residents unless it addresses a number of their concerns. In a report delivered to the committee meeting, UBC planning staff had scaled back some of their earlier proposals for amending the Wesbrook Place Neighbourhood Plan. For example, the staff report talks of reducing the number of high-rise buildings in Wesbrook Place and restricting their construction to the eastern (Pacific Spirit Park) edge of the neighbourhood “where the shadowing impact on community livability is minimized.” However, the report does not specify the reduced number of high-rises, and residents remain appalled that UBC would even consider hiking the number of proposed high-rises to 15 compared to the five proposed when they bought property in South Campus a few years ago. The UBC staff report also offers residents some relief by proposing a policy which requires minimum separation of 30 metres between these 15 (or less) high-rise buildings for privacy and views of the forested edge. This separation exceeds the City of Vancouver’s standard of 24 metres, according to the report, which states, “It is expected that the average separation will be 45 metres with a range from 30 to 70 metres.” In a third concession to the concerns of residents and the UNA, the UBC planning document offers to address traffic-congestion concerns, by introducing three new transportation measures. These measures would include opening a new road exit to West 16th Avenue at the north east corner of the neighbouhood (across 16th Avenue from the entrance to Hampton Place). Other concessions include a proposal to document the parks and green space in the neighbourhood to maximize livability there; a proposal to more closely tailor the capacity of the proposed new community centre to meet the needs of the neighbouhood; and a proposal to build a new elementary school in the neighbour-
hood. Finally, the UBC planners pulled back from recommending that Wesbrook Place, facing population growth due to the shift of housing density from UBC Farm (now off limits to housing development), should accommodate a second shift of density—this time from a part of campus called Gage South. UBC students have strongly protested housing going up in Gage South, site of the current UBC bus depot and neighbour to such student-oriented institutions as the Student Union Building, War Memorial Gym and the Student Recreation Centre. To the horror of Wesbrook residents, UBC planners had floated the idea of adding 310,000 square feet of housing (from Gage) to the massive shift of density from UBC Farm. Given the concerns of residents, the planning team concluded that “the 310,000 square feet from the Gage area cannot be accommodated in Wesbrook Place”. In voting in favour of sending the amended neighbouhood plan to the full board for approval, the UBC property and planning committee aligned itself with staff comments that “the proposed amendments strike a balance between improving housing choice and affordability through development of six-storey wood frame buildings, and distributing the transferred floorspace in the neighbourhood in a way that supports livability.” The original neighbourhood plan had not referred to six-storey wood frame buildings because they were not legal then. However, British Columbia recently amended its Building Code, and UBC seems destined to move aggressively into this area of multiple-family housing construction. Over-all, the committee agreed, “The amendments bring the Wesbrook Place neighbourhood plan in alignment and consistency with the Land Use Plan and Board of Governors’ policies for land use and development on the Vancouver campus.” Only one governor opposed the motion to approve planning changes in Wesbrook Place. UBC student Sean Heisler recommended more consultation with the public, including another open house. “What’s the rush” Mr. Heisler asked, echoing the call of Wesbroook residents. “We could put this off another few months.” Another governor asked, “Where’s the UNA?” Indeed, governor Richard Johnston asked the question twice. A third director referred to the UNA note. (See stories elsewhere on this page about positions of residents and the UNA.)
Board Bids UBC Communicate More with Residents on Wesbrook Proposals UNA Letter to UBC Director of Planning, Nov.17 Mr. Joe Stott Director, Planning UBC Campus & Community Planning 2210 West Mall Vancouver, B.C., V6T 1Z4 Dear Mr. Stott, The UNA Board of Directors acknowledges and appreciates the special role it plays as an advisory board to the UBC Board of Governors. The UNA Board also acknowledges the opportunity given to UNA residents to become members of the Wesbrook Place (formerly South Campus Plan) Neighbourhood Plan Amendments Planning Committee. In a letter to you as Director of Campus +Community Planning, on October 27, 2010, the UNA Board wrote that it strongly supported the designation of the UBC Farm from Future Housing Reserve to Green Academic which the UNA Board understood would necessitate the transfer of density originally meant for the Farm to other areas on campus including Wesbrook Place, Acadia and Stadium Road. The UNA Board also strongly supported four main proposals in the UBC Campus Land Use Plan that would contribute to housing affordability on campus: to increase the Floor Space Ratio (FSR) from 1.2 to 2.5 FSR, to allow 6 storey wood frame construction, to eliminate the requirement of providing 40% of housing units at ground level, and to eliminate the housing unit cap to encourage the building of smaller, and more affordable housing. The UNA Board continues to support the objectives of the UBC Campus Land Use Plan and supports amendments to the Wesbrook Place Neighbourhood Plan that are consistent with the Land Use Plan’s objective of creating a University Town with a high quality of life. However, the UNA Board also acknowledges that the proposed amendments to the Wesbrook Place Plan have caused serious concerns amongst some UNA residents that the proposed density transfer to Wesbrook Place might negatively affect their ‘quality of life’. To address these concerns, the UNA Board of Directors strongly encourages the UBC Board of Governors: 1. To maintain and preserve green space in Wesbrook Place by minimizing site coverage on high rise sites and maxi-
mizing green space within the public realm; and to this end, to reconsider the amount of gross buildable area in Wesbrook Place to achieve the “village in the woods” character of the community; 2. To implement a policy in the Plan that sets a minimum of 30 metres for separation between high-rise buildings; 3. To develop a design vision for Wesbrook Place that will enhance the built environment in a natural setting; 4. To aggressively engage the appropriate provincial ministries to resolve and confirm the regulatory authority that will allow the UNA to regulate, control and enforce parking bylaws. 5. To vest authority to the UNA to review the parking stall ratios in the UBC Development Handbook to assess the adequacy of these ratios; 6. To pace the build out of the Wesbrook Place neighbourhood to not more than 400 units per year to minimize negative impact on residents and the environment; 7. To transfer Gage South density currently being considered for Wesbrook Place to other sites on campus including academic sites; 8. To commit to maximizing the number of housing units dedicated to UBC’s work: live ratio to ensure affordable faculty/staff accommodation; 9. To ensure that the sustainability of the Wesbrook Place neighbourhood continues to evolve and improve through the upcoming review of the Residential Environmental Assessment Program (REAP) and the development of the Community Energy and Emissions Plan (CEEP), with special attention to inspiring and sustainable design and public transportation, including rapid transit. The UNA Board strongly recommends that Campus + Community Planning conducts more thorough and effective communication with campus residents. We wish to reaffirm that the UNA is committed to the creation of a model University Town that is liveable, vibrant, and sustainable and at the same time we firmly support the university’s academic mission. Sincerely, Prod Laquian Chair and President
Residents Request More Time for Review of Planning Report By Claire Robson We are asking that Members of the Board place the November 2011 amended Wesbrook Place Neighbour Land Use Plan under further review. The residents need more time to understand the impact and discuss their concerns with Campus & Community Planning (C+CP). We fully support the concept of a liveable, vibrant community on the UBC Campus. A community whose population includes the academic world and the general population is an ideal we share. As
owners, we have invested in the concept of affordable housing and the value of housing based on a work: live ratio. The shift in “farm’ density to Wesbrook Place dramatically changes the character of our neighbourhood. Residents of Wesbrook Place and the wider community are concerned. The amendments are, in reality, a completely new neighbourhood plan. We support our resident’s right to be heard and their right to have a ‘determining say’ in issues that affect their neighbourhood. The desired outcome is one of informed citizenry and the consideration
of different points of view. This is lacking; C+CP’s communication has been incomplete. The Board’s acceptance of this new neighbourhood plan in the face of resident opposition would send a wrong signal to the resident community. Further review is reasonable. Claire Robson, Wesbrook Place, is chair of the Keenleyside strata council
Published monthly by the University Neighbourhoods Association
Advertise with us! email firstname.lastname@example.org
THE CAMPUS RESIDENT NOVEMBER 22, 2011
Beyer Bids UBC Build Slower, Taller ‘Signature building’ in South Campus could be 60 storeys, says new UNA director; with focus on this building, development overall in South Campus would be slowed Thomas Beyer, newly-elected director of the University Neighbourhoods Association, wants to see the pace of building homes in South Campus slowed. At the same time, he wants the height of at least one proposed high-rise building there increased dramatically. At the November board meeting of the UNA directors, Mr. Beyer—who has a business background—called for “a signature building” in the large chunk of South Campus land being converted into a residential neighbourhood called Wesbrook Place. This signature building would tower over its neighbours in Wesbrook Place, and Mr. Beyer says its erection would allow UBC to slow down development to a point that residents who have bought homes there might find comfortable. “This signature building would rise 20 storeys, 40 storeys, 60 storeys,” Mr. Beyer said. “It would have views over all of the Lower Mainland and a view of Vancouver Island. People looking at this building should say, ‘Wow’.” Mr. Beyer said the ability of a signature building to house a vast number of residents would reduce the need of UBC to mass-produce smaller buildings at a faster pace on what he referred to as the “larg-
est piece of land under development in the Lower Mainland”. In recent months, Wesbrook residents have expressed anger at proposed UBC plans to densify Wesbrook Place such that its projected population on build-out will be 12,000, not 5,000 as originally projected. This growing concern of Wesbrook home-owners and others at the UBC plan for doubling the density of Wesbrook Place—comes as the UBC board of governors prepares to debate the issue. Over the last three or four months, UBC has held three Open Houses with structured question-and-answer sessions as a way of consulting with the public. Attendance has swelled with successive Open Houses—the last one a packed house. At this last Open House, held on November 1, residents and others cheered the call of Claire Robson, chair of one of the condominium strata councils in Wesbrook Place, when Ms. Robson called for “a moratorium on development in South Campus.” Above and beyond the 17 sites cleared for development—and in some cases already built on—under the existing neighbourhood plan, UBC proposes another 21. An amended plan would allow up to five more high-rises between 15 and 18 stories; four more high-rises between 14 and 16 storeys; and 12 low-to-medium-rises between four and six storeys. Most of the new high-rises would stand in a line running just west of Pacific Spirit Park. A spokesman for the Pacific Spirit Park Society said her group was “not impressed in the least” with UBC plans for the proposed wall of high-rises on the east side of Wesbrook Place. Mr. Beyer attended the November 1
Thomas Beyer meeting, organized by the UBC campus and community planning department, and he offered to refer the concerns of local residents to the UNA board, which he did on November 8. He then urged the board to take up the matter with the UBC administration before the UBC board meets
December 1 to debate whether the densification plan should go ahead. “The UNA should lobby UBC on behalf of the residents,” he said. “We have failed todo this over the last couple of years.” A resident of Chancellor Place (at the opposite end to campus from Wesbrook Place), Mr. Beyer steps into this debate about property development in South Campus with experience in the stewardship of real estate. In running for UNA office in September, he listed some of his qualifications as follows: “As the president of Prestigious Properties and chairman of the board of the property management firm Fireside Property Group I am the chief steward for now close to 2,000 rental apartments in western Canada and Texas, co-owned by 500-plus investors, managed by a team of approximately 25 employees. Responsible governance, cost control, revenue improvements, property enhancements, and customer/tenant/ investor/employee satisfaction is my daily bread.” He gained the most votes of six candidates for the two vacant positions of resident-director.
THE CAMPUS RESIDENT NOVEMBER 22, 2011
Letters Re Parking on Sundays in Chancellor Place This is to request that the current blanket ‘No Parking’ regulation along Iona Drive be amended to permit parking on Iona Drive by parishioners of St. Ignatius Church (at the UBC Chapel of St. Mark’s College) during Mass hours, normally Saturdays at 5PM and Sundays and other holidays of obligation from 9AM to 12 Noon and weekdays between 12Noon and 1PM. Religious worship has always been considered a sacred human right. Religious services have been held at the site for the past 55 years (since 1956) and considering that the site is not easily accessible by public transport, this request is to permit parishioners to park on the road for very limited periods during the services. Please note that the church and congregation are relatively small, and based on my observation, street parking would probably be limited to only about five to 12 cars at any one time. We trust that, as the MLA for this district, you will take the necessary steps to grant this request by your constituents. Antonio and Cecilia Carpio, 14th Ave W, Vancouver Marissa Peña, Newton Wynd, UEL I write to humbly request your attention to a situation that has recently crept up in our St. Ignatius Parish, located within the UBC campus area at 5935 Iona Drive. The chapel at which we worship, in conjunction with St. Mark’s and Corpus Christi Colleges, has had limited parking within its area from their inception. As a result, our worshippers on Sundays from 9:30am – 12:30pm have parked along the side of the relatively narrow Iona Drive from time immemorial. We are not aware of any particular difficulty this fact has imposed on anyone. Quite a few of the parishioners attend from a significant distance and some others are disabled and so the use of a personal automobile has usually been necessary to allow them to attend Sunday worship. Very recently within the past month, the signage on Iona Drive has been changed to indicate “No Parking” at any time with a risk of violators being towed away. This untimely change has already had a significant negative impact on our Sunday attendance. We feel strongly that our Christian worship adds significantly to community building and creating social capital. We are mindful that Parking Regulations in many areas often allow parking at certain times such as on weekends, after 6:00pm etc. Allowing parking on Iona drive on the side of the chapel for the 9:30am – 12:30 AM time window on Sundays and on Holy Days of Obligation such as Good Friday can be selective without creating inconvenience to any! The total prohibition of parking at all times seems unduly strict! We are informed that the Ministry of Transport bears jurisdiction over this matter, so this letter is being so copied. We humbly request your good graces in looking into this matter as our elected representative. Felix Durity, Chancellor Boulevard Resident We are writing to protest the change in parking enforcement on Sunday mornings along Iona Drive in the theological part of the UBC campus. It is clear that allowing unlimited parking during the week would cause a problem because some of the people spending the day at UBC would
park their cars for the day along Iona. There is no need to forbid parking completely, however, since the problem could be solved by limiting parking on Iona to a maximum of two hours. We can testify that parking on Iona on Sunday mornings causes little or no problem. We attend 9:30 AM mass in the chapel shared by St. Ignatius parish, St. Mark’s college and Corpus Christi College. We park legally elsewhere on campus and walk to the chapel. Sometimes we choose a walking route that runs along most of Iona Drive, and we see no congestion at that time. Our parish serves seniors and people with health issues that make it difficult for them to attend services without parking nearby. The same applies to families with very young children. Remember the multiple references on the webpage http://www. bcliberals.com/ to “putting families first.” John and Frances Fournier, West Ninth Avenue. Vancouver As parishioners of St. Ignatius of Antinoch at UBC, we wish to have the new parking regulations waived on the south side of Iona Drive for the hours of worship (9:00AM to 1:00PM) on Sundays. Our parishioners have been parking there since 1956 and feel we should be ‘grandfathered’ in respect to the new parking regulations. Many of the churches in Vancouver either do not have any regulations or minimal regulations if they are on local streets. Or the streets are widened to accommodate added lanes. But total prohibition of parking on narrow streets like Iona Drive is discriminatory particularly when the Parish and the College preceded all the residential development. Gerard and Elizabeth Farry, Balsam St. Vancouver Mea Culpa. I am an illegal parker on Sundays. Years ago, there used to be several small pay parking lots near the church my family attends on Sundays. Those lots became high price condominiums and now the churchgoers’ cars are an inconvenience to residents. I would like to make two points: 1. Regardless of the posted signs, what law or bylaw am I breaking? Please tell me the exact bylaw, and under which jurisdiction is it illegal to park a vehicle on the road in the area in question. 2. This towing threat seems very targeted against churchgoers. Sunday worshipers park for about an hour on Sundays. Yet there are hundreds of illegally parked cars in other neighbourhoods. Here are some examples (yes I counted them): • Between 150 to 200 cars parked daily from Monday to Friday in the Wesbrook Place neighbourhood south of 16th Ave. • Around 100 cars in the Hawthorn Place neighbourhood. Just look how empty of cars those roads are, ironically, on Sundays. The point is: Why are Christians being singled out? It will be heavy-handed to start towing cars from people attending a religious service for a short period of time, particularly if there are no clearly defined bylaws, and there are worse offenders in your neighbourhoods. J. D. Jimenez, UEL Resident (Note from Editor. UBC advises that parking on Iona Drive between the “noparking” signs is a violation of the Motor Vehicle Act, which is a BC statute.)
St Mark’s (Roman Catholic) College stands at the entrance to Iona Drive, UBC. Parishioners seek exemption from no-parking rules on Sundays when attending church there.
Parishioners Plead for Exemption from New ‘No Parking’ Rule Parking has not been regulated outside Chapel of St. Mark’s College at UBC in 55 years; now, UBC is threatening to tow parked cars while congregation worships Members of a church at the University of British Columbia have appealed to Premier—and local MLA—Christy Clark for relief from what they see as a draconian ‘No Parking’ rule imposed by UBC on the campus roadway outside the chapel where they worship on Sundays. The church-goers belong to St. Ignatius Parish, a Catholic church that has—for 55 years—held Sunday mass in the Chapel of St. Mark’s College which stands at 5935 Iona Drive in what was once called the theological precinct on campus. Other theological buildings standing in this northern corner of UBC include Chapel of the Epiphany, belonging to the Vancouver School of Theology (VST), St. Andrew’s Chapel in St. Andrew’s Hall, a Presbyterian facility, and Carey Theological College, a Baptist institution. However, in recent years, the area— dominated architecturally by the Iona Building, belonging to the VST—has also become a compact residential neighbourhood called ‘Chancellor Place’, and responding to the many complaints of Chancellor Place condominium owners that Iona Drive was often cluttered with improperly parked cars, especially on Sundays, UBC recently erected a host of ‘No Parking’ signs compliant with the Motor Vehicle Act, a BC statute. St. Mark’s College stands at the eastern end of Iona Drive, and until the new ‘No Parking’ signs went up, parishioners attending mass on Sunday mornings between 9 AM and noon routinely
parked cars on the north side of this narrow roadway outside the Chapel. While UBC offers no paid or free parking on Iona Drive, it does offer paid parking at various removes, including on Walter Gage Road a few hundred yards away to the south and at a large parkade north of the Student Union Building, a half mile away. Parishioners—many of them elderly— say they do not find the prospect of parking at these alternate locations appealing. They also find the new no-parking regime galling since UBC seems not to impose the same regime elsewhere on campus—at least judging by the high number of cars seen parked in its other residential neighbourhoods. Speaking with one voice in a series of ‘Open Letters’ to Premier Clark, the parishioners say UBC should find a way to waive the new no-parking regulations on Iona Drive—with their threat of cars being towed while the congregation worships—for the short duration in which mass is held on Sunday mornings and at other times of religious observance. The church-goers feel the threat of towing while they worship has already had a significant negative impact on Sunday attendance. While many residents may welcome sight of the new ‘No Parking’ signs UBC has erected on Iona Drive as a means of reducing traffic on the narrow roadway, not all do. In October, The Campus Resident printed a Letter to the Editor from resident Elizabeth Hawthorne in which Ms. Hawthorne commented: “I find the large new ‘No Parking’ signs around my Chancellor Place neighbourhood appear intimidating and ugly. A ‘police-state’ atmosphere is surely not necessary in the refined environs of UBC.” Please see ‘Open Letters’ of parishioners to Premier Christy Clark appealing new ‘No Parking’ signs on Iona Drive elsewhere on this page.
Call for volunteers for the UNA Emergency Preparedness Committee Please contact email@example.com.
THE CAMPUS RESIDENT NOVEMBER 22, 2011
Biodiversity in your backyard Patrick Lewis, Director, UBC Biodiversity Collections Contributing a column to The Campus Resident about UBC Biodiversity Collections is a great opportunity for me to keep your community informed about the exhibits, events, programming, and much more available to you at our facilities. More than that, it opens the door to a dialogue that can benefit all of us. First, let me introduce “UBC Biodiversity Collections”. In April, the UBC Botanical Garden and Centre for Plant Research was transferred from its longtime home (Land and Food Systems) to the Faculty of Science to join UBC’s new natural history collection, the Beaty Biodiversity Museum (aka “the Whale”) within a new unit, UBC Biodiversity Collections. Understanding biodiversity is among the most pressing scientific challenges of our time. Bringing these two research and public facilities together reflects the University’s commitment to meeting the challenge. As many of you know, the Garden just
WATER continued from Page 1.
A Metro representative said the rationale for Metro marking up the rate at which water is sold to the UEL has to do with location of the UEL outside the Metro water district. The Metro staff member also said the 20% mark-up has to be seen in the light of the UEL having no liability for debts incurred by the water district as it finances improvements in its facilities, which fetch top-quality water from the North Shore Mountains and filtrate it. History aside, the double mark-up accounts for UBC residents paying 30% more for a cubic metre of water than residents of, say, Vancouver, and this has some asking whether the grounds for one or other mark-up (or both) should be reviewed. Maria Harris, re-elected on November 19 as Metro Vancouver director for Electoral Area A (which includes UBC and the UEL) thinks the idea of a review is good, at least as far as the 20% mark up is concerned. In a report to the November meeting of the University Neighbourhoods Association (UNA), Ms. Harris says, “The 20% mark-up has been in place since 1949. The circumstances that exist today are very different from those in 1949.” As an example of circumstances being different today than in 1949, Ms. Harris points to “the large number of people who now live on the UBC peninsula, the majority of them on UBC lands.” In contrast, no one lived at UBC in 1949 and only a few hundred lived in the UEL. While Ms. Harris offered comments on the 20% mark-up, she declined to do so on the 10% mark-up, which she called “a private arrangement between UBC and the UEL. “It would not be appropriate for me to comment,” she said. As a result of the price structure which supports these two mark-ups, The Campus Resident understands Metro will sell water to its member municipalities (Vancouver, Surrey, Richmond, etc) at
hosted the 21st annual Apple Festival. We are still tallying the results but there is no question that the event was a success, introducing many new visitors to the garden and raising funds that will contribute significantly to our research, education, conservation and public outreach goals. I suspect it is less widely known that this year the Garden saw the first of what we hope will be seasonal UNA/Garden events, a late summer Magic Show and Pumpkin carving at the Pavilion the week before Halloween. All UNA members are entitled to a free yearly membership on presentation of your community services card at our front gate. botanicalgarden.ubc.ca will keep you up-to-date about upcoming events and courses. The Garden’s new sister facility, the Beaty Biodiversity Museum, is a statement of the majesty and intimacy of life here on Earth. Committed to a shared sense of community and wonder, “the Beaty” is Vancouver’s only museum dedicated to just natural history. Among its treasures are a 26-metre-long blue whale skeleton suspended in the Djavad Mowafaghian Atrium, the third-largest
a rate of $0.5437 per cubic meter in the off-peak period starting January 1, 2012. In contrast, it will sell water to the UEL at $0.6524 per cubic meter (reflecting the 20% rate hike), and the UEL will then charge UBC for water at a rate of $0.7176. Meanwhile in the summer season, Metro will sell water to its member municipalities at a rate of $0.6796. In contrast, it will sell then to the UEL at a rate of $0.8155, and the UEL will sell some of this water to UBC at a rate of $0.8971 per cubic meter. Metro water rates have more than doubled in the last five years. They are expected to rise by more than 50% in the next five years.
fish collection in the nation, and myriad fossils, shells, insects, fungi, mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, and plants from the province and the world. This unique combination of a world-class, university-based research collection and compelling exhibits aims to make research at UBC more accessible to the public. UNA members receive a preferred rate on yearly membership. The Beaty celebrated its first birthday this October by introducing new family and children programming, installing Phase One of a timeline marking geological and biological events, and equipping the museum for art shows and temporary exhibits. The UNA closed out the month with a Halloween bash at the Beaty that drew over 400 people. I am also pleased to announce that we are now able to show the documentary “Raising Big Blue” in the museum auditorium. The film follows the whale from the red earth of PEI to enzyme baths in Victoria to the atrium ceiling. Drama to keep you engaged. Please consult the UNA website or speak to one of our staff for more information. beatymuseum.ubc. ca gives a full list of programs.
Ultraviolet light disinfection units in Seymour-Capilano Filtration Plant (Photo Metro Vancouver)
Aerial of region’s Seymour-Capilano Filtration Plant (Photo Metro Vancouver)