Skip to content
Join our Newsletter

Vision shepherds have let the wolves in

To the editor: Re: "MLA's tower criticisms reveal political fragility for Vision," July 12. The mayor says a misunderstanding is the cause of the upset over the Grandview-Woodland Emerging Directions plan.

To the editor: Re: "MLA's tower criticisms reveal political fragility for Vision," July 12.

The mayor says a misunderstanding is the cause of the upset over the Grandview-Woodland Emerging Directions plan. A simple misunderstanding does not explain why ordinary, usually non-political, folks are adamantly upset and mobilized against it.

The fact is the people feel deceived because they have not been properly consulted. Now as the people try to express their opinions their concerns are being dismissed as a misunderstanding.

In previous community plans and vision statements (Kensington-Cedar Cottage 1997, Hastings-Sunrise 2004) the householders were directly notified by mail and received surveys. Ideas were shared and vetted. Public preferences were summarized in reports to managers then to mayor and council. For the past 14 months of this plan's history, public notifi-cations were provided by taping vaguely worded decorative posters to utility poles (ironically, contrary to city bylaws) and by using, "new tools" such as social media, web based engagement, blogs/vlogs, and crowd sourcing as methods to

engage the public about the new plan. These are methods generally more suited for announcing the coming of a musical performance at a local cabaret.

The new tools are both a mystery and a burden to many people as they take significant time and energy to comprehend and participate in. This is especially so for the older audience and those with limited free time owing to employment and family obligations. They also present a significant barrier to those who cannot afford to or cannot regularly access the Internet. These people tend to place trust in the city's civil service and expect continuity in the planning process.

I place myself in the limited time category. My expectations were for a more "evolutionary" plan as compared to the "revolutionary" plan presented. I think most expected a new plan to follow precedent and build on the conditions set out in the existing plan with minor revisions to zoning. Indeed the two plans previously mentioned did exactly this. This explains the outrage as the reckless plan presented as the Emerging Directions directly affects people's lives, their social networks, their finances and life plans.

If there is a misunderstanding, it is on the part of our civic leaders and their staff. We have been betrayed as they have engaged developers as stakeholders long before the public. This process is sideways because it was never based on the desires of the community. Now our neighbourhood is rife with speculative interests. The only way to address this situation is to stop the process and have an extended cooling off period. This,

of course, will not happen. Our shepherds have let the wolves in for the slaughter.

Philip Hill,

Vancouver

$(function() { $(".nav-social-ft").append('
  • '); });