We’ve covered the rejection by the District of North Vancouver Council of the Delbrook affordable housing proposal, CHAC funding and previous consultation processes.  Here’s another:

Hollyburn Family Services project killed in camera

  • Hollyburn Family Services operates two safe houses/transition houses for young people on Mount Seymour Parkway, in two single-family homes that house six young people each.  Hollyburn leases the land from the DNV.
  • Hollyburn put some resources into crafting a proposal to redevelop the sites into a larger, multi-family style facility with approximately 40 units.
  • Additional density on Mount Seymour Parkway was not acceptable to the majority on DNV Council, so they rejected the proposal. They were able to kill the project in camera because it was a decision re: the disposition of DNV land.

 

Comments

  1. It is a shame, but this is precisely what this Council was elected to do: stop everything. It is a jaw-dropping thing to behold in person but the loudest District residents truly feel beseiged by change and traffic; well and truly victimized by it all. It is the very worst of middle class entitlement in action. I feel the worst for Matthew Bond. He is the lonely, outvoted voice of maturity in that little bastion of white suburban reaction that now represents 85,000 people in the District. If you think it can’t happen on the south side of the Burrard, think again. Elections matter.

    1. Why has more rights ? Folks who live there (sometimes for generations) and pay taxes or folks that do not live there yet ?

      Many folks do NOT like density, and that is why they escaped from Vancouver or Burnaby to the North Shore ! We ought to keep this in mind !

      Where on this blog is there a discussion on healthy immigration levels into the country, BC or Lower Mainland ? Perhaps 350-400,000+ folks PER YEAR is too many into Canada? Perhaps opening up too many schools to too many foreign students has gone too far ?

      1. You think it is appropriate that a local District council take it upon itself to enact and enforce its own national immigration policy. OK, I see that. But I contend that everybody has equal rights, and one’s “right” does not extend to the right to shut everyone else out. That is frankly as disgustingly selfish as a human can be. It is indefensible. “I got mine. Everyone else out!” I would not have suspected an immigrant to be so indulgent of historically myopic intolerance. Look at me be wrong.

        The vast majority of us in this province are newcomers, relative to the folks that had been living here for thousands of years before Capt. Cook got lost on his way to Australia. Whether your family was lucky enough to arrive in 1971, 1871, or last year, it makes no difference. The comfortable homeowners in North Vancouver, and their descendants, have benefited from a local government welcoming growth and the construction of their lucky homes. Now they arbitrarily feel as if it’s too much and want to keep others out. How noble.

        1. Of course elections matter – but when Councils run roughshod over people it is easy to come to think that one’s opinion doesn’t count. I happen to think the October 2018 election was a breath of fresh air. Our turnout still stinks but is at least moving strongly in the right direction.

          North Vancouver wasn’t always what it is now – the North Vancouver I grew up in was a town divided between the classic working class on the one hand and tradesmen and small business people on the other. We got along together nearly all the time.

          Yes was and it is a good place to live but 2 of my 3 children no longer do nor feel they have the opportunity to. My family story is all too common and you clearly have no idea how that makes most of us feel.

          A LOT of us feel that the things we most love about our community are being lost year after year. We understand its growing and approve most of it but bitterly resent those who claim we’re “driving people out” because we reject a minority of developer proposals. And the proposals rejected by District Council ARE a minority.

          North Vancouver people are absolutely NOT “BANANAS” (build absolutely nothing anywhere near anybody) but we don’t feel we have to blindly say yes to every suggestion high rolling developers bring our way.

        2. It is too much.

          That is the message being sent. Politicians chose not to listen, though !!

          Why is there no third narrows bridge for example or a development up Indian Arm ? Or higher up the mountains? Why not propose a subway under Marine Drive or a six lane tolled LionsGate bridge ? Many ideas need discussing to accommodate new folks on the north shore not just density but no new roads and just more buses !!!

          1. It is too much. Beyer doesn’t listen though !!!

            Why should I have to put up with the extra noise stench and carnage that would come from encouraging more people to drive by building bigger bridges? Why should somebody else’s excessive comfort and heavy footprint trump my right to clean air and safety?

            Cars are useful tools in rural areas and small towns. They become increasingly problematic for both the owners and everybody else the more that cities grow. Too many have a hard time adjusting to the realities of growing cities. But only large or growing cities can justify the excellent public transit Beyer always pushes for.

            Some want to live in their leafy green enclaves and keep everybody else out. Then they should equally respect that they keep their dangerous stinky vehicles out of our walkable neighbourhoods including downtown.

            By all means, toll our roadways. But that act alone will reduce demand so we don’t need more or bigger bridges. More cars can never be the solution in growing cities. Give it up Beyer.

          2. Apparently voters in NVan think differently .. as do folks that move to Delta or Coquitlam or Surrey as they are growing faster than Vancouver ! Surrey will surpass Vancouver as BC’s biggest city sometimes in the 2020s .. why: more room to buy a house (and this includes usually a car, oh horror ..)

            We need MORE ROOM for housing as there is VAST SPACE north of North Van .. or noorth of Coquitlam / along Indian Arm. Why is it not utilized ?

            Many people come to Canada NOT to be crammed into tiny shoeboxes but to escape crowded cities and have a better life style. And yes it includes more room for cars, but of course also subways, LRTs, SkyTrains, bike lanes and walkability. ALL OF THE ABOVE. [As such, I do not promote cars .. I promote reality ]

            A major policy failure in the Lower Mainland ! Why is Hwy 1 not 6 lanes to Chiliwack ? Where is Massey Tunnel expansion ? Patullo bridge – a decade or 2 late. Major infrastructure shortages !

            Richmond could expand west as could Delta or Surrey (into Boundary Bay) .. it’s not restricted to the north shore.

            More people also means more commerce is more TRUCKS !

            More people into Canada means more goods in teh ONLY port on the west coast serving all of Canada: MetroVan .. with its 30+ ports .. all need ROOM .. trains systems, truck lanes, port expansions, deeper rivers ..

            With more and more EVs there will be less stench, btw .. and less noise. God willing, we might even have less DIESEL buses and subways or electric buses on day !

          3. You did not answer why those who choose to live light, in walkable neighbourhoods, should be over-run by people who choose to drive into our neighbourhoods. I don’t impose my car on them. I come lightly by bike or transit.

            It is not an equatable transaction.

            If people choose to live in the far reaches of our region because they choose a car-dependent lifestyle over neighbourliness then they can just stay out there. Though they are certainly welcome to come visit by transit or bike and not impose their excessive, polluting lifestyle on us. Why should we provide more room for cars? What’s in it for people who choose not to own cars?

            It is not an equitable transaction.

            VAST SPACE north of the North Shore and up Indian Arm? You’re too funny. Have you thought of stand-up? Clearly you haven’t seen the terrain, just looked at a map no doubt.

            There IS vast space in the region, It’s between all the houses and mini malls and across the wastelands of suburban parking lots. If people come from elsewhere to live in nature they should choose one of the many dozens of small towns that can offer just what they’re looking for.

            Meanwhile the city of Vancouver has grown and greatly expanded its jobs and economy all while reducing the number of cars on the road. The suburbs should learn to do the same. Are you listening West Vancouver?

  2. @Mary
    That viewpoint is selfish. Think via Mazlovs Hierarchy of needs. Basic needs ie housing are much more important than ones self actualization ie views, the type of or quantity of neighbors, traffic etc. When one says no to more density you say, “my problems related to traffic or what kind of neighbor I have is more important than someone else having a home.” Mary please think about other people in true need.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *