No Legitimate Basis
for Joyce Precinct Review
The following formal comment on Joyce Precinct Review has been forwarded to City of Vancouver.
Re: Joyce Precinct Review
To: Michelle Yip / JoyceStationReview@vancouver.ca
From: Joseph and Jeanette Jones
Date: 28 November 2015
The Joyce Precinct planning lacks legitimacy because of
• Failure to communicate in Chinese
• Contamination of options by an already-submitted development application
• Disregard of Renfrew-Collingwood’s existing Norquay planning
• Inadequate assessment of amenity deficit in the local area
• Discriminatory disparity in allocation of Vancouver population density
Therefore the Joyce Precinct planning needs to go forward by undertaking adequate consultation with a
local-area working group (e.g. Norquay, Downtown Eastside) before presenting further information to the community.
The 20 information panels presented at the 21 October 2015 open house show contempt for the Renfrew-Collingwood community and therefore provide no legitimate basis for further planning.
Lack of Communication — English-only information panels are provided to a diverse ethnic community. At a minimum, all information should always be provided in Chinese for that substantial component.
Misrepresentation — The City of Vancouver web site at http://vancouver.ca/news-calendar/renfrew.aspx presents Renfrew-Collingwood as “primarily a residential area” with “easy access to services and amenities.” Astonishingly, the only introductory planning reference is to adjacent Grandview-Woodland.
Norquay Planning — The reality is shown on panel 7. Right next door to the west, still in Renfrew-Collingwood, lies Norquay Village Neighbourhood Centre, still an active process. The document for that mass rezoning of 1912 properties and approximately half a square mile stated:
It should also be noted that by planning for new housing types in the neighbourhood centre,
the existing RS-1 zoning is maintained for the majority of the surrounding areas.
(p. 19, Norquay Village Neighbourhood Centre Plan, 4 Nov 2010)
To almost immediately propose to eliminate yet more RS-1 in Renfrew-Collingwood — especially after having facilitated the 2011 assemblage into CD-1 of 33 individual parcels at 5515-5665 Boundary Road, 5448-5666 Ormidale Street and 3690 Vanness Avenue — shows that City of Vancouver regards Renfrew-Collingwood as little more than an ongoing density dump.
Existing Density — Figures show that for 1996-2006, among the 22 Vancouver neighborhoods, Renfrew-Collingwood ranked second only to Downtown in rate of population increase at 17% and in rate of dwelling increase at 26.5%. With 61.6 persons per hectare in 2011 in Renfrew- Collingwood, only six other Vancouver neighborhoods rank as denser: West End, Downtown, Fairview, Kitsilano, Mount Pleasant, Kensington-Cedar Cottage (descending order).
Amenity Deficit — In light of the foregoing, it seems preposterous for panel 19 to assert that “Joyce-Collingwood is generally well-served by existing and planned facilities.” Consider those other denser neighborhoods and what they offer in their immediate areas. Renfrew-Collingwood is clearly already overpopulated and underserved in comparison.
Contaminated Options — The legitimacy of this pretense at planning is also compromised by a curiously similar set of three options into which the local community has had no genuine input. Only two points need to be made about the options:
1. Option 3 embeds an existing blockbuster development application for 5050 Joyce Street. This is reactivity, not planning.
2. The highlighted statement on the first options panel (panel 8) defines the information and the process as pure jello:
The following options are not exclusive options. Based on responses, staff will create a preferred option
that may include components of each option.
These words could easily translate as: Staff will pick and choose from positive comment solicited from developer interests through our open house and then aggregate those into our preferred option to maximize both height and density.