City of Vancouver

 
The City of Vancouver web site for planning related to Norquay calls for the portal that follows. Chaotic information architecture matches incoherence of planning process. Planners stumbled along as they regressed to simple force. In the end they imposed their plan on a neighborhood they refused to listen to. The tangle of their files mirrors groping, obfuscation, and disregard.

 
Norquay Village Neighbourhood Centre Program
This initial screen offers limited current information.

 
Updates and Archives (Norquay Village Neighbourhood Centre Program)
At the top of the screen, 21 links in reverse chronological order mix together 6 open house reports, 5 of 7 newsletters, 5 letters and reports, 3 reports on 2009 workshops and meetings, and 2 dead links (Initial Work Schedule, Initial Program Process). A true “archive” would not remove or alter materials. The 21 links provide a table of contents for the sections further down on the same screen.

 
Norquay Village Neighbourhood Centre Program – Q & A
At the left of the screen, links provide Q & A screens for 8 topics: Norquay Q & A; Taxation; Public Process; Relationship to Community Vision; EcoDensity; Rate of Change; Delivery of Amenities; Density. Great caution must be exercised in reading this City of Vancouver “information.”

For example, under EcoDensity the Answer states that EcoDensity is separate and does not suggest changes to Neighbourhood Centre planning. Meanwhile, another City of Vancouver document, Future Neighbourhood Centres Planning, demonstrates that this assertion is untrue: “EcoDensity is already influencing Centres planning, as exemplified by the review of new housing potential along Kingsway in the Norquay Village planning process” (p. 5). Thus in June 2007 EcoDensity can be seen to affect planning a year before it received approval as policy. [And now the 4 Nov 2010 Norquay Plan has established a base height of ten stories along both sides of one mile of Kingsway.]

One more example: Under Delivery of Amenities the Answer states: “Further work on needs and facilities will be completed before a final Plan is recommended to Council.” Yet the plan sent to Council and approved on 4 November 2010 states: “A more detailed public benefits strategy will be developed as part of the implementation of the Neighbourhood Centre Plan” (p. 15). Always strewing vague promise and never delivering specifics, planners offer neverending deferral. Pushing through a mass rezoning is their only real concern.

 
Newsletters provides separate direct access to 7 newsletters, as well as to one separate “Letter to Community” of 12 Dec 2007. (Planners issued this letter shortly before ending their stonewalling of strongly negative survey results — see below).

 
Norquay Survey Overview is buried under the vague heading of Further Planning Work Underway, one of the 21 links in Updates and Archives. This material needs to be read with care, and set alongside the analysis provided by Norquay Survey Results: History and Context.

 
 
Back to Eye on Norquay       [ Updated 14 Apr 2011 ]
 

Advertisements

Written by eyeonnorquay

14 April 2011 at 12:34 am