STAY CONNECTED TO VIBRANTVICTORIA
WHAT'S HAPPENING ON CITIFIED VICTORIA
I was looking for info on Arthur Erickson and found this Hansard excerpt from April 3, 1973.(Useless trivia: the world's first cellphone call was made on that day in New York City. Aaaaanyway)...
MR. H.A. CURTIS (Saanich and the Islands): Mr. Chairman, the First Member for Vancouver-Point Grey (Mr. McGeer) spoke about the precinct for the parliament buildings, for the centre of government here, and I really feel that the Minister should outline in a little more detail his thoughts with respect to the long-term future of the precinct. If I may make a point. Mr. Chairman, I really feel that there is a danger that the provincial government, regardless of what party may be in power, will, over the next decade or 15 years, tend to keep the precinct area too small.
Just what is the precinct in terms of boundary streets in the view of the present Minister, Mr. Chairman? Is there not some very real merit in considering the location of additional buildings some distance from where we are today? Elsewhere in the City of Victoria, possibly in Victoria West -
I identify this as an area which would benefit greatly, Mr. Chairman, from the injection of ...Interjection by an Hon. Member.
MR. CURTIS: No, not necessarily Saanich - I was hoping some Member would rise to that bait. I'm not speaking parochially, I am speaking about elsewhere in Victoria, Victoria West, possibly Esquimalt, perhaps even the Oak Bay area, so that we don't have this morning rush to a relatively small part of Victoria city and then extremely heavy traffic going home, much of it generated by the people who are in the civil service. How much better it would be to move some facilities to other areas which have not yet been considered, as far as we can determine, for government buildings in the urban part of Greater Victoria.
I would like the Minister to touch on that, Mr. Chairman, because we are so close to the Strait of Juan de Fuca at this location that we are really at the bottom of a funnel, or the bottom of a jar, if you will, with most people coming to the parliamentary precinct, whether it's two blocks wide or four blocks wide, having to fight their way through a great deal of residential and commercial development in order to get here. If this were the centre of the city in the true sense of the word, with residential areas to the south and to the west as well as to the north-cast, then it would be much easier.
Hopefully the Minister will comment on this and hopefully his department will consider what I consider to be the importance of diversification, as far as locating public buildings is concerned and moving them around in the urban part of this Greater Victoria capital city area.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Minister of Public Works.
HON. MR. HARTLEY: I think this is a very good question that the Member for Saanich and the Islands has raised. Of course this is the very purpose of our precinct plan. In this plan I think one of the factors that we have to consider is how one department can work with the other in interdepartmental relations and also government-city relations with the surrounding municipalities.
At this point in time I am not prepared to say that this precinct area would be bounded by this street or that street, but we do have holdings throughout the lower island - substantial holdings as large as a city block, where the public works warehouses are at Cloverdale Avenue. [Are they talking about what is now (or was) the BCBC building near Cloverdale and Blanshard?]Our plan and study is so that we can decide where future buildings should go. For instance, if there is to be a separate building for car insurance, should that be located here or could it just as well be integrated with the business community uptown? The same applies to other buildings that we will be considering. Certainly if we can have them handy here, it's very well.
Also, I believe we have to be involved in a certain amount of construction, because this is the only way we can feel certain that a certain type of style of design would complement the present main building. If we do this and put buildings on the property that we own, this is the only way we can make certain that that is the way it will be. A future administration could come in and dispose of some of this property and sell it off for some purpose that might not complement the overall precinct area.
I think it's important that we do plan this, because I believe this is a major tourist attraction - people come from all parts of the world to view our Legislature and the City of Victoria. It's for this reason that we are attempting to sit down and work with the city planning and with the city mayor and any person, certainly such as the Member for Saanich and the Islands, who holds other responsible offices in this immediate area. We'd be pleased to have their input and their suggestions.
When the precinct plan is ready - and I hope it will be ready very shortly - we would welcome anyone who wishes to see it and has input.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. First Member for Victoria.
MR. N.R. MORRISON (Victoria): Mr. Chairman, I am most interested in this precinct area. I wonder if I could make one or two suggestions.
In any new buildings which are built in this area I think we should seriously consider the underground parking under each of them adequate to handle the number of employees who might be in that building.
For the time being I wonder if we couldn't seriously consider perhaps having a park-and-ride situation where employees could park their cars on property which is now already owned by the government - I am referring to the ex-Hudson's Bay warehouse area. There is ample parking in that area. We could use a commuter type bus to bring people in in the morning and take them back again at night.
One of the major problems in this city is the amount of traffic that originates in this area, traffic that goes through the core of the city and creates a rather serious traffic jam. I appreciate that it's not of long duration, but it can be most annoying for people in the centre of town. One or two of these new buses which we have acquired I think we could perhaps use on that type of run.
I also think that some of the buildings which are proposed for this area - I concur that a design contest of having someone give an overall design would be an excellent idea for this area. I wonder if he would care to comment on that.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Minister of Public Works.
HON. MR. HARTLEY: I think we're in agreement certainly with the First Member for Victoria (Mr. Morrison) that there are two problems. I think I did indicate that a loop transit system was being considered so that a person using the legislative buildings, for instance, if he had to nip uptown to the insurance office or to any other government facility, would find this handy. I just used that as an example.
One of the decisions that we will have to make very early whether is we should spend money in underground parking or~ parking as such about any building that we should plan, or whether we would be farther ahead to use those dollars in a modern improved transit system so that, as my friend from Victoria suggests, you could park your car somewhere on the outskirts and then get onto a quick bus and ride into the centre. I personally favour this.
Some planners say that Victoria really doesn't have that bad a traffic problem at this point in time. But I think we have to look ahead and try and plan so that that type of transit problem or that type of traffic congestion just doesn't build up in Victoria.
I believe there's a great deal to be said for pedestrian malls in and about the Empress Hotel and in the precinct area - at least some "people" spaces so that people could move about freely.
These are basic decisions and we are thinking of them. Mr. Member for Victoria, we'd certainly like to have your input.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Second Member for Vancouver-Point Grey.
MR. GARDOM: On this same point, Mr. Chairman, we've aft got the most admirable respect for Mr. Erickson and his renowned capabilities. But I don't think we need the expertise of Mr. Erickson to reach the conclusion that it's totally unnecessary to have any parking whatsoever around this building and around the courthouse in Vancouver. You've just got to snap your fingers and they will go out. You should do it tout de suite. Because insofar as this building is concerned the parking is primarily for the benefit of cabinet and some deputy Ministers and so forth and so on.
I'm not knocking the cabinet or the deputy Ministers, but there's no need for it. This particular building provides one of the most distinctive and world-renowned views of British Columbia. Make no mistake of that. The cars should not be there. We're not advertising Detroit. Get the stupid putrefactions out of there, is my view.
Secondly, I was interested to hear of the Hon. Minister's desire for ethereal calm in the hearing of court cases. He talked a little bit about the contemplated new building in Vancouver. I would like to ask him whether it is contemplated - and this question was not answered by you - that the court facilities will totally go into the new structure. Or is it contemplated that the existing court facility will continue as a courthouse? Now that's a pretty simple question. [Ah...now they're talking about the Vancouver courthouse which is now the VAG and the proposed new Erickson courthouse as part of what would become Robson Square]
I would also ask the Minister to amplify certain remarks when he said that there were some changes, I think, planned for the Press gallery. Does this mean new quarters, more light, more air, a little bit of food under the door and that type of thing - Roman baths or saunas - "squash courts, " says the Hon. Member from Victoria (Mr. D.A. Anderson) - washrooms, other useful and needful facilities, or are they going to continue on in their sort of semi- but very historic and interesting dungeon?
The last question that I'd like to ask the Hon. Minister is to whether or not he agrees that in all public buildings access should be provided for handicapped people. I am not going to speak any more about that because, as the Minister knows, I have Bill No. 97 on the order paper dealing with that very aspect.
I would appreciate the Minister's answers to those four questions:
(1) will the cars be totally removed from the precincts of these legislative buildings and from the courthouse in the City of Vancouver? Get them out completely. Let's go back to the grass and the flowers. :|
(2) Will the court facilities only be in the newly contemplated building, or will the existing court facilities in Vancouver continue as the courthouse?
(3) Exactly what does the Minister intend to do with the Press gallery facilities?
(4) Will the Minister comment concerning access to public buildings for handicapped people?
MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Second Member for Victoria.
MR. D.A. ANDERSON: Thanks, Mr. Chairman. Further on this question of Victoria, I am not clear from the Minister's statements. I understood originally that we had a precinct plan and we were not thinking of moving buildings outside, in particular moving any buildings past Blanshard Street, which I understand to be the boundary line which has always been considered to be in existence for any government buildings.
I checked with the dictionary as to what "precinct" means and I am even more confused as to what's in the mind of the Minister. Are we having a precinct around this area which is going to house the government buildings or are we going to scatter them in the town? Or I guess you could have both -precincts immediately around this building and other government buildings scattered out.
At the moment I am not too sure from what the Minister has said this afternoon as to what is in his mind as far as this goes.
The parking and traffic questions around these buildings have always been a problem to Victorians. The question has been raised already, but the suggestion of staggering the hours has not, and this solves the problem completely. There is no problem as far as rush hour traffic for civil servants is concerned if the hours of leaving and arriving at work are staggered. I wonder whether the Minister would like to say how far he's progressing on this.
Before we get into such expensive and unnecessary things as underground parking and things of that nature, I think we should at least attempt to have a decent system of staggering hours. We legislators, of course, leave this place at about 11:00 at night or sometimes later and we don't confuse too many people or get in their way - unfortunately perhaps. But others could certainly leave at more reasonable hours during the day. I think this would solve many of the problems of underground parking, park-and-ride and the traffic terminals that we have been talking of.
As far as the main buildings themselves are concerned, I am glad that the Minister - and I quote his own words - is "interested in the rehabilitation of politicians." We think that's great. We're glad that it's under his department instead of the Minister of Rehabilitation and Social Improvement (Hon. Mr. Levi) sitting down the road.
Interjection by an Hon. Member.
MR. D.A. ANDERSON: That comes later? Not too much later; if things carry on the way we are now we'll probably be under his charge, or that of the Minister of Health Services and Hospital Insurance (Hon. Mr. Cocke) - I am not sure which.
In any event he mentioned suites for MLAs and cabinet Ministers. We'll certainly forgo the suites if we would occasionally get the odd office. At the moment the office space for MLAs is not adequate and I think the Minister is fully aware of this. He has certainly shown sympathy for my remarks in previous months.
I wonder whether he can give this House and the Members here more indication of how fast he intends to move on getting new office space, rearranging things so that, as he said, these buildings can be used by legislators.
I mention this because I understood in the fall session that the Liberal caucus would shortly get changes in their facilities. It so happened that nothing happened until two days before this new spring session. I trust the same experience will not befall us in the future. The actual alterations - and we appreciate the Minister's concern - unfortunately took place during the session and we had to send our secretaries home for some days while they took place. While the workmen worked very efficiently and effectively and the alterations were well done, nevertheless it was of considerable inconvenience to our constituents and to ourselves.
So perhaps the Minister would like to tell us when we might expect these new parliament buildings devoted not to civil servants and, in particular, Ministerial aides, but devoted to MLAs and servicing their constituents. This is particularly important for myself, the. Hon. First Member for Victoria (Mr. Morrison) and the other local MLAs. We find that we have many visitors who want to come in. They sit in the galleries here and look down at the floor and then they come and tell us how terrible it is immediately afterwards in our offices. We would like to make sure they have at least some opportunity to sit and be comfortable during those discussions.
To sum up: could the Minister indicate what he is doing about the question of staggered hours? What precisely is the objective as far as the precinct is concerned and as far as other buildings are concerned? In particular, how about the so-called Blanshard Street boundary? Is that still in existence as a limit for any Government expansion? What is going to be done for legislators in this building to make sure we have adequate office facilities?
Finally, Mr. Minister, neither I nor the First Member for Victoria (Mr. Morrison) has seen the precinct plan. We appreciate your idea that we should provide suggestions here and now, but perhaps it might have been a little more useful had we been involved a little earlier. The only way I can find out what's happening in this regard is to get my own brother elected an alderman in Victoria and he tells me what's happening from city hall and that's great.
But it might be better, as we are the Members for this area, for us to be involved so that we have some idea before the final plan is unveiled so that we can have some input - and that's the very word that the Minister used. It's no good getting input too late.
We would like to know why we have been excluded in this process by this so-called "open" Government and what steps are going to be taken to rectify it?
MR. CHAIRMAN: I recognize the Hon. Minister of Public Works.
HON. MR. HARTLEY: Well, you certainly haven't been excluded. As yet the cabinet hasn't seen the plans. We just really took a check on it last Friday to see how things were coming, and that's why I say it was a preview.
When there is a little more definition to the plan, we would be pleased to have you and any other Members who are interested look into it.
As far as a definitive line about the precinct area, as far as streets, I don't see that we can really say, "here, here and here." I believe we have to have some involvement certainly in the whole James Bay area so that we can get some direction into the whole style here. That's what we're trying to do.
There will be buildings uptown, possibly as far out as the old Hudson's Bay Company property on Cloverdale Avenue. We have certain facilities there now. It just may be a point where we should have a parking lot or a point where people could walk in and hop onto a loop-transit system or some form of public transit.
On the point of staggering hours, I think this has to be considered too. I think this can have quite a bearing. I notice when I drive in in the morning if you're here a few minutes earlier or a few minutes later it does make a fantastic difference in congestion. So I think this is a very good suggestion.
Interjection by an Hon. Member.
HON. MR. HARTLEY: Would you give them to me again? Which were those?
MR. CHAIRMAN: The Hon. Second Member for Vancouver-Point Grey, just to repeat the questions.
MR. GARDOM: Yes. I asked you four questions. I asked you the question whether you would definitely favour the abolition of parking around the legislative buildings and around the courthouse in Vancouver. I am speaking of the respective blocks only.
MR. D.A. ANDERSON: As of tomorrow. [Note: this is David Anderson, who went on to become MP for Victoria]
MR. GARDOM: As of tomorrow. There's no need for it. [Thirty four ****ing years ago...]
The second question was whether or not you will be phasing out the court facility in the existing courthouse in Vancouver and including it in the new structure which you have been talking about earlier today. That was the second question.
The third question: are you able to furnish details or at least let us know what the guidelines are of what you have in mind for the Press gallery? You just said the word "changes." That's rather an anomalous word - maybe - depending upon from where it's delivered, I suppose.
The fourth question was whether or not you are in favour of providing access to handicapped people to all government buildings.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. The last question is out of order.
HON. MR. HARTLEY: On the three questions, I am in favour of the removal of parking ...
AN HON. MEMBER: Do it!
HON. MR. HARTLEY: Well, of course as you say you can do it with a snap of your finger. But if it throws certain problems on the existing - or nonexistent - transportation system or if there are not adequate parking facilities to take up the gap, all right. But basically I agree that this is a beautiful building and having vehicles parked about it adds nothing to it.
With regard to the court facilities, we have asked Mr. Erickson to work this into his design - a new court facility for Vancouver.
