Jump to content

      














Photo

[Burnside/Gorge] Streetlink Ellice Street shelter | 5-storeys | Built - completed in 2010


  • Please log in to reply
157 replies to this topic

#81 G-Man

G-Man

    Senior Case Officer

  • Moderator
  • 13,123 posts

Posted 20 June 2008 - 09:48 AM

Well I agree and disagree. Communication is sporadic that is for sure, It comes down to whether "community" means the community associations. Community associations are not an elected body so the city's duty to inform should be to the broader community first, the community association second.

#82 martini

martini
  • Member
  • 2,500 posts

Posted 27 June 2008 - 08:16 AM

If anything the removal of Ellis park is a step on the way to a solution for those suffering from homelessness. To use any reference to discrimination against the homeless in an argument that supports blocking the shelter seems disingenuous at best.

I think parks have become so much of a sacred cow to some Victorians that they are no longer looked at as individual cases in a rational openminded way. Say "park" and you immediately have a legion of supporters, regardless of the bigger picture, or any other variables.

We all support parks, we all support cultural institutions for children, we all support community consultation and we all support solutions for homelessness - or at least we think we do. But when it comes down to actually getting something done what we find is that invariably, reality means sacrificing some of one thing to realize another. This is the moment of truth for the community - because we have discovered that by playing all these good things off against each other, we can, and have, created a status quo that guarantees that none of these things can ever move forward. Caught in a deadlock, City Council takes a beating for a lack of leadership. But if they move forward one step, they are met by the voices of citizens who think themselves progressive, yet act against any progress whatsoever.

The only argument that resonates with any degree of sense to me in the case of Ellis park is the argument against creating a ghettoized area along Burnside-Gorge. I think that is a valid concern, and needs to be considered carefully. I also see the point that if the city is willing to act decisively in creating a shelter, they should also act decisively in order to create a replacement park - and I wish the community would put the effort into finding an ideal location for that replacement park rather than trying so hard to block the shelter. But then, that would be forward motion. And we don't want that.


I may not be able to express myself as eloquently, but I'll try.:)

What seems to be resonating to me is whether it's Ellice Park or the CP Lawn Bowling Club, our beefs with process and city council wind up pitting us against each other. This should never be the case!
I honestly do not believe a working model of homes for the homeless should ever come at the expense of a neighbourhood.
To toss around losing a 'play lot' equates to refusal to aid the homeless is an illogical statement at the end of the day. The fact of the matter is City Spaces did absolutely no impact studies in designating Ellice an 'ideal' location.
My argument is the 'institutional' model is doomed to fail. It's plugging another finger in the dam. imho
I would gladly support working models such as Pacifica Housing's Medewiwin, or the new 18 unit Clover Place they are taking up on Douglas St.
I also have a halfway house, and a recovery house around the corner from me, and they have always been good neighbours. BUT...those are smaller efficiently run facilities. Controllable.
Not what is being proposed for Ellice.
If Don Mctavish from Cool-Aid said himself smaller facilities scattered across the city is ideal, why are we pursuing this Albatross?
I have a great respect for Mohan Jawl, and if he's up in arms over this process and shelter; we should be listening.

#83 martini

martini
  • Member
  • 2,500 posts

Posted 27 June 2008 - 08:20 AM

FYI
http://www.pacificah...tml#cloverplace

#84 Caramia

Caramia
  • Member
  • 3,835 posts

Posted 27 June 2008 - 09:01 AM

I agree that smaller units are ideal, especially when we are talking about longer term stays. I'm not so sure about smaller units for short term shelters, which typically house people who are homeless for very short periods of time. The people I met while volunteering for Streetlink were a mix of hardcore homeless who were in for the night, and a lot of short term homeless, many of them employed in physical seasonal work. And yes, Mohan has a very good point - that the Gorge is increasingly a ghetto. And that is a point I see and agree with.

The argument I was rebutting was when people suggest such things as... "The only reason people don't think that park works is because they are prejudice against the homeless who use it." The park doesn't work. Period. It is not a play-space, it is a wasteland. This has nothing to do with blaming the homeless, it has to do with a poor location. One daycare does not justify a park. A school would. A dense neighbourhood of young families would.

I also disagree with the idea that services for people in need of shelter should not come at the expense of parks, neighbourhoods, business, or whatever... Everything has a cost, and there will always be something that people can protest is more important than solving our homelessness issue. The fact is, that every protest is a vote FOR the status quo. And in Victoria, that status quo is what people are voting for. Deceiving themselves that if they fend it off here, it will surely go "somewhere else" is getting really old. Turns out "somewhere else" also has its defenders.

Regarding a variety of smaller shelters, if we were to build 4 small shelters, and bus people between them, the expense would be huge compared to one large one. Not to say it isn't an expense worth spending, but, in that case, finding city land to put them on would be even more important. Would you be willing to make a trade off. Say, a shelter 1/4 the size, on Ellis park, with three other shelters, each in a different neighbourhood. Would that be acceptable? Would the benefit of having a smaller scattered shelter be enough to give up Ellis park without the replacement park, since the funds used for that might instead go toward buying land elsewhere for one of the other shelters? Would you be willing to support all these shelters in each neighbourhood wholeheartedly, realizing that it would have to have a HUGE amount of public support to defray the added cost to the taxpayers of fighting 4 separate battles in 4 separate neighbourhoods, none of whom want a homeless shelter in their backyard?

#85 G-Man

G-Man

    Senior Case Officer

  • Moderator
  • 13,123 posts

Posted 27 June 2008 - 09:41 AM

The four shelters would never get built as there aren't enough hard up areas and you will never be allowed to build one in Fairfield, Oaklands, Rockland, James Bay They would burn down city hall.

The fact is that no mater whether the units house one person or 200 there will be a large public outcry against it because people want to help the homeless, just not too close to them.

#86 gumgum

gumgum
  • Member
  • 7,069 posts

Posted 03 July 2008 - 10:30 AM

Ellice Park petition to block homeless shelter comes up shy
Effort to force city to keep park alive now on the ropes
Carolyn Heiman, Times Colonist
Published: Thursday, July 03, 2008


#87 G-Man

G-Man

    Senior Case Officer

  • Moderator
  • 13,123 posts

Posted 03 July 2008 - 11:06 AM

Slightly off topic but under what authority would the petition has forced the city to hold a referendum?

Anyone thinking what I am thinking? Amalgamation referendum????

#88 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 25,981 posts

Posted 03 July 2008 - 11:10 AM

Anyone thinking what I am thinking? Amalgamation referendum????


Can we find 6000 people (in the City of Victoria) who will agree that amalgamation is the only logical course for the future of the region? I mean , I am vehement about it, but I get the feeling MANY will buy into the doom and gloom prophecies put forth by the current powers-that-be. That being said, I will be quick to put MY name on any such petition.

#89 Koru

Koru
  • Member
  • 715 posts

Posted 03 July 2008 - 11:29 AM

Can we find 6000 people (in the City of Victoria) who will agree that amalgamation is the only logical course for the future of the region? I mean , I am vehement about it, but I get the feeling MANY will buy into the doom and gloom prophecies put forth by the current powers-that-be. That being said, I will be quick to put MY name on any such petition.


Well...we'll never know unless a group of citizens gets together and tries...Finding a way to force a referendum sounds like the only way its going to happen anytime soon...I personally live in View Royal...but I grew up in the City of Victoria and I know many people I grew up around in Fairfield including my family that would certainly put signatures on a petition of such...just a thought...

#90 Caramia

Caramia
  • Member
  • 3,835 posts

Posted 03 July 2008 - 11:30 AM

While the petition didn't get the names needed, the 3,000 names that it did get should be considered significant. I really do think that Burnside Gorge have a legitimate complaint about the scale of the shelter, and the clustering of social problems along the Gorge. I don't think it is fair that other neighbourhoods consistently manage to duck out of shouldering their share of the burden, and I wonder if part of the reason why they don't has to do with a more educated demographic with more leisure time for protesting.

This is a really tough issue, and regardless of the result, as a city, we shouldn't let it go after July is over, done deal or not. There needs to be some kind of continuing commitment to the Gorge by the City and by other neighbourhoods, particularly neighbourhoods who have avoided having such resources located within their borders.

#91 martini

martini
  • Member
  • 2,500 posts

Posted 03 July 2008 - 05:05 PM

While the petition didn't get the names needed, the 3,000 names that it did get should be considered significant. I really do think that Burnside Gorge have a legitimate complaint about the scale of the shelter, and the clustering of social problems along the Gorge. I don't think it is fair that other neighbourhoods consistently manage to duck out of shouldering their share of the burden, and I wonder if part of the reason why they don't has to do with a more educated demographic with more leisure time for protesting.

This is a really tough issue, and regardless of the result, as a city, we shouldn't let it go after July is over, done deal or not. There needs to be some kind of continuing commitment to the Gorge by the City and by other neighbourhoods, particularly neighbourhoods who have avoided having such resources located within their borders.


Thank you very much.

July 24th is going to be a packed house over this issue.
Aside from the activity on Gorge Rd. now, factor in the Mobile Needle Exchange as well.
I also feel Cool-Aid has been caught in the crossfire between the community and City Hall. Very unfortunate.
But at the same time, I was not happy with Kathy Stinson telling us this will be a good thing for our community.

#92 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 15,815 posts

Posted 03 July 2008 - 05:54 PM

...the 3,000 names that it did get should be considered significant.


No kidding. So is Victoria a big city again today? They round up 3,000 signatures re: the fate of a small park and yet it isn't enough to matter?

The 0.2-hectare Ellice Park represents four per cent of the park area in the Burnside Gorge area. Of all city neighbourhoods it ranks fifth for having the lowest park-per-1000 population, behind Rockland, Harris Green, Fernwood and Jubilee.


That's a very interesting statistic. So how would folks rate the quality of life in those other neighbourhoods?

Then again, Victoria's neighbourhood boundaries can be rather goofy and arbitrary. It's not like anybody knows where the lines are and whether or not the nearest park is in their neighbourhood or in the next neighbourhood over.

#93 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 15,815 posts

Posted 03 July 2008 - 06:01 PM

But Russo said "parkland and green space is needed in every community. If you look at Richmond, with all that light industry, built around green circles. That is planning in the 21st century for quality of life and livability.... There is a place for parkland within a business community."


Victoria should be emulating Richmond.

#94 martini

martini
  • Member
  • 2,500 posts

Posted 03 July 2008 - 06:12 PM

No kidding. So is Victoria a big city again today? They round up 3,000 signatures re: the fate of a small park and yet it isn't enough to matter?



That's a very interesting statistic. So how would folks rate the quality of life in those other neighbourhoods?

Then again, Victoria's neighbourhood boundaries can be rather goofy and arbitrary. It's not like anybody knows where the lines are and whether or not the nearest park is in their neighbourhood or in the next neighbourhood over.


I think I need help understanding the stats. :confused:
Ellice accounts for 4%?
I thought within the B/G boundaries we only had Ellice, Sumas and Selkirk Green.

#95 martini

martini
  • Member
  • 2,500 posts

Posted 03 July 2008 - 06:25 PM

No kidding. So is Victoria a big city again today? They round up 3,000 signatures re: the fate of a small park and yet it isn't enough to matter?

Also the fact they were collected within a thirty day period.
That certainly is monumental imho.
A daunting task considering each signature required a separate 8x10 sheet.

#96 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 15,815 posts

Posted 03 July 2008 - 06:46 PM

I wonder if that was supposed to be 40%? If you look at a map and adhere strictly to the neighbourhood boundaries (in other words, don't include any part of Gorge Park) then that 4% figure doesn't seem to add up.

#97 martini

martini
  • Member
  • 2,500 posts

Posted 03 July 2008 - 07:33 PM

I wonder if that was supposed to be 40%? If you look at a map and adhere strictly to the neighbourhood boundaries (in other words, don't include any part of Gorge Park) then that 4% figure doesn't seem to add up.


Yes, that would make sense then!

#98 Rob Randall

Rob Randall
  • Member
  • 12,673 posts

Posted 04 July 2008 - 12:35 PM

Don't turn our backs on the homeless

Times - Colonist
Jun 27, 2008

I am writing on building a 104-bed emergency shelter on what is now Ellice Park. I own property on David Street one block from Ellice Park, where I work and maintain a rental suite. I fully support this project.

I know what it's like to live and work near a homeless shelter, as a property owner in Chinatown, one block away from Streetlink. I have lived here for almost 10 years with my daughter. We have never once felt threatened by a homeless person.

I understand that people in Rock Bay were not consulted, which was a big blunder. The fears are predictable, but phrases like "Ghettos or Gardens" are manipulative to the point of offensiveness. A homeless shelter does not a ghetto make. I understand that the project will eliminate a park. Simple solution: Create a new park.

I am constantly shocked by how little our society does to provide the basic needs of any human being. Seeing people wait in line on a cold, rainy winter afternoon, holding all their worldly possessions, knowing that there are not enough beds for everyone is one of these things I've seen.

Streetlink is inadequate. I have been going to meetings for years hearing the same thing: Finding money for a new shelter is possible, but finding the land is the hard part. Now, the land is available and the money is there.

Of course we need supportive housing. But this will take time. We need emergency beds now.

Sandra Meigs

Victoria


Sandra is a Board member and former Chair of the DRA. The DRA has no official opinion on the Ellice Shelter proposal as it is not in the Downtown area.

"[Randall's] aesthetic poll was more accurate than his political acumen"

-Tom Hawthorne, Toronto Globe and Mail


#99 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 10 July 2008 - 11:11 PM

Ellice Street shelter plans to go to public hearing
Carolyn Heiman, Times Colonist
Published: Friday, July 11, 2008

A public hearing aimed at turning a Victoria city park into a place where a homeless shelter can be built will be held on Thursday, July 24.

Victoria city council set the date for the hearing, expected to have strong opposition from residents in the Burnside Gorge area, Thursday night.

[...]

#100 martini

martini
  • Member
  • 2,500 posts

Posted 19 July 2008 - 08:04 AM

Victoria News

Ellice Street only site considered for shelter

By Keith Vass - Victoria News

Published: July 09, 2008 2:00 PM
Updated: July 09, 2008 2:19 PM

The Ellice Street playlot was the only site considered for a new emergency shelter in a study that looked at how five pieces of public land in Victoria could be used to reduce homelessness.

The study, released this week after a freedom of information request, was delivered to the city and B.C. Housing by local firm CitySpaces Consulting last February, was commissioned by the province to evaluate potential costs to develop the properties, which were identified by City of Victoria planning staff and approved by city council for inclusion in the study in 2006.

[...]
Find this article at:
http://www.bclocalne...s/24272349.html

You're not quite at the end of this discussion topic!

Use the page links at the lower-left to go to the next page to read additional posts.
 



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users