Arbutus: Greenway & Future Streetcar | Proposed - Page 70

officedweller · #**1381** Posted **Aug 8, 2016, 11:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by s211

I am wondering if there might be a less-publicized reason for halting the paving. Is it possible that sections along the former rail bed are contaminated and should have been remediated before any improvements, temporary or not, are made to the land? Could the city have gotten ahead of itself? In the real world, not having a clean bill of property health can hold up development for extended periods of time until certificates of compliance are obtained from the province.

If anything, the paving would create an impermeable layer and prevent the further leaching/migration of contaminants until properly dealt with in the final design/redevelopment.

CanSpice · #**1382** Posted **Aug 8, 2016, 11:41 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by officedweller

If anything, the paving would create an impermeable layer and prevent the further leaching/migration of contaminants until properly dealt with in the final design/redevelopment.

That's not how it works. If the land is contaminated, then they're not allowed to do any development on the land until it's remediated. The City of Vancouver would know if any of the Arbutus Corridor were contaminated and would not allow the land to be developed in any way before doing remediation.

It's like abandoned gas stations -- if you want to change the use of the land, say from rail to multi-use, then if it's contaminated you need to remove the contamination. You can't just pave it over, use it, and wing it later.

That link has an interesting tidbit: the contamination can't be sold, so since the rail company initially owned the land and then sold it, they'd be responsible for the removal of the contamination even after the land was sold. There's been absolutely no talk about this anywhere that I've seen, and the City of Vancouver would most certainly raise a stink about it should they know any of the land is contaminated.

MIPS · #**1383** Posted **Aug 9, 2016, 1:10 AM**

I can only imagine the storm that brews if the city demands the soil removed but they refuse, so the walkway is fenced off and remains that way for decades.

You thought a disused rail line impacted your property value before, grandpa? How about an unfinished greenway that's closed due to soil contamination along its length.

officedweller · #**1384** Posted **Aug 9, 2016, 8:59 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by CanSpice

That's not how it works. If the land is contaminated, then they're not allowed to do any development on the land until it's remediated. The City of Vancouver would know if any of the Arbutus Corridor were contaminated and would not allow the land to be developed in any way before doing remediation.

No, that's what I mean. The paving could be a stop gap measure that doesn't trigger the remediation requirement (to remediate to "Urban Park" remediation standards) if it falls short of "development" which the construction of a full blown greenway might do.
i.e. if a gravel parking lot is paved as an interim use, does it have to be remediated first?

logicbomb · #**1385** Posted **Sep 6, 2016, 11:13 PM**

Some info I heard. It appears as there will be no asphalt. Compact trail gravel/sand is being looked at to complete the rest of the corridor until a more permanent plan is designed in 2018 or 2019. The person I talked to on Sat says that some of the residents have been opposed to the idea of a "bike friendly" corridor.

idunno · #**1386** Posted **Sep 6, 2016, 11:56 PM**

This makes me so angry. I was so excited about how fast they were working on it!

Vantage · #**1387** Posted **Sep 7, 2016, 5:51 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by logicbomb

some of the residents have been opposed to the idea of a "bike friendly" corridor.

I guess the crème de la crème of Vancouver don't want 'outsiders' using 'their' path. Pretty ridiculous if you ask me. Why wouldn't they build it as a bike friendly corridor?!

MIPS · #**1388** Posted **Sep 7, 2016, 2:06 PM**

Because they want their gardens.

swimmer_spe · #**1389** Posted **Sep 7, 2016, 2:12 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by MIPS

Because they want their gardens.

Yup. Anything that prevents them from having their gardens is bad.

Jebby · #**1390** Posted **Sep 7, 2016, 3:06 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vantage

I guess the crème de la crème of Vancouver don't want 'outsiders' using 'their' path.

I hate when people call this area "crème de la crème". It's not. The vast majority of people who live long this corridor are middle class professionals.

Tfreder · #**1391** Posted **Sep 7, 2016, 3:17 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jebby

I hate when people call this area "crème de la crème". It's not. The vast majority of people who live long this corridor are middle class professionals.

I dont believe (or hope) that anyone is using it seriously. It's just a reference to the infamous quote during the 2000s era Arbutus Corridor legal battle

Quote:

“We are the people that live in your neighbourhood. We are dentists, doctors, lawyers, professionals, CEOs of companies. We are the creme de la creme in Vancouver. We live in a very expensive neighbourhood and we’re well educated and well informed. And that’s what we intend to be.”

aberdeen5698 · #**1392** Posted **Sep 7, 2016, 3:49 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jebby

I hate when people call this area "crème de la crème". It's not. The vast majority of people who live long this corridor are middle class professionals.

Your opinion is a hard sell to everyone who lives east of Ontario Street, and especially so for those who live east of Boundary Road...

idunno · #**1393** Posted **Sep 7, 2016, 4:00 PM**

I would say many in this neighbourhood are either old, retired folks who moved there many decades ago and cling to the ideals of the garden corridor they once had, or new, foreign (mostly Chinese) residents who don't care too much about these kinds of issues.

Jebby · #**1394** Posted **Sep 7, 2016, 4:23 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tfreder

I dont believe (or hope) that anyone is using it seriously. It's just a reference to the infamous quote during the 2000s era Arbutus Corridor legal battle

Considering the two comments above, people on here truly believe it's upper class millionaires and rich Chinese who populate the entire Arbutus corridor.

It's just not true, though. And with regards to it all being old people it's also just not true. This area has some of the highest proportions of minors in the entire metro:

Source: http://www.vancouversun.com/news/met...ped/index.html

aberdeen5698 · #**1395** Posted **Sep 7, 2016, 7:46 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jebby

Considering the two comments above, people on here truly believe it's upper class millionaires and rich Chinese who populate the entire Arbutus corridor.

It's just not true, though. And with regards to it all being old people it's also just not true. This area has some of the highest proportions of minors in the entire metro:

So... you're trying to tell us that people who can afford to raise children in this rather expensive part of the Lower Mainland are poor?

Jebby · #**1396** Posted **Sep 7, 2016, 8:16 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

So... you're trying to tell us that people who can afford to raise children in this rather expensive part of the Lower Mainland are poor?

No. I don't understand how you could misconstrue "middle class professionals" as saying that poor people live there.

logicbomb · #**1397** Posted **Sep 7, 2016, 9:06 PM**

I think we can all agree that the few vocal minority are those old boomer hippies that want to preserve the neighborhood as it is and will prevent the development of anything that is deemed beneficial to the region.

The fact that the City has caved into the demands of some 9 losers is alarming and it upsets me dearly.

And some of you think that the COV will one day see a streetcar running down this corridor? Ha. I still wish the COV held off on purchasing the corridor and let and CP run enormously long trains down to False Creek.

jsbertram · #**1398** Posted **Sep 7, 2016, 11:29 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tfreder

I dont believe (or hope) that anyone is using it seriously. It's just a reference to the infamous quote during the 2000s era Arbutus Corridor legal battle

A proper attribution to local resident Pamela Sauder:

http://www.6717000.com/blog/2004/04/...rbutus-ruling/

– At a city hall hearing, local resident Pamela Sauder spoke in opposition to rapid transit through Kerrisdale and her quote became a flashpoint in the debate:

“We are the people that live in your neighbourhood. We are dentists, doctors, lawyers, professionals, CEOs of companies. We are the creme de la creme in Vancouver. We live in a very expensive neighbourhood and we’re well educated and well informed. And that’s what we intend to be.”

the craptastic VanSun website can't find news items from 2004.

oy1234 · #**1399** Posted **Sep 7, 2016, 11:54 PM**

It's absurd that one quote from one resident 12 years ago still gets so much attention.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsbertram

A proper attribution to local resident Pamela Sauder:

http://www.6717000.com/blog/2004/04/...rbutus-ruling/

– At a city hall hearing, local resident Pamela Sauder spoke in opposition to rapid transit through Kerrisdale and her quote became a flashpoint in the debate:

“We are the people that live in your neighbourhood. We are dentists, doctors, lawyers, professionals, CEOs of companies. We are the creme de la creme in Vancouver. We live in a very expensive neighbourhood and we’re well educated and well informed. And that’s what we intend to be.”

the craptastic VanSun website can't find news items from 2004.

VancouverOfTheFuture · #**1400** Posted **Sep 8, 2016, 12:16 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by oy1234

It's absurd that one quote from one resident 12 years ago still gets so much attention.

that's what happens when you get a jealous people who can't let go of things. "lets not look at what the area is, lets use the quote from 12 years ago from one person!"

but, that is civilization as a whole. same reason when a guy has a nice car they say they must be "compensating" for something. they are just jealous and want to make themselves feel better because they want what they can't have.