In March 2007, BC Housing announced plans for the redevelopment of the Little Mountain Housing complex. There was no need to dislocate more than 600 residents and demolish 220 affordable homes in the middle of a housing crisis because the 15-acre site will have to be redeveloped in at least three successive phases. But realtors had advised BC Housing that they would get better offers for the land if they could provide a “blank slate.” Neighbourhood supporters and Little Mountain tenants organized Community Advocates for Little Mountain (CALM) to lobby officials on behalf of the community, but to no avail. Many of the tenants were intimidated into accepting unsuitable accommodations. City Council went along with this approach because Housing Minister Rich Coleman made the sale and demolition of Little Mountain a condition for funding construction of desperately needed supportive housing on City-owned sites.
One rowhouse containing four homes was spared, and is currently occupied by tenants who refused to accept relocation. BC Housing agreed to let them remain because forcibly removing them would have generated negative publicity and raised more questions about why the province was needlessly destroying a thriving low-income community and its social capital. This rowhouse could yet be retained for its heritage value (Little Mountain was Vancouver ’s first social housing complex) and renovated to serve as offices or a day care centre, but that would reduce the number of market condos that could be built.
After the City approves a Development Framework, which could happen this spring, the developer can initiate a rezoning process, which planning staff estimate would take about 18 months. So the earliest that construction could begin is the fall of 2013. It is unlikely that any of the dislocated tenants will be able to return until 2016. When redevelopment plans were announced in 2007, they were told that they could be back in their new homes at Little Mountain by 2010.
The price that Holborn Properties (a subsidiary of a Malaysian merchant bank) agreed to pay for the land has been kept secret, but it is widely believed that they offered a lot more than other, more experienced developers on expectations that it could be redeveloped at extremely high densities with towers and multi-million-dollar penthouses overlooking beautiful Queen Elizabeth Park. But when the planning process finally started (in December 2009) it became clear that this would be unsuitable because towers would obstruct the park’s unique views to Mount Baker and far up the Fraser Valley . The site is not suited for extremely high densities because it is not on a rapid transit line or near a major employment area. Large increases in car traffic would be a problem because it is bounded on two sides by bicycle greenways.
The sale will not be completed until the land is rezoned. If Holborn cannot persuade City Council to approve a development policy that permits very high density and if the City won’t agree to forego much-needed Community Amenity Contributions—a condition that Holborn is demanding in return for replacing the social housing—the sale may have to be cancelled. Opposition MLA’s and MPs have opposed this privatization, and would prefer that it be redeveloped by non profits as mixed-income housing with rents geared to income. There is strong support in the community and with housing advocates throughout the city to keep this land in public hands as it could then be redeveloped with more affordable housing and a better income mix than the current proposal, which would juxtapose 234 units of social housing with about 1600 high-end condos.
Note: Planning staff say that immediately following Saturday’s Little Mountain Open House all the Open House boards will go up on the City of Vancouver website and the public can continue to provide input. The Open House boards should be then accessible at: http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/planning/littlemountain/
See also this article by Ned Jacobs giving an update for Michael Geller in March 2011. Much of this is still relevant today. http://gellersworldtravel.blogspot.com/2011/03/ned-jacobs-response-to-my-post-whats.html
CAPTION: A rally organized by CALM in 2008 to protest the dislocation of the LM tenants, who could have remained because the site will have to be redeveloped in at least three separate phases.
Caption: Vancouver artist Tiko Kerr and friends in January 2009 mounting paintings on the windows of a vacant building at Little Mountain—part of a CALM protest.
Caption: January 2010, after the buildings had been demolished. One rowhouse containing four units was spared, and is currently occupied by tenants who refused to accept relocation. BC Housing agreed to let them remain because forcibly removing them would have generated negative publicity and raised more questions about why the province was needlessly destroying a thriving low-income community and using this land as a cash-cow to fund construction of supportive housing in other areas, instead of relying on tax revenue. One of the policy questions is whether the remaining rowhouse should be retained and rehabilitated for its heritage value (Little Mountain was Vancouver ’s first social housing complex). It could be used for homes, offices or a day care centre.
CityHallWatch: Tools to engage in Vancouver city decisions 
I wonder if the trade union movement can be convinced to use some of its pension funds to support a non-profit housing development on the site of the original social housing project. It could be the beginning of a beautiful and historic partnership.
The all-new Holborn proposal is over five times the earlier Little Mountain Housing site density. The community around Little Mountain assumed some of that open space on the earlier development, where kids played for decades out in the open and in the sun, would be lost, but all of it?
This new proposal aims to be at least twice as dense as anywhere in the downtown peninsula, Yaletown, Coal Harbour, or the West End. At 760 people per hectare, it aims in fact to be nearly four times the density of the high-rise Concord-Pacific Development Lands of Yaletown. (Data source here: http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/currentplanning/urbandesign/br2pdf/falsecreek.pdf.)
The Holborn vision of Little Mountain lacks any community perspective or respect, let alone any vision at all, and certainly will leave none for nearby residents or QE Park visitors.
Worse still, it would leave another Olympic-Village-sized legacy of failed public land privatization that provides little or no community benefit and no affordable housing. On that note, watch carefully how the “replacement” social housing is phased in during this decade-long development and consider similar fungible community amenity “deals” the City has struck in places like the East Fraser Lands.
There is absolutely no transparency in this project, even with regard to the underlying land sale itself. Like SE False Creek, the City is once again a partner with no control or accountability, and such situations always leave citizens and taxpayers holding the bag.
Worth reading is a Geller’s 27 Jan blog >DENSITY Part 3: Little Mountain: A challenging Situation<
http://gellersworldtravel.blogspot.com/2012/01/density-part-3-little-mountain.html
An opening line from Geller: "Yesterday I attended the latest Open House for the proposed redevelopment and left shaking my head."
I rented the upstairs suite of an up-and-down duplex at Main and 37th for 3-years back in the Expo ’86 days. Our unit had a tiny balcony over the front doors that looked across 37th to the Little Mountain complex. During the three years I was resident the CNIB constructed new buildings on their property across Main Street. I could survey the construction site from the rear bedroom of the suite—2 stories high. A small house was built on the lot next door that I was able to survey through the window of the small bedroom—2 stories high. My strongest memory of living there came on a snowy night. The 1960’s duplex had single pane windows. In the living room, the noise coming up from Main Street was deafening during rush hour, especially on rainy days. Not so with a few inches of snow on the ground. The sound muffling of the fresh snow is something that I can still hear today as I write this.
In this urban context, 234 units of social housing with about 1600 high-end condos on the site across the street from where I barbecued salmon in tin foil is nothing short of obscene. I remember walking out with my camera and 400 ASA Fuji film in a late autumn afternoon to get grainy images of the rain drenched vegetation of Queen Elizabeth Park, and getting back a stunning portfolio from the photo lab.
Ned is only scratching the surface of what is really wrong about this proposal in an area of our city that has received very little attention. The history of Main Street, Sophia Street, Watson Street, John Street, and the nearby cemetery are not really known. And we can add Queen Elizabeth Park. and Cambie ‘Boulevard’ to that list.
Yet, these are the hot-spot sites of development in our city outside the downtown.
We can do much better. We must strike in a new direction.
Pingback: Last remaining Little Mountain housing unit set for demolition | CityHallWatch: Tools for engagement in Vancouver city decisions, creating our future.