STORY posted on August 29, 2010 by Roslyn Cassells

The gentrification of Grandview Park

an exercise in privilege and exclusion

by Roslyn Cassells and Grant Fraser

Share

Also posted by Roslyn Cassells:

Also in :

GroundWire August 5 | MMIWG2S Campaigns, Bill 21 Passes in Quebec, & Winnipeg’s Portage Place Sold

Over 60 actions organized internationally in response to police raid of Wet'suwet'en

GroundWire | April 9

GroundWire | March 26

GroundWire | Housing in the Budget, Fontaine Boushie Protest Camp, International Women's Day

GroundWire | February 26

GroundWire | January 15

GroundWire Year in Review: BLM, Colonialism 150, Anti-Racism protest, First Nations displaced by fire, Radio Centreville

GroundWire | December 18

Dec 4 | GroundWire

The year-long closure of Vancouver's most visited park has illustrated the push for gentrification in one of Vancouver's poorest neighbourhoods, and the determination of the civic government to serve their political masters in the face of strong grassroots opposition to the plan.

The gentrification of Grandview Park has been an exercise in parts, which have combined to exclude all but the rich and powerful from the decision-making process.  Located in the heart of the lower mainland's activist and artistic community, Grandview Park is a hub of community connections which serves a plethora of purposes as varied as those people in her midst.

In the grand or not so grand scheme of things, depending on which side of the Main Street divide you find yourself on, the differences are institutionalized and ingrained.  The quantity and quality of public greenspaces and other community ammenities could not be more pronounced than in the Grandview-Woodlands neighbourhood.  Per capita, the west side of Vancouver contains several hundred percent more greenspace than East Van.  Tiny Grandview Park, plump in the middle of a struggling working class neighbourhood has the highest usage of any park in the city.

Grandview Park serves a number of practical purposes essential to the health and wellbeing of local residents, especially our most marginalized sisters and brothers.  The park is a place where people can sleep, use the washroom, clean up, and get clean water to drink.  It is a place which is safer to hang out at and sleep in than many back alleys, shelters, and so-called social housing. This is essential if you are homeless or living in dirty, dangerous, substandard  rooming houses, especially in the hot summer months when access to shade and water is required for survival.  The park is home to a number of feeding programs which many people depend on, including children and elders.  There are harm-reduction programs run at the park, such as needle exchange and free condoms.  It is the place where people go to get a breath of fresh air when they are living in overcrowded homes, cramped accomodations, or apartments without balconies and homes without gardens.  It is our backyard, our coffee klatch, our smoking room, our kidz place, our dogs' place, our park.  It is also an organizing place for progressive political movements, something the powers that be would love to shut down.

The closure of Grandview Park and the loss of public access began many years ago.  The forces of gentrification have long demanded the exclusion of the current dominant demographic using Grandview, low-income people, homeless people, kids, dogs, birds, and the occasional squirrel or raccoon.  

Instead, say the nimby yuppy newcomers and soon to be dominant demographic, the park's fate should be controlled by those who, because they are wealthier, because they are homeowners, landowners, slum lords, and business people, have a greater right to decision-making about this public greenspace.  The eviction of the "undesireable element" according to these affluent new residents, is necessary for the safety of all in this public park.  The complete closure and destruction of Vancouver's most visited greenspace is demanded by these upstanding citizens, despite the contrary opinion of the great majority of "undesireable" park users.

The perogative of the landowners is to increase their property values by ridding themselves of the real East Van-ers, and creating a greenspace designed to exclude the current park users and discourage their current activities.  A coalition of local people have made their opinion on this matter known to park board in no uncertain terms during the last few meetings.  The response from the board has been to arrest and eject some of the speakers, and refuse entry to others.  The meeting at Stratcona Community Center, where many from the Defend Grandview Park movement spoke, had such a heavy police presence the meeting had the air of an armed camp, bristling with hostility against the people of the neighbourhood.  There were more police in attendance than politicians, and it spoke to the criminalization of dissent in our society, and the attempts by park board to marginalize entire segments of our society...making them at the very least unwelcome at the meetings, and at the worst fearing for their safety and liberty.

The park board continues to impose on the community authoritarian structures and institutions where cooperative community initiatives existed before.  And as designer Mullein Bass commented at the July 19 2010 park board meeting, the process of public consultation and final design excluded many in the community and are thus unrepresentative of the community.  In his letter to park board Bass wrote "the current system, while once considered progressive, is beginning to look hide-bound and obstructive".  He suggests the following solution: "In support of the choice for diversity and difference, I suggest that opening the planning process to public involvement at a deeper level is the first, most obvious and most compelling possibility to consider" for the result "that regular people are in a position to exert a determining influence on the design of public projects."

Hazel Hoyte, a local resident, felt that the public consultation took place after all the decisions were made, deals were struck, and resources located.  She commented that park board met first with a select group of local residents before announcing plans for a public consultation to renovate the park.  She feels that the majority of residents are actually opposed to the renovation citing the thousands of people gathered in the park in a show of grassroots opposition following the announcement of the planned renovation.

According to Pietr Rudgers, senior bureaucrat at Vancouver Park Board, the contractor CAP which was awarded the Grandview Park renovation is a "reputable company".  He mentioned that Victoria, Tecumseh, and Falaise Parks were all renovated by CAP.  Norquay Park was recently award to C.A.P.  For some reason each contract lists the company with different names/spellings.  Looking at the connections betweeen a number of seemingly associated companies leaves many questions unanswered.  As they say, "follow the money..."

CAP, C.A.P., C A P, and Spade Holdings, Spade Holdings Ltd., Active Earth Engineering, Vanderzalm Construction, and other Vanderzalm names appear to be connected in some way with the Principal for the Grandview Park renovation contractor Peter Vanderzalm.

A survey of the company name CAP Ventures Ltd.  with Principal Peter Vanderzalm 604-580-6161 in the Better Business Bureau lists the company as a General Contractor at 12473 King George Hwy in Surrey.  An inquiry reveals a B+ rating and the comment that the BBB "does not have sufficient background information on this business" and "This business is not a BBB Accredited Business"  A search of accredited contractors with the BBB netted 25 in Surrey alone.

There is a provincial government connection with Active Earth Engineering (Spade Holdings) of 9190 Church St., Fort Langley, which was awarded a brownfield renewal strategy program contract for $110,594 for a lower mainland project.

The imposition of a policing center around ten years ago drew a line in the sand between state forces and people power in Grandview Park.  Then, as now, a "public consultation" was held.  Then, the public input around proposed usage of the repurposed caretakers house was received by the board, then ignored.  Now, the public input and opposition to the planned closure and "renovation" of the park has been ignored.  A decade ago the park board had a pre-determined plan to impose the policing office in the park, just as now they plan to impose a one-year park closure and "renovation" on Grandview Park.   

To date, no accomodations have been made by the board for any of the services and programs effected by the closure.  Their withdrawal will have a serious deliterious effect on  specific individuals, and a negative effect on the community as a whole.  Effected are food security programs, harm reduction programs, housing for homeless people, the local informal market, public toilets, public access to water, public access to seating and tree cover in sunny and rainy weather, and last but not least, the free accessible community meeting and organizing space.

If previous local reaction to the policing center and the word on the street is correct, the park reno will go the way of the policing center, somewhere up the road.  Vancouver Park Board, like the Vancouver Police Department, has lost the trust of the people, and in doing so, any jurisdiction over the park and the people of the park.  The board, like the cops, may increase patrols in the park, but they will never have control of the park, or the people of the park.

Park Board Out of Grandview Park, the People's Park!!