What could make this scene better ... than a gigantic casino
I consider myself a reasonably knowledgeable person when it comes to current events – I have a mild addiction to CBC news and have a good ‘ol fashioned love affair with reading good ‘ol fashioned newspapers. Which is why the announcement of a new casino being planned for the False Creek area of Vancouver caught me wayyyy off guard. My mind started running through all the reasons this was clearly a mistake: didn’t Gordon Campbell campaign (way back in the day) on a promise to curb gambling? Isn’t False Creek a burgeoning residential area in great need of schools, community centres, and, well … anything but a 100,000-square-foot monstrosity of a casino? Is this really in line with the aesthetically-conscious urban design plan for Vancouver? Convinced that this was merely an idea – just like the idea a few years back to move the Vancouver Art Gallery into that space – I made a mental note to find out when and where community consultations would be taking place, knowing that there would be a large, engaged group of citizens who would turn out to express their suggestions and concerns.
My confusion grew and frustration blossomed as I scoured news sites later that day to find out how I could become involved in the process. As I read more about the proposed casino, I started taking note of my questions and concerns – if it’s merely replacing the Edgewater casino, why is it 70,000 square feet bigger? With (very valid) concerns about gambling addiction, will this ‘state-of-the-art’ casino implement measures to address this, such as new regulatory technology in Ontario that does not allow self-identified problem gamblers into casinos? With a historical precedent of returning a percentage of gaming revenues back to arts/culture organizations and charities within the community, what benefits will be returned to the city? How much say do our city planners have in the design of the building? With an expressed interest in accelerating construction, will design changes be taken into consideration? If we don’t want it – will it still be constructed?
Sadly, the opportunity to have my questions answered seemed to get more dim as I kept reading: City counsellors have more or less stated that their hands are tied – with the site on provincial land, it is exempt from city zoning. It was also stated quite explicitly that the city is in no position to demand any benefits at all from the development.
Vancouverites should be entitled to have their questions answered, complaints heard, demands made, and wants taken under serious consideration. Our city is young, growing, and still in the process of defining itself – if we adamantly feel that this new casino is not a good ‘fit’ for our city, or have valid concerns about the size, location, design, or revenue distribution, we have the right to have our voices authentically heard. I do hope that community consultations do come to fruition, and they are more than just a tokenistic attempt to appease the masses – and hey, if they do, I hope to see you there.
Did you enjoy this post?
May we also suggest:
Vancouver is not Vegas North This afternoon, I’m going to Vegas for three nights and four days with a group of my best girlfriends. This … Continue reading →...
Let’s Preserve Vancouver’s Views This is my 3rd year in Vancouver and I continue to be bowled over whenever I witness the amazing landscapes … Continue reading →...
Hi Michelle,
This is a good article. I share your wariness about the lack of consultation. However while some of the design issues might be hurdles we’ll have to deal, I think a bigger and more divisive challenge that consultation hasn’t addressed is the question of the the ills of gambling vs. the benefits of a lot of new jobs. I fall on the job side of it all. The reality is people are going to gamble whether the casino is there or not. With the growth of online gambling and and the fact that Richmond is sucking people to River Rock and making a mint doing so, I think it may be time for Vancouver to keep some of the jobs and tax money local.
Kurt
I don’t know if the Casino is really going to bring in the kind of jobs that are going to grow and sustain a vibrant, intellectually-charged, meaningful community, though. The real answer might lie in lessons from a more sinful community: http://dailygumboot.ca/2009/06/a-sinful-community/.
Las Vegas North, with all its total and/or semi-menial jobs (unless you get to handle the communications for the casino, I guess), isn’t the answer. A lot of young, hip, talented, media-creating, idea-consulting professionals live in that neighbourhood. They’ve bought into high-denisty new urbanism and, well, they like making babies (or have some already). It would be really cool if those babies (who, I hear, turn into children) had schools to attend and/or art galleries to visit. Also, the last time I checked, people with jobs build schools and art galleries as well as work in them when they’re finished. A novel concept for space-use, I know.
Consulting the community aside, do you really think this is the best use of space? Your sense of community intrigues me. This is a Joe Pesci movie, man.
- JCH
First there should NEVER be casinos. Second if there are proposals there should aleays be community consultations because casions are windowless boxes that kil communities. My grandmother lost our hole family’s inheritence by gambling it away. One million jobs aren’t worth that and john is right that there are other ways to employ people. But schools by a stadiumn is a stupid idea john, so think about movie theatres, amusement parks or a big shopping mall. Those are better ideas then schools and casinos and will still make money.
Good post!
- Pete