Grandview Park ... all guns and drugs? Or good 'ol family fun?
I vividly remember listening to a lively CBC radio debate – lively enough that the tension seemed to permeate along with the radio waves through the room – in Fall 2008 about the potential redesign of Grandview Park in East Vancouver. Stephanie Maingot, Commercial Drive resident, was advocating for the allotment of $1 million from the city in order to ‘redesign’ the park, which she described as being fraught with drug dealing, crime, violence and illegal protests. The tension within the interview arose when Ms. Maingot was unable to pinpoint exactly how these funds would be used to address these issues, and was likely fuelled by the fact that the radio host, at the height of the interview, slipped in the fact that he is a proud East Van resident. Ms. Maingot’s plight is supported by both a group of neighbors calling themselves the ‘Friends of Grandview Park’ and the Commercial Drive Business Improvement Association. For more on Ms. Maingot’s views, check out this Vancouver Courier story in which she was interviewed on the topic.
Earlier this year, the Vancouver Parks Board announced that this redesign project was approved, with construction set to begin in Summer 2010. The ‘Friends of Grandview Park’ were very involved in this approval process, presenting to the Parks Board on the necessity of this redesign. More details and conceptual design options can be found on the Parks Board site. Of course, there are those in opposition to the redesign, stating gentrification of the area as their main concern. The argument can be found on their Defend Grandview website.
Now. I live quite close to Grandview Park, and frequent it regularly. I’ve seen some shady transactions take place, very open displays of drunkenness, and homeless people sleeping in bushes. I’ve also seen amazing drum circles, children playing, and lovers picnicking. DG correspondent Kurt Heinrich was lucky enough to see a bike polo match the other weekend (which may or may not be played by resident ‘hipsters’). One can’t help but feel a sense of community when visiting Grandview Park, and if not accept, then tolerate the more systemic issues that confront residents that frequent the park. I don’t have anything against the redesign, per se – I can’t really argue against park improvements such as a better drainage system, new playground equipment, and more benches and flowerbeds – but it seems to me that a $1 million dollar redesign of the area will do little to address the more systemic issues that face the individuals who visit Grandview Park and the surrounding area. How will this redesign address homelessness? Mental health and addiction concerns? Poverty? Is the intention of the ‘Friends of Grandview Park’ group to see these individuals move along to another park, or are there other initiatives happening parallel to this that provide support for our community members? If so, I haven’t seen any indication that this is occurring.. As a wise man once said, “Every society is judged by how it treats the least fortunate amongst them”.
Did you enjoy this post?
May we also suggest:
People’s Park Still Under Attack This morning during a walk along Commercial Drive I wandered past Grandview Park. Last year the park had been hotbed … Continue reading →...
Your Digital Fill – When Community Consultation Breaks Down Kinda sad. Kinda crazy. Kinda something. See what happened at a recent Park Board meeting at Strathcona Community Centre when … Continue reading →...
The material from the FOGP is so much bullshit. Ms. Maingot complains about “anarchists” and a soup kitchen. Sorry there’s some drug-dealing and drum circles near your million-dollar home.
Hi Michelle,
Thanks for the thoughful post. I firmly believe Vancouver parks are for
everyone in the community to enjoy.
Parks are for bike polo, children, seniors, people experiencing poverty and
other challenges. The same rules and regulations need to apply to everyone.
In my experience, the best communities are created by working together.
The renewal of our parks (like Grandview) is designed to create truly
amazing spaces where people can get fit and healthy and have some fun, not
to gentrify or exclude people.
Sincerely,
Sarah Blyth
Vancouver Park Board Commissioner
Thanks so much for your response, Sarah.
I couldn’t agree with you more about what the goals of a park should be, and how they should be designed to be inclusive of all community members. The parks renewal initiative is very necessary and a great undertaking, and I’m very happy to see the Parks Board dedicating funds to this. I’m wondering if there are any plans for additional supportive programming for residents in the Commercial Drive area who may be experiencing mental health/addiction concerns. For example, community gardens have been shown to be very effective in building community, engaging members who may feel marginalized, and offering therapeutic benefits. It seems that part of the impetus for this renewal was these greater issues of poverty and addiction identified by the Friends of Grandview Park, and it may be worthwhile to consider how – if not now but in the future – these could be addressed.
The controversy around this redevelopment continues to perplex me.
At risk of putting words in your mouth, Michelle, your description of Maingot’s position seems to imply that, because part of the motivation behind redeveloping the park apparently comes from potentially selfish, gentrifying interests, the legitimacy of the redesign is undermined. Brenton’s comment above has a similar flavour, and the “Defend Grandview” crew embrace this position and run with it.
However, there is an obvious logical problem with this position, which is that just because some of the complaints may “lack legitimacy”, there may well be a load of other legitimate motivations not mentioned by the Defend Grandview site, or the courier article (e.g., drainage, as you mentioned). Maybe lots of low-income single moms have made complaints about the park as well. Furthermore, even if the selfish yuppies were the only movers and shakers behind the initiative, it doesn’t necessarily follow that the redesign will fulfill their dreams and get rid of the riff raff.
The key question is whether the proposed redevelopment will actually do anything to exclude anyone, and I have yet to hear any arguments that it will. The Defend Grandview website is all about the alleged complaints that are allegedly the motivation for the redesign, and doesn’t actually provide any criticism of the proposal. For instance, one of the complaints from rich people cited on this website is:
“5. “The unsanctioned use of tennis courts by the bi¬cycle polo club” means that the “… tennis courts (are) no longer available for parents to teach their kids how to ride bikes.””
However, if you actually read the minutes from one of the Parks Board meetings where they discuss the redevelopment, it sounds like they’re going to tear down the tennis courts to make a dedicated bike polo court, and do a bit of landscaping with the rest of the park (OK, slight exaggeration here, but there is a major focus on accommodating bike polo). Clearly, the city is not simply bowing to the will of a few rich people and trying to yuppify the place.
Back to your post, Michelle, I realise that you are not suggesting that the redesign will exclude people, but you do suggest that it should do more to address systemic problems, i.e., “a $1 million dollar redesign of the area will do little to address the more systemic issues that face the individuals who visit Grandview Park”. A community garden is a great idea, but without some sort of social services support, it is not going to help marginalized people. The Parks Board does not have the tools or the budget to solve problems of mental health/addiction/homelessness – those aren’t even municipal responsibilities. The redesign, Parks Board and Friends of Grandview Park shouldn’t be faulted for problems that they could not possibly begin to solve.
Julian,
Thanks for your comment. I agree with you that the controversy surrounding the redevelopment is perplexing, with each group having different issues and agendas: those against the redevelopment cite gentrification and marginalization, those for the redevelopment cite a safer park for families without drugs and violence, and those actually doing the redevelopment acknowledge that it can only accomplish so much, and the redesign will do little to address systemic problems as this is beyond their budget and ability. So why the disconnect between the parties involved? What can be done to resolve this disconnect? I suppose one way to look at it is community at it’s best – parties so passionate about their neighborhood they are actually getting involved instead of the usual apathy that is normally seen. What bothers me about this whole thing is that that the problems brought forth by the Friends group (violence, drug use, homelessness, noise, protests) won’t be solved by the ‘solution’ of the redesign that they advocated for, leaving the greater systemic issues unsolved. This in no way undermines the actual redevelopment, and while these changes aren’t the responsiblity of the Parks Board these systemic issues have – for better or worse – become intertwined with the redevelopment project and as such should be acknowledged and discussed.
Great article Michelle — and good to see the discussion it has provoked!!
Maybe the redesign proposal should include some kind of design element to allow these dialogues to take place?
A speakers soapbox? A large round table? A chalkboard? A community cafe? A community garden? A large covered playground (kids in the day, homeless shelter at night)? A huge wading pool/bathing area/duck pond/bike polo ground/running track/dog park complex?
I think the reality is that problems of drug use, homelessness, noise, etc will never be ‘solved’ — not through park redesigns, not through systematic change. Of course we must fund social welfare problems, try to engage with all of our neighbours, and offer folks good options to help ‘get them back on their feet’, as well as great green spaces, but we’re fooling ourselves if we think these problems will go away.
Pingback: Grandview Park redesign controversy « VPSN Public Space Blog
It’s Saturday night. The party is raging. Not being able to sleep, I went out and tried to speak to the Black Bloc kids hanging out on the barricades while the Main Street hipsters partied in the park. The paranoia of the one dude who would bother to speak to me was on the scale of the American Tea Party movement, and this dude’s views on what makes a healthy community demonstrated a complete disconnect from reality as it’s practiced by anyone with a shred of sense.
Public space apparently, should be open for any sort of activity day or night. If you want to have a screaming festival at 3am, that’s cool man, go for it. And the new park design… it’s nothing more than a plot to become a surveillance state apparently.
It’s unfortunate that Maingot has become the strawman for this cause, becoming a nexus for the anger of people who think the core reason for the reno is to push out the “nar-do-wells”, when in fact most residents who use the park don’t care if people enjoy a splif or a beer in the park, so long as they don’t lose their shit and bother those around them. Ask most people who actually use the park and they’re happy to hear it’s being renovated. Better playground, more seating.
My wife suggested that this anger doesn’t have anything to do with new grass, or the homeless persay, but more to do with a post-Olympics feeling of powerlessness. She’s probably right.
(12:51AM: now they’re yelling. I hope they all have hangovers tomorrow morning and can’t find the ibuprofen.)
I live in the co-op building across from the park on Cotton Street. We have many children in our complex and the younger ones play in the courtyard all year round. Due to major building envelope renovations starting next week and continuing for a year, including the courtyard our children will have nowhere to play. Is there any provision being made for spaces to play or recreational activities for this coming summer for the Grandview kids and their parents?
I also need to address the issue of drugs, sleeping overnight in the park etc.. I am one of the people, a senior, who enjoys just sitting in the sun reading my book, and I don’t mind a circle quietly passing a joint around or the hisipanic group that sets up by the tennis courts every summer afternoon with their guitars and sings with enthusiasm if not skill. I have lived in one of the suites just a couple hundred feet from the Cotton St park edge for 7 out of the past ten years. What have I heard? One late night fight. All day the soft sounds of the dummers and the marimba player. Other than that, the sounds of bands and children playing.
The mention of budget constraints made me think, “One million dollars for beautification?” What happened to the Van. police having an office in the park house? What happened to the orange vested volunteers who strolled around the park till 10 pm to ‘keep an eye’ on things and report to authorities?
I see junior high school kids coming to the back alley not more than 300 feet from the park, smoking up and hiding their bong on the back porch of the building on Cotton. When I called the city police about them tresspassing and told them to send a cruiser during the school break of about 11:30 to 12:30 just to pass by, I was told it could not happen because there were not enough police to spare to do that, that I must call just when it happens. It’s not up to me. What are the priorities now that the budgets are blown?
Let New York City be an example, if you start with the little things “the broken window” theory, the big things will not happen.
Hey John P and Theresa,
Just wanted to send some kudos for the great thoughts and comments.
For me and my partner, the big issue is smoking and cigarette butts being tossed around the park. That’s what really grinds our gears, particularly in the summer when I want to walk around in bare feet but can’t without stepping on all sorts of ash. Fortunately, the Vancouver Park Board seems to be taking some (at least symbolic) action on this front.
John P, I totally agree with your take on the anarchists. My partner and I watched the street party last night and found it kind of raucous, but also amusing. The hipsters were having a blast, which within reason (and provided its not keeping too many people up to late, seems reasonable once every blue moon).
However, the guys that I really found frustrating were the idiot anarchists who were “fighting the man” by trashing newspaper dispensers, spray painting the pavement with a giant A, and paint bombing provincial government offices. Are you kidding me?
It’s unfortunate that whenever these clowns show up tensions tend to shoot up as well. I salute you for trying to engage them, but am not particularly surprised at the feedback you got. I think your wife’s got it right. But I also don’t think many of them have really thought through the philosophy they are espousing too much.
Kurt
I’ve just started a Facebook group actually. My hope is to find middle ground between the Friend’s of Grandview, and the Defend Grandview types.
In short, we support the reno, but we want to ensure that it continues to reflect the diversity of our community. I think the Defend Grandview people bring a lot of great energy, but the party was essentially a hostile, disrespectful act. It basically said, “we’re gonna party, and if you try to stop us, we’ll riot”. That to me is a huge “F-U”, and they have to recognize that this is NOT the way to build community.
Parties are wicked. We should have more. That said, going till 2am is probably not really ever acceptable. It simply isn’t fair to the people who live nearby. Start earlier, push it as far as reasonable… say even midnight, and wrap it up. That’s always worked great for every single other party we’ve seen held in the park.
Anyhoo, check out the group! Understand if you delete this for being spamy.
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=117685251602819&ref=ts#!/group.php?gid=117685251602819&ref=mf
Thanks for the link, John, and for your comments Kurt and Theresa.
I definitely agree that there needs to be some middle ground here, and this Facebook group seems like a good way to start bridging these two communities. I also walked by the party on Saturday night … and saw the aftermath the next morning. I felt ashamed and angry – a group purporting to ‘Defend Grandview’ ironically ends up vandalizing the area and disrespecting those that live in the surrounding neighborhood with their noise and attitude. What, exactly, were they trying to achieve? I agree with your wife – that was NOT about the redesign.
In general, I think that the aim of the ‘redesign’ is only really clear to the Parks Board – they have their mandate, funds, and conceptual plans. The park, at the end of the day, will be nicer for all individuals who use it – and that’s a good thing. I think that the two groups on opposing sides of this redesign, however, have different aims and goals – some commendable, some ridiculous, some unrealistic, and some delusional. At this point – they’re fighting each other, and the actual redesign comes secondary. What this really speaks to, I think, is culture clash within this community.
What are your thoughts on what can be done to address this greater issue?
Honestly, I don’t know. For a start, people need to start talking to each other. I’m not sure how that’s going to happen though. I tried talking to the Black Bloc kids on Saturday night, and they just gawked at me. I finally got one dude who wasn’t masked to chat, but he mostly just yelled at me, telling me “just didn’t get it.”
From what I can recall, his core issues were that public space should be open 24/7 for whatever purpose people want, no matter what, so there was nothing disrespectful about the party. Also, that laws governing such stuff are unethical and should be disobeyed. Also, that the park was being opened up, and making is easy to see crimes, thus turning us into a surveillance culture, and intimidating the poor.
I argued that not having hiding spots for weirdos made it safer for everyone, kids, women, seniors, but that insulted him, and he walked off.
Sorry… got off topic there.
I get that people are angry. A lot of this stems from the Olympics, and the broken promises re social housing. People have no reason to trust government. The problem with this thinking though, is the government isn’t always out to screw us. Sometimes it works.
I’ve tried pointing out that the consultation process actually was pretty good (something like 5 public meetings), that they actually adapted their plans to accomodate groups (bike polo), that their estimate of 1 year closure is off by 4 months (8 months), and that no other park reno has resulted in the poor being left out (Victoria, and Oppenheimer), but to no avail.
So I don’t know. I personally don’t think that many of the 500 who came out that night genuinely care. I think they were there for the party. I think there is a small, but vocal minority, and that they have the support of some very radical elements. This concerns me for what it could mean to the community.
I’ve spoken to some people at CBC and they’ve started to do some coverage. On The Coast looked at the issue today, but I missed it. Also, I wrote the landscape designer and suggested that he consider holding another town hall if he wants to at least try and show some extra good will, though that could be a painful process, and not yield much.
Anyhoo… sorry for the brain dump.
What are your thoughts?