Categories
Development Government UNA

City Steps Back from UBC Annexation Plan

The following is a guest post by John Tompkins, editor and publisher of the Wesbrook Journal, former editor of the Hampton Journal, and resident of UBC. If you would like to submit a guest post, contact us.

Lack of local interest is cited; new thrust is to provide UBC more services

The City of Vancouver has lost interest in the idea of annexing UBC, at least for the time being.

The City has not lost interest in expanding the range of services it provides UBC, however. On the contrary, City Council in October voted in favor of starting a courtship which, if consummated, could eventually see—among other things—Vancouver City Police take over policing duties at UBC from the RCMP. (video)

Categories
Uncategorized

TransitDB: Underground Bus Loop would have been completely overloaded

For those of you new to UBC and UBC Insiders, Dr. Darren Peets has already written the authoritative piece deconstructing the poor planning behind the underground bus loop. Darren would undoubtedly be proud to think that he may have literally analyzed the project to its death.

Before the big news broke yesterday, UBC Insiders had been looking further into the technical design of the underground bus loop. In the interest being topical, and also of not having all this research going to waste, here’s an interesting data study that was conducted on the bus loop’s capacity showing that the whole thing would have been absolute chaos every single day.

Carson Lam, a science student at UBC, developed an absolutely awesome website called TransitDB, which takes all of Translink’s data and presents it in new and much more useful ways of looking at it. But for data nerds, the biggest asset of having a database is that you can mine it for information. Data is a science student’s best friend.

Categories
Uncategorized

A Tunnel to Nowhere?

The AMS this morning released a statement saying that UBC intends to cancel the underground bus loop project.

Earlier today, Blake Frederick outlined the situation: 3 weeks ago UBC starting thinking of a contingency plan if loop wasn’t going forward, due to concerns over Translink’s funding drying up. Translink was supposed to commit $10M to the project. Blake: “If Translink’s funding doesn’t come through, they have no other source of funding and they will have to cancel the underground bus loop.” Translink’s ten year plan does not include this funding. Blake has now reached the conclusion that the project will be getting the axe.

Blake also passed on information from Tim Chu’s meeting with Translink representatives this week. Apparently Translink does not yet have the technology available for the proposed bus loop, and also do not have the staff available to devote to the project, presumably because of the transportation planning going into the Olympics.

Ken Hardie, spokesperson for Translink said only that “Translink is not in a position to fund expansion,” adding that what exactly falls within the definition of expansion is a discussion to be had between Translink and the University.

Nancy Knight, AVP Campus & Community Planning, said that while the Mayors Council funding package announced earlier this week does not appear to contain the necessary funding to go ahead with the project, UBC is still waiting to hear this officially from Translink. She indicated that UBC is still committed to the project, but that it has always been a partnership with Translink, and in a partnership, if one partner is unable to meet its obligations the project falls apart. In the event that Translink pulls out of the project, the tunnel will not be built but that in all likelihood the road would (half of which is already built).

When asked about all of the utilities that were moved last year, she said those would have needed to be moved anyways in order to properly service the new buildings going in there (currently only the New SUB and the Alumni Centre, and possibly some student residences.) Even if the project is cancelled, the university still does not look fondly on the current location for two reasons: a promise made to the UEL that the bus loop would only be temporary, and the designation of the land it currently sits on as the “Gage South” neighbourhood, slated for market housing. As to what that means, while Campus and Community Planning will be looking to develop the future transportation plan with all of campus (we can all hope that actually happens; it certainly didn’t with the underground bus loop), a rather large, easily accessible and relatively central location would have to be found if a new bus loop were to be built. In the land use plans laid out in the current version of the campus plan, that certainly isn’t there (and this is why we should all listen to Darren Peets when he says planning is a total crapshoot).

Although no one has yet confirmed the exact fate of the underground bus loop, it’s a safe bet that the project’s dead.

Update: October 27, 4:56pm
Nancy Knight has issued an open letter regarding the status and future of the Underground Bus Loop, which can be found here. Details are still vague, and confirmation regarding this cancellation is still pending discussion with TransLink.

Update 2: October 28
Nancy Knight has released an amended version of her open letter in which it has been confirmed that Translink will not be able to contribute its share towards the underground bus loop.

Categories
AMS

AMS Council: October 21, 2009

Highlights from tonight:

  • AMS serves intent to leave CASA as of April 1, 2010
  • Committee Reform Proposal
Categories
CASA

Breaking: UBC Insiders Issues First Notice to CASA, AMS to Violate Contract?

Upon receiving our tweet regarding the motion to leave CASA this evening, CASA has sent a letter, with supporting documentation, to various UBC media regarding the constitutionality of such a motion.

CASA claims the AMS has two unmet obligations: that 30 days notice be given to CASA prior to leaving, and that one full membership-year be passed prior to leaving. Insiders was the first notice given to CASA regarding this motion, and one full membership-year has yet to expire.

CASA concludes the earlier the AMS could leave CASA is upon the end of the membership-year: April 1st, 2010, and as a result, under a new executive committee.

The letter convincingly demonstrates that the AMS was aware of this obligation, having exercised full member privileges up to and including March 2009.

Further, the letter claims that the AMS has been negligent to respond to questions from CASA, who still seeks clarification around their concerns, and the steps that the organization could take to address them.

This editor remains convinced that new blood need to be entered into the decision, as it has become clear the main players are too invested in personal politics, and are having that cloud any reasonable assessment.

This is a difficult issue to access from the outside, as the information both media and council have received has been largely hearsay. CASA does not yet proactively disclose minutes of meetings. Upon requests for minutes, CASA has promised draft copies to Insiders, but to no avail yet.

Further, this editor is not convinced that AMS VP External Tim Chu has provided due diligence in this affair. It appears from my limited perspective that he has been avoiding CASA staff, preferring to not speak to them or respond to their questions, and instead holding ‘public’ meetings with students, personally invited by himself, complete with dubious claims about CASA spending. This is demonstrated by both CASA’s claims about the lack of contact between him and CASA staff, as well as his attitude at the public meeting where CASA was present. Chu remained silent throughout. Given the other gaffs of his term, council should be most skeptical of what comes from his office tonight.

In other news, the University Act provisions in Bill 13 just passed committee amendment phase in the legislature without revision, with exclusive focus on the parking lawsuit.

Categories
Campus Life Issues UNA

Come on feel the noise

The UNA just started a public consultation about their proposed noise bylaw which runs until November 9.

This process has been ongoing since well before the appearance of Bill 13, which would give UBC the ability to regulate noise all over campus. The University Neighbours’ Agreement, the document which defines the governance of the UNA, outlines how rules regarding noise, nuisance, parking, and traffic can be put in place. Although the UNA does all the legwork to develop the rule(s), UBC’s Board of Governors would be the ones to ultimately put them in place. The Neighbours’ Agreement is clear that any new rules would apply only to the areas falling under UNA jurisdiction, not all of campus.

The fact that Bill 13 exists is a tacit acknowledgment that the BOG never really had the legal authority necessary to enact any noise rule the UNA came up with (not that it would have stopped them, of course.) Since it’s likely Bill 13 will pass, this is probably a moot point but still worth noting.

Reading through the proposed bylaw the image that comes to mind, to borrow a phrase, is that of a wildly overlapping Venn diagram. It contains some very broad, very vague rules with seemingly contradictory clauses, odd exceptions and an uneven mode of enforcement. Naturally, this is a subject on which UBC Insiders cannot keep quiet.

Categories
Senate

Costeloe, First-Ever Student Vice-Chair of Vancouver Senate

Just confirmed with the Senate Secretariat that Mr. Geoff Costeloe, of Terry fame, was elected to the position of Vice-Chair of the Vancouver Senate this Wednesday.

This is the first time a student has been elected to the position since its creation in 1916. No one formally asked for the tally, but I’m told it was “close”.

The role of the Vice-Chair is to be speaker of the Vancouver Senate in the absence of the Chair, Prof. Stephen Toope.

The last election of the Vice-Chair, student senator Mr. Blake Frederick lost to incumbent Vice-Chair Dr. Rhodri Windsor-Liscombe in a close tally of 36:23.

This would mean in the occasional absence of the President, a student reigns over the most powerful academic body at UBC Vancouver. The vote indicates a strong show of support and trust in the student body by the faculty, alumni and administration, and a progressive vision for the current Senate.

Categories
Development

Planning the Unplannable

The following is a guest post written by Dr. Darren Peets, former student Board of Governors representative and campus planning aficionado. We invited Darren to offer a critical retrospective on campus planning procedures, and to offer a solution. Dr. Peets is currently working as a post-doc in Japan.

I was invited to write a short piece for UBC Insiders on the amenability of university campuses (campi, perhaps?) to physical planning exercises such as the current UBC Vancouver Campus Plan. While I’ve been on plenty of planning-related committees and have argued with plenty of planners, I don’t have a degree in planning, so there may be things I’ve overlooked, misunderstood, or oversimplified. I am, however, probably qualified by now to offer a curmudgeonly admonishment about how you people are getting it all wrong, how you should really do it, and how, back in my day, we had to carry the horse through five metres of snow to school and back, uphill both ways. I should also mention that I’m not known for being brief, but I’m occasionally sarcastic.

The first and most important thing to understand about university physical planning is where new buildings and public open space come from on a university campus (existing buildings require much less planning).

Categories
Uncategorized

Province Expands Board Powers, Creates Oligarchy?

The Province tabled a bill yesterday to expand the powers of the Board of Governors, in response to asks from the University Neighbourhoods Association and the Board. It represents a stark change in the authority of the Board, giving it municipal powers such as the ability to regulate, prohibit and fine those in contravention.

Categories
Campus Life Development

No More Hospice Behind Marine Drive

Just got a mail from the planning department: St. John Hospice will not be built behind Marine Drive! There is much to rejoice here, as it points to something in the planning cycle working. Here’s the letter that made my morning.

Spam prevention powered by Akismet