Declaration of Carnegie Community Centre Association about Sequel 138 development

The Carnegie Community Centre Association (CCCA) represents about 5000 members who use the Carnegie Centre.  Our Centre is the living room for thousands of low income people in the DTES who feel safe here and need our services and programmes in a space where they are comfortable.

We fear that our food services could be strained by newer people who are not low income.  If City Council allows Sequel to go ahead with 79 new condos, the mandate of our Centre to serve low income people could be challenged.  New condos in the 100 Block of E. Hastings will promote even more gentrification in our neighbourhood and put pressure on rents of hundreds of people who live in privately owned hotels in this block.

We urge the city to turn down the Sequel 138 development proposal.

Advertisements

4 responses to “Declaration of Carnegie Community Centre Association about Sequel 138 development

  1. You mean your contract to provide food services thanks to generous govt subsidies would be challenged by this development. What crust! Hardly the long view.

    The fact is that SRO hotels in the hood are in appalling condition. Somehow they escape the notice of City bldg inspectors and the B.C. Residential Tenancy Branch. B/c it’s the land not the buildings that make these awful places so valuable, landlords have no incentive to maintain them in a reasonably habitable condition.

    The question is, does it make economic sense to subsidize housing for the city’s most vulnerable demographic – people who admittedly consume far more resources than they contribute – on Vancouver’s most expensive waterfront real estate? This is a population that makes it very challenging for small businesses in the hood, to say the least, yet w/o their business tax contributions, the subsidies on which residents rely would be greatly reduced.

    Are there alternative locations that might be more appropriate for social housing and assorted services – locations more removed from the temptations of ‘party central’? What about the chi-chi University Endowment Lands (UEL)?

    More development discussion, ideas required. And if Vancouver developers haven’t got ’em, submit the problem to tender. Let’s see what other jurisdictions might propose.

  2. Pingback: Downtown Eastside residents sound the DISPLACEMENT alarm | The DTES is not for Condo Developers

  3. Pingback: Downtown Eastside residents sound the DISPLACEMENT alarm | The Mainlander

  4. I would offer to refute your ill-informed statements here, AskBiblitz, but I can’t stop laughing at your Facebook page! are you the only person who comments on your posts? must be some incisive commentary you’ve got there.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s