Nanaimo Wet Housing Public Hearing

---

Low Barrier Housing

Round 3

Tomorrow night the city will once again continue the public hearing process dealing with the zoning application which would allow 36 units of no barrier housing on Bowen Road.

The public hearing will also deal with the Brechin-Newcastle rezoning as well, so it would be hoped that those wishing to address the Bowen Rd. rezoning will respect the fact, that theirs is not the only issue City Council has to deal with.

For the most part the contingent from Quarterway School area have conducted themselves courteously but there have been a few exceptions where unhelpful shouts and catcalls from the audience do nothing to enhance the process or forward their cause. It could also be noted that at least one councilor gives the impression that they are not really interested in listening to the delegations, which is not helpful either.

Another 'hurdle' which faces council and adds to the frustration of delegations on this matter, is the perception that many, if not most, Councilors had already made up their minds on this whole matter and are merely going through the motions by conducting these hearings.

Follows are a few questions I hope are answered during this process as they need answering , it seems that the process, as outlined in the Memorandum of Understanding has not exactly been followed which has contributed to the conflict we now see. For example, had the actual design and purpose and operating conditions of the Bowen Road project been clearly shown to the affected public, the storm we are now seeing , would have come much earlier.

Questions:


1. In the Memorandum of Understanding on page 7 at 26. Public Consultation, it states: “Where required by regular development approval processes, the Society will present the proposed Building for consideration at a public information meeting where the public will be able to speak to any issues or concerns they may have.” Since the ‘Society’ has not been selected, I presume the approval for the design of the actual buildings for the Quarterway sites is not finalized as presented in current rezoning applications? In other words, the public still has to be consulted about the final proposed Building?
2. Schedule A of the MOU at 2.) states in part that the Bowen Road site “could serve more independent tenants in approximately 30 bachelor or one bedroom units.” Who made the decision to deviate from this objective and make this location the site of wet housing allowing active drug use? By that, since the Society does not exist, I presume the decision to deviate from this intended purpose was made by city staff?
3. Where is the study which would indicate that moving 70+ active drug users into a neighbourhood is not a detriment to the area? For example, is it not considered likely that the potential base of 70+ ‘customers’ is going to attract drug dealers to the area? This would seem the logical outcome, as active drug users still require the procurement of drugs, I presume the dealers will not be too far away?
4. If there is no concern about the potential of housing 70+ active drug users in the Quarterway area, why was the opening of a 7/11 with 24 hr. per day operation on Nicol St. considered so undesirable by the SECA ? If a concentration of these poor souls is not considered problematic, why has there been such a concerted effort to remove them from the downtown core? 
5. On the question of the site that is to be placed in the ‘north end’ of the city, is this site planned to accommodate a wet house where active drug use is condoned, or is it to house ‘more independent tenants’ which seem to be displaced from the Bowen Road project?
6. The city website states these are to be small units spread ‘across the city’. Since this is a stated objective, other than the fact the city currently owns the two lots adjacent Quarterway school, what is the other rational for putting such a high concentration in one area? Over 50% of all planned no barrier housing units are currently planned for the Quarterway area, which had previously been as high as 66% of all planned units.
7. The number of people in the area that these projects propose to help is most ‘fluid’, the number is said to be between 150 – 300 (2008 document) and VIHA currently has a caseload of some 45 likely candidates for these projects. Since the Wesley Street project is designed to accommodate 40 people, it would appear it would provide shelter for most of VIHA’s current case load. The number of 150 – 300 (fluctuates seasonaly) are not all likely candidates for ANY type of housing and are not all considered to be living on the street, but do not have a place they call home. At this present time how many ‘beds’ are available in existing facilities to house those in need and how many of them are sitting empty right now?
8. Since it would appear that the Nanaimo 'homeless' will not fill the intended 160 units, and it will actually be the province, through a contractor, who runs these facilities, it begs the question, will these projects become 'provincial' in nature? In other words, if they can not be filled with people currently needing help in Nanaimo, will the occupants be 'imported' from elsewhere? 
9. Since the city is granting a 60 year no taxation benefit to the operators of these sites, in the eventuality the project fails, and the sites are reverted to high barrier housing where higher rents are charged etc., does the city have any mechanism to start charging taxes before the 60 year period expires?
10. What is the fair market value of the two parcels of land the city currently owns, where these two Quarterway no barrier housing projects are planned to operate? I refer to the Townsite and Bowen Road sites.
11. Does the city have any plan or policy in place which would reimburse any stakeholders in the area of these two projects, should it be proven their property values have been negatively affected by the impact of housing potentially 70+ active drug users in this area?