Open Letter to the City of Vancouver
The introductory sentence says it all – “As requested, Bunt & Associates (Bunt) has prepared this letter report to support the construction of a new playfield, spectator seating and parking lot at Notre Dame Regional Secondary School in the City of Vancouver.”
It is clear that the sole purpose of this incredibly weak and biased “study” is, as defined above, to support the school’s proposed plans.
The recording of traffic on a normal school day is completely irrelevant to the potential impact of the proposed McCarthy Stadium. The study also claims to have monitored an “event” when 200 people came to an AGM. No significant parking or traffic concerns were noted. A more representative event might have been the open house for prospective parents on Jan 17 when the Notre Dame parking lot was completely full and overflow cars were parked in fire hydrant zones, private driveways and sticking into intersections. City traffic enforcement staff had to ticket and tow several vehicles that night.
Future stadium events have the potential to be far more disruptive.
The study takes Notre Dame’s word that this multi-million dollar facility, with 740 stadium seats and capacity for over 1000 more (as per Notre Dame’s own press release) will be used only a few times a week for practice and a small number of games, with anticipated audiences of 40-80.
Traffic assessment needs to be done on the actual capacity of the venue being studied, not on the extremely low estimate given by the school on the projected attendance/traffic generated.
The school has always sought ways to bring in revenue by renting out its facilities to third parties —from bingo nights in the 90’s, to renting the parking lot out to school buses and PNE parking, to the current rental of the gymnasium for non-school events.
It is only a matter of common sense to predict that, having spent millions on this new stadium, Notre Dame will attempt to use it as a revenue source.
If the school insists that the stadium will not be rented out, they should sign a binding covenant to that effect. Perhaps the City could facilitate such a document.
The new traffic study makes this inaccurate statement (2.1.1, second bullet):
“the immediate neighbourhood has not materially changed from what was present in 2007; “
Since 2007, like most Vancouver neighbourhoods, we have seen a big increase in densification as people seek to make city living affordable. Laneway houses and multi-suite houses are now replacing singly family dwellings.
Two examples of local changes since 2007:
On the SW corner of the Notre Dame campus there used to be a double lot with a bungalow and one occupant. The same lot now holds two multi-suite houses and two laneway homes, multiplying the density by x6 at a bare minimum.
Similarly, on the NE side of the campus another single family house on a double lot has been replaced by two sets of multi-suite and laneway homes.
These are only two examples of recent developments in the area. It is a neighbourhood- and city-wide trend that is only likely to increase in future.
New Parking Lot
It is ridiculous to project that the reduction in parking lot size from 98 spots to 68 will not cause problems, even on a regular school day, let alone during events.
Not only will the number of parking lot spaces be greatly reduced, there will also be no street parking at the SW corner of the campus where the entrance and exit to the new lot will be. This corner, you may remember, is where the two new multi-suite houses and laneways are located, and that stretch of Parker Street is heavily used by those residents for parking.
The traffic study mentions at least twice that no field lights are included in the current permit amendment and on the stadium drawing included with the traffic plan there are indeed no signs of light stands.
However, light stands are clearly visible on the official permit application drawing on the City Permit web site, so we assume that these are part of the official permit amendment request.
While the school may not be requesting field lights at this point, it seems that they are putting in infrastructure so it will be easy to flip that switch via another “minor permit amendment” — once the dust from this one has settled. Eventually, lights will bring even more traffic and parking issues to our neighbourhood.
Firehall No. 14
From page 7-8, 2.2, Bunt & Associates
“There is a No Stopping zone in front of the fire hall and its driveways. In addition, traffic cones were noted to be deployed along the curb (see Figure 3). Nonetheless, motorists were observed to stop (and sometimes wait) in this No Stopping zone in order to drop-off and/or pick-up students. Additional signage (engineering), reminders to parents by the school (education) and the issuing of tickets for parking violations (enforcement) should further discourage people from stopping and/or parking in front of Fire Hall No. 14 and its driveway. In 2007-2008, Engine 14 responded to an average of 1482 calls per year or four calls per day.1 Engine 14 would most likely respond to a call by turning right on Venables Street towards Renfrew Street and driving past the school’s main entrance and primary pick-up/drop-off area. Should Engine 14 need to respond to a call when students are being dropped off or picked up and Venables Street was blocked by cars parking, the engine may need to turn left and circle the block counter clockwise to reach Renfrew Street. The peak school drop-off times are from 8–8:30 a.m. while peak pick-up times are from 2:45-3:15 p.m.”
So, from this part of the study we learn that Notre Dame parents will ignore (a) common sense and (b) parking cones, in order to persist in parking in a firehall “No Stopping” zone.
Signs, fines and school announcements may or may not solve that particular problem.
The firehall situation neatly sums up the “drive through” attitude displayed by school parents/visitors. Imagine this problem multiplied by sports crowds (school or otherwise) looking for parking and dropping off/picking up players on weekends/evenings/holidays.
The fact that the traffic study is quite sanguine about the fact that a fire engine on a life-saving mission may have to “turn left and circle back counter clockwise” to get to Renfrew is somewhat breathtaking, and indicative of a failure to see beyond school’s convenience.
We hope that these comments and observations will be taken into account and will encourage a far more extensive and realistic study into the impact of McCarthy Stadium before any permit amendment is granted.
A first step to doing this would be to acquire an accurate assessment of the potential use and volume of traffic to be generated by the stadium — one based on reality and not the unrealistic estimates currently being put forward by Notre Dame.
Yours truly, Notre Dame Neighbours
WHAT YOU CAN DO
To pass on any of these, or your own, comments about parking and traffic concerns surrounding the proposed McCarthy Stadium, write to firstname.lastname@example.org and/or email@example.com
You can also write to Vancouver’s Mayor and City Council.