'Back Packer' is an apt name for the expected goings on enabled by that kind of project.

I think a smarter idea would have been to relocate the child hostle from across the street from the strip joint on second avenue to someplace more appropriate and then turn the building across from the strip joint into the 'back packer' for the bums. Then leave the private neighborhoods alone from the zoning terrorism of public dollar empire builders.

Wow Ben. Harsh!! and unsympathetic. Perhaps we should relocate the BackPacker to the landfill where all the support services are.

Note to Editor. Don't remove this again, if you'll notice, the post is not offensive.

Opinion250 has checked the claim by Pisspulper and it is totally incorrect.
You registered on May23-2007, and have posted 37 comments since that date.
Not one single comment that you have made has been removed or have you ever been prevented from making same.
Your comment of today is fair comment, why in the world would it be removed.

"There was a suggestion that other locations for the facility where looked at"

Does anyone know where these locations are?

Precisely what are the support services they require and where are they located? The detox centre is at the hospital, for instance.

Doesn't the government pay for taxis to get to such facilties?

Personally I think there is a lot of "chicken little" fear mongering going on about this proposed building and its use. The area has had, and continues to have major social and public safety problems without the new building. I would not be surprised if the proposed use will actually make the area safer in that there will be a presence in the area of social workers which has not been the case so far.

Like it or not we have a homeless problem. Facilities must be built. Would you rather these people live in a shelter or sleep in your backyard? Our society has created the homeless as predicted and now also as predicted we are paying the price. If you don't like what is going on you should have spoken up when social services were being cut. Instead of looking to the future, we re-elected these politicians. Now it is costing twice as much to fix the problems as it would have cost to fix the root problems. Don't like it? Too bad we reap what we sow.

"Every time the Back Packer Motel is discussed as the site for a new homeless shelter you have to wonder just when the decision was made to build there"

Is this a a homeless shelter? I understood it was assisted living where residents are required to pay some form of rent and get their lives back on track. If that what Ben calls a homeless shelter then you might as well call the homes that habitat for humanity build the same thing...come on people wake up....would you rather have the old backpacker there - which really in all reality was a homeless shelter or a beautiful building helping people.

I do live in the area and welcome this much needed addition.

Please get your facts straight before voicing opinions.

It is true though, every few years things are shuffled around to new areas. What gets to me is why so close to the main park where young mothers take their small children? Why not shuffle the "problem" to College Heights for a change? Ah, just kidding, just kidding. Seems a good area to build a homeless shelter would be somewhere inbetween Value Village and the First Litre Pub area. Not too long ago I saw a homeless man sleeping underneath a parked trailer in the parking lot of Value Village. Was hard to keep driving by but I had my kids with me. I drove by again another day with a blanket just incase but he was gone. That area is also close to the hospital.

It really doesn't matter what you call it.
It will NOT be what it is advertised to be.
Wait for it.

I too live in the area although hopefully not for long. I haven't had a lot of contact with the homeless but the contact I have had leads me to believe that many of them choose the lifestyle. I know for a fact that there is one man around here that won't live in any other place but outside. I absolutely hate the fact that 'they' will spend huge amounts of money when less will do, building something that will not be valued and kept by the free loaders living there. (I, of course, am not refering to the deserving poor. The ones for whom social services was set up for.) I do really wonder about the city council. If they really wanted to clean up the down town, why aren't they controlling what business go in there better. We don't need more bars, strip cluds, pawn shops, or casinos. I think we need a new mayor. It's as good a place as any to start.

Well I just had a tour of the REAL homeless shelter (in the old heritage building on Brunswick St. run by Active Support Against Poverty) and found it to be extremely clean, professional looking, and well run. The new proposed building at the former Backpacker site is NOT a homeless shelter, and yes Andyfreeze, it does matter what you call it because calling it a homeless shelter is simply incorrect. I suggest you do your homework and look up the other properties run by the Friendship Center and take a drive by and see if you think they pose a huge threat to their neighbours. If you want to leave these people without a place to stay and out on the street (because let's face it, NOBODY wants them in their backyard), then let's bring in another government and change our social system because it's not the Canada that we currently live in.

....and to be honest, my family lives out in the country because we didn't want to deal with some of the issues of living in the city. It's the choice we've made, and while we love it, it's not perfect for us due to gasoline prices and commute times (etc.), but at least we have the luxury of making such choices, just as most Canadians do. Too bad some of the people who need this type of new housing are considered to be 'garbage' by the tone of many of these comments. They have fewer choices and this new building provides at least one more option for them.

Agreed 100% Buzz...well said!

A little nugget of info for those out there who claim that the potential residents choose their lifestyle, or are simply freeloaders:
The Canadian Mental Health Associations states that up to 75% of Canadian homeless people live with largely untreated mental illnesses. Do you really expect rational decisions from someone incapable of making rational decisions?

What's wrong with helping these people develop the skills they need to deal with their mental illnesses and/or addictions? Seems like the Christian thing to do

A little nugget of info for those out there who claim that the potential residents choose their lifestyle, or are simply freeloaders:
The Canadian Mental Health Associations states that up to 75% of Canadian homeless people live with largely untreated mental illnesses. Do you really expect rational decisions from someone incapable of making rational decisions?

What's wrong with helping these people develop the skills they need to deal with their mental illnesses and/or addictions? Seems like the Christian thing to do

Sorry for the double post.

To reiterate what had been said above, Friendship Lodge is NOT to be a shelter a la Ketso Yoh, or Bridgit Moran Place. According to Barb Ward-Berkitt, Executive Director of the Native Friendship Centre, "... Friendship Lodge will be a HOME, not a shelter, for people who
are homeless or at-risk of being homeless, for people who have mental illnesses and may experience barriers in their life as a result of their mental illness." It's not going to be a flop-house.
And yes, there are resources available in the area that the residents will need to access. There are a handful of counsellors in the neighbourhood, not to mention the sexual assault centre, YAP, CMHA, BC Schizophrenia Society, Native Healing Centre, Healthiest Babies Possible, John Howard Society, Phoenix, E. Fry, Native Friendship Centre, etc, etc, etc.

As I said in another post. The City owns most of the property adjacent to the Heritage Shelter on 6th. They own the parking lot, empty lot, CKPG building and could without any problem buy out the Outrigger and the Kings Inn and then build this facility adjacent to the Heritage Shelter. Why wouldnt they do this, especially since it would not cause any problems for any residential areas.

Is it because they want to have this property sold off to developers like the Metropolis, or somesuch. This property is across from Days Inn and adjacent to the new Casino (Gaming Centre) perhaps they dont want the shelter in their backyards.

Seems to me this would be a natural place for it, however I doubt it would ever happen.

"Why wouldnt they do this, especially since it would not cause any problems for any residential areas."

Because downtownpg would fight against that. I suspect they still carry more clout than a more or less uncoordinated residential group around the old Backpacker site.

I attended the meeting last night. I walked the 4 blocks to Ron Brent while most of those in attendance used their cars. I found that interesting, here we are to discuss a proposal for a transitional housing facility (please stop calling it a homeless shelter) 6 blocks away and most drove. It was a gorgeous fall night last night and the walk (up 17th) home afterward was uneventful, no needles, no hookers, no drunks, no homeless.
That would not have been the case just a few years ago when the Back Packer was in operation and before the RCMP cracked down on the walk up “drug windows” operating in the apartment on the corner of 17th and Juniper.

During my residency here in the neighborhood that building was supporting people’s habits 24 hours a day. Sometimes there’d be a line up at the windows, each and every time I would make a call to the RCMP and they would arrive, take care of business then in a day the windows would be back in business again. One day a couple years back things began to change, no more window service, less prostitution in the area. It happened right around the time the Back Packer (rented rooms by the minute) was closed. Today the face of this neighborhood is changing, people are coming in purchasing homes, investing in renovations, keeping up with lawn & garden maintenance and the streets are cleaner (Kenwood is). At one time as you got closer to 20th the worse it got, not so today even 20th between Queensway and Victoria is moving forward.

I believe in this project and this community, however we must bring neighborhood concerns to the table in a rational manner, yelling never settles the debate, it only adds fuel. Last night when an outsider, someone who does not live in the area or even close, battered the BC housing representative about the “other” location, received a rousing applause for their rant on the situation. There was no need for that; yes everyone in the community should have their say, but not a residence meeting. They were there in a capacity were their questions should have been answered in a Q & A with the appropriate representatives after the meeting then documented for public access. Grandstanding and adding fuel to the fire; when did that become a valuable solution to a social economic emergency? That behavior was completely uncalled for and in my opinion, unprofessional.

I have done my best to inform and educate my neighbors on the proposal, explain the differences between transition housing and a homeless shelter. Most are seniors and “believe what they read” too bad no one is bring forth the truth. I’m still waiting to read it or hear it or see it in any of the local mediums.

As for the “other” location, the stakeholders want to de-centralize services. Smart idea. Whether it was the city, BC housing, the province or Northern Health is not important. Understanding de-centralizing these types of services puts less pressure on one specific area. The downtown core does not need more of what it already can’t handle. This is the reality of the decision makers I understand what they’re trying to accomplish. I’ve been down Vancouver’s blood alley, lived in the Tenderloin and struggled with booze and drugs. I’ve been clean and sober for almost 11 years, I utilized services to get me into a position to be who I am today; A father of two beautiful children one of whom has never seen me use or drink, a husband but most important a productive member of society and this community. I love my neighborhood, I love this city.
In reality we can live anywhere we want, any city, any province, any street in this community. Not surely certain that would be the case if I did not find my 12 step program and the public services that were available to me when I needed them. We need this facility and a couple more; we need more low income housing. Poverty is not going away. You can not push it under a bridge, people are not VCR’s.

We do not throw people aside, no matter what their social economic circumstance.

I attended the meeting last night. I walked the 4 blocks to Ron Brent while most of those in attendance used their cars. I found that interesting, here we are to discuss a proposal for a transitional housing facility (please stop calling it a homeless shelter) 6 blocks away and most drove. It was a gorgeous fall night last night and the walk (up 17th) home afterward was uneventful, no needles, no hookers, no drunks, no homeless.
That would not have been the case just a few years ago when the Back Packer was in operation and before the RCMP cracked down on the walk up “drug windows” operating in the apartment on the corner of 17th and Juniper.

During my residency here in the neighborhood that building was supporting people’s habits 24 hours a day. Sometimes there’d be a line up at the windows, each and every time I would make a call to the RCMP and they would arrive, take care of business then in a day the windows would be back in business again. One day a couple years back things began to change, no more window service, less prostitution in the area. It happened right around the time the Back Packer (rented rooms by the minute) was closed. Today the face of this neighborhood is changing, people are coming in purchasing homes, investing in renovations, keeping up with lawn & garden maintenance and the streets are cleaner (Kenwood is). At one time as you got closer to 20th the worse it got, not so today even 20th between Queensway and Victoria is moving forward.

I believe in this project and this community, however we must bring neighborhood concerns to the table in a rational manner, yelling never settles the debate, it only adds fuel. Last night when an outsider, someone who does not live in the area or even close, battered the BC housing representative about the “other” location, received a rousing applause for their rant on the situation. There was no need for that; yes everyone in the community should have their say, but not a residence meeting. They were there in a capacity were their questions should have been answered in a Q & A with the appropriate representatives after the meeting then documented for public access. Grandstanding and adding fuel to the fire; when did that become a valuable solution to a social economic emergency? That behavior was completely uncalled for and in my opinion, unprofessional.

I have done my best to inform and educate my neighbors on the proposal, explain the differences between transition housing and a homeless shelter. Most are seniors and “believe what they read” too bad no one is bring forth the truth. I’m still waiting to read it or hear it or see it in any of the local mediums.

As for the “other” location, the stakeholders want to de-centralize services. Smart idea. Whether it was the city, BC housing, the province or Northern Health is not important. Understanding de-centralizing these types of services puts less pressure on one specific area. The downtown core does not need more of what it already can’t handle. This is the reality of the decision makers I understand what they’re trying to accomplish. I’ve been down Vancouver’s blood alley, lived in the Tenderloin and struggled with booze and drugs. I’ve been clean and sober for almost 11 years, I utilized services to get me into a position to be who I am today; A father of two beautiful children one of whom has never seen me use or drink, a husband but most important a productive member of society and this community. I love my neighborhood, I love this city.
In reality we can live anywhere we want, any city, any province, any street in this community. Not surely certain that would be the case if I did not find my 12 step program and the public services that were available to me when I needed them. We need this facility and a couple more; we need more low income housing. Poverty is not going away. You can not push it under a bridge, people are not VCR’s.

We do not throw people aside, no matter what their social economic circumstance.

I attended the meeting last night. I walked the 4 blocks to Ron Brent while most of those in attendance used their cars. I found that interesting, here we are to discuss a proposal for a transitional housing facility (please stop calling it a homeless shelter) 6 blocks away and most drove. It was a gorgeous fall night last night and the walk (up 17th) home afterward was uneventful, no needles, no hookers, no drunks, no homeless.
That would not have been the case just a few years ago when the Back Packer was in operation and before the RCMP cracked down on the walk up “drug windows” operating in the apartment on the corner of 17th and Juniper.

During my residency here in the neighborhood that building was supporting people’s habits 24 hours a day. Sometimes there’d be a line up at the windows, each and every time I would make a call to the RCMP and they would arrive, take care of business then in a day the windows would be back in business again. One day a couple years back things began to change, no more window service, less prostitution in the area. It happened right around the time the Back Packer (rented rooms by the minute) was closed. Today the face of this neighborhood is changing, people are coming in purchasing homes, investing in renovations, keeping up with lawn & garden maintenance and the streets are cleaner (Kenwood is). At one time as you got closer to 20th the worse it got, not so today even 20th between Queensway and Victoria is moving forward.

I believe in this project and this community, however we must bring neighborhood concerns to the table in a rational manner, yelling never settles the debate, it only adds fuel. Last night when an outsider, someone who does not live in the area or even close, battered the BC housing representative about the “other” location, received a rousing applause for their rant on the situation. There was no need for that; yes everyone in the community should have their say, but not a residence meeting. They were there in a capacity were their questions should have been answered in a Q & A with the appropriate representatives after the meeting then documented for public access. Grandstanding and adding fuel to the fire; when did that become a valuable solution to a social economic emergency? That behavior was completely uncalled for and in my opinion, unprofessional.

I have done my best to inform and educate my neighbors on the proposal, explain the differences between transition housing and a homeless shelter. Most are seniors and “believe what they read” too bad no one is bring forth the truth. I’m still waiting to read it or hear it or see it in any of the local mediums.

As for the “other” location, the stakeholders want to de-centralize services. Smart idea. Whether it was the city, BC housing, the province or Northern Health is not important. Understanding de-centralizing these types of services puts less pressure on one specific area. The downtown core does not need more of what it already can’t handle. This is the reality of the decision makers I understand what they’re trying to accomplish. I’ve been down Vancouver’s blood alley, lived in the Tenderloin and struggled with booze and drugs. I’ve been clean and sober for almost 11 years, I utilized services to get me into a position to be who I am today; A father of two beautiful children one of whom has never seen me use or drink, a husband but most important a productive member of society and this community. I love my neighborhood, I love this city.
In reality we can live anywhere we want, any city, any province, any street in this community. Not surely certain that would be the case if I did not find my 12 step program and the public services that were available to me when I needed them. We need this facility and a couple more; we need more low income housing. Poverty is not going away. You can not push it under a bridge, people are not VCR’s.

We do not throw people aside, no matter what their social economic circumstance.

Yes econ101,we get the message!

Econ101 - What a thoughtful, sensitive and caring letter. Thank you for sharing. I salute you. Chester

Well said, econ.

Econ ... I agree with you in all but your last statement:

"We do not throw people aside, no matter what their social economic circumstance."

I think that is what we should be striving for however, the reality I see tells me something different. Some of us do not throw people aside, others do not care one way or another, and then there are actually those who do throw people aside.

Well said, econ.