University Neighbourhoods Association ANNUAL REPORT

The Old Barn Community Centre, December 2006

February 2007

- 1 -

University Neighbourhoods Association ANNUAL REPORT

TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY………………………………………………………………………2 INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………………………..2 The Directors ...................................................................................................................................2

University Appointees: ...............................................................................................................2 AMS Appointee: .........................................................................................................................2 Elected by UNA Membership:....................................................................................................2

Basic Organization...........................................................................................................................3 Membership .....................................................................................................................................3 Website ............................................................................................................................................3 The UNA In Your Neighbourhood Newsletter and Other Communications ...................................3 Our Relationship with the University ..............................................................................................3 VOLUNTEERISM AND COMMITTEES…………………………………………………….. 4

Arts Council Update - Chair, Lisa Johnson ……………………………………………………… 4 Community Services Planning Committee - Chair, Mike Moon.....................................................5 Emergency Preparedness Committee – Chair, Kathy Griffiths .......................................................6 Internet Tree Committee – Coordinated through the UNA Office ..................................................6 Schools Committee – Chair, Catalin Ristea.....................................................................................6 Standing Committee on Development - Chair, Jeremy Gordon ......................................................8 Sustainability (Recycling) Committee - Chair, Heather Friesen .....................................................9 ISSUES AND UPDATES……………………………………………………………………… 11

Governance Summary ………………………………………………………………………….. 11 Operational Governance …………………………………………………………………….. 11 UBC/UNA Agreement (including Access) …………………………………………………. 11 Fundamental Governance ………………………………………………………………… 13

Police Tax……………………………………………………………………………………… 14 Private Nightly Security Patrols …………………………………………………………………14 Old Barn Community Centre ……………………………………………………………………14

Family Fun Days ………………………………………………………………………………...14 Construction & Neighbourhoods, C & CP Update …………………………………………….. 15 Neighbourhoods Population, excerpts from the UBCPT Survey 2006…………………………..16

THANK YOU………………………………………………………………………………….. 16

- 2 -

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. The University Neighbourhoods Association (“UNA”) was incorporated in Spring 2002. Currently, the Directors consist of seven members, two appointed by the University of British Columbia, one appointed by the AMS and four elected by the UNA members.

2. The principal issues that occupied the UNA in 2006 included:

a) Governance i. Operational Governance

ii. UBC/UNA Agreement iii. Fundamental Governance

b) Completion of the Old Barn Community Centre c) Security and the Police Tax d) Obtaining an adequate, universal Recycling program for all UNA residents.

INTRODUCTION

3. This is the fourth Annual Report of the UNA. It will be formally presented at our General Meeting scheduled for Thursday, February 1st, 2007. 4. The UNA was incorporated in Spring 2002 under the Societies Act of BC. Pursuant to section 34 of the University Act the UNA is an advisory body to the Board of Governors. The UNA holds two meetings each year; an AGM and a Townhall Information meeting. The Directors 5. There presently are seven Directors. University Appointees: Dana Merritt, Treasurer, Associate Vice-President Finance UBC; and David Rankin, Associate Vice-President Business Operations UBC. AMS Appointee: Jeff Friedrich, Vice President Academic AMS. Elected by UNA Membership: Jim Taylor, Chair, Hampton Place resident; Brian Collins, Hampton Place resident; Mike Feeley, Hawthorn Place resident; Sharon Wu, Hawthorn Place resident. Pursuant to the provisions of our Constitution and Bylaws, two of the directors are University appointed and one is appointed by the AMS. 6. The Directors usually meet on the 2nd Tuesday of the month at 5:00 p.m., at the UNA office located at

- 3 - Cecil Green Park Coach House, 6323 Cecil Green Park Road, UBC, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z1. UNA members and the public are welcome to attend. Meeting minutes are published and archived on the UNA website (www.myuna.ca). The UNA Office will relocate in the Spring of 2007 to the Old Barn Community Centre. Basic Organization 7. The UNA has hired an Executive Director who began her employment in September 2006. Jan Fialkowski, Executive Director Phone: 604-827-5317, Fax: 604-827-5375, Email: janf@myuna.ca The office continues to be managed by Cathie Cleveland, Administrative Manager, Phone: 604-827-5158, Fax: 604-827-5375, Email: admin@myuna.ca Membership 8. Every adult resident of Hawthorn Place, Chancellor Place and Hampton Place is entitled to free UNA membership. By the time of the February 2007 Annual General Meeting, we will have over 1,200 members. It is important that we continue to enrol as many members as possible, primarily because both the University and the Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD) judge our credibility based partly upon our numbers. Please encourage your neighbours to join the UNA by completing the forms available either from Cathie (604-827-5158) or from the website (www.myuna.ca). Website 9. We have a website (www.myuna.ca) which provides access to a variety of information about the UNA and its activities. The UNA In Your Neighbourhood Newsletter and Other Communications 10. The UNA In Your Neighbourhood Newsletter is currently on hiatus until we are able to hire a marketing staff person who will not only take on this task but other marketing and membership promotion duties. Our Relationship with the University 11. Over the past five years, the UNA has emerged as a community-oriented organization, representing the needs of residents on a variety of issues. The UNA has had direct support from the University and UBC Properties Trust (Properties) who have made staff available for advice and assistance.

- 4 -

VOLUNTEERISM AND COMMITTEES

12. The UNA’s ability to represent the interests of residential leaseholders and tenants in the existing and planned residential communities will largely depend on the participation of individual residents. Cathie Cleveland is actively recruiting volunteers from all neighbourhoods of the UNA to serve on committees and help with various activities which the association is involved. 13. We have established the following committees:

Arts Council Community Services Planning Committee (the Barn Committee merged with the CSPC) Emergency Preparedness Committee Internet Tree Committee Multi-Cultural Advisory Council Noise Committee Schools Committee Standing Committee on Development Sustainability (Recycling) Committee Traffic and Safety Committee

14. In addition, members of the UNA represent us on a variety of UBC or GVRD committees: including the Main Campus Review Plan, the South Campus Advisory Planning Committee, the Development Permit Board, TPAC (Transportation Planning Advisory Committee), The University Town Steering Committee, UBC Community Liaison Committee and the West Point Grey Visioning process. 15. We are anxious to identify volunteers who wish to participate in our work. Any interested volunteers should contact Cathie Cleveland at the UNA office by telephone 604-827-5158, fax 604-827-5375 or email admin@myuna.ca. COMMITTEE REPORTS Arts Council Update, Chair, Lisa Johnson 16. The Arts Council was established in February 2005 to encourage the development of a mutually beneficial relationship between the residential community and the UBC arts community. The Council aims to raise awareness about the arts and improve access to the rich cultural community at UBC. 17. In Fall 2005, the Arts Council released the Passport to the Arts an information and coupon booklet that introduced residents to some events and venues that the campus has to offer. The Passport was well received, and the plan was to produce a similar booklet for Fall 2006; however, with the vacant UNA marketing/communication staff position, the workload of producing the booklet has been overwhelming for the Arts Council. The Chair hopes to see renewed energy in the Arts Council in 2007, and welcomes new members and new ideas – contact lisa.johnson@ubc.ca or 604-822-7913. 18. Upcoming Events:

- 5 - Pacific Spirit Concert Series & Reception February 4, 2007, 4:00 PM, School of Music Recital Hall UBC Violinist Eugenia Choi performs with pianist Ian Parker $20 Adults, $10 students & seniors UNA members receive a 2 for 1 discount with their Community Services Cards!! Community Services Planning Committee - Chair, Mike Moon 19. The Community Services Planning Committee (CSPC) has gone through extensive changes during 2006. Unfortunately we had a few very knowledgeable individuals resign after a couple of years of excellent service. In the spring of 2006, Michael Moon was elected to the Chair’s position, after Fred Pritchard stepped down. Fred had been the CSPC Chair for a couple of years and had been instrumental in the progress the committee and, indeed the UNA, had made towards the creation of a complete community here in the new University Town. The loss of Fred’s expertise and experience (as the former Director of Campus Planning for UBC) was a major loss for the CSPC. 20. Another challenging situation was created when the UNA Board amalgamated the Barn Community Centre Committee with the CSPC. The fact that the Barn was still months away from occupancy meant that the CSPC’s time was now almost entirely committed to issues surrounding the completion of this facility alone. When it became apparent that the creation of a Daycare in the community centre was fiscally impossible, the CSPC had to focus on rectifying this problem. Ultimately the CSPC passed a motion to request the UNA Board to reopen negotiations with UBC Daycare in order to provide access to their services for the residents. Mike Feeley has spearheaded this initiative. Look for an announcement in early 2007. The Daycare in the Barn was cancelled. 21. A further challenge was created when the UNA Board chose to replace board representative Brian Collins (Chair of the Barn Committee) with Mike Feeley as the board representative. Normally this would not have been a major problem, but now the CSPC has no representation from any resident outside of the Hawthorn Neighborhood and we did not have Brian’s years of experience addressing the issues surrounding the development of the Barn. If you live in any of the other neighborhoods and would like to get involved please contact Cathie Cleveland at the UNA office. 22. As one of the objectives of the CSPC the committee is currently working on re-working the existing Terms of Reference to indicate who is eligible for committee membership. For consistency and ease of reading, the amended Terms of Reference follow the model set by other committees of the UNA. When finalized, the document will be submitted to the UNA Board for approval. 23. In early 2007 the CSPC is planning to conduct a survey of the residents that will help the committee to make recommendations to the UNA Board regarding services, amenities and facilities that are required for residents both now and in the future. I would like to thank all of the volunteers that have committed their personal time to assist our community by working with the CSPC in 2006! UNA Emergency Preparedness Committee – Chair, Kathy Griffiths

- 6 - 24. First the bad news: 2006 was a lacklustre year for the UNA Emergency Preparedness Committee. After deciding to focus the year’s activities on public communications of emergency preparedness information to residents, the committee encountered two major difficulties: We were unable to get emergency preparedness information into the UNA newsletter because publication of the newsletter has been interrupted by the UNA’s difficulty in hiring a new editor. Then we were thwarted in our plans to hold a public meeting for residents to hear experts on emergency preparedness, this time by delays in the opening of The Barn where the event was scheduled. 25. Additionally, the committee has been unable to access a copy of Dr. Michael Feller’s report on fire risk mitigation in the area of Pacific Spirit Park adjacent to Hampton Place, despite requests made to Gary Gibson, our representative on the GVRD, and to Mitch Sokalski, GVRD Parks West Area Manager. The report was commissioned by the Greater Vancouver Regional District ostensibly to assist in their fire management activities. Dr. Feller says he submitted his report to the GVRD in July 2006. 26. The UNA Board of Directors had officially requested that the GVRD clean up the park at the eastern edge of Hampton Place as a preventative measure against wildfire. Clean up has not occurred. Indeed, with wind damage to the park this winter, the ground fuel buildup appears to be an even greater fire hazard in coming summers. 27. Now for the good news: Pat Powell, a resident at St. James House, was unanimously chosen to chair the committee, replacing Kathy Griffiths who resigned as chair a few weeks ago after serving more than two years. 28. The committee now plans to hold its public information meeting on emergency preparedness (with speakers, emergency demonstrations and equipment displays) on Monday, April 16 from 7 to 9 p.m. in The Old Barn Community Centre and looks forward to a huge turnout. Internet Tree Committee – Coordinated through the UNA Office 29. The UNA distributes community notices via email to a list of volunteers who have computer access and will assist by posting the notices in their building. If you would like to be a “branch” of the Internet Tree for your building, please contact Cathie at the UNA Office at 604-827-5158 or admin@myuna.ca. Schools Committee – Chair, Catalin Ristea 30. Current Situation of schools at UBC: There are two schools serving the U-Hill catchment area which includes, besides UNA neighbourhoods, other UBC residential areas and the UEL. U-Hill Elementary was built for a capacity of 400 spaces, and it has 4 portables on site. For the current school year, 2006-07, the enrollment is 509 students while 135 other children (as of Jan ‘07) were sent away to Queen Mary and Queen Elizabeth. A bus program, heavily subsidized by UNA and UBC, transports children daily to U-Hill, Queen Elizabeth, and Queen Mary schools (275 riders registered in the school bus program; 179 to U Hill and 96 to QE/QM). U-Hill is the only school in the City of Vancouver that has a bus program for non-special-needs kids who live within the catchment area. 31. U-Hill Secondary has a capacity of 350 spaces and 7 portables on site. For 2006-07 the enrollment is 525 students, while 30 were sent away (as of Jan ‘07) to Lord Byng (grades 8, 9, 10) and Kitsilano (grades 11, 12).

- 7 - 32. New Schools process – plans for the future: It is known that the U-Hill catchment area has a large shortage of school spaces for both elementary and secondary students. This is expected to increase even further with the new housing developments on UBC lands and other neighbourhoods in the catchment area. Any new schools would be built with funding from the Province (Ministry of Education). The Vancouver School Board (VSB) has to apply for this funding when certain criteria are met, according to a process established by the Province. UBC, as land owner and real estate developer, does not have a mandate to build or otherwise provide schools, although UBC is setting aside land for a school site, currently identified as the “old NRC building”. 33. The major difficulty with creating new schools in the U-Hill catchment area is the funding received from the province (Ministry of Education), or lack thereof. The current provincial guidelines for applying for new school funding do not favour the UBC area because it is expected that the student overflow will be absorbed by neighbouring schools (Queen Mary Elem., Queen Elizabeth Elem., Lord Byng Sec., Kitsilano Sec., etc.). Essentially, if there is room in other schools in the district (Jericho area), no new schools will be built. To further complicate the matter, the Vancouver school district experienced a decline in student numbers overall this year, and there are many schools (East Side, mainly) with available capacity. 34. The VSB applied for funding for a new secondary school and the province made the announcement in April 2005 that it will support the 2005 Capital Plan for the expansion (increase of capacity) of U Hill Secondary (money will be available in the 2007-08 fiscal year). This is a long process (announcement → feasibility study → design → construction) which can take 3 - 4 years. Currently we are in the feasibility phase and in June 2006 the VSB identified a preferred option for siting of the new secondary school in a building made available by UBC – the old NRC building. However, the status of negotiations with UBC is undetermined yet. The earliest known date for this school to be opened is 2009, if it will go that route which is uncertain. It is also possible that only an increase in capacity through a major renovation will be chosen by VSB especially if the new elementary school is not approved in time. Being aware of the difficult situation of UBC schools, in 2006 the VSB has done some maintenance upgrades for U-Hill Sec. at a total cost of about $43K from their annual budget of $180K. 35. The VSB also recently applied for funding for a new elementary school in our area but a decision has not been made yet by the province. Even if the funding is approved now, given the length of the process, the earliest that the elementary school can be opened would be sometime in 2010. The funding is requested to be available for the fiscal year 2009-2010. 36. The School Committee will make it a priority this year to intensify the lobbying of the VSB, Ministry of Education, local elected government officials, etc. with respect to the new schools issues. We are always looking for enthusiastic people to help with this; please contact Catalin at catalin.ristea@ubc.ca if you are interested to participate. 37. Many thanks to committee members for their activity in the past year: Lisa Johnson, Prod Laquian, Charles Menzies, Michael Moon. Standing Committee on Development - Chair, Jeremy Gordon 38. The UNA Standing Committee on Development (SCD) has three objectives

- 8 -

• To provide advice to the UNA Directors on development issues • To establish and coordinate a community consultation mechanism • To keep in contact with the UBC planners

In the past 6 months, SCD has focused on three initiatives • Useable Neighbourhood Open Space (UNOS) • Community Consultation • University Town Development Report Card

39. Open Space: UNOS (Useable Neighbourhood Open Space) is the area set aside in the neighbourhood plans that isn’t developed into buildings or roadways. It is the community’s future parks and recreation facilities. 40. The Official Community Plan (OCP) specifies that a certain amount of space must be set aside per one thousand people living in the neighbourhoods. Unfortunately, it is not clear how many people (especially children) do actually live here! Last year, UBC Properties carried out a census of residents. We hope that by the date of this AGM, we will have finally been given access to the raw numbers gathered. 41. The history of useable open space development in our neighbourhoods has not been good to date – Hampton Place has none, and many people are dissatisfied with what was done in Hawthorn Place. 42. With the development of South Campus (Wesbrook Place) getting under way, our committee was very concerned that all residents have the opportunity to express their views and present their ideas on what was, and wasn’t, suitable use of open space. 43. Our committee met with UBC’s Community and Campus Planning (C&CP) a number of times to help develop an open space design process in which

• The steps to produce the design guidelines are clearly specified • The steps for approving each individual development project are clearly specified • Residents are given the opportunity to provide input • All input provided is recorded and it is reported which input themes were accepted and which

were rejected, and why • Together, these provide the critical transparency and accountability that residents have been

calling for. 44. By now you will know that two Open Space workshops have been scheduled in January 2007 and February 6th and hopefully you plan to attend one or both. This is your opportunity to show UBC that you care about our neighbourhoods and mean to have a voice in their development. We welcome C&CP having recently taken on responsibility for the design process for open space (as well as for greenways and the commercial areas) and appreciate the openness and willingness C&CP has shown in working with us on this issue. 45. Community Consultation: We have also begun working with C&CP to improve the transparency and accountability of any community consultation undertaken. We hope to develop general guidelines for where in a process input can be given; how opportunities for resident input is advertised; how the input themes received are recorded and made public; and how these themes were used and, just as critically, why

- 9 - themes were not used. 46. In this way, residents can be confident that they will have the opportunity to give input and that this input will be taken seriously. We expect that the UNOS process described above will become a model for future community consultation practices. 47. Development Report Card: It has been a long-standing goal to provide residents with up-to-date and relevant information on the numerous development activities going on around us, and on what impact these will have on us in the short- and long-term. 48. Some information is already available but it is scattered in various places and does not address the issues from the resident’s point of view. Obviously, much of the development around campus has already finished, so we will be concentrating on South Campus (Wesbrook Place) and the remaining areas still under development in the neighbourhoods. We will also include information on the general infrastructure developments that affects us all. We hope to work with C&CP on this in the coming months. 49. The Upcoming Year: In the upcoming year we will continue working on the issues reported above. We will also consider how we can contribute to the discussion on the governance of UBC and surrounding areas, as raised by the GVRD. Finally, I anticipate us reviewing our committee terms of reference and membership structure. 50. I would like to thank all the members of the SCD for their enthusiasm and hard work over the last year and to thank the UNA Board and UNA Office staff for their support. SCD welcomes new members – you can contact us through the UNA Office. Sustainability (Recycling) Committee - Chair, Heather Friesen 51. The mandate of the Committee is to promote and facilitate a lifestyle within the UNA community that is environmentally, socially and economically sustainable. To this end the Committee launched two major projects during the year – the first to establish a Community-wide recycling program for the UNA and the second to establish a Community Garden at UBC Farm. The following summarizes the progress made on each project. 52. Community-Wide Recycling Project: The consulting firm of Gartner Lee Limited was hired by the UNA in May to help design a community-wide recycling program for UNA residents. The project began with a survey of the existing garbage and recycling facilities at each residential development. Residents were invited to a workshop in July to establish objectives for a common baseline level of garbage and recycling services. Gartner Lee presented the outcomes from the workshop and a recommended strategy to the Recycling Steering Committee in August. 53. The proposed strategy that was presented to residents at an open house in September had three components: 1. a “universal access” model for garbage and recycling services funded through the service levy or like charge; 2. annual collection events for hard to handle materials; and 3. opt-in organics collection. 78% of respondents indicated that the proposed overall program was “about right”; fewer than 10% felt it was not ambitious enough and 12% felt it was overly ambitious. 54. Gartner Lee has prepared a final report with recommended steps for implementation. The UNA Board has authorized the Sustainability Committee to proceed with the development of a business plan for

- 10 - implementing the recommended strategy. This will entail identifying the nature of the services required, the funding mechanism, the tendering process and continued community communication. The report highlights the need to support “champions” of the program and to implement a comprehensive public education campaign. 55. The final report and periodic updates on the progress of the project will be posted on the UNA website (visit “Committees” and click on message that says “Goto the new Recycling Project Page”). Hard copies of the final report can be obtained by contacting the UNA office. 56. Community Garden Project Proposal: “To own a bit of ground, to scratch it with a hoe, to plant seeds, and watch the renewal of life – this is the commonest delight of the race, the most satisfying thing a man can do.” – Charles Dudley Warner (1829-1900), from My Summer in a Garden (1870) An MBA student at UBC was engaged by the UNA on a summer internship program to help put together a Community Garden Project Proposal to present to UBC Farm. The student visited the community gardens in neighbouring communities of Acadia Park, Kitsilano (Cypress Gardens and Maple Gardens) and Kerrisdale researching information about their organizational structure and gardening practices. She also solicited feedback from UNA residents on the idea of community gardens, met with the Program Co-coordinator at the Farm, organized a Community Gardens Steering Committee to oversee the project and drafted various documents to include in the UNA’s submission to the Farm. 57. A Community Garden Proposal was developed in close contact with Farm staff and submitted to the Farm Advisory Committee (appointed by the Faculty of Land and Food Systems and reporting to the Dean) in mid September. Based on preliminary feedback from the Farm Advisory Committee, committee members were impressed by the quality of the submission and supportive of the Proposal in principle. 58. However, the Proposal also raised issues and concerns from other sectors of the University which had to be considered before a final decision was rendered. In the end, it was found that the Faculty of Land and Food Systems did not have the authority to enter the University into a land-lease agreement with the UNA for use of land at the Farm and we were referred to Campus and Community Planning. Campus and Community Planning advised that adoption of the UNA’s Community Garden Proposal would require approval at the university board level and that it would be difficult to recommend approval of the Proposal without first exploring the feasibility of having community gardens within the open space designed for South Campus. The Community Garden Steering Committee will pursue this with Campus and Community Planning and is hopeful that the original proposal will be reconsidered. 59. New Members: The Committee welcomes new members as well as comments, ideas and suggestions from residents on current projects and new initiatives. Contact the UNA office or email UNAsustainability2006@yahoo.ca

ISSUES AND UPDATES

60. We are providing a brief report on certain current issues not otherwise covered in this report. Governance Summary, Jim Taylor, Chair, UNA Board of Directors

- 11 - 61. Operational Governance In early 2006 the Directors considered and adopted a memo referred to as the Governance Memo. This was widely circulated and commented on by the neighbours. 62. The comments have, to a large extent, been incorporated in a re-drafted and revised Governance Memo. This still leaves a number of questions to be answered or, where generally theoretically sound ideas were thought by the Directors to cause too many practical problems, there are explanations as to why the Directors take the position they do. A copy of this is found at Appendix 1 of the full memo. 63. An underlying operational governance issue for us is that pursuant to our Constitution and Bylaws the University is entitled to appoint two directors and the AMS is entitled to appoint one director to the UNA Board. This arrangement is controversial to some and we ought examine it. 64. UBC / UNA Agreement (including Access) The most important principles we appear to agree on are:

a. The University will segregate the residential Services Levy and the appropriate portions of the General Municipal Services Levy (“GMSL”) (see below) which are dedicated to ensuring that the University is able to deliver the municipal-like services to which the residents are entitled. These monies will be held in a single transparent fund (“Neighbours Fund”) which the University will maintain and concerning which it will file annual, audited, financial statements;

b. Each year the UNA will prepare a budget reflecting the anticipated cost of providing the residents

with all necessary municipal services. That budget will be placed before the BOG for its consideration. After this process, the budget may be funded from the Neighbours Fund. If the budget is not funded then the parties would have to resolve any disagreements or terminate the Agreement. If the budget is funded then all expenditures from the budget (and effectively that means all the expenditures of the Services Levy and other revenue which aggregates in the Neighbours Fund) will be made by the Directors;

c. Save for a very few agreed upon instances, the University will not pay any monies from the

Neighbours Fund to itself. The UNA will advise the BOG each year of the monies that it requires to discharge the UNA’s obligations throughout the year. The budget request will be put before the BOG. Once the budget request has been met, and the UNA has the budget, disbursements from the budget will only be made with the approval of the Directors;

d. The UNA will continue to provide municipal-like services in the residential neighbourhoods,

subject to the direction of the members;

e. The Neighbours Fund will not only receive the Services Levy monies (what we pay in taxes) but all of the University’s GMSL collected from UBC entities which by the nature of their location or otherwise incur expense in the neighbourhoods. The GMSL is the institutional equivalent of the residential Services Levy;

f. UBC will collect the Community Amenity Charges (“CACs”), monies charged by the University

to developers to assist in the development of our community. If the CACs are used to build an amenity within one of the Local Areas UBC will consult with the residents. If UBC wants to use the CACs in any way in relation to facilities or amenities located outside of the Local Areas this

- 12 -

may only be done if the UNA (by a majority of resident Directors) agrees to the use, the amount and reasonable access; and

g. Either party may terminate the Agreement upon written notice.

65. The question of access raises a series of significant issues. The critical principles, on which it appears we will be able to agree in principle (these will have to be reduced to the form of written agreement), subject to consultation with the neighbours, are:

a. UNA residents will have physical access, as do other groups on campus, and meaningful programming access, to identified facilities on campus (generally the ones most necessary to the delivery of a municipal recreational program);

b. The adequacy of access will be benchmarked to an objective standard;

c. UNA residents will receive a preferred admission rate (the student rates) which will be in part in

consideration of the fact that the UNA will make a contribution to the operational costs associated with residents’ use;

d. At the same time the UNA will ensure that access to its facilities and amenities is available to the

University Community;

e. The UNA and UBC together will plan and budget for identified facilities and amenities outside of the Local Areas which the UNA concludes may serve a municipal purpose, valuable to the neighbours (and, as noted in paragraph 11(f) above particularly those that involve the use of CACs);

f. UNA residents will through the use of CACs contribute to the capital cost of building more

daycare spaces and the spaces thus produced will be made available, on a first call basis, to UNA residents;

g. The UNA’s obligation to contribute to the operational cost of the University will be met by a

reciprocal obligation (details to be precisely worked out) on behalf of the University where the University deems access beneficial;

h. As residential areas have been developed to date the University has obtained reductions in the

number of hectares that must be made available for open space for use by the community. This open space is referred to as Useable Neighbourhood Open Space (“UNOS”). The UNA will agree that the reduction to date is referable to the University’s contribution of capital represented by the existing available municipal-like facilities and amenities and that the hectare reduction to date is reasonable given the formula provided under the OCP (which is that the University’s obligation to provide open space is reduced to some extent if the University itself provides municipal-like facilities and amenities); and

i. Despite the UNA’s obligations to pay a share of operational expenses on an ongoing basis the

University will agree to ensure affordability given the context of the UNA’s budget and considering the expenditure choices the UNA has made.

66. Fundamental Governance

- 13 -

In terms of fundamental governance there appear to be five possible realistic options. These are:

a. Continuing with the status quo and continuing to enhance it (such as by the agreements and operational regimes referred to above);

b. Amalgamation with Vancouver; c. Continuing the status quo but with the GVRD introducing a detailed, new by law to permit the

GVRD to more closely manage UBC’s development of the residential neighbourhoods and its institutional projects;

d. The separate incorporation of our area as a municipality; and e. The adoption of a governance model such as that enjoyed in the UEL which model relies on

provincial (not GVRD) oversight.

67. There are costs and benefits (in each case some significant ones) to each of these options, including a potential impact on property values and a diminution of some services we receive. 68. Because this continues to be a significant issue for the UNA and its residents we thought it made sense to again report on this issue. 69. It would be wrong for me not to end this section, which is the only section in this Report I intend to address orally at our meeting, indicating that all of us (including the Directors, all other volunteers, our staff, the residents and many senior and other people in the administration of the University) have, in my opinion, reason to be proud of the work that we have done in establishing and nurturing the UNA and securing and providing the independent representation of the neighbours’ interests to the University. We have had a number of disagreements but almost invariably we have dealt with them civilly and privately and although I, and I am sure this is true of other residents, have not been happy with each accommodation, I am satisfied that they were reasonable in the circumstances. I prefer the process that we have established (of frank talk face to face in order to reach a reasonable accommodation) to the process that UBC enjoys with many other elements of what it accepts (or is required to accept) as its community where public rancor, press statements, staged events and complaints to the GVRD and others are the accepted modus operandi. I do not believe that, ultimately, that process serves anyone well. All the Directors are genuinely trying to identify mechanisms that: make sense from both the perspective of the University and the neighbours; are fair to both; and ensure that both recognize the responsibility that they owe one to the other. Police Tax 70. We reported in detail last year on policing and taxation. Since that time there has been significant progress. The Solicitor General has agreed to reduce the applicable rate. The worst case scenario would result in the UNA paying $100,000 instead of $200,000. We continue to make representation to the Solicitor General’s Office to reduce this further. UBC apparently concedes that these monies may be taken out of the Services Levy (that is, we will not have to pay any further property taxes of any nature). Private Nightly Security Patrols through the Neighbourhoods

- 14 - 71. In an effort to provide the neighbourhoods with additional security, the UNA undertook an RFP process during the summer of 2006 to identify a private security provider that would offer the UNA nightly patrols through the neighbourhood streets. At the time of writing this report, the patrol service through the neighbourhoods has begun and communication with the stratas to increase the level of service by patrolling through the underground parkades of interested strata buildings is underway. The cost of this service is being provided to the residents of the UNA through the UNA budget which is derived from the Services Levy. The Old Barn Community Centre 72. At the December 2006 meeting of the UBC Board of Governors, the community centre currently being completed in Hawthorn Place was officially named the Old Barn Community Centre in honour of the former cow barn that once stood on this site. The Old Barn Community Centre is scheduled to open in the Spring of 2007 and will offer a number of services that will be of interest to the neighbourhood. Currently plans are being finalized to offer a variety of recreational and leisure programs for all age groups in the neighbourhoods. The UNA is pleased to introduce the Salt Spring Organic Coffee Company to the Old Barn Community Centre; the coffee shop opening is scheduled to coincide with the opening of the community centre. There will be meeting and function rooms available for the private use of residents, strata councils and members of the university community. And lastly, the UNA office will be moving to the Old Barn Community Centre allowing the UNA directors and staff the ability to improve our services to you. If you have any questions about the community centre, please call or Cathie at the UNA office at 604-827-5158 or by email at admin@myuna.ca Family Fun Days 73. These afternoon events have a theme and feature a craft project, story time and a delicious snack provided by UBC Food Services. The 2006 Family Fun Day program series was sponsored by the University Neighbourhoods Association, UBC Bookstore and UBC Food Services.

- 15 - Construction and the Neighbourhoods, UBC Department of Campus & Community Planning 74. Campus has become a lively place with two neighbourhoods nearing completion and several others in stages of design and construction.

a. Hawthorn Place. There are four building projects wrapping up in Hawthorn Place, including the new community centre on Main Mall; the community centre park is also taking shape.

b. Chancellor Place. In Chancellor Place, there are several projects underway, and the final development permits for the area have been issued.

c. Wesbrook Place. Some work has started in the South Campus Neighbourhood, which was recently named “Wesbrook Place”. As of January 2007, there are two residential projects underway, as well as preliminary infrastructure development. Several more projects are in the early phases of the development permit process, including the food store and the seniors housing complex. In addition, UBC Campus & Community Planning will be working with the community to develop principles that will to guide the design and development of park spaces in the neighbourhood.

d. East Campus. The East Campus Neighbourhood has two completed residential projects and one under construction. The remaining two market residential sites require road re-alignment before they can be developed.

e. University Boulevard. A design competition was held to develop the urban design framework for implementation of the University Boulevard Neighbourhood Plan. That competition concluded in 2005, and the University began further work on the building program and very substantial infrastructure components of the Plan. The process is now proceeding to the schematic design stage.

75. Within the academic core, UBC is committed to a comprehensive, inclusive, and engaging consultative process for the new Vancouver Campus Plan, which will encompass the academic components of campus north and south of 16th Avenue. From June 2006 to June 2008, UBC will be assessing the 1992 Main Campus Plan to generate a new Campus Plan that builds on an evolving physical form and incorporates the values of Trek 2010, the University's vision statement. More information about the Campus Plan consultation process can be found online at www.campusplan.ubc.ca. 76. Upcoming events:

Neighbourhood Open Space = Your Parks – Design Workshop # 2 February 6, 2007 6:30 – 8:30 PM Asian Centre Auditorium – 1871 West Mall

Vancouver Campus Plan Speaker Series - Teaching, Learning & Research; Place Making, Sustainable Campus; Campus & Student Life; Campus Planning Visit www.campusplan.ubc.ca or call 604.827.3465 for more information.

- 16 - Neighbourhood Populations, excerpts from the UBC Properties Trust Neighbourhoods Survey 2006 77. During the summer of 2006, UBC Properties Trust conducted a survey to establish the demands for school facilities in the near future. Although the participation rate was 50%, the sample may be skewed by some factors which are hard to quantify:

o The survey does not account for vacant units. o The survey was done primarily by email with phone back-up. Anyone not willing to respond in these ways may

no be reflected in the data. o Although the survey was designed to respect respondent’s privacy, the questions about family size, children,

etc may have caused some residents to refuse the survey. The population projection may be high as a result of these factors and the Canada Census data, when released, will be used to corroborate the survey results. 78. According to survey data, 68% of UBC neighbourhood households qualify as work-study according to the GVRD OCP requirements for UBC neighbourhoods. 79. There are approximately 3854 residents in the 1554 UBC neighbourhoods households. 82% of households are owner-occupied while 18% are tenant-occupied. On average, there are 2.48 occupants per household, not including households that are occupied by non-resident owners. There is an average of 1.93 adults per household. Nearly 38% of households have children and, of these, 74% have children attending public school and 19% have children in on-campus daycare. Approximately 200 children are 5 years old or less and 1 in 5 of these say that they will be sending their pre-schoolers to daycare on campus. 80. 42% UBC neighbourhoods households speak a language other than English in their home as a mother tongue. The percentage of languages other than English is particularly high in Hawthorn Place where 55% do not speak English at home. In contrast, just 15% of Chancellor Place households do not speak English as a mother tongue. 81. Residents currently view green-space, community safety and proximity to work/school as the most valuable UBC neighbourhoods amenities. The most commonly sought improvements are more local shops & services, more traffic calming and more control over noise and construction. Residents also voice support for more 3Rs/waste reduction programming. Asian language households and households with children are also significantly less likely to report that they recycle, suggesting that communications in Asian languages and encouragement targeted at children might serve 3R programming well. THANK YOU

82. Early on in this Report we asked that those who are eligible for membership become members and, once members, to participate as volunteers in the work of the UNA.

83. The UNA could not achieve what it has without a team of dedicated volunteers. The two members of our Board who are University employees attend, on behalf of UNA residents, evening and weekend meetings and put in time during their busy days to deal with UNA issues. The student representative has been a conscientious attendee and participant on our Board, and has provided valuable advice on student perspectives.

84. We want to record our deep appreciation to all who have participated in the work of the UNA and to thank them on behalf of our entire community for the contribution they make to our residential life. 85. Finally, we would not be able to do most of what we do without the hard-working contribution of Cathie and Jan. We owe then a real debt of gratitude for all the good we are able to do!