“Hey, do you like Earl’s?” asks a man with a ragged and unkempt appearance, offering me a $25 gift card to Earl’s that he had gotten while panhandling: he tells me how he had gone to an Earl’s restaurant to try and use it, but they wouldn’t serve him because he was homeless.
“It’s of no use to me”, he shrugs. “I’d rather sleep indoors tonight than eat at fucking Earl’s.”
This juxtaposition of poverty and higher-end living is common in Vancouver, especially in the Downtown Eastside area, where the border between the poorest postal code in North America and Gastown is a vague one. This border is arbitrary, more upheld by social biases and stigmas, than by any physical or geographic markers.
The area that is now considered the shame of Vancouver was once a vibrant center, housing the central library, City Hall, and a streetcar terminal. In 1958, however, streetcars ceased to run through that area, followed by the central library’s move to Burrard and Robson. This, in combination with many companies also moving their head offices from the area, led to a drastic decrease in traffic. Other parts of the city — including Kitsilano — were seeing a gradual reduction in low-income housing, which brought more people to live in the Downtown Eastside, which was becoming more and more affordable. Another blow to the neighbourhood came when the Eaton’s department store moved to Granville St. from its location on Hastings Street — where SFU Harbour Center is located today.
The 1970s saw a turning point in the neighborhood’s history: due to funding cuts, thousands of psychiatric patients were de-institutionalized and left to fend for themselves. Many ended up in the Downtown Eastside, looking for low-income housing. The area has since become known for the high rates of drug addiction and abuse. This stems from the late 1980s when cocaine gained popularity over heroin, and consequently, the cheaper, lower quality crack cocaine became widespread. The rise in addiction came hand-in-hand with a rise in crime. As the demand rose, more and more pawn shops opened in the area, which made it harder for other types of businesses to stay successful. The final blow came in 1993, when Woodward’s closed down, bringing down with it what remained of businesses and restaurants in the area.
Last year, the annual Carnegie Community Action Project (CCAP) reported that 328 new units of social housing opened in the area, but also noted that high end restaurants are opening up in the area, causing real estate to skyrocket. “While this has been a good year for social housing, it has also been a year of gentrification,” reads the report. “Speculators are buying hotels and turning them into money-making investments.”
The theme of the annual report was the gentrification of the area.
Gentrification is the process by which businesses and investors build their projects in low-income neighbourhoods, thereby changing the face of the demographic, and usually pushing out the current inhabitants from the area. This is a rising concern in the Downtown Eastside as the trendy feel of neighbouring Gastown starts to bleed into Hastings St.
The CCAP reported at least 700 people that are currently homeless or living in shelters in the concentrated several blocks that the Downtown Eastside consists of, not including those that are living on the street or couch surfing. Thousands more live in privately owned single resident occupancies (SROs), which provide their occupants with little more than a small bed and a hotplate. These places are infested with cockroaches and rats, and are unsafe for vulnerable groups such as women. There are another 1,500 SR’s in the downtown eastside that are government-owned, or run by non-profit organizations. While the hygiene standards are higher in these than in privately-owned SROs, there is nonetheless little room, and no private kitchens or washrooms. Furthermore, many of these SROs do not meet earthquake safety standards. The report found that it is getting increasingly more difficult for low-income residents of the Downtown Eastside — many of whom survive on welfare or disability pay — to stay in even the squalor of privately owned SROs: the rent is growing, and the clerks at the front desk often profile potential occupants based on health issues and race. In 2011, only seven per cent of these hotels had rents of $375 or less, down from 29 per cent in 2009. There are occurrences of people double-bunking in these rooms, which are already too small for even one person to live somewhat comfortably. Most of these SROs are not allowed to rent by the night or the week, but some do so illegally, which also affects the vacancy of these places.
A staggering number of Downtown Eastside inhabitants are receiving welfare, with a majority on disability pay. According to the National Council of Welfare’s website, a single person on disability welfare in BC receives an annual $11,559, which calculates to $963.25 per month. A single employable person receives $7947 in welfare, which leaves these individuals to live on about $662.25 per month. While rent in SROs can be as low as $375, these are decreasing as real estate prices in the area rise, and vacancies are rare. Some of these SROs can cost upwards of $600 per month, which leaves those living on welfare with little choice regarding where and how they live. I spoke to a man living on disability welfare in the Downtown Eastside whose only choice of a place (based on finances and vacancy) was on the fourth floor — his lung problems made it almost impossible for him to go up that many flights of stairs, so he scheduled his day so as to only have to go up the stairs once each day.
The area is subject not only to deplorable living conditions, but also to corruption and stigmatization of its inhabitants. The 2011 Carnegie Community Action Project noted this as an issue, and provided a case study to paint a picture of the level of exploitation:
“At the Lotus Hotel . . . the lowest rent in the summer of 2010 was $440. In the summer of 2011, CAPP researchers got two different rent prices. A low-income Aboriginal DTES resident was told rent was $800 a month, and that there were no vacancies. A white university student was told by the same manager on the same day that rent was $675 and that the room would be available by the end of the month. The manager said they’re ‘not supposed’ to accept walk-ins, they are supposed to only accept new tenants through Craigslist applications for ‘quality control’ reasons.”
“As a generalized urban strategy, gentrification weaves together the interests of city managers, developers and landlords, corporate employers and cultural and educational institutions,” writes urban theorist Neil Smith. “Gentrification has become a strategy within globalization itself; the effort to create a global city is the effort to attract capital and tourists, and gentrification is a central means for doing so.”
The western area of the Downtown Eastside was among the first parts to experience gentrification: the historic Woodward’s site now houses over 500 condominiums, and the SFU campus at Woodward’s was controversially funded by mining giant Goldcorp. This sparked four more condo developments in the span of several blocks, not to mention restaurants and bars along the lines of Bitter Tasting Room. With the new condo developments, new restaurants and stores had to be built to meet the needs of the new demographic moving into the condos. Many of the restaurants along Carrall Street, as well as some of the condo developers in the area, have advertised as being in neighboring Gastown, which regard as an insult to the Downtown Eastside’s rich identity and history. Closer to the south, even more condo projects were established (V6A, Ginger, Strathcona East, Keefer Suites), and in April 2011, the city of Vancouver approved the Historic Area Heights Review, with new building allowances that approve a 17-storey condo and retail project, and a Rezoning Policy for Chinatown South.
The 2010 Vancouver Olympics were met with opposition for this very reason: the fear that a surge in development would further the process of gentrification. In 2008, after the initial bid for the Olympics went through, Pivot Legal Society — in association with the Carnegie Community Action Project and the Impact of the Olympics on Community Coalition — complained to the UN about the living conditions in SROs in the Downtown Eastside.
“We’re concerned about the 4,000 people living in privately owned residential hotels and rooming houses in Vancouver,” said David Eby of Pivot Legal Society. “They are being illegally evicted, they live in terrible conditions, and they are afraid to speak up because they need that housing.”
These fears, and the consequent protests, did nothing to deter the building and growth that came with the Olympics.
It is not only the Downtown Eastside that is experiencing gentrification: other areas, such as Mount Pleasant and Grandview Woodlands are seeing a surge in rent prices, forcing the inhabitants — mostly seniors and working-class families — to move to more affordable housing. The outrage surrounding the gentrification in Vancouver is further fuelled by the growing socio-economic gap between the residents of the Downtown Eastside and those at the top of the chain.
For example, Brandt Louie and Jim Pattison — both B.C. billionaires — received tax exemptions for their investments in Woodward’s. Another example shows a glimpse into the politics behind gentrification: for the past two municipal elections — both successful — Vision Vancouver allegedly got significant funding from real estate developers. Many see the gentrification not only as a logistical problem — that of where the current low-income residents will go — but also a moral one, even an attack on those that are already downtrodden.
“Approaching the isabella I expect to see an upscale enterprise has erased the old hotel & displaced all the misfit inhabitants & wonder what new monstrosity of redevelopment looms amid toronto’s global city agenda driving people into every doorway along bloor street after dark”
“Gentrification” -Bud Osborn, Downtown Eastside poet and activist
