Sunday, January 9, 2011

Sexual Health a Radical Choice

The Opt clinic is a much used but little known resource in Ganges. Run by two nurses, a rotation of female doctors and a handful of volunteers, it provides confidential and non-judgemental care to anyone with a sexual health concern.
Mostly that means dispensing birth control pills to teens who don't want to get pregnant (good idea). Pelvic exams are also available to women of all ages, well-woman exams (including breast self-exam tutorial), STD and pregnancy tests and counseling are also available.
Most of the clients are female and they range in age from teens to seniors. Some people use the clinic because they prefer a female doctor for certain procedures, some like the lower dispensing fees on oral contraceptives and some rely on the privacy afforded by the confidential service.
Everybody who comes to Opt as a client is facing the daunting challenges of physical health and also social and emotional wellness. Young women commonly experience distressing symptoms like headaches, abdominal pain, moodiness, skin problems and weight gain as well as conflicting advice from doctors and friends. Then there are the really scary things like infection, pregnancy and abuse. All this in the middle of growing into adulthood; trying to figure out how to earn a living, how to manage relationships and how to remain true to themselves. It's a lot of work!
Those who work at Opt do so because they want to help where they have been helped. As one volunteer put it, “I have to work here because I'm the poster child for this place; I've tried everything”. The message these women send is this: “There is no shame. Taking care of yourself is a radical thing to do and if you've made it in the front door, you're already doing it.”
Recognizing each person's ability to choose their own sexual activity and is the key to providing these services and providing them is key to individuals' ability to choose their own health.

Statement to the Islands Trust December 2010

My name is Emily McIvor. I am a voter and I live and work in downtown Ganges. I am here today to speak to the Development Permit application of Mr. Leon Aptekman regarding the tear-down and reconstruction of his buildings at 146-150 Fulford-Ganges Rd.. These historic buildings are right in the centre of downtown with some of the best pedestrian exposure in the village. The existing buildings need a lot of work and the landlord wants to tear them down and replace them with another building (phase 3) which would match the neighbouring Phase 1 and 2 in that block.

At this time, the buildings house four small local and independently owned shops. When the reconstruction is complete, the whole space, as well as the one next door (which currently houses Mark's Work Wearhouse) will be made into one single storefront and leased to Mark's. That means a long strip of street frontage, taken away from little unique shops and turned into one large chain store.
I understand that the current land-use bylaws do not govern who can use the land (that would be discriminatory). However the character and diversity of our village is threatened by this change, so I think it must be addressed.

In regard to the specific application of Leon Aptekman and his architect, Johnathan Yardley, I would like to speak to several sections of Bylaw No. 434. Section E.1: Development Permit Area One- Island Villages. Under heading E.1.2- Reasons for the Development Permit Area, the second paragraph states that the requirement for development permits in Island Villages, “will guide the community's most significant concentrated and visible new development so that it is compatible with existing building, with the natural environment and with community objectives for villages.” The proposed development, even if it falls within current regulatory standards, is not compatible with community objectives (as shown by the 669 signatures on a petition opposing it). The proposal and it's ultimate effect on the visual, social and economic environment of Ganges do not reflect community values of diversity, locality and craftsmanship.

In section E.1.3- Objectives of this Development Permit Area, section E.1.3.3 aims to “encourage creative designs that continue to reflect the diversity and richness of Salt Spring Island. To avoid design controls that would make island villages appear architecturally sterile or contrived.” I understand the planners imperative to match new buildings with existing ones however, some existing buildings are not worth matching. I find the current phase 2 to be both architecturally sterile and contrived and since the original plans were drawn up during the 1980s, I do not think there can be any defense of them as modern or progressive.

Section E.1.6.7 under the heading- Scale, Massing and Modulation, requires that “the existing 'rhythm' of buildings along street frontages be respected.” While the new building may match the adjacent Phase 2, the variety, interest and quaint facades of the current buildings will not be matched.

In section E.1.6.14 under the heading- Details, “the use of imaginative, handcrafted products of local craftspeople is encouraged.” No such handcrafted products are part of this proposal.

In section E.1.6.15 “a pleasant pedestrian environment” is advised. Variety and character are the spice of pedestrian experience. A proposal which detracts from the variety and character of the street frontage can only harm the pedestrian environment.

My point is that while I understand that the building may need to be replaced or repaired, I do not think that one big store with multiple door openings is the same thing as several smaller stores and while I understand the idea of matching one building to the next, I do not think that ugly buildings should be matched.
I believe that the character and diversity of not only our built environment but also our social and economic ones are threatened by changes like this and if the current bylaws do not allow the governing body to protect these things, changes should be made.
I would like to participate in the upcoming bylaw review and I request that, in the review, a bylaw be written which restricts the floor size of individual businesses in the core of lower Ganges ( Jackson Ave, to Rainbow Rd. and down to the waterfront). I would also like to see a preservation of heritage facades.

I request that this permit not be granted until it is clear that it fully meets community objectives.

Head Office Distances Itself from Mark's Franchise

Robin Lynas, Vice President of corporate relations for Mark's Work Wearhouse, warns that a franchise buy-out by head office will not necessarily increase in amount with the square footage of an expanded local store. “If they expand the store and their sales do not increase to match, it doesn't look good” said Lynas, in a phone conversation. He went on to explain that while head office does have first right-of-refusal for any franchise operation, the buy-out formula is based on sales as well as a number of other factors.
Ten paper letters as well as numerous phone calls have been received by head office in opposition to the planned expansion of Mark's on Salt Spring. ( The plan would see Mark's expand over 900 square feet and take up the entire block of downtown street-frontage.) Many Salt Springers have stated that while they want to support Mark's, they don't want to lose the unique and charming character of a more varied commercial area. Lynas also stated that Mark's is a destination store, best suited to an area with plenty of convenient parking.
Only around ten percent of over three hundred Mark's stores remain as franchise businesses, the rest have been bought back by the parent company which is a subsidiary of Canadian Tire, making the prospect of another remotely owned, big chain store in downtown Ganges, a remarkably reasonable concern. Lynas suggested that the most important conversation for the community to have is with the land owner, Leon Aptekman. Mr. Aptekman has been unavailable for comment and has ignored the many petition signatures, letters to the editor and personal pleas by community members.
Local Trust committee members will discuss the development permit application for the new Mark's store, on Friday, January 14th at their monthly meeting, held at Artspring. It remains to be seen whether current bylaws will suffice to prevent the expansion but the meeting is open to the public and polite discussion is welcomed. The townhall portion is scheduled for 12:30, the application will be discussed after that.