Stanley Park Storm Damage Almost 6 Months Later

My husband and I walk through Stanley Park a lot. By a lot, I don’t mean we stroll along the seawall during a lovely afternoon while sipping a chai latte (…okay sometimes we do). We go off the beaten path, explore, climb, hike and have come to know our urban oasis very well. We went out on a trek today, and I took some photos to compare the “progress” of the restoration so far – a public/private/government multi-million dollar funded effort after being devastated by a storm almost 6 months ago. The thing is… trees are still covering paths, trails are still closed, the seawall is still closed around the north end, and we really haven’t noticed much development aside from perimeter road traffic being restored, which makes me wonder where all the money is going – or at least when we’ll start seeing some improvements.


8 Comments so far

  1. Gwen (unregistered) on May 21st, 2007 @ 11:42 pm

    Rather than offering an explanation for where the money went, I’m ranting. The destruction in Stanley Park was sad and the funding to clean up was a boon to the city. Usually time=money and the sooner they clean up, the sooner the park can re-coop. Personally, I want to rant because not having the Seawall open has cause the re-routing of two races I’m in (for less picturesque and more difficult routes) – one back in Febrary, and the one in July is also a no-go.

  2. Jonathon Narvey (unregistered) on May 22nd, 2007 @ 10:52 am

    On a related topic, I hadn’t heard whether the city had decided to act on any of the suggestions put forth about how to dispose of all that fallen timber before it turns into a summer-heat fire trap. I thought the suggestion repeated by Darren Barefoot about letting carvers and artists to chop it up and cart it away and use it creatively was a great idea. Sure beats paying helicopter pilots to fly the logs out of there.

  3. Vince (unregistered) on May 22nd, 2007 @ 11:08 am

    Has all the money Siwashed away? ;-)

  4. Jimmy (unregistered) on May 22nd, 2007 @ 12:33 pm

    Judging by the before and after pictures, I imagine they’ve spent a bunch of time and money draining Burrard inlet. That reminds me… I lost a flip-flop off of the sea wall back in ’89. I should shimmy down there to see if it’s turned up.

  5. Kooz (unregistered) on May 24th, 2007 @ 7:36 am

    I hate it when people use the phrase “beg the question” without knowing what it means.

  6. Mark (unregistered) on May 24th, 2007 @ 7:02 pm

    That’s kind of harsh criticism. Have you checked the park’s board website?

    The reason why sections are still closed is because work is being carried out to stabilize the escarpment above the Seawall.

  7. mark (unregistered) on May 24th, 2007 @ 7:07 pm

    “Begs the question”: An argument that improperly assumes as true the very point the speaker is trying to argue for is said in formal logic to “beg the question.”

    Here is an example of a question-begging argument: “This painting is trash because it is obviously worthless.” The speaker is simply asserting the worthlessness of the work, not presenting any evidence to demonstrate that this is in fact the case.

    Since we never use “begs” with this odd meaning (“to improperly take for granted”) in any other phrase, many people mistakenly suppose the phrase implies something quite different: that the argument demands that a question about it be asked–raises the question.

    If you’re not comfortable with formal terms of logic, it’s best to stay away from this phrase, or risk embarrassing yourself.

  8. keith lim (unregistered) on May 25th, 2007 @ 4:25 pm

    I’m completely on your side about the misuse of “beg the question”, but I’ve pretty much given up on correcting it; it’s a lost cause to me.

Terms of use | Privacy Policy | Content: Creative Commons | Site and Design © 2009 | Metroblogging ® and Metblogs ® are registered trademarks of Bode Media, Inc.