Notes from a meeting with SJDRDTF, SPRC, CD, and Silver Threads December 14, 2011
Meeting St John the Divine December 14, 2011
Attending
From the St. John the Divine Redevelopment Task Force:
Deborah Curran
Larry Scyner Priest in Charge
Peggy Wilmot
Patricia Lane
Robert Brown SJD Chesterman Properties
From Single Parent Resource Centre/1Up:
Christine St Peter
Barbara Heringer
Liz Bloomfield
William Lake
Alice Ages
From City Spaces:
Dean Strongitharm
Brenda McBain
Sheila Catchpo
From Centennial Daycare:
Karen Macauley
From Silver Threads:
Brian Blair
Edie Copeland
Terry Prentice
Jason French
Values and opening statements
Excitement. Validation of the vision and partnership. Victoria Foundation agreed to
fund us and feels like they will be with us for the long term.Poised to move ahead.
Task Force reported that SjD has moved forward with some of the technical aspects.
 Prep for meeting with Parish mid January, parking study under way;
formalizing relationships all as foundational for meeting with City early
February. Diocese needs to be kept in the loop but generally positive.
 Meetings with the North Part Community Association, First Metropolitan
United, Girl Guides etc. either happening or scheduled.
Agreement to set up working group of trio and sjdtf now appropriate. No more
architectural work by SJD appropriate until we ensure that the approaches are
Page
1
Notes from a meeting with SJDRDTF, SPRC, CD, and Silver Threads December 14, 2011
integrated. Need to think about tenure and design. Early January- Dean reported
that he met with First Met this am and they are wanting to loop back into SJDTF
process and early January will work for them too in all likelihood.
Is this a building for just the trio or other agencies as well?
Needs of Trio
 Will be a wonderful use for the building as part of a campus integrated with
other service providers.
 Missions seem to work well with the current services church offer.
 Room and space to expand our services.
 Extra space would be of enormous benefit.
 Intergenerational hub is anew idea in BC. Proven elsewhere.
 Relationship strong. But need to grow at the base to be a foundation for new
community outreach.
 Fund raising easier for ownership by trio versus fundraising for a broader
project
 How to preserve the identities of the Trio – vs can be done by building
design.
 Accounting concern of using rent to pay mortgage.
SJD Vision
SJD has a vision that all the entities have come together to co-locate. All the
organizations animate the space- intentions, physical location, some programming –
handing land back to the community with an overarching public interest
sustainability mandate that will endure overtime. We see the site as one entity.
Application process will see values reflected in entire site. How can we have
autonomy inside a broader community. How can the community amplify service
work?
There is a difference between sharing and animating space vs integrating
programming, the latter being more complex and only developing over time as
organizations are able.
Common set of values and goals and we agree how we choose our co-locators.



Don’t want a “standard” office building without real sharing. Occupying the
same building isn’t necessarily the same as shared space.
Vision of shared space with others will take some space to grow.
Fund raising can be done as a service for the trio and other non profits to be
better housed might be even better fund raising proposition.
Suggest that St. Johns’ Task Force circulate an internal document with examples of
how people can build and co-locate and govern space together.
Page
2
Notes from a meeting with SJDRDTF, SPRC, CD, and Silver Threads December 14, 2011
Sub Committee: Work towards a shared vision and values for the project and the
site. Once sign off then move towards specifics. Delve into each topic – what do we
need to know to understand the possibilities? Each of us will continue with the
work we each do as well as the collaborative process now beginning in a more
structured way.
40,000 sqare feet available for redevelopment. 18,000 available using a U shaped
building. 20-25,000 if not a U shape.
Working group makes recommendations – governance structure that models site.
Representative group – Project executive board. Built around a shared vision for the
site. MOU to contain mechanism for including others.
Before Dec 31 names of people to Deb for the working group. Deb will convene
dcurran@dcurranandco.ca
Task of working group to meet minimum every two weeks,
Mandate:
 To meet no less than biweekly
 Shared principles for the site.
 Governance structure
 Develop a project charter which will include a process for bringing other
groups into the MOU
 Timeline
Each of our groups will need to approve this.
Page
3