1956-1990 Stainsbury Avenue
For the second time in a month, Darren and I were forced to split up in order to cover multiple events. While he was at City Hall for an Urban Design Panel meeting, I went to the Croatian Cultural Centre to learn about this colourful proposal. Despite the city’s strict design regulations effectively turning these mid-rise buildings into a modern version of the Vancouver Special, this one manages to do something different.
While it is not much, I really appreciate how the design team has splashed some vibrant colours onto what would typically be a bland black and white building. Unfortunately that does not continue to the top floors, as city policy requires them to be set back and incorporate white materials in order to blend in with the sky. Unsurprisingly, no one at the open house appreciated this gesture.
One neighbour claimed that now whenever they go into their backyard, they cannot help but picture this structure, and how imposing it will be. Others were concerned it might limit their ability to increase their income by adding a laneway home to their own property. This opposition sheepishly melted away, after another individual pointed out that, given Vancouver’s rental crisis, it was simply egotistical to oppose these needed homes for these reasons.
I can understand this person’s passion as, under the Moderate Income Rental Housing Pilot Program, 20% of the building’s floor area will be permanently geared to households with incomes between $30k – $80k a year. That said, the southeast corner does feel very snug, but since the property is made up of four large single family lots, there is room to shift this bulk upwards. This could be done by adding a 6th floor, or by removing the setbacks.
Still, some opposed even these five floors and preferred only two or three stories be allowed to match the height of the neighbourhood to the east. Interestingly, they overlooked the taller building to the north. Like that project, this one also required a large courtyard, which I imagine makes it more difficult to reach the Passive House environmental standard it is seeking.
I do not think any of the other event’s 56 attendees brought up that issue, but some were concerned there may be an increase in traffic along the lane. Ironically, some of them also wanted to see more parking provided. Those desires clearly contradict each other, but the applicant has tried to address them by moving the parking garage entrance from the centre of the southern facade to its current location.
As it now sits at the highest point of the property, this partially underground structure acts as a large blank wall along Stainsbury. It has also upset some of the neighbours across from it who suggested the entrance would be better located along the road instead. However, a member of the applicant team explained it would negatively impact the public realm as, for pedestrians, it would be like looking into a dark cave.
Though they admitted if a desire for that change was shown in the public feedback, they would consider implementing it. Darren and I certainly know public feedback can make a difference, so whether you agree with any of these sentiments, or have your own thoughts, make sure your voice is heard by commenting here.
City Duo 