Hello again, friends, parents, neighbours,

Here I will share a final ask and a copy of the letter below that went from Parents for Thoughtful City Planning to the City Planner, Theresa O'Donnell.

Please consider submitting your own comments in the next 24 hours in order to advocate for the most vulnerable in our community, children, and the women and women-led families of the Sancta Maria Home that have fundamentally been dejected and rejected by this uncanny proposal.

Thank you,

Parents 4TCP

[LETTER]

I would ask in the light of the arguments that follow, along with the abundance of communication in opposition and most of all on behalf of those impacted including the long established Sancta Maria Home for women fleeing violence (testimony linked) and the large preschool and elementary school campus  (testimony linked) surrounding the site that you reject the request for a Development Permit for the 2086-2098 W 7th Ave and 2091 W 8th Ave development application as is.

Pertaining to the specifics of the Development Permit process and application, this proposal is lacking the good design relevant to successful, desirable social housing outcomes including the wellbeing for tenants, a sense of belonging for our communities and generating long-term value for the city.

1/ Design of social and community housing underpins the creation of better places that support the physical, social, cultural, environmental, and economic wellbeing of the community. This proposed design is plainly and painfully institutional. The cold and abrupt appearance of the tower risks further stigmatizing those that dwell in it as being institutionalized. Its shocking appearance with zero setbacks does nothing to integrate into the immediate and tender public realm including a toddler park, elementary school playground and a women’s shelter for those fleeing violence and reuniting with their young children.  

Action: Seek to amend the build form with the generous $65M budget into one that yields a greater and gentler pride of place, a design that is warm and welcoming to dwellers and potentially even bears a cheerful, cultural celebration. One should not be labelled or be stigmatized by the building one enters to live in, especially when buildings that are paid for and designed by public funds. A successful example of this that garnered national headlines is the striking passive house, basket weave building by GBL (a $55M project) planned for Grandview Woodlands. Here is another https://architizer.com/projects/ginkgo-project-1/ 

2/ This proposed site has been the exception and not the rule of placement or design of projects serving those with mental illness and addiction in the city's entire history. Sites such as this have never been placed inside a school campus. As such I believe an exceptional approach must be taken to engage the community and accomplish the much desired outcome that is its sense of belonging.  Additionally, it should be recognized that this approach is necessary as the site casts shadows and towers over the schools only playground and learning rooms for the majority of each day where the children spend the majority of their daylight hours each week.

Action: Seek to amend the exterior build form and/or facade by running the design by a committee of youth drawing participation from the area's six schools.  Create opportunities for learning and engagement in the built environment and inspire the youth of the city to engage in civic planning. Diffuse an otherwise contentious project through engagement and garner headlines for being a city interested in the feedback of youth for the design of social and community housing. 

3/ All development should seek to deepen a sense of belonging for our communities. The proposed site undoes belonging.  Despite the location right next to a temporary shelter for women (that could act as a feeder site) and the cities’ published equity framework that guarantees Vancouver to be a place where all women have full access to the resources provided in the city, this site excludes women if they are expecting or have given birth to a child. The units are single only and the MOU targets males only. None of the units are for families. The children at the six neighboring elementary schools, however they may wish to, will not be able to participate in deepening any sense of belonging with the dwellers. They simply will not be able to integrate with the population as they are not permitted on site.

Action: Seek to amend the dwelling types into community housing with varied units inclusive of two bedroom units for families and seek to add a childcare facility within the amenity space.

4/ The site design does not work to create long term value for the cities investment. Creating long term value for the partnership from the significant $65M investment would do well by a site design both inside that unlock the gates of integration - KEY to the success of sites - and does better to eliminate the ‘us’ and ‘them’ divide. The lack of setbacks are an affront to a desired safe, connected environment. Dwellers of similar sites have been known to drop items out of windows, and without deeper setbacks the proposed would put children, families and other passersby at high risk of injury.

Action: Do integrate community housing within market dwelling settings, BUT create a safe, connected environment with increased setbacks. Increase setbacks to allow for increased safety, natural lighting and added benefit of green space on this busy arterial, transit hub, and school zone. It would add to the safe and independent passage of the 1700 school children to and from the area. Increase the setback along Arbutus to strongly influence how the development interacts with the public realm and the experience it creates on the public street by creating an appropriately scaled enclosure and active yet gentle frontage.

Thank you for your engagement thus far.

I am open and look forward to your feedback and dialogue.

[END]

___