We received the list of required zoning variances for Mackay Laneway House last week and they have been posted to the Globizen blog.
As is said in the post, we have requested clarification on a few items and we will be resubmitting the drawings to address some of the notices.
But I still think it’s great to get this information out in the public. It’s the sort of thing that usually doesn’t get published and I know there’s a lot of interest in laneway housing in the city right now. If you haven’t already, please consider signing your name at lanewaylove.com.
It is, however, a fairly esoteric post. So if this is not your bag, ignore this post and check back tomorrow. Regular scheduled programming will resume then.
Vancouver has supported laneway houses since 2009. So today I thought I would take a look at what their policy considers to be an “eligible lot.” All of the information for this post was taken from this laneway housing how-to guide dated November 2016.
Here are some of the main ways in which they assess eligibility:
Laneway houses are allowed on all lots in the following zones: RS single family zones, RT-11/11N, RM- 7/7N, RM-8/8N, RM-9/9N and RM-9A/9AN.
LWHs are permitted in addition to a secondary suite within the main house.
LWHs can be for family use or for rental.
LWHs are permitted on lots with a minimum width of 9.8m (32.15′). But provided they are designed appropriately, planning may also allow LWHs on lots as narrow as 7.3m (23′).
The LWH site must have access to an open lane.
A fire access path must be provided from the street along one of the sideyards to the entrance of the LWH. This path needs to have a clear width of 900mm.
The lot must be deep enough to allow for a both a LWH and a backyard open space.
The LWH and the main house must have a minimum separation distance of 4.9m (16′).
If you’re a regular reader of this blog and wondering how Mackay Laneway House stacks up against the above criteria, here are the test results:
The lot is in a Residential R Zone, which permits a variety of different building types ranging from detached houses to fourplexes and apartment buildings.
The lot width is 7.62m, which exceeds the lower minimum dimension.
There is a lane.
The access path on the sideyard is 2.38m, but with a bay window projecting into it. So net, it’s closer to 2m, which still greatly exceeds the minimum clear width above.
The design includes for a generous backyard between the main house and the proposed LWH.
The separation distance between the first floor of the main house and the proposed LWH is 7.5m (24′-7″). The main house steps back on the second floor, and so this distance would then increase. But in all cases, the minimum dimension is easily exceeded.
If you’d like to learn more about laneway housing in Vancouver, click here.
My friend Bruce of getrefm.com (real estate financial modeling) just introduced me to a new real estate startup called Envelope. Basically it’s 3D mapping software that allows you to quickly visualize the zoning envelope for a particular site. It’s similar to what Flux.io was initially trying to do.
Now, I think this is very cool, but my first reaction was: What if the zoning is out of date? What if approvals/entitlements are done a site-specific basis? This isn’t the case in every city, but I’ve heard some people in Toronto argue that this city basically has no zoning code. (We can debate that one in the comments, I’m sure.)
That being said, there are still many design guidelines in this city that shape built form and I could see a tool like this being incredibly useful. They’re still in private beta but I would like to try it out. Hopefully they’ll see this blog post and let me have an early peek.
Image: envelope.city