I rarely say this, but Toronto should
be a lot more like Vancouver. I don't think we should wear more fleece or do
more yoga, but I do think Vancouver is on to something when the city makes it
easy for Vancouverites to build laneway houses. Here in Toronto it is next to
impossible to build a laneway house.
Of course, "next to
impossible" does not mean it cannot be done. If you have a preexisting
structure and a laneway that has two exits for emergency vehicles to move, your
chances are better, though still tough. Also, with a condo, like the Duke under
construction in the Junction, part of the condo is planned laneway houses.
Sadly, if you are not a developer, then this certainly won't work for you.
I'm surprised that the city of Toronto
still makes it so difficult to build laneway houses, especially with the rise
of such groups as Toronto Laneway Renaissance whose mission is to make laneways
more useful and more aesthetically pleasing throughout the city. In addition to
this, Toronto's official plan allows for densification. This usually means
building condos on previous parking lots, or unused land, but why not laneway
houses on long lots? Is it not a good way to increase density in the city?
Would that not help with the mandate of the official plan?
As the city of Toronto sees it, at
this point, laneway houses create more problems than benefits. It would put
more stress on existing infrastructure like water and sewage. The city gets
cranky when there are no fixed address or street names for laneways. In the
eyes of the City, to give laneway addresses and names would cost they city
money, even though they would also create more property taxes with more
homes.
For some laneway houses, they would
take the place of a garage and remove
the street property's parking spot creating a bigger burden for street
parking. In many Toronto neighbourhoods, it is already very hard to find street
parking. Some do not even give out permits any longer. Still, I do see houses
in our city with nothing but land in the backyard off the lane, with parking in
the front or through a mutual drive. In Vancouver, new laneway houses need to
have a parking spot. So, solutions do exist!
I can understand there are certain
drawback for the city's perspective to building laneway houses, but there are
more benefits than disadvantages when the laneway houses are built right.
First, they look great! Mostly because they are built by eager architects and
design folk who have the patience and the know-how to work through the city
permit process. Secondly, they usually are small spaces that are designed well
to maximize their usage and be more sustainable. From the city of Toronto, laneway houses would take the heat off of the
increasing demand for low-rise houses. It would create a whole new area where
houses can be built. Best of all, for those who live there, laneway houses
would be quiet, often away from a busy street. Not even on a street at all, but
tucked away in the back away from traffic.
To be honest, I don't see the City
changing their minds soon. It's too bad. It would really make good use of this
city and open the flood gates for a lot of creative projects that would offer a
whole new option for city living with the houses, condos, and lofts. It would
ease the pressure on the limited low density housing demand, and it would
create a stronger tax base for the city. Let's hope I'm wrong, and the new
mayor can be open to a little vision in the next four years.
No comments:
Post a Comment