geller: preliminary report form design

8/2/2019 Geller: Preliminary Report Form Design

1/37

March 2012 :: Draft for Discussion

Mayors affordableHousing Task force:roundTable onbuilding forM and design


2/37

2

Mayors Affordable Housing Task Force: Roundtable on Building Form and Design

March 22, 2012

Mayor Gregor Robertson and Ms. Olga Ilich,Co-chairs, Mayors Task Force on Aordable Housing,City o Vancouver,453 West 12th Avenue,

Vancouver, BC V5Y 1V4, Canada

Dear Mayor Robertson and Ms. Ilich,

re: PreliMinary findings of roundTable on building forM and design

As Chair o the Roundtable on Building Form and Design, I am pleased to submit thispreliminary report to assist the Task Force in its deliberations. As requested, we haveattempted to identiy zoning and building code requirements and other design regulationsthat may be unnecessarily adding to the cost o aordable housing.

When I rst agreed to participate in this Task Force initiative, a number o peoplequestioned whether any positive benets would be orthcoming. They noted that many othe actors contributing to the cost o housing in Vancouver, such as the high cost o land

and the impacts o oreign investment, are beyond the mandate o the City. However, asI believe you will note rom this report, there is much that the City can do to improve itszoning and building regulations to encourage the creation o a variety o more aordablehousing orms.

For instance, by modiying the RS zoning, it will be possible to acilitate the developmento smaller, more aordable single amily, duplex, semi-detached and coach house homes.


3/37

3Mayors Affordable Housing Task Force: Roundtable on Building Form and Design

By creating new transition zones, it will be possible or the City to encourage a broader

range o more aordable rowhouse, townhouse and stacked-townhouse units. As youknow, I am particularly keen to see more ee-simple rowhouses developed in the City.

By undertaking revisions to the RT (two-amily) and C-2 zones, it will be possible toacilitate an increased supply o more livable housing located close to transit and otheramenities.

By reconsidering parking standards and regulations, minimum suite sizes, and changes tore regulations and accessibility standards, additional savings can be realized.

While the City has achieved a high level o recognition or its zoning, planning anddiscretionary design requirements, many people believe the competing demands rom

various city departments are contributing to a very complex approval process and higherhousing costs. They would like to see the same level o commitment to aordability thatis currently being devoted to sustainability. In this regard, it is suggested that the Cityconsider appointing an Ombudsman to adjudicate the design conficts that oten arise dueto the dierent values and requirements o City departments.

Finally, while many may question whether reduced costs will translate into reduced pricesI am condent that by acilitating an increased housing supply and greater competitionin the marketplace, cost reductions resulting rom many o the suggested measures

will ultimately translate into lower prices and more aordable housing choices or theresidents o Vancouver.

Respectully submitted,

Michael Geller, B.Arch, MAIBC, FCIPChair, Roundtable on Building Form and Design


4/37


inTroducTion

Purpose and objectives 6Composition and working arrangements 6

Aordable Housing Priorities 7Structure o this report 7

cHaPTer a: Zoning, building code

regulaTions and design guidelines

iMPacTing lower densiTy forMs

of Housing

A.1 Single amily housing 9 - 10A.2 Secondary Suites 11A.3 Laneway Housing (LWH) 12 - 13A.4 Duplexes and Semi-detached Housing 14 - 15

cHaPTer b: Zoning, building code


iMPacTing MediuM densiTy

ground-orienTed Housing

B.1 Townhouses, rowhouses and other

medium density ground-oriented orms 17B.2 Stacked Townhouses 18 - 19

cHaPTer c: Zoning, building code


iMPacTing Mixed use develoPMenTs

in c-2 Zones 21

index


5/37


cHaPTer d: THe case for sMallersuiTe siZes 23

cHaPTer e: sPecial consideraTions

E.1 Obstacles to more modest ormso housing 25E.2 Impact o parking regulations onthe cost o housing 26E.3 Impacts o Green BuildingRequirement 27

E.4 Resolution o competing demandsrom various departments 28E.5 Innovative design ideas toencourage the retention o Vancouverssignicant stock o older rental housing 29

cHaPTer f: suMMary and conclusions 31 - 34

acknowledgeMenTs 35

aPPendices

Appendix A 36Appendix B 37

Report designed in Vancouver, BC by Mitra Mansour of (www.creativeroom.ca)


6/37


PurPose and objecTives

Many actors contribute to the high costo housing in Vancouver. They includethe cost o land and construction;municipal ees and other nancingconsideration; and the complex approvalprocess. Two related considerations arethe costs associated with the regulationo building orm and design, and theshortage o suitably zoned land or moreaordable housing choices.

The Roundtable on Building Form andDesign was created to advise the Mayors

Aordable Housing Task Force. Its goalsand objectives include the ollowing:

To identiy design and buildingcode requirements and related

guidelines and procedures that maybe unnecessarily adding to the costo housing in Vancouver;

To identiy zoning and building codebarriers that may be restricting thesupply o more aordable housingorms;

To review constraints and otherconsiderations related to thedevelopment o smaller micro-suitesor rent or or sale; and

To identiy additional buildingorm and design issues that mayassist the Task Force in developingrecommendations on how bestto increase the supply o moreaordable housing in Vancouver.

coMPosiTion and working

arrangeMenTs

The Roundtable was chaired byMichael Geller, a Vancouver basedarchitect, planner, real estateconsultant and property developer. Itincluded architects, developers, andhousing ocials active in the designand development o various types ohousing in Vancouver;

The group sought input rom codeconsultants, engineers, real estatelawyers and other building experts;

It liaised with the ArchitecturalInstitute o British Columbia (AIBC)and the Urban Development Institute(UDI) and received input rom their

members;

It consulted with City sta rom thePlanning, Building, Housing andthe City Managers Oce during itsdeliberations.

In reviewing some o the commentsreceived rom architects, developersand other proessionals with City sta, it

was noted that one must be careul notto generalize rom specic situations.

Also, there appeared to be many mythsand misconceptions regarding zoningand building code requirments, anddepartmental requirments, that warranturther review and discussion.

It is intended that the Roundtablesnal report will more ully address theapplicability o specic concerns andcomplaints to the broader context.


7/37


affordable Housing PrioriTies

Aordable housing means dierentthings to dierent people. TheTask Force is ocussing its eortson addressing aordability or lowto middle income households in

Vancouver which ranges rom individualhousehold incomes o $21,500 tocombined household income o $86,500per year For the purposes o thisreport, aordable housing includesaccommodation or:

lower income singles and couplesdesperately needing suitable rentalaccommodation;

singles and couples struggling to buytheir rst home in the City;

amilies with children who want tolive in the city rather than have tomove to more suburban locations;and

empty-nesters and seniors hopingto downsize without havingto leave their long establishedneighbourhoods.

sTrucTure of THis rePorT

The types o housing in Vancouverrange rom traditional single amilyhouses to low-rise, mid-rise and high-riseapartments. In between are a variety oother housing orms including lanewayhousing, secondary suites, rowhousesand townhouses, semi-detached andduplex housing, stacked townhouses andother orms o ground oriented housing,and housing in mixed-use developments.

This report examines zoning, designguidelines, and building code regulationsand barriers related to these dierentorms o housing. Where appropriate, itsets out items or urther consideration.It also includes additional matters orSpecial Consideration by the Task

Force in its immediate and longer termdeliberations. These include:

Obstacles to the development o thewalk-up apartment and other modestorms o housing similar to thosebuilt throughout Vancouver in thepast;

The impact o parking regulations onthe cost o housing

The impact o green buildingregulations that have been developedas part o Vancouvers strategy tobecome the Greenest City in the

world by 2020;

A review o competing demandsrom City Hall departments arisingrom dierent values related tobuilding orm and design, whichoten result in unnecessary costs and

an extended approval process.

Innovative design ideas to encouragethe retention o Vancouverssignicant stock o older rentalhousing.


8/37


Zoning, building code regulaTions and

design guidelines iMPacTing lower densiTy

forMs of Housinga.

Danielson Grove, Kirkland, WA - Rosschapin Architects


9/37


a.1 single faMily Housing

Most new single amily housesin Vancouver are not aordable.However, the City now permitssecondary suites and lanewayhouses resulting in the potential orthree dwelling units on most singleamily lots. This is signicant andhas resulted in a gentle increase inFSR rom 0.6 to approximately 0.73.

However, smaller more aordablehouses sized under1200 squareeet, similar to those built aterthe war, are rarely developed.This is primarily due to the CitysSubdivision and Zoning By-laws that establish minimum lot

widths and sizes, and the building

industrys reluctance to build lessthan the maximum permitted FSR.

In the past, successul skinnyhouses have been built on 16 anda hal oot lots. Some would likethe City to permit the subdivisiono existing 33 oot lots in hal,or see 50 oot lots divided intothree. Others advocate or a higherallowable FSR. However, a morecautious approach may be a more

successul way to gently densiysingle amily neighbourhoods.

In some neighbourhoods, largerolder houses are being demolishedand replaced by a new dwellingalong with a basement suiteand laneway house. Given thesustainability benets o retainingolder buildings, it may beadvantageous to allow the strata-titlesubdivision o larger single amilyhouses into two or more units.

Large house with 3 or 4 car garage on one singlelot

Its time to consider alternatives to largerconventional single family housest

Many existing houses are being demolished andreplaced with a new house, basement suite andlaneway house


10/37

10


consideraTions

To encourage the construction o smallersingle amily houses and other housingsuitable or amilies with children, andempty-nesters and seniors wishing toremain in their neighbourhoods, thecity should consider, on a selective pilot

project basis, three dierent initiatives inappropriate neighbourhoods:

1. Subdivision o 50 oot and widerlots into lots with a minimum widtho 25. While secondary suites mightbe permitted, laneway housing

would be prohibited on the smallerlots.

2. As an alternative to a largerdwelling, and two rental suites, the

City should permit three smallerunits or sale, provided that thetotal area is no greater than thatpermitted under the current zoning.This could result in smaller, moreaordable amily-oriented singleamily houses, duplexes, triplexesand/or coach houses.

3. In neighbourhoods with larger olderhouses, the City should considerallowing strata-title subdivision o

single amily properties into twoor three units, provided suitableupgrading and saety measures areput in place.

A good example of three unit building on a singlecorner lot

An example of a new home on a 25 foot lot inSeattle

Hollyburn Mews in West Vancouver comprisesthree new homes on a single family lot


11/37

11


a.2 secondary suiTes

Secondary or basement suites otenprovide the most aordable rentalhousing in the city. Regulationsgoverning basement suites in singleamily houses have recently beenmodied to acilitate more livableunits. Generally, only one basementsuite is legally permitted in adwelling, although in some instances,it might be easible to have twoseparate suites under a dwelling.

The city also allows lock-o suitesin multi-amily housing in certainzones. These smaller suites canresemble en-suite bedrooms, butinclude separate compact cookingacilities. However, ew have been

built. Further investigation is neededto determine why more units havenot been built.

consideraTions

4. To increase the supply o moreaordable rental suites, the cityshould allow secondary suites induplex and townhouse/rowhousedevelopments;

5. To encourage more lock-o suites,the City should investigate whymore units have not been builtand reconsider its minimum sizerequirement and other design andbuilding concerns that may berestricting their development.

6. Noting that in many situations it iscost eective to add a basementsuite in a single amily house, theCity should consider allowing an

additional secondary suite in lieu oa laneway house.

7. The City should also reviewwhether having a building withthree units would be deemeda multi-amily building withresulting higher code standards andadditional costs

Perkins & Company Architecture and UrbanDesign - lock-ff suite at SFUs UniverCity

Zoning bylaw changes have resulted in improveddesigns for secondary suites in new single familyhouses

Many older homes have mortgage helpers in thebasement


12/37

12


a.3 laneway Housing (lwH)

LWH was intended to createaordable housing or amilymembers or or rent. While theprogram has been popular andachieved international attention,ew new units have been completedor less than $250,000 and rents aregenerally $1600 to $2300 a month.

Many attribute the higher costs tothe Citys extensive design guidelinesand extremely careul scrutiny oapplications.

Most units built to date are one anda hal storeys high with an enclosedgarage that is oten designed tobe converted to living space at a

later date. The resulting bulk hasoten caused some neighbourhooddisapproval. Many would preerto see single storey cottage-stylehouses which might be moreaccessible or seniors.

Developers o laneway housing areseeking regulatory changes to bringdown costs without aecting healthand saety. They would also like thecity to accept pre-approved standardplans.

While LWH results in more expensiverental units, they could be moreaordable ownership units. Manypeople would like to be able topurchase a laneway house. Sincecurrent zoning regulations onlypermit rental dwellings, somehouseholds are entering into Tenantsin Common and other complex legal

arrangements in order to purchaseLWHs. Vancity even oers a specialmortgage program.

An attractive laneway house on an internal lot

It is much easier to develop laneway houses oncorner lots

Does this garage really need French doors


13/37


consideraTions

8. As part o the ongoing LWHprogram review, in collaboration

with laneway housing designers anddevelopers, the City should evaluatethose regulations and requirmentsthat are considered unnecessarilyexpensive, such as separate sewerhook-ups.

9. The City should acilitate andencourage simpler, single storeylaneway units with carports or openparking spaces, in addition to thecurrent designs. While this mayrequire modications to setbacksand limiting distance requirements,the result could be more accessible,less expensive and less intrusive

houses.

10. The City should also consider apilot program that allows the saleo a limited number o LWH locatedon larger corner lots (50 eet or

wider). Both ee-simple and bareland strata orms o subdivisionmight be tested in neighbourhoods

where neighbours are willing tosupport such pilot projects.

11. In order to ensure that the minimumparking requirement o one spaceor three units on a single amily lotis met, the City should take stepsto end the common practice odesigning garage spaces in lanewayhouses so that they can be easilyconverted to uture living space. (ie:no in-foor radiant heat, no Frenchdoors, no bay windows, etc.)

Recent typical Laneway Housing in Vancouver, BC

Extra windows are being added to garages innticipation of them being converted to additional

living space

Efforts should be made to facilitate more singlelevel cottage style laneway houses

he City should examine ways to reduce the cost ofew laneway houses


14/37


a.4 duPlexes and seMi-deTacHed

Housing

Duplexes comprise two separatedwelling units or sale or rent.They may be one beside another,one behind another, or one aboveanother. Duplexes are generally on

one legal lot and subdivided as strataunits, rather than ee-simple. Theyare usually developed in the variousRT zones in Vancouver.

Semi-detached housing comprisesside by side units on separate lots,

with a legal party wall agreementthat provides right o support inperpetuity or each owner. Whilethis orm o housing is extremelycommon in other countries and

Canadian cities, it is very rare inVancouver.

One o the advantages o duplex andsemi-detached orms o housing isthat they can be designed to appearlike larger single amily homes andeasily t into established single amilyneighbourhoods.

Duplexes and semis can providemore aordable orms o housingcompared to single amily houses.However, some RT zoned propertieshave not been redeveloped sincezoning regulations are deemedcomplex and conusing and theapproval process is oten muchlonger. Moreover, the additionaldensity permitted in RT zonescompared to RS zones is marginal.

An assymetrical side by side duplex as large as alarge house from the street.

Semi-detached housing has been built in the UKand other countries for decades


15/37


consideraTions

12. To encourage more duplex housing,the city should review, simpliy,and modiy where necessary its RTzoning regulations. Considerationshould also be given to a modestincrease in the FSR and sitecoverage.

13. To acilitate ee-simple semi-detached housing, (and rowhousingas set out in Chapter B) the

Vancouver Law department shouldtake measures to allow Party Wall

Agreements similar to those in placein most other cities and countriesaround the world. The SubdivisionBy-law should also be modied toallow narrower lots.

14. To increase the stock o aordablerental housing, secondary suitesshould be permitted in duplex andsemi-detached housing on a pilotprogram basis.

15. The City should consider allowinglaneway units in other RT zones,provided the overall FSR is nogreater than that permitted underthe applicable zoning.

Modifcations to RT zoning could acilitate moreduplex housing

Legislature changes may need to be made to allowsemi-detached housing on separate lots

Secondary suites should be considered in duplexand semi-detached housing

Many new laneway houses are being built as partof lot redevelopments


16/37


Zoning, building code regulaTions anddesign guidelines iMPacTing MediuMdensiTy ground-orienTed HousingB.

Fee simple row houses in Toronto, ON


17/37


b.1 TownHouses, rowHouses and

oTHer MediuM densiTy

ground-orienTed forMs

Townhouses are usually dened asattached dwellings that are part o acondominium development, whilerowhouses are attached ee-simple

individually owned dwellings rontingonto a public street. As a result,they are not part o a condominium.Both can oer highly desirable,more aordable orms o housingcompared to single amily, duplex orsemi-detached housing.

While ee-simple rowhousing is otenregarded as the most generic orm ohousing in the world, it is not built in

Vancouver or a number o reasons.

These include legal concerns relatedto Party Wall Agreements; the needto subdivide lots below minimum

widths set out in Subdivision By-law;and the shortage o suitably zonedland.

Similarly, ew townhouse projectsare built in Vancouver, especially

when compared with surroundingmunicipalities. This is generally dueto the absence o a suitable zoningcategory and a shortage o zonedsites. Consequently, most townhouseprojects must go through a rezoningprocess with all the inherentuncertainties, risks and costs.

Densities similar to townhousingcan oten be achieved with smallerground-oriented developmentscomprising three, our or six unitson one lot. This can be a highly

desirable and aordable orm ohousing. While popular in othercities, they are less common in

Vancouver due to the lack o suitablyzoned land.

consideraTions

16. To acilitate more aordablerowhouses, townhouses and othermedium density ground-orientedhousing, the City needs to createa new zoning category. This zonecould be a transition zone betweensingle amily housing and apartmentand mixed-use zones. A suitableFSR might be in the order o 1.2.

17. To amiliarize the public with thesevarious types o housing, the Cityshould undertake a variety o pilotprojects around the city. However,unlike the current NeighbourhoodDemonstration Projects, thedevelopment o one project shouldnot prevent the development o

other nearby projects.

Row Housing, Pt. Grey, Vancouver, BC

An example of a legalized basement suite in aCalgary townhouse


18/37

18


b.2 sTacked TownHouses

Stacked townhousing generallycomprises a three or our levelbuilding with two or more unitsstacked above another. Buildingdesigns can include both throughunits with windows at both ends,and back-to-back units with

windows at one end, not unlikean apartment. However, unlikeapartments, there are oten no sharedcorridors or stairs.

While this type o housing is verypopular in Toronto and throughoutMetro Vancouver, especially or

younger singles and couples withand without children, it is rarely builtin Vancouver.

This is not a new orm o housingor Vancouver. Many stacked units

were built in the 70s along theSouth Shore o False Creek and inneighbouring Fairview Slopes.

There are a number o reasonswhy this aordable housing ormis rarely built in Vancouver. Firstly,there is no suitably zoned land. As aresult, stacked townhouses are eitherdeveloped within an apartment zone,or through a rezoning.

Another key issue is parking. Iunderground, it can be costly,especially i elevator access isrequired. (Developers generallypreer to build apartments i theyhave to build underground parkingand an elevator.) To allow enclosedparking at grade, parking relaxationsor FSR exclusions may be required.

A more critical issue may beVancouvers re regulations/exitingrequirements that could discouragestacked units. In one particularinstance, the developer went toextraordinary lengths to meet resaety requirements.

While stacked townhouses may notappeal to everyone, especially given

the number o stairs, the groundoriented access can make themparticularly attractive to youngerhouseholds with children seeking analternative to an apartment building.Other benets include the potentialor larger units oten with roo decks.

Stacked Townhouse - interior courtyard, Verdant,SFU

An attractive new stacked townhouse developmentin Mount Pleasant, Vancouver, BC


19/37


consideraTions

18. To encourage and acilitate thesupply o stacked townhouses, thecity should create another suitabletransition zone and consider thepre-zoning o appropriately locatedproperties.

19. The City should also review howre saety requirements or stackedunits can be achieved at costscomparable to low-rise apartments,noting that in theory it shouldbe less expensive to meet reregulations or units that have directaccess to the outside. ,

20. The City should continue its highly-regarded practice o reducing

parking requirements; however,it should also modiy zoningregulations i necessary to acilitatealternatives to costly undergroundparking.

21. The City also needs to examinesome o the myths andmisconceptions related to stackedtownhousing and other buildingorms. For example, is an elevatorrequired rom underground parking?Is an elevator required or anapartment building or can a twoand a hal storey walk-up, similar tothose o yesteryear be built today?

Increased density on a lot and back-to-backtacked Townhouse development proposal -oronto, ON

tacked Townhouse, Toronto, ON - with thelimination of underground parking, extra suites

can be tucked below


20/37

20


Zoning, building code regulaTions anddesign guidelines iMPacTing Mixed usedeveloPMenTs in c-2 Zonesc.

Mixed-use development with C-2 zoning in Kitsilano, Vancouver, BC


21/37

21


c. Mixed use develoPMenTs in c2

Zones

Vancouver has a large supply o C-2land that could be redeveloped withnew retail and residential uses. Manypoint to this as Vancouvers unusedzoned capacity since it is close to

transit and other services. Whilesuccessul developments have beenbuilt in recent years, many sites arelikely to remain under-developed

with older one and two storeybuildings or decades to come.

This is due to a number o actors:the value o the land as commercialis oten so high it is uneconomicalto redevelop or aordable housingabove commercial. Also, narrow

lots are dicult to redevelop andragmented ownership makes itdicult to consolidate properties.

Another challenge is the zoningregulations and design guidelines. Toachieve the maximum 2.5 FSR in aour storey building, the unit depth isoten quite deep. I the City appliesthe horizontal daylight angle, as itoten does or both livability andsustainability reasons (although notalways), the rear space can no longerbe occupied legally as a bedroom.

Another barrier to the redevelopmento these properties is the challengeo providing underground parking onsmaller sites.

An additional concern is therequirement that residential units notencroach within 20 eet o the lane.This can prevent ground orientedunits which might ront onto a lanein some instances (where servicingdoes not interere with livability) andresult in a better transition to adjacenresidential development.

consideraTions

22. Given the signicant amount oundeveloped C-2 land, the Cityshould once again revise the zoning

regulations and guidelines toencourage more projects oeringaordable housing.

23. Particular consideration shouldbe given to either eliminatingthe horizontal daylight anglerequirement, or allowing ve orsix storey buildings. The recentProvincial Building Code changepermitting up to six storeys in woodrame makes our or ve storey

wood rame structures over a onestorey concrete platorm technicallyeasible and cost eective. Thisprovision was not in place when thebylaw was last revised.

One of a number of successful mixed usedevelopments along Dunbar Street, Vancouver, BC

Current C-2 zoning magp of Vancouver, BC -the City should once again revise the zoningregulations and guidlelines


22/37

22


case for sMaller suiTe siZesd.

A murphy bed helps make smaller suites in the Burns Block more livable


23/37


d. case for sMaller suiTe siZes

Currently, City bylaws require rentalunits to be not less than 320 squareeet and units or sale to be not lessthan 398 square eet. However, anumber o projects have receivedrelaxations to permit smaller suitesizes.

In 1993, VLC Properties developed600 Drake Street, an aordable rentalbuilding. Sixty our percent o theunits are less than 320 square eet.

While many criticized the project,(one City Councillor reerred to thesuites as cons) over the years, thebuilding has been very popular andachieved ull occupancy.

In 2009, the City approved theconcept o sel-contained lock-osuites within apartments in certainzones. Lock-os in existing suitescan be as small as 205 square eetand 280 square eet in new units.However, very ew have beenconstructed.

Recently, considerable mediaattention was given to the renovatedBurns Block in the DTES thatprovides very small urnished rentalapartments averaging 270 squareeet. While many criticized the smallsuite size that was relaxed to acilitateHeritage preservation, there was astrong demand rom renters. Thereis now increased interest rom thedevelopment community to buildsimilar projects.

In other cities, new developments

are being built oering smallersuites. While many architects anddevelopers believe the currentstandards are appropriate, othersbelieve the City should have a singlestandard or both sale and rentalunits that is smaller than the currentbylaw requirements.

consideraTions

24. The City should consider approvalo additional pilot projects providingsuites or rent and or sale belowthe current minimum standards,provided such projects incorporatesuitable design eatures to enhancefexibility and livability. Thesemight include built in murphy bedsand ample closet/storage space.The buildings should also oer ahigher level o amenity space.

25. It might be appropriate to limitthe size o projects oering suitesizes below the current minimumsto no more than 60 suites, or limitthe percentage o smaller suites inlarger projects. Noting the need or

larger three and our bedroom suitesin the city, it might be appropriateto relax minimum suites sizes whenlarger amily sized suites are oeredin a development.

26. Further study needs to beundertaken to determine whetherthe minimum unit sizes should bechanged. However, based on theexperiences o SFU and UBC wherelock-o suites have been built, and

600 Drake Street, and Burns Blockaminimum size in the order o 260 to280 square eet can be quite livable.

27. The City should review whetherto continue to have dierentminimum suite sizes or rental andcondominium units, noting this iscurrently regarded as a nancialincentive to encourage more rentalhousing.

Burns Block, Vancouver, BC


24/37


sPecial consideraTionse.

This older co-op has simple, elegant design, but would it be approved given current design expectations?


25/37


e.1 obsTacles To More ModesT

forMs of Housing

Much o Vancouvers most aordablehousing is ound in the simple boxytwo storey plus basement walk-uprental and coop apartments builtalong city arterials in the 50s and the

60s. During the course o this study,a number o people questioned whywe no longer build these simple,inexpensive building orms o thepast.

There are a number o reasons.Current re codes no longer permitthe single central stair that wasso common in these buildings,despite the act that buildings arenow sprinklered and built rom less

fammable materials. In addition,accessibility standards may requireelevators, and any at-grade parkingunder the building is usually includedin the FSR.

More importantly, the simple,unadorned exteriors are not likelyto be approved by neighbours,development planners, the UrbanDesign Panel and DevelopmentPermit Board.

While urther research is requiredto determine just how much cityregulations and design guidelines addto the cost o housing, there needsto be a broad discussion on whetherthe public is prepared to reduceits expectations and trade o moreexpensive exterior designs in returnor what could be more aordablehousing.

A new, modest 6 suite walk-up apartment buildingin Calgary


26/37


e.2 iMPacT of Parking regulaTions

on THe cosT of Housing

In recent years, Vancouver has beenvery progressive when it comesto reducing parking requirements.However, as noted in Chapter C,many prime sites along commercial

streets are not being redevelopedbecause o the challenges omeeting the Citys on-site parkingregulations. Indeed, the cost oproviding underground parking canbe a very signicant actor aectingaordability, especially on small orconstricted sites.

It is not just the number o requiredparking stalls that adds cost; it is alsohow parking lots and garages are

designed. The City needs to allowmore ecient parking solutionsincluding a higher percentage osmall car parking spaces, tandemparking, and in some cases reduceddriveways and turning radii.

The City should also consider how toacilitate at grade enclosed parking,or possibly above grade parking inmulti-amily developments, without itbeing included in FSR calculations.

While resident parking standardscan and should be reduced, theCity may wish to increase both car-share parking and visitor parkingrequirements to minimize the impactso new developments in certainneighbourhoods. While residents maynot have cars, visitors oten do.

expensive to build than underground parking

While Vancouver has reduced its parkingrequirments, further revisions could improve

Older affordable walk-ups often have lanewaygarages rather than more expensive undergroundparking


27/37


e.3 iMPacTs of green building

requireMenTs

Vancouver wants to be the greenestcity in the world and oten boastso its requirement that all rezoningsmust meet LEED Gold requirements.The City has also established energy

requirements that are higher thanany other jurisdiction in Canada.Moreover, a new ASHRAE regulation

will soon be in place that is expectedto urther increase the cost obuilding in Vancouver.

Many architects, engineers anddevelopers privately complain aboutthe higher costs they must incur tomeet these standards, but given theCitys commitment to sustainability,

ew complain to the City. Instead,costs are passed on to purchasersand renters.

However, during consultations withAIBC and UDI members, the costsand complications caused by theCitys enorcement o increasinggreen building requirements wasidentied as a very major concern.The issue was not just the cost ocomplying with new regulations. It

was also the attendant liabilities thatboth developers and consultants areincreasingly reluctant to assume.

O particular concern were the costsassociated with LEED registration andadministration. Many believe thereare better ways to encourage andmeasure improved environmentalperormance. Another concern is theotentimes conficting requirements

o the Sustainability Group, thePlanning Department, and BuildingDepartment.

Further discussions need totake place between senior Cityocials, the Sustainability Group,representatives o the Canada GreenBuilding Council and Vancouversmost respected sustainabilityexperts to ascertain the validityo the concerns regarding theappropriateness o the Cityssustainability requirements andinsistence on LEED registration andadministration.

Further study is also requiredto better determine the actualcosts associated with the variousSustainability Group requirementssince there is much disagreementbetween the opinions o sta andthe development community as to

whether the cost premium is 1% or3% or signicantly more.

Canada Green Building Council LEED program

The City needs to explore how to offset the higherup-front costs of sustainable features in newhousing


28/37

28


e.4 resoluTion of coMPeTing

deMands froM various

deParTMenTs

Architects and developers repeatedlynoted that conficting designrequirements between variouscity departments are signicantly

adding to the time required toobtain approvals and the cost ohousing. O particular concern arethe requirements being demandedby the Sustainability Group, as notedin section E.3. In many instances,its requirements confict withBuilding and Plumbing Departmentrequirements, and on occasion withPlanning Department requirements.

The Urban Design Panel was

also singled out or unnecessarilycontributing to housing cost.

Although smaller projects do notnormally go through the UDP, manyprojects do. It was not just thedemands rom the UDP that wereoten considered very arbitrary; it wasalso the timing o its demands, notingthat expensive drawings and modelsare required and expected beoresubmissions can be considered bythe Panel.

Industry representatives believe thesituation is so serious that it is nowessential that the City appoint anOmbudsman, i only on an interimbasis, to adjudicate in situations

where direct conficts between therequirements o dierent departmentsare causing undue delays andunnecessary costs.

It was suggested that it would bemost benecial i all City departments

were required to demonstrate thesame commitment to aordabilityas they are to sustainability inthe regulation o new housingdevelopments. This might includeapplying an aordability checklistlike that used to assess thesustainability o projects.

Vancouver City Hall


29/37


e.5 innovaTive design ideas To

encourage THe reTenTion of

vancouvers significanT sTock of

older renTal Housing.

Much o Vancouvers rental stock isaging and in need o renovations.Given the overall economics o rental

or ownership housing and pressuresto redevelop sites, incentives areneeded to encourage landlordsto upgrade their buildings. Oneapproach may be to allow additionalon-site rental housing in exchangeor certain upgrades. Two ideas wereconsidered during this study.

In some instances, it may betechnically easible to add one ormore penthouse foors on the roo

o a high-rise building in returnor upgrading. These foors couldbe constructed with light-weightsteel possibly using modular units.

Additional FSR would most likelybe required, but the benets mayoutweigh any neighbourhoodconcerns.

Another option might be stackedlaneway units or new units overparking areas. In many instances,there are vacant parking spaces

which could be redeveloped withrental or ownership housing. A ewpilot projects might be a good wayto assess the broader easibility othis idea. Again modular units mightbe an ecient way to create thishousing.

W Consideration should be given to permittingadditional suites on roos o older rentalapartments to help fnance renovations

Areas behind older apartments could provide opportunities or multi-amily infll housing


30/37


suMMary and conclusionsf.

Changes to Vancouvers zoning bylaws could result in more affordable housing choices


31/37


f. suMMary and conclusions

There is an increasing need oraordable housing in Vancouver to servea range o households. While manyactors aecting housing aordabilityare beyond the control o the Cityadministration, there is much the City cando with its zoning by-laws and designregulations to increase both the supplyand choice o housing. This includesthe creation o new zoning categories,modied parking requirements, changesto accessibility standards, approval orsmaller lots and smaller units, changes tore regulations, and perhaps relaxationo certain green building requirements.

As a result o such changes, and othersput orward or consideration in this

report:

The homeless and those living indecrepit SROs could benet romsmall new rental units with suite sizesless than required by the current by-law. As demonstrated by the successo 600 Drake Street and the BurnsBlock, others will likely chose thistype o housing as well;

Singles and couples struggling tobuy their rst home could have theopportunity to purchase a smalllaneway house or a suite within anolder house in an established singleamily neighbourhood;

Households with children wantingto live in the city could choosetownhouses and stacked townhousesrather than have to move to Burnaby,Richmond or North Vancouver. (One

Vancouver City planner did recentlypurchase a stacked townhouse inNorth Vancouver because he couldnot nd one in Vancouver!)

Many empty-nesters and seniorscould stay in their existingneighbourhoods with a variety o

housing choices, including a singlelevel laneway house; a small duplexor single amily house, a townhouse,rowhouse or other orm o ground-oriented housing.

Vancouvers Zoning Bylaws have changed over the years


32/37


This report sets out more than twodozen ideas that may warrant urtherconsideration. Some might be seenas quick xes. Others will requireconsiderable time and eort. However,given the Citys limited resources, tryingto determine which should be thepriorities and where to begin may bechallenging.

From discussions with housing providersand consultants, architects, anddevelopers during the course o thisstudy, a number o priorities seem tohave emerged, as ollows:

1. Creation o new transition

zoning categories to

accommodate townhousing,

stacked townhousing and higher

density ground oriented housing

There is a need to modiy existingRT zones and develop newtransition zones that could acilitatethe development o rowhouses,townhouses, stacked townhouses andother orms o higher density groundoriented housing, appealing to thosenot wanting to live in an apartment,but unable to aord a single amilyhouse.

Prime locations or such zonesinclude the non-commercial portionso many arterial roads, and theblocks between C-2 and nearbysingle amily zones. Over time,zones accommodating higher densityground oriented housing couldextend into other suitably locatedsingle amily areas such as thosearound transit nodes,parks andcommunity centres.

2. Modifcations to C-2 Zoning

The C-2 zone has the potentialto provide a signicant amounto well-located aordable rentaland ownership housing in closeproximity to transit. One way toacilitate more aordable and

livable housing would be to allowheight increases rom our to vestoreys. Modications to someparking requirements could also bebenecial. Impacts on adjacent singleamily neighbourhoods could beaddressed through the creation o theore mentioned transition zones.

Vancouver is a city of neighbourhoods all wanting to have a say in their planning future


33/37


3. Create more housing choices in

RS zones

Given that so much o the propertyin Vancouver is zoned single amily,the Citys decision to permit threedwelling units on a single amily lot

with a modest increase in FSR is verysignicant. It would now seem mostappropriate to urther explore otherapproaches to create a broader rangeo more aordable housing choiceson single amily lots.

These might include a triplexcomprising three smaller units orsale, a duplex combined with acoach house, or three smaller houseson a lot. In some instances, bycombining lots, small attractive inll

developments could be developedwithin established neighbourhoods.The resulting housing choices couldappeal to a variety o households.

To promote these opportunities, theCity should initiate a pilot projectprogram in neighbourhoods around

Vancouver to demonstrate howsmaller units or sale and rent canbe sensitively inlled within existingneighbourhoods without any increasein FSR.

4. Appoint an Aordability

Ombudsman

Finally, there seems to be aconsensus that to addressaordability along with good design,sustainability, and livability, there isa need to reconsider expectations.Most o the aordable housing that

was built in the past would never getthrough todays Urban Design Panelor Development Permit Board. Nor

would it meet the complex BuildingCode interpretations that increasinglyresult in disputes between BuildingDepartment sta and Building CodeConsultants.

It is recognized that good qualitybuilding design does not always

mean more expensive design,and more sustainable housing isnecessary to address climate changeand can be cost eective overtime. However, most architects anddevelopers interviewed or this studyidentied the conficting values anddemands o the Sustainability Groupand other City departments as majorobstacles to more aordable housing.

This led to the suggestion that anOmbudsman, with a mandate topromote aordability be appointedto resolve the otentimes competingdemands o various City departmentsthe Urban Design Panel, and otheradvisory boards. This need not bea permanent position, but ideally itcould be someone who can ask Citysta What have we done to helpreduce costs on this project?

Triplex in Kitsilano Vancouver, BC


34/37


A key overriding issue: Will lower

costs translate into lowerprices?

This raises an underlying issue thatneeds to be addressed. Throughout thestudy process, many people questioned

whether reducing housing costs throughchanges to regulations aecting orm anddesign would necessarily translate intoreduced housing prices.

While this is a question that may moreappropriately be addressed by theTask Forces Academic Roundtable,most people interviewed during thisstudy believe that without some o thechanges suggested in this report, it willbe dicult to bring down the cost ohousing.

Others pointed out that the best wayto improve aordability is to increasesupplyand competition between housingproviders. Many believe that this canbe acheived through less complexzoning regulations and guidelines,and a more collaborative approach byBuilding Department ocials will resultin more developers wanting to build in

Vancouver. This, combined with moresuitably zoned land will lead to greatersupply and competition.

In conclusion

Hopeully, this report has identiedissues that warrant urther discussionand investigation by City Hall sta,architects, developers, other housingproviders. These include the many mythsand misconceptions such as when is anelevator required, or whether at gradegarages are included in FSR calculations.

It is urther hoped that this reportwill contribute to a better andmore constructive dialogue withneighbourhoods who will ultimatelysupport necessary changes to

Vancouvers zoning and buildingregulations and practices. Only in this

way can Vancouver expect to havegreater housing choice and aordability

throughout the city.

Mews, one of the new townhouse developmentsalong Oak Street, Vancouver, BC

Recent zoning changes have resulted in muchimproved secondary suites in basements


35/37


acknowledgeMenTs

Many people assisted the Working Group inundertaking its research and preparing thisreport. They include:

David Wiebe o the Architectural Institute oBC who arranged or a special meeting in theinstitute oces that attracted 45 architects,

many o whom have continued to providenew ideas and comments on the variousdrats o this report;

Patrick Santoro and his colleagues at theUrban Development Institute who arrangeda special meeting that attracted principalsrom some o Vancouvers most activedevelopment companies and consultingrms, and subsequently provided excellentcomments;

Cameron Gray, the ormer Director o

Housing or the City o Vancouver, whooered provocative ideas and criticalcommentary on each drat o the report;

Graham Harmsworth and Teddy Lai o GHLCode Consultants who provided numerousexamples o Building Code regulations thathave become barriers to more innovative andaordable housing;

Architects Norm Shearing o ParklaneHomes and Alan Diamond whose commentsassisted the Working Group during the

report preparation. Tom Staniszkis o NSDAArchitects or advice on C-2 zoning;

Bob Ransord whose longstanding interestand knowledge about aordable housingcan be regularly ound in the Vancouver Sun,

who provided valuable comments;

Jake Fry o Smallworks, one o the earlyproponents o laneway housing, whoprovided comments on how to reduce costsand improve the approval process or LWH.

Jake also organized a group o architects,planners and housing providers to explorehow RS zones can provide a broader rangeo aordable housing choices;

Roger Hughes, one o the innovativearchitects who transormed False Creek andFairview Slopes who oered his Whistlercabin as a sanctuary to prepare the nalreport;

City sta including David McLellan, KentMunro, Will Johnston, Anita Molaro, Jim De

Hoop, Denise Westerman, Dan Garrison,Pat Ryan, and Paul Cheng, who oeredconstructive comments and criticismsthroughout the study review;

Mitra Mansour o Creative Room, whovolunteered her time to assist the WorkingGroup with the creative design andproduction o this report; and

Finally, Task Force Co-Chair Olga Ilichwho participated in many meetings anddiscussions and oered valuable comments

on each and every drat.

To all o you, and so many more who havebeen regularly writing to me with complaintsand suggestionsthanks

- Michael Geller B.Arch, MAIBC, FCIP

March 2012


36/37


aPPendix a: coMMenTs Heard froM

MeMbers of THe arcHiTecTural

insTiTuTe of briTisH coluMbia aT a

sPecial MeeTing on MarcH 6, 2012

The city needs to better dene its role in

project approval. Some planners are micro-

managing design eatures that should be let

to the architect.

There does not seem to be sucient respect

in the planning department or the experience

and talents o architects.

There are too many zoning regulations that

have been adapted and changed over time by

political whim.

Im worried because some city councilors

now want to increase Accessibility

Standards. They just dont understand the

design and cost implications o this.

There is a need to undertake a

comprehensive review o the various zoning

categories, especially the RT zones that

have become conusing and ineective in

delivering more aordable housing choices.

Every time the city adds a new regulation,

it should be required to eliminate an older

regulation!

The purpose o planning is to look orward.

The planning department needs to be moreorward thinking about zoning, rather than

continually basing zoning restrictions on past

situations.

The Burns Block development, with its

smaller micro suites, demonstrates an

aordable rental program that is succeeding

because o its good design.

Livability should be dened not by square

ootage, but by amenity. Livable aordable

housing can be achieved through smaller

suites combined with larger amenity spaces.

There is a role or preabrication in

aordable housing. But it is not necessarily

less expensive unless it can be repeated and

mass produced.

Lower development costs only translate into

lower prices when there is sucient supply

and competition in the marketplace.

Small and abnormal lots oer unique

opportunities or more aordable housing

and warrant more leniencies in the

application o zoning bylaws.

There are too many inconsistencies in theapplication o by-laws by dierent planners

which translates into great diculty or

architects.

The city should pre-certiy foor plans or

laneway housing and perhaps other housing

types, just like CMHC did ater the war.

Current set back requirements are oten

restrictive, pointless, and outdated when

considering new more aordable orms o

housing - especially ront yard setbacks!

The RT-10 zone is not working because the

original expectation o lot consolidation

to create alternative housing orms is not

happening.

There is oten no buer between high

density and low density zones such as

arterial development and single amily

housing behind. The city needs to create new

transition zones.

Many departmental demands seem small,

but they all add up. We oten eel were beingnickeled and dimed to death, especially by

the sustainability department.

Planners should not be exercising their

power based on their own personal tastes.

Alternative building types such as stacked

townhouses seem to be punished by excessive

saety requirements to the point that they are

no longer viable or aordable.

The city should not penalize progressive

architecture because its dierent!

Why does the city keep applying LEED when

there are so many more cost eective ways o

building green?


37/37

aPPendix b: coMMenTs Heard

froM MeMbers of THe urban

develoPMenT insTiTuTe aT a sPecial

MeeTing on MarcH 7, 2012

The City wants aordable housing, yet every

new requirement is adding to the cost o

housing. ASHRAE 90.1 will be next.

The City doesnt understand the longer

term liability implications o some o its new

sustainability demands. We could well have

another leaky condo situation.

Innovate beore you regulate.

Building department appeals have become

extremely conrontational. It never used to

be like this. Were supposed to be working

together.

We must do something about the Urban

Design Panel. Planners ask or its adviceand the result is a bunch o people adding

unnecessary costs!

The sustainability group is running amuck.

It is single-handedly adding signicant costs

at a time when we should be reducing costs.

The city needs an aordability ombudsman

to review arbitrary decisions that are adding

costly design eatures.

The Province is streamlining its regulations;

the city should start to do the same.

The City needs to apply to aordability the

same energy its applying to sustainability.

Theres a need to undertake a cost-benet

analysis or each new regulation.

Developers will sell or less when the risk is

less.

Why must approvals take so much longer in

Vancouver? The City could learn zoning and

approval procedure lessons rom Burnaby

and Surrey.

The City needs to pre-zone more land or

multi-amily developments. This will lead to

greater supply and greater aordability.

The City should be oering incentives

or more sustainable buildingslike CAC

reductions. Instead we get costly regulations.

The City should conduct an audit on the

cost implications o each departments

requirements.

I price is important, then relax the design

regulations!

geller: preliminary report form design

Documents