Laneway homes?

[rugatika]

Didn't want to hijack the zero emissions thread on that laneway home.

Just curious how everyone feels about the whole laneway home thing to begin with. I know I'd be pretty ****ed if I had bought a home in a single family subdivision and all of a sudden people are building second homes in their backyard to rent out. Increased traffic, population density, parties etc etc.

I remember hearing something about this when it was being voted on, but since I'm not from Edmonton anymore (thank God), I didn't pay too much attention to any debate they had on it.

[agentsmith]

In terms of density, I guess it's no different than basement suites, just detached and plainly visible. Most basement suites fly under the radar, but that's presumably much harder for laneway houses, so at least there's some control with permits and whatnot.

[The Elkster]

I can see both sides. Densification is a far more efficient use of space and resources like utilities but at the same time if someone bought under one premise then had that changed...that could suck. Maybe better to make it a known potential in new subdivisions only where people buy in knowing the risk. I wouldn't want to live next to too many buildings myself. But its inevitably going to happen as population grows. Urban sprawl is hugely expensive in the way of utilities and infrastructure needs and more people are buying into densification.

[Scott h]

Originally Posted by rugatika

Didn't want to hijack the zero emissions thread on that laneway home.

Just curious how everyone feels about the whole laneway home thing to begin with. I know I'd be pretty ****ed if I had bought a home in a single family subdivision and all of a sudden people are building second homes in their backyard to rent out. Increased traffic, population density, parties etc etc.

I remember hearing something about this when it was being voted on, but since I'm not from Edmonton anymore (thank God), I didn't pay too much attention to any debate they had on it.

I've got three on my block (one next door) and they don't have any impact in the least. They replace a homes garage and they have a parking pad beside them. On the other hand I have other neighbors that have more cars parked all over the place and crappy cars parked behind their triple car garage.
I'll take the laneway homes.

[HalfBreed]

Maybe I'm far too traveled, but there is a zero density issue anywhere in Canada. Proper cities build it in. Take a walk around some North American areas such as New York, Chicago, to see what density is. Alberta is wide open spaces.

[CaberTosser]

If I can scrape up the cash, its my intent to build one on my lot over a very big garage, large enough in fact that I'd either have to get a variance for the suite to be larger than code, or to arrange some of the loft area as storage to reduce the suite size to the acceptable level. I think people who get all NIMBY about lofted garages figure that they'll turn the neighborhood into rental ghetto's have to stop and thing about what the nature of their neighborhood already is, and whether the place is owner-occupied. I think for owner-occupied instances its not the least bit of a concern as they'll be right there and will have the same level of care of the property as they did when it was single occupancy. If a place is a rental and is also basement-suited then has a laneway home tacked on over the garage then I could see cause for concern.

[JB_AOL]

I have no problem with it, in fact I like the idea.
It's better than what's happening now in Calgary, Buy 2 infill lots, split them into 3 or four, and build 15' wide "luxury" homes, which ends up wrecking the community more than something like this would.