Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 201 to 240 of 240

Thread: Suburban-style front garages coming to mature Edmonton neighbourhoods?

  1. #201

    Default

    ^ I always remeber alley way rhubarb and raspberries as a kid.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  2. #202

    Default

    Brintnell is new, and the alleys look 3rd world. There are lots of older, average areas with really nice alleys. I don't go south very often, but there's a lot of surprisingly well maintained alleys around Londonderry/Northgate, and those aren't upscale by any means.
    "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction" - Blaise Pascal

  3. #203

    Default

    I guess I'm in the minority here but I prefer having the garage in the front and attached to the house. It's convenient, you drive in and you're in the house. No having to cut through a cold snow covered backyard while carrying groceries. Also, there's less chance of it getting broken into than a garage that's unattached and facing the back alley. You also don't have people going into your backyard as they cruise the back alley looking for empty bottles (happened to a buddy of mine).

    As for the look of it, I don't really care all that much as I don't spend the majority of my time looking at the outside of my house or my neighbors.

  4. #204
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,491

    Default

    ^ There are lots of options for people that feel that way all around the city. However, those of us who have chosen neighborhoods with alleys want to make sure that any new garages go in the back.

  5. #205

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Doc Hollywood View Post
    I guess I'm in the minority here but I prefer having the garage in the front and attached to the house. It's convenient, you drive in and you're in the house. No having to cut through a cold snow covered backyard while carrying groceries. Also, there's less chance of it getting broken into than a garage that's unattached and facing the back alley. You also don't have people going into your backyard as they cruise the back alley looking for empty bottles (happened to a buddy of mine).

    As for the look of it, I don't really care all that much as I don't spend the majority of my time looking at the outside of my house or my neighbors.
    Convenient yes... good for the neighborhood and our city... some would argue that it is not and there would be research that would agree with them.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  6. #206
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Parkdale - Goldbar - Downtown
    Posts
    5,375

    Default

    Exactly. I prefer a rear detached garage, and older neighbourhood infrastructure was built to have garages at the back.

    Plenty of options out there for those who want a traditional front attached

  7. #207

    Default

    I'd like to see a study done that examines children being ran over by vehicles compared to the types of driveways and housing orientations.
    "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction" - Blaise Pascal

  8. #208
    C2E Super Addict
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Beautiful BC
    Posts
    1,657

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Doc Hollywood View Post
    I guess I'm in the minority here but I prefer having the garage in the front and attached to the house. It's convenient, you drive in and you're in the house. No having to cut through a cold snow covered backyard while carrying groceries. Also, there's less chance of it getting broken into than a garage that's unattached and facing the back alley. You also don't have people going into your backyard as they cruise the back alley looking for empty bottles (happened to a buddy of mine).

    As for the look of it, I don't really care all that much as I don't spend the majority of my time looking at the outside of my house or my neighbors.
    Best comment of the year so far...
    "The only really positive thing one could say about Vancouver is, it’s not the rest of Canada." Oink (britishexpats.com)

  9. #209

    Default

    ^^ that is asinine.

    Cars kill... and like Rob Ford (the everyman) would put forward People who are hit by cars likely deserved it... esp if they are on a bike.

    Holland long ago stood up for the rights of pedestrians and bike users and look what they created. In North America We created laws about Jaywalking and banned things like ball hockey. We tor out and up multi modal streets.

    So as in a another thread I have been labeled an Anti Car Nazi.. but really I am just advocating for more balance more of the time.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  10. #210

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by expat View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Doc Hollywood View Post
    I guess I'm in the minority here but I prefer having the garage in the front and attached to the house. It's convenient, you drive in and you're in the house. No having to cut through a cold snow covered backyard while carrying groceries. Also, there's less chance of it getting broken into than a garage that's unattached and facing the back alley. You also don't have people going into your backyard as they cruise the back alley looking for empty bottles (happened to a buddy of mine).

    As for the look of it, I don't really care all that much as I don't spend the majority of my time looking at the outside of my house or my neighbors.
    Best comment of the year so far...
    The mind reels....
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  11. #211

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    ^^ that is asinine.
    How is it asinine? Maybe you didn't get the point of my suggested study.

    Let's say you take a million front-garage homes, and a million rear garage alley homes, of similar socio-economic makeup. If one has 228 vehicle-related injuries on the driveway or street, and the other has 41, then you have a very valid reasoning that one style is safer than the other.

    I don't know if that's the case, and I'd like to see a study that determines that.
    "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction" - Blaise Pascal

  12. #212

    Default

    How Your Garage Designs Your Neighbourhood

    http://www.planetizen.com/node/66767

    "What do garages have to do with speeding?"

    " I recall many resulting discussions with developers and builders about the implications of the garage choice, often with the developer’s response that garages, and suburban house design in general, are “none of the city’s business.” It’s more of a personal issue and choice for a home buyer, they argued, and it doesn't affect the broader city."

    "often referred to as "snout houses" if they pert rude closer to the street than the actual house) also mean there's no “eyes on the street,” which makes the street less safe and social. Such houses even fail the “trick-or-treat test” at Halloween! Can you find the door bell, or is it hidden from street view? It can sometimes feel like there's no house at all, or at best that it's a house attached to a garage, rather than a garage attached to a house."

    and it goes on....
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  13. #213

    Default

    lol....

    Some cities like Calgary, where I planned previously, use such real lanes commonly across the suburbs (long before they became popular again as part of the New Urbanist design movement). Amazingly though, in many Calgary suburban communities, developers have created the worst of both worlds… rear lanes with parking pads, often used to store campers and such, AND set back front yards and front drive multi-car garages! Perhaps the most wasteful condition I can think of.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  14. #214
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    4,019

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    lol....

    Some cities like Calgary, where I planned previously, use such real lanes commonly across the suburbs (long before they became popular again as part of the New Urbanist design movement). Amazingly though, in many Calgary suburban communities, developers have created the worst of both worlds… rear lanes with parking pads, often used to store campers and such, AND set back front yards and front drive multi-car garages! Perhaps the most wasteful condition I can think of.
    There's a few neighbourhoods in Edmonton that have that as well. Blue Quill Estates has some, Lansdowne has a lot. Grandview too.

  15. #215
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    4,019

    Default

    I attended the Evolving Infill forum last night put on by the city.
    http://www.edmonton.ca/city_governme...ng-infill.aspx

    Pretty well laid out, lots of brainstorming and interaction, though it wasn't too busy when I was there later in the day.

    There certainly were a few comments about allowing front attached garages 'for convenience' and a lesser amount of comments saying to keep the restriction in place. The forum was more about best ways to get the infill discussion going, rather than particular details, but that seemed to be lost on many attendees.

    One of the better comments was the possibility of putting on a basic course for those interested in infill where they could learn the ins and outs and ask questions to planners and zoners without having to actually go through the whole application process.

    I also managed to corner one of the zoners and ask him about 2.5 storeys and flat roofs. He seemed to think that a 2.5 storey house with a flat roof, with the top storey being 50% of the floor area of the storey below it would be allowed without a variance. They would trace an invisible gable over the top floor and if the imaginary side walls met the 0.66m min while keeping the 10m mid-gable height restriction, it would be ok.

  16. #216
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    48,662

    Default

    'I also managed to corner one of the zoners and ask him about 2.5 storeys and flat roofs. He seemed to think that a 2.5 storey house with a flat roof, with the top storey being 50% of the floor area of the storey below it would be allowed without a variance. They would trace an invisible gable over the top floor and if the imaginary side walls met the 0.66m min while keeping the 10m mid-gable height restriction, it would be ok.'

    Good to hear, but I would be sure to request a meeting with a DO pre-application.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  17. #217
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    4,019

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Good to hear, but I would be sure to request a meeting with a DO pre-application.
    Agreed, though they are hard to get a hold of if you don't have a formal application. Would be nice if they offered a weekly or monthly drop in forum where you could pick their brain for a bit. A lot of items are harder to explain over the phone.

  18. #218

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Suburban-style front garages coming to mature Edmonton neighbourhoods?

    When do you think a developer should be able to build a large, front double-garage extending several metres out from the front of a house in a mature neighbourhood?
    I disagree with the way you phrased the question. You are implying that front garages must be "large" and "extending several metres". That fact is, they don't have to be, if properly regulated.

    The questions are actually two parts:
    1) Should front garages be allowed at all?
    My opinion is that they should be.

    2) What kind of size and setbacks should be imposed?
    That is something to discuss only if you answer yes to question one.
    Last edited by eons; 13-02-2014 at 10:20 AM. Reason: rephrase

  19. #219
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    48,662

    Default

    Obviously a blanket statement yes and you can incorporate front garages reasonably well if at the side, without protrusion and as single doors.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  20. #220

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Obviously a blanket statement yes and you can incorporate front garages reasonably well if at the side, without protrusion and as single doors.
    I have actually thought about doing an infill seriously. Here are my 2 cents:

    1) Most residents in mature neighborhoods don't like front garages. Most residents in newer neighborhoods like them. They voted by foot and it's a self-fulfilling prophecy. They may use "ugly" or "unsafe" as excuses. But the reality is that they have been living like that for the past X number of years. There is no right or wrong. It's a faith.

    2) Most people, including both types from above, never seriously considered an infill with front garages, because it's easily $750k~$1M and out of their budget. (And we are not even talking about ravine lots etc.) Whatever they say, I don't take it seriously. It's more or less like young boys talking about Ferrari. You get the idea.

    3) Most $1M new house (infill and new area combined) buyers do want front garages. For every $1M new build with rear garage, there are probably fifty $1M new builds with front garages. And even that single one with rear garage, it may not have been voluntary.

    In the end, my decision was to not buy an infill lot. Instead, I bought an estate lot in a nice new neighborhood. I designed the house to have triple garages, with two stalls entered sideways and one straight. This did create the problem of having 2 driveways, but I have already got the variance permitted. I am obsessed with my front garage, I think it has more architectural merit than most "character homes" in mature neighborhood.

    This is something the city missed. They have a very narrow vision about how infills should be done, and at the same time wonder why people don't invest their $1M in a mature neighborhood infill.

  21. #221

    Default

    ^Not sure it's quite a 1:50 ratio as you claim. Just drive through Windsor Park, Belgravia, Glenora, Westmount etc. The ratio you claim has more to do with land availability.
    www.decl.org

  22. #222

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Obviously a blanket statement yes and you can incorporate front garages reasonably well if at the side, without protrusion and as single doors.
    side or built in.

    http://activerain.com/image_store/up...1125452069.jpg


    activerain.com
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  23. #223

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GreenSPACE View Post
    ^Not sure it's quite a 1:50 ratio as you claim. Just drive through Windsor Park, Belgravia, Glenora, Westmount etc. The ratio you claim has more to do with land availability.
    Easy. Try to read:
    http://www.edmonton.ca/bylaws_licenc...it-report.aspx

    There is a section of single family home development permits. The price they list is calculated based on $190/sf.

    To make it fair, compare 3000sf (and up) houses in new areas to 2500sf (and up) houses in mature neighborhoods and see how many are there.

  24. #224
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Sherwood park
    Posts
    2,691

    Default

    For everyone infill lot that can accommodate the size of house you want there are probably 50 new lots available to fit that same house as GreenSPACE was stating.

    I guess we can count ourselves lucky that you didn't do an infill.

  25. #225

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SP59 View Post
    For everyone infill lot that can accommodate the size of house you want there are probably 50 new lots available to fit that same house as GreenSPACE was stating.

    I guess we can count ourselves lucky that you didn't do an infill.
    I didn't say I would use the same blueprint for an infill. Remember to design your house based on the lot's characteristic, if you have never designed one.

    I would be OK with double front garage, if it's an infill, assuming it's a 40' pocket lot in Belgravia for $400k~$450k. My current lot with the mentioned garage configuration has a pocket width of 60'.

  26. #226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gord Lacey View Post
    And this little strip is the perfect example of why I don't want front-driveways in my neighbourhood. Almost all of them have vehicles parked on them, and it looks gross. I don't want to see SUVs and trucks cluttering the front of a house. And two of those houses just have parking pads (do they also have a garage in the back?). Ugh, just ugh.
    Same here. I highly dislike the view of SUVs and trucks. That's exactly I built a house with front garages. Most neighbors are good enough to park their cars inside the garage. There are a few that parks in their own driveways. The worst kind park on street, but fortunately they are only oddballs here and there.

    I mean, I have no issue with street parking if it's Hollywood, where there is sunshine year round and people show off their sports cars. But here in Edmonton, street parking is a blight that keeps snow graders slow and sometimes even blocks the sidewalk or driveways.

  27. #227

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Doc Hollywood View Post
    I guess I'm in the minority here but I prefer having the garage in the front and attached to the house. It's convenient, you drive in and you're in the house. No having to cut through a cold snow covered backyard while carrying groceries. Also, there's less chance of it getting broken into than a garage that's unattached and facing the back alley. You also don't have people going into your backyard as they cruise the back alley looking for empty bottles (happened to a buddy of mine).

    As for the look of it, I don't really care all that much as I don't spend the majority of my time looking at the outside of my house or my neighbors.
    Growing up with a front drive but rear detached garage we often stopped to play in the yard, on the driveway, play with or talk to neighbours, discover mom or dad already out doing the grass, working with the garage door open, etc. Basically this set up is ideal, and it's amazing how much outside stuff you do, except the garage isn't attached for cold winter days.

    Today, we drive in to the attached garage and have to make a mental decision to get out into the yard. I imagine most kids today don't even get past their electronics.
    Last edited by KC; 13-02-2014 at 04:09 PM.

  28. #228

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Doc Hollywood View Post
    I guess I'm in the minority here but I prefer having the garage in the front and attached to the house. It's convenient, you drive in and you're in the house. No having to cut through a cold snow covered backyard while carrying groceries. Also, there's less chance of it getting broken into than a garage that's unattached and facing the back alley. You also don't have people going into your backyard as they cruise the back alley looking for empty bottles (happened to a buddy of mine).

    As for the look of it, I don't really care all that much as I don't spend the majority of my time looking at the outside of my house or my neighbors.
    The majority of city dwellers definitely want front attached garages. You can clearly see that from new developments. Back lane homes are only offered as an inexpensive alternative to homes with front garage. I never heard of a single new development where there are a significant number of back lane homes over $500k are offered.

    I chose to look at new developments for the comparison, because with mature neighborhoods I have no way of finding out whether a back lane home was the preferred choice or a choice forced upon.

    But most who strongly voice their opinions on the Internet are against front garages. It's not unlike the Gore vs. Bush debate. If you only read online comments, you would think that Gore would win effortlessly. But in the end, we all learned that the more conservative and sub-urban type simply didn't post their opinion on the Internet.

  29. #229

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by eons View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Doc Hollywood View Post
    I guess I'm in the minority here but I prefer having the garage in the front and attached to the house. It's convenient, you drive in and you're in the house. No having to cut through a cold snow covered backyard while carrying groceries. Also, there's less chance of it getting broken into than a garage that's unattached and facing the back alley. You also don't have people going into your backyard as they cruise the back alley looking for empty bottles (happened to a buddy of mine).

    As for the look of it, I don't really care all that much as I don't spend the majority of my time looking at the outside of my house or my neighbors.
    The majority of city dwellers definitely want front attached garages. You can clearly see that from new developments. Back lane homes are only offered as an inexpensive alternative to homes with front garage. I never heard of a single new development where there are a significant number of back lane homes over $500k are offered.

    I chose to look at new developments for the comparison, because with mature neighborhoods I have no way of finding out whether a back lane home was the preferred choice or a choice forced upon.

    But most who strongly voice their opinions on the Internet are against front garages. It's not unlike the Gore vs. Bush debate. If you only read online comments, you would think that Gore would win effortlessly. But in the end, we all learned that the more conservative and sub-urban type simply didn't post their opinion on the Internet.
    I agree completely. I'll soon be in the market to buy a home, and a front garage is an important factor I want. Why on earth would I want to walk outside in the middle of winter to a back lane garage that takes up half my backyard and drive down an alley that is most likely full of ruts?

    I grew up in Nova Scotia where back lanes don't exist (I've never seen one in the Maritimes). This idea of enhanced civility and friendship with neighbours as a result of having to get out of your car and walk into your house is the biggest load of b.s I've ever heard. My family spoke outside with neighbours all the time when washing cars, gardening or mowing the lawn and we all had front garages. Who the hell sits in their back yard waiting for their neighbour to come home to talk to them? I want to avoid rain and the cold when I get into my car, as well as be able to carry my groceries 5 feet from my car into the house from inside my garage. There's a reason pretty much every new house in Canada has a front garage, people want them.

  30. #230
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Parkdale - Goldbar - Downtown
    Posts
    5,375

    Default

    ^ and you can go to any one of countless new neighbourhoods in the city and purchase a front attached garage home. There are certainly no shortage of those

    But those of us that have invested in unique character neighbourhoods like Alberta Ave, Westmount or Bellevue-Highlands did so at least in part due to the streetscapes and tree filled boulevards, that we believe are worth preserving. That's the intent of the MNO. So folks who want a suburban style house in a central area may have more difficulty finding one. They are out there, but you'll just have to look a little harder

  31. #231

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 240GLT View Post
    ^ and you can go to any one of countless new neighbourhoods in the city and purchase a front attached garage home. There are certainly no shortage of those

    But those of us that have invested in unique character neighbourhoods like Alberta Ave, Westmount or Bellevue-Highlands did so at least in part due to the streetscapes and tree filled boulevards, that we believe are worth preserving. That's the intent of the MNO. So folks who want a suburban style house in a central area may have more difficulty finding one. They are out there, but you'll just have to look a little harder
    I'm with you on that. The older neighborhoods should have what they already have and there is no point in trying to squeeze in a house that just doesn't flow with the rest of the neighborhood. Also, with the infill stuff that's been happening lately I just don't see companies plopping down the cookie cutter houses you see in the newer neighborhoods simply because no one in their right mind would pay $600,000 or more for a house that they could get for $425,000 in another location. There has to be something special about it to pay that kind of price.

    Also, turning lots into duplex lots in these mature neighborhoods is just a bad idea simply because it seems the majority of people in these neighborhoods park on the street and with a duplex you're getting twice as many cars. If you want to see bad planning then head down to the Laurel neighborhood in the south east. You've got duplexes on both sides of the street and the street itself isn't wider than a standard one so roads there become one lane in the winter and even in the summer if you get people who don't know how to park. So glad I moved out of there.

  32. #232

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Doc Hollywood View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by 240GLT View Post
    ^ and you can go to any one of countless new neighbourhoods in the city and purchase a front attached garage home. There are certainly no shortage of those

    But those of us that have invested in unique character neighbourhoods like Alberta Ave, Westmount or Bellevue-Highlands did so at least in part due to the streetscapes and tree filled boulevards, that we believe are worth preserving. That's the intent of the MNO. So folks who want a suburban style house in a central area may have more difficulty finding one. They are out there, but you'll just have to look a little harder
    I'm with you on that. The older neighborhoods should have what they already have and there is no point in trying to squeeze in a house that just doesn't flow with the rest of the neighborhood. Also, with the infill stuff that's been happening lately I just don't see companies plopping down the cookie cutter houses you see in the newer neighborhoods simply because no one in their right mind would pay $600,000 or more for a house that they could get for $425,000 in another location. There has to be something special about it to pay that kind of price.

    Also, turning lots into duplex lots in these mature neighborhoods is just a bad idea simply because it seems the majority of people in these neighborhoods park on the street and with a duplex you're getting twice as many cars. If you want to see bad planning then head down to the Laurel neighborhood in the south east. You've got duplexes on both sides of the street and the street itself isn't wider than a standard one so roads there become one lane in the winter and even in the summer if you get people who don't know how to park. So glad I moved out of there.
    It's all about balance.

    If the city and the MNO residents are determined to keep the way as is, I have no issue with that. However, the reality is that the city doesn't want to keep it the same way. The city wants more money to be invested into the areas, for a number of benefits.

    To attract potential developers and the make infill a sound business case, the city could allow front garages, or allow lots to be split. They choose the latter. Now that you see 20 ft wide houses with no side yards in a generally 40 ft areas. Is that better than a well designed 40 ft front garage house? To me, it's not. But maybe yes to some other people.

  33. #233
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Parkdale - Goldbar - Downtown
    Posts
    5,375

    Default

    Currently front attached garages are allowed on lots that do not have a rear lane. They can also be considered for lots that do not have a boulevard, and if there are a number of front attached garages already on a block face a front attached can be considered as well.

    You can also build a non-conforming building, apply for a permit seven years later and beg for forgiveness apparently.

    Regardless, there are plenty of locations where you can put a house with a front attached garage, even within the MNO. However there are neighborhoods where such a buildng really doesn't fit. Neighborhoods like Alberta Ave and Westmount should really have some sort an overlay that strengthens the standards for infill, not loosens them. In these central neighborhoods the character of the streets must be considered as part of any redevelopment.

    Given the fact that Alberta Ave is one of the (if not the) fasted infilling central neighborhood in the city, I don't think we need to be bowing to the pressure of developers too much. There is already a high demand there for infill housing. Developers will adjust.
    Last edited by 240GLT; 17-02-2014 at 01:28 PM.

  34. #234
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    48,662

    Default

    ^exactly. Strengthen the unique nature of these areas, allow front garages in other areas and ensure we create opportunities for all areas.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  35. #235
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,491

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by eons View Post
    If the city and the MNO residents are determined to keep the way as is, I have no issue with that. However, the reality is that the city doesn't want to keep it the same way. The city wants more money to be invested into the areas, for a number of benefits.

    To attract potential developers and the make infill a sound business case, the city could allow front garages, or allow lots to be split. They choose the latter. Now that you see 20 ft wide houses with no side yards in a generally 40 ft areas. Is that better than a well designed 40 ft front garage house? To me, it's not. But maybe yes to some other people.
    I'm one of those who say yes. I'll take mediocre narrow lot houses over high end front garages with driveways breaking up the boulevards and blocking street parking. IMHO we had residential neighborhood design right 100 years ago with closely spaced 2 and 2.5 storey houses on narrow lots. Things went downhill fast in the latter half of the 20th century. Splitting up the 15 m lots and cutting side yard requirements is a step back in the right direction.

  36. #236
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    4,019

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Titanium48 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by eons View Post
    If the city and the MNO residents are determined to keep the way as is, I have no issue with that. However, the reality is that the city doesn't want to keep it the same way. The city wants more money to be invested into the areas, for a number of benefits.

    To attract potential developers and the make infill a sound business case, the city could allow front garages, or allow lots to be split. They choose the latter. Now that you see 20 ft wide houses with no side yards in a generally 40 ft areas. Is that better than a well designed 40 ft front garage house? To me, it's not. But maybe yes to some other people.
    I'm one of those who say yes. I'll take mediocre narrow lot houses over high end front garages with driveways breaking up the boulevards and blocking street parking. IMHO we had residential neighborhood design right 100 years ago with closely spaced 2 and 2.5 storey houses on narrow lots. Things went downhill fast in the latter half of the 20th century. Splitting up the 15 m lots and cutting side yard requirements is a step back in the right direction.
    For the vast majority of the lots in the MNO, that won't cut it. They are RF1, which means in order to be split currently, they'd have to be 78' wide (to make two lots 12m/39' wide). Even at 39' wide, with side lots, you're looking at a 31' pocket. You can't build a double attached garage and make the house look attractive in any way.
    As mentioned, there are areas in the MNO which don't have alleys, which means they have to have front attached. In many of those areas, the lots are wide enough to split (even as RF1), it will be interesting to see if those neighbourhoods are accepting of that.

    I haven't met anyone who thinks a front attached garage looks better than a similar house without the garage. The main benefit is convenience. The drawbacks are numerous, mainly aborting any semblance of a welcoming facade and streetscape.
    I'd be ok with rear attached garages in mature areas.

  37. #237
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,491

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nobleea View Post
    I haven't met anyone who thinks a front attached garage looks better than a similar house without the garage. The main benefit is convenience. The drawbacks are numerous, mainly aborting any semblance of a welcoming facade and streetscape.
    I'd be ok with rear attached garages in mature areas.
    Agreed. There would need to be more strict height regulations for rear attached garages to avoid blocking the sun for the neighbors back yard, but I would have no problem with minimum height single storey structures connecting houses to rear garages.

    We could also consider allowing much higher lot coverage in a few areas where the lot depths are close to or less than the 30 m minimum. Two or three units could be built on a 15 x 30 m lot that way, with the "back yards" being large decks on top of rear attached garages.

  38. #238
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    4,019

    Default

    Another infill going up in Holyrood with a front attached garage. On the block there are 21 houses. 9 have front access drives (mostly with rear detached garages). I don't know how they got this new one approved. That puts it pretty close to the 50% of homes, which I thought is what was required to almost have a rubber stamp on future infill having front attached.

    Rules were meant to be broken I guess.

  39. #239
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Strathcona - Mill Creek
    Posts
    5,601

    Default

    See if you can file an appeal.
    They're going to park their car over there. You're going to park your car over here. Get it?

  40. #240
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    4,019

    Default

    Do I get my appeal money back if it's accepted? Seems silly that concerned citizens should have to fork out $40 to call a development officer out on their mistake.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •