Laneway Living

How Do You Feel About Laneway Houses?

In a climate where housing in Toronto has become increasingly expensive and hard to find, it is, perhaps, not surprising that the City of Toronto is beginning to discuss the value of “laneway housing.” It is said that there are 2400 laneways that span more than 300 kilometers in the city. Joe Cressy, City Councillor, Ward 20 Trinity-Spadina, states, “our laneways are a tremendous untapped resource and they should and need to be activated. The question is what type of activation and on what laneway?”

Councillors Ana Bailao (Ward 18) and Mary-Margaret McMahon (Ward 32) have been championing this cause at city hall. In a piece on CBC by Andrea Janus, Bailao argued that “there’s such a need for diversifying our housing stock that people are excited about this idea. I think Toronto is ready to have this conversation…This is taking your basement apartment and putting it on top of your garage.”

Two companies Lanescape and Evergreen held public meetings and collected answers to surveys which led to a report on Detached Secondary Suites published on May 26th, 2017. Councillors Bailao and McMahon presented the report to city council in July. As a result of this meeting, discussion and research on this proposal will move forward and I would expect that there will be a number of changes over the months.

However, the report as tabled in May, describes these secondary suites as follows:

• Non-severable units that remain under the same ownership as the main house

• Intended for use as rental housing, for family members, and for aging-in –place

• All servicing (water, sewage, gas, electrical) is connected via the principal residence or main street

• Recognized under Provincial legislation as a means of supporting intensification and increasing low-rise neighbourhood-oriented rental stock

Although the authors of the report suggest that laneway housing can alleviate some of the housing problems facing Toronto, the report also raises possible concerns from the public including:

• Elimination of trees and loss of green space

• Access for emergency vehicles and snow clearing

• Shadowing from laneway suites on neighbouring properties

• Privacy and overlook from neighbouring properties

• Lack of parking and increased traffic with added density

• Increased stress on local social services, parks, and schools with added density

• Noise

So considering the pros and cons listed, what’s my take on all of this? In the right situation secondary houses can be charming. Some delightful coach houses which sold in lovely neighbourhoods immediately come to mind. However, they are generally on large properties and have been allowed to be severed. These houses sell separately from the main house and can bring a very high price as they can be desirable both because of the design and the location.

The problem with the laneway housing as it is proposed in the current debate is that we are essentially proposing secondary houses on a property that can only be used for family or as a rental and cannot be severed. Therefore, these additional houses will not add to the less expensive housing stock that young people need.

Some, including some in municipal government, also suggest that these laneway houses could bring more rental opportunities which the city needs.

This attempt to increase rental housing however is in direct contradiction to what the provincial government recommended earlier this year. In the spring, just as some developers were once again planning to build rental buildings in Toronto, the provincial government suggested that it might prevent all new rental stock from increasing rent by more than the cost of living per year to a maximum of 2.5%. This immediately put some developers’ plans on hold at least until they hear the final decision. If we need rental units perhaps we shouldn’t be preventing builders who are willing to make an investment in our city from making a fair profit. To this end, I think that the different levels of government, especially provincial and municipal, need to communicate more effectively. It appears that the city is trying to increase rental opportunities with laneway housing while the provincial government is preventing it by instigating controls that are too tight. We of course need to find a way to provide more low income housing but that is a separate issue which will not be solved by a cap on annual rent increases on all housing.

That having been said, some laneway housing could be interesting so long as we maintain enough space that we still like our neighbours.

Any input from my readers I will be happy to pass on to the counsellors involved. Just post them on my blog.