- Part 1: "Rumble on Craven Row"
- Part 2: "How About a Craven Row Challenge?"
- Part 3: "Thoroughly Modern Through-Lots"
I've approached a few architecture profs and departments with the idea of a Craven Row Challenge, but haven't had a bite yet.
In the meantime, the video below highlights a fascinating initiative in Vancouver called Decoding Density, an "international contest [that] addresses two of the most existential problems today: climate change and housing affordability."
Here's a clip explaining the setback rule for new housing:
Here's a clip explaining the setback rule for new housing:
The full video "How Breaking Rules Could Create Better Apartments" includes some very cool thought experiments.
Here's another.
Imagine how Parkmount Road might look if its front-yard setback rules changed to match those currently governing the west side of Craven Road.
This is 331 Coxwell Ave, which was "a shoe repair shop in the 1970s, and a tattoo parlour in the 1980s":
 |
The rules for garden suites and laneway suites both assume that the new suites are back to back with their neighbours, which is why the distance to the side and rear lot lines can be so small (1.5 metres).
By contrast, the front side of houses are normally given more space to breathe, with decent setbacks from the street and sidewalk (4.5 to 6.0 metres).
Now, it's understandable when Parkmount's residents think their gardens are normal backyards like everywhere else in Toronto...
...and often treat Craven as their back alley.
However narrow it may be, though, Craven Road is a city street, not a laneway.
Which means Parkmount lots are through-lots.
Which means a structure built in their backyard is also, technically, a structure fronting on a city street.
As garden suite homes begin to be built fronting the west side of Craven Road, then, wouldn't it seem fair that the same setback rules should be applied to them as to new homes fronting on Parkmount and the east side of Craven?
