The Metropolitan Vancouver Region is expected to have a population of over 3.3 million within the next 25 years. As a designated growth concentration area, the City of Vancouver is expected to absorb 160,000 people by 2021. While existing plans will allow for future high density developments, 70% of the City's residential areas remain zoned explicitly for single-family use. The intensification of these single-family neighbourhoods is viewed as a way of using the existing housing stock and the existing residential land more efficiently. The intensification techniques that are appropriate for single-family neighbourhoods include: conversion, infill and redevelopment. Planners think that intensification efforts will not only alleviate some of the detrimental impacts of sprawl, but will also provide a more diversified housing stock that will be more appropriate for the needs of an increasingly complex society. Unfortunately, some existing residents have been extremely vocal in opposition to any intensification efforts in their neighbourhoods. The residents claim that any intensification will disrupt the character of their existing single-family neighbourhoods. While the arguments for retaining exclusive single-family neighbourhoods are specious at best, the NIMBY mentality of residents has often proved to be an effective form of opposition to intensification efforts. An approach for overcoming the NIMBY syndrome is a successful program of community outreach. Community outreach attempts to minimize community opposition and to rally support for the development within the community. Attention is focused on the residents who have not already become opponents of the development. A successful community outreach program will limit residents' factual misunderstandings and their exaggerated fears about the project's potential impacts. Negotiations should be undertaken with residents who are willing to compromise; residents who refuse to talk cooperatively should not be brought into the problem-solving process. Future plans for intensification must establish a sense of certainty in the way a neighbourhood will change. The exaggerated sense of fear that residents have about the potential changes in their neighbourhood is the biggest obstacle to overcome if the Metropolitan Vancouver Region is to successfully implement an intensification program into existing single-family neighbourhoods.

The Metropolitan Vancouver Region is expected to have a population of over 3.3 million within the next 25 years. As a designated growth concentration area, the City of Vancouver is expected to absorb 160,000 people by 2021. While existing plans will allow for future high density developments, 70% of the City's residential areas remain zoned explicitly for single-family use. The intensification of these single-family neighbourhoods is viewed as a way of using the existing housing stock and the existing residential land more efficiently. The intensification techniques that are appropriate for single-family neighbourhoods include: conversion, infill and redevelopment. Planners think that intensification efforts will not only alleviate some of the detrimental impacts of sprawl, but will also provide a more diversified housing stock that will be more appropriate for the needs of an increasingly complex society. Unfortunately, some existing residents have been extremely vocal in opposition to any intensification efforts in their neighbourhoods. The residents claim that any intensification will disrupt the character of their existing single-family neighbourhoods. While the arguments for retaining exclusive single-family neighbourhoods are specious at best, the NIMBY mentality of residents has often proved to be an effective form of opposition to intensification efforts. An approach for overcoming the NIMBY syndrome is a successful program of community outreach. Community outreach attempts to minimize community opposition and to rally support for the development within the community. Attention is focused on the residents who have not already become opponents of the development. A successful community outreach program will limit residents' factual misunderstandings and their exaggerated fears about the project's potential impacts. Negotiations should be undertaken with residents who are willing to compromise; residents who refuse to talk cooperatively should not be brought into the problem-solving process. Future plans for intensification must establish a sense of certainty in the way a neighbourhood will change. The exaggerated sense of fear that residents have about the potential changes in their neighbourhood is the biggest obstacle to overcome if the Metropolitan Vancouver Region is to successfully implement an intensification program into existing single-family neighbourhoods. / Applied Science, Faculty of / Community and Regional Planning (SCARP), School of / Graduate

No description available.

In the 1980s, very large houses began to replace smaller homes in older single-family zones in Canada's major cities. Protests by residents resulted in more restrictive single - family zoning schedules. In Vancouver, however, houses built as large as zoning permitted had appeared in the late 1960s. This case study traces Vancouver's single- family land use from 1900 to 1990. The intent of Vancouver's original single- family zoning (1930) was to create a suburban landscape. To appeal to European immigrants of the 1950sand Asian immigrants of the 1970s, Vancouver's east-side builders developed a distinctive large house easily converted to include one or more illegal suites. By encouraging this design, zoning amendments in 1974 destroyed the sub-urban pattern intended by the original zoning. In response to affluent Asian immigrants of the 1980s, westside builders constructed larger, more elaborate homes. The city reacted to complaints about the size and design of these houses by amending its schedule in the 1980s to legalize suites, to reduce the bulkiness of new construction and to re-establish the suburban pattern. Local residents do not like the new homes, and many neither need nor can afford them. The research indicates that Asian buyers are outbidding locals for these homes, and locals are dispersing to peripheral areas where homes are more affordable and styles support their cultural traditions. The research suggests that the more compact land use pattern of the 1900s may be more appropriate than land use patterns that have resulted from the city’s original and amended single-family schedule. The research concludes that Vancouver addressed symptoms of the problem but not its cause: a zoning practice that continues to exclude the less affluent from single-family zones. Vancouver needs to espouse a more inclusionary zoning schedule that adopts the compact land use and mixed tenures typical before zoning and preserves the traditions of local residents. Other-wise, the zoning changes may preserve single- family areas for affluent immigrants as the Vancouver market aligns itself with the global market.

The single family neighbourhood is a favoured residential form, yet this low density residential option is unsustainable. With its high consumption of land and services, the continued development of the traditional single family neighbourhood results in urban sprawl and inefficient use of infrastructure. In addition, zoning regulations that prescribe large lot sizes, deep setbacks and singleuses, create disconnected, mono-functional residential enclaves. Residential intensification is increasingly touted by urban theorists and proponents of sustainable development as part of the solution. This involves focussing new development on underutilized land, which in turn necessitates the acceptance of new housing forms within existing neighbourhoods. However, people are often wary of higher densities and alternative housing options, believing that the qualities of livability that they identify with the single family neighbourhood are threatened. Focussing on ground-oriented residential alternatives, this project examines the key elements that comprise the residential environment and their connection to aspects of livability. A set of guidelines based on principles of sustainable development directs the design for a higher density, environmentally responsive, groundoriented residential development on an infill lot in an existing single family neighbourhood. The final design proposes the division of the single site into five developable lots, introduces four different dwelling types, and integrates into the landscape a stormwater management system. The plan is compared to other similar alternative developments.

No description available.

This thesis examines a typical Montreal housing type---the multiplex, a time-tested model to accommodate commercial activities. The focus of this research is on its physical characteristics, which facilitate small-scale commercial transformations of homes with specific needs for different businesses. / Chapter 1 introduces the theoretical background of this thesis, and places it in the context of previous research on the subject of small-scale transformations of dwellings. / Chapter 2 reviews the history of shophouses in Montreal from 1642, when the city was founded, through to the Industrial Age. / Chapter 3 begins with a general discussion of the multiplex dwelling---its basic forms, types, and architectural character. The second section of this chapter introduces the case studies. These trace the interior transformations of four multiplexes, all of which were built in the first decade of this century. / In Chapter 4 and 5, the spatial changes identified and collected in all four cases are closely examined. All existing changes have been photographed. These changes are associated with the specific needs of each shop; the four cases were tested, and proved the building's adaptable nature to different degrees. All changes are further regrouped and analyzed according to four important elements---bearing members, non-bearing members, service, and circulation. (Abstract shortened by UMI.)

In the 1980s, very large houses began to replace smaller homes in older single-family zones in Canada's major cities. Protests by residents resulted in more restrictive single - family zoning schedules. In Vancouver, however, houses built as large as zoning permitted had appeared in the late 1960s. This case study traces Vancouver's single- family land use from 1900 to 1990. The intent of Vancouver's original single- family zoning (1930) was to create a suburban landscape. To appeal to European immigrants of the 1950sand Asian immigrants of the 1970s, Vancouver's east-side builders developed a distinctive large house easily converted to include one or more illegal suites. By encouraging this design, zoning amendments in 1974 destroyed the sub-urban pattern intended by the original zoning. In response to affluent Asian immigrants of the 1980s, westside builders constructed larger, more elaborate homes. The city reacted to complaints about the size and design of these houses by amending its schedule in the 1980s to legalize suites, to reduce the bulkiness of new construction and to re-establish the suburban pattern. Local residents do not like the new homes, and many neither need nor can afford them. The research indicates that Asian buyers are outbidding locals for these homes, and locals are dispersing to peripheral areas where homes are more affordable and styles support their cultural traditions. The research suggests that the more compact land use pattern of the 1900s may be more appropriate than land use patterns that have resulted from the city’s original and amended single-family schedule. The research concludes that Vancouver addressed symptoms of the problem but not its cause: a zoning practice that continues to exclude the less affluent from single-family zones. Vancouver needs to espouse a more inclusionary zoning schedule that adopts the compact land use and mixed tenures typical before zoning and preserves the traditions of local residents. Other-wise, the zoning changes may preserve single- family areas for affluent immigrants as the Vancouver market aligns itself with the global market. / Applied Science, Faculty of / Community and Regional Planning (SCARP), School of / Graduate

The single family neighbourhood is a favoured residential form, yet this low density residential option is unsustainable. With its high consumption of land and services, the continued development of the traditional single family neighbourhood results in urban sprawl and inefficient use of infrastructure. In addition, zoning regulations that prescribe large lot sizes, deep setbacks and singleuses, create disconnected, mono-functional residential enclaves. Residential intensification is increasingly touted by urban theorists and proponents of sustainable development as part of the solution. This involves focussing new development on underutilized land, which in turn necessitates the acceptance of new housing forms within existing neighbourhoods. However, people are often wary of higher densities and alternative housing options, believing that the qualities of livability that they identify with the single family neighbourhood are threatened. Focussing on ground-oriented residential alternatives, this project examines the key elements that comprise the residential environment and their connection to aspects of livability. A set of guidelines based on principles of sustainable development directs the design for a higher density, environmentally responsive, groundoriented residential development on an infill lot in an existing single family neighbourhood. The final design proposes the division of the single site into five developable lots, introduces four different dwelling types, and integrates into the landscape a stormwater management system. The plan is compared to other similar alternative developments. / Applied Science, Faculty of / Architecture and Landscape Architecture (SALA), School of / Graduate

No description available.