. . . . and, relatively speaking, the Okanagan might have natural beauty to spare, but it's a cultural wasteland - defined narrowly as a lack of access to good restaurants, theatres, cultural/community resources, internationally significant events and ethnically/culturally distinct neighborhoods. Vancouver has this in spades. Of course, if you're comparing the Okanagan to
Metro Vancouver (ie. Surrey, Langley, Coquitlam, etc.), the cultural differences would be rather moot. I'd take the Okanagan over any of those latter three cities any day.
I'm all for the laneway housing initiative. First, it's optional, so people can keep those picket fences if they want to. Nor does it mean building "dog-houses", as professor Vansky has so eloquently put it. These certainly could be as spacious or much moreso than your average 1 or 2-bedroom condo; would likely provide at least some access to green space (a little piece of that picket fence/postage stamp yard that people seem to want so badly); and would certainly be built according to code. In addition, they would increase the city's property tax revenue efficiency, thus perhaps (at some point in the future) allowing for moderation in property tax rates.