SkyTrain Station Renovations

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by SpikePhanta

Is it possible to do, a laneway house, one basement, two ground floor dwellings and an up stairs dwelling?

Seems like a good way to pay for mortgage and get some extra income

Not only possible but I've seen houses that have them ( minus the laneway house, as that's a new thing ). See, to me, I think it would be better to disallow these extra suites... and instead allow for easy rezoning for row housing. Better standard of living for each of the people who live there in about the same amount of living space. You could easily turn two 40' side-by-side lots into three 25' row houses without needing to turn every family into a landlord.

Most of these suites are out of necessity. People want to live strata free in a SFH.

[SpikePhanta]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

Not only possible but I've seen houses that have them ( minus the laneway house, as that's a new thing ). See, to me, I think it would be better to disallow these extra suites... and instead allow for easy rezoning for row housing. Better standard of living for each of the people who live there in about the same amount of living space. You could easily turn two 40' side-by-side lots into three 25' row houses without needing to turn every family into a landlord.

Most of these suites are out of necessity. People want to live strata free in a SFH.

I would love to see row houses, but it would be hard to do especially if the whole block is single houses, and even when developers buy out all the houses on the block they prefer to build townhouses (from what i've seen in Edmonds and ROyal Oak.

[djh]

Originally Posted by SpikePhanta

I would love to see row houses, but it would be hard to do especially if the whole block is single houses, and even when developers buy out all the houses on the block they prefer to build townhouses (from what i've seen in Edmonds and ROyal Oak.

I don't think wood construction is ideal for row houses. Fire would spread far more easily than houses which are separated by a few feet. And building out of concrete - which I think is the best choice - is orders of magnitude more expensive.

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by SpikePhanta

I would love to see row houses, but it would be hard to do especially if the whole block is single houses, and even when developers buy out all the houses on the block they prefer to build townhouses (from what i've seen in Edmonds and Royal Oak.

They prefer to build townhouses because it's familiar and thus it is more easily to rezone for townhouses. People know what they're getting into. However, fee-simple rowhouses can be built in less space than townhouse complexes and are more suitable for replacing SFH. The beauty of it is you don't need a whole row of houses. You just need 2 or 3. Short North-south Streets of East Vancouver come to mind. These blocks have just a few houses on them.

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by djh

I don't think wood construction is ideal for row houses. Fire would spread far more easily than houses which are separated by a few feet. And building out of concrete - which I think is the best choice - is orders of magnitude more expensive.

Using that logic... 4-story wood-frame low-rises are insane.

[DKaz]

Originally Posted by djh

I don't think wood construction is ideal for row houses. Fire would spread far more easily than houses which are separated by a few feet. And building out of concrete - which I think is the best choice - is orders of magnitude more expensive.

Townhouses and apartment units by code are required to have a two hour fire separation between suites. This is achieve by putting two layers of drywall on each side of the demising walls. Actually two layers takes two hours to burn through. An apartment is actually worse because while the separating walls are two hour rated, the inside walls are only one hour rated, so in an hour the frame within the suite itself can become compromised and spread to other suites. Not so much in a townhouse where the fire may spread into the frame but only for that particular suite still.

[djh]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

Using that logic... 4-story wood-frame low-rises are insane.

I wouldn't go as far as calling them "insane". I would definitely prefer to buy in a concrete building than a wood one, precisely for the reason that they are less likely to burn down and your insurance costs are lower, among other things.

[djh]

Originally Posted by DKaz

Townhouses and apartment units by code are required to have a two hour fire separation between suites. This is achieve by putting two layers of drywall on each side of the demising walls. Actually two layers takes two hours to burn through. An apartment is actually worse because while the separating walls are two hour rated, the inside walls are only one hour rated, so in an hour the frame within the suite itself can become compromised and spread to other suites. Not so much in a townhouse where the fire may spread into the frame but only for that particular suite still.

Good to know.
Still prefer a concrete townhouse over a wooden one.

[twoNeurons]

I honestly don't know ANY townhouse complex that is concrete in Western Canada. They're all woodframe.

Most low-rises are also wood-frame.

"Sugar" on Hastings street advertised concrete construction as a feature, because most units of comparable size are wood-frame.

Wood is still good.

Quattro in Surrey went up in flames because it was under construction, with lots of exposed wood.

A fire in Coquitlam a couple years ago in Maillardville did the same, during a heatwave, because of careless roofers in the complex being built. Incidentally, it also set afire the wood-framed duplex next door. Half the duplex was destroyed. The other half had smoke damage.

The insurance company figured it was cheaper to rebuild without tearing the other half down... and this was a duplex.

[officedweller]

Most townhouses that are in downtown condo tower complexes (in the podiums) are concrete. However, in that circumstance, some are wood if there's a separation between the townhouses and the tower (i.e. The Park on West Georgia, where the townhouses leaked).

[cabotp]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

They prefer to build townhouses because it's familiar and thus it is more easily to rezone for townhouses. People know what they're getting into. However, fee-simple rowhouses can be built in less space than townhouse complexes and are more suitable for replacing SFH. The beauty of it is you don't need a whole row of houses. You just need 2 or 3. Short North-south Streets of East Vancouver come to mind. These blocks have just a few houses on them.

These short town house complexes. Is it possible to add on to them in the future.

What I'm thinking is a developer comes in and buys up two properties. Builds 2 or possibly 3 townhouses on those two lots. At a later date the properties on either side are on the market. It would be nice if a developer could buy up one or more of those lots and add onto the existing town house complex.

That way a developer wouldn't have to buy up and entire block.

[cabotp]

Originally Posted by SpikePhanta

Is it possible to do, a laneway house, one basement, two ground floor dwellings and an up stairs dwelling?

Seems like a good way to pay for morgage and get some extra income

Not sure if it would cover the cost of the mortgage. From what I can gather and this is only a quick estimate.

The laneway house is about 250-300 sq ft. Each downstairs suite in the house is 500 sq ft each. And the upstairs suite is 1000 sq ft.

Whether the owner lives upstairs or the whole house was rented out I'm not sure. All I know is apparently sold for about $900,000. Which comes to about $5,500 / mth in payments at 5.40%. Of course that doesn't include insurance.

I don't see there being enough rent collected to cover the mortgage. Although I'm not sure what the cost to rent them is.

[SpongeG]

Originally Posted by cabotp

Is that actually rezoning.

Currently most of vancouver is zoned as RS-1. Which is the detached house with a suite and a laneway house. Is there now a new zone code for a case where a lot has a laneway house + 3 dwellings in the main house.

Rezoning to me would mean the zone code for that lot has changed. Which I don't think a developer has to do in a situation that you described.

I also don't think you can buy those basement suites. You can only rent them.

I know there is a house just recently built that is that 3 lots from mine. It has a upstairs dwelling, 2 downstairs dwellings and a laneway house. I believe it sold for about $900,000 before it was even finished. And I know someone is already living in the laneway house. I haven't seen them though.

i don't know about rezoning but the ones we saw were single family dwellings - knocked down and replaced with a a house that looked basically the same size but could house 4 families - it was made to look like it had a single entry - the second entry was tucked on the side and the basement suite entries were also tucked out of sight and the basement suites were sold as separate and not as mortage helpers to the buyers in the main suites

maybe the zoning is already in place in these areas and its up to people to sell and than whatever goes on happens finally


I just remember parking seems to get worse and worse as more people are squeezed into a street

[cabotp]

Originally Posted by SpongeG

i don't know about rezoning but the ones we saw were single family dwellings - knocked down and replaced with a a house that looked basically the same size but could house 4 families - it was made to look like it had a single entry - the second entry was tucked on the side and the basement suite entries were also tucked out of sight and the basement suites were sold as separate and not as mortage helpers to the buyers in the main suites

maybe the zoning is already in place in these areas and its up to people to sell and than whatever goes on happens finally


I just remember parking seems to get worse and worse as more people are squeezed into a street

Ya the zoning is already there. RS-1 allows this.

In the house that I saw built. The front door goes up stairs. Then the basement suites are accessed by two rear doors. There is also a stair case to access a back door on the upper level. Probably for fire reasons on this one. The laneway house has a door facing the lane.

I know another house was built it doesn't have a laneway house but I believe it has at least 2 dwellings in the house. The property is only 50x80 so it is too short for a laneway house.

As for parking I kind of see a benefit to it. If people have no place to park their cars. They might give up owning one.

If not people are going to start demanding that underground parking lots should be built on the properties. Although I don't think the city would allow that in the area I live.

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by cabotp

Ya the zoning is already there. RS-1 allows this.

In the house that I saw built. The front door goes up stairs. Then the basement suites are accessed by two rear doors. There is also a stair case to access a back door on the upper level. Probably for fire reasons on this one. The laneway house has a door facing the lane.

I know another house was built it doesn't have a laneway house but I believe it has at least 2 dwellings in the house. The property is only 50x80 so it is too short for a laneway house.

As for parking I kind of see a benefit to it. If people have no place to park their cars. They might give up owning one.

If not people are going to start demanding that underground parking lots should be built on the properties. Although I don't think the city would allow that in the area I live.

Almost every single new house built today in East Vancouver ( and I'm talking 95% ) have two suites in the back. They look like the grey house here:
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s..._HKEYBdnBAXLNiuWGg&cbp=12,207.58,,0,8.21

Two car garage, sometimes, a spot for a third car.
Two doors in the back for the two suites. Usually both two bedroom. Usually no laundry. It has a combined kitchen/dining/living room, usually tiled.

Here's a good example of one for $950:


source:
http://vancouver.en.craigslist.ca/van/apa/2001555983.html


Assuming you rent both suites, you bring in $1900. That's taxable, mind you. A laneway house will bring in $1200. A basement suite on top of it could bring in $800. Assuming you don't mind managing three suites and assuming a month or two per year where a suite is vacant... I'm assuming you could bring in $3000 / month avg.

[jlousa]

The 2nd basement suite is illegal. We know almost all new houses are built with them, but they remain illegal. Infact the city comes back a year after occupancy to inspect for it. Most owners keep the plumbing in the walls until after this secondary inspection before complete buildout.

Anyways lets try and move this back on topic, it appears that Translink is retrying to get get cellphone reception in the Dunsmuir Tunnel, they had placed a rfp out before the Olympics but it doesn't appear anything happened from that. They are going at it again, hopefully with better results.

[hollywoodnorth]

Originally Posted by jlousa

Anyways lets try and move this back on topic, it appears that Translink is retrying to get get cellphone reception in the Dunsmuir Tunnel, they had placed a rfp out before the Olympics but it doesn't appear anything happened from that. They are going at it again, hopefully with better results.

jesus I sure hope so.......what was the problem last time? not offering enough $$ or incentive? seems like a great "sponsorship" type opportunity especially if you tie it in with free WIFI.

"downtown skytrain station and tube WIFI and Cell service provided by Bell"

[DKaz]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

I honestly don't know ANY townhouse complex that is concrete in Western Canada. They're all woodframe.

The townhouses at Mosaic Rennaisance on Lougheed Hwy at Madison Ave. in Burnaby is concrete. A lot of high end downtown townhouses are built of concrete as well, but emphasis on high end. You can certainly get a house of any kind made of concrete if you want to pay for it. My dad built a concrete house with steel beam roof on 2165 Harrison Dr. in Vancouver, it's a beautiful house, cost $800,000 to build it on land the owners have lived on for many many years prior.

Is WiFi really necessary at a Skytrain station? Most people with a smartphone have data plans these days and no one stays at a Skytrain station long enough to browse any more than a couple of pages.

[twoNeurons]

I guess when I think of townhouses I didn't think of podium townhouses. That makes sense, though. It would be silly to make the podium with a lower life expectancy than the tower.

[cabotp]

Originally Posted by jlousa

The 2nd basement suite is illegal. We know almost all new houses are built with them, but they remain illegal. Infact the city comes back a year after occupancy to inspect for it. Most owners keep the plumbing in the walls until after this secondary inspection before complete buildout.

Anyways lets try and move this back on topic, it appears that Translink is retrying to get get cellphone reception in the Dunsmuir Tunnel, they had placed a rfp out before the Olympics but it doesn't appear anything happened from that. They are going at it again, hopefully with better results.

If the 2nd basement suite is illegal. Although I thought they allowed it now. Why are developers even allowed to build them?