Council Eyes End to Front Garages

[You Need A Thneed]

Originally Posted by Stang

I actually like what Korzym says about having a couple of strips for your tires and then let the grass grow in between. If maintained, could look very nice and much better than a giant slab of concrete.

I don't think this works out very well in real life, the grass/whatever inbetween the tire tracks never grows very well. It would be often driven on, road sand/salt/gravel would fall of of cars onto the soil - making the soil not very friendly to plant life, cars parking there would block the sunlight for long periods of time, etc.

I think installing a variety of looks for the concrete pads would be a better idea instead of every single one being simple uncoloured broomed finish concrete. Add some colour, and stamped patterns, plus add landscaping around the driveway, make them vary like the houses do.

Here at our office, the driveway (not leading to a front garage), is made of stamped coloured concrete that looks a lot like big flat stones. It looks really good.

[freeweed]

Originally Posted by Stang

Most new neighbourhoods that I have seen either offer smaller "starter homes" (although I hate the term), or larger houses with front garages.

Like it or not, there's a reason that term is used. And it explains much of the vehemence thrown towards attached, front-facing garages.

It's cheaper to build a house without a garage, all else being equal. If these "starter homes" were always built with garages in the back, that wouldn't be the case, but that's not how things are done. Maybe the city should require all new homes to be built with garages, to take away some of this perceived class separation, and let people decide which they prefer on merit alone.

[Dado]

I'm not following your logic here. With vehicle access at the front, the only real options* for a garage are the snout design (cheap) and the integrated design (much more expensive). Either way, the garage, if you're going to have one, pretty much has to be built at the time the house is constructed.

But with rear lane access, the garage can be skipped and just left as an empty driveway. People can build their garages later if they so desire, or build a bike garage or a garden shed or whatever they fancy. At any rate, skipping the garage is a pretty easy way to chop several thousand dollars off the initial purchase price of a house.


One of the issues with rear lanes is that they increase the total amount of land used for roads, which reduces density. This is where reducing the road width can help, so RoW is transferred from the front to the back. Another appealing option is something like the one posted earlier from Winnipeg, where the entire concept of front and back is reversed; still I'd make the front lane at least wide enough to drive on.


*The side garage would be an option with wider lots but that just increases the requirement for cross-streets.

[freeweed]

Originally Posted by Dado

But with rear lane access, the garage can be skipped and just left as an empty driveway. People can build their garages later if they so desire, or build a bike garage or a garden shed or whatever they fancy. At any rate, skipping the garage is a pretty easy way to chop several thousand dollars off the initial purchase price of a house.

That is exactly why these are termed "starter" homes, and why there's a perceived "low end" vs "higher end" distinction between the two house types.

[hulkrogan]

With the rear garage you aren't wasting a decent chunk of lot on a big concrete driveway. You should be able to shrink lot sizes and still have more useable space, or, preferably, push the house up and have a giant back yard with a garage. More windows on the main floor of a house sure makes for a nicer interior.

[freeweed]

Originally Posted by hulkrogan

With the rear garage you aren't wasting a decent chunk of lot on a big concrete driveway. You should be able to shrink lot sizes and still have more useable space, or, preferably, push the house up and have a giant back yard with a garage. More windows on the main floor of a house sure makes for a nicer interior.

Conversely, with a front garage you could push it forwards and eliminate the large concrete pad in front. I've seen this with townhouse style condos although I suspect it would draw even more ire from those dead-set against front garages.

Oh, and plenty of rear garages are built deep into the property, with a large concrete apron out front. Also with side garages in places that still have them (older areas usually). They're just not required to do so as is typically the case with front garages.

[devonb]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

Roof top terraces are taking over infill in central Toronto. It does require the homeowner's attention and is several flights up from the kitchen but does provides a fair amount of outdoor space for a house that covers around 80% of the property.

This is what we're thinking of doing in our back yard. We'd like a double garage for my wife's car, my motorcycle and tools, but we don't want to lose the yard space for the garden. So, we're thinking we'll eventually put a rooftop garden on the garage and reclaim the space that would otherwise go to waste. I haven't looked into pricing, but I'm sure it's not cheap.

[Ferreth]

I wonder why no one builds houses with attached garages backing onto the lane rather than the front. I've seen a few older houses where the owners have "attached" the garage to the house by enclosing the space between the house and the garage. What I hate is all the houses with a garage sticking out the front and nothing above it - waste of good space. These days, you can usually get a "bonus room" built into that space, which usually improves the look of the house IMO.

I'd say rather than banning front garages, there needs to be some thought given to restrictions on what can be built. The first thing I would ban would be building any front garages on feeder routes, bus routes or any other heavier traffic community streets. Those places all get back lanes and room for back garages. There is no way a car should be backing out onto one of these roads. Frankly, if it's a bus route, it pretty much should be relegated to higher density to start with, not single house with garage type stuff.

Second, I'd restrict how much garage frontage you can have on the front of a house. A double garage looks out of proportion with a small house - restrict those to single car, and put the garage under the first level. The same goes for attached units, single garage under each unit, with some stagger between units to break up the monotony.

Thirdly, I'd remove back lanes from any plan for a street allowing predominately front garages. As previously mentioned, it's a waste of space.

I'd also encourage designs that allow things like decks over garage roofs - in one friend's case they have a bonus room and a deck over their garage (it's a bigger house with an ample 2 car garage) There are several of these in my neighborhood - I have a deck on my backyard garage which makes up for the lack of yard to some extent, and another person has a hot tube on theirs - a little 'public' being on the front side for my taste, but they happen to have a nice city view there to go along with that.

[McMahon]

From the article:

Paul Hughes, chair of the CFPC, said proposed amendments to the document that guides city development could be the death knell for backyard gardens and green spaces if it’s approved.

“Paving paradise is exactly what we’re doing here — we’re turning our backs on our heritage and people being able to make decisions with their own properties,” he said.

I don't get this argument at all. In fact, it's ridiculous. If a person wants to grow vegetables in their backyard, then they're going to buy a home with a large backyard. It's not as if people are going to be forced to buy these "front garage"-less homes. They'll just make a decision on it, like they would any other decision when buying a home.

[niwell]

The article was awfully reactionary and shallow on facts, but I guess it is the Sun. "OMG, but how will people EVER be able to grow all the food in their backyard PARADISE in this AWFUL recession". Considering this would only be on streets with laneway access, I'm not sure what the huge deal is. How many new houses with laneways even have front garages? From the new areas I've driven through I'd guess it would be a minimum. Consumer choice would involve picking a house that doesn't have a laneway so you can have your front garage.

And there are certainly advantages to the detached laneway garage that people have already mentioned. Another would be that the presence of a structure at the back of your lot actually creates a more private setting for your backyard. It's kind of nice compared to some new houses where it seems like you're looking directly into the neigbour behind you.

A larger issue may be the nature of suburban Calgary in that developers have almost exclusively chosen to go with the deep-narrow lot configuration which more or less dictates either a snout house or laneway parking. You can still achieve similar suburban densities with a shallow-long configuration which provides for the side garages others have posted. Not saying this is better, but it is another option. Ottawa has gone almost exclusively in this direction for new single family homes, and places like Markham have a mix of lot styles (albeit not necessarily in the same development) for new housing.

[freeweed]

Wow, did I ever read this story wrong. My impression was that council was seriously debating a complete ban on front garages. Hey, we've seen weirder.

For those as stupid as me (maybe I'm the only one): this is only a ban on front garages on properties that already have a back lane. Which completely makes sense - why have the worst of both worlds? The awkward look of a snout, combined with still having to trudge through your yard with your garbage/recycling.

niwell is right. I've rarely seen back lane houses with front garages, and when you do see it, it looks ridiculous. I think maybe 1-2 streets in an average new neighbourhood in Calgary do this.

Please someone tell me I'm not the only one who made this mistake.

[O-tacular]

Lake Bonavista is the worst for this as there are alleys everywhere and virtually no detached garages in the back. Houses are almost exclusively snout.

[You Need A Thneed]

So, this is just about having no alleys in lots that are intended for front attached garages? So, basically the most pointless discussion ever? There are already virtually no lots in new communities that have both alleys and are designed for front garages. The only places where it does happen is where the community design requires it due to some quirk.

They should just turn around the houses and have rear attached garages. The problem is the Land Use Bylaw that requires 6 metres from the rear property line to any living space (attached decks included)

[Wentworth]

There is an excellent real life case study on this issue here in Wentworth. A few streets were designated for "Euro Zone" homes with rear garages, the remaining lots were designed for traditional front-garage homes. When we were building we seriously considered the laned homes because they had great street appeal. But that came at a price. For starters, the lots were smaller because of the space eaten up by the lane. If you had a detached garage, then that meant doing the sprint every morning from the house to the garage. In a cold city like Calgary, people love their attached garages. If you opted for a rear attached garage, then you ended up with practically no back yard as you had both a garage and a driveway in the back yard now. The back yards of these homes also had a somewhat claustrophobic feel. Perhaps some of that could have been resolved by moving the homes forward. Anyways, these lots did not sell well. The developer took several deep cuts on the lots and eventually permitted garage fronting homes to be built on them. The result was a little silly looking, I'll have to see if I can find it on Google Street View.

[frinkprof]

Bump.

Originally Posted by Calgarian

This doesn't look too bad to me, much better than the Beige stucco. What we need to do in this city is ban front entry garages, you should use the alley like most of MacKenzie town does.

[LFRENCH]

well thank you frinkprof

I for the life of me cannot figure out the debate on either the front or rear garages? maybe someone can give me a run down on the issue

A)Why are front garages such a big deal?
B)How does a front or back garage differ in the density?
C)How do we believe we are going to get better architecture from moving the garages into the back?

I'm not trying to be a smart ass, more of a dumb ass However I just don't understand how this debate is happening

[Wentworth]

Just Google "snout house" and you will find the case against this type of housing, e.g. http://www.cartage.org.lb/en/themes/...snouthouse.htm

[freeweed]

Originally Posted by LFRENCH

well thank you frinkprof

I for the life of me cannot figure out the debate on either the front or rear garages? maybe someone can give me a run down on the issue

A)Why are front garages such a big deal?
B)How does a front or back garage differ in the density?
C)How do we believe we are going to get better architecture from moving the garages into the back?

I'm not trying to be a smart ass, more of a dumb ass However I just don't understand how this debate is happening

Basically it comes down to this:

1. Some people hate the look, period, without any particular reason (we all have our own valid tastes).

2. Some people dislike the perceived "affluence" that comes with a front garage. Remember that back in the day you were lucky to be able to afford a garage period, and the only people who could put one facing forward (ie: not in a back lane) were the wealthy. As building types changed and our houses grew bigger (and cities just planned differently) we started to see a lot of "regular folk" being able to afford a front garage, albeit at a premium over a rear garage. This difference continues today in every neighbourhood in Calgary, at least. Front garaged houses are always more expensive than rear garaged homes, all else being equal - at least in every single neighbourhood I compared prices in. This really bothers some people, but I leave it as an exercise to the reader as to why. A tremendous number of people I've known over the years fit into this category - they know squat about density, urban form, pedestrian realms, and all the stuff you're about to here in forthcoming posts. They plain and simple do not like front garages, because it makes the owners look like they have more money and that they're flaunting it (cars == affluence, to some). You can really spot these folks because they're not so much against snout houses as they are ANY front-facing garage. The convenience of just pulling up and into your garage (and walk right into your house) seems to always come at a premium, and this upsets some people.

3. Front garages end up taking some of the "visibility" out of a neighbourhood. You're basically putting a huge wall on the front of your house, as opposed to having windows - the "eyes on the street" effect. This of course assumes that all or most commonly used rooms in a house face the street, and really would have to be mandated into building codes to have any meaning. Forcing bedrooms to face the back of the house, etc. I know of many, many laned areas where the majority of the busy rooms face the rear of the house, for instance. This could be mostly mitigated by having attached garages at the side of the house, and plenty of front windows - but see point #2 above. It's still argued against by many, because ANY front garage presence is BAD.

4. Obscure arguments about what is and is not pedestrian friendly. I find this has far more to do with having bloody sidewalks than anything else. I've seen plenty of back-laned neighbourhoods with no sidewalks - tell me that's pedestrian friendly. Put sidewalks in and people will walk, as evidenced by the throngs of people walking their dog and kids by my house every single day. But to some, having a garage in front says "no pedestrians allowed". Oddly, having double the pavement for the same number of houses has always struck me as even more auto-focused, but I'm in the minority here.

5. Really, a lot of this comes down to whether or not you view a visible garage as saying "cars first, bitches!" or "um, nearly everyone has a car, this is just accepting reality". Many people here fit into the first category, I fit into the latter. It's a psychological difference that ain't gonna be easily solved on an Internet forum. There's a lot of irony here in that plenty of people with garages (front or otherwise) don't actually put their car into them, they park on the driveway/street and fill their garage with crap. When I've lived in laned areas, it always seemed like the road was covered with parked cars on both sides. Tell me that doesn't say "cars first, bitches!", but again I'm in the minority here. And of course having a front garage but not actually putting a car in it is really stupid - that IS effectively putting up a wall on the front of your house for no good reason.


Note that I'm completely in the dark as to actual research on any of this, this is purely my own anecdotal evidence from living in and visiting every type of residential neighbourhood over the years. And actually trying to find out WHY people have a preference for something or other, beyond either "it's what I grew up with, therefore that's how everyone should live" or "my parents had this and I'm rebelling against their lifestyle, so everything they did is wrong" (which generally dominate, but some folks actually think about this stuff a little deeper).

The front/rear garage preference has been a minor obsession with me since I was a teenager, so I've talked to hundreds if not thousands of people about it. It's always amazed me just how many different responses you can get on something like this.

[frinkprof]

^Freeweed,

I've actually never heard anyone have the sentiment you describe in point #2. I'm really not sure if it's a common one. Maybe I'm in the dark here.

I agree with your point #3. The existence of sidewalks is probably more important than building design/lot layout, from a pedestrian friendliness standpoint anyway.

[fusili]

I got nothing against front garages. Build what ever the hell you want. Its your choice, not mine.