While pouring the front sidewalk today and seeing the end product, a sensible person can't help but look how we are building homes on lots in the inner city and and feel there is something wrong.
This means we are rebuilding the city from the inside out but not in a way that we won't come to regret. By this I suggest that the front setback is such a burdensome and project damaging requirement that it should be changed by the city.
The result of long contextual front setbacks is 'backwardization' of the site coverage. Tiny back yard and oversized front yard is the outcome. This is what we are building in 2017, although the context was set 50-75 years ago by homes that are largely being demolished now. I would prefer the opposite site use than what is currently allowed, and so would my buyers, the new community members that are going to live in these houses. The buyers have zero say in permitting matters, by the time they enter into the picture the project is long since permitted and possibly built.
What will it take to change this bylaw? I'm not sure, but what we have now needs a redo. This is another problem with a 400 page zoning bylaw. It doesn't contain a chapter on common sense. I have heard there is support at the political level to change this, and it looks like some planning staff are considering new rules on front setbacks. Maybe with the main streets initiative passed earlier this month some planning staff resources can be reallocated to this issue?
The flatwork is done. My crew did a nice job. The front setback looks ridiculously long from this vantage. Can we ever change this? Why are we building houses with bigger front yards that are essentially used for nothing except sod, and smaller rear yards where a lot of outdoor living is meant to take place?