Jordan Van Brakel
@jordanvanbrakel.bsky.social
Reposted by Jordan Van Brakel
Update: we’ve had a project canceled due to the recent zoning changes that restrict what size lane house can go behind an existing single family home
holy @!#
It looks like the final adopted update to Burnaby's R1 zoning is really bad.
The allowable footprint area for a house and LWH is now capped at either 30% or 40% of the lot.
This change appears to kill the current design for one of our projects, and the housing library designs.
It looks like the final adopted update to Burnaby's R1 zoning is really bad.
The allowable footprint area for a house and LWH is now capped at either 30% or 40% of the lot.
This change appears to kill the current design for one of our projects, and the housing library designs.
January 12, 2026 at 4:40 PM
Update: we’ve had a project canceled due to the recent zoning changes that restrict what size lane house can go behind an existing single family home
Reposted by Jordan Van Brakel
Being profoundly upset about the 51st state stuff was not an unreasonable reaction.
January 3, 2026 at 1:51 PM
Being profoundly upset about the 51st state stuff was not an unreasonable reaction.
Reposted by Jordan Van Brakel
Reposted by Jordan Van Brakel
If the worst single-family house in your n’hood costs over $1 million, then your n’hood should be zoned for apartment buildings.
(It’s pretty much that simple)
(It’s pretty much that simple)
December 17, 2025 at 9:50 PM
If the worst single-family house in your n’hood costs over $1 million, then your n’hood should be zoned for apartment buildings.
(It’s pretty much that simple)
(It’s pretty much that simple)
Reposted by Jordan Van Brakel
full toon (from Jan 25)
![Elderly lady: Electric scooters should be illegal
Man on scooter: Well they're not
EL: I don't like your pants
Guy on street: So what, deal with it
EL: [at neighborhood mtg, into mic] We should get to decide what other people do with their property
Concerned neighbors: "Great point! She's right! Hear hear](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:carj4mhaflwfubqzioy5wxl3/bafkreigikh2cyh3nryt6egt27k2g4tjgkggrey5lig6pd5usxf5rogm24e@jpeg)
December 14, 2025 at 9:13 PM
full toon (from Jan 25)
Reposted by Jordan Van Brakel
Single Stair changes to the Vancouver building code approved, but this is key - they actually need to be allowed by zoning in places where they're viable to build.
Only a 🤏 fraction of the west side directly on major corridors allows multifamily residential and 4+ storeys, with ground floor retail
Only a 🤏 fraction of the west side directly on major corridors allows multifamily residential and 4+ storeys, with ground floor retail
December 11, 2025 at 3:29 AM
Single Stair changes to the Vancouver building code approved, but this is key - they actually need to be allowed by zoning in places where they're viable to build.
Only a 🤏 fraction of the west side directly on major corridors allows multifamily residential and 4+ storeys, with ground floor retail
Only a 🤏 fraction of the west side directly on major corridors allows multifamily residential and 4+ storeys, with ground floor retail
Reposted by Jordan Van Brakel
New piece. The more I go to housing conferences, the more people I feel like we've collectively lost the plot. If housing is a human right, why do we keep highlighting places and models that continue to violate it?
Read here: www.missingmiddleini...
Read here: www.missingmiddleini...
December 2, 2025 at 1:30 PM
New piece. The more I go to housing conferences, the more people I feel like we've collectively lost the plot. If housing is a human right, why do we keep highlighting places and models that continue to violate it?
Read here: www.missingmiddleini...
Read here: www.missingmiddleini...
Reposted by Jordan Van Brakel
A 4 storey plex does stand in sharp contrast to a 50s bungalow, but the problem isn’t the plex - it’s the decades of exclusion where @cityofburnaby.bsky.social didn’t even allow lane houses until recently.
www.cbc.ca/news/canada/...
www.cbc.ca/news/canada/...
Public backlash to 'gigantic' multiplex homes in Burnaby, B.C., has council scaling back | CBC News
The City of Burnaby is reversing course on parts of its multiplex housing rules, after fielding complaints from residents about the size and scale of the new multi-unit homes in previously single-fami...
www.cbc.ca
October 19, 2025 at 11:40 PM
A 4 storey plex does stand in sharp contrast to a 50s bungalow, but the problem isn’t the plex - it’s the decades of exclusion where @cityofburnaby.bsky.social didn’t even allow lane houses until recently.
www.cbc.ca/news/canada/...
www.cbc.ca/news/canada/...
Reposted by Jordan Van Brakel
Burnaby started out with a forward-looking implementation of the provincial SSMUH legislation.
But after some “feedback from residents” they scaled that back to pretty much the minimum they can get away with under the legislation.
But after some “feedback from residents” they scaled that back to pretty much the minimum they can get away with under the legislation.
City Council cuts height and size of new Province-mandated developments | City of Burnaby
Burnaby City Council has approved changes to the R1 Zoning Bylaw to reduce the height and size of small-scale multi-unit housing (SSMUH) projects, aiming to protect neighbourhood character and livabil...
www.burnaby.ca
October 17, 2025 at 5:00 AM
Burnaby started out with a forward-looking implementation of the provincial SSMUH legislation.
But after some “feedback from residents” they scaled that back to pretty much the minimum they can get away with under the legislation.
But after some “feedback from residents” they scaled that back to pretty much the minimum they can get away with under the legislation.
Reposted by Jordan Van Brakel
Vancouver planners spelled out the answer to this very clearly:
Allowing larger laneway homes would be valuable for families, and planners believe that creating value is bad. Therefore homes sizes should be capped to be too small to be comfortable for families.
council.vancouver.ca/20090616/doc...
Allowing larger laneway homes would be valuable for families, and planners believe that creating value is bad. Therefore homes sizes should be capped to be too small to be comfortable for families.
council.vancouver.ca/20090616/doc...
September 14, 2025 at 10:09 PM
Vancouver planners spelled out the answer to this very clearly:
Allowing larger laneway homes would be valuable for families, and planners believe that creating value is bad. Therefore homes sizes should be capped to be too small to be comfortable for families.
council.vancouver.ca/20090616/doc...
Allowing larger laneway homes would be valuable for families, and planners believe that creating value is bad. Therefore homes sizes should be capped to be too small to be comfortable for families.
council.vancouver.ca/20090616/doc...
Reposted by Jordan Van Brakel
Ok let’s talk zoning approval processes.
A thread…
They’re slightly different in every city but here’s my understanding of the hierarchy as (from easy/fastest to slowest).
1/x
A thread…
They’re slightly different in every city but here’s my understanding of the hierarchy as (from easy/fastest to slowest).
1/x
July 18, 2025 at 3:05 PM
Ok let’s talk zoning approval processes.
A thread…
They’re slightly different in every city but here’s my understanding of the hierarchy as (from easy/fastest to slowest).
1/x
A thread…
They’re slightly different in every city but here’s my understanding of the hierarchy as (from easy/fastest to slowest).
1/x
Reposted by Jordan Van Brakel
When regulatory capture collides with social housing. Just because most prospective tenants are unlikely to own a car does not mean that the city won’t hold this up over $40,000 in lieu payments for each parking space not built.
Housing for residents with disabilities put on hold due to lack of parking – Tri-Cities Dispatch
An affordable rental project for residents living with mental illness failed to cross the finish line in Port Coquitlam council chambers recently, with
tricitiesdispatch.com
July 14, 2025 at 4:47 PM
When regulatory capture collides with social housing. Just because most prospective tenants are unlikely to own a car does not mean that the city won’t hold this up over $40,000 in lieu payments for each parking space not built.
Reposted by Jordan Van Brakel
Ok. I need to rant for a minute.
For years I've been reading @douglastodd.bsky.social opinion pieces in the @vancouversun.bsky.social and - for years - he has had a 'single-family-zoning-sized' hole in his logic.
🧵
For years I've been reading @douglastodd.bsky.social opinion pieces in the @vancouversun.bsky.social and - for years - he has had a 'single-family-zoning-sized' hole in his logic.
🧵
July 2, 2025 at 4:12 PM
Ok. I need to rant for a minute.
For years I've been reading @douglastodd.bsky.social opinion pieces in the @vancouversun.bsky.social and - for years - he has had a 'single-family-zoning-sized' hole in his logic.
🧵
For years I've been reading @douglastodd.bsky.social opinion pieces in the @vancouversun.bsky.social and - for years - he has had a 'single-family-zoning-sized' hole in his logic.
🧵