Eight municipalities, 17,367 house lots on land their plans already set aside for apartments. Three places stand out, and they sort themselves by size. In each, the point access block fits on one lot or two; what changes is how tall it can go and what stands in the way. Click a marker on the map, or a card below.
What works. RMM has no minimum lot size and allows 6 storeys at up to 2.0 FSR, 2.5 on lots of 2,500 m² or less. The lots are flat, wide for the valley and shallow, which suits a compact plate.
What stands in the way. Two things. RMM keeps 6 m from every interior lot line, so a 21 m lot leaves a 9 m strip; a single-lot block needs a variance or a site-specific zone, and the easiest case is a lot that already touches commercial or multi-family land, where the Urban Centre and City Centre zones drop to 3 m. And almost none of this land is in a TOA, so Section 150 parking still applies. On one lot the parking, not the zone, sets the height: what fits on grade behind the building is what you get, which is why this is the 1.5 FSR, 4-storey case.
What works. Bylaw 3300 is the only one in the valley that names the single exit stair building: in R3 it may sit 1.5 m from a side lot line instead of 6 m, with no coverage cap, 6 storeys and 2.1 FSR base, 2.6 with the rental bonus. Outside the TOA the City lets an apartment cut five stalls for each car share vehicle, so a car-share model can carry part of the parking.
What stands in the way. Site size. R3 asks for 1,000 m² and 26 m of frontage, which is two of these lots, and 1.0 to 1.45 stalls per unit still apply outside the TOA. A pocket, not a city, but the zone is ready and no design has been tested on it yet.
What works. The province, the OCP and the MR7 zone agree on 8 storeys and 3.0 FSR, and since June 2024 Surrey requires no resident parking in a TOA, so the whole plate can be building and the developer decides how many cars to house. Almost every lot touches other house lots, so assembly is possible, but it no longer has to be.
What stands in the way. Most of these lots sit on quiet suburban streets, and a 6-storey block between two bungalows is a hard sell at a public hearing. The better sites are the ones on or beside an arterial, next to commercial or existing multi-family, where the Low-Rise II zones already allow 0 m side setbacks and where 3 m sides instead of MR7's 7.5 m can be argued. MR7 itself still wants 2,000 m² and 36 m of frontage, so a single-lot block needs a CD zone.
| SAbbotsford1.5 FSR | MCity of Langley2.0 FSR | LSurrey Tier 32.5 FSR | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Density | 1.5 FSR, about 4 storeys | 2.0 FSR, up to 6 storeys | 2.5 FSR, 6 storeys; 8 allowed |
| Site | One 21 m lot | Two 19 m lots, 1,000 m² | One 19 m lot, or two |
| Zone to ask for | RMM with a setback variance, or a CD zone | R3 as written | MR7 by assembly, or a CD zone for one lot |
| Side yard | 6 m; 3 m next to centre zones | 1.5 m for a single exit stair | 7.5 m in MR7; 0 m in the -C zones; 3 m to be argued |
| Parking | Section 150 minimums; sets the height | 1.0 to 1.45 per unit; car share cuts 5 each | None required |
| Pool | 952 lots | 178 lots | 5,849 lots |
CRM allows apartments with 0 m front and side setbacks on 668 m² and 18 m of width, inside the Port Haney TOA with no parking minimum. Four storeys, 1.4 to 2.0 FSR. The catch is the designation: only the Lougheed Mixed-Use and Town Centre lots point to it, and the plans write a 2,000 m² assembly into the apartment areas. Maple Ridge page
DT2 allows apartments with 0 m setbacks on every side at 4.5 FSR, and MU1 and DT1 do the same with commercial below. 56 house lots sit in the Downtown designation and the Mission City TOA; the larger Mid-Rise pool, 1,217 lots, still points to the 7.5 m setbacks of MA1. Mission on the screening page
R7 allows an all-residential apartment with 3 m sides and a 1.5 m front on a 900 m² lot; C3 downtown allows 0 m on every side above a commercial first storey on 450 m². The 385 Low Rise house lots point to R5 and its 6 m setbacks, so these are zones to ask for, not zones the plan hands over. Chilliwack on the screening page
RM-4 keeps only 3.5 m from the side lot lines but wants 0.4 ha; MC Mainstreet Commercial allows apartments above commercial with 1 m sides on 450 m². A pool of 75 house lots, 4 of them in the TOA, so an opening for one building rather than a programme. Pitt Meadows on the screening page
The argument does not need a new law in any of the three places. Abbotsford has the land and the land values and needs a 3 m side yard. The City of Langley has the side yard and needs two lots. Surrey has the land, the density and the parking rule and needs a zone written for one lot instead of three. A small, a medium and a large block, drawn once each on a real lot, would show what each council is already most of the way to allowing.