If we stand a chance in slowing the rate of climate change, we need to make a radical shift in not only our daily habits, but also where we live. To do this effectively, there needs to be the willingness to innovate on a municipal level.

Lucky for Vancouverites, the City of Vancouver created the Greenest City Action Plan (GCAP) in order to become the world’s greenest city by the year 2020. The plan aims to reduce carbon emissions and construction waste by promoting the deconstruction of old buildings and relaxing bylaws to allow for innovative green building projects.

In light of these goals, I propose that the City of Vancouver officially legalize tiny houses.

Small mobile housing such as tiny houses address Vancouver’s affordability concerns while fulfilling the GCAP’s mandate: tiny houses use less energy than regular houses to build and heat, they can be built from almost entirely recycled materials and they provide an affordable and sustainable means to densify without changing the character of Vancouver’s neighbourhoods.

In addition to this, the minimal cost of a tiny house provides the added benefit of increased financial and personal freedom.

So, the question is, if tiny houses were considered a legitimate form of housing, would you trade less space for a more sustainable and less consumptive lifestyle with increased financial freedom?

A tiny house is a small house that ranges from 80 to 800 square feet. The tiny-house movement is a North American phenomenon comprised of people who choose to live in smaller than average homes, complete with all of the comforts of a “regular”-sized home.

Tiny houses and small living spaces are not an unusual concept in many parts of the world, but are a new and almost radical concept in North America where the average median house size was 2,438 square feet in 2009.

Tiny houses can be built on a foundation, but are often built on a flatbed trailer because mobile tiny houses allow the ability to relocate easily and navigate city building codes. By building on a trailer, a tiny house can be built to the custom-built recreational vehicle (RV) code and certified by the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) rather than the city’s residential building code. Many tiny house enthusiasts choose to build their home on a trailer because most cities enforce a minimum home size that applies to homes built on a foundation.

Why are people choosing to downgrade? Tiny houses are gaining popularity for environmental and financial reasons, but they also appeal to those seeking more time and financial freedom.  According to tinyhouselisting.com, “a typical American family’s rent or mortgage payment represents roughly 30% of their total income.”

Researcher Rose Quint of National Association of Home Builders claims homeowners are downsizing because they “are responding to Americans’ concerns over high energy costs and the realization that smaller homes cost less to operate”. Tiny houses require less energy to heat and cool; they are more efficient than large houses because they can better utilize solar heat.

By reducing carbon emissions, tiny houses align with the Greenest City Action plan’s goals to “reduce carbon emissions by 33% (of 2007 levels)” and “improve energy efficiency and reduce greenhouse gas emissions in both new and existing buildings.”

Solar power can be easily harnessed to provide enough electricity for energy efficient LED lighting and running small heating and electronic appliances.

Propane, with its relatively small carbon footprint, can be easily and cheaply utilized for refrigeration and cooking.

One of the main reasons the tiny-house movement is gaining momentum is because tiny houses use less embodied energy than regular-sized homes. Embodied energy is a way of looking at buildings and building materials as ”a storehouse of nonrecoverable energy”.

By applying the “Cradle to Gate” concept, an assessment of a product life cycle can be made. Cradle is to Gate is defined as “the life cycle of a product from manufacture (‘cradle’) to the factory gate (i.e. before it is transported to the consumer)”. The small size of a tiny house means they require less building materials than average-sized homes and can preserve embodied energy by diverting materials from the dump.

By reusing materials, we allow building materials to live out their lifecycle. By reducing waste, tiny houses perfectly align with the GCAP’s goal to “prevent wood and other materials from being sent to the landfill or incinerator through a process that takes apart buildings and salvaged materials, rather than a traditional demolition method.”

As a rapidly growing city, one of the major concerns of the City of Vancouver is the need for densification. In many neighbourhoods, major condo developments are at the receiving end of community protests. Neighbourhood activists claim that high rises “undermine affordability, block public views and ignore the Community Plan”. Of primary concern in many of these protests is preservation Vancouver’s neighbourhoods and their character.

In response to these concerns, in 2009, the City of Vancouver changed its bylaws to allow for the development of the Laneway House Pilot Program. Laneway houses are small accessory buildings located on the property of a primary residence; they allow for densification without changing the character of neighbourhoods or blocking views.

The difference between a tiny house and a laneway house is that a laneway houses are secondary buildings built on a foundation (usually over a garage), and at 500 to 600 square feet, are on the larger side of most tiny houses.

Since the program started, 800 permits have been issued and 500 laneways houses have been built. The success of this pilot project signifies a move to densify in a more sustainable direction.

Despite the effort on the city’s part to address densification, laneway houses do not address affordability issues; many homeowners and renters find laneway houses unaffordable. Many homeowners would like the added income a laneway house provides, but the zoning of their property does not qualify for a laneway house. According to the City of Vancouver’s Laneway Housing “How to Guide”, only houses with specific lot sizes and with certain zoning qualify.

As one of the most expensive cities in the world, Vancouver’s cost of living is much higher than average. In 2014, the City of Vancouver conducted a survey on as part of the Mayor's Final Task Force and found that “22% of respondents [surveyed by the City of Vancouver] reported that they were spending more than 40% on housing.” That is 10 percent higher than the national average.

According to Michael Lyons, vice-president of marketing for the local laneway house company Smallworks, the cost of an average laneway house build is between $250,000 and $270,000. Even with proper zoning, at such a high cost, it is no surprise that many homeowners cannot afford to build a laneway house in their yard. At $,1000 a month to rent, many renters cannot afford to lease a laneway house.

Although tiny houses may not provide an overall solution to densification, they can offer a solution to those who wish offset expensive mortgages as well as get around zoning and affordability issues of laneway houses.

One problem that tiny house enthusiasts face is that tiny houses currently reside in a legal “grey area”; they are neither legal or illegal. Current zoning bylaws do not allow for houses on foundations under 500 square feet. RVs, on the other hand, such as tiny houses on wheels, are technically legal, but living in an RV is not directly addressed by local bylaws; there is no clear bylaw stating that living in an recreational vehicle is illegal.

This lack of legal acknowledgement is a major issue that holds back the entire tiny house movement in North America; many people are afraid to invest their time and money into building a tiny house in fear that they will be evicted.

To quote the Greenest Action Plan, “It’s up to everyone to do their part, to rethink, re-evaluate and re-imagine the way Vancouver works and how we lead our lives.”  

Take a look at your own life and consider what a reduction in rent or mortgage cost could offer you. Consider your stress level, the number of hours you work, and the amount of time you get to spend with your friends and family. Are you satisfied? Is the way you are living working for you? Chances are you are feeling strained in at least one of those areas. Consider how a radical change could alter your outlook.

Take tiny house blogger Laura LaVoie for example, who claims her life changed dramatically for the better since moving to her tiny house; she quit her job of eight years to pursue writing full time. LaVoie says “This has been my dream for as long as I can remember and moving to the tiny house has made that possible.”

In order to change local bylaws, there has to be a shift in perception and support of local residents. This is where the City of Vancouver needs to step in and officially support the radical change in lifestyle that tiny houses signify.  By officially supporting the tiny house movement, the City of Vancouver would create a ripple effect across North America.

Support for radically sustainable living will help slow the rate of climate change, support GCAP’s goals, and will encourage more people to live fuller, more sustainable lives without the fear of financial burden. It’s time to start rethinking where happiness comes from and how we can bring more of it into our own lives in a cheaper, greener and more authentic way.

So the question is, would you trade less space for more time and happiness?