Secondary Suites

[jeffwhit]

Originally Posted by frinkprof

This topic comes up periodically on this forum and in Calgary municipal politics and media. Looks like it may rear its head again, so I figured this may be a good opportunity to start up a new thread.

There's an information session upcoming for Hillhurst/Sunnyside as part of the TOD Planning and ARP amendment process:

Link

So what are your thoughts on secondary suites, either in the context of Hillhurst/Sunnyside or Calgary in general?

frink, I am a little confused by whether or not you're a HH/SS resident or not? The way you worded it in the other thread "as a resident of Sunnyside" I wasn't sure if you were referring to me or to yourself.

I received a counter to the above scanned letter today from a different neighbour in my mailbox that was rational, reasoned and only used 1 font size. Did this happen to be you?

[frinkprof]

Nevermind.

[MichaelS]

Originally Posted by jeffwhit

I received a counter to the above scanned letter today from a different neighbour in my mailbox that was rational, reasoned and only used 1 font size.

Would you be willing to share this other letter with us as well?

[jeffwhit]

Originally Posted by MichaelS

Would you be willing to share this other letter with us as well?

Yeah, I'll get around to it later, it's not all that interesting.

[frinkprof]

Nevermind.

[MichaelS]

^ No rush, just wanting to see the counter argument in the debate.

[jeffwhit]

Originally Posted by MichaelS

^ No rush, just wanting to see the counter argument in the debate.

[frinkprof]

Nevermind.

[MichaelS]

Thanks Jeff.

[octothorp]

Jeff, we must be neighbours; you're across the street from the letter-writer, and I'm across the back alley (and down a few doors) from them.

Anyway, I agree with your thoughts. I love living in a lower density inner-city neighbourhood, but I also realize that one can't complain against sprawl and yet refuse change in one's own neighbourhood; a little bit of added density won't hurt Sunnyside at all.

Edit: as far as I can tell, the sort of structures she's protesting against are ones like this one over on 6th; personally, I think they can be quite nice and can keep within Sunnyside's character:

http://maps.google.ca/maps?f=q&sourc...,86.26,,0,1.84

[Riise]

She's opposed to those? Towering monstrosities eh?

Anyway, I like this comment I found one the Herald's site:

Originally Posted by Sweep away those generalizations

I am a widow living by myself in a half-duplex, and am often out of town for work. I have a renter downstairs who is a wonderful single woman, also older, who works in a field our society happens to grossly undervalue: a day care & after school program in our neighbourhood. My transit-using renter loves the garden, appreciates the large suite with bedrooms for her grandchildren to visit, and is an inspiration to me in terms of being a good citizen very active in the volunteer sector, and who trades gardening tips with our neighbours.

I find it baffling that this arrangement which suits us - where we each have our own kitchen and own space - is considered something that should be illegal. Two ladies quietly preparing toast in their own kitchens and their own 1000 square foot, 3 bedrom apartments? What does the city say? Send out the bylaw officers and shut this down immediately to stop this! All single people should be forced to live in apartment buildings and only permitted to enjoy gardens if they are in the stage of life and inclination to have nuclear families. All widows who prefer to provide affordable housing to others and can't afford to keep their homes on their own should be forced to sell immediately to families of the correct size and composition.

Oh, and she doesn't drive, I'm usually out of town, so at most there is one car associated with our home, parked neatly in the double garage.

We're really destroying the neighbourhood, I know. Keeps me up at night, the guilt.

[jeffwhit]

Originally Posted by octothorp

Jeff, we must be neighbours; you're across the street from the letter-writer, and I'm across the back alley (and down a few doors) from them.

Anyway, I agree with your thoughts. I love living in a lower density inner-city neighbourhood, but I also realize that one can't complain against sprawl and yet refuse change in one's own neighbourhood; a little bit of added density won't hurt Sunnyside at all.

Edit: as far as I can tell, the sort of structures she's protesting against are ones like this one over on 6th; personally, I think they can be quite nice and can keep within Sunnyside's character:

http://maps.google.ca/maps?f=q&sourc...,86.26,,0,1.84

To be honest, she's against pretty much anything. I also like that little garage unit, so yes, sounds like we're just separated by one street, with a lunatic guarding the way. You maybe have seen me wheeling a giagantic instrument down 2nd ave.

[LFRENCH]

any word how the Hillhurst/Sunnyside meeting went?

here is a example from my hometown of increasing density without destroying the neighbourhood:

http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=en&sou...225.97,,1,1.44

[frinkprof]

Nevermind.

[frinkprof]

Nevermind.

[frinkprof]

Nevermind.

[You Need A Thneed]

Secondary thoughts, Part 1
By Jason Markusoff Wed, May 12 2010

An annex of sorts to our latest story about Calgary secondary suite policy...

Grants conditionally approved for new secondary suites in incentive program's first year: 63

Target for annual suite creation for Calgary's 10-year plan to end homelessness : 200

Number of development applications for secondary suites (or suite-like basement "duplexes") since introduction of new land-use bylaw, June 1998 2008: 72

Develpment permits granted for suites or duplexes since then: 46

Number of techinically illegal suites requested or ordered to shut down by city inspectors last year: 336

% of Calgarians who strongly or somewhat support new secondary suites with regulation: 84*

% who support making existing suites legal: 85*

% who support suites in their own neighbourhoods: 76*

* = Mustel Group poll for City of Calgary. 501 respondents. Results considered accurate within 4.4 percentage points, 19 times out of 20

Source: City of Calgary

So... The city's plan to end homelessness is to shut down 6 times as many suites as they approve new ones?

Makes sense to me.

46 DPs issued in two years, shutting down 300 some per year.

Make them legal, then people will get permits and build them properly! At least a much higher percentage of them.

When we were looking at homes to buy a few years ago, there was some real garbage the people were calling a basement suite.

[jeffwhit]

I swear the reason these suites are not getting approved is because someone in city hall is worried Rick Bell will say something mean about them, like calling them silly.

[bob1954]

This debate is rediculous!! If any of you guys get's to Chicago, look at large percentage of property's that have these "secondary suites" or "inlaw houses" on the same narrow lot. The city kept a lot of people in the city because these "suites" gave people an affordible option, that otherwise might have had to leave or live in a lees desireable are! Calgary is becoming a large city sounds like some folks in govn't need to start realizing this.

[frinkprof]

Nevermind.