MF YYC Politics - there, I mega did it

[timun]

Originally Posted by Slava

But that’s the thing; all those things contribute to the property value. And sure, I don’t care today because I have no plans to sell, but I will one day. And I have zero doubt that people are going to pay more to not be beside a multifamily place as opposed to a SFH.

Slava, the thing is: that is factually untrue. You don't stand to lose any value in your house whatsoever. In fact the value will go UP.

[Torture]

I live in Mount Pleasant where we have lots of infills because the base zoning is RC-2. I live in a single detached.

The infills are essentially the same size as large modern houses on a single lot, they just have 2 doors. It's not like we're putting massive apartment blocks in the middle of a bunch of SFH, we're just utilizing the space that would have gone to one or two big houses for 2 or more slightly less big houses that are attached. This is not that big a deal.

[Slava]

Yeah, and I get it in neighborhoods like that. You guys already have cars parked on the streets and traffic there. I don’t, and I’m not super excited about the prospect.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by Slava

Yeah, and I get it in neighborhoods like that. You guys already have cars parked on the streets and traffic there. I don’t, and I’m not super excited about the prospect.

To steal/paraphrase a sentiment from (I believe) Nenshi, we're in the middle of a housing crisis our main focus should be where people sleep at night, not where cars park at night.

That being said, I get it. It's a valid concern.
I live in a neighborhood that is quickly densifying, and more and more people are parking on the streets.
I don't love streets filled with cars, but I understand that's a necessary evil/a small price to pay for fixing a much larger issue.

If you can afford to live in that type of neighborhood, you can afford to be a little altruistic about the solution to a problem that affects people that don't have the same means.

[timun]

Cars parked on the street! OOOOooooooOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooo!!!

I can't ####ing believe the excuses...

[Sr. Mints]

Originally Posted by Torture

I live in Mount Pleasant where we have lots of infills because the base zoning is RC-2. I live in a single detached.

The infills are essentially the same size as large modern houses on a single lot, they just have 2 doors. It's not like we're putting massive apartment blocks in the middle of a bunch of SFH, we're just utilizing the space that would have gone to one or two big houses for 2 or more slightly less big houses that are attached. This is not that big a deal.

Funny you mention Mount Pleasant. That's exactly what Rosedale doesn't want, and has been that way for as long as I can remember. And people do and will pay more to live there.

I'm torn on this. I wouldn't want increased densification on my street. The traffic and parking alone would drive me to murder. But I understand the rationale for upzoning. Glad I'm not making the call.

[Roughneck]

Easy way to manage cars parked on the street: increase parking prices.

[timun]

Originally Posted by Roughneck

Easy way to manage cars parked on the street: increase parking prices.

Yeeeeeeessssssssssssss

[Slava]

Originally Posted by timun

Slava, the thing is: that is factually untrue. You don't stand to lose any value in your house whatsoever. In fact the value will go UP.

Originally Posted by timun

Cars parked on the street! OOOOooooooOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooo!!!

I can't ####ing believe the excuses...

Good for you; you can buy a property where you like and I’ll do the same.

[timun]

Where do you live, anyway? And does it look anything like this:

Spoiler!

?

If so, I can guarantee no one is going to be in a rush to build duplexes let alone rowhouses there, and your fears are totally unfounded.

[accord1999]

Originally Posted by Sr. Mints

Funny you mention Mount Pleasant. That's exactly what Rosedale doesn't want, and has been that way for as long as I can remember. And people do and will pay more to live there.

Rosedale's interesting in that its desirability has caused it to go in the opposite direction and de-densified. It's desirable enough (especially on Crescent Road) that people/developers are assembling multiple lots to build expensive mansions.

[woob]

Slava, surely you have to understand how your thoughts on this look? You're concerned about someone having to pay a bit more for a SFH not next to multi-unit housing, thus getting less for your SFH. You're concerned about multi-unit housing going up in typical SFH neighbourhoods. You're concerned about blanket upzoning, which one could presume means you'd be OK with upzoning, just not in certain neighbourhoods. And you're concerned about an increase in traffic and parking cars on the street.

All of those a highly superficial concerns. It's like the definition of NIMBY. It's counter to helping a city evolve, grow, diversify, and densify.

I live in Tuscany where it's a sea of parked cars on the street. Sometimes my preferred spot to park in is taken when a neighbour has visitors or a big gathering. I just find somewhere else to park and move my vehicle the next day.

People live here because of the paths, the parks (seriously, so many playgrounds and parks), the walkability, and the closeness to the big highway and the mountains. Tuscany houses go FAST. Whether its a big house in Tusslewood or a smaller bungalow around 1100sq ft. I live about 2 blocks from a big multi-unit row house complex. I walk by another multi-unit row house complex on my way to Sobeys and the liquor store for patio beers (about 7 min walk). Yes, I know Tuscany isn't inner city and probably won't see much change as a result of blanket upzoning. But I would 100% welcome if it did.

I sometimes think about moving to an older neighbourhood (where my kids go to school), but the neighbourhood has none of the appeal. Yes, there's mature trees, character SFHs with big lots, etc. but the walkability is awful, there's a fraction of the parks and pathways, and it doesn't have the same feel.

[Torture]

I park in my garage 90% of the time (crazy idea, I know), but I have never had a problem parking in front of my house when I want to.

[Cowboy89]

I'm against this because I want to live in a SFH when I return to the Calgary region, don't want to live next to a Du/four/eightplex and don't want to have to park blocks away due to cramped streets. Upzoning the entire city all at once is insane and will ruin many great neighborhoods. I could be for this though if all density requirements for new communities were dropped concurrently (Hey why not let the market decide if legions of 4 story wood condo buildings straddling the city limits are actually desired).

I think the SFHomeowners who will see the biggest increase in value will be people who live in Cochrane, Okotoks, Airdrie & Strathmore.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Slava

Good for you; you can buy a property where you like and I’ll do the same.

Isn’t that the rub? If you really don’t like it, you can move somewhere you like.

“Why should I have to move…” yeah, I get it. But you won’t have to. You’ll obviously want to, so you can go ahead and do that. Nobody is making you move, but it’s on the table.

Speaking as someone who lives in a SFH in a neighborhood where parking is an issue, it’s really such a pointless concern. You’ll get over it faster than you can imagine.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

I'm against this because I want to live in a SFH when I return to the Calgary region, don't want to live next to a Du/four/eightplex and don't want to have to park blocks away due to cramped streets. Upzoning the entire city all at once is insane and will ruin many great neighborhoods. I could be for this though if all density requirements for new communities were dropped concurrently (Hey why not let the market decide if legions of 4 story wood condo buildings straddling the city limits are actually desired).

I think the SFHomeowners who will see the biggest increase in value will be people who live in Cochrane, Okotoks, Airdrie & Strathmore.

Then buy a SFH that isn’t next to a whatever-the-plex.

This isn’t hard.

[accord1999]

Originally Posted by woob

I live in Tuscany where it's a sea of parked cars on the street. Sometimes my preferred spot to park in is taken when a neighbour has visitors or a big gathering. I just find somewhere else to park and move my vehicle the next day.

People live here because of the paths, the parks (seriously, so many playgrounds and parks), the walkability, and the closeness to the big highway and the mountains.

Tuscany is also popular because it is extremely suburban, with detached SFHs making up a high percentage of dwellings. If you want an idealized (and attainable) Calgary suburb, Tuscany might be it as no new communities these days have anywhere as many SFHs built relative to other housing types.

[Torture]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

I'm against this because I want to live in a SFH when I return to the Calgary region, don't want to live next to a Du/four/eightplex and don't want to have to park blocks away due to cramped streets. Upzoning the entire city all at once is insane and will ruin many great neighborhoods. I could be for this though if all density requirements for new communities were dropped concurrently (Hey why not let the market decide if legions of 4 story wood condo buildings straddling the city limits are actually desired).

I think the SFHomeowners who will see the biggest increase in value will be people who live in Cochrane, Okotoks, Airdrie & Strathmore.

You want to live in a rapidly growing city of well over a million people but don't want neighbours. You're probably right, if that's what you want perhaps you should live in Okotoks, etc.

[Brendone]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Then buy a SFH that isn’t next to a whatever-the-plex.

This isn’t hard.

But if you’re looking to move to your “forever” home, theres no certainty that if your neighbours house goes up for sale, it doesn’t get bought and demolished for a multi family dwelling. I don’t think it’s that crazy to want some certainty if a SFH home in a low density neighbourhood is your goal, is it? Or are we saying if that’s your goal, leave the city?

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by Torture

You want to live in a rapidly growing city of well over a million people but don't want neighbours. You're probably right, if that's what you want perhaps you should live in Okotoks, etc.

I'm fine with neighbors on each side. Just not multiple households. Calgary's not New York, Toronto, or Chicago either. It's not like we're this massive cosmopolitan urban center than demands mass condo/multiplex living in the region. Pretty much every comparable population center in the US has affordable SFHs.