Calgary Civic Election Discussion

[Addick]

Originally Posted by someguy51

I'm actually for legalized basement suites. There is a severe lack of affordable housing in this town. If its gets the working homeless into a suite they can afford then I can live with the inconvenience. If the average family only owned one or two cars it probably wouldn't be a big deal.

Bravo to you sir, I tip my hat! You keep hearing how Calgarians are such kind and helpful people yet when it comes to sharing their communities with the less fortunate/desirable services they usually become an instant-NIMBY. It's great to see this selflessness! Maybe the residents of Elboya could learn a thing from you...

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by someguy51

I am sure that if there was an emergency a fire truck would not fit.

Oh, it would fit. There might be some people looking at insurance claims, but it would fit.

[4X4]

Originally Posted by North East Goon

I just cannot vote for someone in favour of legalized basement suites. It's just not feasible for my community. And since you are from Saddleridge, I bet the parking crunch in your neighborhood is just as bad?

Maybe not for your community, but for many communities it is feasible. Almost all inner city neighbourhoods are already zoned R2 or greater, so it isn't an issue there. In places like Fairview, Haysboro, Acadia (yeah, I'm a southie) where there are plenty of bi-levels and bungalows but it is zoned R1, it would be a great way to slow urban sprawl, and provide affordable housing. And it would help first time buyers afford a house (legally).
Parking isn't so much of an issue in these neighbourhoods because there are back lanes and the lots are relatively wide.

Everybody knows that there are plenty of MILs in Calgary, but making them legal would not only do those aforementioned things, it could also be another source of revenue for the city if only for the one-time inspection.

[North East Goon]

But are these basement suites being rented as low income dwellings or are they being used for landlords to maximize there return on property? If basement suites rental prices are capped and the suites allocated to more established area's with bigger lots then I am all for it. As someone mentioned earlier if you are in a condo complex, isnt your parking spot reserved for you? If you have a house, it is free game to whomever beats you to the punch. Do we really need lanes being blocked from emergency services?

[4X4]

Capped? I sure hope not. Let the market decide what it's worth.
And what's wrong with someone trying to maximize their return on investment? Don't tell me you wouldn't try to get as much as you could for the suite you install in your basement.


edit* I'm not sure what you mean by lanes blocked for emergency services. But I think you mean that too many cars around the neighbourhood means that people will start parking in the back lanes and hinder a firetruck's ability to properly respond to an emergency.

If that is what you meant, I totally disagree. You may have noticed an emergency vehicle's tendancy to park wherever the heck it wants. It doesn't parallel park in front of the house fire it extinguishes. It pretty much stops wherever it wants.

As for walking around parked vehicles, the firefighter is in good shape. The extra 7 steps won't kill him.

[ken0042]

I have no issue with secondary suites- provided the home owner lives in one of the two suites. Because the ultimate in "NIMBY" is somebody who wants to turn a single family dwelling into a multi- but refuses to live there themselves. By adding that clause you remove so many of the other issues; like slumlords.

Plus- with the recent street violence coming front and centre, one of the things mentioned is people not knowing their neighbours. Well, if you have a street full of rentals, that will continue. But if you have a street full of homeowners, it can be a little less of an issue.

[North East Goon]

Originally Posted by josh white

How is it not feasible? Are there no basements in your neighbourhood?

Lack of parking spaces available due to size of lots!

[North East Goon]

Originally Posted by ken0042

I have no issue with secondary suites- provided the home owner lives in one of the two suites. Because the ultimate in "NIMBY" is somebody who wants to turn a single family dwelling into a multi- but refuses to live there themselves. By adding that clause you remove so many of the other issues; like slumlords.

Plus- with the recent street violence coming front and centre, one of the things mentioned is people not knowing their neighbours. Well, if you have a street full of rentals, that will continue. But if you have a street full of homeowners, it can be a little less of an issue.

That's a good idea as well. I have noticed people in our area rent out their properties for 2 suites, then move down the street to essentially payoff their own mortgage. Adding congestion on the streets and lack of up-keep to the rented property.

[North East Goon]

Originally Posted by 4X4

Capped? I sure hope not. Let the market decide what it's worth.
And what's wrong with someone trying to maximize their return on investment? Don't tell me you wouldn't try to get as much as you could for the suite you install in your basement.


edit* I'm not sure what you mean by lanes blocked for emergency services. But I think you mean that too many cars around the neighbourhood means that people will start parking in the back lanes and hinder a firetruck's ability to properly respond to an emergency.

If that is what you meant, I totally disagree. You may have noticed an emergency vehicle's tendancy to park wherever the heck it wants. It doesn't parallel park in front of the house fire it extinguishes. It pretty much stops wherever it wants.

As for walking around parked vehicles, the firefighter is in good shape. The extra 7 steps won't kill him.

Maximizing the return on investment doesnt solve the affordable housing crisis. Which is supposed to be the main reason for legalizing suites.

[4X4]

Originally Posted by North East Goon

Maximizing the return on investment doesnt solve the affordable housing crisis. Which is supposed to be the main reason for legalizing suites.

But it does dilute the market which usually causes prices to go down. But you're right, the main reason this is being discussed is affordable housing. A secondary issue is urban sprawl.

I just don't see it any differently than the individual that owns a condo and rents it out. He gets to charge market value, so should the investor that puts a secondary suite in his or her house.

[North East Goon]

Originally Posted by 4X4

But it does dilute the market which usually causes prices to go down. But you're right, the main reason this is being discussed is affordable housing. A secondary issue is urban sprawl.

I just don't see it any differently than the individual that owns a condo and rents it out. He gets to charge market value, so should the investor that puts a secondary suite in his or her house.

I am a business man, I understand your point. But if they are going to legalize suites for the sole purpose of providing affordable accomodations, then it must be capped. If they are legalizing suites for fat cats to maximize profits, then I really dont see a need for this.