Brentwood Development and Transportation Committee<\/strong><\/p>\n Why should you get involved in your Community Association? <\/strong><\/p>\n After about 96 Bugle articles dating back to 2017, and after over 7 years as the Development and Transportation Committee Chair, I will be stepping down from my role by September.\u00a0 Development and Planning matters never cease, so the we will need some new members who can help to ensure that our community voice is represented.\u00a0 If you\u2019re thinking that you don\u2019t know much about Development Permits (DPs) or City Bylaws, neither did most of us before becoming part of the Development and Transportation Committee (DTC).\u00a0 There are all kinds of ways to learn, there are other committee members who have experience to share, plus we need a variety of skills.<\/p>\n Perhaps you have an architectural background and can read a blueprint or set of plans?\u00a0 Great; that would help us evaluate any new DP applications.\u00a0 Perhaps you are good at taking notes?\u00a0 Great; we need a secretary for the monthly meeting.\u00a0 Perhaps you could volunteer to update the bulletin board in the CA building, or perhaps post information on our BCA website.\u00a0 If you are interested, please send an email to the office (office@brentwoodcommunity.com<\/a>) and let us know how you would like to get involved.<\/p>\n Why should you get involved?\u00a0 For starters, to meet and feel connections within your community.\u00a0 It\u2019s nice to go for a walk and meet people that you\u2019ve come to know through the Community Association.\u00a0 It\u2019s interesting to view new DPs for projects, such as an advance look at proposals for the Northland Mall redevelopment.\u00a0 Representing our community has been very challenging at times (such as speaking before Council) but there is also satisfaction in knowing that you tried your best, regardless of the outcome.<\/p>\n Finally, even if you think you aren\u2019t particularly interested in planning and development, you may find yourself in a position of having to learn quickly.\u00a0 Redevelopment is happening in Brentwood (we\u2019ve had our first application for an R-CG building with 8 units) and the more you know ahead of time, the better that you will be able to respond.<\/p>\n A case in point. Twice in the past week, people from other communities have sent me an email with a scanned copy of a sheet of paper that they found in their mailbox.\u00a0 In one case, the homeowner received a letter asking if they would sell their home so that there could be an amalgamation of properties on their street:\u00a0 a developer wanted to buy some homes in a row so they could maximize the number of units to be built.\u00a0 In another case, all neighbours in an area received a notice that angrily stated, \u201cOur rights are being taken away by blanket rezoning.\u00a0 A builder has just posted notice to develop beside our home\u2026. 16 homes which can be divided into 32 suites on only 2 lots.\u00a0 I\u2019m just learning that due to blanket rezoning, we can\u2019t fight it!<\/em>\u201d<\/p>\n When I looked up the application on the second letter, the zoning was R-CG (the same as most former single-family homes), and that zoning allows for this type of development.\u00a0 To be clear, this application is for a \u201cDiscretionary\u201d Development Permit, which means that neighbours can submit their comments during the review process.\u00a0 What would you do?\u00a0 There is contact information for the file manager on every DP.\u00a0 Certainly contact them, ask questions and post comments.\u00a0 But then what?\u00a0 Many times, that\u2019s when people contact their Community Association, usually asking something like, \u201cbut they can\u2019t really do this, can they?\u201d or \u201ceveryone on our street is opposed, so how do we stop it?\u201d<\/p>\n If a project is approved, residents can appeal a decision at the SDAB (Subdivision and Development Appeal Board).\u00a0 This is not easy:\u00a0 the appeal has to be filed within 3 weeks of the DP approval, you need to submit all the materials (photos, letters, etc.) clearly stating your rationale and reasons, and there is no guarantee of an outcome.\u00a0 The cost is $200 to file, and many residents also hire consultants to represent them.\u00a0 I\u2019d encourage you to look up some of the current cases so that you have an idea of how the SDAB process works.\u00a0 You can also view the Plans & Reports for each hearing, which will give you a good idea of the types of developments taking place throughout the city \u2013 many of the current appeals are for R-CG rowhouse and townhouse projects. https:\/\/www.calgarysdab.ca\/active-appeals.html<\/a><\/p>\n What you cannot do is present your opinions before Council; blanket rezoning removed the public hearing process. A public hearing allows for both sides (in favour or not in favour of a Motion) to present their arguments in front of a group of individuals (councillors) who are supposed to be unbiased and open and amenable to persuasion.\u00a0 The important part of a public hearing is that everyone can see and hear all the arguments on both sides, plus see how the decision was reached.<\/p>\n Unfortunately, most people do not really care or get involved with City Planning matters until it impacts them directly.\u00a0 I communicate regularly with CA Development leaders from communities throughout Calgary \u2013 people I’ve come to know since 2017 when the Brentwood Development and Transportation Committee was formally started.\u00a0 We are volunteers who have spent a great deal of time on development issues within our respective communities.\u00a0 Many of us share the frustration of our residents who expect that we can work miracles to \u201cstop\u201d a project or proposal that they don\u2019t like.\u00a0 Yes, Community Associations have a stake in DP applications, but once blanket rezoning was approved, many applications as now beyond our control.\u00a0 We keep trying to inform residents, we meet with our Councillors, we write letters to Council.<\/p>\n Essentially though, neither the CA nor community residents can fight what the Bylaws allow.\u00a0 You can make arguments about Discretionary DP items such as massing, shadowing, context, etc. and you can appeal, but these are difficult to do if you have no understanding of the City\u2019s Planning process or of the Bylaws.\u00a0 Learning these things within a week or two after a DP notice is almost impossible.\u00a0 Join your CA.\u00a0 Attend a meeting.\u00a0 Bring your talents into the group.\u00a0 We need you, and you may need us some day as well!<\/p>\n Contact the BCA at office@brentwoodcommunity.com<\/a> or at 403-284-3477.<\/p>\n Melanie Swailes New Rules for Short Term Rentals<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n Do you operate a Short Term Rental?<\/strong>\u00a0 If so, there are new rules that come into effect on January 1, 2024.\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0For complete details, see the City of Calgary website at \u00a0www.calgary.ca\/STR<\/a>. \u00a0Effective January 1st, if you rent out any home or portion of the home, you must<\/u> have a valid Business Licence for the STR, regardless of how frequently or infrequently you rent out the unit.<\/p>\n How can you find out if a Short Term Rental has a valid License?<\/strong>\u00a0 There are about 5,700 STRs in Calgary.\u00a0 If they have a license, they will be on this map. \u00a0Map of Short Term Rentals | Open Calgary<\/a>\u00a0 If a unit is not on the map, it might be a licensed \u201cBed and Breakfast\u201d, which falls under a separate category.\u00a0 If it is an unregistered STR operating without a license, then complaints can be submitted to 311 (online, phone, text).<\/p>\n What is defined as a Short-Term Rental?<\/strong> Why are the new rules needed?<\/strong> What if I have a Secondary Suite?\u00a0 Can I use that as a STR?<\/strong><\/p>\n Yes, but the host must have a short term rental licence.\u00a0 The Secondary Suite must be fully compliant with all the bylaws and building codes for a secondary suite, including being on the Registry.<\/p>\n What are the new rules?<\/strong> You must also include:<\/p>\n In addition, the following regulations apply:<\/p>\n What if a host does not comply with the bylaws? Are there fines for non-compliance?<\/strong><\/p>\n The City\u2019s approach is to achieve voluntary compliance for bylaws whenever possible. Failing to abide by the regulations can result in a $1,000 fine for each offense upon conviction.<\/p>\n If you rent out your home or part of your home, it\u2019s up to you to get a license and learn the rules.\u00a0 The City website also has a Good Host Guide and a Good Guest Guide to provide knowledge on best practices.\u00a0 If you are a neighbour being impacted by an STR nearby, complaints should be submitted to 311 (online, phone, text).<\/p>\n If you are interested in community planning and redevelopment issues, we welcome new members to join us.\u00a0 We meet at 7:00 p.m. on the first Monday of every month in the Sportsplex Boardroom.\u00a0 Contact the BCA for more information at office@brentwoodcommunity.com<\/a> or at 403\u2013284-3477.<\/p>\n Submitted by Melanie Swailes<\/p>\n On behalf of the Development and Transportation Committee<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div> Will \u201cUpzoning\u201d Work to Make Housing More Affordable? Housing purchase and rental costs have soared compared to the inflated costs of other necessities, while wages have not kept up.\u00a0 Many people struggle to make ends meet and housing is commonly their largest monthly expense. \u00a0How did we arrive at this point?\u00a0 Clearly, some market-driven issues have increased demand, including population growth in Calgary.\u00a0 Added to this are increased borrowing and mortgage costs, higher costs of groceries, insurance, utilities and so on.\u00a0 Renters have to compete to find a home, while potential buyers have to compete with investors, developers and Short Term Rentals, additionally reducing the affordable housing supply.<\/p>\n Is housing affordability solely a supply-and-demand issue, as some industrial and governmental voices suggest, or are other factors at play? \u00a0Effectively, the voices supporting a market-only solution suggest that additional housing units of any kind, at any price point, will have a trickle-down effect, reducing prices and making housing more affordable. Such an approach is advocated by our Civic and Federal governments who have provided the housing industry with reductions in approval timelines and taxes without requiring the housing industry or rental property managers to achieve any housing affordability performance measures. The houses being built are not necessarily \u201caffordable\u201d.<\/p>\n While such housing demand and inflationary financial pressures are real, two questions should be asked:<\/p>\n To answer the first question, densification alone does not automatically equal affordability. Not everything trickles down into an \u201caffordable\u201d or lower sales price and rent.\u00a0 If we needed \u201cjust\u201d to build more houses, then there should be solid historical data that increasing housing supply drives down prices, even in the face of increasing demand, making housing more affordable for those with the greatest affordability needs. \u00a0That doesn\u2019t seem to be the case: individual townhouse unit prices are often about the sale price of the entire previous older house and property that was replaced.<\/p>\n As for increasing the supply of housing, yes, almost everyone agrees more housing needs to be built.\u00a0 However, blanket upzoning of existing R-C1 homes assumes that those are some of the only possible places to build more. Little heed is placed on all the other \u201cbrownfield\u201d properties in the City that have been promoted as desirable building locations.\u00a0 For example, the new arena deal advocates for all the increased residential buildings that will be built in Victoria Park. Another example is the large Westgate LRT area which has been vacant for many years. The redevelopment at Northland Mall is a good example of higher-intensity use of existing<\/u> lands.\u00a0 There are many areas of the city with empty or under-utilized lots, where building could start without first removing existing homes \u2013 homes that in many cases are the affordable or lower cost homes.<\/p>\n What if blanket upzoning actually serves to increase<\/u> the price of houses in existing developed communities?\u00a0 Older houses that are cheaper to rent or buy (sometimes referred to as \u201cNOAH\u201d – naturally occurring affordable housing) are usually the first ones to be replaced by new and more expensive units, further decreasing affordability within any area. Potential community residents who want to buy a family home have to compete against developers to make a purchase. Developers seeking to build an 8-unit building have more leeway on what they can afford to pay for the property because they can divide the lot cost by multiple units. Speculation means that land values may go up in an area, not down.\u00a0 Developers make their money through building, so their best interests are served by building what is most profitable, and it is unlikely to be a low-cost affordable dwelling.\u00a0 Building larger, higher end units (with items such as granite countertops and expensive finishes) doesn\u2019t help those seeking affordability.<\/p>\n R-CGs bring substantial other changes because they can cover 60% of a property (compared to 45% for R-C1):\u00a0 in most cases, mature trees are ripped out and there is little room to ever plant any new trees. Green spaces and vegetation should not<\/u> be considered mere niceties, they are necessities!\u00a0 Shading and massing are also concerns because R-CGs can be 3 storeys tall.\u00a0 Given the many bungalows in Brentwood, the increased height difference can be quite jarring.<\/p>\n We urge you to inform yourself about this issue.\u00a0 Read and learn more. The web links below provide some recent articles and opinions.\u00a0 You can express your opinions either by attending and speaking at the Public Hearings April 22, 2024, or by writing to the Mayor and City Councillors prior to the Hearings.<\/p>\n The following are some recent opinions by others.\u00a0 Please read and learn more.<\/p>\n Condon, a UBC professor, articulates how \u201cincreasing density without affordability only further inflates urban land values to the benefit of speculators, resulting in nearly all of the value of individual labour and creative enterprise of entrepreneurs in regional economies to be absorbed as land wealth\u201d. Patrick Condon: Density, Affordability, & The ‘Hungry Dogs’ of Land Price Speculation | The Planning Report<\/a><\/p>\n Submitted by Melanie Swailes<\/p>\n Development and Transportation Committee<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div> What do Blanket Zoning changes mean to you?\u00a0 <\/strong><\/p>\n Calgary City Council is going to vote on \u201cblanket rezoning\u201d in April and if approved, that will allow for rowhouses and multifamily development on all properties previously zoned as R-C1 \u2013 single-family housing.\u00a0 This is a very significant change because it includes not only potentially 8 units next door (4 units plus 4 suites) but also because it allows for much greater lot coverage (leaving less green space or trees) and greater building height (more shadowing or overlooking).\u00a0 It\u2019s difficult to balance increased densification within a community while still preserving some of the sense of community and the aspects residents enjoy most.\u00a0 Many of our residents tell us, \u201cI bought R-1 for a reason\u201d so let\u2019s take a look at what zoning means in the first place.<\/p>\n Why do we need zoning?\u00a0 <\/strong><\/p>\n Imagine you live on an acreage where your nearest neighbour is a full kilometre away.\u00a0 Both of you are unlikely to impact the other through your activities.\u00a0 Regardless of whether you raise chickens, use power tools, sing or yodel, the neighbour won\u2019t hear you or be affected by what you do.\u00a0 Similarly, the size and shape of your home are unlikely to impact the neighbour.\u00a0 You could build an expansive house, 3 storeys tall, with windows all around, and there won\u2019t be a negative impact from massing, shadowing, or loss of privacy.<\/p>\n But in the city, those aspects definitely matter because when people live closer together, the desires and interests of one person may not align with others around them.\u00a0 Some basic regulations are needed to try to minimize potential areas of conflict.\u00a0 These fall into 3 broad categories:\u00a0 Bylaws, Building Codes and the Land Use Bylaw (zoning).<\/p>\n Bylaws regulate behaviours.\u00a0 Noise levels, garbage, smoking, etc. have rules around how they are handled. Different opinions come into play.\u00a0 You may find bagpipes charming or they may drive you crazy and the same with things like outside stereos\/TVs or a dog barking.\u00a0 Different people have different tolerance levels, but the hope is that neighbours will co-operate with one another in order to live harmoniously.\u00a0 If necessary, bylaws provide some basic rules and enforcement.<\/p>\n Building Codes usually fall under Provincial jurisdiction.\u00a0 They specify how construction is to happen \u2013 the size of beams or walls, the type of cement, wiring regulations, and so on, with the goal of ensuring safety and standardization for construction.\u00a0 Building codes do not regulate where<\/u> something can be built, just how<\/u> it should be built.\u00a0 It is the City of Calgary Land Use Bylaw (LUB) which regulates the use (i.e. residential, retail, commercial) and the intensity (i.e. the maximum height, the number of housing units) of development that can be constructed on any particular property in the city.<\/p>\n Zoning is an important stabilizing influence in a city.\u00a0 It provides certainty for what can or cannot be built next door to you.\u00a0 Historically, zoning separated housing from other less desirable activities, for example, to ensure that you wouldn\u2019t have a blacksmith or a pig farm next door to you.\u00a0 While blacksmithing activities aren\u2019t a big concern anymore, we still use zoning to delineate properties and uses.\u00a0 Some areas of the community have high rises, some have shopping malls or commercial stores, while others have single-family houses.\u00a0 Over time, some people may wish to change what can be built on a property, and the owner of a property does have the right to apply for a change of zoning.<\/p>\n Changing the zoning is a serious matter as it will affect the use of that parcel of land long into the future.\u00a0 Therefore, one of the main considerations in evaluating a rezoning application is the impact on adjacent properties.\u00a0 The Community Association, neighbours to a site, and other affected people have an enshrined right to weigh in before a decision is made. The Municipal Governance Act (MGA), the Municipal Development Plan (MDP) and the City\u2019s Engage policy all include public input and feedback on any decision that will impact them.<\/p>\n Rezoning requires a Council Hearing and it usually happens on a case-by-case basis:\u00a0 the merits of rezoning a property are discussed and debated.\u00a0 A \u201cblanket\u201d rezoning is rare because it covers many properties and residents at once.\u00a0 The current proposed rezoning impacts 500,000 households, which will see changes to what is allowed on their property and the properties around them. \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Most people are not against changes over time in their community.\u00a0 They are however, concerned about balancing the sometimes competing interests of densification with the reality of losing trees and greenspace, being over-shadowed by a much larger building, loss of parking and most of all, losing the sense of security that zoning provided to them. \u00a0It can be a difficult challenge for the City and for residents.<\/p>\n Rezoning is not some abstract concept.\u00a0 It is a foundation of your neighbourhood where you have built your home and your life.\u00a0 I\u2019ll end with a quote:\u00a0 \u201cthe people who live in a neighborhood are the world’s experts on that particular place. Any project to improve things should be guided by the community’s wisdom, not the dictates of professional disciplines. This is the most important lesson about making great neighborhoods we have learned in 30 years of work.\u201d<\/em> (Source:\u00a0 Project for Public Spaces)<\/p>\n Get involved.\u00a0 Read and learn more. Write to the Mayor and councillors. Plan to speak at Council on April 22, 2024.\u00a0 Provide your feedback to your Community Association.\u00a0 Recognize that you are the expert in your community!<\/p>\n Submitted by Melanie Swailes<\/p>\n Development and Transportation Committee<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div> Brentwood Development and Transportation Committee<\/strong><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n You Don\u2019t Know What You\u2019ve Got \u2018Til it\u2019s Gone At the time of writing (end of February), residents have continued to voice their concerns to the BCA and on various social media sites.\u00a0 In response, the BCA Board has sent a formal letter to the City in an attempt to initiate the process to change the designation for the park spaces to S-SPR, Special Purpose – School, Park and Community Reserve District, with the sites declared as Municipal Reserve on the land title. Since the intention appears to be to keep all<\/u> the spaces as park area, this redesignation would provide significantly more assurance than the blanket rezoning to R-CG.<\/p>\n The blanket rezoning proposal includes another major change: if approved at Council on April 22, all residential R-C1 lots would be rezoned to R-CG.\u00a0 This means that on most Brentwood lots, a rowhouse with up to 8 units (4 main + 4 basement suites) could be built.\u00a0 The building envelope could be up to 3 storeys (11m or 36 feet) high, with 60% of the lot covered by the house and garage, not including patios, decks, concrete steps, sidewalks, and other impermeable surfaces.\u00a0 By comparison, single detached houses can cover only up to 45%, and many Brentwood homes built in the 1960s cover far less than even the 45% maximum.<\/p>\n Why blanket rezoning? \u00a0Rezoning for housing (calgary.ca)<\/a>\u00a0 The City website states that \u201cThis change will help increase the supply of housing to meet demand. Also, it reduces the costs and timelines for permit approvals. Finally, it allows for greater housing variety and options to suit your needs<\/em>.\u201d\u00a0 Almost everyone agrees more housing needs to be built, especially housing that is \u201caffordable\u201d to either rent or purchase.\u00a0 The proposal for blanket rezoning arose from the Housing Affordability Task Force (HATF) recommendations.\u00a0 However, blanket upzoning of existing R-C1 homes does not include any requirement that the new buildings are affordable: densification alone does not automatically equal affordability. Not everything trickles down into an \u201caffordable\u201d or lower sales price and rent.<\/p>\n The biggest question is how any new R-CG buildings will fit into our area, especially in terms of how they might impact the adjacent homes.\u00a0 Going from a \u201csingle family\u201d house to rowhouses covering up to 60% of the lot, with potentially 8 dwelling units, plus a height of 11m (36 ft) is a substantial change, with impacts on shadowing, massing, overlooking, parking and other concerns.\u00a0 To be clear, proposed redevelopments will still need to go through the development permit and approval process, but the applicant will not be required to \u201crezone\u201d the property.\u00a0 The right to build various housing forms up to a rowhouse will already exist so you will not be able to oppose that aspect.<\/p>\n Will an R-CG rowhouse be constructed next to you?\u00a0 Maybe, maybe not. On April 22nd<\/sup>, if the proposed blanket upzoning is approved by council then yes, Brentwood\u2019s large lots will be desirable places for redevelopment.\u00a0 When an existing older house sells, it may be a question of whether someone will actually move into the existing house, or whether a developer will tear it down to build something new.\u00a0 If the developer wants to build a new single-family house, he certainly can, but he can also choose to build a rowhouse with 8 units.<\/p>\n No one is suggesting that every home will be demolished to accommodate this style of use, but if the home next to you sells, it is certainly possible.\u00a0 The City asserts that the change within a community will be gradual, but as someone commented to me, as an individual property owner, \u201cit is always about the stakes and not the odds\u201d.\u00a0 When the imposition is right next to you the odds are very cold comfort indeed.<\/p>\n Because I wanted to see first-hand what the impact of an R-CG next door might be, I went to check it out.\u00a0 Twice in recent weeks, I have stood in the backyard of two dismayed homeowners in other communities who allowed me to intrude into their little world to take photos of the massive rowhouse (R-CG) developments recently constructed next door.\u00a0 In one case, a mere 1.2m (4 feet) away from the homeowner\u2019s fence was a 3-storey, 11m (36 feet) high building towering over us as we stood there. \u00a0In both cases, the homeowners were near tears as they told me how \u00a0devastated they felt because they could have never imagined something like that being allowed next door.\u00a0 Both lamented their loss of sunlight and privacy:\u00a0 in one case, I counted 13 windows that looked directly into the neighbour\u2019s backyard.\u00a0 Although it was winter, both backyards were still filled with planters, back decks with outdoor furniture and perennial or vegetable beds just waiting for the summer months.\u00a0 Except this year, the sunlight won\u2019t shine much anymore into their backyards.\u00a0 Both told me that they didn\u2019t know how or if their gardens would even grow this year.\u00a0 Oh, and one of the homeowners pointed out 4 sets of air conditioners on the new complex next door, inconsiderately located on the furthest extreme of the townhouse, but directly facing her property.<\/p>\n This is the reality of what an R-CG townhouse can look like next door.\u00a0 A towering wall 36 feet high filled with windows so the neighbours can enjoy the view of your trees and grass in your once-private oasis while you, in return, stare at massive stucco walls.\u00a0 A few newly planted narrow columnar trees will never approach the splendor of the large spruce trees so common throughout Brentwood.\u00a0 Residents who comment with dismay or even horror on the prospect of a 36 foot wall with multiple windows directly overlooking their backyard are dismissed as NIMBYs (Not In My Backyard).<\/p>\n Our community is not a blank slate. \u00a0Opposing unsuitable development is not NIMBYism, it is a legitimate planning concern. When the building next door overshadows, overlooks and negatively impacts your use of your yard, it is simply not good enough to claim that there is some greater good in allowing for poorly conceived development without referring to the safeguards and standards that already exist.<\/p>\n The City of Calgary has Infill Guidelines, Established Area Guidelines, and sections of the MDP (Municipal Development Plan) that all refer to the importance of \u201csensitive\u201d and \u201ccontextual\u201d redevelopment that takes into account the impact on existing homes.\u00a0 Some examples:\u00a0 The MDP, Section 2.2.5, \u201cThe City promotes infilling that is sensitive, compatible and complementary to the existing physical patterns and character of neighbourhood.\u201d\u00a0 The Infill Guidelines key concept for Context is that \u201cNew development should be designed in a manner which is responsive to the local context.\u201d\u00a0 For Building Mass, \u201cNew development should respect the existing scale and massing of its immediate surroundings.\u201d\u00a0 For Placement of Windows, \u201cThe privacy of adjacent residences should be respected\u201d.\u00a0 And yet, somehow, those guidelines did not help the homeowners whose properties I visited when a multi-plex was constructed next door.<\/p>\n Whether it is the park along John Laurie Blvd or a blanket rezoning of every house in our community, speak up now if it matters to you because if you don\u2019t, it might change in ways that you really don\u2019t like.\u00a0 We often hear people say \u201cwhy bother?\u201d or \u201cthe City will just do what they want anyhow\u201d.\u00a0 Maybe, but residents do have an enshrined right to participate and be involved in decisions that affect them.<\/p>\n A recent Calgary Herald article by George Brookman ended with these comments:\u00a0 \u201cThe best way to reverse any outcome before it reaches a tipping point is to speak up, let your voice be heard and never give up the things you believe in.\u00a0 There are no irreversible tipping points, only people who decide the fight is not worth the outcome and allow disruptive change to occur because it is easier than trying to stop a trend that is taking us along.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n April 22nd<\/sup>.\u00a0 Let your voice be heard.<\/p>\n Submitted by Melanie Swailes<\/p>\n On behalf of the Development and Transportation Committee<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div> Brentwood Development and Transportation Committee<\/strong>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n What\u2019s the best type of house for you?<\/strong><\/p>\n The Brentwood Community Association turned 60 last year, which means most of the houses in our neighbourhood are also about 60 years old.\u00a0 The majority of houses have been renovated or updated over the years, although not replaced, which means they have stood the test of time very well. After April 22, if blanket rezoning was approved by City Council, the types of dwellings you see will change, in some cases quite drastically, possibly with 8 units replacing an existing house (a 4-plex plus 4 secondary suites).\u00a0 What changes will we witness and how will the new housing forms stand the test of time? \u00a0(The word \u201cdwelling\u201d is used in this article to reflect that new units will not necessarily be \u201chouses\u201d in the conventional way that the term is used. A person\u2019s \u201chouse\u201d may include a detached home, a condo, a duplex or other forms, so the word \u201cdwelling\u201d encompasses all of those building forms.)<\/p>\n (The source for the following is Economic Research Department, Economics and Statistics Division, Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation; Ottawa, 1964.\u00a0 Data is for Canada as a whole, not specific to Brentwood.)<\/p>\n Dwelling sizes<\/strong><\/p>\n In 1963, the average house size in Canada was 1204 square feet, with bungalows comprising 72% of the total, split-level houses about 20 %, and two-storey houses about 7%.\u00a0 Now the average new single detached house is about 2000 square feet or larger and townhouses are about 1600 \u2013 1800 square feet (spread out over more levels).\u00a0 More square footage means higher costs to build and maintain, plus higher costs for heating or cooling the space.\u00a0 Even things like higher ceilings (10 feet instead of 8 feet) mean higher utility costs to heat the increased volume of the room.\u00a0 A new 3-storey townhouse unit often includes air conditioning:\u00a0 as you can imagine, since heat rises, the upstairs bedrooms would otherwise be uncomfortably warm in the summer months. \u00a0If the goal is to build \u201caffordable\u201d housing, size is an important factor, both for the initial cost and also for the ongoing costs.<\/p>\n Dwelling heights<\/strong><\/p>\n There is a trend for increasingly tall dwellings.\u00a0 Bungalows are rarer, ceiling height preferences have increased, and more \u201cskinny\u201d infills or townhouses are being built:\u00a0 the overall footprints of the home are smaller, but the number of levels increase to make up for this.\u00a0 R-CG townhouses with 2 or 3 storeys are becoming more common.\u00a0 One obvious change is the number of internal stairs, especially with higher ceilings on the main floor.\u00a0 For seniors looking to downsize, or anyone who uses a cane or a walker, the stairs can become a limiting factor pretty quickly.\u00a0 For people with young children or babies, there might be a lot of \u201cbaby gates\u201d required to avoid accidental falls.\u00a0 The older bungalows had a lot of advantages in that they allow for aging-in-place more easily.<\/p>\n Dwelling Lot Coverage<\/strong><\/p>\n When Brentwood was being developed, most lots were about 50 x 100 feet, or about 5000 sq ft in total.\u00a0 Simple math shows that a 1204 square foot house on a 5000 square foot lot means about 24% lot coverage.\u00a0 Adding in a detached double garage with about 500 square foot brings the lot coverage to about 34%.\u00a0 This is below the maximum allowed in the Land Use Bylaw, which is 40%.\u00a0 In contrast, the R-CG townhouses can cover 60% of the lot, including the main dwelling and the garage.\u00a0 The 60% does not include porches, stairs, paved sidewalks or paths, or other hard landscaping.\u00a0 What this means is that there is less space left on the property for \u201csoft\u201d landscaping such as trees, grass or other plantings.\u00a0 This has implications for not only the look and feel of an area, but also for stormwater run-off and the heat capture of a property (cement heats up, trees provide cooling shade, etc.).<\/p>\n Townhouse or Condo Ownership<\/strong><\/p>\n Townhouses (or other forms of attached housing) may be either freehold or condos.\u00a0 A freehold title means that the owner owns both the land and the dwelling unit, whereas a condo land title means that the owner owns their own unit, but not the land for the overall complex.\u00a0 Many of the new townhouses being built promote the advantages of a freehold title, namely that the owner has the most control and there are no condo fees.\u00a0 However, if there is work to be done (such as a roof or fence replacement), then the individual owners have to work together and agree on costs and payments of the project.\u00a0 This might not be a problem right now when the units are newly-built, although over time, it\u2019s not difficult to imagine there might be some differences of opinions or conflicts that need to be resolved.<\/p>\n Purpose Built Rentals versus Condo Rentals <\/strong> Construction Standards and Livability<\/strong> Brownfield versus Greenfield Areas<\/strong> Within the brownfield areas, some older houses are being torn down and replaced with a new 4-plex, which does provide additional housing.\u00a0 However, because the new units tend to be larger and more expensive, that removes more of the affordable existing affordable homes:\u00a0 those older homes likely provided some affordable housing, if only because they were older, maybe even somewhat run-down, and therefore they were rented out at a lower rate.\u00a0 The core problem is that the City can\u2019t force someone to build on a property, so there are obvious examples of where the City would like development to happen, but the lots sit empty, even for decades.\u00a0 Westbrook LRT Station is a prime example, and closer to home, other examples include University Innovation Quarter (Research Park) and the Brentwood Mall TOD (Transit-Oriented Development) area.<\/p>\n Building more housing is not a simple matter!\u00a0 There are many decisions that have to be made along the way and the choices made today will impact communities long into the future.<\/p>\n Submitted by Melanie Swailes<\/p>\n On behalf of the Development and Transportation Committee<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div> Brentwood Development and Transportation Committee<\/strong><\/p>\n What\u2019s the Best Type of Housing for You?<\/strong><\/p>\n When the Brentwood Community Association turned 60 last year, most of the houses in our community did as well.\u00a0 The majority of houses have been renovated or updated over the past 60 years, although not replaced, which means they have stood the test of time. \u00a0The blanket rezoning Public Hearings, which started on April 22 and continued into May, have brought greater awareness to many other types of building forms, especially R-CG.\u00a0 The R-CG land use would allow for up to 8 dwelling units (4 main units plus 4 secondary suites) on most Brentwood lots. (The word \u201cdwelling\u201d is used in this article to reflect that new units will not necessarily be \u201chouses\u201d in the conventional way that the term is used. A person\u2019s \u201chouse\u201d may include a detached home, a condo, a duplex, rowhouse, townhouse or other forms: the word \u201cdwelling\u201d encompasses all of those building forms.)<\/p>\n What changes are we likely to see?\u00a0 What types of housing are likely to be built? Dwelling sizes<\/strong><\/p>\n In 1963, the average house size in Canada was 1204 square feet, with bungalows comprising 72% of the total, split-level houses about 20 %, and two-storey houses about 7%.\u00a0 Now the average new single detached house is about 2000 square feet or larger and townhouses are about 1600 \u2013 1800 square feet (spread out over more levels).\u00a0 More square footage means higher costs to build and maintain the structure, plus added costs for monthly utilities.\u00a0 Even things like higher ceilings (10 feet instead of 8 feet) mean higher utility costs to heat or cool the increased volume of the room.\u00a0 A new 3-storey townhouse unit often includes air conditioning:\u00a0 since heat rises, the upstairs bedrooms would otherwise be uncomfortably warm in the summer months.\u00a0 If the goal is to build \u201caffordable\u201d housing, size is an important factor, both for the initial cost and also for the ongoing costs.<\/p>\n Dwelling Lot Coverage<\/strong><\/p>\n When Brentwood was being developed, the majority of lots were about 50 x 100 feet, or about 5000 sq ft in total.\u00a0 A 1204 square foot house on a 5000 square foot lot means about 24% lot coverage.\u00a0 Adding in a detached double garage with about 500 square foot brings the lot coverage to approximately 34%.\u00a0 This is below the maximum allowed in the Land Use Bylaw, which is 45%.\u00a0 In contrast, R-CG townhouses can cover 60% of the lot, including the main dwelling and the garage.\u00a0 The 60% does not include porches, stairs, paved sidewalks or paths, or other hard landscaping.\u00a0 What this means is that there is less space left on the property for permeable or \u201csoft\u201d landscaping such as grass, shrubs, gardens\u00a0 \u00a0or other plantings.\u00a0 This has implications for not only the look and feel of an area, but also for stormwater run-off and the heat capture of a property (cement heats up, trees provide cooling shade, etc.).<\/p>\n Dwelling heights<\/strong><\/p>\n There is a trend for increasingly tall dwellings.\u00a0 Bungalows are rarer, ceiling height preferences have increased, and more \u201cskinny\u201d infills or townhouses are being built:\u00a0 the overall footprints of each home are smaller, but the number of levels increases to make up for this.\u00a0 R-CG townhouses with 2 or 3 storeys are becoming more common.\u00a0 One obvious change is the number of internal stairs:\u00a0 with higher ceilings on the main floor, there may be 13-15 stairs per level.\u00a0 For seniors looking to downsize, or anyone who uses a cane or a walker, the stairs can become a limiting factor pretty quickly.\u00a0 For people with young children or babies, there might be a lot of \u201cbaby gates\u201d required to avoid accidental falls.\u00a0 The older bungalows had the advantage of allowing for aging-in-place more easily.<\/p>\n Freehold or Condo Ownership<\/strong><\/p>\n Townhouses (or other forms of attached housing) may be either freehold or condo title.\u00a0 A freehold title means that the owner owns both the land and the dwelling unit, whereas a condo land title means that the owner owns his\/her own unit, but not the land for the overall complex.\u00a0 Many of the new townhouses being built promote the advantages of a freehold title, namely that the owner has the most control and there are no condo fees.\u00a0 However, if there is work to be done (such as a roof or fence replacement), then the individual owners have to work together and agree on costs and payments of the project.\u00a0 This might not be a problem right now when the units are newly-built, although over time, it\u2019s not difficult to imagine there might be some differences of opinions or conflicts that need to be resolved.<\/p>\n Purpose Built Rentals versus Condo Rentals <\/strong> Construction Standards and Livability<\/strong> Brownfield versus Greenfield Areas<\/strong> Within the brownfield areas, some older houses are being torn down and replaced with a new multi-unit townhouse, which does provide additional housing.\u00a0 However, because the new units tend to be more expensive, that removes more of the existing affordable homes:\u00a0 those older homes likely provided some affordable housing, if only because they were older, maybe even somewhat run-down, and therefore they were rented out at a lower rate.\u00a0 The core problem is that the City can\u2019t force someone to build on a property, so there are obvious examples of where the City would like development to happen, but the lots sit empty, even for decades.\u00a0 Westbrook LRT Station is a prime example, and closer to home, other examples include University Innovation Quarter (Research Park) and the Brentwood Mall TOD (Transit-Oriented Development) area.<\/p>\n Building more housing is not a simple matter!\u00a0 There are many decisions that have to be made along the way and the choices made today will impact communities long into the future.<\/p>\n Submitted by Melanie Swailes<\/p>\n On behalf of the Development and Transportation Committee<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div> Brentwood Development and Transportation Committee<\/strong><\/p>\n <\/p>\n After Blanket Rezoning\u2026\u2026.<\/strong><\/p>\n At the time of writing (in May), blanket rezoning has been approved.\u00a0 There seem to be some legal challenges still underway, as well as a review of the process.\u00a0 The final Minutes have not yet been released, nor have details of some of the proposed Amendments.\u00a0 There will likely be updates in the media or online by the time this issue goes to print.<\/p>\n When writing Bugle articles, I\u2019ve always tried to write factual and accurate information. \u00a0I\u2019ve often been told I am being too neutral and should be providing more insights and personal opinions, although more recently, one person did write that I was presenting a biased viewpoint.\u00a0 No pleasing everyone.<\/p>\n This month, this is my own opinion as I am reassessing my Development and Transportation Committee (DTC) role.\u00a0 After the lengthy blanket rezoning public hearings, I am completely disappointed and disillusioned by the process and by what I witnessed at council. If I no longer believe in the validity and importance of our community role in the development process, then I have a hard time telling \u201cmy\u201d residents that their opinions matter and that they should get involved.<\/p>\n First, I\u2019d like to thank every single person who took the time to write thoughtful and well-researched letters.\u00a0 Those letters, plus a well-attended meeting, plus a great deal of research were the basis for our BCA submissions opposing blanket rezoning.\u00a0 I was also part of a group of 52 representatives from CAs across the city who met with the mayor to discuss our concerns, plus I spoke at Council on April 29.<\/p>\n The Blanket Rezoning Public Hearing was the longest Public Hearing in Calgary’s history (15 days), with 736 Calgarians presenting at Council and 6,101 Calgarians submitting a written statement, with over 13,000 pages in total. The majority of speakers at Council (about 70%) were opposed to blanket rezoning and the written letters were about 88% opposed.\u00a0 Despite this overwhelming and unprecedented opposition, blanket rezoning was approved by a 9-6 vote.<\/p>\n In the end, regardless of how much public feedback, it all comes down to just 15 votes: 14 for the Councillors plus one for the mayor.\u00a0 (Should the public have had a direct say?\u00a0 Although a plebiscite was debated at Council, it too was defeated.)\u00a0 The Councillors voting in favour of blanket rezoning were Jennifer Wyness, Jasmine Mian, Raj Dhaliwal, Richard Pootmans, Courtney Walcott, Gian-Carlo Carra, Koutney Penner, Evan Spencer plus Mayor Jyoti Gondek.<\/p>\n The six Councillors who opposed blanket rezoning were Sonya Sharp, Sean Chu, Terry Wong, Andre Chabot, Dan McLean and Peter Demong.\u00a0 Some Councillors, especially Sonya Sharp and Andre Chabot, presented numerous Motions for amendments, but almost all were outvoted again and again.<\/p>\n At the conclusion of the lengthy Hearing, the task of Administration was to summarize over 13,000 pages of submissions plus the comments from 736 Calgarians into a What We Heard (WWH) report.\u00a0 The link to the presentation WWH presentation is here. \u00a0PowerPoint Presentation (escribemeetings.com)<\/a> \u00a0If you wrote or spoke, do you see your comments included?\u00a0 Do you think this accurately represents all of the public input?\u00a0 The administration presentation starts at 30:30. pub-calgary.escribemeetings.com\/Players\/ISIStandAlonePlayer.aspx?Id=2b7000f6-7eca-475f-b9e0-857c4afebaee<\/a>.<\/p>\n In my opinion, City Administration failed completely with the WWH report:\u00a0 much of the citizen feedback was ignored, and therefore the report is inadequate, incomplete and misleading. The WWH summary does not mention specifics such as lot coverage (60%), drainage, massing, shadowing, windows overlooking, heritage or community character, and more \u2013 all of which were brought up over and over again by speakers. The WWH report seems to spend more time rationalizing why change should happen, rather than detailing all reasons for the massive opposition.<\/p>\n Here\u2019s an example to try to explain why I am so disillusioned.\u00a0 Imagine that you and a group of co-workers, 20 people in total, decide to order pizza one day.\u00a0 An administrator is put in charge of determining what to order and asks for input.\u00a0 17 people say pepperoni, 2 say vegetarian and one person wants Hawaiian.\u00a0 Administration reports that \u201csome\u201d want pepperoni, and \u201csome\u201d want vegetarian (while completely leaving out the Hawaiian option). That report and summary is technically true, but it fails to convey an accurate picture of what has been said.\u00a0 Administration then determines that vegetarian is better for you so that\u2019s what will be ordered.\u00a0 They feel they know what is best for the group as a whole, so even though a vast majority wanted pepperoni, that\u2019s not what will happen.\u00a0 What would your reaction be?<\/p>\n Statements such as \u201cwe\u2019re all dealing with change\u201d and \u201cchange is incremental\u201d are dismissive and minimize the disruption that is faced by a homeowner who lives next to a single house that changes into an 8-unit building.\u00a0 Speaker after speaker in opposition to blanket rezoning told emotional stories about why they bought their home and why they love their area, and how they worked and saved to make that possible.\u00a0 Most acknowledged that change will happen and most agreed that more housing is needed but they wanted a stronger voice in how and where changes should happen.\u00a0 Developers want blanket rezoning to simplify the process and to allow them to profit from more rapid building, but they do not care about my community.<\/p>\n I finally figured out what is wrong with the debate over blanket rezoning. I haven\u2019t heard a single inner-city builder talk about what they love about my community.\u00a0 Blanket rezoning fails to account for residents\u2019 dedication and affection for their own unique communities, regardless of where they live in the city.\u00a0 Developers see dollars where residents see a permanent home.<\/p>\n On my street, there are still some original owners who purchased their house in 1964 or 1965.\u00a0 Nobody buys a house in the 1960s thinking that if they hang onto them until 2024, the house will be worth $700,000!\u00a0 The houses were not commodities to be bought and sold to maximize profits, they were first and foremost homes<\/u>.\u00a0 What we lose with blanket rezoning is two things:\u00a0 one is the right to a Council Public Hearing before the land use is changed and the other is the sense of stability that has guided our community for over 60 years.<\/p>\n Of course, communities should change over time, we all agree on that, but blanket rezoning puts developers and investors in charge of how they change.\u00a0 Developers build their project, then move on to the next one.\u00a0 They do not have a stake in the community.\u00a0 They do not come and help seniors in Brentwood rake up their leaves or shovel their sidewalks on cold winter days.\u00a0 They do not fill our Brentwood Cares food box.\u00a0 They do not care about the students renting our older homes with suites, the same ones that will be torn down in favour of more expensive units.<\/p>\n Give communities a stronger voice within their own communities.\u00a0 We will figure out where to put density and various housing forms.\u00a0 We want the seniors to stay in our communities, and we will determine housing types that work.\u00a0 R-CG is not the right form:\u00a0 too many stairs, for one thing. There were so many good ideas presented at Council; harness some of that energy and experience.<\/p>\n I have lost faith in the process at City Hall. When 13,000 pages and 2 weeks of hearings, with an overwhelming number of residents in opposition, cannot sway the outcome, I am left wondering what the point is of spending so much time and energy on a seemingly hopeless task.<\/p>\n There have been many good things that have come out of this lengthy process, all of them related to the wonderful people I have met!\u00a0 Connecting with residents from within Brentwood, as well as other CA board members from throughout the city has led to new friendships and a renewed appreciation for my own community.\u00a0 Thank you for that.<\/p>\n Enjoy your summer and happy holidays.<\/p>\n If you would like to join our Community Association, you are always welcome to do so.\u00a0 Contact the office at office@brentwoodcommunity.com<\/a> or at 403-284-3477.<\/p>\n Melanie Swailes<\/p>\n On behalf of the Development and Transportation Committee<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div>
\nOn behalf of the Development and Transportation Committee<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/i><\/i><\/span>February - <\/span><\/a><\/h4><\/div>
<\/i><\/i><\/span>March - <\/span><\/a><\/h4><\/div>
2024<\/h1><\/span>
<\/i><\/i><\/span>January - New Rules for Short Term Rentals<\/span><\/a><\/h4><\/div>
\nMost people are familiar with Airbnb or VRBO.\u00a0 The City\u2019s definition is \u201cthe business of providing temporary accommodation for compensation, in a dwelling unit or portion of a dwelling unit for periods of up to 30 consecutive days.\u201d\u00a0 Note that an STR may be either a full dwelling (such as renting out a whole condo or house) or a portion of a dwelling (such as a basement or a room in your condo).\u00a0 Either way, new rules will apply.<\/p>\n
\nAccording to the City, these amendments aim to strike a balance between enabling the economic benefits for short-term rentals and minimizing the negative impacts on the community. \u00a0The rules are intended to:<\/p>\n\n
\nAs of January 2024, you must<\/u> have a valid Business Licence for the STR.
\nThe requirements include:<\/p>\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/i><\/i><\/span>February - Will \u201cUpzoning\u201d Work to Make Housing More Affordable?<\/span><\/a><\/h4><\/div>
\n<\/strong>
\nMark April 22, 2024 on your calendar.\u00a0 This is the day City Council will start a Public Hearing where they propose \u201cblanket rezoning\u201d, probably Calgary\u2019s most significant zoning change ever.\u00a0 If approved, all single-detached housing properties (currently zoned R-C1) could be redeveloped as townhouses (R-CG zoning).\u00a0 Potentially, the house next to you could be torn down and replaced with a 4-unit townhouse with 4 additional secondary suites (8 housing units in total).\u00a0 Affected neighbours would not be able to oppose or appeal such a redevelopment if it complies with other bylaw requirements.<\/p>\n\n
\n
\n
<\/i><\/i><\/span>March - What do Blanket Zoning changes mean to you? <\/span><\/a><\/h4><\/div>
<\/i><\/i><\/span>April - You Don\u2019t Know What You\u2019ve Got \u2018Til it\u2019s Gone<\/span><\/a><\/h4><\/div>
\n<\/strong>
\nAt the risk of offending Joni Mitchell, you sometimes don\u2019t know what you\u2019ve got \u2026 until it might be rezoned to R-CG.\u00a0 The BCA has heard loud and clear from many concerned residents opposing the City\u2019s proposed blanket rezoning which will apply not only to existing homes, but also to some of the edges of the park space along John Laurie Blvd.\u00a0 The strips of land in question are currently zoned R-C1, probably dating back to the 1960s, and would be rezoned R-CG (a Land Use designation which allows building forms ranging up to rowhouses). In response to many queries, the City website has been updated with this response: \u201c\u2026 While these parcels are being proposed for rezoning (i.e., from RC1 to RCG), this does not mean they are being proposed for development. They will remain park spaces even if they are rezoned<\/em>.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/i><\/i><\/span>May - What\u2019s the best type of house for you?<\/span><\/a><\/h4><\/div>
\nWithin the 5 towers at the Brentwood Transit Oriented Development (TOD) area, there are 2 different scenarios for rental units.\u00a0 The 4 coloured towers are condos that are individually owned:\u00a0 some are owner-occupied, while others are rented out privately by individual owners.\u00a0 The 5th<\/sup> tower, the Brio, is a \u201cpurpose-built rental\u201d, meaning that there is one management company that is in charge of all of the units in the building. One possible advantage of a purpose-built rental is that, in case of any problems, there is one company in charge of dealing with issues.\u00a0 For condos, there is a condo board that oversees the building, although there may not be someone on site (for example, a rental office).\u00a0 Another example is the 2 new buildings at Northland Mall, both of which are purpose-built rentals managed by an on-site office.\u00a0 In either case, the condo board or the building management can set rules such as whether the units can be used as Airbnbs, whether pets are allowed, and so on.<\/p>\n
\nThere is a balance between improving the living conditions for occupants versus the cost of doing so. For example, building a high-energy efficient dwelling including heat pumps, solar panels or triple-pane windows saves the occupant money on their utility bills, but they will cost more to build up front. If the City wants to have \u201caffordable\u201d housing built, should they also require increased energy efficiency, and to what extent?\u00a0 Another consideration if for items above and beyond what the building code requires, such as extra sound-proofing between units or better ventilation, but again, those items add to the cost.<\/p>\n
\nBroadly speaking, new dwellings can be built in either new areas on the outskirts of the city (greenfield areas) or in existing established communities (brownfield development).\u00a0 Greenfield areas can be master-planned all at once, whereas in infill areas, the challenge is how to make the new developments fit into what is already there.\u00a0 The Municipal Development Guidelines, the Infill Guidelines, the Established Area Guidelines and other documents emphasize the need for \u201cinfilling\u00a0that is\u00a0sensitive, compatible and complementary to the existing physical patterns and character of neighbourhoods.\u201d\u00a0\u00a0 (Page 37, Municipal Development Plan 2020)\u00a0 Sometimes, though, it seems that creating guidelines is easier than following them.<\/p>\n<\/i><\/i><\/span>June - What\u2019s the Best Type of Housing for You? <\/span><\/a><\/h4><\/div>
\n(The source for the following is Economic Research Department, Economics and Statistics Division, Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation; Ottawa, 1964.\u00a0 Data is for Canada as a whole, not specific to Brentwood.)<\/p>\n
\nWithin the 5 towers at the Brentwood Transit Oriented Development (TOD) area, there are 2 different scenarios for rental units.\u00a0 The 4 coloured towers are condos that are individually owned:\u00a0 some are owner-occupied, while others are rented out privately by individual owners.\u00a0 The 5th<\/sup> tower, the Brio, is a \u201cpurpose-built rental\u201d, meaning that there is one management company that is in charge of all of the units in the building. One possible advantage of a purpose-built rental is that, in case of any problems, there is one company in charge of dealing with issues.\u00a0 For condos, there is a condo board that oversees the building, although there may not be someone on site (for example, a rental office).\u00a0 A second example is the new residential buildings at Northland Mall, which are purpose-built rentals managed by an on-site office.\u00a0 In either case, the condo board or the building management can set rules such as whether the units can be used as Airbnbs, whether pets are allowed, and so on.<\/p>\n
\nThere is a balance between improving the living conditions for occupants versus the cost of doing so. For example, building a high-energy efficient dwelling including heat pumps, solar panels or triple-pane windows saves the occupant money on their utility bills, but they will cost more to build up front. If the City wants to have \u201caffordable\u201d housing built, should they also require increased energy efficiency, and to what extent?\u00a0 Another consideration is for items above and beyond what the building code requires, such as extra sound-proofing between units or better ventilation, but again, those items add to the cost.<\/p>\n
\nBroadly speaking, new dwellings can be built in either new areas on the outskirts of the city (greenfield areas) or in existing established communities (brownfield development).\u00a0 Greenfield areas can be master-planned all at once, whereas in infill areas, the challenge is how to make the new developments fit into what is already there.\u00a0 The Municipal Development Guidelines, the Infill Guidelines, the Established Area Guidelines and other documents emphasize the need for \u201cinfilling\u00a0that is\u00a0sensitive, compatible and complementary to the existing physical patterns and character of neighbourhoods.\u201d\u00a0\u00a0 (Page 37, Municipal Development Plan 2020)\u00a0 Sometimes, though, it seems that creating guidelines is easier than following them.<\/p>\n<\/i><\/i><\/span>July - After Blanket Rezoning\u2026\u2026.<\/span><\/a><\/h4><\/div>