- Reaction score
- 1,520
- Points
- 1,260
Enabling and encouraging secondary and tertiary units shouldn't have to come at the cost of trampling good practices and granting carte blanche to do stupid things.
For those who bothered to read it, I believe that is the position of the Association.
It is the SARA/SARG position that there are significant drafting problems and a failure to properly consider impacts on the environment and the adjacent neighbours in these Permissions and Zoning By-Law Amendments. Expanding housing options can have a positive effect on Neighbourhoods if done in a manner which enhances the quality of life and character of the neighbourhood community. With the push and rush to roll out the projects of the Expanding Housing Options in Neighbourhoods document, neighbourhoods feel overwhelmed rather than excited by the arrival of such initiatives as Garden Suites. Let’s restore the balance and equity between the developers’ perceived right to build and the adjacent neighbours right to the safety, security, privacy and comfort of their homes.
For members of other home-owner associations, your YMMV regarding Garden Suites.
Some Other Thoughts and Questions about Garden Suites from our home-owners association:
1. Will the City protect the Green Landscape against the anticipated flooding of Climate Change's torrential rains?
2. Will City Planning identify topography such as flood planes etc. when refusing permissions for Garden Suites as suggested by the City Steering Group Planners in their consultation meetings with Resident Associations and their communities?
3. Will City Planning define the specifics of the size of Garden Suites to ensure that they are clearly an ancillary building and much smaller than the main residential building?
4. Will the emergency 1(one) metre wide exit/access be identified in the By-Law?
5. Will the City be proactive in providing the infrastructure (storm water and sewage drains) to support the overwhelming onslaught of increased density and hard landscape?
6. Will City Council pass a motion to cover city-wide communities with Flood Insurance when Insurance Companies refuse it to their customers as was the case in BC?