legal issues regarding basement apartment - viewpoint of a new comer
Jack W.
Markham and Richmond Hill. It is against the by-laws in most area in
York Region to build a second kitchen in a single family house.
Forgive me I am new to Canada, but why is there such stupid by-laws
which prohibits our society from providing flexible housing to itself
? For instance, I know a young man who is single, who work for a
computer company in Markham, and he needs affordable housing which can
save him from communting. But there is basically no apartment
available in the area of Markham where he works ! If our cities allows
basement apartments to be built it would be beneficial to the tenants
and the home owners. And it can attract more young workers into our
neighbourhood.
I understand that part of the reason for these by-laws is to prevent
the 'nice'
neighbourhood from decading into something 'less nice', but I think we
got to be a little bit flexible here. Some part of Markham and
Richmond Hill are not that 'upscale' anyway. Why can't we accomodate
some more 'working class' fellows into our 'working class'
neighbourhoods ? Why can't we save the by-laws for places like Bayview
Hill or Unionville ?
Can someone explain this a bit to a new comer ?
JW
WebCam
"Jack W." <buyw...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6de7f155.0212...@posting.google.com...
> I understand that part of the reason for these by-laws is to prevent
> the 'nice' neighbourhood from decading into something 'less nice', but I
think we
> got to be a little bit flexible here. Some part of Markham and
> Richmond Hill are not that 'upscale' anyway. Why can't we accomodate
> some more 'working class' fellows into our 'working class'
> neighbourhoods ? Why can't we save the by-laws for places like Bayview
> Hill or Unionville ?
It is less a matter of urban decay as it is a safety issue. Quite often
these apartments are not equiped with proper fire detection devices and
those that are may be difficult to get out of posing a higher probability of
death in a fire. This has been a primary concern in many areas, not the
urban decay.
There are laws about apartments below grade as well. Saving life's is the
motivation, how do you argue against that?
Cameron
Jack W.
Thanks for the rsponse. But if safety is the major concern, why don't
we set up some safety guideline for anyone who want to build an
apartment in their house ? Instead of totally prohibiting them from
doing so ? Another poster mention the strain on schools and community
services, can we set up some reasonable by-laws to allow only one or
two adults to live in a basement ? No school age children allowed ? As
far as my observations go, here in York Region those who want to rent
a basement apartment a usually single young people with a job.
People seem not to recognise the benefit of attracting young
professionals into our community. They pay more tax than what they
receive from the system.
Marc Bissonnette
news:6de7f155.02121...@posting.google.com:
> Cameron,
>
> Thanks for the rsponse. But if safety is the major concern, why don't
> we set up some safety guideline for anyone who want to build an
> apartment in their house ? Instead of totally prohibiting them from
> doing so ? Another poster mention the strain on schools and community
> services, can we set up some reasonable by-laws to allow only one or
> two adults to live in a basement ? No school age children allowed ? As
> far as my observations go, here in York Region those who want to rent
> a basement apartment a usually single young people with a job.
>
> People seem not to recognise the benefit of attracting young
> professionals into our community. They pay more tax than what they
> receive from the system.
But then you get into discrimination and human-rights issues; As it is,
landlords can get into some nasty legal issues when they try to ban kids,
teen-agers, pets, elderly, etc, etc.
The safety issues are already taken care of in the fire and electrical
codes (and a bunch of other regulations in the ministry of housing, or
something like that);
Personally, I thought the explanation on the strain on the school and EMS
services was amazing; I'd never even thought of that, before (I had
always assumed those bylaws were solely about safety and 'community
standards'.
>
>> It is less a matter of urban decay as it is a safety issue. Quite
>> often these apartments are not equiped with proper fire detection
>> devices and those that are may be difficult to get out of posing a
>> higher probability of death in a fire. This has been a primary
>> concern in many areas, not the urban decay.
>>
>> There are laws about apartments below grade as well. Saving life's is
>> the motivation, how do you argue against that?
>>
>> Cameron
>
--
-----------------------------
Marc Bissonnette
Internalysis - Intelligence in Internet Communications
http://www.internalysis.com
Beverly Erlebacher
Jack W. <buyw...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>Thanks for the rsponse. But if safety is the major concern, why don't
>we set up some safety guideline for anyone who want to build an
>apartment in their house ? Instead of totally prohibiting them from
>doing so ? Another poster mention the strain on schools and community
>services, can we set up some reasonable by-laws to allow only one or
>two adults to live in a basement ? No school age children allowed ? As
>far as my observations go, here in York Region those who want to rent
>a basement apartment a usually single young people with a job.
There used to be a bylaw against basement apartments in Toronto, but it
was revoked some years ago, since it was being widely disregarded and there
was a severe shortage of housing. At one point, about 15 years ago, the
city was even subsidizing people a bit to convert their houses to add an
extra apartment.
There are, of course, bylaws that control standards regarding health and
safety. For one thing, the ceiling has to be a minimum distance above
the floor, not as big a deal in newer houses as in ones more than 50 years
old.
No doubt the main reason that basement apartments are illegal in Markham,
if they indeed are, is the ideal of the suburban single-family dwelling
as the only decent form of housing for decent families. At the same time,
I am sure there are many basement apartments in which relatives of the
homeowners dwell.
If you feel strongly about it, why not attend some municipal council
meetings or speak to your representative.
>People seem not to recognise the benefit of attracting young
>professionals into our community. They pay more tax than what they
>receive from the system.
Tenants don't increase the municipal tax base at all, unless multi-unit
dwellings are taxed at a higher rate, and in Toronto, this isn't the
case when there are only two units in a house.
I suspect that Markham still prides itself on being a wealthy community
(at one time it had the highest per capita income in Canada) and doesn't
like the idea of having icky working class type things like people fixing
up their basements to rent to strangers.
Intensification in urban and suburban areas makes a lot of sense economically
for municipalities and ecologically as well. However, most people who move
to such areas are trying to get away from sane land use, so intensification
will lower property values, or so the argument goes. Personally, I would
have had a hard time paying off my first house if I didn't have a second
floor apartment to rent to students.
Donald Tees
>Cameron,
>
>Thanks for the rsponse. But if safety is the major concern, why don't
>we set up some safety guideline for anyone who want to build an
>apartment in their house ? Instead of totally prohibiting them from
>doing so ? Another poster mention the strain on schools and community
>services, can we set up some reasonable by-laws to allow only one or
>two adults to live in a basement ? No school age children allowed ? As
>far as my observations go, here in York Region those who want to rent
>a basement apartment a usually single young people with a job.
>
>People seem not to recognise the benefit of attracting young
>professionals into our community. They pay more tax than what they
>receive from the system.
>
>
>
>>It is less a matter of urban decay as it is a safety issue. Quite often
>>
>>
We have laws like that here in Kitchener ... while basement apartments
are not allowed, "granny flats" are. Those are basement flats, or even
a cottage in the back yard, for parents to live in. Good idea, in my
opinion.
Donald
MJ
This is because governments in this country have little respect for
property rights. They feel free to dictate what gets built on land that
others have paid for with their own money.
Most middle class homeowners expect city council to keep their property
value artificially high by restricting density and preventing lower income
families and individuals from moving in. They band together and whine like
a bunch of schoolchildren every time someone wants to build an apartment or
townhouse complex in "their" neighbourhood. Politicians listen to them
because they are afraid of losing votes. The Ontario Municipal Board is
the only organization that can defend the rights of property owners who
wish to build higher density housing on their land. Personally, I'd like
to see cities stripped of most of their zoning powers. This would save
everyone a lot of time and money. Cities work better when land use is
decided by market forces rather than bureaucrats at city hall.
It is not a matter of being unable to provide additional infrastructure or
services such as schools. If this were the case, then it would be illegal
to build a new house anywhere. Markham and Richmond Hill would not even
exist today. The GTA is growing rapidly and new residents need to be
accomodated somewhere. It is a question of whether we want them to live
within existing urban areas or on farmland.
It would be much safer to license basement apartments and then inspect them
to ensure that they meet fire and building code regulations. Having them
rented out on the black market puts tenants at risk.
Donald Tees
>Donald,
>
>I wonder how by-laws in your city define apartments from granny flats
>? I agree that those are good ideas. I think living close to ones
>parents without compromising each others privacy, such as the
>situation in a granny flat or cottage in the backyard, are quite an
>ideal and humane arrangement, but that is another topic.
>
>
>JW
>
>
I believe they are handled on a case by case basis, and get listed on
the deed as "non-conforming-land-use". This is a somewhat weird law
usage, based on the statute of limitations. In effect, after a certain
length of time (seven years?) an "illegal" zoning infraction cannot be
reversed. So if I apply for permission, get it, and build a granny
flat, then rent it to students six months later, my neighbours can
complain, and get a court order to make me tear it down. However, after
a fixed length of time, they cannot. The restriction can also make it
very difficult to get a mortgage until the statute of limitations cuts
in, and makes it "legal-non-comforming". That makes it impractical for
a landlord that plans on selling the property.
The illegal apartments you mention come under the same law ... if they
have been there for a certain length of time and have not been disputed
in that period, then the municipality cannot force you to remove them.
They can, under standard zoning bylaws, force you to remove illegal
stuff, but only until the staute of limitations runs out. In other
words, if you can get away with it for seven years, you are "in". They
can also force you to bring the unit up to safety minimums at any time,
but not to conform with simple zoning.
The law has been somewhat controversial, but kitchener has a very strong
menonite tradition that includes extended famillies living together.
That probably explains why the law was put into place. A politician
forcing your elderly and frail grandmother out of the house into a
nursing home would definitely get more flack than they could handle.
At least I think that is how it works ... <G> ... you have to be sneaky
in this country too, on occasion, but thank you for your kind words
about the country, and welcome to being Canadian from an old 7-8th
generation canadian hippie. I agree ... all in all, it is one of the
more civilized places on earth. We are very lucky.
Donald <-- proud to be Canadian, and thinks people claiming us to be
like the USA rather naive.