Making secondary suites illegal snubs residents
Dear Editor:
Snubbing secondary suites in communities like Windermere or Fairmont is a shortsighted and, I would even argue, prejudiced move.
By narrowing the scope of the Regional District of East Kooteany’s proposed secondary suites bylaw, you’re limiting the options for people seeking affordable accommodations.
Essentially you’re suggesting sectors of the population like young people, families or single parents, who can’t necessarily afford to rent whole houses, are not welcome in some Columbia Valley communities.
Strong communities are composed from all sectors of the population, let’s not limit ourselves here.
Bram Rossman
Windermere
As the owner of a ” legal”, secondary suite, and as a past user of “legal” and also non legal suite during formative years after university, I can attest to and completely agree with Bram’s two letter considerations regarding attitudes towards legal suites and the RDEK.
Legal suites are built to a much higher standard than normal “non legal ” suites and are to “code”, the good or bad of ” code” being what it is. Legal suites are as safe as any upstair structures in which you and I live whether in Windermere or Fairmont, Invermere or Radium.
Legal suites and their revenues allow the home owner to reduce the debt load faster and at the same time allow a multitude of tax incentives to the home owner. But most importantly, a legal suite allows individuals, couples and new families the opportunity to reside in affordable accomodation in areas that those folks live.
One of the unintended consequences of this planned exclusive policy is that you, the home owner, should this policy take hold, will not be able to have your kids, your in laws, or your parents reside in your own home be it in the basement or above the garage or in the purpose built legal suite in the back 40 ( so to speak ).
Our own current “legal” suite has over the years allowed us to meet some absolutely stunning individuals that needed affordable, safe, bright accomodations for a short period of time. The folks have been wonderful, they have been pleasant and they have been productive members of the community.
I want to publicly thank each and every one at this moment, for your association with my wife and myself. You are the best.
Area F & G residents, RDEK staff and directors, please, don’t saddle yourselves with the Non Opportunity to meet and greet so many wonderful folks. They are truly a positive addition to any community, in spite of what I suspect are some exclusive attitudes on the part of a minority.
It’s always nice to read of experiences like yours David, but unfortunately not all situations have the same outcome. Generally I find any discussion about normally good folks operating in an illegal way to be distasteful. If it’s illeagl its AGAINST THE LAW and no one should treat out laws & statues with disrespect. That’s a problem plaguing all mankind today in many areas of life. Fix it legally please.
Agreed Alvin, doing things in the wrong manner is not the choice of smart folks or that of intelligent folks at all.
As to your comment vis a vis, ” not all situations have the same outcome”? I have to agree completely in that there are always good and bad situations and that is why it is imperative to the home owner with a legal suite, to do their own due dilagence regarding potential renters,to reduce the potential for a “bad” experience.
The home owner calls the potential renter’s last two landlords, calls the employer to confirm employment, calls credit references towards payment history and and and and does so prior to agreeing to allow that person(s) into the suite.
There are many different methodologies to reduce poor situations possibly occuring.
The overall impression I have received by employing these methods, is the result of what I iterated in the previous post.
You get great tenants and friends.