The battle against NIMBY forces in Bankview

I’m an official neighbourhood activist now. There’s an application to tear down the houses across the street from ours and to change zoning to accommodate higher density (probably in the form of four-storey condos), and as soon as I saw the application posted, I knew that somebody would be knocking at my door. Our next-door neighbour is opposed, or concerned, on design principles (he wants houses that have entrances on the street, townhouse-style) but he heard me out when I said that I wanted HIGHER densities. Yes, HIGHER. No great dispute there; his concern is aesthetic, mine is “social,” and I can see a middle ground here. But then I got a letter from some purported rep for the “community association,” and it really pissed me off. So I called the city planning department and also wrote this letter:

I write to express my SUPPORT for the application named in the subject line to change zoning to allow for higher density residential development at and around 14A Street and 19 Avenue SW.

I am aware of some of the complaints about this application, but as a homeowner who lives directly across the street from the properties, I suggest that my support is important to state. The arguments of the community association are, in my view, misguided. The property is virtually on the “edge” of Bankview and so most of the dreaded new traffic will not occur in the community per se but will sweep out onto 17th Avenue and 14 Street. Parking will be no more of an issue than it is currently on 19th Avenue, since any development will provide off-street parking for residents, just as is now available for residents. 19th Avenue, on the portion to be redeveloped between the Nimmons House parking area and 14A street, is one of the least attractive sections of Bankview, with small, heavily “Eisenhowered” older homes in generally poor condition, and the development would comprise what is currently an extremely ugly pair of empty lots, on 14A and 19th (the latter directly across from my home, and a terrible eyesore that persons opposing this development do not have to witness every day as I do).

I support RM5, because as a sociologist, I understand and appreciate the importance of increasing inner-city densities as a means of curbing urban sprawl. With this property we have a golden opportunity to turn what it currently a mostly derelict corner and surrounding strip into a lively, populated block. We would lose a strip of ugly, absentee-landlorded houses. Because the proposed zoning is RM5, the new construction could contain housing that is more affordable than detached houses, semi-detached houses, or townhouses would offer. We have a new townhouse development at 19 Avenue and 17 Street where units are priced at nearly $900,000!

The community association speaks of maintaining “diversity” in Bankview, but in resisting RM5, it is only assuring that the rich, and only the rich, can purchase here. I don’t want this for my community. I want new, denser, more affordable housing. I want people; I want mixes of income; I want eyes on the street. I want more of the ingredients of a vibrant urban neighbourhood. This zoning change is part of how this might be accomplished.

In the letter I received from the community association’s representative, there was a reference to the notion that people move to Bankview because of its “character,” and the idea that opposing this zoning change would support this “character.” I contend that this is elitist nonsense. The majority, the vast majority, of Bankview residents are renters, and many are poor (by Calgary standards). They move to Bankview because of the availability of housing, especially rental housing. To insist that only single-family homes be built on sites like this, we destroy the nature of the community and impel its unfortunate transformation into a refuge for the wealthy.

This is a great opportunity. Change the zoning, please. After that, the community association can have its say with the developer about the quality of the new project, and I will be as insistent as anyone on those matters. But nothing positive will come out of refusing this application.

Thank you.

And this is the beautiful, characterful empty lot that the NIMBYs want to save:

Choked with weeds, a nice homeless campsite, makeshift parking lot, and dogshit receptacle. That’s “character” all right.