Shoebox homes are not really so special

Re: “Rosemont bylaw intended to save 561 shoebox homes” (Montreal Gazette, Oct. 6)

I would be surprised if Christine Gosselin or any other Projet Montréal city councillor has ever lived in a shoebox home.

They would like to protect 561 homes in Rosemont from the evil Montreal developers who would replace them with new construction that would meet the safety, security and structural standards of today’s building codes.

Have they taken the time to survey the owners of these houses and ask their opinion about wanting to stay on such cramped premises?

I would guess most of these owners live there because of financial reasons, not because of preserving heritage and other such motives.

Most of these homes have very little daylight, only one bedroom, basements without windows, outdated electrical and plumbing systems and structural issues.

A family with one or two children would be forced to build bedrooms in a sixfoot-high basement without windows.

In addition, being sandwiched between two higher structures causes excessive snow on the roof, leading to leakage. A second-floor addition is difficult because foundations were not designed to carry additional loads.

As your article states, the owners of these homes should be supported and consulted before the city forces legislation on their property.

Isaac Alt, Côte-St-Luc