Policies that encourage tenure mix as a strategy to help narrow socio-spatial distance between homeowner households and their renter counterparts have a long and controversial history in North American and European cities. Research that seeks to evaluate the merits of such policies has typically focused on the frequency of encounters between these two types of household, at the expense of the quality of this contact. Accessory apartments in subdivided houses (also known as secondary suites) provide a germane micro-scale environment to examine the content of interactions between homeowners and renters. Inspired by Gill Valentine’s work on ‘encounters with difference’ and using a series of interviews with secondary-suite homeowner-landlords and their tenants in the city of Vancouver, this article illustrates three types of encounters across tenure-based difference. These examples of conflictive, tolerant, and respectful encounter provide helpful material to reflect on the limitations of tenure mix as a macro-scale policy.
ArthursonK (2008) Australian public housing and the diverse histories of social mix. Journal of Urban History34(3): 484–501.
2.
ArthursonK (2013) Mixed tenure communities and the effects on neighbourhood reputation and stigma: Residents’ experiences from within. Cities35: 432–438.
3.
AugustM (2008) Social mix and Canadian public housing redevelopment: Experiences in Toronto. Canadian Journal of Urban Research17(1, Supplement): 82–100.
4.
AugustM (2014) Negotiating social mix in Toronto’s first public housing redevelopment: Power, space and social control in Don Mount Court. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research38(4): 1160–1180.
5.
BerreyE (2015) The Enigma of Diversity: The Language of Race and the Limits of Racial Justice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
6.
BlomleyN (2007) How to turn a beggar into a bus stop: Law, traffic and the ‘function of place’. Urban Studies44: 1697–1712.
7.
Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (2015a) Literature review and case studies of local jurisdictions that permit secondary suites. Research Highlight. Ottawa: CMHC.
8.
Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (2015b) 2011 Census/National Household Survey Housing Series: Issue 3 – The adequacy, suitability and affordability of Canadian housing, 1991–2011. Research Highlight. Ottawa: CMHC.
ChaskinRJosephM (2015) Integrating the Inner City: The Promise and Perils of Mixed-Income Public Housing Transformation. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
11.
CrumpJ (2002) Deconcentration by demolition: Public housing, poverty and urban policy. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space20(5): 581–596.
12.
DooleyDFreisSKingsleyTet al. (2000) HOPE VI: Community Building Makes a DifferenceWashington, DC: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
13.
EppG (1996) Emerging strategies for revitalizing public housing communities. Housing Policy Debate7(3): 563–588.
14.
FlustyS (2001) The banality of interdiction: Surveillance, control and the displacement of diversity. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research25: 658–664.
15.
GrahamEManleyDHiscockRet al. (2009) Mixing housing tenures: Is it good for social well-being?Urban Studies46(1): 139–165.
16.
HulchanskiD (2004) A tale of two Canadas: Homeowners getting richer, renters getting poorer. In: HulchanskiDShapcottM (eds) Finding Room: Policy Options for a Canadian Rental Housing Strategy. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, pp. 81–88.
17.
IossifovaD (2010) Identity and space on the borderland between old and new in Shanghai. Working Paper No. 2010/39, United Nations University – World Institute for Development Economics Research.
18.
JacobsJ (1961) The Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York: Random House.
19.
JargowskyP (1997) Poverty and Place: Ghettos, Barrios, and the American City. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
20.
JosephMChaskinR (2010) Living in a mixed-income development: Resident perceptions of the benefits and disadvantages of two developments in Chicago. Urban Studies47(11): 2347–2366.
21.
JosephMChaskinRWebberH (2007) The theoretical basis for addressing poverty through mixed-income development. Urban Affairs Review42(3): 369–409.
LaurierEPhiloC (2006) Cold shoulders and napkins handed: Gestures of responsibility. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers31(2): 193–207.
24.
Le GalèsP (2012) Social mix and urban policy. In: BridgeGButlerTLeesL (eds) Mixed Communities: Gentrification by Stealth?Bristol: Policy Press, pp. 25–33.
25.
LeyD (2012) Social mixing and the historical geography of gentrification. In: BridgeGButlerTLeesL (eds) Mixed Communities: Gentrification by Stealth?Bristol: Policy Press, pp. 53–68.
26.
LowS (2003) Behind the Gates: Life, Security, and the Pursuit of Happiness in Fortress America. New York: Routledge.
27.
LyleM (2014) Jane Jacobs and Sharon Zukin: Gentrification and the Jacobs Legacy. In: SchubertD (ed.) Contemporary Perspectives on Jane Jacobs: Reassessing the Impacts of an Urban Visionary. Burlington, VA: Ashgate, pp. 71–81.
28.
MasseyDDentonN (1993) American Apartheid: Segregation and the Making of the Underclass. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
29.
MatejskovaTLeitnerH (2011) Urban encounters with difference: The contact hypothesis and immigrant integration projects in eastern Berlin. Social & Cultural Geography12(7): 717–741.
30.
MendezP (2011) Ambiguity at home: Unauthorized geographies of housing in Vancouver. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, University of British Columbia, Canada. Available at: https://open.library.ubc.ca/media/download/pdf/24/1.0072450/1 (accessed 21 February 2017).
31.
MendezP (2016) Professional experts and lay knowledge in Vancouver’s accessory apartment rental market. Environment and Planning A48(11): 2223–2238.
32.
MendezPQuastelN (2015) Subterranean commodification: Informal housing and the legalization of basement suites in Vancouver from 1928 to 2009. International Journal of Urban And Regional Research39(6): 1155–1171.
33.
MitchellD (1997) The annihilation of space by law: The roots and implications of anti-homeless laws in the United States. Antipode29(3): 303–335.
34.
MusterdSAnderssonR (2005) Housing mix, social mix, and social opportunities. Urban Affairs Review40(6): 761–790.
35.
NealSBennettKJonesHet al. (2015) Multiculture and public parks: Researching super-diversity and attachment in public green space. Population, Space and Place21(5): 463–475.
36.
NewmanKWylyE (2006) The right to stay put revisited: Gentrification and resistance to displacement in New York City. Urban Studies43(1): 23–57.
37.
ParkRBurgessEMcKenzieR (1925) The City. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
38.
ParksJ (2015) Children’s centres as spaces of interethnic encounter in North East England. Social & Cultural Geography16(8): 888–908.
39.
PiknerT (2016) Atmospheric politics and entangled encounters: Freedom Square in Tallinn. In: DarlingJWilsonH (eds) Encountering the City: Urban Encounters from Accra to New York. London: Routledge, pp. 79–96.
40.
RosolM (2015) Social mixing through densification? The struggle over the Little Mountain public housing complex in Vancouver. Die Erde146(2–3): 151–164.
41.
SautkinaEBondLKearnsA (2012) Mixed evidence on mixed tenure effects. Findings from a systematic review of UK studies, 1995–2009. Housing Studies27(6): 748–782.
42.
SimpsonM (1985) Thomas Adams and the Modern Planning Movement: Britain, Canada, and the United States, 1900–1940. London; New York: Mansell.
43.
SuttorG (2016) Still Renovating. A History of Canadian Social Housing Policy. Montreal/Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press.
44.
TachLM (2010) Beyond concentrated poverty: The social and temporal dynamics of mixed-income neighborhoods. PhD Dissertation, Harvard University.
45.
TalenE (2002) The social goals of new urbanism. Housing Policy Debate13(1): 165–188.
46.
TalenE (2006) Design for diversity: Evaluating the context of socially mixed neighbourhoods. Journal of Urban Design11(1): 1–32.
47.
TanasescuA (2009) Informal housing in the heart of the new west: An examination of state toleration of illegality in Calgary. North American Dialogue12(2): 1–11.
48.
TanasescuAChui Wing-takESmartA (2010) Tops and bottoms: State tolerance of illegal housing in Hong Kong and Calgary. Habitat International34(4): 478–484.
49.
ThibertJ (2007) Inclusion and Social Housing Practice in Canadian Cities: Following the Path from Good Intentions to Sustainable Projects. Ottawa: Canadian Policy Research Networks. Available at: www.mcgill.ca/urbanplanning/files/urbanplanning/Joel_Thibert_CPRN.pdf (accessed 21 February 2017).
50.
ThomsonT (2010) The death and life of the Little Mountain Housing Project: BC’s first public housing community. MA Thesis, University of British Columbia.
51.
ValentineG (2008) Living with difference: Reflections on geographies of encounter. Progress in Human Geography32(3): 323–337.
52.
ValentineGHarrisC (2016) Encounters and (in)tolerance: Perceptions of legality and the regulation of space. Social & Cultural Geography17(7): 913–932.
53.
ValentineGSadgroveJ (2014) Biographical narratives of encounter: The significance of mobility and emplacement in shaping attitudes towards difference. Urban Studies51(9): 1979–1994.
54.
ValentineGWaiteL (2012) Negotiating difference through everyday encounters: The case of sexual orientation and religion and belief. Antipode44: 474–492.
55.
VaradyDWalkerC (2003) Housing vouchers and residential mobility. Journal of Planning Literature18(1): 17–30.
56.
WalksAMaaranenR (2008) Gentrification, social mix, and social polarization: Testing the linkages in large Canadian cities. Urban Geography29(4): 293–326.
57.
WillisK (2010) Social collisions. In: SmithSPainRMarstonSet al. (eds) The Sage Handbook of Social Geography. London: Sage Publications, pp. 139–153.
58.
WilsonH (2011) Passing propinquities in the multicultural city: The everyday encounters of bus passengering. Environment and Planning A43(3): 634.
59.
WilsonH (2013) Collective life: Parents, playground encounters and the multicultural city. Social & Cultural Geography14(6): 625–648.
60.
WilsonH (2017) On geography and encounter: Bodies, borders, and difference. Progress in Human Geography41(4): 451–471.
61.
WilsonWJ (1987) The Truly Disadvantaged: The Inner City, the Underclass, and Public Policy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
62.
WilsonWJ (1996) When Work Disappears: The World of the New Urban Poor. New York: Knopf.
63.
WirthL (1938) Urbanism as a way of life. American Journal of Sociology44(1): 1–24.
64.
WylyEDeFilippisJ (2010) Mapping public housing: The case of New York City. City & Community9(1): 61–86.
65.
YoungCDiepMDrabbleS (2006) Living with difference? The ‘cosmopolitan city’ and urban reimaging in Manchester, UK. Urban Studies43(10): 1687–1714.
