City should say yes to infill housing

Opinion

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 28/04/2016 (2918 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

The fire that recently scorched the corner of Maryland and Westminster last weekend brought horrific destruction to the doorstep of one of Winnipeg’s most charming residential neighbourhoods. Flames that burned through the night consumed an 11-unit rental apartment building under construction and seriously damaged two adjacent houses. Days later, a reminder of the inferno’s heat could be seen in the melted digital signboard of Westminster United Church across the street, some 23 metres away. Were it not for the selflessly quick thinking of neighbours and the heroism of Winnipeg firefighters, this terrible event would have been a tragic one.

For the developers of the apartment block, a local company named the Ranjjan Group, this destruction is the absolute worst-case scenario. Insurance for the project will recover capital costs, but likely not indirect costs such as interest and operating expenses. In spite of the loss, Ranjjan has stated it will rebuild on the site.

Maryland, once named Boundary Street to indicate its place as the original western limit of the City of Winnipeg, is now the boundary between two established and increasingly desirable neighbourhoods, Wolseley and West Broadway. A quieter alternative to Osborne Village, and home to the burgeoning Sherbrook Street, it is easy to see the area’s appeal. A similarly sized condo building, also by Ranjjan, is underway at the opposite end of the block, while a larger rental development is planned for the other side of Maryland.

To begin construction over again might seem like starting at square one, and in many ways it is. But much of the work was done before construction could get underway.

This infill development required a rezoning of the property, in order to build 11 units instead of the permitted six. It also required myriad variances to the zoning bylaw concerning things like the setback of the building and the number of parking spaces. For example, the developer had to get permission to provide only four parking spaces instead of the required 14. These decisions needed to be made by council in public hearings. Altogether, the approval process took more than three months.

For developers, this long and laborious process adds uncertainty to what is already a risky venture, since council can effectively kill a project on a whim if it decides it doesn’t support the rezoning. This doesn’t exactly fill potential investors with confidence.

That such a small apartment block on a busy street in a neighbourhood with many existing apartment blocks requires so much time and effort is a testament to how current regulations can prohibit density.

Outside Winnipeg’s downtown, which has its own zoning bylaw, regulations uphold a suburban ideal of separated densities and land uses that has little relevance to the urban context of most mature neighbourhoods. Even building a single-family house on a typical lot in Wolseley requires a variance — any lot less than 5,000 square feet is too small to build on, according to the bylaw.

These regulations are held in place by a council wary of upsetting NIMBY (“not in my backyard”) residents who view their neighbourhoods as club goods — akin to a private park — where any new development threatens to cause congestion. In 2013, council rejected a recommended small tweak to the zoning bylaw that would lessen red tape for single-family infill.

In such a restrictive zoning environment, it is somewhat understandable that Winnipeg’s largest development companies have avoided doing infill in established neighbourhoods. Not only is the scale too small, but the potential red tape and NIMBY pressures are too overwhelming.

Major infill areas such as former industrial sites in St. Boniface or South Point Douglas can work for large developers, but these typically involve complicated land assembly and service agreements, and require a lot of equity and planning capacity.

In the meantime, small infill developments offer additional housing choices for people who want to live in established walkable neighbourhoods close to downtown, but maybe don’t want the century-old house or apartment that seemingly goes with it. Small development does this without significantly altering a neighbourhood’s scale and built character.

Reforming zoning regulations in established neighbourhoods can allow planners and council to get on with the business of creating and passing neighbourhood plans, such as one for the Sherbrook-Maryland corridor, that give greater certainty to both developers and residents. Small infill developers such as Rajjan and others like them can get on with the business of building.

Robert Galston is a master’s candidate in the city planning department at the University of Manitoba.

Twitter:@robgalston