Opinion: Rolling back pro-density zoning restricts housing choice
On June 30, Edmonton city council will decide whether to roll back some new zoning rules that enabled building gentle density in all neighbourhoods. It's not hard to predict the arguments they will hear in opposition to infill: 'Preserve neighbourhood character;' 'This is too much, too fast;' 'I'm not against infill, but I have some concerns.'
The language is careful, and measured. Nobody wants to sound unreasonable. The opposition to infill insist they're not against density. They understand we need more housing to accommodate growth sustainably, improve city finances, and shorten commutes. They just have concerns about the pace, the scale, the process. But strip away the diplomatic language and the crux of the debate becomes clear: Should people be able to live where they want to live, in the neighbourhoods they love?
The answer should be obvious, yet here we are again, debating whether people have the right to choose affordable homes in desirable neighbourhoods.
It's no surprise that people want to live in places like Garneau, Belgravia, and Crestwood. Edmonton's mature neighbourhoods offer something special: walkable streets, established trees, proximity to downtown, access to quality schools and community amenities. Even if it means renting instead of owning, accepting smaller square footage, or living in a basement unit, the iron law of real estate remains unchanged: People want location, location, location. These are reasonable compromises, practical choices that reflect what people can afford while still accessing the neighbourhoods they value.
Fortunately, Edmonton has begun to respond to this demand. In 2024, new zoning rules came into force that allow different types of housing, such as rowhouses, to be built in neighbourhoods that previously only allowed single-family homes. According to city development data, 4,000 new infill homes have since been permitted in mature neighbourhoods, validating what many already knew: There is strong pent-up demand to live in our central neighbourhoods. Thanks to the zoning changes, thousands more people will soon be able to live in the neighbourhoods they love.
Unfortunately, city council is poised to roll back some zoning changes, prioritizing the complaints of a vocal minority of existing homeowners over the needs of people who want to live in infill housing. Pitched as a compromise to make new infill fit in with the neighbourhood, the proposed changes include reducing maximum building lengths, and limiting the number of side doors. In short, this means reducing flexibility granted with the new zoning bylaw. As Coun. Michael Janz openly implied, these changes will result in fewer rowhouses built in mature neighbourhoods. That means more people priced out of mature neighbourhoods, gatekeeping Edmonton's best neighbourhoods so that rowhouses look like single-family homes.
The irony is that despite complaints about new zoning moving too fast, mature neighbourhoods continue to change gradually. The data show that at current rates, if you live in a mature neighbourhood, it will be an average of 29 years until a home on your block develops into a rowhouse of five or more units. The home next to you? An average of 140 years. Practically, this means that when you walk around mature neighbourhoods, you will almost surely encounter a larger rowhouse, but they will not be anywhere near the norm for decades. There is no need to further slow the pace of change, when the pace of change is already slow.
We need to better contextualize the infill debate within this broader housing crisis. The question isn't whether neighbourhoods will change; they always have and always will. The question is whether we will allow them to change in ways that give people the freedom to live in neighbourhoods they love. This freedom shouldn't be a luxury reserved for the wealthy. It should be a basic right in a city that claims to welcome growth and opportunity. When we restrict housing choice, we're not preserving neighbourhood character: We're enforcing neighbourhood exclusion.
Jacob Dawang is a volunteer with Grow Together Edmonton, a pro-housing advocacy group run by ordinary Edmontonians, and a data blogger on the side.
We invite you to write letters to the editor. A maximum of 150 words is preferred. Letters must carry a first and last name, or two initials and a last name, and include an address and daytime telephone number. All letters are subject to editing. We don't publish letters addressed to others or sent to other publications. Email: letters@edmontonjournal.com
Bookmark our website and support our journalism: Don't miss the news you need to know — add EdmontonJournal.com and EdmontonSun.com to your bookmarks and sign up for our newsletters here.
You can also support our journalism by becoming a digital subscriber. Subscribers gain unlimited access to The Edmonton Journal, Edmonton Sun, National Post and 13 other Canadian news sites. Support us by subscribing today: The Edmonton Journal |The Edmonton Sun.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson to veto measure giving police power to set temporary teen curfews
CHICAGO — Mayor Brandon Johnson announced he will issue a rare mayoral veto after aldermen granted Chicago's police superintendent the power Wednesday to declare a teen curfew anytime, anywhere in the city. The highly contentious ordinance faced months of City Council debate before passing in a 27-22 vote. After the vote, Johnson, who had blasted it as 'lazy governance' and unnecessary, said he will issue the first mayoral veto in decades in a bid to kill the ordinance. Johnson called the measure 'counterproductive to the progress that we have made in reducing crime and violence' and said it will elicit costly lawsuits against the city. 'It's important now more than ever that we do not repeat the sins and the failures of the past,' Johnson said. 'I stand against this proposal because we need data-driven, effective strategies to guide our community.' The 27 votes in favor of the ordinance Wednesday were well below the 34 needed to override a mayoral veto. During floor debate, Johnson's handpicked Finance Committee Chair Ald. Pat Dowell pushed back on the mayor's description of the ordinance and his argument that aldermen should focus on investing in youth instead of passing the ordinance. 'I believe we can and should do both. I'm not down here doing lazy governance. I'm down here to actively work and do what is necessary to protect my community,' Dowell said. 'Stopping these potentially chaotic and violent gatherings will help everybody.' The last mayoral veto occurred in 2006, when Mayor Richard M. Daley vetoed an ordinance that would have required 'big box' retailers such as Walmart to pay wages of $10 an hour. Ald. Brian Hopkins, 2nd, first proposed a curfew ordinance last year after a downtown youth gathering ended in violence and began to push it forward again in March after two similar gatherings culminated in high-profile shootings. He would not say after the Wednesday vote how he would respond to a Johnson veto. 'We'll see what he does,' Hopkins said. 'I think we did the right thing.' The Streeterville alderman first planned to target only downtown with an 8 p.m. curfew, two hours earlier than the long-standing citywide teen curfew. He then sought to give both Johnson's deputy mayor for community safety and the police superintendent shared power to declare the pop-up curfews together. All the while, progressive aldermen and civil rights groups blasted the curfew push as an unconstitutional and unfair crackdown harming teens. Ald. Angela Clay, 46th, argued aldermen were ignoring teen voices and underlying disinvestment that leads to chaotic gatherings. 'What we are doing right now is not listening to the young people of this city,' she told aldermen. 'The issue that we are discussing here is a broader conversation that a lot of us are too afraid to have.' Johnson criticized the early versions, but did not always take a clear side until Hopkins pushed forth a version giving Snelling the exclusive power to declare pop-up curfews. 'It has not worked,' Johnson said of curfews Tuesday, pounding the table during a news conference. 'And now we're doing stuff that works, and then they want to come up with another idea that has not worked. What sense does that make?' Snelling, who would be required to consult others on any curfew and issue public warning 30 minutes before implementation, has loomed large over the debate as both supporters and opponents claimed to have his support. Hopkins said Tuesday Snelling had been calling aldermen to urge 'yes' votes. 'Every one of those conversations ends with the superintendent saying, 'I support this ordinance. I urge you to pass it,'' Hopkins said. But Ald. Jason Ervin, 28th, said Snelling told Black Caucus aldermen Tuesday night that he does not need the powers the ordinance grants. Ervin added that he hopes Johnson will veto the measure. Snelling offered a mixed response to the ordinance in court testimony last week. He said he would not use a 'snap curfew' power to declare curfews shortly before they go into effect, but would use a power allowing him to declare curfews days in advance when police are forewarned of such gatherings. The ordinance 'would be used as a deterrent where, if we have that information days before, we would send out notifications to CPS, to parents,' he said. 'This is going to prevent the possibility of violence.' The superintendent added he would never agree to a measure targeting only downtown and said curfew violations are not criminal, meaning they would not result in arrests. But Snelling backed away from the debate Wednesday morning. In a statement to the Tribune, he said police 'have always enforced the law at large gatherings and will continue to do so.' 'The curfew ordinance has become more a matter of politics than public safety. Given that this is a matter that sits within the City Council, I have no further comment,' he added without saying whether he will use the ordinance's powers. Johnson argued later that he and Snelling are aligned in their views on the curfew power. 'There is no space and distance between me and those that I put in charge to run my departments,' he said. A coalition of groups opposing the ordinance called for the city to instead invest in youth jobs, violence prevention programs and safe, engaging activities for young people before the vote. The curfew ordinance could lead to teens being kicked out of parks and beaches, GoodKids MadCity organizer Reynia Jackson said. 'It isn't fair and it isn't equitable,' Jackson said. 'What we need is healing. What we need is prevention.' _____ (Chicago Tribune reporter Sam Charles contributed.) ____
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
B.C. Sikhs hold protest marking two years since community leader's assassination
A few dozen protesters gathered outside the Indian consulate in downtown Vancouver to mark two years since the assassination of Hardeep Singh Nijjar in Surrey, B.C., allegedly at the behest of the Indian government. It comes as Canada and India normalize relations. (June 18, 2025).
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Newsroom Ready: 'Long: B.C. Sikhs hold protest marking two years since community leader's assassination'
A few dozen protesters gathered outside the Indian consulate in downtown Vancouver to mark two years since the assassination of Hardeep Singh Nijjar in Surrey, B.C., allegedly at the behest of the Indian government. It comes as Canada and India normalize relations. (June 18, 2025).
