18 days: Critics fear major changes to London’s growth blueprint were rushed

Article content

Some warn city hall’s quick march toward taller towers and stacked neighbourhood townhomes is too much, too fast; others welcome a bold response to the city’s housing affordability crunch. But most observers agree boosting residential density will have lasting impacts, Jonathan Juha reports

Some see it as a sweeping, hurried change that would put London’s growth blueprint on steroids and change the fabric of city neighbourhoods.

Article content

Others see it as a bold but necessary move to help tackle London’s housing affordability crisis.

Either way, most observers agree there could be long-lasting impacts if city council agrees to pre-emptively rezone large swaths of London to allow greater residential housing density as a matter of right.

Driving the changes is Mayor Josh Morgan, who this month introduced an amendment to the London Plan – the city’s development master plan – to permit higher buildings across London and construction of stacked townhouses of up to four storeys in residential neighbourhoods.

Approved by planning committee Sept. 10, and up for full council approval Tuesday, the proposed changes would:

• Raise the maximum height of downtown apartment buildings to 45 storeys from 35.
• Increase the maximum height of apartment buildings at public transit hubs from 22 to 35 storeys, higher than the 30 storeys city staff had recommended.
• Allow four-storey stacked townhouses on neighbourhood “connector streets,” such as Wortley and Base Line roads and Talbot and Cheapside streets. The current limit is now three storeys.

Article content

In a city whose tallest new downtown tower is 40 storeys, with even higher ones proposed, jacking up maximum building heights to help ease London’s growing pains has generated little controversy.

But for some, allowing higher stacked townhouses on dozens of city connector streets is a different story. Widely seen as the new starter home, the one- or two-storey units are stacked atop each other in multi-unit developments.

Already allowed along major roads and at connector street corners, four-storey stacked townhouses are cheaper and faster to build than traditional homes, making them appealing to developers. Allowing them in more parts of London, including on residential streets, could help boost the supply of homes within reach of more buyers.

Morgan insists he’s been consistent on the need for more housing in London to meet growing demand, saying it’s a “reality” the city can’t escape.

Traditional suburban homes, he adds, aren’t going to solve the housing crunch: “Building a whole bunch of million-dollar, single-family homes with big yards is not going to help the affordability crisis.”

Article content

Article content

A “bold” move that would help London hit its provincial goal of building 47,000 new homes of all types by 2031, allowing higher stacked townhouses would also make the city more attractive to investors and builders, said economist Mike Moffatt, who follows area growth and housing trends.

“It creates a lot of certainty for builders and developers who will know that, ‘OK, I’m not going to have to go through all this large process . . . that may or may not be successful.’ Rather, I know up front that I’m going to be allowed to do these things,” said Moffatt, an assistant professor at Western University’s Ivey business school.

But more stacked townhouses could boost population density in parts of London still lacking critical services like public transit. Down the road, that could force the city to spend millions more to service those areas, something the London Plan tried to avoid by concentrating higher density in certain areas, said Sean Galloway, a former London planner who steered the plan’s development.

Stacked townhouses may make more financial sense for developers, but multiple approaches are needed to solve the housing crisis, said Galloway, now North Vancouver’s planning director. “It’s not just build more supply and thou shall solve the problem.”

Article content

One big rub for some critics is how fast the proposed changes are moving through city hall’s approval mill, with no special public meetings for something that could noticeably change the look and feel of residential streets. Some say the public has had little time to digest the implications.

“Nobody over the age of about three really likes surprises, and for some people, this is going to be a surprise if and when something gets built on their street,” said former city councillor Sandy Levin, who now heads the Orchard Park Sherwood Forest neighbourhood association.

Some people aren’t even aware the higher stacked townhouses proposal is in the works, he said.

Morgan’s proposed changes to the London Plan were only made public Sept. 6, four days before planning committee backed them. If ratified by full council Tuesday, that would mean a little less than three weeks for full political approval. The province also must sign off

That’s too fast, without enough public consultation, Levin insists.

“You can never under-communicate in a change, and the city has under-communicated,” he said. “That’s when you get resistance.”

Article content

In a city that’s seen its share of not-in-my-backyard residential development fights – over buildings too high, too dense or that don’t fit in – some see the stacked townhouses proposal as breathtaking in speed and scale.

On the other hand, London isn’t the only government aggressively pushing new housing options.

Premier Doug Ford’s Ontario government has moved quickly to change provincial planning rules to speed construction of new housing and reduce opposition to it, for example by empowering municipalities to allow greater neighbourhood housing density and limiting opponents’ ability to fight new projects before a provincial tribunal.

And both Queen’s Park and Ottawa have baked in financial incentives for municipalities to move quickly on new housing.

Unthinkable in a city like London only a few years ago, those factors have created the perfect storm for moves like the one led by Morgan, said Martin Horak, a political scientist in Western University’s local government program.

“One legitimate concern is if you keep watering down planning permissions and permitting more all across the city, . . . you might end up getting . . . sort of less appropriate, less good-quality development,” he said.  “You also have to be careful about . . . not giving away the farm to the development industry in . . . trying to get more housing built.

Article content

“From a planning and a policy perspective, this change is going to allow and encourage developers to build more of what they call ‘the missing middle,’” Horak added. “(But) from a local participation perspective, it’s a big change away from participatory norms that we’ve had for the past two decades.”

Levin is more blunt, saying he’s worried about a power imbalance between developers and regular citizens with the “guardrails” giving the public a say in how their community is developed starting to come off.

“I don’t think people understand that,” he said. “There’s an effort, conscious or not, to tell people: ‘Yeah, your opinion doesn’t matter anymore. We’re in charge. We know best. Take it, and if you don’t like it, leave.’ ”

Morgan defends his speed, saying governments often are criticized for going too slow, but adds he won’t use his “strong mayor” powers to move the changes along.

“I always think you can slow things down and drag things out a really long time,” he said. But “I respect the majority of council on this, and if they want more time, then that’s something that someone can move a motion to do.”

Article content

The mayor notes Ontario’s Land Tribunal already has ruled several times that stacked townhouses are “compatible” with other forms of development, including detached homes, and the city only would accept them in areas where they’re generally already permitted.

“For all of the talk and maybe anxiety about this, we’re talking about one extra storey on streets where four storeys are already allowed at the ends,” he said. “So, how much do we want to spend our staff time on – and delay the opportunity for housing – when we can cut to the chase and focus on the other things we need to focus on?”

Morgan suggests anxiety about the issue is a little overblown. He likens the debate to one that erupted when the city increased how many rental units can be developed in a home from three to four.

“Just like four units as-of-right doesn’t happen on every street, in every part of the city where they’re allowed, neither will stacked townhouses,” he said.

jjuha@postmedia.com

Article content