Five years ago, the city of Minneapolis abolished single-family zoning, a first on the North American continent. In the eyes of some experts, this is one of the keys to countering the housing crisis, but precautions are necessary.
The Minneapolis 2040 Plan is generally considered a success. As the Bloomberg agency reported in the spring, the metropolitan region which includes Minneapolis and its neighbor Saint-Paul was the first where the inflation rate fell below 2% in the United States.
“It’s a super interesting case,” observes Adam Mongrain, director of housing for the organization Vivre en ville. “It makes sense because inflation has been driven up for years by housing spending. »
In Minneapolis, single-family homes are no longer the default model for residential neighborhoods. However, the bungalows have not been replaced by townhouses, duplexes or triplexes, as one might have expected, notes Mr. Mongrain. The developers have instead invested in “slightly larger multi-residential properties”. For what ? Because at the same time the city had abolished parking standards that forced developers to provide a car space for each resident.
“These standards were one of the major obstacles to the profitability of multi-residential projects by the private sector. Parking spaces on the ground or underground cost a fortune in development costs. »
For Tom Davidoff, director of the Center for Urban and Real Estate Economics at the University of British Columbia (UBC), zoning reform is crucial if we want to reduce prices and allow more people to find housing. In English, we call this “ up-zoning “.
In many cases, the more density you add, the more you stimulate construction, he argues. And the greater the number of housing units, the more attractive the economies of scale are in the eyes of developers.
Legal recourse
The example of Minneapolis has inspired many. In Canada, the cities of Vancouver, Edmonton and Calgary are all relaxing their zoning regulations to increase urban planning density.
Quebec also plans to modify the zoning grids in its central districts.
However, Minneapolis undertook its reform before the pandemic and the surge in prices that followed it, which gave it several steps ahead.
Meanwhile, the already tight market in a city like Vancouver was spiraling out of control. The actions to be taken today must therefore be very strong, according to Tom Davidoff of UBC.
For the effect to be significant, the decision must come from the highest possible level of power, he says. “This is actually what is happening right now: the federal government is forcing cities to densify and British Columbia is imposing its will at the local level. » Local elected officials, conversely, cannot undertake such controversial changes alone.
From the outset, cities that take this route must be prepared to face headwinds. As such, the Minneapolis case shows how strong the wind can blow.
The City has been fighting in court for years with local associations who are demanding the abolition of the 2040 plan because of its negative effects on the environment and on disadvantaged African-American populations. Defeated at first instance in September, the municipality decided to appeal the case.
The suit alleges the plan risks increasing water pollution and reducing the amount of green space available for wildlife. She also argues that the plan risks accelerating gentrification in certain neighborhoods where African-American populations already have difficulty accessing property.
The egg or the chicken
For Tom Davidoff, these arguments do not hold water. “Research in New York and elsewhere in the United States instead shows that building new buildings in disadvantaged neighborhoods lowers housing prices. Yes, there is gentrification, but we see that the new buildings are being built because the neighborhood was gentrifying anyway. »
It is absolutely necessary to distinguish the value of land from that of housing, he continues. “If you are wealthy enough to afford a single-family home, and the value of the homes increases because they can now be subdivided, yes, you will be penalized. On the other hand, people who can only afford an apartment will see their situation improve. »
Regarding the environment, he argues that it is better to sacrifice certain green spaces in the city than to push entire populations to the periphery by increasing urban sprawl. Adam Mongrain is of the same opinion. “If we don’t densify city centers, they will be built in wetlands. »
Optimistic, Tom Davidoff notes that “not in my backyard” type movements no longer have the vigor they had 20 years ago. “Today, people who oppose the construction of housing are also booed in certain assemblies,” he says, emphasizing that millennials have different concerns. Some cities have also seen the appearance of “YIMBY” movements for “ Yes in my back yard » (yes, in my backyard) in recent years.
Unlike Tom Davidoff who recommends that we increase the height gauges as much as possible, Adam Mongrain believes that we would benefit from a gradual approach. “People have to get used to it,” he said.
Projects are often poorly received because the communities concerned have not changed for 20 years. Therefore, zoning should always provide for the possibility of increasing the size by a notch. Thus, houses zoned single-family would by default have the possibility of being converted into a townhouse or duplex; duplexes, triplexes; triplexes to quadruplexes… and so on.