Infill guidelines are long overdue By: Editorial Posted: 7:00 PM CDT Tuesday, Sep. 1, 2020

Opinion

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 31/08/2020 (1580 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

When three appeals of proposed lot splits were heard by the City of Winnipeg on Tuesday, the issue was about more than a few new houses. It was about citizens protesting to send a message about the unfairness of the city’s approach to infill housing.

The attempts to reverse the city’s approvals are by residents of Glenwood, an area of about 1,400 homes within St. Vital. It’s neither a coincidence nor a surprise that the three appeals all come from Glenwood, and dozens of other Glenwood residents are waiting their turn to appeal.

Residents there say deaf ears at city hall have forced them to adopt a tactic that can be summed up in two words: challenge everything. The residents have organized and launched a strategic plan to stall all infill applications with legal manoeuvres. For example, they argue proposed new developments will block sunlight, remove trees and otherwise change the character of the neighbourhoods.

The spectacle of citizens automatically using every possible avenue to obstruct all attempts at infill development in their area doesn’t look good on anyone involved in the imbroglio. The blitz of appeals ties up city resources; the protesting citizens undoubtedly have better uses for their time; and it’s unfair to developers whose business plans are thrust into limbo.

At the root of the infill unrest is the Glenwood residents’ belief that the city is not treating all areas equally. The city has approved about 100 variance applications for lot splits in the past 10 years in Glenwood. Meanwhile, some attempts by developers to split lots in other areas, including Old Tuxedo, have been thwarted when neighbours protested.

In theory, all reasonable people should understand it’s more economically efficient for the city to service a growing population in existing neighbourhoods, rather than expand infrastructure and stretch its services to new subdivisions on the outskirts.

In practice, however, infill housing can be contentious among people who already live in the affected neighbourhood. Will the infill homes be incongruous in size and appearance? Will lot splitting be allowed so two residences are crammed together and the property no longer has room for lawn and trees?

The issues are complex, but some guidance is expected soon in the form of a preliminary city report that a city spokesperson tells the Free Press should be released publicly within months. The long-awaited report — it was initiated in October 2019 — is intended to offer design guidelines and future locations for residential infill in Winnipeg.

The guidelines can’t come soon enough. Just ask folks who live in Glenwood, where lot splitting typically means tearing down an older home on a 50-foot lot and erecting two new ones on 25-foot lots, with the new residences of a boxy architecture that is taller than adjacent homes and not in keeping with the neighbourhood’s character.

Some champions of infill housing will argue the developers who bought the lot shouldn’t be obliged to seek the approval of neighbouring residents, and that the rights of existing homeowners end at their property lines.

But to anyone who appreciates that Winnipeg is a more interesting city because it’s a quilt of existing neighbourhoods with distinct characters, effective city planning is essential.

A resident who has lived in Glenwood for 30 years, Pam St. Godard, said she and her neighbours don’t oppose infill development; they oppose the inconsistent way the city approves infill proposals that don’t fit the neighbourhoods: “We’re not NIMBYs — we’ve never once said stop the infills. We’re more like QIMBYs — we want quality in our backyard.”