Taking a wider view on urban planning

The Aug. 3 Montreal Gazette contained several pieces on real-estate development and urban planning which show that in these matters, it is good to be able to hold more than one thought in one’s mind at the same time.

Murtaza Haider and Stephen Moranis (“In land assembly, 2 + 2 can equal more than 4”) argue that the high cost of homes in Vancouver is due to an insufficient supply of new housing, which is due, in turn, to tight zoning rules. But the experts that Natalie Obiko Pearson quotes (“Vancouver housing paradox: Costly to buy, cheap to own”) attribute the “stratospheric prices” of housing to abnormally low real-estate taxes and to speculation by foreign buyers with deep pockets. These factors, and others, are in fact at play at the same time. Which ones you emphasize depends on your political outlook.

Briana Tomkinson (“Developers must put pedestrians before transit”) presents the views of planning consultant Brent Toderian, who backed away from the idea of transitoriented development to embrace pedestrian-friendly development. But the two ideas are complementary. It makes sense to build more housing in places where people will have commuting options and where transit will get more riders. But it also makes sense to ensure that neighbourhoods give reasons for people to walk (i.e., destinations near the home) and offer safe and pleasant streets on which to do so. In fact, pedestrian-friendly urban design is needed not only in transit-oriented development but also in suburban environments with large shopping malls.

Raphaël Fischler, Dean, Faculté de l’aménagement, Université de Montréal