Densité et étalement urbain

Reportage à l’émission radio Ça nous regarde sur les défiis de densification de Bécancour
La municipalité a un grand besoin de logements en raison de l’afflux de travailleuses et travailleurs de la filiière batterie. … et bien sûr il y a du NIMBYisme…

Aussi, une route a même du être construite pour pallier au trafic.

:headphones: Coordonner le développement immobilier à Bécancour : Vincent Rességuier Rattrapage du mardi 30 janvier 2024

1 Like

Version texte du reportage radio

2 Likes

C’est ma crainte depuis qu’on annonce cette nouvelle industrie au Québec, en-dehors des grandes villes, qui apporteront leur lot de travailleurs et nouveaux résidents. Que les municipalités se trouvent à faire un développement résidentiel de très faible densité avec un maximum d’étalement. Or, je remarque dans ce cas que la municipalité s’est bien entourée (Vivre en ville, entre autres). Malgré tout, les résidents actuels ont décidé par référendum du sort des futurs développements, et par conséquent d’un étalement urbain et de la destruction des milieux naturels. J’ai peu d’espoir de voir un frein à l’étalement sans changement législatif. Je me demande si leur nouveau plan d’urbanisme pourra y changer quelque chose.

2 Likes

La CAQ est loin d’avoir pris le véritable virage densité urbaine, une nécessité environnementale. La première étape dans ce long cheminement, simplifier les changements de densité en favorisant les intérêts supérieurs de la communauté au détriment des opposants locaux, dont les intérêts particuliers sont loin d’être représentatifs sur le plan démocratique. Ce rapport de force est d’ailleurs devenu insoutenable et fait dangereusement obstacle à l’urgence d’adapter notre développement urbain à des valeurs vraiment durables.

5 Likes

Nouvelle vidéo de la chaîne YouTube Oh The Urbanity!

What NIMBYs Get Wrong About Density (Intentionally?)

A few years ago, a concerned resident opposed a four-storey apartment on this site in their Edmonton neighbourhood by saying: “more apartments are economically unnecessary and actually unwanted by the community”. We know what it means when homeowners don’t want new housing nearby but what does it mean for an apartment building to be “economically unnecessary”?

4 Likes

Il aussi un reportage vidéo sur le site de Global

Could the way Canadians park vehicles be part of the housing crisis?

By Uday Rana Global News
Posted February 11, 2024 4:00 am
Updated February 9, 2024 4:38 pm

It’s no secret that Canada is facing a major housing shortage. But could the sheer amount of space used for parking vehicles be part of the problem?

A recent Re/Max report looking at participation in the housing market said the “vast majority” of lower-priced properties in the Greater Toronto Area are parking spaces, and that most of the 250 ‘properties’ listed for sale under the $400,000 price point are parking spaces, lockers and vacant land.

For housing advocates, it touched on a longtime frustration.

“Four parking spaces side-by-side on a surface parking lot is about the same amount of space as a one-bedroom apartment,” said Mark Richardson, from the Toronto-based housing advocacy group HousingNowTO. “If we’re going to spend money – particularly government money and government time – on things that land, that space is better used as places for people rather than empty car storage.”

A 2021 report by the Canadian Energy Systems Analysis Research, also known as CESAR, said Canada has exponentially more parking spaces than cars. The report said Canada has around 23 million light-duty vehicles but has somewhere between 71 million to 97 million parking spots.

That suggests there are 3.2 to 4.4 parking spots for every car in the country.

In some cities, parking takes up most of the space in the city’s downtown core. In Regina, for example, nearly half of private land in the city’s downtown core is parking lots.

In the city of Toronto, a bylaw dictates that a parking spot should be 5.6 metres in length, 2.6 metres in width and have a vertical clearance of two metres. This comes to around 156 square feet for a single vehicle, while according to Canadian Real Estate Magazine, the size of the average Toronto condo is just under 650 square feet – around the same as the four parking spots Richardson cited.

“It encourages sprawl,” Richardson said. “It’s not being turned into housing and it helps lead to our housing shortage.”

According to the CESAR report, 40 per cent of Canada’s parking spaces are residential, 26 per cent are commercial and institutional, and the balance are “on-road” spaces.

Much of this has to do with “parking minimums” – or the requirement that developers must build a certain number of parking spaces for any new development.

Get the latest Montreal news. [Sent to your email, every day.](javascript:void(0))

Rebecca Clements, a researcher at the University of Sydney in Sydney, Australia, told Global News that Minimum Parking Regulations (MPRs) have had a devastating impact on housing affordability in many industrialized nations including Canada and the United States.

“This forces developers to include parking everywhere, greatly contributing to building costs,” she said. “MPRs also reduce the diversity of housing and non-residential land uses, by effectively prohibiting zero-parking buildings which might otherwise be excellent designs.”

In December 2021, the City of Toronto abolished parking minimums, following Edmonton’s lead.

Richardson said that was the result of advocacy by housing groups in Toronto, who have argued parking minimums made it hard for affordable housing projects to be built.

“We had a project in Toronto where for 32 units of seniors’ co-op affordable housing. The old default bylaw said they needed 42 underground parking spaces. So that would have cost that not-for-profit $4 million to create the parking before they created a single unit of affordable housing,” he said.

“These parking minimums in many cases have been around since the 60s and the 70s. It’s taken us 40 years to get into this hole. It’s going to take us at least 20 to get out of it,” he said.

Are parking minimums on the way out?

In addition to Toronto and Edmonton, the cities of High River, Alta. and Lunenberg, N.S., abolished local regulations for parking minimums in 2021. In December, city councils in Vancouver and Saskatoon took similar measures. The city of Regina, which is seeking money from the federal Housing Accelerator Fund**,** is also looking to make changes to its parking regulations.

According to the Parking Reform Network, a non-profit that advocates for parking policy reforms, major American cities like San Francisco, CA, and Austin, TX., have also abolished such measures.

In New Zealand, the National Policy Statement – Urban Development requires all municipalities to remove parking requirements for new developments.

Clements said one of the most successful examples is that of Japan, where on-street parking is “effectively banned” in Japan.

“There are MPRs in Japan, but they mainly apply to large offices and commercial buildings, so basically all small to medium homes and retail establishments are exempt. This helps greatly with offering more home and building diversity, and affordability,” Clements said.

Japan also has a “proof of parking” rule, which means you cannot register a car without first having secured a parking spot for it.

“This shifts the responsibility for parking onto the car owners themselves, rather than making it the general public’s problem, where car owners demand and expect parking to be provided for them everywhere in the public domain,” she said.

But in Canada, experts say removing parking minimums won’t be enough and cities need to start prioritizing development that is transit-friendly and building more walking distance developments.

“We have a chicken and egg problem. The problem is we want dense development but development isn’t initially dense enough,” said Dawn Parker, a professor at the University of Waterloo’s School of Planning. “Retail activities, other activities, employment locations are so spread-out people still need to have a car.”

Parker recommends that in the short run, cities build multi-level parking lots concentrated and contained to certain areas in a way that they can later be converted into housing units rather than sprawling parking lots that use up land that could be available for housing.

In the long run, Richardson says Canadian cities have a choice facing them during this housing crisis.

“It’s parking or it’s people,” he said. “You really can’t have both at this point.”


Sur le sujet des terrains de stationnement qui pourraient servir à construire de l’habitation, cette vidéo publiée il y a quelques semaines de la chaîne City Beautiful

3 Likes

Urbanisme avec Richard Bergeron : Logement, les approches ontarienne et québécoises.

1 Like

Dans l’enregistrement de la séance de hier soir de Sainte-Catherine on entend la directrice générale mentionner que, dans le nouveau PMAD, il y aurait des zones de densification minimale à 75 logements / hectare. Présentement, les niveaux minimum les plus élevés sont de 40 logements / hectare dans la ville.

J’ai hâte de voir les cibles près des stations de transport plus lourd. J’espère aussi que le zonage exclusif d’unifamiliales tombera, car il n’existe présentement aucune volonté politique de changer ça. Aussi, j’espère vraiment que le PMAD forcera la protection des milieux naturels, particulièrement ceux se trouvant en zone de densification. Ça ne fait aucun sens de raser des milieux naturels pour développer des quartiers “durables”.

8 Likes