Opinion: Upzoning Isn't Just for Major Streets

Henry Grabar argues that policies that encourage higher-density development only on busy streets and commercial corridors amounts to discrimination against renters that perpetuates inequality. As Grabar puts it,

Unfortunately, big streets are not nice places to live. Their traffic is noisy, dirty, and dangerous. Allowing apartment buildings to be built at all is progress, but ensuring they rise only in the worst locations is not fair to the people who live in them.

The practice elicits less resistance from neighborhood groups that want to maintain single-family zoning, notes Grabar, "[b]ut that doesn’t mean it’s a good idea." While it's logical to build housing near transit, side streets in the same areas could also be upzoned to accommodate more housing. "Many critics have rightly pointed out, in recent years, that zoning in residential neighborhoods seems a lot more concerned with types of neighbors than with the supposedly hazardous consequences of their arrival." Meanwhile, planners concerned about additional traffic from high-rise buildings naturally lean toward placing them on busier roads, compounding the problem. 

In an October article, Daniel Oleksiuk made a similar argument, calling for Vancouver to stop relegating multi-family dwellings to busy arterials and effectively turning renters into a 'buffer' for the pollution caused by crowded urban streets. According to Oleksiuk, while some people may choose to live on busy thoroughfares for the convenience, renter households should not be forced to suffer the brunt of urban pollution and public health hazards.