The effects of NIMBYism on housing supply in Ontario.

Housing supply is not keeping up with demand, and that is the primary cause of Ontario’s housing crisis. As we emerge from the pandemic, and population and immigration trends return to where they were before Covid-19, housing supply needs to increase significantly if we want to have any chance of getting the upper hand on a crisis that has made housing increasingly unaffordable and left many Ontarians scrambling to find a home that meets their needs and budget. There are many things that can be done to increase supply, including updating zoning rules and regulations, streamlining approval processes, and reforming development charges. In previous posts we have looked in detail at each of those and proposed some solutions. However, there is one more factor that contributes to constrict new supply of purpose-built rental housing in Ontario, and that is the prevalence of strong NIMBY sentiments that make building more housing difficult. Unless NIMBYism is meaningfully addressed, builders will always find it challenging to develop new purpose-built rental housing we need.

In a recent survey of 1,500 GTA residents conducted by the Building Industry and Land Development Association and the Toronto Real Estate Board a vast majority (87%) agreed that housing affordability can be improved by new developments. However, a majority of respondents also indicated that they were against new developments happening near their place of residence. In addition, the resistance to new construction increased with the proposed density of the project, with 52% saying they would oppose mid-rise apartment buildings built within half a kilometer of their home, and 59% saying they would oppose high-rise developments. This opposition, particularly against much needed higher density developments, is concerning as it causes slowdowns in the construction process and serves to reduce supply and increase prices of the type of housing that is most needed in the province. Making matters worse is the fact that NIMBY sentiments are strongest in those urban areas where housing prices are already highest, as revealed by a survey of builders from the Fraser Institute.

The reasons for NIMBYism are varied, and they range from misinformation, to concerns about new developments’ impact on traffic and public infrastructure, and prejudices against certain housing types. As the above surveys show, a lot of what gives rise to NIMBYism is emotional, with people saying they’re against new development even knowing that more supply is needed to combat the housing crisis. A lot of it comes down to nostalgia and a resistance to change, with residents wanting their neighbourhoods to look as they always did. Unfortunately, this creates obstacles to building more housing where it is needed and it is encouraged by some of the policies and procedures in place in many municipalities, such as assessments for look and feel of a neighbourhood in the approval process for new developments.

Political considerations of elected city councillors serve to exacerbate these problems and create obstacles where there should not be any. Under the planning act, municipalities must hold public meetings when considering zoning by-laws or amendments. If the type of housing being considered is already allowed by the zoning rules in place, no meeting is necessary. However, on many occasions, councillors choose to hold meetings anyway to not risk angering their constituents, further bolstering NIMBYism, and endorsing the practice of current residents having the right to determine who lives next door, or what kind of building is built.

To mitigate that risk, it is important for municipalities to approve as-of-right zoning for purpose-built rental projects that provides certainty based on meeting a set of conditions agreed upon by the province and municipal sector. For example, zoning approval on an existing rental housing site could be automatically available saving years in the process and unlocking thousands of units. A recent survey by the Ontario Real Estate Association shows that 78% of Ontarians would be in favour of minimal zoning requirements in urban areas to fuel more housing supply.

That does not mean that projects should move forward without public consultation or input. The proper means of engagement with a community, initiated ahead of time and with the participation of all relevant stakeholders, have been shown to satisfy ?NIMBY sentiments and opposition in many cases. Municipalities must take a leading role in initiating better engagement, and meetings should be well planned, conducted, and moderated with the intention of informing and educating communities. In many cases NIMBY feelings are fueled by misconceptions and misinformation and they can be dispelled with respectful dialogue between all parties and a willingness to work together to find solutions.

With Ontario in the midst of a housing supply crisis, it is important that all stakeholders work together to overcome obstacles to getting more housing supply to market. Overcoming NIMBY opposition can be tricky, but working closely with builders and local communities, municipalities can take steps to ensure that the right kind of development is built where it is needed. This will require some policy changes, such as approving more as-of-right zoning and density incentives for purpose-built rental projects in communities where rental housing is needed the most. It will also require educating the public on the root causes of the supply crisis, and addressing common concerns that give rise to NIMBYism. It is only by working hand-in-hand with local communities that we will find a solution to the housing crisis in Ontario.