The Concept of Gentle Density for the Wider Community

I have been walking around Toronto thinking, “is that a laneway suite?” since I learned what they are. It has certainly changed how I view laneways, and housing, forever.

If you’re like me, and newly converted to city politics and issues, you may have never heard of a laneway suite. It is a small dwelling in the back lot of a property (think: a cool shed) that for all intents and purposes is a basement apartment not technically connected to the actual main house. For years I have jokingly told my parents that I would turn their shed into my permanent residence — and truthfully never knew that this wouldn’t be legal. It begs the question — why isn’t it?

If you’d like a list of the great features, by-laws in Toronto, barriers and definitions on laneway suites please see here for some of Evergreen’s amazing resources. This blog won’t be speaking about any institutional barriers to laneway suites, but instead about the concept of gentle density and housing as it pertains to Toronto.

Gentle density, as explained by expert Brent Toderian, is the concept of building well-designed ground level housing with a similar scale to stacked townhouses, rowhouses and other smaller spaces. These have minimal impacts, especially when compared to the usual thought of concept of adding to the housing supply with numerous condos and apartments. However this concept of gentle density raises some intense controversy among communities or streets where it’s proposed.

This is often NIMBYism (Not In My Backyard philosophy) disguised behind arguments of unfeasibility, property tax and value changes and zoning inabilities. Those arguments aside, gentle density seems an incredibly viable way to increase housing supply while strengthening communities. Though this seems to be on a neighborhood by neighborhood basis, where the areas with the most space (generally more high cost neighborhoods) are effectively protected from gentle density ever existing due to them being ‘stable’ neighborhoods.

“Despite their proximity to the Downtown core, places like Rosedale and the Annex aren’t regarded as appropriate sites for density. These areas make up about 40% of the City. In some of these neighbourhoods, like The Annex, population has been steadily declining as home prices rise out of reach.

Amidst an urgent housing crisis and a record waitlist for affordable housing, the rhetoric of ‘stable’ areas dictates that it’s necessary to preserve increasingly expensive neighbourhoods areas as they are, even as population declines” — Stefan Novakovic

I personally love the idea of laneway suites and gentle density, and think the protection of these ‘stable’ neighborhoods are unrealistically remaining resistant to the needs of the diverse and ever-changing community of Toronto.

Gentle density seems like a way to increase housing supply while creating a more tailored approach to housing and community. However, if we look at the Vancouver example (or really any Canadian example), while this may present an opportunity for more housing, it doesn’t address the ever salient and problematic issue of housing affordability.

As a humble newbie to this topic, the intense paperwork, time and development costs associated with laneway suites and other gentle density designs seem to have prevented the ability of this concept to translate into affordable housing. Perhaps creating a more effective approval process or the reduction in development costs could start to address this.

When it comes to arguments and controversies like this, I always get stuck in the ethical debate between the individual and the community. Do we continue to have public consultations in which homeowner voices triumph over those searching for a home or in need? Is the addition of 1,000 new homes in the area worth a raise in property taxes for current owners? Should the stable community forfeit some luxuries for the betterment of the greater community? Again, I have no answers but it’s certainly worth thinking about.