On Monday, April 27, Edmonton\u2019s city council will decide whether to reduce the maximum building height for new housing in mature neighbourhoods from 10.5 metres to 9.5 metres. This may seem like a small change. What could cutting just one metre from housing really do, after all? Unfortunately, the answer is a lot.<\/p>\n
At 10.5 metres, a new building can comfortably accommodate four levels: a basement, main floor, and two additional storeys. In practice, this enables a pair of family-sized homes stacked atop one another. The lower unit is no longer just a basement suite; it includes its living space on the main floor with just the sleeping areas in the basement, while the upper unit spans two full storeys above. This configuration delivers higher density while providing functional, livable spaces in both homes.<\/p>\n
This is an increasingly popular form of housing in our city that delivers what\u2019s preferred: two households where everyone gets adequate light and space, and a sense of being inside a home, not underneath one. Take one metre out of this design to meet the proposed 9.5-metre limit, however, and the livability of one or both units is compromised.<\/p>\n
Either the lower unit gets pushed back underground, or the uppermost level is compressed into a partial storey that\u2019s useful for storage, maybe, but less so for living. With just one metre lost, what had been a livable design to provide Edmontonians what they want becomes compromised, or just left unbuilt.<\/p>\n
The people most likely to feel the effects of this proposed height change are renters, a group that often isn\u2019t front and centre in these discussions.<\/p>\n
Many who\u2019ve rented in Edmonton have rented a basement suite. We have a large post-secondary presence that creates a significant number of people who need lower-cost rental housing in the core. But these aren\u2019t great suites. Most are in the basements of older homes where the ceilings are low. Light is limited and windows are small. You feel like you live under a home, rather than in one. You leave when you can find something better.<\/p>\n
The 10.5-metre height has enabled an alternative housing form in mature neighbourhoods, one that uses design to provide more dignified living\u00a0spaces. Bedrooms may still be located in the basement, but the main living spaces are brought above ground, into natural light.<\/p>\n
This proposed change is not happening in a vacuum. In some established neighbourhoods, new multi-family housing developments are unwelcome. Council appears to be responding to that frustration with a visible, easy-to-understand change \u2014 a one-metre reduction in height \u2014 that signals action but doesn\u2019t meaningfully address the underlying concerns. Will losing one metre substantially reduce shadows for existing residents? Likely not. Will it limit the types of housing designs that people are asking for? Likely yes.<\/p>\n
A frustrating part of this discussion is also the obvious contradictions. As council considers reducing housing height in established neighbourhoods to 9.5 metres, it is also working within a policy framework that aims to meet climate targets and limit property tax increases. Removing appealing housing options from the core will only make these targets harder to hit.<\/p>\n
Meanwhile, council allows housing as tall as 12 metres in new and developing neighbourhoods. It\u2019s already easier to deliver desirable, functional housing on the edges of the city than within it, but council may double down and widen that gap.<\/p>\n
What could cutting just one metre from housing really do? In Edmonton, quite a lot. It risks limiting the types of homes people are actually looking for, while doing little to address the concerns driving opposition. Council should take a harder look at whether this change meaningfully improves outcomes \u2014 or simply makes good housing harder to deliver.<\/p>\n
Chelsey Jersak is the founder and strategic director of Situate, a company that since 2016 has helped housing projects move through complex approval systems so that we can build more housing in Western Canada.<\/p>\n
Letters welcome<\/p>\n
We invite you to write letters to the editor. A maximum of 150 words is preferred. Letters must carry a first and last name, or two initials and a last name, and include an address and daytime telephone number. All letters are subject to editing. We don\u2019t publish letters addressed to others or sent to other publications. Email:\u00a0letters@edmontonjournal.com<\/a><\/p>\n Bookmark our website and support our journalism:\u00a0Don\u2019t miss the news you need to know \u2014 add\u00a0EdmontonJournal.com<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0EdmontonSun.com<\/a>\u00a0to your bookmarks and\u00a0sign up for our newsletters here<\/a>.<\/p>\n You can also support our journalism by becoming a digital subscriber. Subscribers gain unlimited access to The Edmonton Journal, Edmonton Sun, National Post and 13 other Canadian news sites. Support us by subscribing today:\u00a0The Edmonton Journal<\/a>\u00a0|The Edmonton Sun<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"On Monday, April 27, Edmonton\u2019s city council will decide whether to reduce the maximum building height for new…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":16898,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[10],"tags":[8761,1642,52,8423,1813,8760],"class_list":["post-16897","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-edmonton","tag-basement-suite","tag-city-council","tag-edmonton","tag-housing-developments","tag-neighbourhoods","tag-rental-housing"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/canada\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16897","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/canada\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/canada\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/canada\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/canada\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=16897"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/canada\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16897\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/canada\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/16898"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/canada\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=16897"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/canada\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=16897"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/canada\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=16897"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}