The Misunderstood NIMBY

New projects don’t affect one person, they affect everyone, in positive and negative ways. If people are being asked to do what is good for society by increasing access to housing in their communities and giving their city a chance to thrive, residents need to work with officials to let them know what is wanted, needed, and expected.

While there are some people who concern themselves about traffic volumes, the load on infrastructure, or the appropriateness of a building’s architecture, these are all aspects of development and growth that are handled by professionals within the city who use their knowledge and expertise to ensure that specifications are met. No engineer would risk losing their livelihood by pushing a project through if it did not meet all engineering standards, be it about sanitation, volume tolerances on roads, or sun/shade studies.

Assuming these requirements are met, what is the problem? It’s likely a lack of trust, founded or not. Montrealers can name the projects they’ve seen where parks or schools suddenly disappeared from the plans. Projects that promised affordable or social housing were paid off into a fund so that developers could maximize profits. Projects that go up promising a community transformation, but instead result in no new resources, no upgrades to active transportation or public transit, and offer only inconvenience.

It doesn’t have to be this way.

Pointe-Claire is creating an urban plan to try to ensure that change benefits the existing neighbourhoods, not just city coffers or developer pockets. Unfortunately, in this process, not all voices are being heard or given the proper weight. While the public consultations have enjoyed a measure of success, concerns have been expressed that certain subjects are not being discussed, that there is a lack of specificity to the topics, and that only a vocal minority is being heard. 

A person living in a quiet cul-de-sac may not realize that a new development on the other side of Pointe-Claire disrupts local traffic patterns, sending “rat runners” down local roads to bypass congestion. People who have young children may not be as concerned about the safety of the walk from the REM to Fairview as the parent of a CEGEP student. A senior who no longer drives may not view their new prospective rental as being conveniently located near a grocery store. Those living in an area with no pool, pickleball court, or dog run may be apprehensive about the number of new residents coming into their area.

Residents need reassurance before a project is built; they need to know that there will be shops and services built within larger projects, that traffic and parking issues will not spill onto their streets, that sightlines will not be ruined, that recreational facilities will be provided, that neighbourhoods will remain peaceful and safe, and that any issues they currently experience will be fixed first and not just fixed with piecemeal solutions. Much like the adage “measure twice, cut once,” it is better to plan well than to fix later.