BC Provincial Government Housing Policies 2023

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by chowhou

It's not currently financially viable for me to do so. In the meantime, I regrettably get to ride the wave of land continuing to spiral upwards as everyone else suffers around me. My land makes almost as much every year in appreciation as I do from my paycheck and it's all tax free...

And really, isn't that a big part of the problem?

No wonder Canada's productivity and business investment are abysmally low when everything's skewed to make property investment attractive at the expense of everything else.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by whatnext

And really, isn't that a big part of the problem?

No wonder Canada's productivity and business investment are abysmally low when everything's skewed to make property investment attractive at the expense of everything else.

"Buy land, they're not making it anymore" - Mark Twain

Now bear in mind, we absolutely could build more land—the ocean is right there—but we all know that's not happening anytime soon. In the meantime, given the fact that housing costs are already disgustingly high, the only path forward for greater housing supply is to allow more housing on the land we already have. There is no such thing as making land less attractive (unless of course you advocate for some sort of land value tax or a war or some form of economic devastation). We just need more housing.

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

Those Mary Hill buildings are quite the vintage! I'll look up their zoning too

Ironically, the FSR of those rowhouses is only around .75 which I suppose is quite high for the area and the era, but it's not even modern Vancouver SFH density!

[Migrant_Coconut]

It's either that or clear out every tree and farm between here and Hope. Pretty much every major Canadian city is noticing the diminishing returns on building outward, and is opting to build upward instead.

[chowhou]

I would very much like to see what the "find out" stage of "🞵🞵🞵🞵 around and find out" looks like.

B.C. housing minister singles out 2 municipalities for lack of new home construction

In September 2023, the province gave 10 municipalities new home construction targets to meet in the first year under B.C.'s Housing Supply Act.

The housing minster says two – West Vancouver and Oak Bay – didn’t come close.

West Vancouver’s target was 220 new homes. Ravi Kahlon says only 58 were completed.

“West Vancouver council has had a historic record of not really approving much housing, and I don't know quite the reason why. But I will say that it's imperative that West Vancouver, and all communities, do their part,” said Kahlon.

Oak Bay is the other municipality that fell well short of its target of 56 new homes completed in year one.

“Having the community come back and say we're at 16 is a little disappointing, especially when you see right next door the city of Victoria has over 1,400 units, and Saanich is over 400 units,” said Kahlon.

But mayors of both communities insist housing is being built, it just takes time. And delays are often exacerbated by the province.

“If you actually include the housing applications approved and under way, we exceeded the 56 number that was in the first year. So, I think we're doing great,” said Oak Bay Mayor Kevin Murdoch.

“At this point in time, we have 766 units with issued building and or development permits,” said West Vancouver mayor Mark Sager, who bristles at the suggestion his city has a record of not approving housing.

“Perhaps the minister is unaware that we just passed the Cypress Village plan, which is a comprehensive long-term plan for 3,700 units. The biggest delay in getting that approved was actually the ministry,” Sager added.

Unconvinced, the minister says staff will engage with local governments in West Vancouver and Oak Bay in the next 30 days.

“At that point, I'll have to make a decision,” said Kahlon.

“I have two options. I have the decision to go ahead and bring in a special advisor to go in and review decisions and see what the issues might be in the process of approving housing, or I can step in and make decisions to change bylaws to have more housing be built.”

Murdoch says that’s completely unnecessary.

“I understand from a political standpoint why that's advantageous, it gives you the opportunity to assign blame and take credit. But I don't think it actually moves our housing forward,” he said.

The mayors believe they are being unfairly singled out so the province can appear tough on housing.

“I don't really feel like this is a legitimate complaint on the part of the province. I feel like it's performative,” said Murdoch.

“I concur with those comments,” said Sager. “This is just theatre.”

They’re confident once the minister sees what’s in the housing pipeline in their communities, he will back off.

https://bc.ctvnews.ca/b-c-housing-minist...-lack-of-new-home-construction-1.7151437

[GenWhy?]

“I don't really feel like this is a legitimate complaint on the part of the province. I feel like it's performative,” said Murdoch.

I mean, not building housing next to one of the largest post secondary institutions and net to downtown Victoria is also a form of political performance art in a way.

[jollyburger]

Vancouver Approves New Development Approval Procedure Axing Public Hearings

Under the newly-approved Development Approval Procedure By-law, rezoning applications for projects that are compliant with the City's Official Development Plan (ODP) and have over 50% of the proposed floor area as residential use will go directly to Council for a decision when ready, and public hearings are prohibited for such projects.

For rezoning applications that are ODP-compliant but have less than 50% of the proposed floor area as residential use, Council will have the authority to refer the application to either a direct decision or a public hearing.

For rezoning applications that are not compliant with the ODP, or where there is no applicable ODP, the approval process will be as it was previously, with public hearings required.

Instead of the existing system, Renovate the Public Hearing's top recommendation was to reorient public engagement around ODPs/OCPs, a much earlier and more comprehensive planning stage, which was the hope when the Province introduced Bill 18. In Vancouver, residents will have that opportunity later this year when the City hosts public engagement for the Official Development Plan.

https://storeys.com/vancouver-public-hearings-development-approvals-procedure/

[jollyburger]

Just 35 City of North Vancouver lots eligible for small-scale multiplexes under new rules

Nine days after the provincial deadline, City of North Vancouver council has passed bylaws intended to meet the province’s mandate for more diverse housing in “restricted” single-family neighbourhoods. But the new rules approved by council on June 9 are expected to bring only “nominal” change, according to staff.

The province’s Bill 44 required municipalities to update their bylaws to allow four to six units on single-family properties – depending on their lot size and proximity to transit – if the properties were previously limited to detached homes, homes with a secondary suite or coach house, or duplexes.

Because the city already allows both secondary suites and coach houses in most zones, staff said most properties would be exempt from the rules requiring multi-plexes.

When council last debated the matter in May, staff estimated the new rules would still apply to 880 properties with the potential to add another 1,000 new residences. Despite a June 1 deadline looming, council voted at that time to send the matter back to staff to focus on “improved livability.”

Rather than rewrite the bylaws to include more four- and six-plexes, council instead opted to remove the minimum lot width requirements for coach houses, putting almost every lot in the city in compliance with the letter of the province’s law.

Just 35 properties will be eligible for the type of multiplex housing intended by the provincial legislation.

https://www.nsnews.com/local-news/just-3...ale-multiplexes-under-new-rules-10796276

[mcj]

Directives issued to get more homes built in Oak Bay, West Vancouver

The directives to the District of Oak Bay are it must:
amend its Development Application Procedures Bylaw to delegate minor development variance permits to municipal staff by Dec. 31, 2025; and
amend its Parking Facilities Bylaw for sites containing multiple units, to a minimum of one parking stall per unit where the bylaw currently requires a minimum of more than one parking stall per unit, by Dec. 31, 2025.

Additionally, Oak Bay must provide updates on work toward:
meeting the Dec. 31, 2025, deadline for updating its official community plan, with a focus on housing; and
amending its Building and Plumbing Bylaw in relation to blasting activities, in consultation with the development community.

The directives to the District of West Vancouver are it must:
amend its Official Community Plan Bylaw to increase density in the Park Royal-Taylor Way area by Dec. 31, 2025. The amendments must provide development regulations and an accompanying schedule that defines the area and provides for the minimum required densities;
amend its Official Community Plan Bylaw to provide for increased density in the single-family and duplex prescribed areas adjacent to Ambleside and Dundarave, by Dec. 31, 2025; and
adopt the proposed Ambleside Centre Local Area Plan by Dec. 31, 2025.

Additionally, West Vancouver must:
identify in future annual progress reporting the type of development applications and number of housing units considered and rejected under the Preliminary Development Proposal and Public Consultation Policy.

[Changing City]

Looking at housing starts data so far this year, compared to the BC Provincial expectations of housing completions, it's noticeable that all three north shore municipalities are way below the number of units the legislation says they should be generating. So far this year (in 8 months) the three combined have 306 starts, and they're supposed to be completing around 1,500 a year.

Pitt Meadows might be in a bit of trouble too - they're supposed to see 145 a year complete - but so far this year, as far as I can tell, there have been no housing starts.

[jollyburger]

COV's update to the province on the housing target implementation

Jericho Lands 2026

Comprehensive planning process to guide the delivery of diverse housing
types within the 90-acre site, with the Policy Statement adopted in 2024, the Official Development Plan adopted in 2025 and the Phase 1 Rezoning application process upcoming in 2026.

Heather Lands

Q2 2026 Council approval

https://council.vancouver.ca/20251113/documents/spec1.pdf

[Sheba]

I'm surprised no one has posted this - West Vancouver mayor says he won’t back down from standoff on provincially mandated housing targets

Of all the B.C. cities targeted to increase housing development, West Vancouver may have the most contentious relationship with the province — and the mayor says he is refusing to back down.

As a provincially mandated Dec. 31 deadline looms over the city to approve more housing density in three neighbourhoods along Marine Drive, West Vancouver Mayor Mark Sager says he’s fundamentally opposed to the province’s approach.

“I just think picking arbitrary dates, arbitrary numbers, and trying to force their vision on local communities is fundamentally wrong,” Sager said.

But if the district doesn’t do what the province wants, the province has the authority to override the district and densify where it wants.

West Vancouver was one of 10 municipalities on the province’s so-called “naughty list” in 2023.

It was nearly last in meeting its targets for new housing, with only 172 homes built between Oct. 1, 2023, and Sept. 30 this year. It didn’t reach even 40 per cent of its goal.

But Sager said he refuses to abide by the provincial directives because he's opposed to the process, arguing it should be based on housing approvals rather than completions, and municipalities should have more time to come to local decisions.

...

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by Sheba

I'm surprised no one has posted this - West Vancouver mayor says he won’t back down from standoff on provincially mandated housing targets

There's been some posts about it in the North Shore thread. I mean if any area of West Vancouver that should densify it should be Ambleside in terms of access to transit and shopping/recreation. It's not like they are forcing 50 storey towers on them..

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

There's been some posts about it in the North Shore thread. I mean if any area of West Vancouver that should densify it should be Ambleside in terms of access to transit and shopping/recreation. It's not like they are forcing 50 storey towers on them..

It was quite awhile ago now but I remember a proposal for the North Shore (likely West Van) that was for 5 towers plus retail, and someone stated they didn't want a Station Square in their neighbourhood - meanwhile I think the tallest tower proposed was 12 storeys. I'm pretty sure 5 storeys would be too tall for a lot of people living there.

[jollyburger]

Eby sounds alarm on B.C. housing slowdown as minister looks the other way

Premier David Eby told the real estate community Tuesday he’s very worried about slumping housing starts and stalled high-rise condo projects, as he seeks to avoid contributing to what could be a housing supply crunch in just a few years.

“We're following the housing starts pretty closely,” Eby said to delegates from the B.C. Real Estate Association meeting in Victoria. “We're still above the 10-year average, the building is still taking place, which is positive. But I am extremely concerned about the next couple of years and where those numbers are going to go.”

Rents continue to fall and real estate prices remain flat—good news for tenants and buyers. But it has blown up the financing model for condo towers, where developers rely on pre-sales to secure construction loans. Without those buyers, projects stall.

“Suggestions that are coming forward from the homebuilders, from UDI [Urban Development Institute] and others, about how we can keep building through this curve are absolutely critical,” Eby said. “We’re taking it very seriously.”

The premier cited market realities, the price of materials and “the impact DCC [development cost charge] decisions have had on buildings in various communities in the province, including Metro Vancouver’s decisions” as concerns—a clear shot at metro mayors who have sharply increased DCCs, now rebranded as developer fees, to plug municipal budget holes.

The worry, Eby admitted Tuesday, is that when Ottawa inevitably relaxes rules on immigration in the future, the stalled out housing sector will fail to meet the sudden population growth, leading to another supply crunch.

“Making sure that our policies keep up with the current situation faced by the housing sector is crucial,” he said. “We need those builders to keep building right now.”

B.C.’s housing starts fell 3.6 per cent to 44,193 units in 2025. The government projects 44,210 in 2026 and 45,920 in 2027, but the Independent Contractors and Businesses Association (ICBA) has said more realistic projections are as low as 34,000 units this year.

While Eby was delivering his speech to Realtors, back at the legislature his housing minister was showing anything but concern at the situation.

Christine Boyle mostly shrugged her way through questions about housing starts during her ministry’s estimates, displaying none of the concern shown by the premier.

The premier’s much-vaunted BC Builds program, announced in 2024 with $2 billion in financing and $950 million in program funding to construct affordable middle-class rental units?

It has produced exactly 72 completed units two years later, confirmed Boyle.

Another 2,717 units are in construction—still a long way from the 9,000 promised.

BC Builds is also no longer on track to hit its 9,000-unit target by 2029, Boyle confirmed. “We are re-pacing some projects,” she said.

https://www.biv.com/news/commentary/rob-...as-minister-looks-the-other-way-11988046

[kikin]

always depressing to read Eby's take on what should be done for our futures here in this city, but thanks for posting it

[GenWhy?]

"Another major concern often cited by municipalities is funding for infrastructure. They say they can’t approve new housing without roads, sewer and water upgrades. The province promised help when it imposed housing targets several years ago. But, Boyle revealed that the $1-billion Growing Communities Fund, which was supposed to last to 2028, only has $225 million left with two years to go.

Good luck, municipalities."

Zero means zero? Working like a charm!

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by kikin

always depressing to read Eby's take on what should be done for our futures here in this city, but thanks for posting it

Yeah I wish our City would do a better job too

[mcj]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

"Another major concern often cited by municipalities is funding for infrastructure. They say they can’t approve new housing without roads, sewer and water upgrades. The province promised help when it imposed housing targets several years ago. But, Boyle revealed that the $1-billion Growing Communities Fund, which was supposed to last to 2028, only has $225 million left with two years to go.

Good luck, municipalities."

Zero means zero? Working like a charm!

Certainly there's no other mechanism for municipalities to fund necessary infrastructure upgrades other than handouts from the Province.

[seamusmcduff]

Just noticed that back in october Surrey eliminated the requirement for development permits for houseplexes. It was considered a redundant review that overlapped too much with BPs, with minimal design improvement.

https://www.surrey.ca/sites/default/files/corporate-reports/CR_2025-R221.pdf

It seems like other than the north Shore, COV is continuing to be one of the most restrictive when it comes to multiplexes. I think the province would have a lot more criticism of the current restrictions in Vancouver if they hadnt have happened to come in before the provinces SSMUH policy.

[whatnext]

Did anybody catch this private members bill from some NDP nitwit?

B.C. industry groups warn bill restricting cities from development reviews could 'jeopardize public safety'
MLA George Anderson says his bill tries to balance professional expertise with efficient housing development
-Lauren Vanderdeen · CBC News · Posted: Mar 13, 2026

More than a dozen B.C. professional associations are concerned that a bill proposing to change the way cities review developments will remove safeguards that uphold public safety.

But NDP MLA George Anderson is defending his private member's bill, the Professional Reliance Act, which he said aims to reduce delays in the housing approval process that can involve "significant duplication of technical review."

Nearly 500 organizations, local governments and individuals submitted public feedback on the bill. Many were opposed — some were scathing....

...The B.C. Ministry of Housing, run by Anderson's NDP party, also reiterated industry concerns and suggested the bill appears to have "implications that could extend further than intended."

The B.C. Professional Fire Fighter's Association said the bill "has the potential to jeopardize public safety" by removing technical checks on critical building systems....

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-c...638?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email