The fall of 2023 has witnessed an unprecedented surge in announcements and housing-related legislation, surpassing the cumulative measures introduced over the past decade. The sheer scope, scale, and volume of these developments have presented a substantial challenge for both industry professionals and regulatory authorities. A total of 19 pieces of legislation were introduced, as highlighted in the BC Government’s news release, with key pieces of housing legislation passed in the fall session including:
- reining in the rapidly expanding short-term rental market and turning short-term rentals into homes for people through the Short-Term Rentals Accommodations Act;
- delivering more small-scale, multi-unit housing for people, including townhomes, triplexes and laneway homes, and fix outdated zoning rules to help build more homes faster through Bill 44;
- speeding up the delivery of homes, removing barriers and encouraging more communities near transit, services and amenities that make life better for people through new transit-oriented development legislation. This legislation, if passed, builds on work underway to facilitate more transit-oriented development and create more livable communities; and
- reducing construction delays and streamlining processes to fund key services, infrastructure and amenities for growing communities through new development finance tools in Bill 46.
REGULATIONS, POLICY MANUALS, AND TIMELINES RELEASED
These announcements have been offered in a series of press releases and conferences, frequently stating details were still pending. On December 7, 2023, the Province released Regulations and Policy Manuals with a summary from the BC Government and links to background materials, etc. to deliver more homes faster.
The timelines have also been released and are equally ambitious.
- Released Dec. 7, 2023:
-
- regulations for Bill 35, 44, 47 deposited;
- Province designates interim TOD Areas and policy manual released; and
- small-scale, multi-unit housing policy manual provided to local governments.
- January 2024:
-
- $51 million distributed to local governments to help meet new requirements that promote the provinces housing-density initiatives.
- Early 2024:
-
- Housing Needs Report guidance provided to local governments.
Feb. 29, 2024:
Local governments requests must be submitted to opt out of the principal-residence requirement.
- May 1, 2024:
-
- principal-residence requirement (including definition of exempt areas or accommodations), changes to legal non-conforming use protections; and
- short-term rental hosts will be required to display a valid business licence number on their listing, where a business licence is required by a local government.
- June/July 2024:
-
- guidance provided to municipalities to update Official Community Plans and zoning bylaws.
- June 30, 2024:
-
- local governments must have designated TOD Areas bylaw and removed minimum residential-parking requirements; and
- local governments must have updated their zoning bylaw to accommodate small-scale, multi-unit housing requirements (except in areas where they have applied for an extension).
- Jan. 1, 2025:
-
- local governments must have completed their interim Housing Needs Report.
- Dec. 31, 2025:
-
- municipalities update of their Official Community Plans and zoning bylaws (based on the interim Housing Needs Report).
.
MIXED REACTION & PUSHBACK
These actions, widely regarded as commendable and, by some accounts, aggressive, reflect the provincial leadership’s response to our persistent housing crisis. However, the reception to these measures has been mixed. The proposed timeline and accompanying regulations will necessitate municipalities to invest considerable effort, dedicated time, and staff resources to fulfill the specified requirements and meet deadlines.
I would like to wager, that the real challenge lies in the fact that municipalities are resisting the obligation to make these accommodations, viewing them as an ‘overreach’ by the province into municipal responsibilities and jurisdiction.
In a recent presentation to Surrey Council, Don Luymes, General Manager of Planning and Development, outlined the pros and cons of the extensive legislative changes. “Luymes told council on Dec. 4 that city staff reaction to the legislation up to this point is that it constitutes a provincial government “over-reach” into areas of municipal jurisdiction bearing good intentions, but a lot of unintended consequences.
“Frankly, it renders years of community planning and consultation I’d say is obsolete as the province has come in and essentially changed the game plan,” Luymes told council.
“There’s been I would say a lack of meaningful consultation with local governments considering the magnitude of the changes and not that much consideration of the infrastructure implications, for instance around school planning, sanitary sewers, road networks and the like.”
Luymes’ presentation outlined concerns and potential problems and suggested a lack of consultation but overall recognized these actions were undertaken to meet the need to increase housing supply, but that may require ‘… the re-working of approved plans for the City Centre, Fleetwood, Clayton, Guildford, Newton, including infrastructure servicing plans, school projections and plans, road networks, and sanitary sewer infrastructure.’
The Township of Langley Council (ToL), led by Mayor Eric Woodward, has taken a very intransigent posture to the new legislation and proposed repeals of approvals on the Booth, Rinn, and Fernridge Neighbourhood Community Plans (NCPs) that represent housing for over 47,000 new residents.
Citing the provincial legislation allowing densification of the single-family lot, it was suggested a total increase to over 115,000 residents and the impact on infrastructure and plans for parks, parking, schools, and services have not been taken into account. This is somewhat facetious as it assumes that every SF lot will be built out to 4-6 units, and it should be noted that none of the areas of concern have been built yet.
18 UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES, AND COUNTING …
Reports from members and other industry representatives indicate as many as 18 instream housing applications in the ToL have been shelved while the Council and Mayor prepared to square off with the Province to “seek clarity” and funding to provide infrastructure, while at the same time asserting their boundaries regarding planning and land use policy.
Both the ToL and Surrey are experiencing high growth rates, and the concerns are valid, but the legislation was, as Don Luymes noted, put forward to create more housing supply. The posture of the ToL and the regressive actions being contemplated appear to be politically motivated and it is no secret that ToL, and several other mayors and municipalities are more concerned about “provincial overreach” than the potential to address our underserved housing requirements.
Minister Kahlon has stated, “… the province has, and will, continue to support infrastructure projects, and to lobby the federal government for infrastructure spending, but that municipalities have to do more to get housing built now” and “We don’t want this to be an excuse for local governments that have not been approving the housing.”
FEDERAL SUPPORT
Last week Federal Housing Minister Sean Fraser in a letter to Metro Vancouver stated that in light of their decision to institute some form of measured review and application of DCCs the funds set to flow from the federal $4.3 billion Housing Accelerator Fund will be released to those “meritorious” applications. This would include the $191 million that he withheld from Burnaby and Surrey due to their support of the Metro DCCs. (It should be noted that the DCC increases from Metro will still proceed adding many millions of dollars of costs to pending applications including many currently instream.)
TAKING POLITICS OUT OF HOUSING
Nonetheless, the monies available from the Feds and the Province to address infrastructure concerns are being made available and the mechanism to seek exemptions based on infrastructure shortcomings is embedded in the legislation. I have heard Minister Kahlon say many times that to deal with the housing crisis we “… need to remove politics from housing …”
This is absolutely required – and so is a collaborative effort. Posturing by the municipalities coming at the expense of the developers and builders is at best counterproductive and undermines the spirit and intent of the efforts to expedite the process, housing supply, and affordability.
It has been noted previously, that stalling projects proposed by large-scale production builders might be absorbed by those who have deeper pockets and more patient financing, but it is the more modest projects of scope and scale that constitute a large proportion of our industry production that will be most affected. The smaller builders do not have the cushion to weather the delays imposed by municipalities seeking to make a point or to leverage funding.
DATA FOR A COLLECTIVE VOICE
HAVAN, actively engaged with your municipal and provincial governments is seeking feedback from members on the impacts of the municipal actions in terms of the number of homes that will be sidelined and the potential costs and or financial consequences. If your projects are affected, please provide some details to info@havan.ca
HAVAN continues to work with CHBA BC and CHBA to advocate for all levels of government to work together to address the challenges of the housing industry including zoning restrictions, density limits, and NIMBYism.
Looking to stay up-to-date on Metro Vancouver’s residential housing industry? Sign up for Ron’s weekly Monday Morning Briefing and other HAVAN emails here.
QUICK BITES …
- Last week the province announced that changes to the BC Building Code will be adopted and go live by March 1. 2024. It is important to note that changes regarding universal accessibility and seismic requirements have been deferred until March 1, 2025 to allow for more consultation and input from stakeholders. We see this as a tangible “win” as HAVAN and members actively opposed the changes as proposed and the adverse effect on affordability that was inherent in the pending regulation. BC is also looking at single access stairs for multi-unit buildings.
- CHBA-BC has produced three one-page facts sheets on BILL 44 (Small Scale, Multi Unit), BILL 46 (Development Financing DCCs, DCLs, ACC), and BILL 47 (Transit Oriented Developments) that have been discussed herein. Please see the links to review.
- Recognizing that we suffer from a structural deficit in housing that will require a major effort to effectively double our housing output for ten years in order re-establish a more balanced supply/demand equation, the Federal Liberals have introduced a number of programs and legislation that were intended to spur housing supply.
It should be noted that this government is in a minority position being supported by the federal NDP, and despite all the announcements and funding allocated the polls show Justin Trudeau and the Liberals would not retain government should an election be called today. As such please see this video produced by the federal Conservatives on how they see housing issues.
- FortisBC would like to collect your feedback on the proposed redesign of FortisBC’s New Home Program and collect general feedback on your current experience with the Program. Please email newhome@fortisbc.com to coordinate a time for a one-on-one consultation meeting.
-
HAVAN member Green Sheet Construction Data tracks the Metro Vancouver construction market. Their online searchable database provides clients with a powerful tool to see past, current, and future construction projects across the Lower Mainland. Visit Green Sheet Hot Tips to view this month’s featured projects.
