Recently, the B.C. government introduced sweeping changes to the framework for how municipalities plan and approve homes through three new pieces of legislation.
Op Ed: Collateral Effects of New Provincial Housing Legislation
Recently, the B.C. government introduced sweeping changes to the framework for how municipalities plan and approve homes through three new pieces of legislation. These changes are some of the most ambitious and wide-ranging that we have seen in over 40 years and aim to address B.C.’s housing crisis by encouraging more multi-family housing – both in previously single-family areas as well as in transit-oriented areas.
Fundamentally, Coquitlam is aligned with the intention of what the Province is proposing. We have been taking bold action on housing for more than a decade, and we recognize that solving the housing problem in our region will require collaborative action by all.
But this legislation also imposes requirements and timelines on municipalities that will significantly impact staff resources and force the City to put other priority projects on hold. It reduces local decision-making authority and hinders our ability to use development revenue to fund the amenities and infrastructure our community needs.
Rather than blaming municipalities and imposing a one-size-fits-all solution, the Province should be looking to what is working in high-growth communities like ours, communities that have achieve strong results.
A History of Leading and Innovating on Housing
Coquitlam has long been carrying our share of housing in alignment with Metro Vancouver’s Regional Growth Strategy. We know there are some in our community who have concerns about the pace of development, but City Council and staff have held strong to our commitment to doing our part to support housing initiatives because it was and is the right thing for a region with limited land and a housing shortage.
- Coquitlam has had a Transit-Oriented Development Strategy since 2012, ensuring that by the time the SkyTrain opened in 2016 we were well-positioned to take advantage of higher-density housing around rapid transit.
- We are strategically using density bonus legislation to ensure that the amenities and infrastructure our community needs, such as roads, parks and community centres, are adequately funded and can support our growing population.
- We have also used density bonus revenues to fund affordable housing initiatives. As of this year, $20.3 million has been provided to support 957 new non-market and below-market units across the community through our Affordable Housing Reserve Fund.
- As a result of the incentives laid out in our Housing Affordability Strategy, Coquitlam has approximately 12,000 dedicated rental units currently in the development process, including over 2,000 which will rent at below market rates.
We have also implemented a number of other housing policies that strongly align with the new Provincial legislation. Coquitlam has won awards and been singled out by previous Provincial housing ministers as a community doing the right things to support housing. And now we will no longer be able to do some of those things because of the way this legislation is shaped.
The Risk of Collateral Effects
So we are speaking up for our community and for others to say that the legislation is too much, too fast, and too restrictive. It brings a risk for collateral effects that – given more time – we could mitigate together:
- Development will no longer pay for growth. With the loss of the bonus density funding, municipalities will not have a mechanism to fund all the required amenities and infrastructure. Amenities such as the future Northeast Community Centre or affordable seniors’ housing in Maillardville will be in jeopardy. As some of the things we fund with density bonus can not be funded with other development tools, municipalities will have no choice but to cancel the infrastructure investment, or to look to property taxes to close that gap.
- The aggressive timelines will impact other work. Municipalities cannot simply hire more planners and other staff to take on this additional work – they don’t exist. Current staff resources will have to be redeployed to make these changes happen in the timeframes set by the Province, which means pausing other important work around parks, recreation facilities, road improvements, infrastructure management and current housing applications.
- Residents will lose their voice in the development process. The proposal to eliminate public hearings doesn’t remove power from local Councils. But it does remove the right of our community members to have their voice heard on development in their neighbourhood.
- Our neighbourhoods will be impacted. Good community building happens in a way that allows other much-needed infrastructure – schools, parks, utilities, transit – to be built in a timely way. Some of these amenities are funded by other levels of government (e.g. schools, transit), which are already not keeping pace with current development levels. Additionally, this legislation specifically limits municipalities’ ability to require minimum levels of parking around transit areas, which we know will impact neighbourhoods.
- Ready-to-go projects will stall. Development and housing projects that are shovel-ready may put their application on hold to wait for higher density options.
Local governments are the experts in shaping what makes a city or a town a complete community. Those communities that have been advancing strong housing supply for years know how to create and implement policy to create housing supply, and how to do it at a size and pace that is appropriate for the individual needs of the neighbourhoods and communities we serve. Decisions about communities should be made at City Hall, not in Victoria.
We want our residents to thrive in our community from their earliest moments to latest days and we want new homes to meet the needs of different families. But we also need to make sure there are schools and parks and community centres to build our community right.
We are asking the Premier, the Minister of Housing, and our local MLAs to press “pause”. Listen to your local partners for the good of your community and your constituents. Incorporate our feedback, our concerns and our ideas into your legislation. Collaborate with municipalities to establish ambitious but realistic timelines for this incredibly complex work. Let us work together on these solutions to do the best possible work for the people who call our communities home.
Mayor Richard Stewart
City of Coquitlam
We acknowledge with gratitude and respect that the name Coquitlam was derived from the hən̓q̓əmin̓əm̓ (HUN-kuh-MEE-num) word kʷikʷəƛ̓əm (kwee-KWET-lum) meaning “Red Fish Up the River”. The City is honoured to be located on the kʷikʷəƛ̓əm traditional and ancestral lands, including those parts that were historically shared with the q̓ic̓əy̓ (kat-zee), and other Coast Salish Peoples.