bc.-government-gives-burnaby,-langley-township-transit-hub-density-ultimatum
| | | |

B.C. government gives Burnaby, Langley Township transit hub density ultimatum

HOME BUYERS – To get the best exclusive listings visit www.vreg.ca and go to “EXCLUSIVE DEALS”

Read More

The proposed Willowbrook SkyTrain station.
The proposed Willowbrook SkyTrain station. Photo by Ministry of Transportation /Government of B.C.

The B.C. government has given at least two municipalities until Oct. 31 to implement provincial requirements around housing developments near transit hubs — otherwise the province will impose them.But the mayors of those two cities accused the NDP of provincial “overreach” and interference in municipal jurisdiction. They also sayUnder Bill 47, which passed last fall, Metro Vancouver municipalities were required to pass bylaws to allow housing developments of up to eight to 20 storeys near SkyTrain stations and eight to 12 storeys near bus exchanges.

As first reported by Global News, Infrastructure Minister Rob Fleming wrote to Langley Township Mayor Eric Woodward in late July, after township council missed the June 30 deadline to recognize the site of the future Willowbrook SkyTrain station as a transit-oriented development zone.

Similar to threats levelled against West Vancouver over that council’s refusal to allow between four and six units on a single-family lot, the minister said the province has the legal right to force the changes through if necessary.

In a statement, the Ministry of Transportation said the letters are designed to give municipalities that haven’t complied with the requirements additional time and that the ministry will continue to work with these communities to implement those changes.

Woodward says his council will consider Fleming’s letter in September or October, but believes the new mandatory minimum zoning will increase land values and compromise the ability of municipalities to create healthy, vibrant communities.

“When you mandate densities on every single lot, you really compromise local government’s ability to deliver bonus density with additional amenities for the community,” said Woodward.“You undermine the location of new schools and park sites and the location of community centres. Now we’ll be paying more for land for these amenities and It’s nothing more than a huge giveaway for land speculators in the Willowbrook area.”

Burnaby Mayor Mike Hurley has similar reservations and said he has also received a letter from Fleming that gives his council until Oct. 31 to fall in line with the province’s density requirements.

At a council meeting on June 24, Burnaby council unanimously voted to put off the changes for three months in order to allow staff to further study the legislation and the impacts it will have on neighbourhoods like Brentwood, where residents have signed a petition seeking an exemption from the requirements.

“If you’ve driven through Brentwood, you’ll see the amount of density that is there and is going to be there,” said Hurley. “So we’re still not sure if there needs to be more density in that neighbourhood, but we’ll see where it finishes up as we go through our deliberations.”

Article contentHurley called the legislation a “big overreach” by the provincial government and accused it of being a “one-size-fits-all” solution that does not take into account the specific needs of each municipality.He believes the province would have been better off to simply impose housing targets on municipalities, which the NDP has done for 40 municipalities, and then leave it up to each community to figure out how to meet those targets.

Coquitlam Mayor Richard Stewart said that, unlike Burnaby and Langley Township, his council did vote in favour of transit-oriented-development bylaw changes but still has concerns that the policy will actually reduce housing starts because developers are unclear about what the rule changes mean for projects in the works.

“We’ve actually had developers pull projects off the table because they can no longer get financing under the somewhat unpredictable regime that we’re in now, or else they believe the project is no longer viable,” he said, adding council also had to pull staff off development approvals to make sure Coquitlam meets provincial deadlines for rule changes.

Article content“I’ve never seen this kind of enormous change to the housing regime with no plan and with no consultation whatsoever with municipalities that have to implement it.”Stewart also agreed with Woodward’s complaints around amenity funding, stating that provincial changes to the bonus density process under Bill 46 precludes municipalities from spending that cash on affordable housing.

“We have an affordable housing reserve fund that is funded entirely out of bonus density, and that allows us to just incentivize but also to subsidize affordable housing projects, including projects that aren’t being subsidized by the province, even though it’s within their mandate,” he said.

UBC housing sociologist Nathanael Lauster, who helped the province model the potential impacts of its legislation, said he understands concerns from mayors and community members when it comes to the loss of control over the approval process but believes it is necessary to get more housing built quicker.

He said it is time municipalities stop relying on fees imposed on developers through the bonus density process to be able to afford community amenities.

Article content“So much of the funding that municipalities have relied upon and come to rely upon has been effectively extracted from the construction of housing and there’s a real concern that that’s really depressed the overall level of housing construction,” said Lauster.Craig Jones, associate director of UBC’s housing research collaborative, added that growth is happening regardless of what policies are put in place and housing near transit makes the most sense as it gets people out of cars, reduces congestion and lowers travel costs for residents.

At the same time, he said municipalities and the province need to be careful to keep housing in these areas affordable so that renters and marginalized communities are not pushed further away from the transit they rely on.

“I think definitely there is a real place for municipalities to take a look and consider how their marginalized renters might be impacted by this set of policies and to try to assist them,” said Jones.

Share this page

Similar Posts