The Pitfalls of David Eby's New Zoning Approach

The recent housing legislation introduced by David Eby's Gvernment aims to address the housing crisis by promoting the construction of small-scale, multi-unit housing, to as far as 6-plexes on single building sites. While the intentions behind this zoning approach are commendable, it is crucial to critically examine whether these changes can genuinely make homes more affordable or if they might inadvertently lead to undesirable and expensive outcomes.

One of the primary concerns with the proposed zoning changes is the potential increase in construction costs. Building multi-unit housing often involves more intricate designs and construction processes, leading to higher expenses. This could counteract the goal of affordability, as these increased costs may be passed on to homebuyers.

The legislation allows for three to four units on lots currently zoned for single-family or duplex use, depending on lot size. This may drive up the demand for land, subsequently increasing land prices. As a result, the overall cost of development may rise, making it challenging for developers to provide affordable housing options.

While the legislation encourages multi-unit housing, it does not effectively address the affordability of single-family homes. This may lead to a scenario where the demand for single-family homes remains high, keeping their prices elevated, while the increased demand for land and construction materials for multi-unit housing raises costs across the board.

The push for increased housing units on existing single family lots will obviously contribute to higher urban density. While this type of increased density is often seen as a solution to housing shortages, it could lead to overcrowding, strained infrastructure, and reduced quality of life for residents. The desirability of living in such areas may decline, impacting property values.
When developers request higher density, they usually go through a complicated rezoning process, facing scrutiny from Councils and local residents. However, with Eby's new density approach, this seems to be absent. As a result, issues like increased traffic, parking, and essential infrastructure are not being addressed. Could this then mark the start of poorly functioning neighborhoods?

The introduction of more small-scale, multi-unit housing might alter the character and aesthetics of established neighborhoods.
Residents may resist changes that impact the charm and identity of their communities. This resistance could lead to legal battles and delays in the implementation of the new zoning rules, slowing down the construction of much-needed housing.

The legislation also permits six units on larger lots close to transit stops with frequent service. While this encourages transit-oriented development, it may result in an overemphasis on certain areas, leading to uneven urban development. This concentration of development could make these specific areas less desirable for residents seeking a balanced and diverse living environment.

While BC's new zoning approach seeks to rushingly address the housing crisis, there are valid concerns regarding its ability to make homes more affordable and desirable. The potential increase in construction costs, impact on land values, and limited focus on single-family homes may hinder the legislation's effectiveness in achieving true affordability. Moreover, issues related to urban density, community character, and transit-dependent development raise questions about the desirability of the proposed changes. A comprehensive and balanced approach that considers the diverse needs of residents and communities may be necessary to achieve lasting and effective solutions to the housing crisis.