Recommendations
Building the housing supply that is
required to meet British Columbia’s
current needs and planning for
future growth will take action by
all levels of government.
The recommendations outlined in this report are
only some of the tools to address taxes and fees
as barriers to new housing delivery. Some of these
recommendations build on the opportunities identified
by the Development Approvals Process Review (DAPR)
and recommendations of the Canada-B.C. Expert
Panel on Housing Supply and Affordability (Expert
Panel), to improve processing times and streamline
development approvals at the local and provincial levels.
Other recommendations include tax-specific solutions
to create certainty for home builders, and intentionally
support the development of new rental housing.
Streamline Development
Approval Processes
Steps must be taken to streamline approvals and
minimize the impact of annual property taxes, as
well as better coordinate government charges to
reduce the layers of taxes and fees that apply to
new housing. Lengthy development processes add
costs to new housing in the form of both time and
funding. Considering the extensive rezoning timelines
in jurisdictions such as Vancouver, holding costs such
as property taxes and interest can become significant
while the project goes through the development
approvals process. Uncertainty in the total amount
of charges on a project add a level of risk that can
jeopardize the viability of the project.
Establish Standardized Timelines and Processes
UDI recommends that municipalities establish
standardized and predictable development approval
timelines and processes. This recommendation aligns
with the Expert Panel, which advised that “the B.C.
government impose statutory time limits to all stages
of the property development process, municipal or
other, for all types of development.” 7 Currently, larger
developments can take many years to reach final
approval due to the capacity constraints of municipal
staff, competing policy objectives, negotiated CACs,
and lengthy Council proceedings. Streamlining municipal
approvals could address the risks associated with taxes
that are charged annually, such as the AST. It could also
minimize the impact of changes to DCC, DCL, and
CAC rates on in-stream projects. Additionally, offsetting
increases in community amenity contributions with added
density would help maintain the viability of a project, and
ultimately support the growth of the full housing continuum.
Incorporate Pre-zoning into Official Community Plans
Pre-zoning sites would reduce a project’s approval
timeline by decreasing the time and risks associated
with a full rezoning process. The DAPR recognizes the
opportunity to “Provide training to local governments
and/ or create best practices guide on conducting
a meaningful and robust public consultation process
for OCP and pre-zoning, then delegate approval of
subsequent applications.” 8 In the Vancouver and
Saanich examples, it is estimated that rezoning could
take anywhere from 12-26 months. The taxes incurred
during this time, and the uncertainty embedded
within the public-hearing process, adds risk to the
delivery of new housing. Approaches could include
pre-zoning at the end of area planning processes,
or pre-zoning within 800 metres of major transit hubs.
This would improve certainty for builders and speed
up the approvals process, reducing both cost and time
barriers to new housing delivery.9
Taxing Growth
Recommendations