Dear Editor,
Lots of talk about the BC NDP’s bill 47 and the enforced changes to how we do housing in B.C. A great deal is being asked of the municipalities in B.C. and especially in the case of new undeveloped areas (greenfield) as it sets a complete change of direction as far as density, infrastructure and a host of other concerns and in some cases may result in a complete redo of the existing Official Community Plan.
There are time and money costs to a major revision to an OCP. Who pays? The provincial government has set funds aside to help with this, but it decides who gets what and how much. Will it be enough? Will the taxpayer end up footing the bill?
Housing Minister Kahlon said “it is a lot of money to be able to develop housing in greenfield sites. So when we do make those considerable investments, what we want to see is the amount of housing that makes the most value for the infrastructure.”
Who is the we in this? I thought it is the local taxpayer and the elected local government making the decisions and those decisions formed a contract between the municipal government and the citizens of that jurisdiction, not the provincial government playing big brother.
The next thing you might ask is where and how all this required infrastructure is supposed to magically appear? The short time-frames this government has mandated are just that –short – and seem almost impossible without putting other municipal projects aside or hiring more qualified staff… if you can find them?
And by the way there are penalties to those jurisdictions that do not comply or meet the dates the province has set out. In addition, it should be noted after the OCP plans is approved, there is no more public engagement allowed. We, the taxpayers, no longer have a say in the form and character of our local neighbourhoods.
There are many unanswered questions to this fast-tracked approach to the housing shortage. Neighbourhood plans are wide ranging documents that take time and careful consideration. The B.C. government’s own web site ”B.C. communities guide” shows in detail what entails a good community plan. Maybe the housing minister should read it carefully.
This government suggests that they have the answers to the housing shortage and along with this affordability is in the mix. Will it bring affordability to housing?
This elected provincial government has done an extensive modelling of what might happen to land values, cost of mortgages and many other things affecting housing costs. These are not facts but best guesses as what the future holds for housing.
Currently if you calculate the cost of a serviced 7,000 square foot and divide by four (the proposed fourplex design) and say we put a 1,500 square foot home and let’s say it costs $275 per square foot. Does this this meet the needs of say a family of four. Is it affordable? Will it sell?
Lots of unanswered questions. The housing in Canada for the most part is not regulated and is in a free market and therefore this provincial government does not have control of the market.
One true statement they have made is “it offers another choice.” Will their predictions become reality?
I am a senior and have been around awhile to see past government predictions, and in my experience, more often than not, government programs have flaws in implementing with lack of solid planning, and inevitable cost overruns, and are never on time.
I suggest if this provincial government’s radical and untested approach to the housing crisis does not meet the average family’s needs as to the type of housing and its affordability, this government may find themselves in jeopardy at election time. Big gamble on their part.
Bob Langston, Brookswood
.
• READ MORE: B.C. brings in house flipping tax
• READ MORE: Podcast features housing minister on the B.C. Housing Supply Act
.