Does little ol’ Victoria offer a cautionary tale for upzoning?

You’re probably wondering, hey Geoff, this is a Vancouver newsletter, not Victoria, why write this story? Well dear readers, Victoria’s much-hyped recent housing policy, which Vancouver is also contemplating, is proving to be much less effective than originally envisioned.

What happened: Earlier this year, Victoria city council passed a law to allow up to six units on a single-family lot, with the goal of increasing the housing supply, similar to a policy in Auckland, New Zealand. The total number of applications to upzone properties? Zero, according to the Vancouver Sun.

The problem? Always read the fine print. According to the story, stakeholders say the rules and restrictions make it impossible to build these units. One developer told the paper the problem was restrictions on height, how close it could be built next to the property line, and the amount of floor space for each unit. Said Robert Berry, of the group Home for a Living:

• “But the fact is what they legalized are such small buildings located right in the middle of the lot with such finite bylaw limits on the building itself that it’s … still much easier to build a big, expensive mansion — and a profitable mansion at that — than it is to build a fourplex or a sixplex.”

Here in Vancouver: As the saying goes, the devil is in the details. A similar problem has been identified in Vancouver’s proposed missing middle housing plan, the allowable housing floor space to build new homes is not big enough to drastically increase multiplex builds.

What it means: The director of Abundant Housing Vancouver published an editorial in Urbanizedin February where he argued that the current rules would prevent any low-rise apartments or townhouses on the vast majority of land in Vancouver.

Looking ahead: The province’s own policy of allowing four units on a single-family lot may not be enough to deal with the issue of municipality pushback. According to the Vancouver Sun, Ravi Kahlon said he was concerned and said the policy will have specific language to address these issues. But are they willing to get into a fight with recalcitrant municipalities?