Despite provincially-mandated housing targets and rezonings, CMHC reports Greater Victoria’s 1,379 housing starts from January to May 2025 are 12% lower than the 1,572 starts in 2024. The region’s 376 housing starts in May 2025 are 4% lower than the 391 starts in April 2025.
The BC govt’s claim that housing supply is improving through taxpayer-funded programs such as BC Builds is not reflected in the data. New single family homes are down 31% and large multis have declined 15%.
Year-to-date, Langford and Colwood again lead in new home construction at 506 and 290 units respectively. The City of Victoria has188 followed by Saanich at 134, Sooke 124, Esquimalt 91, Oak Bay 14, North Saanich 9, Central Saanich 5, Sidney 5, View Royal 2, Highlands 1, Metchosin 0.
Yet the BC govt put Langford on the “naughty” list for housing targets while half a dozen CRD municipalities wallow in single digits. Metchosin has zero new homes year-to-date.
Presently 58% of the CRD’s new housing is in two West Shore communities – Langford and Colwood.
The BC govt’s policies have increased the cost of housing. In addition to more building regulations, the province enabled municipalities to increase fees such as DCCs (development charges) and ACCs (amenity charges) without caps. Victoria and Oak Bay ratcheted up regulations and fees to obstruct the province’s legislation which is supposed to enable up to 6 units on single family lots. Esquimalt is already obstructive with costly demands and is now considering DCCs to add to those demands.
A recent report on Oak Bay said “District staff should meet with industry representatives for a workshop to discuss the projects that make up the DCC program, their estimated costs, and the determination of benefits or municipal assist. Depending on the outcome or feedback, Council may want to revisit the matter and better transition the costs to lessen their impacts.”
In addition, public hearings for simple variances are politicized – “people were ostensibly speaking to the variance, but effectively, they were taking another opportunity to oppose the entire development. Moreover, putting minor variances in front of Council invites public input and opposition from people not impacted by the variance; people who live blocks away would experience no personal impact from a side yard setback variance of a foot or two. Therefore, we strongly recommend that the District delegate variances to staff.”
The report also recommends, “whoever chairs Council or committee meetings should be extremely diligent in ensuring their comments are not made about anything except the variance in front of Council.”
The report made a number of recommendations that many low-performing municipalities should adopt.
BC’s housing policy is only political grandstanding without the following:
- A cap on fees and taxes including Development Cost Charges (DCCs) and amenity contributions.
- Mandatory site standards outlining suitable setbacks, building heights, etc to make housing buildable and more affordable.
- Enforced timelines for development and permit approvals.
- A pause on new, costly code regulations
- Requiring all municipalities to participate and show results, rather than offloading their housing responsibilities to Langford and Colwood.