Council steers around proposal to relax parking requirements
City council members worry reducing parking demands to lower housing costs would lead to fights over parking spots
Reducing parking requirements at new developments could cause more problems than it solves, some city councillors say.
The proposal to show “flexibility” in parking regulations is one of 23 suggestions in a so-called Healthy Housing strategy developed by city planners.
The reasoning goes that lowering parking requirements could reduce the cost of the project and make the resulting homes more affordable.
But some councillors said that could just lead to parking-related tensions in the neighbourhood.
“I’m not sure this isn’t going to blow up in your face,” Coun. Charlie Hodge told planner James Moore.
Mayor Colin Basran also said there would need to be a “robust debate” before any action was taken to reduce the parking requirements associated with new residential projects.
Councillors Luke Stack and Maxine de Hart also expressed reservations that significantly reducing parking requirements would be a wise thing to do.
Other ideas in the strategy include lowering development cost charges for some types of infill housing projects, engaging in more partnerships with non-profits for below-market housing projects, using more public money to buy land for subsidized housing complexes, and hosting an annual housing symposium.
“We aren’t going to solve all of our housing problems in one fell swoop, but we do have the potential here to really move the needle,” Moore said.
Hodge asked if any consideration had been given to offering homeowners a tax incentive to put in a secondary suite. Moore said that wasn’t discussed, partly because as many as 300 secondary suite and carriage home applications come forward annually anyway, but could be at the direction of council.
However, Coun. Gail Given said she wouldn’t like to see the city pursue that idea. It would be better, she said, for the city to stick with its current policy of offering such tax incentives only to the developers of new, purpose-built rental housing complexes.
“I would far rather our dollars and incentives go toward primary, assured, long-tenure types of facilities, as opposed to secondary suites, which can be easily converted to short-term rentals,” like Airbnbs, Given said.
There was clarification at council that the exemption from municipal taxes for new rental housing complexes will stay at 10 years and not be extended to 25 years. The staff report was unclear on this point, and several councillors said after reading it they had believed a longer tax exemption was under consideration.
What staff were proposing was that the commitment by developers who receive the 10-year tax holiday to keep the project as rentalonly be extended to 25 years from 10 years.
Coun. Tracy Gray noted the 23 recommendations will be the subject of further research and debate before all, or any of them, are adopted.
For his part, Basran said the Healthy Housing strategy showed the city is trying to do something to make housing in Kelowna more affordable. He said he had been taking what he said was unjustified criticism for speaking out against the provincial government’s new speculation tax.
Last week, Basran said the tax could be “disastrous” for Kelowna’s economy. The comment, he said, was misconstrued as meaning city hall cares more about the interests of out-ofprovince residents who have second homes in Kelowna than about promoting more affordable home ownership for locals.
“We are trying to do our best to make sure this community is for everyone,” Basran said.