The District of Squamish will consider a package of measures on Tuesday aimed at streamlining development approvals and spurring housing construction. District staff are recommending five policy changes designed to speed up the approval process and reduce costs for developers, according to a report going before the Committee of the Whole on Feb. 11.
The recommendations come as Squamish misses its Housing Accelerator Fund target by 276 units and falls 711 units short of its Housing Needs Report target. The district is also subject to a provincial Housing Target Order that tracks the number of units actually occupied rather than just approved.
“The construction industry, new housing in particular, is facing challenging financial conditions, with project costs exceeding achievable sales prices,” according to the staff report. The district noted that nationally, approved projects are increasingly on hold, and fewer new developments are entering the application stage.
The proposed changes would allow staff to approve larger projects without council review, eliminate a requirement for three-bedroom units in rental buildings, explore property tax breaks for rental projects, review landscape bonding requirements, and support rezoning efforts beyond what the province requires.
Currently, only projects with up to 20 residential units can be approved by staff. The district wants to raise that threshold to 50 units and remove the 400-square-metre cap on employment space that can be approved without council involvement.
In 2024 and 2025, projects that would have qualified under the proposed criteria took up 348 minutes of scheduled council time across 11 applications. Those delays don’t account for the typical four-week wait to get onto a council agenda, according to the report.
Staff are also recommending loosening variance permit rules to allow bigger reductions in parking requirements, building setbacks, and other zoning standards without needing council approval. For example, parking requirements could be reduced by 20 per cent, rather than the current 10 per cent limit.
The district wants to scrap a policy requiring that 20 per cent of units in new residential projects have three bedrooms. Staff said developers have repeatedly reported that this requirement is particularly difficult to achieve in rental buildings. With Squamish’s rental vacancy rate at 0.2 per cent as of October 2025—among the lowest in British Columbia—staff are recommending more flexibility for rental projects.
The district is also exploring whether to accept surety bonds instead of cash or letters of credit for landscape bonding, which can tie up developer funds until landscaping is completed. The provincial government amended the Local Government Act last June to allow surety bonds as financial security.
For rental projects specifically, staff are seeking council direction on whether to pursue a property tax abatement program. Such a program would temporarily reduce operating costs for purpose-built rental developments through revitalization tax exemptions. Staff said they need council’s interest confirmed before completing detailed financial analysis on the proposal’s implications.
The recommendations follow feedback from the Urban Development Institute and developers currently navigating the approval process. New amenity and development cost charge bylaws are scheduled for adoption Feb. 17, which will increase development charges for new applications.
Simply put, if an agenda decreases the maximization of profit, it will challenged.
If a proposal improves the ability of a buyer to purchase the benefit will be absorbed by the seller (corporate or private). This includes declines in the iRate – the “bonus for the buyer will show up as an increase in price.
Increased floor space reduces profit if affordability is the goal. Less $ per square foot is not in the interest of Developers.
How do you reduce prices if incentives merely entrench profit margins?
Building more units does not increase prices. That’s at direct odds with basic economic theory.
There is a tidal wave waiting to engulf the Canadian Real Estate market. An event so similar to the rush to buy experienced in Richmond and Vancouver with the influx of Asian Buyers. Except this time, it will be Buyers from America and Europe, spooked by the catastrophes evolving there politically and from war.
A price will not drop one penny if the economic model doesn’t manage profit.
Perhaps a model that specifically permits an initial portion of the revenues from a project to be exempt from taxation and then a sliding scale as profits are taken.
But then, who else is there to carry the deficit. You and me?