The District of North Vancouver Council will review a staff report at the March 16 Council meeting, concluding that current market conditions make small-scale multi-unit housing financially unviable and that adding affordable unit requirements would make a difficult situation worse.
The District of North Vancouver staff report, dated March 2, 2026, responds to direction from a Feb. 9 Council workshop, where members asked staff to analyze two questions: whether rental tenure rules should apply to small-scale multi-unit housing (SSMUH) developments, and whether six-unit SSMUH projects should be required to include one affordable unit.
Both questions were referred for independent economic analysis. Council faces a provincial deadline of June 30, 2026, to update its Zoning Bylaw, which requires municipalities to permit between three and six units on most single-family lots within Urban Containment Boundaries.
Call 604-849-0728 to advertise with the North Shore Daily Post
No Path to Viability Under Current Conditions
Consultants Urban Systems and Waters Development Management tested five sites across the District — in Boundary, Norgate, Cove Cliff, Carisbrooke, and Canyon Heights — under both strata and rental tenure models. According to the staff report, none proved financially feasible. High land values, rising construction costs, and a slowing real estate market were identified as the primary barriers.
The province permits municipalities to require one affordable or special needs unit within six-unit SSMUH developments — but only where economic analysis confirms the requirement would not render the project uneconomical. According to the staff report, the analysis did not clear that bar.
Council to Weigh Two Options on Each Question
On rental tenure, staff will present the Council with two paths. The first would impose no requirements, maximizing flexibility for property owners and aligning with provincial guidance recommending municipalities monitor SSMUH activity for at least three years before considering mandatory tenure rules. The second would apply rental tenure zoning broadly — an approach staff noted would likely suppress construction under current market conditions.
The affordable unit question follows the same structure. Option one would require nothing, with staff monitoring development activity before revisiting the question. Option two would mandate an affordable sixth unit in qualifying developments. According to the staff report, that requirement would likely result in very few projects moving forward.
Staff noted that property owners motivated by non-financial goals — multi-generational living or aging in place — may still pursue SSMUH projects regardless of market conditions. The District will also continue pursuing affordable housing commitments through rezoning negotiations on larger multifamily developments.
