Connaught Heights Small Sites Affordable Housing

As part of its 2019-2022 Strategic Plan, New Westminster City Council resolved to leverage City resources to secure development of below- and non-market housing. This direction is in response to the housing affordability crisis facing the city and region as a whole. One of the most direct ways that Council can deliver affordable housing options is to identify City-owned sites suitable for housing.

On October 28, 2019 Council directed in principle the use of the City-owned properties at:

  1. 350 to 362 Fenton Street (located in Queensborough)
  2. 2035 London Street and 2038 Ninth Avenue (located in Connaught Heights)

This page is focused on the project proposed for the site in Connaught Heights. Click here to learn more about the Queensborough project.

Connaught Heights Next Steps

The City issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) inviting housing providers to propose how they would develop this site for affordable housing. Seven proposals were received in response.

We are not yet ready to make a recommendation as to which proponent should be selected for 2035 London Street and 2038 Ninth Avenue. Further time is required to explore the potential impact of the Crown Land Grant (more information below). The delay will mean that an application will not be completed in time for the January 2021 deadlines set by BC Housing. However, we will continue to move forward with a project, taking into account any outcomes of the research into the Crown Land Grant, with the objective of having a project ready for the next BC Housing funding intake process, anticipated in 2022.

  • FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

    We have put together a list of frequent questions. We will continue to add to this list as more questions arise.

    New questions have been added and others updated as of August 24, 2020 to reflect feedback heard during the Connaught Heights and the Queensborough Virtual Information Sessions.   

    What is the policy context behind using these two sites for affordable housing?

    [NEW] How does the City define “affordable housing?”

    [NEW] What is the distinction between “supportive” and “independent, non-market housing?”

    What is the demand for affordable (non-market) housing in Connaught Heights and Queensborough?

    [NEW] Will the proposed affordable housing meet the needs of residents in these two neighbourhoods?

    Why were these two sites recommended for affordable housing?

    What process was used to determine the suitability of these properties for affordable housing?

    What other sites were considered and why were they not recommended for affordable housing?

    How are the proposals being evaluated?

    How much affordable (non-market) housing is there in New Westminster?

    [NEW] Does the City have a disproportionate amount of affordable housing compared to other municipalities?

    [NEW] What else is the City doing to increase the number of affordable housing units? Are there any other projects planned in our neighbourhood?

    [NEW] What process is involved to change the use of a parcel of land?

    [UPDATED] What are the opportunities for resident engagement related to the redevelopment of these two sites for affordable housing?

    Why is the City not pausing the project and taking the time to do additional consultation with neighbourhood residents?

    [NEW] Is there any particular time sensitivity related to the projects?

    Was the fact that the Connaught Heights properties are designated as future parkland taken into consideration?

    Why were these sites identified when it will be difficult for occupants or tenants to meet their daily needs such as shopping for groceries?

    [NEW] What will be the impacts of these projects on local schools and child care facilities?

    What will be the impact of this development on off-street parking and traffic? Will the development be able to meet its off-street parking needs?

    What will be the City’s contribution to the two affordable housing projects? Are local taxpayers subsidizing these projects?

    Is it a certainty that the two sites will be used for affordable housing purposes?

    Is there any evidence that this type of development will not decrease property values in the area?

    [NEW] Will this project be managed by a society? If so do they do the client selection? Will neighbourhood residents get priority? How can residents apply? 


    What is the policy context behind using these two sites for affordable housing?

    Council, as part of its 2019-2022 Strategic Plan, resolved to “aggressively pursue creative approaches to housing policy and on the ground projects to transform the way housing is provided in New Westminster” and to “use partnerships, negotiations with developers and leveraging City resources to secure development of below- and non-market housing, as well as affordable child care.”

    [NEW] HOW DOES THE CITY DEFINE “AFFORDABLE HOUSING?”

    There are many definitions related to affordable housing. The City, as part of the request for proposals for the two small sites affordable housing projects, used the terms below- and non-market rental housing and defined them as follows:

    Below-market rental units intended to meet rental demand for households earning between $30,000 and $75,000 per year (in 2020).

    Non-market rental units intended to meet rental demand for very low-income households with incomes under $30,000 per year (in 2020).

    [NEW] WHAT IS THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN “SUPPORTIVE” AND “INDEPENDENT, NON-MARKET HOUSING?”

    Supportive housing is subsidized housing with on-site, non-clinical supports and common amenity areas. Supports can include counselling and referral to primary health care services, employment readiness and lifeskills training, supervision and care planning, etc. Independent, non-market housing is subsidized housing in which tenants live independently with minimal or no support or supervision. The majority of proposals for both sites are based on an independent, non-market housing model.

    What is the demand for affordable (non-market) housing in Connaught Heights and Queensborough?

    According to Taxfiler data, 19.1% of residents in Connaught Heights were considered low-income in 2017, which was higher than for New Westminster overall (17.2%). In total, there were 330 residents of Connaught Heights who were considered low-income in 2017, including 40 children and youth (0 to 17 years) and 70 seniors (65+ years).

    In Queensborough, 15.6% of residents were considered low-income in 2017, which was lower than for New Westminster overall (17.2%). In total, there were 1,510 residents of Queensborough who were considered low-income in 2017, including 270 children and youth (0 to 17 years) and 330 seniors (65+ years).

    Across New Westminster there were 10,215 households spending 30% or more of their before-tax household income on housing costs in 2016, or 31.3% of all households. The Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation considers housing to be affordable if it costs less than 30% of a household’s before-tax household income.

    In New Westminster, the number of households on BC Housing’s waitlist increased by 28% between June 2014 and July 2019, from 460 households to 589 households. The need for affordable housing cuts across all demographic groups: in July 2019, there were 215 family households, 207 senior households, 105 person with disabilities households, 47 single person households, and 15 wheelchair accessible needs households on the waitlist.

    [NEW] WILL THE PROPOSED AFFORDABLE HOUSING MEET THE NEEDS OF RESIDENTS IN THESE TWO NEIGHBOURHOODS?

    Affordable housing is a regional and a local issue, and New Westminster is working to contribute to addressing it. In the Connaught Heights and Queensborough neighbourhoods alone, there are more low-income residents than could be served by the two proposed affordable housing projects. Tenants, if eligible, will be identified by the operators of the affordable housing projects. While these may include existing residents of the two neighbourhoods or of New Westminster in general, they may also include residents seeking affordable housing in New Westminster.

    Why were these two sites recommended for affordable housing?

    One of the most direct ways that Council can deliver affordable housing options in New Westminster is to identify City-owned sites suitable for housing, and invite non-profit housing providers to propose how they would develop them. Such available sites are very limited, and the properties identified in Connaught Heights and in Queensborough are some of the only suitable sites in New Westminster.

    What process was used to determine the suitability of these properties for affordable housing?

    In August 2019, staff conducted an inventory of all City-owned properties to identify potential sites for small-sites affordable housing projects. A short list of five sites was identified, three of which were on the mainland and two of which were in Queensborough. These were identified by eliminating properties that were physically unsuited, including those that were too small for development; unusably shaped and not appropriate for safe access; without vacancy in the short-term; and within environmentally sensitive areas. The shortlisted sites were reviewed by senior staff in Development Services, Engineering, and Parks and Recreation to identify any foreseeable technical challenges that could complicate affordable housing development on the sites (e.g., geotechnical issues, rights-of-way, servicing requirements, land use, etc.) The five sites and staff’s evaluation were then presented for consideration by Council, which made the final site selection.

    What other sites were considered and why were they not recommended for affordable housing?

    All City-owned properties were originally considered, and a short list of five potential locations for small-sites affordable housing projects was identified, by eliminating properties that were physically unsuited. Of the three other physically suited sites not selected, two of the sites were on the mainland of New Westminster – 1823 to 1835 River Drive, and 700 Cumberland Street. One of the sites was in Queensborough – 329 Johnstone Street. Based on the evaluation process, these sites were not recommended for the following reasons:

    1823 to 1835 River Drive

    The main site challenges were as follows:

    • higher expected construction costs, including required storm water extension; a new sidewalk, curb and boulevard; and potential required undergrounding of utilities;
    • challenging traffic access from Stewardson Way;
    • liveability issues for affordable housing residents related to relative proximity to industrial area;
    • difficult site conditions, including an irregularly shaped parcel of land, with dedication/servicing right-of-way required for lane and River Drive; several on-site trees that would need to be replaced and/or retained; and, steep site topography.
       

    700 Cumberland Street

    The main site challenges were as follows:

    • small site size, comprising only 515 sq. m. (5,546 sq. ft.), which would limit its use for affordable housing purposes; and, adjacent southeast road could be upgraded to a multi-use path, the setback of which would further reduce the already limited buildable area;
    • liveability issues for affordable housing residents related to relative proximity to potential location of temporary large recycling area; and,
    • expected construction of the New Westminster Aquatic and Community Centre during timeframe of the project, which could create unexpected construction complications.
       

    329 Johnstone Street

    The main site challenges were as follows:

    • a significant sewer force main runs through a portion of the site, the setback of which would reduce the buildable area; and,
    • the parcel has been identified for potential use as part of a future mid-block greenway connection between Derwent Way and Wood Street.
       

    How are the proposals being evaluated?

    The evaluation process for the proposals received is intended to take into account affordability, financial viability and sustainability. The evaluation process is also intended to identify those projects that best meet objectives stated in the request for proposals (RFP) for each site to:

    • demonstrate elements that enhance long term affordability;
    • be sympathetic in design with the existing neighbourhoods;
    • incorporate units that are suitable for families with children;
    • be replicated elsewhere in the city; and,
    • be completed by fall 2022.* 
       

    The complete list of evaluation criteria is as follows:

    • the quality of the proposal in addressing the objectives of the RFP (noted above);
    • the ability to meet the timeline and scheduling requirements outlined in the RFP, the readiness of the project to proceed, and the anticipated timeframe to complete the project;
    • the proponent’s capacity to undertake the project;
    • the level of affordability proposed to be achieved and maintained over time;
    • the quality of the plan of work, the community consultation approach, and the suggested responsibility assignments;
    • the neighbourhood context and project design, the proponent’s knowledge of and experience in identifying the affordable housing needs of the city, the quality of the design of the project as it relates to the context of the neighbourhood and the community impact;
    • the project’s innovation in terms of addressing affordability, energy efficiency and accessibility considerations;
    • the proponent’s record of accomplishment, including whether the proponent and/or development team has successfully completed and/or operated a similar type project or a project of similar scope and size;
    • the financial feasibility, including preliminary anticipated costs and revenue sources, the proposed capital and operating pro-formas and the construction cost analysis;
    • the proponent’s ability to secure construction financing;
    • the construction procurement approach;
    • the proponent’s property management experience, including the number of units and affordable units managed, the years of experience and the performance record, including the familiarity of the various funding sources for housing development and rental subsidies; and,
    • the quality of the proponent’s references, with particular attention to past projects and client contracts.
       

    How much affordable (non-market) housing is there in New Westminster?

    The City currently has 1,608 units of affordable (non-marked) housing, excluding supportive housing like Mazarine Lodge in Queensborough. Given the small size of New Westminster, the distribution of amenities and services such as affordable (non-market) housing is best understood at the sub-area level. According to this analysis, the west side of the City,  which includes Connaught Heights, has the second lowest number of non-market and co-op housing units by sub-area in New Westminster, with 121 such units. Queensborough has the lowest number of non-market and co-op housing units by sub-area in New Westminster, with five such units.

    Sub Area Number of Independent Non-Market and Co-op Units Percent of Total
    Downtown 162 10.1%
    Centre of the City 952 59.2%
    East Side of the City 368 22.9%
    West Side of the City 121 7.5%
    Queensborough 5 0.3%
    TOTAL 1,608 100.0%


    [NEW] DOES THE CITY HAVE A DISPROPORTIONATE AMOUNT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMPARED TO OTHER MUNCIPALITIES?

    About 4.5% of the city’s total housing stock is comprised of below- and non-market housing, which ranks the city fifth out of 21 municipalities in Metro Vancouver. The City is aiming to increase our percentage of below- and non-market housing, given the current housing affordability crisis in Metro Vancouver and throughout BC. Such housing meets the needs of low- and moderate-income households, including families of first responders and other needed professionals; and addresses unique situations, including seniors on fixed incomes and persons with disabilities.  

    [NEW] WHAT ELSE IS THE CITY DOING TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS? ARE THERE ANY OTHER PROJECTS PLANNED IN OUR NEIGHBOURHOOD? 

    The City is taking a number of initiatives to facilitate the development of new affordable housing in New Westminster. Other than the Small Sites Affordable Housing Initiative, one of the most direct ways that the City will increase the number affordable housing units is through its Inclusionary Housing Policy (2019). This policy requires that new multi-unit strata and mixed-use residential developments seeking additional density will have to contribute to the affordable rental housing stock. This means in most cases a developer will either have to provide new affordable housing units in the development or will have to provide a cash-in-lieu contribution to the City’s Affordable Housing Reserve Fund, enabling the City to pursue other opportunities and partnerships. Projects that will include affordable housing units are now in the planning and approvals process. None are currently proposed in Connaught Heights or Queensborough, but it is expected that through this policy, new affordable housing will be provided over time throughout many parts of New Westminster.

    [NEW] WHAT PROCESS IS INVOLVED TO CHANGE THE USE OF A PARCEL OF LAND?

    There are two components that control the land use of a property: the zoning (controlled by the Zoning Bylaw) and the land use designation (controlled by the Official Community Plan). The Zoning Bylaw is a regulatory tool that includes specific requirements that the buildings/structures constructed on the property must comply with (e.g., permitted density, site coverage, land use, and parking). The Official Community Plan (OCP) is a high-level policy tool that more generally identifies the contemplated uses. The OCP includes land use designations and the Land Use Designation Map, which show the type and location of growth that Council is likely to support.

    Changing the land use for the two affordable housing projects will require an OCP bylaw amendment (to change the land use designation) and a Zoning Bylaw amendment (or rezoning). The proposed changes to these two bylaws will be examined through the development review process, which includes public consultation. At the end of this process, the decision as to whether or not to approve a change to the OCP or zoning is made by Council.

    You can click here to review a guide to the Zoning Amendment (Rezoning) process. The OCP amendment process is very similar but also includes consultation with a number of external agencies (e.g. the School District, First Nations). Often the OCP and zoning amendment processes are run concurrently. 

    [UPDATED] What are the opportunities for resident engagement related to the redevelopment of these two sites for affordable housing?

    Both sites would have to go through a development approvals process related to an Official Community Plan (OCP) Amendment and a Zoning Amendment.

    There are multiple opportunities for the public to provide feedback through the application review process. The process typically includes applicant-led consultation, review by City committees and City-led consultation. The review process is iterative and revisions are considered, based on consultation feedback, throughout the process.
    To date the City has held an information virtual “open house” for each site, but the project is in the early stages, prior to any opportunities for public feedback. There are no scheduled consultation opportunities yet. More information will be posted in this webpage when it is available. The opportunities to provide feedback will be advertised in the following ways:

    Why is the City not pausing the project and taking the time to do additional consultation with neighbourhood residents?

    The City previously paused both small sites affordable housing projects to enable staff to focus their attention on the City’s COVID-19 response, including related to at-risk and vulnerable populations such as frail and isolated seniors and those facing food insecurity and homelessness. Now that the City has moved into recovery planning and implementation, consistent with the BC Recovery Plan, work on other priority projects such as the small-sites affordable housing program has resumed. The City has been following the same process used for the previous intake to the program, resulting in two projects at 43 Hastings Street and 630 Ewen Avenue. This process includes early and ongoing consultation with the community and, in response to community feedback, has added additional opportunities for public information and feedback over-and-above what was done as part of the first intake.

    [NEW] IS THERE ANY PARTICULAR TIME SENSITIVITY RELATED TO THE PROJECTS?

    Generally, due to the significant need for affordable housing, and the social and financial costs related to assisting those who find themselves homeless due to unaffordability, there is a time sensitivity for all affordable housing projects.

    Specific to these projects, all of the proposals are reliant to some extent on senior government funding to meet capital and, in some cases, operating costs. On May 27 2020, BC Housing issued a request for proposals for its Community Housing Fund, which is providing $1.9 billion over 10 years to facilitate the development of new affordable housing. The submission deadline for construction-ready projects is September 4, 2020 and the submission deadline for all other projects is January 15, 2021.

    The first request for proposals related to the fund in question was issued on April 18, 2018, with the deadline being September 17, 2018. There may be future requests (e.g., 2022); however, there are no guarantees, particularly given the upcoming provincial election, which must be held prior to or on October 16, 2021.

    Was the fact that the Connaught Heights properties are designated as future parkland taken into consideration?

    Yes, this was taken into consideration in the staff evaluation, and Council was provided for use in their selection of the sites the information that these properties were designated as future parkland in the Official Community Plan (OCP). Given the housing affordability crisis in the city and larger region, Council has directed staff to use these properties for affordable housing purposes and to circulate a call for proposals to non-profit housing providers for creative approaches to addressing affordable housing needs.

    The City’s OCP includes policy for providing “well-designed parks and open spaces that accommodate and respond to the needs and demands of the diverse and growing community.”  The City is strongly committed to exploring current and future needs for additional parks and open spaces in the Connaught Heights neighbourhood, and the best way to meet those needs, through two upcoming initiatives:

    • the 22nd Street Station Area Bold Vision, which will consider the specific needs of the neighbourhood, taking into account the projected future population of the area; and, 
    • the update to the Parks and Recreation Comprehensive Plan, which in part, will  focus on equitable delivery of parks and open space opportunities across the city and develop strategies for increased and changing demands.
       

    There will be opportunities for community members to provide input into both initiatives when they more forward.

    Why were these sites identified when it will be difficult for occupants or tenants to meet their daily needs such as shopping for groceries?

    Connaught Heights

    According to the Walkscore website, these properties have a transit score of 84 out of 100, which is considered to be an excellent score. The 22nd Street SkyTrain Station is located within 0.54 km walk away, which will be close enough to walk to for many residents. The SkyTrain connects to many areas of Metro Vancouver, including Downtown New Westminster, Edmonds and Metrotown, with a high rate of frequency (i.e., two to three minutes during peak hours). The 22nd Street SkyTrain Station is also a hub for many bus routes, including the 100, 101, 104, 128, 155, 340, 388, 410 and 488, that tie this location into many other locations such as Queensborough, Richmond and South Vancouver.

    There are also two bus routes that are located very close to the site. One is the 128 route, which has a stop 0.27 km away at 21st Street and 8th Avenue, and operates every 18 minutes at peak hours, and connects the area with 22nd Street SkyTrain Station, Canada Games Pool, Century House and Uptown New Westminster. The other one is the 116 route, which has an eastward stop 0.28 km away near Griffiths Drive and 10th Avenue and a westward stop 0.53 km away along Southridge Drive, and operates every 10 to 15 minutes during peak hours, and connects with Edmonds Station and the Big Bend office and retail areas.

    The site is also conveniently located for families, with Connaught Heights Elementary School located 0.24 km away, as well as two parks (Connaught Heights Park – 0.15 km away and Grimston Park – 0.74 km away) located within walking distance of the properties. There is also a new ice arena being built 0.50 km away in South Burnaby near 18th Street and 10th Avenue that is scheduled to open in fall 2021. The BC Parkway, a popular bike and walkway route, is also located 0.52 km away.

    Queensborough

    The Fenton Street site is located within walking distance of the Queensborough Landing Shopping Centre (1.0 km away), which has a full range of shopping amenities. Furthermore, the Fenton Street site will be located within walking distance (0.88 km) of the Queensborough Eastern Node shopping area at Mercer Street between Ewen Avenue and Duncan Street once the Queensborough Eastern Node project is completed. The site is also located within a short walk (0.45 km) from Old Schoolhouse Park, which has a wide range of amenities, including a playground, nature play area, basketball court, tennis court, sports field, picnic shelter and outdoor fitness circuit.

    The Fenton Street site is a short walk away (0.33 km – 0.40 km) from the bus stops for the 104 bus, which is a short bus ride (two to three minutes) from two schools (Queen Elizabeth Elementary School and Queensborough Middle School), three parks (Ryall Park, Port Royal Park and Port Royal Riverfront Walk) and the many amenities (library, fitness centre, community centre, and meeting rooms) of the Queensborough Community Centre). The 104 bus, which operates every 13 minutes during peak hours, also connects the Fenton Street site with the Skytrain System (at 22nd Street) and workplaces on Annacis Island.

    [NEW] WHAT WILL BE THE IMPACTS OF THESE PROJECTS ON LOCAL SCHOOLS AND CHILD CARE FACILITIES?

    The proposed projects are relatively small by development standards, and most of the proposals comprise a variety of bedroom types, including one, two and three bedroom units. As such, they are likely to generate only limited numbers of children aged 0 to 17 years.

    Regarding child care, which serves children aged 0 to 12 years, the west side of the city, which includes Connaught Heights, had the highest number of licensed child care spaces (42.3) per 100 children aged 0 to 12 years by sub-area in New Westminster (October 2018). Queensborough, by contrast, had the lowest number of licensed child care spaces (10.9) per 100 children aged 0 to 12 years by sub-area in New Westminster (October 2018). Given this lack of child care resources, the City has focused its efforts on creating new child care spaces in Queensborough. To this end, the City and School District recently partnered on the development of 40 new school-age care spaces; the City successful applied for a provincial grant to develop 12 infant/toddler and 25 three to five child care spaces at 490 Furness Street; and the City has applied for a provincial grant to develop 12 infant/toddler and 25 three to five child care spaces at 232 Lawrence Street.

    What will be the impact of this development on off-street parking and traffic? Will the development be able to meet its off-street parking needs?

    Studies indicate that very low-income and low-income households are more likely to use transit than moderate and high-income households. A Transit-Oriented Affordable Housing Study by Metro Vancouver, for example, found that over 30% of all work trips in Metro Vancouver by very low- and low-income renter households were by transit, compared with approximately 15% of all work trips by moderate- and high-income owner households. Vehicle ownership among low-income households is lower than for other households: a Department of Transportation Study from the United States in 2009 found that 24% of Americans households at or below the poverty level had no vehicles, while close to 50% had one vehicle. In contrast, 2% of American households earning $100,000 or more had no vehicles and approximately 10% had one vehicle.

    What will be the City’s contribution to the two affordable housing projects? Are local taxpayers subsidizing these projects?

    The City is providing the land at no cost for the purposes of realizing affordable housing on the sites in question. As part of the call for proposals, the City emphasized that its strong preference is for a 60-year lease, to allow the City to retain ownership of both sites. The City is contributing funds to the project from the City’s Affordable Housing Reserve Fund. City policy guides allocation of the funds, which is generally determined in relation to the number of affordable units, with a higher amount potentially considered for projects with more than nine units if there are extenuating circumstances such as adverse soil conditions, floodplain considerations and other site constraints. Regarding this fund, it receives monies through density bonusing, annual contributions from operations, and a portion of the revenues from digital signage.

    Is it a certainty that the two sites will be used for affordable housing purposes?

    The two sites in question will have to go through a development approvals process, with Council making the final decision with regard to the approval of the Official Community Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment Bylaws. Additionally, the affordable housing projects are dependent on receiving funding. If a proponent is unable to secure senior government funding related to capital and/or operating costs, then they may not be in a position to proceed. As such, there is no guarantee that the two sites in question will be used for affordable housing purposes.

    Is there any evidence that this type of development will not decrease property values in the area?

    The most relevant study to examine this question is one from BC Housing, published in January 2020 and entitled “Exploring Impacts of Non-Market Housing on Surrounding Property Values.” This study reviewed 13 case study sites for a variety of non-market housing developments in British Columbia and their impact on median assessed residential property values for properties within 200 metres of the developments. This study compared the changes in property values during the five post-construction years with the changes during these years to property values in their municipality-as-a-whole. This study found the following results:

    • four study sites: nearby area residential property values increased faster than for the municipality-as-a-whole;
    • six study sites: nearby area residential property values increased at the same rate as for the municipality-as-a-whole; and,
    • three study sites: nearby area residential property values did not increase as quickly as the municipality-as-a-whole.
       

    Based on analysis of these sites and other factors during this study, it was concluded that the main factors affecting residential real estate property values were global and local economic factors, not the introduction of non-market housing to the area. 

    [NEW] Will this project be managed by a society? If so do they do the client selection? Will neighbourhood residents get priority? How can residents apply?

    The successful proponent will be the manager of non-profit affordable housing, and will be responsible for tenant selection. Once housing units become available the proponent will utilize the BC Housing Registry to select eligible applicants for an interview process. The Housing Registry, which is administered by BC Housing, provides a centralized database of applicant information to non-profit providers of affordable housing.

    Affordable rental housing is regional and local issue, and while eligible tenants on the Housing Registry may include existing residents of the Queensborough neighbourhood, they may also include residents seeking affordable housing in New Westminster. If you live in B.C., have a low income and meet eligibility criteria, you may qualify for the subsidized housing. To learn about subsidized housing options available in B.C. and how to apply please visit the BC Housing website at: https://www.bchousing.org/housing-assistance/rental-housing 

     

  • VIRTUAL PUBLIC INFORMATION SESSION

    A virtual information session was held on Monday, June 29 from 6:30pm to 8:00pm to provide information and answer questions about the site at 2035 London Street and 2038 Ninth Avenue.

    Thank you to everyone who attended – we had more than 70 community members join the meeting. 

    At the virtual meeting, hosted on Zoom, staff provided an overview of the small-sites affordable housing initiative, the evaluation criteria that has been developed to review the proposals, and next steps in the process to explore affordable housing on this site. Click here to see the presentation

    After the presentation, there was a question and answer session.

    We have updated the Frequently Asked Questions sections above to reflect the questions that we heard during the information session. We have also summarized the key feedback we heard from participants below, as well as providing some follow up information, and answering some “less frequent” questions. 

    WHAT WE HEARD

    They key themes we heard during the virtual information session, and from comments sent directly to staff, are:

    • Parkland is needed in the community. We heard that there is a strong desire among session participants for more park space. Connaught Heights Park is shared with the school and is not always accessible by community members during the day.
    • Desire for an improved and more transparent process. Participants raised concerns that the process felt rushed and expressed disappointment that the community was not included in preliminary conversations about the selection of this site for the affordable housing initiative. Participants also suggested a need for a wider notification area for direct mail from the City.
    • The Official Community Plan (OCP) should be respected. We heard concerns that an affordable housing project does not align with the OCP land-use designation for this site. Some participants questioned why a site already envisioned for multi-family use in the OCP was not selected or purchased for this project.
    • Two city-owned single detached housing size lots are not the appropriate location for this type of project. We heard concerns that these small sites may not be large enough to accommodate multiple families and to provide adequate play space for children in an affordable housing development, and that such a project would be more suited on a larger site as part of a developer-led project.
    • Why Connaught Heights? Session participants questioned why Connaught Heights was selected for this project instead of other neighbourhoods in the City. Some questioned the choice to locate an affordable housing project in an area that has minimal retail services.
    • Parking and traffic congestion in the area are already concerns. Participants expressed concerns about parking and traffic circulation in the area currently. Participants are worried that a multiple family development on this site would add to the parking and traffic congestion in the area.
       

    FOLLOW UP INFORMATION

    In addition to the information provided through the FAQ we want to share some additional context about this site.

    Crown Land Grant 

    Through this consultation process, we became aware of a Crown Land Grant on 2038 Ninth Avenue that identifies of the property for parks and recreation purposes. This land grant is not registered on the title of the property and therefore was not discovered during the due diligence the City conducted for each parcel of land prior to the issuance of the RFP. This is likely because there was no requirement to register such Grants with the Land Titles Office prior to April 5, 1968.  Once this information was received, the City began further research into the history of the site. Through this research, we discovered that Connaught Heights Park was created by the City instead of developing 2038 Ninth Avenue as a park. Plans for the new park were initiated in 1974, when federal, provincial and city funds were made available for improvements under the Neighborhood Improvement Program. The residents of Connaught Heights, through their Citizens Planning Committee, recommended the development of a park in the current location. It was intended that 2038 Ninth Avenue be sold to provide the balance of money needed for the project. However, the land was not sold. We will continue to research this new information and explore what it could mean for this project.

    Heritage Register

    In 2009, these two lots were briefly added to the Heritage Register (where they were referred to as “Connaught Village Green”) as part of a larger city-wide update – before being removed a short time later. The update included a dozen City properties such as parks and civic facilities. Through Council’s deliberations on the additions (April 2009), it was suggested that listing some of the community or City-owned features “may not be suitable for the purpose or may impede future decisions relating to those properties”. A handful of the properties listed, including these two lots, and referred them to the Community Heritage Commission (CHC) for further review. The CHC did not support the addition of these two lots, citing lack of historic association, features, or overall heritage significance. A month later, Council removed the properties from the Heritage Register.

    ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS

    The FAQ section above has now been updated. We added new questions and updated some of the existing questions based on those raised during the information session. There were also a few “less frequent” questions that didn’t get added to the FAQ but we still want to answer.

    We started consultation on the future of Connaught Heights more than three years ago. What has happened with that work?

    The 22nd Street Station Bold Vision work remains an important project for Mayor and Council. However, as a result of the unpreceded nature of the COVID-19 pandemic, Council has made the decision to postpone some projects until a later year, including the 22nd Street Bold Vision work. The Bold Vision is not the only priority project impacted as a result of the pandemic – a number of other projects have also been delayed as a result.

    More information about Bold Vision can be found at: www.newwestcity.ca/22streetplan.

    You can also contact the Planning Division at with additional questions, or sign up for the mailing list to get updates once the project resumes.

    Could the City and BC Hydro work together and create a park, dog park, or water park?

    A recommended action in the City’s Comprehensive Parks Plan is to acquire more parkland in Connaught Heights, with the opportunity of using the BC Hydro lands identified. This is an opportunity we hope to explore in the future.

    The City is working on People, Parks and Pups: A strategy for sharing parks and open space in New Westminster. The initiative is currently paused as we explore how to best consult the community during the pandemic, but there will be opportunity to provide input.

    Another upcoming initiative is the update to the Parks and Recreation Comprehensive Plan, which in part will focus on equitable delivery of parks and open space opportunities across the city and develop strategies for increased and changing demands. There will also be opportunity to provide input though this process.

    What is the Official Community Plan and how often is it changed?

    The Official Community Plan (OCP) guides the overall future of New Westminster and provides a broad framework for managing future growth and change. In some cases, further detail on implementation of the various policy areas can be found in other plans, strategies, policies and bylaws. The City’s Affordable Housing Strategy, Master Transportation Plan, and Community Energy and Emissions Plan are examples of policy documents that connect with the OCP to help implement the vision.

    Changes to the OCP can be grouped into three main categories:

    • Major Updates: A major update of the OCP was completed in 2017. This was the first major update since 1998. These major updates include a substantial community consultation process and result in a new OCP.
    • Minor Updates: The City does minor updates to the OCP on a more frequent basis. These updates ensure the OCP still property reflects the vision and remains up to date, even though a comprehensive review isn’t yet needed.
    • Project Specific Updates: Project specific updates are either initiated by the City or though a development application. While this is the most frequent type of change to the OCP, these changes are still generally infrequent and are typically only supported when the proposed project aligns with a number of the policies in the OCP.
       

    Why did City staff attempt to remove a sign which was in opposition of the small sites affordable housing project in Connaught Heights?

    City staff responsible for maintaining City property regularly monitor all our properties for general maintenance and upkeep, including litter. It was through this regular activity that they came across a sign in opposition to the small sites affordable housing project in Connaught Heights. Based on City practice, which does not allow posting of third party signs on City property without permission, the staff determined that it should be removed. Through discussion with two residents, the staff determined to first check with their Superintendent, who advised them not to remove the sign as the fence it was affixed to belonged to the adjacent private property. Staff left without removing the sign.

    The City has provided this information to the related property owner, who advised that it is resolved to their satisfaction.

  • Additional Resources

    Background materials and Council reports will be posted here.

    August 10, 2020: Council Report - Queensborough Recommended Proponent and Connaught Heights Next Steps

    July 13, 2020: Council Report - Update on Next Steps

    June 29 and July 8, 2020 - Virtual Information Session (Connaught Heights site presentation and Queensborough site presentation). 

    June 2020 - Staff conducted an evaluation of the 14 proposals received against the evaluation criteria included in the RFP (see Attachment 2).

    May 27, 2020 - BC Housing announced a new round of funding for the Community Housing Fund.

    March 2020 - The initiative was paused to enable staff to focus their attention on the City’s COVID-19 response.

    January 2020 - The City posted an RFP for each site. The RFPs were open for an eight week period. A total of 14 proposals were received: seven for each site.

    October 28, 2019 Council Report - Recommended Sites and Calls for Proposals

    July 2019 - Staff conducted an inventory of all City-owned sites, which were subsequently evaluated to determine suitability for the initiative.

    Spring of 2019 - The Affordable Housing and Child Care Task Force instructed staff to initiate a new round of the Small Sites Affordable Housing Initiative.

  • John Stark
    Senior Social Planner
    604-515-3777

    Anur Mehdic
    Housing and Child Care Planning Analyst
    604-515-3792