A decisive result
British Columbia has a new government. The BC Conservatives under Lorne Doerkson won a majority in the October 24 snap election, with preliminary results giving the party 64 of 93 seats. The BC NDP moves to opposition after nine years in government, and David Eby has resigned as party leader.
The final count concludes November 6, and a handful of close ridings could still shift. The broad picture will not: a majority mandate, and a transition now underway in Victoria. For everyone working on housing in this province, the question is what the change means in practice.
What didn’t change
If you own property or build small-scale housing in BC, your zoning today is the same as it was before the vote. The small-scale multi-unit housing framework introduced through Bill 44 remains law. Municipalities over 5,000 people must still permit three, four or six homes on lots once restricted to a single house or duplex.
Those requirements are no longer just provincial legislation. After the June 30, 2026 compliance deadline set by last year’s Bill 25 amendments, they are embedded in local zoning bylaws across the province, and in the permits, projects, and homes that have followed. A government can amend a statute in Victoria; unwinding hundreds of local bylaws and the investments made under them is a different matter entirely, and nobody has proposed it – the repeal of Bill 44 was left off the final Conservative platform.
The transit-oriented development framework under Bill 47 likewise remains in force.
What the new government has said it will do
The Conservative platform’s housing commitments centre on cost, speed, and local decision-making. The party has pledged to cut construction taxes and charges, approve homes in months rather than years, and work with municipalities so zoning bylaws match official community plans. It has also committed to review the Step Code, simplify the building code, restore choice in home heating energy, and prioritize BC wood in government-funded projects.
The platform’s framing on density is the clearest signal of a shift. Where communities locate density should, in the party’s words, “be a decision of local government and local residents,” with municipalities held to locally developed community plans carrying appropriate density targets.
Just as telling is what the platform leaves out. In 2024, the party campaigned on repealing Bill 44; the 2026 platform makes no such commitment. Platforms are statements of intent rather than legislation, and the throne speech and first bills will tell us more. As signals go, though, this one points to continuity on small-scale housing, with the emphasis moving toward local planning.
What the BC election means for gentle density
For gentle density, our own research frames what this election can and cannot change. Last spring, Small Housing BC and the Planning Institute of BC completed joint province-wide research on small-scale housing delivery, built on key informant interviews and seven regional focus groups. The message from planners was consistent: zoning reform under Bills 44 and 47 is largely done, and delivery is now the constraint.
With that in mind, four threads from this election are worth pulling.
First – where decisions get made. If the centre of gravity moves from provincial requirements to locally developed community plans, the case for small-scale housing will increasingly be made municipality by municipality. Those conversations between newly elected councils and their staff will need to navigate previous upzoning efforts, and what a pragmatic approach to help increase housing delivery ultimately looks like at a local level. Small Housing will continue to provide information and support to help communities make informed decisions.
If local leadership is interested in undoing existing regulations, they will also need to consider the work that that would entail. For many communities, undoing the implementation of these bills would be a major effort, potentially revoking development allowances from existing property owners, while negatively impacting new housing delivery. Because of this, communities may likely carry on. The open question is what happens where mayors and councils have resisted gentle density upzoning, whether vocally and publicly or through their implementation of provincial legislation. There, the outcome will depend on the efforts of staff as well as engagement from residents, small builders, and advocacy groups.
Second is project economics. The momentum here is real. CMHC’s latest national analysis credits BC’s small-scale housing reforms with helping reverse a decade-long decline in small-scale infill, which now accounts for nearly one in ten housing starts across Canada. Metro Vancouver leads the country in small-scale redevelopment relative to its stock of detached homes, and infill’s share of Vancouver-area starts has roughly quadrupled since 2016. The task now is to let that momentum compound. A fourplex or a laneway home cannot spread approval delays and fixed charges across dozens of units, so small projects feel both challenges more acutely than large ones. If commitments to shorten approvals and reduce construction charges are delivered, more small projects will pencil, and more housing options will return to established neighbourhoods at price points people can afford.
Third is what gentle density gives back to local economies. A fourplex or a laneway home is rarely built by a large-scale developer. It is built by a local contractor, framed, wired and plumbed by local trades, and supplied by businesses in the region, so the dollars a small project generates largely stay in the community that approved it.
The economic benefits are just as local. Homeowners gain options to age in place, house family or add a rental suite. Renters and first-time buyers gain homes in established neighbourhoods, near schools, transit and jobs, at price points people can afford.
Small builders and trades gain something too: a steady pipeline of modest projects, less exposed to the financing cycles that stall larger developments. That steadiness matters most in smaller communities, where large projects are rare.
This is worth keeping in view as decisions shift toward community plans. A council weighing gentle density is not only weighing housing units. It is weighing local economic development, and the beneficiaries are its own residents, builders and businesses.
Fourth is fiscal responsibility. Small-scale infill can make better use of existing roads, pipes and services, while greenfield development adds new infrastructure that taxpayers must maintain and eventually replace. For councils focused on spending discipline, comparing those full lifecycle costs alongside ongoing maintenance costs creates a strong fiscal case for accommodating more homes within existing neighbourhoods.
What we’re watching
Between now and the first sitting of the legislature, a few markers will tell us more than any platform:
- The final count on November 6, and the cabinet that follows
- The first throne speech, and whether a community-plan approach to density targets becomes legislation
- Any amendment addressing the small-scale multi-unit housing development frameworks
- Where infrastructure servicing, the top delivery barrier planners identify, sits in the new housing agenda
- The treatment of development charges and approval timelines
- The scope of proposed building code changes
Our work does not change with the government of the day. Small Housing supports governments in building good housing policy, then supports industry and homeowners with the tools and skills to deliver on it. We look forward to working constructively with the new provincial government and with councils across BC, and we will keep this space updated as commitments become law.