What Could the New BC Conservative Government Mean for Housing and Development in Coquitlam?

The change in provincial government could have a meaningful impact on housing policy in British Columbia, particularly when it comes to small-scale multi-unit housing, transit-oriented development and the balance of power between the Province and municipalities.

For homeowners in Coquitlam, especially those whose properties have redevelopment potential, it is important to separate what has actually changed from what may change.

As of now, the existing provincial housing legislation remains in force.

The biggest issue is who decides where density goes

The BC Conservatives campaigned on returning more control over housing density to local governments.

Their 2026 platform says municipalities and local residents should have a greater say in where density is located and what that density looks like. The party has also said municipalities should be held to locally developed Official Community Plans and that zoning bylaws should better align with those plans.

That is a significant change in direction from the previous provincial government's approach, which imposed minimum density requirements on municipalities through legislation.

The practical question for Coquitlam homeowners is therefore not simply whether density disappears. It is whether some of the density currently mandated by the Province becomes a decision for Coquitlam City Council instead.

What could happen to Bill 44 and small-scale multi-unit housing?

Bill 44 introduced province-wide requirements for small-scale multi-unit housing, commonly referred to as SSMUH. Under the current provincial regulations, municipalities such as Coquitlam are generally required to permit at least:

• 3 dwelling units on lots of 280 square metres or smaller

• 4 dwelling units on lots larger than 280 square metres

subject to exemptions and other requirements.

The Union of BC Municipalities has identified repealing Bill 44 as one of the commitments made by the incoming Conservative government. However, repealing Bill 44 would not automatically return Coquitlam properties to their former single-family zoning.

Coquitlam has already amended its own zoning bylaws. For example, the City's R-1 Small-Scale Residential zone currently allows up to three units on smaller lots and four units on lots of 280 square metres or larger. The zone also establishes its own density, height, lot coverage and subdivision regulations.

Those are now municipal zoning rules.

If the Province repeals Bill 44, it would remove the provincial requirement forcing municipalities to maintain those minimum densities. Coquitlam would still have to amend its own zoning bylaw if Council wanted to reduce those permissions.

For that reason, I would not assume that Coquitlam will simply revert to traditional single-family zoning. In fact, in July 2026 Coquitlam rezoned another 374 properties in southwest Coquitlam from R-3 to R-1 following completion of its own planning review.

That suggests small-scale housing has become part of the City's broader planning framework rather than being purely a provincial requirement.

Transit-Oriented Areas could be more significant

The bigger issue for some properties may be transit-oriented development. Under the current provincial Transit-Oriented Areas regulations, minimum allowable density and height apply around rapid-transit stations.

In Coquitlam, the current minimums are:

• Within 200 metres of a SkyTrain station: 5.0 FAR and 20 storeys

• Between 200 and 400 metres: 4.0 FAR and 12 storeys

• Between 400 and 800 metres: 3.0 FAR and 8 storeys

The City's own information also confirms that Coquitlam cannot refuse an eligible rezoning application solely because of density or height where the proposal remains within the applicable provincial minimums. Development still has to meet other planning and regulatory requirements.

This gives certain properties near SkyTrain a level of development certainty that did not previously exist.

The Conservatives have not, at least so far, clearly committed in their 2026 platform to repealing the Transit-Oriented Areas legislation. However, their broader policy of allowing municipalities to determine where density goes could lead to amendments to the current system.

Does that mean Coquitlam will reduce density around SkyTrain?

Not necessarily. Coquitlam has been planning higher-density communities around transit for many years. The City currently expects approximately 50% of future growth to occur in transit-oriented areas including City Centre, Burquitlam and Lougheed. Its existing City Centre and Burquitlam-Lougheed plans already concentrate significant density around SkyTrain.

As recently as May 2026, the City also approved additional planning changes around Burquitlam, Lougheed and Austin Avenue aimed at creating more medium-density housing and better transitions between established neighbourhoods and higher-density transit areas.

For that reason, I would consider it unlikely that Coquitlam suddenly abandons higher-density development around SkyTrain. The more realistic question is whether the City eventually gains greater discretion over exactly how far that density extends into surrounding neighbourhoods.

Some properties may be more affected than others

Properties immediately adjacent to major transit stations are likely to remain logical redevelopment sites regardless of provincial policy. A property 100 or 150 metres from a SkyTrain station will generally remain much more attractive for higher-density development than a similar property located 700 or 800 metres away.

If the Province reduces or removes minimum density requirements, properties toward the outer edges of Transit-Oriented Areas could potentially see more change than properties immediately surrounding stations.

That does not mean those properties lose their development potential. It means future density may depend more heavily on Coquitlam's Official Community Plan and zoning decisions rather than a province-wide minimum.

Existing zoning, OCP designation and provincial rules are different

When evaluating a property with development potential, I think it is increasingly important to separate three different things:

Current zoning: What can currently be built under the City's zoning bylaw?

Official Community Plan designation: What type of development does the City envision for the property over the longer term?

Provincial housing legislation: Does provincial legislation currently establish additional minimum density or height requirements?

Those are not necessarily the same thing. A property may have significant long-term redevelopment potential without being currently zoned for that development. Conversely, a property may benefit today from provincial housing legislation that could potentially be amended by a future Legislature.

There could also be benefits to a more locally focused system

More municipal control does not necessarily mean less housing or lower development values. The Conservative platform also proposes faster approvals, reducing unnecessary construction charges and better aligning zoning with Official Community Plans.

If municipalities eventually pre-zone properties to match their OCP designations, developers could gain greater certainty about where development is actually intended. There is also an argument that blanket upzoning can make land assembly more difficult when every property owner begins pricing future development potential into their land. A system that concentrates density into clearly defined areas could potentially increase the value of properties that remain within those redevelopment areas.

There will likely be both winners and losers depending on how the legislation ultimately changes.

What should Coquitlam homeowners do now?

At this stage, I would not make a major real estate decision based solely on speculation about what the new government may do. Bill 44 and the current Transit-Oriented Areas regulations remain in effect today.

The Conservatives have clearly indicated that they intend to return more planning authority to local governments, but the details will depend on legislation that has not yet been introduced.

For homeowners with properties that may have redevelopment potential, the important thing is to understand exactly where that potential comes from.

Is it based on current zoning?

Is it based on Coquitlam's Official Community Plan?

Is it based on a Transit-Oriented Area designation?

Or does it depend on assembling multiple neighbouring properties?

Those distinctions can have a significant impact on value.

If you own a property in Coquitlam, Port Moody or Port Coquitlam and would like to understand how its current zoning, OCP designation or transit-oriented development potential may affect its value, feel free to contact me.

David Reimers PREC
Royal LePage West Real Estate Services
Expert Guidance. First Class Results.