When approvals aren't results: Burnaby's housing and employment-land dilemma

Announcements are not accomplishments. Results are. Burnaby needs housing — but we also need to ask a more fundamental question: are we building the right housing, in the right places, at the right time, while protecting the jobs and tax base that make our city sustainable?

The City of Burnaby says it has approximately 25,000 approved housing units that have not proceeded to construction, and acknowledges it cannot compel private developers to build. That raises an important question for the Mayor and City Hall: if we keep approving housing but thousands of approved units aren't being built, who is accountable for measuring the gap between approvals and actual results?

Palm Avenue is a useful example. The BCGEU purchased the properties in 2019 and applied to rezone the site in 2020. Council approved the rezoning 7-2 in 2022. The original proposal was presented as an affordable-housing project. It changed significantly because financing and construction costs had increased. A building permit was eventually issued for 312 rental units, and the city adopted a new housing agreement in 2026. The lesson isn't that Palm Avenue should never have been approved. The lesson is that approvals, announcements and targets are not the same as delivering homes.

There is another issue we need to confront. As Mayor, I would not use employment or industrial land as the easy answer to Burnaby's housing needs. Burnaby's own 2050 Official Community Plan recognises the importance of protecting employment and industrial lands and preventing their conversion, while encouraging more intensive employment uses. These lands provide places for manufacturers, tradespeople, logistics companies, technology businesses and other employers to operate, and they contribute to the city's long-term commercial tax base. Once that land is converted to residential use, we don't get it back easily.

That is why City Hall needs to think 10, 20 and 30 years ahead, not just to the next election cycle. We should be asking: How many homes were approved? How many received permits? How many are actually under construction? How many are completed and occupied? Why are projects stalled? How many jobs will the development create or displace? What happens to Burnaby's long-term tax base? Does the infrastructure exist to support the growth?

My campaign has heard a clear call for change in this city, after 39 consecutive years of the same civic slate leading municipal government. Change in how we control taxes and spending. Change to restore accountability. Change comes from fresh perspectives and a willingness to do things differently. I'll be the candidate who brings that change.