MY THOUGHTS
HOUSING & GROWTH
Homes people can put down roots in, with growth our community can support.
As a renter and a mother of two, I understand why housing matters. People need options that work through different stages of life: A first apartment, space for a growing family, or a smaller home close to familiar neighbours.
I support more housing choices in Saanich, including co-ops, non-market housing, townhomes, rowhomes, suites and opportunities for attainable home ownership. We also need family-sized homes with practical features such as outdoor space, storage and appropriate parking.
Where and how we grow matters. I favour concentrating greater density around centres such as Tillicum, Uptown, Quadra McKenzie and University Heights, alongside thoughtfully designed housing within established neighbourhoods.
My Approach
I support more housing. More housing choices. Thoughtful design. Infrastructure that keeps pace.
I support adding more housing in Saanich while considering affordability, neighbourhood context, infrastructure, transportation and the natural environment together.
And I believe good growth means paying attention to affordability, design, infrastructure, neighbourhood context and the natural environment at the same time.
The goal should not simply be to fit the greatest number of units onto a piece of land. It should be to build neighbourhoods where people will still want to live decades from now.
I support a broader mix of homes for different stages of life: secondary suites, house-form multiplexes, townhomes and row homes, family-sized homes, apartments, rental housing, co-ops and attainable ownership opportunities.
I am particularly interested in forms of “missing middle” housing that can add homes without dramatically changing the feel of an established neighbourhood.
Large house-form multiplexes inspired by older manor and heritage homes are one example. They can contain several homes while still presenting to the street in a way that feels familiar to a predominantly single-family neighbourhood.
Townhomes and row homes can accommodate greater density in appropriate locations, particularly near centres, corridors and areas already supported by services.
I would like to see garden and carriage homes become a more accessible housing option across Saanich, including opportunities in rural areas where the land, servicing and provincial regulations allow it.
These smaller detached homes can provide flexible housing for aging parents, adult children, renters or homeowners wanting to downsize while remaining on their property. They can also add long-term rental housing gradually without requiring large-scale redevelopment.
Saanich currently permits garden suites on most eligible RS- and RD-zoned properties within the Sewer Service Area and/or Urban Containment Boundary. Rural and Agricultural Land Reserve properties operate under different rules and can have additional servicing, agricultural and provincial requirements.
I would support reviewing where Saanich's rules could responsibly allow garden or carriage homes more broadly, while protecting farmland, sensitive ecosystems and the ability of rural properties to safely accommodate water, septic and other servicing needs.
Supporting more housing does not mean accepting poor design.
I want new development to contribute positively to the neighbourhood around it through thoughtful architecture, landscaping, setbacks, tree retention and transitions in building height.
The Marlowe development at 4201 Tyndall Avenue is an example of a housing form I find interesting. It incorporates apartments and townhomes across several three-storey buildings rather than concentrating all of the density into one large structure. Distributing density across different housing forms.
I would like to see more attention given to gradual transitions in scale. New buildings should not abruptly tower over established lower-density homes when thoughtful design can create a more natural progression between different housing forms.
Similarly, I would prefer well-designed house-form multiplexes over long, narrow buildings that maximize the envelope without enough consideration for how the development relates to the street or neighbouring properties.
Housing decisions cannot be made in isolation.
When Saanich plans significant growth, Council should also be looking 10, 20 and 30 years ahead at the infrastructure required to support it: Water, sewer, roads, transportation, parks, recreation, emergency services and other public infrastructure.
Growth should not simply add people and then leave future councils and taxpayers to solve the resulting infrastructure problems.
I want Saanich to plan the community and the infrastructure together.
Transportation needs are not identical in every part of Saanich.
I want parking, access and transportation impacts to be realistically considered for each neighbourhood and development, recognizing that needs differ depending on location, transit access and household type.
A development near frequent transit, shops and services may have very different parking requirements than housing in a suburban or rural neighbourhood where residents are more dependent on vehicles.
Good planning should recognize those differences rather than applying the same assumptions everywhere.
Rental and non-market housing are essential parts of the housing spectrum, but I also want young people and families to have a realistic path toward owning a home.
I am interested in examining attainable-homeownership models such as Langford's Attainable Home Ownership Program, which has partnered with developments including Trailside at the Lake. The program was designed to assist qualified buyers who can carry a mortgage but face difficulty saving the required down payment.
I would like to understand whether elements of a model like this could work in Saanich, what the financial implications would be, and what partnerships would be required before determining whether it should be pursued here.
Municipal government cannot solve housing affordability alone, but it can look for creative partnerships with senior governments, non-profits, housing providers and the development community.
Building more housing should not inadvertently make housing less secure for the people already living here.
Redevelopment can sometimes mean the loss of older rental homes that, while not formally designated as affordable housing, are among the more affordable options available in the community.
Saanich's Tenant Protection Bylaw now requires qualifying redevelopment projects to provide tenant assistance and compensation and includes a process allowing affected tenants to seek a comparable replacement unit in the new development.
I support protecting renters affected by redevelopment and monitoring how these protections work in practice.
As Saanich adds housing, Council should pay attention not only to the number of new homes created, but also to the type and affordability of housing being lost in the process.
Where redevelopment removes existing rental housing, I want Council considering displacement, replacement housing, tenant supports and opportunities for residents to return.
As density increases, I would also like to see opportunities for more everyday services incorporated into appropriate developments and neighbourhood centres.
Small cafés, local shops, professional offices and other neighbourhood-scale businesses can allow people to meet more of their daily needs close to home while helping create active, connected communities.
Housing growth should ultimately add to the quality of life of both new and existing residents.
Growth and environmental protection should not be treated as competing goals.
Saanich contains Garry oak ecosystems, wetlands, waterways, mature tree canopy and other sensitive habitat that cannot simply be recreated after development occurs.
Areas such as the remaining Garry oak habitat around Braefoot, Maplewood, Tattersall and Cedar Hill demonstrate why environmental considerations need to happen early in the planning process.
Where significant habitat exists, I want Council asking how it can be protected before development decisions are made—not attempting to compensate for its loss afterward.