Port Moody holds off on changing its 2050 population projection

Port Moody will not immediately change its projected 2050 population of 74,300. On Sept. 29, council unanimously endorsed a staff recommendation to return with updated census data in the second quarter of 2027, followed by information on development trends and regional growth projections in the fourth quarter. The decision leaves the figure in the city’s recently adopted Official Community Plan (OCP) unchanged for now, rather than lowering it to either of the alternatives staff presented: 70,500 or 68,000.

Coun. Diana Dilworth said uncertainty is still too great to justify changing the projection, particularly given the relatively small gap between the current figure and some alternatives. She called waiting reasonable, saying another recalibration would require considerable staff work for a relatively small change.

The city’s 74,300 projection comes from land-based modelling that considers the existing development pipeline, redevelopment potential, infill housing and provincial rules allowing greater density around transit stations and on properties previously dominated by single-family housing. Staff said it differs fundamentally from Metro Vancouver’s projections. Metro Vancouver’s 2025 high-growth scenario projected a Port Moody population of 51,182 by 2051, using a primarily demographic method that considers migration, births and deaths. The city’s projection instead incorporates local development capacity and provincial planning rules.

That distinction was central to council’s discussion. Coun. Haven Lurbiecki, the only councillor to oppose the OCP when it was adopted earlier this year, said changing the population number without changing the underlying land-use policies would accomplish little. She said supporting an official community plan means supporting the development envisioned in it. Lurbiecki also said council had discussed projections of roughly 70,500 to 74,300 during the OCP process, reinforcing her earlier opposition to asking staff to revisit the figure.

Coun. Kyla Knowles challenged the idea that supporting the OCP meant supporting a near doubling of Port Moody’s population. She pointed to provincial legislation requiring municipalities to allow additional density in transit-oriented areas and for small-scale multi-unit housing, saying those changes substantially affect development capacity. Knowles called it patently false to say that a vote for the plan meant councillors wanted 74,500 people in the city. She nevertheless said she continues to have serious concerns about the projection’s accuracy, particularly in light of changes in the development market and the effects of provincial legislation.

Staff’s report also cited current market conditions as a reason to wait. Under the approved approach, staff will monitor development activity to better understand project timelines and market conditions before deciding whether to recalibrate the 2050 projection. No OCP amendment or changes to other city plans would be required for that monitoring approach.

Coun. Samantha Agtarap said the projection should not be treated as a population target. She described it as a way to plan for infrastructure and amenities the city might need if it reaches that population. Staff cited the previous OCP as an example of problems that can arise when population projections and land-use plans do not align. The 2014 OCP ultimately used a projection of 50,000 people by 2041, although staff’s parcel-by-parcel analysis at the time estimated roughly 61,000 to 63,000. Staff said the land-use plan was not changed when council lowered the projection. Later amendments permitting developments including Coronation Park, Moody Centre, Woodland Park, Westport and Oceanfront were also not fully reflected in the 50,000 figure. Agtarap said this history helps explain why the jump to 74,300 can look more dramatic than it otherwise would.

Agtarap also questioned how inaccurate growth projections could affect the city’s development cost charges (DCCs) and amenity cost charges (ACCs), which fund infrastructure and amenities associated with growth. Staff said lowering the projection could affect both programs. ACC rates are partly based on the expected number of new homes. Lower growth assumptions could remove some projects from the program, but under some scenarios could also increase costs per unit. Staff said the precise effect could not be determined without reviewing individual projects.

DCCs cover a shorter, 10-year horizon and help fund infrastructure required by new residents. Staff said most projects currently contemplated would likely still be needed under a lower projection, though utility modelling might have to be rerun depending on where and how projected growth changed.

Coun. Amy Lubik cautioned against treating the maximum development permitted under the OCP as something that will necessarily be built. An allowance is not a minimum, she said; a site zoned for a 20-storey building could ultimately be developed with a much smaller project.

Coun. Callan Morrison, who brought forward the original request with Mayor Meghan Lahti to examine recalibrating the projection, said the exercise helped clarify for residents that 74,300 is not a target council is trying to reach. He said that characterization was 100 per cent inaccurate. Although Morrison would prefer a figure somewhere between Metro Vancouver’s projection and the city’s, he acknowledged that the city must account for development that could occur, even if weak market conditions mean some projects do not proceed in the near future. He also pointed to uncertainty from provincial housing legislation, particularly around SkyTrain stations, where municipalities must permit minimum levels of density.

Lahti said the city needs to strike a balance because an inaccurate projection can have financial consequences in either direction. Lower growth projections could lead to higher DCC levies, she said, while lower actual growth could leave the city without enough money to pay upfront for the infrastructure it needs. The mayor said the issue remains open and she wants future reports to explain in more detail how the projection’s components were calculated, including the number of properties affected by provincial small-scale housing requirements.

Staff estimated that immediately changing the projection to 70,500 or 68,000 could cost between $25,000 and $250,000, depending on the amount of consultant work required and how many master plans, financial tools and utility models had to be revisited. An OCP amendment would also require changes to the city’s Regional Context Statement and acceptance by Metro Vancouver; staff estimated the process would take at least four to six months.

Port Moody will have another opportunity for a more comprehensive recalibration in the coming years. Provincial rules now require municipalities to update their OCPs at least every five years, so the city’s plan must be updated by 2030. Staff anticipated starting that work in 2028, when Metro Vancouver is also expected to undertake a comprehensive update of its regional growth projections using 2026 census results and updated demographic information.