City of Vancouver ODP

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by logan5

The game changer here is the reduction of the social housing requirement from 60 percent (at graduating subsidy), to a much more reasonable and developer friendly, 20 percent.

I believe there will be a demand for the dtes if you start from the edges and work your way in. The Woodwords block is completely functional, so the next block over is the next logical step.

The Bronx did it. So can the DTES.

The change to the proportion of social housing is proposed for the DEOD. The rest of the DTES has allowed more market housing, both rental and condos. Recently we've seen a condo building completed in Chinatown, with a high percentage of the units not sold even at completion. That's pretty much the only condo building completed in years. We've seen another condo building completed, but as a hotel, and a site with an approved condo building sold to a nonprofit housing organization for social housing.

With rentals, there are several recently completed social (and supportive) housing buildings, and more under construction, (one with shared ownership market units). There's a modest market rental building under construction on West Hastings, approved under the existing policy. The site next door to it was approved for a larger market rental building years ago, but was never built, and has now been proposed as a 100% social housing tower. Further east there are proposed market rental towers, and there's market rental proposed on the Army and Navy block.

The ODP reflects the existing DTES plans, although it anticipates the changes to be considered by Council next month. The consultation on those changes produced some consistent responses - a concern that there won't be enough welfare rate homes generated by development to replace those being lost, and those needed to move the dial on homelessness, (which is still climbing). The private sector developers were doubtful that the changes would make much difference to the viability of projects, without support for from government or nonprofit housing organizations.

There's been a steady (small) addiction of market housing (mostly market rental) in the DTES in the past decade under existing policy. There's a significant addition to supportive housing in the same period, almost all thanks to CMHC and BC Housing funding. It's a slight net gain on the SROs that have been lost to gentrification and demolition, but it's not been enough to reduce homelessness so far. We'll see if the new policy changes make any difference, but the overall demand for market rental and the number being built outside the DTES will probably have an impact on whether there's any difference in the rate of development in the area.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by logan5

The game changer here is the reduction of the social housing requirement from 60 percent (at graduating subsidy), to a much more reasonable and developer friendly, 20 percent.

I believe there will be a demand for the dtes if you start from the edges and work your way in. The Woodwords block is completely functional, so the next block over is the next logical step.

The Bronx did it. So can the DTES.

It's surviving, I'm not sure I'd call it completely functional. Just look at the issues with the retail there.

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

It's surviving, I'm not sure I'd call it completely functional. Just look at the issues with the retail there.

Exactly. Look at JJ Bean and TD Bank.

I'm surprised the parkades to the north of Woodwards weren't included in COV's rental housing plans.

[seamusmcduff]

The Vancouver ODP has been approved.

Projects with greater than 50% residential that meet the plan will no longer require Public hearings.

[Chirpythecougar]

Originally Posted by seamusmcduff

The Vancouver ODP has been approved.

Projects with greater than 50% residential that meet the plan will no longer require Public hearings.

It's not no longer required - they're prohibited from having public hearings.
https://vancouver.ca/news-calendar/council-approves-vancouver-odp-mar-2026.aspx

[officedweller]

For lack of a better place to put this here's a history of the City of Vancouver's amalgamation:

LEGISLATING CITY BOUNDARIES: VANCOUVER’S EVOLUTION
https://farris.com/content/uploads/2026/01/Legal-Anecdotes-and-Miscellanea-January-2026.pdf

[Changing City]

There's a report about to go to Council on rezonings currently in the system, that aren't compatible with the ODP. There are 17 rezonings that now have to be consulted with first Nations and the VSB/CSF (and one with TransLink), and the Council motion on the Molson Brewery development which needs to go to Metro and the province as well.

"In the future, new rezoning applications requiring a Vancouver ODP amendment will complete consultation concurrently with the rezoning application. These consultation reports will be brought forward to Council early in the rezoning process to ensure this required legislative step is completed without delaying application processing.

In most cases, both the rezoning and the Vancouver ODP amendment will be brought to a public hearing for decision at the same time. The summary of feedback from all consulted groups will be included within the rezoning referral report."

[jollyburger]

Podcast interview with Josh White on the ODP

https://www.vancouverrealestatepodcast.c...ouver-building-code-change-housing-2025/

[jollyburger]

How can they say with a straight face say Vancouver is one of the most dense cities in Canada and reject the Villages plan.. meanwhile almost all those intersections are surrounded by single family houses and low rise commercial.

Michael Geller, a developer and retired architect, said the city is using the villages plan to rezone too many city lots — 750 in total — solely for four- to six-storey apartment buildings, with required retail outlets on the ground floor. “It’s an incredible number of properties,” Geller said.

The strict zoning for up to six-storey buildings effectively “sterilizes” each proposed village, he said, because it doesn’t allow for more mixed structures, including townhouses, other styles of small apartments and laneway houses.

In terms of individual impact, Geller has talked to a homeowner who is facing troubles because he lives on a property in the west side’s Mackenzie Heights, near 33rd Avenue, which is destined to be zoned under the villages plan exclusively for up to six-storey buildings.

That means the owners, who are remaining anonymous, will not be able to do anything else with their land, Geller said. They will be stuck with waiting for a would-be developer to include their detached lot in a land assembly.

On another front, Geller said it is a mistake to demand that each new four- to six-storey building in the Villages plan have retail outlets at the sidewalk level.

That stipulation not only restricts design possibilities, Geller said in an interview, it can cut into developers’ cost margins. Many new retail outlets will go unleased, he predicted.

“There’s just not enough retail action expected in the next 20 years in Vancouver to fill up all these retail centres.”

Geller joins Ducote and other Metro Vancouver urbanists in urging city council to focus more on creative ideas to revive existing neighbourhood commercial centres that are struggling.

They include Dunbar Street, Point Grey Village on West 10th Avenue, the West End’s Denman Street, Kingsgate Mall in Mount Pleasant, and downtown’s International Village Mall.

https://vancouversun.com/opinion/columni...lages-will-increase-uniformity-sterility

[Migrant_Coconut]

"Uniformity, sterility..." as opposed to the vibrancy of a strip mall across the street from a gas station across the street from a parking lot in front of a Safeway... and the exact same thing down the street.