City of Vancouver ODP - Page 6

GenWhy? · #**101** Posted **Jul 16, 2026, 4:27 PM**

I think this still really accurately shows the level of political activation, and participation (and lack of) in our city. There wasn't many speakers I don't think on day 1, but I think most of the opposition (as usual) is centred around roughly 4 "villages" east of Granville Street.

I don't know if the City explained that Dunbar and West 10th already had more density added to their high streets, but that seems to have escaped the conversation. That zoning likely won't work economically until it's revised, or more big money moves in to buy multi-million dollar condos, so Dunbar and West 10th should continue to stagnate while the east side continues to grow. Could be great news for Oakridge Mall.

Villages adds a considerable modernization (or early 20th century-ization) to our City the biggest building blocks are already in place and this not passing isn't too bad.

October will be fun though.

WarrenC12 · #**102** Posted **Jul 16, 2026, 10:49 PM**

People literally crying and freaking out at the City Hall public hearing. Cringe worthy and embarrassing.

Glow Fun City · #**103** Posted **Jul 16, 2026, 11:05 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

People literally crying and freaking out at the City Hall public hearing. Cringe worthy and embarrassing.

I mean, I would probably cry if all the NIMBYs get their way…

Feathered Friend · #**104** Posted **Jul 21, 2026, 12:47 AM**

The Villages Plan hearing has recessed today after hearing Speaker 92 of 319 speakers, which included former city councilor Colleen Hardwick, and current MLA Dallas Brodie, both in opposition.

Total correspondence now sits at 520 in support, 2,169 opposed, and 63 other.

The meeting will resume at 9:30am, Wednesday, July 22, 2026
https://council.vancouver.ca/20260714/phea20260714ag.htm

As the meeting is recessed, people can continue to submit correspondence, and register to speak.

madog222 · #**105** Posted **Jul 28, 2026, 8:04 PM**

Villages Plan rejected. Councilor Maloney did make a "symbolic" vote to approve which was the only vote for.

Out of the entire plan they picked out and approved allowing single egress stairs. I didn't catch what this changes over the approval last year.

csbvan · #**106** Posted **Jul 28, 2026, 9:17 PM**

Party of No strikes again. Will be happy to see the end of ABC.

Migrant_Coconut · #**107** Posted **Jul 28, 2026, 9:19 PM**

Kick out COPE and the Greens too, they didn't vote Yes either.

csbvan · #**108** Posted **Jul 28, 2026, 9:22 PM**

The Feds should yank Accelerator Fund dollars.

chowhou · #**109** Posted **Jul 28, 2026, 9:27 PM**

Despite Maloney voting in favour of the Villages Plan, OneCity officially opposed it as well. Another reason I'm disappointed in this iteration of OneCity.

https://www.onecityvancouver.ca/villages_plan

The Vancouver Liberals also officially opposed it as well.

https://www.vancouverliberals.com/villages_plan_letter

Believe it or not, TEAM also opposed the plan.

https://www.voteteam.ca/post/team-for-a-...ak-attack-on-residents-and-their-neighbo

It seems there isn't a single serious party running in October that is in support of the plan. Methinks the election is too tight for anyone to stick their neck out.

seamusmcduff · #**110** Posted **Jul 28, 2026, 9:28 PM**

Pretty cowardly to vote against a plan you originally proposed, when the main group against it was everyone who you knew from the beginning would be against any change no matter what

GenWhy? · #**111** Posted **Jul 28, 2026, 9:43 PM**

"People hate fake engagement, and the way engagement has rolled out has been detrimental to democracy. It erodes public trust and confidence and leads people to give up on participating in their City.

People need to feel respected and listened to."

What the HELL does this mean?!

chowhou · #**112** Posted **Jul 28, 2026, 9:45 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

"People hate fake engagement, and the way engagement has rolled out has been detrimental to democracy. It erodes public trust and confidence and leads people to give up on participating in their City.

People need to feel respected and listened to."

What the HELL does this mean?!

It means an election is coming up so the buzzwords are coming out.

Quote:

Originally Posted by chowhou

The Vancouver Liberals also officially opposed it as well.

https://www.vancouverliberals.com/villages_plan_letter

I might add, the Vancouver Liberals still seem to be the "least opposed" of the major parties with support for the concept but opposition to not doing it their way.

seamusmcduff · #**113** Posted **Jul 28, 2026, 10:10 PM**

I think this user u/Gym_frere put it best, it turns out the calls for gentle density as opposed to "mega towers" was just a lie, and just a convenient talking point they didn't really believe:

Quote:

For years, decades in fact, NIMBY’s told us that we shouldn’t build towers and instead build lower-rise, missing middle homes. They told us that they loved going to Paris or Montreal or Stockholm and seeing the middle-density housing.

Now, when we’re faced with an opportunity to actually implement it, they make excuses. Oh, it won’t be affordable enough, as if 3 million dollar SFH’s are affordable. Oh, it’s gonna get rid of too many trees. Oh, we’re gonna have too many commercial spaces - I saw many speakers say that they didn’t want businesses to compete with each other. Utter nonsense.

I don’t know about anybody else but for me, this kind of stuff makes me really disheartened about living here. These people want us to live in a city that’s frozen in time, same as it was in the 1970’s. They want compromises, but when they’re given an inch, they take a mile. What more do they want? It just makes me sad, man. Seeing people leave because they can’t afford to live here. People can’t start families because they can barely support themselves.

Edit: look at what these [ABC clowns said on Twitter.](https://x.com/vote4abc/status/2082195226492617041?s=46) “What you do with your home should be your choice.” Do these people think we’re fucking idiots? Approving this plan would literally give more choice to landowners! Anything other than SFH’s are illegal in the areas where the Villages Plan would’ve applied.

This shit does my head in, man. They’re talking about “one size fits all development”. What do we call it when it’s illegal to build anything other than SFH’s in a certain area?

logan5 · #**114** Posted **Jul 28, 2026, 10:24 PM**

If the Villages Plan is no good, then so is the rest of the Vancouver ODP. What a waste of time.

The Villages Plan would probly be fine in the east side, so the City should have put a moratorium on the whiney west side, but proceed in the east side.

The next layer in the Vancouver ODP is "Neighbourhood Centres", which is also one size fits all. Is that going to be scrapped too?

And one size does fit all, ffs.

logan5 · #**115** Posted **Jul 28, 2026, 10:45 PM**

I wonder if the Province would intervene at all here, and override this decision, after all it was provincial legislation that led to the creation of the ODP, so they may not be happy to see the Plan not being adhered to, as it sets a bad precedence for every other jurisdiction. I'm assuming they have the power to override the decision to kill the Villages Plan.

GenWhy? · #**116** Posted **Jul 28, 2026, 10:47 PM**

Neighbourhood centres will not succeed... yet. It'll need years of normalization with other plans and their development being built.

For instance 6-storey buildings on arterials used to get scrutinized and face possible "no" votes and Council, not they sail through. Townhomes and small apartments like Tomo house in busy areas were litigated and stalled and sent back to the drawing board

whatnext · #**117** Posted **Jul 28, 2026, 10:53 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by logan5

I wonder if the Province would intervene at all here, and override this decision, after all it was provincial legislation that led to the creation of the ODP, so they may not be happy to see the Plan not being adhered to, as it sets a bad precedence for every other jurisdiction. I'm assuming they have the power to override the decision to kill the Villages Plan.

Why?

So Eby can throw more tax dollars into a developer bailout? There’s a shitload of unsold inventory on the market.

Migrant_Coconut · #**118** Posted **Jul 28, 2026, 10:55 PM**

Maybe more rezoning for mixed-use? Create some foot traffic in the area, and now suburbistan has less power over the neighbourhood.

chowhou · #**119** Posted **Jul 28, 2026, 11:01 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by whatnext

Why?

So Eby can throw more tax dollars into a developer bailout? There’s a shitload of unsold inventory on the market.

Once again, upzoning to give more freedom to homeowners like you and I does not make developments appear out of the blue. All it does is allow us the opportunity to respond to market forces and develop when the time is right. I can explain this to you as many times as you would like.

csbvan · #**120** Posted **Jul 28, 2026, 11:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by logan5

I wonder if the Province would intervene at all here, and override this decision, after all it was provincial legislation that led to the creation of the ODP, so they may not be happy to see the Plan not being adhered to, as it sets a bad precedence for every other jurisdiction. I'm assuming they have the power to override the decision to kill the Villages Plan.

I doubt that they would intervene. I expect the Feds may consider using Housing Accelerator Fund money as leverage though. That's the real carrot that can be pulled from a higher level of government.