Vancouver's Plan to die and what we can do to save it—Introduction

Detail from “Departure” by George Lunden1—photo by Brian Palmquist

Note to readers: Apologies for the 6+ week absence. I’d like to say I was visiting exotic places, but like many, I’ve mainly been hunkering down in the face of the blizzard of negative world news. But the news in this part of the world is scarcely better, so I will press on in hopes of helping with the resolution of more local issues.

Also, item #21 below, social housing, had errors that have now been corrected. Apologies.

Death may be sudden, but more often, outside of medical misfortune, war, crime and their affects, death comes bit by bit—an accumulation of time, heredity and imperfect choices that eventually overwhelm the host.

A city or town may similarly succumb and die. As with individuals, medical calamity and war may quickly end a community. But more often death of a city or town is not so much caused by calamity as by an accumulation of poor planning for the passage of time and diminishing the community that exists, compounded by imperfect planning and development choices.

I believe Vancouver is currently dying, but need not. I believe many BC and other Canadian communities are also dying, but need not. In the five years I have been writing 200 City Conversations (CCs), many poor choices have been made and continue to be made by those charged with building and maintaining our cities and towns. Some choices relating to planning, architecture and urban design have been captured in my City Conversations. I have generally shied away from other contributors, such as drugs and criminality, that are outside my modest experience and expertise, and I will continue to do so except where urban design and planning may help.

The planning, architecture and urban design culprits killing our city include: some professional planners, designers and architects; many municipal, provincial and federal politicians and the civil servants they command; and those developers, both private and public sector, who make deliberate choices that damage the city for its citizens.

Below is a list of the 22 poor planning and urban design choices I have (mostly) identified in CCs. These choices have been made on behalf of Vancouver and many other cities and towns. I have listed them in the order in which I first considered them in CCs (many topics rated more than one CC). And I have added my summary comments in italics, addressing how I think we can best address these failings:

1. Protected views— A major contributor to moderating the heights of the towers that join downtown to Stanley Park and ring False Creek were our view cones. These were enshrined by City Council in 19892. They were applied to preserve views in the face of False Creek North (FCN) and Coal Harbour, and just about every subsequent high-rise project…at least until the last several years. They have been systematically dismantled by planners, municipal and provincial politicians over the past five years. Many areas of the city west of Coal Harbour and east of False Creek are having their view protections incrementally erased. Reinstatement of the original view cones and additional view cones west and east of the downtown core will bring back that height moderation and preserve the public mountain and water views that make Vancouver the great city it is.

2. Population growth and management— Vancouver’s historic 1% population growth rate over the past 30 years has been challenged by uncontrolled immigration and the expansion of housing supply targets based on aspiration rather than any economic basis. The “never enough” numbers game has resulted in dramatic densification without reference to livability and without providing the necessary engineering and social infrastructures—roads, sewers, parks, schools and community centres, to name a few. Bringing back requirements such as “2.75 acres of new park per 1,000 new residents” and others will help balance growth and supports.

3. City processes that work poorly— Rather than the hard work of consulting neighbourhoods about the need to update and refine the rich mosaic of existing zoning, city staff, management and politicians, as well as provincial politicians, have shut out the public and grossly simplified zoning, allowing an emerging patchwork of buildings that ignore their neighbours, their neighbourhood, infrastructure and climate limits. Vancouver’s charter allows for the repeal or amendment of spot rezonings as well as Official Development Plans (ODPs). City staff at all levels must re-engage with citizens in a meaningful way.

4. Neighbourhood planning and consultation— City staff have repealed rather than revisited more than 70 neighbourhood plans and guidelines that were developed with robust citizen input. The few successor zoning guidelines have had almost no local citizen input—these new zones are characterized by height, massing and density rules that are increased for almost every new application. Neighbourhood planning should be brought back, and strengthened, and whatever zoning arises from reconsideration should be adhered to, not varied every time a new development application arises.

5. The future of False Creek South— Aware of the need to renew their land leases, residents of False Creek South funded and undertook sophisticated densification studies for their homelands. These were ignored by city staff, whose crude and unfair efforts would have shunted existing residents to the margins along 6th Avenue to make room for market-based densification. An overwhelming response by hundreds of residents from across Vancouver sent that plan back for revision; replanning is now being undertaken by a secretive consortium without citizen input. False Creek South as well as other communities already have thoughtful, experienced and engaged residents. There must be no more secretive analyses of future development here or anywhere else in the city.

6. Housing affordability— All levels of government have bought into the simplistic idea “just build more and it will be more affordable.” Zero scientific studies in many countries3 links more construction with cheaper accommodation costs. There are several studies noting that with land as a limiting factor, building more simply inflates the value of the land that homes are sitting on without reducing sale or rental costs. Scant attention is being paid to ways to control land and other costs, despite many historical and current models. The “build build build and it will be affordable” erroneous mindset must be officially set aside in favour of a more nuanced approach founded in affordability/economic principles.

7. Jericho Lands— Although only one-third the area of False Creek North (FCN), the Jericho Lands are planned to have more homes and a higher population, including more than 60 high-rise buildings (as planned, FCN had 50). Public input to the plan has been alternately spurned and ignored, including a community-developed mid-rise plan of similar density. These plans must be paused until a fulsome public consultation process has been completed, and the plan amended accordingly.

8. Rental housing— Almost every development application brought forward in the past two years and ongoing has chipped away at the “requirements” for below market rental housing. This must stop. With the reality that there is already a surplus of new rental housing, mostly unaffordable and frequently unlivable, proposals that do not comply with all requirements should be defeated. This may help depress the cost of development land and permit more affordable rental to become feasible.

9. The Vancouver Plan— Soon to become Vancouver’s Official Community Plan (VOCP) in March 2026 if the current Council has its way, this ever-changing plan will combine Broadway Plan and multiplex densities almost everywhere with elimination of most public hearings4 . Iff (if and only if) the composition of Council changes sufficiently that there is a majority on Council with guts, the VOCP can be repealed per the Vancouver Charter.

10. The Broadway Plan— Part of the VOCP, the Broadway Plan (BP) affects 500+ blocks from 1st Avenue to 16th Avenue and Clark Drive west to Yew Street. This supposedly 30-year plan is halfway to fruition5 less than three years from adoption. It has been amended twice so far, each time increasing allowable heights and densities. Nonetheless almost every application to date has asked to increase height/density and/or decrease below market rental housing. The Broadway Plan should be paused in its entirety until meaningful community consultation has occurred.

11. Shading of community spaces by proposed development— There are several proposed and a few approved rezoning applications that, for example, shade parks and school playgrounds, contrary to what were thought to be clear requirements in the BP and other planning documents. No development that shades schools and playgrounds should be permitted.

12. Multiplex housing— Zoning changes have been approved for most formerly single family and duplex zones permitting up to four market homes on a 33’ lot, up to six for 50’ lots or if they are all market rental. To accommodate this expansion, allowable heights have been increased dramatically, setbacks reduced and all guidelines encouraging neighbourly solutions have been eliminated. Multiplex approvals should be paused until proper community consultation leads to refinements addressing neighbourhood concerns.

13. High-rise housing challenges— The city and BC Hydro’s own research has identified that high-rises require significantly more energy per home to build and to maintain. Development approvals should be paused until regulations respect the science.

14. Loss of democracy— The province has passed several bills that curtail democracy—for example by prohibiting public hearings for any application that complies with a community’s Official Community Plan (OCP). A few communities (not Vancouver which is very much in support) are opposing this and related legislation. Vancouver should lead the fight against loss of democracy, using its Charter where necessary.

15. Homelessness— Vancouver has never implemented more than 1-1/2 of the four pillars approach6 that has been successful in other countries to reduce homelessness. Nor has Vancouver used its land holdings to create safe housing. Vancouver can and should implement a true four pillars approach to address the significant drug addition component of homelessness. Vancouver can sponsor more affordable co-operative, rental and ownership mixes such as False Creek South by leasing rather than selling city lands.

16. Missing Middle Housing and neighbourhoods— The Jericho Coalition has proposed a mid-rise (4-8 storeys) plan for the Jericho Lands that provides as much housing as the proponent’s original proposal. Elsewhere, planners and architects have proposed mid-rise solutions that provide significant density increases. Mid-rise is cheaper than high-rise to build. Council should eliminate Official Development Plans (ODPs) and zoning regulations that favour high-rise over mid-rise construction.

17. Disposing of school lands— The Vancouver School Board (VSB) has already started to dispose of 40 parcels of school land, using specious and redacted data based, it appears, on ignoring all of the proposed new development in most areas of the city—a backward rather than forward looking approach7. Halt land disposition by VSB pending a comprehensive review of enrolment based on actual and proposed development.

18. Bills 44, 46 and 47— These provincial bills mandate an end to public hearings and impose arbitrary, data-free housing construction requirements on most communties8 in the province. Bill 44 effectively transfers control of municipal planning to the province; Bill 46 hobbles municipalities’ ability to fund infrastructure (you know, water, sewers and roads) from development charges, not to mention the costs of additional parks, schools, community centres and other community amenities. Council must oppose those elements of these bills that are detrimental to proper community planning and development.

19. “Affordable” housing design— As more and more privately financed housing developments come on line, it’s becoming obvious that they are not affordable for the families, couples and singles who need them—nor are they designed for them. Vancouver should take the lead in establishing design and construction standards for new residential construction that promote livability as well as affordability.

20. “Villages”— City staff have yet to answer the simple questions: “Where did the villages idea spring from and why are they needed?” and “Won’t these simply accelerate the decline of existing neighbourhood shopping areas?” Council should pause this programme until these and other foundational questions are answered.

21. Social housing9— Only in Vancouver is a social housing building at most 30% affordable, with the other 70% being market sales or rentals. After fierce public opposition at a public hearing, Council postponed until March 2026 blanket rezoning of huge portions of the city for 30/70 social housing, with buildings permitted to be 18-20 storeys. These buildings need only be 30% affordable to avoid the rezoning process. City staff have been asked by Council to revisit their proposals for reconsideration in March. Council should repeal this zoning category and work with the city’s existing neighbourhoods to identify opportunities for affordable social housing.

22. Whatever else comes along… stuff I’ve not yet written about10— Most recently, Council has received a request to build a high-rise residential building in an existing industrial zoned area. City staff and many citizens have recommended against this, as it will destroy what remains of Vancouver’s industrial land base, but Council’s decision is pending, and soon. Council and staff should refuse such proposals.

None of these 22 and more topics has been resolved to date although several are pending soon. Many are inter related.

Over the next few months I hope to consider in detail and in order of urgency how those whose thoughts and beliefs I respect would address each of these 22 failings. I will address them in order of urgency—for example, city staff are right now recommending reduction of a view cone originating at Trout Lake to permit a high-rise much higher than the mountains behind—it may be a done deal by February 4th!

In the spirit of “it takes a village to raise a child…, no, not the city staff Villages!” I encourage readers to send me their thoughts on any or all of these 22 subjects, and other concerns you have. With BC’s municipal elections scheduled for October 2026, time to keep Vancouver and other BC municipalities from dying is fast running out.

This post is over 2100 words not including footnotes, way more than the 3-5 minutes citizens are allowed when they speak to the current Vancouver City Council, in their efforts to suppress democracy. If you appreciated this post, please share to your social media and consider becoming a free subscriber to City Conversations at

Brian Palmquist writes in the ancestral lands of the Musqueam people. He is a Vancouver-based architect, building envelope and building code consultant and LEED Accredited Professional (the first green building system). He is semi-retired, still teaching, writing and consulting a bit, but not beholden to any client or city hall. City Conversations mix real discussion with research and observations based on a 50-year career including the planning, design and construction of almost every type and scale of project. He is the author of the Amazon best seller and AIBC Construction Administration course text, “An Architect’s Guide to Construction.” A glutton for punishment, he is threatening to write a book about how we can Embrace, Enhance and Evolve the places where we love to live. Some of its content may appear above.