REJECT DELTA'S OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN 2024 - PROTECT DELTA'S FUTURE: For present and future generations
199 Comments
A
Andrea Walker-Shaw
2 years ago
No to towers!!
A
Anonymous
2 years ago
Featured
We're being encouraged to "buy local", but the CIty is evicting businesses in Ladner and leaving empty, unplanned spaces. How is this rational? Revitalization does not mean empty buildings; it means empty streets and empty pockets. Please re-think this.
D
Denise Shaw
2 years ago
This process is too rushed. I for one do not want to see mega towers here. If approved kiss Ladner and Tsawwassen goodbye forever. Small scale apartments, 3 or 4 stories is fine, assuming there will not be too many of them. Our whole infrastructure here cannot support huge developments.I support duplexes as the footprint is much smaller.
B
B E Matthewson
2 years ago
Protect Ladner businesses on Chisholm street until accepted plan is available for relocation
J
jason De Los Santos
2 years ago
In a time where urban development often trumps careful consideration, there are moments when the prudent course of action is to reject an official community plan. Such a decision may seem counterintuitive in a world hungry for progress, but when the civil infrastructure fails to support proposed growth, it becomes a necessity rather than a luxury.
In our scenario, the decision to reject the community plan stems from a profound lack of civil infrastructure. Picture a town straining under the weight of its current population, with inadequate in and out roads that already lead to congestion and safety concerns. Adding more residents without upgrading these essential arteries would be akin to pouring water into a leaky bucket—futile and unsustainable.
Moreover, the town finds itself unable to support additional growth due to its stretched resources. With services already strained to the breaking point, from healthcare to public safety, accommodating more residents would only exacerbate existing issues. The town's infrastructure is a delicate ecosystem, and adding to it without fortifying its foundations would only invite disaster.
Perhaps most concerning is the state of the town's educational system. Schools, the bedrock of any community's future, are already struggling to meet the needs of their current student population. Overcrowded classrooms and overworked teachers paint a bleak picture of the town's educational landscape. Adding more families without expanding educational facilities would not only shortchange the town's children but also hinder its long-term viability.
Rejecting the official community plan in this context is not an act of regression but of prudence. It's a recognition that growth, while desirable, must be sustainable. It's an acknowledgment that progress cannot come at the cost of overstretched resources and neglected infrastructure. By taking a step back and reassessing its priorities, the town sets itself on a path towards a more sus
K
Kelley Burgham
2 years ago
Absolutely not with the tunnel left as is / abandoned by the NDP government - shame on them for stranding us as is out here for hours a day, any further density with conditions currently would be a disaster
A
Anonymous
2 years ago
DON’T CHANGE LADNER !!
For once, put aside your greed for money in your pockets and think about what all this densifying is doing to a very small town that can’t handle it !!! Ladner is a farming community, leave it alone !!!
P
Pradnyaa Rao
2 years ago
I reject Tsawwassen High Rise proposal
D
Dragomir Dubljevic
2 years ago
Please REJECT the proposed 2024 Official Community Plan (OCP) & request REVISIONS by City Staff
K
Kiersten Humphrey
2 years ago
We like our sleepy communities and don’t want to ruin the ambiance with short sighted rushed building projects
A
Anonymous
2 years ago
No!
W
Warren Hughes
2 years ago
I agree
R
Rob Sonnenberg
2 years ago
Too much, too soon.
H
Heather Preiswerck
2 years ago
I moved to Tsawwassen because it is a smaller community. If I wanted to be surrounded by concrete I would have stayed in Richmond. We don't have adequate infrastructure now, so how will adding high rise buildings make our community better. I also don't believe it will be "affordable" housing, so what is the point. More thought needs to be put into this before a plan is implemented.
M
Melissa Graham
2 years ago
As a resident of Tsawwassen, I am deeply concerned about the proposed OCP and the apparent abuse of power being demonstrated by Mayor and Council. The OCP should be rejected and proper measures to implement the voices of Delta residents in all Delta communities needs to be done before finalization of the OCP.
J
Janet Brew
2 years ago
Please don't ruin ND
J
Johanna Krawchuk
2 years ago
My concern is decreasing green space (yards) and increasing traffic with one way out of Ladner.
M
Michelle Freeman
2 years ago
Tsawwassen: High-rises up to 24 storeys must be rejected. Besides the fact there is no infrastructure in place to support this, there has already been a huge amount of development that already has had a negative impact. Please don't turn it into a "concrete city" like Richmond. It's a beach/ocean community and some of it's heritage should be preserved.
A
alan casey
2 years ago
We live in a democracy and the people of Delta demand to have a voice. You are rushing decisions with long term ramifications to fix a short term problem.
No to towers!!
We're being encouraged to "buy local", but the CIty is evicting businesses in Ladner and leaving empty, unplanned spaces. How is this rational? Revitalization does not mean empty buildings; it means empty streets and empty pockets. Please re-think this.
This process is too rushed. I for one do not want to see mega towers here. If approved kiss Ladner and Tsawwassen goodbye forever. Small scale apartments, 3 or 4 stories is fine, assuming there will not be too many of them. Our whole infrastructure here cannot support huge developments.I support duplexes as the footprint is much smaller.
Protect Ladner businesses on Chisholm street until accepted plan is available for relocation
In a time where urban development often trumps careful consideration, there are moments when the prudent course of action is to reject an official community plan. Such a decision may seem counterintuitive in a world hungry for progress, but when the civil infrastructure fails to support proposed growth, it becomes a necessity rather than a luxury. In our scenario, the decision to reject the community plan stems from a profound lack of civil infrastructure. Picture a town straining under the weight of its current population, with inadequate in and out roads that already lead to congestion and safety concerns. Adding more residents without upgrading these essential arteries would be akin to pouring water into a leaky bucket—futile and unsustainable. Moreover, the town finds itself unable to support additional growth due to its stretched resources. With services already strained to the breaking point, from healthcare to public safety, accommodating more residents would only exacerbate existing issues. The town's infrastructure is a delicate ecosystem, and adding to it without fortifying its foundations would only invite disaster. Perhaps most concerning is the state of the town's educational system. Schools, the bedrock of any community's future, are already struggling to meet the needs of their current student population. Overcrowded classrooms and overworked teachers paint a bleak picture of the town's educational landscape. Adding more families without expanding educational facilities would not only shortchange the town's children but also hinder its long-term viability. Rejecting the official community plan in this context is not an act of regression but of prudence. It's a recognition that growth, while desirable, must be sustainable. It's an acknowledgment that progress cannot come at the cost of overstretched resources and neglected infrastructure. By taking a step back and reassessing its priorities, the town sets itself on a path towards a more sus
Absolutely not with the tunnel left as is / abandoned by the NDP government - shame on them for stranding us as is out here for hours a day, any further density with conditions currently would be a disaster
DON’T CHANGE LADNER !! For once, put aside your greed for money in your pockets and think about what all this densifying is doing to a very small town that can’t handle it !!! Ladner is a farming community, leave it alone !!!
I reject Tsawwassen High Rise proposal
Please REJECT the proposed 2024 Official Community Plan (OCP) & request REVISIONS by City Staff
We like our sleepy communities and don’t want to ruin the ambiance with short sighted rushed building projects
No!
I agree
Too much, too soon.
I moved to Tsawwassen because it is a smaller community. If I wanted to be surrounded by concrete I would have stayed in Richmond. We don't have adequate infrastructure now, so how will adding high rise buildings make our community better. I also don't believe it will be "affordable" housing, so what is the point. More thought needs to be put into this before a plan is implemented.
As a resident of Tsawwassen, I am deeply concerned about the proposed OCP and the apparent abuse of power being demonstrated by Mayor and Council. The OCP should be rejected and proper measures to implement the voices of Delta residents in all Delta communities needs to be done before finalization of the OCP.
Please don't ruin ND
My concern is decreasing green space (yards) and increasing traffic with one way out of Ladner.
Tsawwassen: High-rises up to 24 storeys must be rejected. Besides the fact there is no infrastructure in place to support this, there has already been a huge amount of development that already has had a negative impact. Please don't turn it into a "concrete city" like Richmond. It's a beach/ocean community and some of it's heritage should be preserved.
We live in a democracy and the people of Delta demand to have a voice. You are rushing decisions with long term ramifications to fix a short term problem.
Totally agree with all these valid points.