Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Land Use Development Code topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council approves amendments to Section 30 development code; staff clarifies design-guideline exemptions

2959612 · April 7, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Council voted to approve amendments to Chapter 20.69 (Section 30) after staff clarified that the new alternative development path would be exempt from certain design guidelines and added a minimum plaza-size standard for urban neighborhood mixed-use centers.

The Vancouver City Council on April 7 approved amendments to Chapter 20.69 of the Vancouver Municipal Code to expand land-use choices for property owners covered by pre-annexation development agreements in Section 30 and to clarify related implementation language.

Chad Eichen, Community Development director and co-project manager, explained that staff accepted several edits suggested by a property owner (identified in the record as HP) to clarify the code’s treatment of an alternative “paid-up” development path. Eichen said staff intended that the Section 30 design guidelines not apply to projects that choose the alternative path and that code language was added in several sections to state that explicitly.

Eichen also said staff and property owners agreed to add a minimum plaza size for projects in the urban neighborhood mixed-use center that propose a plaza rather than a main street as the required neighborhood focal point. He said the ordinance language was amended to require a plaza of at least 10,000 square feet with a minimum dimension of 80 feet when a plaza is proposed.

Councilors asked whether property owners would complete required development-agreement amendments within the ordinance’s set time frame and whether the temporary code additions should be removed after the time frame lapses. Eichen said the planning commission had unanimously recommended approval and that staff would return with suggested language if the council wanted clearer expiration language for the temporary provisions.

Councilor Fox moved to approve item 11; Councilor Stober seconded. The council took a roll-call vote: Council member Harless, Council member Perez, Councilor Fox, Councilor Stober, Councilor Hansen and Mayor Anne McInerney Ogle all voted aye and the motion passed. Staff recommended that the amended ordinance be scheduled for a public hearing on the council’s April 14 meeting agenda.

The code changes modify how pre-annexation development agreement holders may use an alternative set of standards in exchange for limiting certain uses and add clarifying language to multiple subsections (20.69.004B; 20.69.004D4; 20.69.006D4; 20.69.007D8A; 20.69.007E2; 20.69.007E4B; 20.69.007E7B). The record shows the planning commission review and a unanimous recommendation for approval; staff and council described the edits as clarifying rather than substantive.