The Vancouver City Council on Aug. 11 denied a proposal to rezone a 1.6-acre property at Northeast 50 Eighth Street from R22 to R50, rejecting an applicant request that would have allowed a five-story, 77-unit apartment building.

The denial followed extensive public testimony by neighbors who raised concerns about traffic and pedestrian safety, lack of sidewalks, tree removal, stormwater and drainage impacts, and proximity to Walnut Grove Elementary School and Shafer Park. A majority of the planning commission had recommended denial (4–3); council members weighed that recommendation along with testimony before voting to uphold the commission’s decision.

Applicant representatives argued the site qualifies for higher density because of changing housing needs and limited redevelopment opportunities elsewhere in the area; they said R35 would be an acceptable alternative but indicated they might not pursue it. Staff noted the site is across from Shafer Park, that proposed park frontage improvements are planned in 2026 regardless of rezoning, and that site plan review would require additional studies including geotechnical reports and traffic analysis if development proceeded.

Neighbors and homeowners described narrow two-lane streets without sidewalks, school drop-off congestion, tree loss, and existing drainage that would be exacerbated by a larger development. Several speakers cited the planning commission denial and urged the council to respect that body’s recommendation. Council members expressed concern about safety and infrastructure, called for clearer citywide development standards to accompany any future increases in density, and noted the tension between meeting housing targets and protecting neighborhood livability.

Councilor Hansen moved to agree with the planning commission’s denial of the R22-to-R50 rezoning; the motion passed on a roll call vote (Harless — aye; Perez — aye; Fox — aye; Paulson — aye; Stover — nay; Hansen — aye; Mayor McInerney Ogle — aye). By voting to agree with the planning commission, council denied the ordinance to rezone the 1.6-acre site.

Why it matters: The decision preserves the existing R22 designation for this parcel, limiting near-term redevelopment density and deferring any increase in allowable units until the applicant either re-applies, pursues a lower-density rezoning, or seeks a change through the comprehensive plan process.

Next steps: The applicant may reapply for a different zoning designation (for example R35) or pursue a comprehensive-plan designation change; if the applicant chooses to reapply they would be subject to current application timelines and fees and could appeal a final council denial to the Growth Management Hearings Board or superior court.

This article draws on public testimony and staff presentations recorded in the Aug. 11 council hearing.