Council hears ‘second touch’ on Title 20 redevelopment code: emphasis on mixing uses, minimum densities and middle housing

Rebecca, the deputy director leading the code update, and Mark Person walked council through the “second touch” on the Title 20 development-code rewrite that accompanies Vancouver’s comprehensive-plan update. Staff framed the rewrite as a simplification: fewer base zoning districts, building types that carry most dimensional standards, and targeted overlays for places where the city will require ground-floor commercial or other special rules.

Staff said the rewrite shifts the emphasis from separate-use zoning and maximum-density controls toward mixing uses, form-based building types and minimum densities in some areas. The proposed base-district approach would set minimum density, maximum height and broad parking rules; detailed lot standards, frontages, building-to-street relationships, parking and landscaping would live in building-type standards. Staff described base districts such as low-scale neighborhood, medium-scale neighborhood, mixed-use regional activity center, institutional campus, industrial employment and parks/open space.

Key clarifications and examples provided by staff included: a proposed minimum density for low-scale neighborhoods of about 8 units per acre; a low-scale maximum described as three stories or 45 feet; examples of existing developments that match proposed density targets (Esther Short Commons ~82 units/acre; Uptown ~185 units/acre; Evergreen townhomes ~21 units/acre). Staff said the approach would support “middle housing” mandated by state law (HB 1110 referenced) by allowing duplexes through sixplexes in low-scale zones and by creating a renaming and clearer category for the 2–6-unit building type. Staff and council discussed floor-to-ceiling heights for potential commercial conversion (staff proposing 12–14 feet; current mixed-use standard often cited as 10 feet) and flexibility to enable future conversion while avoiding large added costs to development.

On parking and open space, staff said the existing code’s parking minimums will shift toward allowing market-driven parking with some maximums in targeted areas (for example, near high-capacity transit or in station areas). Staff also said they prefer regulating maximum impervious surface rather than only lot coverage and noted a draft example figure (discussed in the meeting) of an 85% impervious cap that councilors flagged as potentially too high for urban forestry goals; staff said they would revisit that number with the urban forestry team.

Councilors raised questions about trade-offs between requiring commercial ground-floor uses and encouraging housing production in the current market; staff said they are developing a “logic model” for where overlays would require ground-floor activation and where mixing will be allowed but not required. Councilor Fox and others asked about how to preserve or attract grocery or neighborhood retail; staff described two approaches—focus development near stable public or private assets (parks, major investments) and make more flexibility for mixed uses so commercial uses can locate where market conditions support them. Councilors also discussed nonconforming uses and redevelopment: staff said existing lawful uses can generally continue and become subject to new standards at the point of substantial redevelopment, and that details on nonconforming treatment will be refined.

Staff indicated a tight schedule: another Council briefing on the code, one more Planning Commission hearing on the code (third hearing in March), a draft preferred map and draft plan tied to a DEIS in Q2, a public-comment period and, staff said, a target to adopt the plan and final EIS by the end of the year. Council provided detailed feedback on definitions, building-type graphics, floor-to-ceiling standards for potential commercial conversion, impervious-surface targets, and clarity in the use table for civic/institutional items (e.g., schools, amphitheaters).