Josh White

Housing is always “filtering”, but the direction of filtering is a policy choice. Old housing filters up if housing does not keep up with demand, and down if it does. And it filters down faster if we make up for past shortfalls.

That is coming to Council within 12 months. Neighbourhood Centres planning after that, an additional hundreds of blocks more, whereby the majority of the city, and any lands within proximity to transit service will enable apartments.

The balance of areas enabling apartment scale housing is shifting - Broadway Plan, Rupert/Renfrew just approved. Villages being delivered with city-initiated rezoning of these new zoning districts will open several hundred more city blocks to apartment.

*that is not needed

More here:

council.vancouver.ca/20250722/doc...

The fastest rezoning is one they does not needed at all. If a rezoning is needed, in more cases, these zoning districts can be used “off the shelf” rather than bespoke zoning bylaws site by site (what we call CD-1s in Vancouver) /5

coming up shortly in areas of Cambie Plan and Broadway Plan and across more areas of the city over time. /4

Moreover, we are proposing City-initiating rezoning, for Council’s consideration, putting the zoning districts “on the ground” aligned with area plan policies so that more applications can move straight to Development Permit… 3/

One key move on that path is creating clear, simpler apartment-scale zoning through a so-called “glass box” approach - basic height, density, and form of development expectations. /2

Vancouver To Transform Development Process With Standardized Residential Zones The changes proposed by the City of Vancouver would set default heights and densities for different residential zoning districts and streamline the development process.

At the City of Vancouver we committed to a path to simplify our regulatory environment, streamline our policy, increasing certainty in our process, and getting to faster approvals to enable housing…

storeys.com/vancouver-st...

We are simplifying district schedules through the “glass box” approach (and city initiating zoning them) as well as dramatically streamlining development policy. We are making huge, huge strides but it won’t be as simple as it ultimately can be in one fell swoop, but we are committed to the path.

*relaxable

2) Frontage requirements are calibrated with regulated FSR
In typical Vancouver blocks to produce the requisite desired typical heights. Eg. 6 FSR matched with x frontage - say -132-150ft will produce the mid-rise tower form the district schedule is intended to enable.

In addition, separation we tend to use as a standard/guideline so we can relax with discretion in certain instances where justified. Regulation like a district schedule (bylaw) is not relatable in the same way…

…or results with setbacks in tiny floor plates, so it definitely aids in cleaner paths to projects that work for projects and the development rights of neighbouring properties….

The minimum lot frontage easily facilitated reasonable separation with efficient floor plates and offers certainty. In their absence we get applications say mid block 99’ where builders are trying to squeeze a tower, but it forces the neighbour to eat the setback for separation…

Completely fair question, let me see if I can explain reasonably succinctly. 1) It has to do with regulation (min. Frontage in district schedule) reinforcing a standard/guideline (separation/solar access). A regulation does not offer discretion, but standards/guidelines do…

Different policy when it gets to ‘tower’ scale above a certain height. Different to side setbacks.

Effectively, it’s for tower separation between adjacent sites. That’s why corners have smaller frontage requirements, because the street serves that function.

The City of Vancouver has a great program of incentives in our Zoning & Development Bylaw for High Performance Buildings (e.g. zero emissions buildings). Last night Council extended the incentive, which has strong industry support, to 2030. Report here: council.vancouver.ca/20250710/doc...

*make that 63 Below Market Rental (not 233 strata twice)...

Of note, one of these projects staff recommended refusal - due to being ahead of upcoming area planning, and of a scale more closely aligned with transit-oriented areas. Council ended up approving the project which has some strong attributes, and I hope it commences soon.

This week Vancouver City Council approved eight residential projects comprising ~1468 homes, including 1035 rental, 233 strata, 200 social housing, and 233 strata.

More information:

Staff Report: council.vancouver.ca/20250708/doc...

Staff Presentation: council.vancouver.ca/20250708/doc...

Media Release: vancouver.ca/news-calenda...

Moreover, it is our first area plan that will seek City-initiated zoning rather than only rezoning policy. This is a key shift in our planning system that will reduce timelines and smooth the path toward housing delivery. /7

Villages also will help enable housing, walkable amenities and services not only on busy arterials and along corridors, but with more abundant opportunity off-arterial throughout the plan area. /6

Additionally, beyond Transit-Oriented Development, it implements the first few “Villages” - which create opportunity for a mix of housing types up to six storeys. /5

A central feature includes the daylighting and restoration of Still Creek, which enhances a vital ecosystem – one of the only remaining salmon-bearing streams in Vancouver. /4

It enhances and intensifies a key employment hub in East Vancouver that’s well supported by Transit and transportation networks. We anticipate over 8000 permanent jobs facilitated in the plan area. /3