Building_development + Cross_cutting + Forests_green_space

14:30 And this slide shows the location of the bakery building downtown Vancouver, along with the parcel that's outlined. Next slide, please. These images show the historic and the compared to its current condition today. Next slide, please. So the final category that's relevant tonight is the stream protection under Clark County Code 3.08.040. This classification designations for land that protects streams, water, resources or shorelines of the state. And qualifying tracks must be contiguous to or straddling major streams designated shorelines

15:24 of the state or identified in the county's Shoreline Master Program. Next slide, please. So the last application located at 19502 Northeast 19th Street is the open space classification under stream protection. For a portion of this larger outlined in the yellow is a 38-acre parcel. I think it's on the next slide I talk about. And so as shown here, it's along the Lacomis Creek area, which is designated shoreline of the state, and it's regulated under the county's Shoreline Master Program. The highlighted area represents the portion where the corridor and the associated vegetation

16:23 along the creek had been evaluated for the compliance of the code. Next slide, please. And so the kind of the key code for this is looking at the minimum 10 contiguous acres for open space exclusive of a home site. And so during the from the time of our work session and to the hearing and in making new maps, the county's GIS system had remapped the parcels. So it came up to you know, originally it was submitted 11.43 acres. But you know, during the updated records, the two parcels are there now two parcels that total 11.37 acres.

17:21 So under our Clark County Code 3.08.040 stream protection classification applies to tracks that are contiguous to or straddle shorelines of the state, which the site does. An important distinction here is that the shoreline management area itself is less than 10 acres, but the code does not require the shoreline polygon to independently meet the minimum acreage threshold. Instead, the minimum acreage applies to the track being classified. Additionally, because the property was created through the subdivision, 3.08.090 requires each lot or parcel to meet the 10 acre minimum. So which here is satisfied. So based on this, the proposed 11.37 acre track meets all the applicable criteria and

18:16 staff recommends approval of the 11.37 acres. Next slide, please. And so here's a little closer look of how the acreage is configured of the 11.37 acres. You see the 7.43 acre parcel in the upper portion and then the 3.94 acre there on the lower side. So these tracks together meet that 11.37 acres. Next slide, please. And that concludes the presentation tonight and happy to answer any questions you may have. Thank you. >> Okay, questions for staff. Let me just make sure you let our recorder know who's speaking. And of course, slowly. Any questions? >> This is Commissioner Haroon. Just a quick question.

19:13 On slide 4, I was just reading it more in curiosity, the open space land in 2019 was 8,796 acres and 2026 is like half of that. So we've actually gone backwards from open space classification? Am I reading that correctly? >> So I wouldn't say backwards. But every transaction between landowners, sellers, buyers, they have the opportunity to continue the use. And so when people do land transactions and if they were in open space, they may have opted out and paid the back taxes. >> Thank you. >> Any other questions? >> Yeah, Hunter, Commissioner Halbert here. Just on back to Fairview Slope, Lot 12.

20:13 So will that be an independent track from all the other tracks that are in that subdivision? Or there'd be two tracks or just one track? >> Yeah, it would be. So in our GIS system, it would still be two parcels. But for the open space classification, it would be one tract. >> Got you, but it is a tract, or it's a parcel that is identifiable. >> Yeah. >> So it would be, in GIS, it would be identified as two independent tax parcels, both with the current use classification applied to them. >> Fair, thanks. Any other questions from the commission? Okay, with that said, we'll bring it back. We'll now hear public testimony for tonight's hearing.

21:11 Oral testimony should be directed at the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission will consider all public comments as they deliberate it and vote on the recommendation of the council. So we'll start off, was there any sign-up sheet? >> There's one person who wants to speak. >> One person wants to speak, okay. So we'll start with that. Public testimony, I don't want to bring that person up. Do we have any other comment? Yeah, go ahead, sir. And make sure you state your name, please. >> Good evening, my name is Spencer Vetter, I'm a planning for a project manager for Pacific Lifestyle Homes. >> I can't hear him. >> Is this better? Okay. >> Yes, let me start your name again so further. >> Sure, all right. Good evening, my name is Spencer Vetter. I'm a project manager for Pacific Lifestyle Homes. I worked on developing this property. I want to thank the commissioners for allowing me this time to talk, and thank you to Kevin and Hunter for putting these slides together.

22:10 I'll keep my comments brief, but I first wanted to touch on the two parcels. They were created as two parcels because this subdivision was originally proposed as a three phase subdivision. So these are, we plotted two phases together, so this is a track from a phase one and from a phase two. It would otherwise be managed the same way by the HOA company. A little bit more fleshing out on this project is this open space will be a benefit to the future residents for their enjoyments. It was previously farmed by the Schnell family, and this is a continuation of that space. If there are any questions, I'm happy to answer them. >> Any questions for the applicant?

23:08 Okay, thank you very much, I appreciate your comments. >> Can he spell his last name, please? >> Yeah, thank you. It's Vedder, V as in Victor, E-T-T-E-R. >> Thank you, sir. Okay, with that said, that was the only one on the list. Okay, do we have any online? Okay, with none back online, we'll bring it back to the Planning Commission for Deliberations. Are there any comments from the Planning Commission regarding this? Or I would signal for a motion or a second if you'd like. >> I'd like that the applicants are taking advantage of these tax incentives to preserve their open space, and that single family, or that residence, and that building downtown.

24:05 I think this is a great program to help them continue to maintain some of our historic buildings and properties around. Great, great program. >> Thank you. Anybody? >> We've lost, okay. That said, I'd say I like the historical pictures too. Thanks for that, I mean, it just gives me a better, I mean, I'm sure it's the same, but I was like, that's really trippy, kind of what it was in the history of it. So it was nice, a good presentation. Thank you, it's always good to see you guys, appreciate your time. With that said, unless someone else would like to comment, I'd consider a motion. >> This is Commissioner Fadness. I move to approve the three requests as presented. >> This is Commissioner Haroon, I second. >> Mr. Berthold, I'll second. >> We have many seconds. Cindy, you can choose one. With that said, we have a motion and a second. Jeff, can we get a roll call, please?

25:04 >> Ryan Halpert? >> Aye. >> Mark Berthold? >> Aye. >> Kyle Fadness? >> Aye. >> Jack Haroon? >> Aye. >> Alicia LaDuke Montgomery?