Building_development

1:05:29 What is proposed for the larger parcel there? This is entirely agricultural land designated. >> So the land that has the MF18 is the Nevin property, and it was included in alternative three as multifamily 18 dwelling units an acre. >> Was this a site specific request? >> It was, it originated a site specific request and then Camas added it to their alternative three. >> Okay, and when were those five acre parcels created? Do we know that? Or if this was part of a cluster development? >> It doesn't appear that it was part of a cluster development. I'm not sure when the parcelization occurred.

1:06:24 There was a lot of parcelization that happened prior to the 1994 plan in anticipation of up zoning or down zoning. >> Right. Rebecca, I had to ask you to have a couple of pages from the, a couple of maps from the Ag study. One of them was page seven from the Ag study that depicts all of the five acre parcels. Across the landscape in Clark County. I just like people to, as I was startled when I saw this. So these were policy decisions from previous councils that really did parcelize the landscape a good deal. And I would just contend that we've already, with the collective decisions over the years,

1:07:19 seriously undermined the long term economic viability of agriculture in Clark County. So all of the yellow is rural five. And it was thought, I think, at the time that five acres was a good parcel for smaller farms. But it really seriously undermines the ability to farm. So this is rural five, the green is the Ag land. And then there was another page, I can't remember the page number, that just shows the Ag designated land. Or not the designated land, but from the Ag study, all of the land that's suitable or meets the criteria for.

1:08:13 This is NRCS map prime Ag soils and soils of statewide significance. Those were the words I was trying to find. So I think we've already seen a lot of subdivision. And I don't see a justification to bring additional land in ND designated Ag, because I think it just puts down the red carpet for litigation. Other comments? >> Sure. >> Yep. >> Okay, so first of all, I mean, I had short conversation with you on this, Oliver. And I want to make sure that we get this right.

1:09:07 Because when you look at 3B, it says expansion to the east for housing. And so my understanding, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that the original concept from the city of Camas came to you in the form that it would be multi-family housing. But then later, there was a newer rendition given that showed it as mixed use, as Councilor Little. I've always heard the city of Camas referred to it as mixed use, but I want to be sure what we're dealing with here. >> Hi, this is Oliver again. And I would like Jose to chime in.