Building_development

2:36:21 with what they have to say and that's, I guess that's what I have to say, so. - Okay, well, thank you very much for your testimony. I'm glad you were able to join us online. - Okay, great, thank you. - Take care, okay. - Okay, bye. - Bye bye. Okay, so we will go back to rebuttal testimony from Mr. Tortorice, thank you. - Thank you. Yes, so as I was mentioning, we have a few folks here from the city that may be able to speak to trees and transportation. I was gonna make a general kind of comment about density. I think if you were to calculate the density it is within the range of R17, but when approving a subdivision, we look at the dimensional standards for the lots, which include a minimum and maximum lot size, lot width and depth. So pretty much those calculations shape how many lots can be created.

2:37:19 And to that, with our finding that the rezone and subdivision meet the approval criteria, you know, the city cannot require a reduced density alternative or require additional open space. Any of that would be at the developers, you know, their initiative. And then moving down to, we talked about infill development. I think we're, I understand. And even the compliance stuff talks about infill. I will make a clarification that we have, the city of Vancouver has something called infill capital I infill development, which is four lots, no larger than two and a half acres. So of course that doesn't apply. I just wanted to draw a line here that we are in, the proposal is to infill, but given that it's a larger than two and a half acres, it's not eligible for infill development. So the rezoned R17 still within the lower density comp plan designation is the way to develop what people classify as underutilized

2:38:18 or underdeveloped lots. Let's see, keep going here. Yes, again, things like the urban heat island, I understand the concern and then how these relate to these larger policy goals identified by city council and the city, but in staff's finding it doesn't, it's not essentially approval criteria. Moving on, I think so. So there was a condition in the staff report where the one lot was larger than allowed. And there were some options discussed about what can be done. And it seemed like the applicant tonight has proposed basically a non-developable tract to retain trees and the community members input that I'm getting to now is they were asking about how the HOA retains control. And that's basically like any common space like condos, et cetera, where the HOA, the housing,

2:39:18 they're responsible for the maintenance and upkeep, et cetera. And that's a private agreement, but I just wanted to see if I could provide any clarity there. Moving on. Someone brought up a concern. I think it was Lynn about the transportation infrastructure being required prior to building homes. And while I can't necessarily speak to the particular requirements for the transportation infrastructure, I will note that all of that is required prior to final plat. And of course you won't be able to construct a home until the final plat is recorded. So all of that kind of sidewalk and frontage improvements, those are completed before the houses are built. Let's see, moving down here. Some things of course, as the city cannot speak to us and maybe the applicant will with a security or background check for construction workers.

2:40:15 A community member brought up and Charles Reagan will speak to this 20770-070 where it pretty much states that when feasible prudent location alternatives exist, basically the city can require redesigning the site to preserve trees. And the only thing I am not an urban forester. The only thing I will note is that that is an option. The city may require it and it was reviewed by our urban forester. And it seemed like at least according to the findings, that wasn't something that was discussed or required by our urban forestry department. They found it to meet the code as conditioned in the report.

2:40:55 - Yes, and I think that that's pretty much it. I know a lot was discussed. I'm trying to condense my response.