During the public hearings for the Swift's Terrace and Mount Hood Vista subdivisions, multiple residents provided testimony outlining their concerns with the proposed developments. Commenters on the Swift's Terrace project focused on steep slope stability, erosion, neighborhood character, and boundary disputes, prompting the hearing examiner to leave the written record open for an additional week to accommodate missed notices. Testimony regarding the Mount Hood Vista project highlighted opposition to a proposed high-density rezone, with residents emphasizing that increased vehicle traffic and a lack of pedestrian infrastructure would endanger families and children walking in the neighborhood.
Cross_cutting
Vancouver Land Use Hearings · Jun 16, 2026 · 1:01:12–1:01:24 · Watch on CVTV ↗
Keywords: public testimony public hearing public comment Public comment
What was said
1:00:09 I see, okay, Mr. Vosburgh, okay.
1:00:17 - I'm not seeing any others. - You're not seeing anybody else? Yeah, I am not seeing, go ahead. Okay. - I'm not seeing anyone. - Okay, so before I turn it back to Ms. Sanchez, there was a request to leave the record open following the hearing this evening. I'd like city staff to make a comment on that as well as the applicant. But I will say that I'm inclined to grant that request, but please do address that request as well. And Ms. Sanchez, and then when I turn it back to the applicant. So Ms. Sanchez, you may proceed. - Thank you, examiner Marshall. To start with regarding the noticing of the staff report, all parties of record who provided their email during the public comment period were included in the email
1:01:16 on June 2nd, and that provided them a link to the staff report and agenda. And I believe Mark Erickson was included on that email. Going to address the comments mentioned regarding the infill ordinance. The current version of the infill ordinance has been in place since 2024. Prior to that, it has been around for at least a decade. They are applying for infill development standards as mentioned before for attaching a family home, which allows a lot as small as 1,500 square feet. Let's see, regarding the SEPA exemption, the city has adopted exempt levels for minor new construction. Any project proposing 30 single family units or fewer can be exempt from SEPA. In this case, the applicant is proposing 18 single family units. So this project is exempt from SEPA. The critical area ordinance is a local requirement and separate from the state SEPA requirements.
1:02:14 By requiring a critical area permit on this project, it doesn't mean that the project is no longer exempt from SEPA. The condition regarding the geotechnical review,
Evidence (1 match)
cross_cutting keyword 1:01:12–1:01:24 public testimony, public hearing, public comment, Public comment
ell. And Ms. Sanchez, and then when I turn it back to the applicant. So Ms. Sanchez, you may proceed. - Thank you, examiner Marshall. To start with regarding the noticing of the staff report, all parties of record who provided their email during the public comment period were included in the email on June 2nd, and that provided them a link to the staff report and agenda. And I believe Mark Erickson was included on that email. Going to address the comments mentioned regarding the infill ordinance