Forests_green_space

2:40:19 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. Yes, and generally speaking as a planner, we're looking to the approved development code and standards that were approved by city council and applying those. We find it to meet or can meet as conditioned, acknowledging those larger impacts that are policy decisions and then deferring to urban forestry with Charles Ray or Eric Hahn with transportation concerns. - Okay, thank you, Mr. Todorishi. - Yes, you're welcome. - Mr. Ray, let me swear to you real quick. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you give will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? - I do. - Great, please state your name, spell your last name and what your title and position is of the city. - Sure, good evening, this is a hearings diameter.

2:41:53 I'm Charles Ray, last name is R-A-Y. Urban forester with the city of Vancouver, certified arborist, urban forestry professional and ISA qualified tree risk assessor. I have testified as an expert witness in Clark County courts regarding tree issues. I've responded to and assist with resolving tree issues within the city, which includes supporting community development, reviewing tree plans and development proposals. In my professional opinion, the project was designed to minimize vegetation loss. The project is proposing to retain trees, existing trees along the West and Southeast section, as well as planting additional trees to meet the code requirements. This part of development is not feasible to retain all trees or all large or old trees due to the density, due to transportation requirements, due to utilities and due to grading, there just simply is not enough space.

2:42:53 Retention of the emerging and mature trees is ideal as they can withstand some impacts to the root system and can acclimate to the site. And some of the comments that we heard tonight regarding retaining additional trees under the new code, the new code does require a percentage of quality trees onsite or healthy trees onsite of 33%, but that is under the new code. There's also discussions about tree canopy goals and tree canopy goals is not a code requirement at this time in the new code, it is a requirement. And just to point out that every parcel and development is a contributing piece to reach, meet and exceed those citywide tree canopy goals. - Okay, all right. Thank you, Mr. Ray.

2:43:52 Did you have anything further on that? - No, I think that addressed all of them, thank you. - Okay, thank you very much. Okay, Eric Hahn. All right, Mr. Hahn, let me swear you, when you swear or affirm the testimony you give will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. - Yes. - Okay, please state your name, spell your last name and state what your position is at the city. - My name is Eric Hahn, last name is spelled H-A-H-N. I am a senior civil engineer in the transportation division. I head up the transportation development review team within that division. - Okay, you may proceed, thank you. - First of all, let me start by kind of describing the neighborhood from a transportation perspective. This existing neighborhood surrounding this site