P®F Page 55 <br />Consistency with the Metro Plan Diagram and Text is addressed In connection with Evaluation <br />of Zone Change Request above. <br />9.8320(2): The proposed PUD is consistent with applicable adopted refinement plans. <br />Two refinement plans are relevant - the Laurel Hill Plan (1982) and the South Hills Study (1974). <br />Laurel Hill Plan Diagram <br />Consistency with the Laurel Hill Plan Diagram is addressed in connection with Evaluation'of <br />Zone Change Request above. <br />Laurel Hill Plan Text <br />The Applicant's June 24 narrative addresses policies in the Laurel Hill Plan at pages 32 - 35. <br />See Discussion of Laurel Hill Plan later in this document (beginning at Page 32). <br />South Hills Study (SH5 <br />The SHS applies because this site is at more than 500 feet elevation and is south of 18th Avenue. <br />SHS adopting Resolution #2295 says that the Purpose Statement and Recommendations set <br />forth in the SHS are adopted as policy statements and as a refinement of the Metro Plan, and <br />are intended to be used in making land-use decisions in the SHS area. <br />As the Hearing Official explained in approving the The Jewell Tentative PUD (PDT 08-1) at page 3 <br />(included as Prehearing Submittal Exhibit 3-1.4): <br />The South Hills-Study (SHS serves as the applicable adopted refinement plan for <br />the site. The SHS does not have an adopted land use diagram, but does include <br />siting and development policies that must be addressed for PUDs. <br />In general, compliance with the SHS standards requires making design choices among <br />conflicting standards that result in trade-offs in the final design. The Applicant's choices in this <br />instance make sense in light of all the other standards that must be considered, weighed, and <br />resolved. The Applicant's narrative explains why the standards are met; no party has explained <br />why they are not met. <br />Ridgeline Park Section - Specific Recommendations. <br />That all vacant property above an elevation of 90,1' be preserved from an intensive <br />level of development, subject to the following exceptions: <br />1. Development of individual residences on'existing lots; and <br />LaurelRidge Applicant Final Argument- Page 21 <br />104 <br />Laurel Ridge Record (Z 15-5) Page 859 <br />