PDF Page 57 <br />c.) least amount of vegetation; <br />d.) least amount of visual impact. <br />2. To encourage preservation as open space those areas characterized by: <br />a.) intermediate and steep slopes; <br />b.) higher elevations; <br />c.) significant amounts of vegetation; <br />d.) significant visual impact. <br />These are standards and must be considered. Each is qualified by the term "encourage." <br />Therefore, these are the softest of standards. They are grist for subjective exercise of <br />determining the correct trade-offs among conflicting values that is done for any PUD. See the <br />discussion at the start of this section. <br />The applicant's June 24 narrative addresses these variables at pages 38 - 40. The June 24 <br />narrative was the Applicant's sixth effort to balance these variables in a fashion that staff could <br />support. <br />Slopes and elevation: The shallowest slopes can be seen on the plans at some of the higher <br />elevations. Some of the steeper slopes can be seen at some of the lowest elevations. <br />Vegetation: The Staff Report says there is not enough information regarding existing <br />vegetation. Data is endless, of course; more can always be collected. This application has an <br />adequate foundation of information about vegetation. It is based on review of detailed air <br />photos, on the ground investigation by a biologist, an exact mapping of trees on the western <br />end of the site, and a lot-by lot field inspection by the Applicant's arborist to evaluate this <br />proposed site plan and to recommend'changes in the location of dwellings. <br />The Staff Report reflects an assumption that the development is to be designed around the <br />trees,'ratherthan tree retention being designed around the residential project. The staff <br />assumption is not based in the language of the code criteria. The code intends designing a <br />residential project consistent with the base zoning and the density cap of the South Hills Study. <br />As discussed in connection with the first of the "Big Picture" points above, the HO in the past <br />has supported removal of all trees if that is what is needed to approve the proposed <br />development in the South Hills. <br />Visual Irimpact: Existing trees on site range from 50 feet to 200 feet tall. Trees have been <br />preserved on all boundaries of the property as well as internal to the development. Buildings <br />are proposed to be a maximum of 35 feet tall. Except for a view by users of 30th Avenue, the <br />buildings will be largely obscured by existing trees that are taller than the roof tops of these <br />structures. That does not mean they are invisible and can never be seen, but the criterion does <br />not require that. <br />That adequate review of both on-site and off-site impact of any development by a <br />LaurelRidge Applicant Final Argument - Page 23 <br />106 <br />Laurel Ridge Record (Z 15-5) Page 861 <br />