PDF Page 68 <br />before any major hillside clearing, excavation, filling or construction is <br />contemplated, the requirements of the Uniform Building Code, Chapter 70, <br />Excavation and Grading, and those sections of the code relative to foundation <br />design may be invoked. <br />b. Considerable latitude shall be allowed the developer in the shaping, depth, and <br />required street frontages of lots where it is necessary to preserve the terrain. <br />The Staff Report notes in many places and relies heavily on their findings that the SHS policies <br />have not been met. This has been discussed above. As evidenced by the Site Plan and <br />supporting documents, alteration of the land contours has been minimized to the greatest <br />degree practical considering the underlying base zone and allowed use on the site. <br />Extensive revegetation, tree planting, mitigation of loss of canopy and reforestation have been <br />proposed. It is not practical to assume no disturbance will take place. (See Applicant's <br />Narrative dated June 24, 2013 at pages 33 - 34) <br />Additionally over 63% of the site will remain undisturbed. This number represents extensive <br />conservation of vegetation, protection of resources and protection of existing topography. This <br />policy has been met. <br />Transportation <br />Policy 1. No arterial or limited access road will be allowed within the boundaries of the <br />Valley which would connect the Glenwood interchange on Interstate 5 to 30th Avenue <br />or Spring Boulevard. <br />Policy 2. No arterial or limited access road will be allowed within the Valley except as <br />necessary to serve Valley residents, as it would physically and thus destroy the <br />neighborhood. <br />The applicant is proposing only local streets. No arterial or limited access road is proposed <br />which is consistent with these policies. <br />Policy 3: Street design will reflect the functions of the streets in accordance with their <br />designation as "collector" or "local," and a mandatorystreet design standard should <br />be avoided. Traffic patterns and street standards shall provide for such uses as public <br />or school bus routes and emergency and service vehicles. <br />Since this LHP policy was adopted; new street design standards have been adopted into the <br />City's code which provide for a variety of street designs, and standards that a developer may <br />choose from, depending on the circumstances. The design standards are largely based upon <br />the amount of traffic capacity for the type of street. The applicant proposes three public, local <br />residential streets as part of this proposal including the Frontage Road, "A Street" and "B <br />Street" with one additional private street (labeled Private Road on the plan sheets) that <br />connects to "A" Street on the west and "B" Street on the east. Additionally, there are several <br />LaureiRidge Applicant Final Argument - Page 34 <br />117 <br />Laurel Ridge Record (Z 15-5) Page 872 <br />