DECISION <br />Pursuant to EC 9.7330, the hearings official may approve, approve with conditions, or deny a Type III <br />application. For the reasons set out above, the hearings official concludes that except for, development <br />west of the eastern arm of the riparian corridor, the applicant has demonstrated that all applicable PUD <br />approval standards have or can be satisfied. With respect to the depiction of the resource boundaries <br />and conservation setback, the hearings official concludes that the applicant has not accurately depicted <br />those features on the plan, and consequently, lot development and stormwater design standards are not <br />satisfied for lots 5 and 6. <br />Having decided that the applicant has satisfied applicable approval standards with respect to a majority <br />of the site, the hearings official is left with two choices: (1) deny the application because not all of the <br />development standards have been satisfied or (2) condition approval to ensure that the standards are <br />met. The hearings official chooses the latter, because the inadequacies in the application are isolated to <br />one area of the property. Therefore, the hearings official approves the tentative PUD plan, subject to <br />the following conditions: <br />The final PUD site plan shall be modified to remove references to the creation of lots 5 and 6, <br />and to development related to those lots. The applicant may retain then adjust Tract "A" to <br />include the entirety of the /WR conservation area, or identify on` the final plan areas that may be <br />developed in the future. If the applicant chooses to retain the entire area within Tract A, the <br />applicant need not depict the boundaries of the resource site or conservation setback on the <br />final plan, but shall include the note described in Condition 15. However, if,the applicant . <br />chooses to retain some of the area as an area to be developed in the future, the applicant shall <br />delineate the boundaries of the Goal 5 resource consistent with this decision, and modify the <br />conservation setback to conform to the modified "top of bank" standard, or apply for a revision <br />to the /WR map as permitted by the code. <br />Unless a modification to the PUD is approved pursuant to EC 9.8335 with respect to the <br />western portion of the site, the final site plans shall be revised to eliminate all proposed - " <br />development west of Lots 4 and 7 and west of the west terminus of Nelson Street and the 7-foot <br />utility easement at the west tenninus of Nelson Street and outside of the /WR conservation <br />setback. <br />If the applicant chooses to modify the final PUD plan to accommodate development west of <br />the eastern arm of the riparian corridor, the applicant shall demonstrate that the proposal is <br />consistent with all. applicable development standards, including but not limited, to stormwater <br />design requirements, private road access standards, and lot development standards. <br />Modifications to the final PUD shall be in accordance with the procedures set out in EC 9.8335. <br />2. The final site plan shall note that reserve strips are required for the i°nd of both proposed streets <br />stubbed to the north (re-named Nelson Court and Sterling Woods Drive) and will be addressed <br />as part of the subdivision review. <br />3. The final site plan shall note that the street names are subject to further review and approval as <br />part of the' subsequent subdivision process (revised names will be required for Nelson Street <br />and Nelson Court). <br />Alder Woods PUD (PDT 07-5 & SDR 08-2) <br />Page 36 <br />Laurel Ridge Record (Z 15-5) Page 1164 <br />