Capital Hill PUD: PDT 17-01 Page 2 of 5 <br />Completeness Review Response <br />➢ Fairmount Neighbors boundary <br />➢ EC 9.8010 Adopted Plans Map and legend; <br />In summary, a portion of the site is within the South Hills Study and is codified in EC 9.8010 Adopted <br />Plans (see attached South Hills Plan map and EC 9.8010 Adopted Plans Map and Legend). The <br />narrative indicates that only tax lots 100 and 201 are within the Laurel Hill Plan boundary, however <br />the entire site, except tax lot 300, is located within the boundary. Tax lots 200 and 400, which are <br />located within the Laurel Hill Plan boundary are also located within the Fairmount Neighbors <br />neighborhood. As well, all of tax lot 300 and small portions of tax lots 100 and 201 are located within <br />the Fairmount Neighbors neighborhood. Please revise the narrative accordingly. <br />The narrative has been corrected to simply indicate that all of the property is in the South Hills Study <br />area and that there is a boundary line on the proposed Site Plan that indicates which property is in <br />each of the 2 neighborhoods. <br />• Staff has concerns that several lots show larger trees within the conservation area that would be <br />potential technical fellings. Staff believes it is feasible to slightly adjust the conservation areas and <br />buildable lot areas in order to preserve for example the 30 inch maple south of lot 15 (tree no. 2169) <br />while still yielding a sizable building area for lots 15 and 14. Other examples include lots. Please <br />review all lots have conservation areas and assess the possibility of further adjustments in order to <br />preserve additional trees. <br />In general this statement above will always be true. The team moved all lots lines around in an effort <br />to ensure some of the more healthy trees were preserved. In doing so we found with the move of <br />one lot line and then another, other trees that were originally preserved were at risk of technical <br />felling. In a forested environment the healthy trees and less than healthy trees are intermingled. It is <br />impossible to move lot lines to preserve healthy trees without affecting other healthy trees. <br />This becomes a guessing game as well. Which trees should remain? Which ones should require <br />adjusting of lot lines? In fact over 33% of the site has been preserved and preserved in a large <br />contiguous area. A valid question might be: If we had preserved 25% of the site and then in <br />response to this request to look at preserving more trees added 10% more would that then have <br />been satisfactory? <br />It is our experience that there is no end for requests to preserve more trees, no matter how many <br />have been preserved. In this case this large group of trees is contiguous with the trees on the Ribbon <br />Trail and meet many if not all of the tree preservation criteria for preserving large stands, not creating <br />individual trees subject to wind throw, etc. It also creates a large contiguous visual buffer on the east <br />side of the property, not an insignificant concern expressed by neighbors through this process. <br />As a not so minor detail many of the deciduous trees (i. e. maples, oaks, cherries, ash) found in this <br />forest are in fair to poor condition regardless of the caliper size. They are being shaded by the <br />healthier more vigorous Douglas firs as indicated in the written statement and in the tree assessment <br />chart provided with the drawing package. <br />Substantial damage has occurred as well as a result of the 2016 ice storm that was followed by a <br />wind storm that damaged or uprooted even more trees. Many of the trees that are shown on the plan <br />in fair or poor condition were damaged as a result of these storms. Healthy trees were damaged as <br />well. <br />• Regarding elevation drawings to show how the site will be viewed from off site and to ensure how the <br />development will be viewed in terms of scale, bulk and height to ensure that the development blends <br />with the South Hills area. Even though your response indicates the site cannot be seen, except by <br />existing residence across Capital Drive, photographic or other evidence is needed to show this is <br />correct. Staff points out that during our past sight visit, from the existing points on Capital Drive, part <br />Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 <br />