1 CDC 9.1011 requires the applicant for tree removal to submit a tree survey of regulated <br />2 and/or significant trees on site. Further, the code defines "tree survey" as a "drawing that <br />3 provides the location of all trees" of a prescribed diameter. Intervenor initially presented a <br />4 tree survey based on a one-acre sample of the subject property, and the city accepted that <br />5 survey. We remanded the city's initial decision, however, concluding that under the above <br />6 code definitions and provisions the county erred in determining that proposed development <br />7 did not involve "clear-cutting" based on a one-acre sample rather than a survey of all trees on <br />8 the property. <br />9 On remand, intervenor submitted a survey depicting all trees on the subject property, <br />10 and an analysis indicating that removal of the proposed 1800 trees for roads and utilities <br />11 would leave approximately 1.07 trees per 1,000 square feet of gross site area. The city <br />12 accepted that survey and analysis. Petitioners argued below, and argue on appeal, that <br />13 intervenor's analysis erroneously considers only trees removed for roads and utilities, and <br />14 fails to consider trees that will be removed in the buildable area of individual lots for <br />15 dwellings. The city adopted findings responding that (1) petitioners could have but failed to <br />16 raise this issue in the previous appeal, and therefore the issue is waived, and (2), in any case, <br />17 the CDC requires consideration only of trees that must be removed for the development <br />18 proposed, not subsequent development authorized under individual building permits, which <br />19 are separately governed by CDC 9.1010(B).6 Petitioners challenge both findings. <br />6 The city's findings state, in relevant part: <br />* * The removal of any trees for purposes of building specific homes within the proposed <br />subdivision is not to be included in determining whether the Applicant's development will <br />result in a `clear cutting.' The removal of any trees for a home is not authorized by approval <br />of this Application and is subject to CDC 9.1010(B) when a building permit is sought. * * * <br />* * The Appellants did not raise the issue of including tree removal from individual homes <br />sites at LUBA. The LUBA remand required a tree survey of the entire site. The tree survey <br />of the entire site establishes that more trees will remain after the tree removal than was <br />estimated by the original sample tree survey. The tree survey of the entire site supports the <br />original decision that approval of this Application does not result in clear cutting. Not having <br />Page 12 <br />