Review in terms of bulk scale and height: <br /> Lots along the east side of the PUD site include defined <br />conservation areas of varying size that limit the buildable area of the lot. The potential home sites are directly <br />uphill and likely to be seen from the Ribbon Trail. Without CCRs there is no way to determine how obtrusive <br />the buildings might be. The staff report states (p. 13): <br />"A third video was previously submitted that depicts a computer animation of the site at build out with <br />typical single family structures. This video is intended to depict the anticipated bulk, size and scale of <br />the project once homes have been constructed on the site." <br />EC 9.8320 (3) <br />This animated video should not replace defined CCRs. See below <br />EC 9.8320 (3) <br />The staff report states (p. 19) that: <br />“The applicant states in their narrative that private covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&Rs) <br />will provide guidelines for the bulk, height and scale of the buildings and a design review team will <br />review and approve proposed building plans to ensure that the intent of the CC&Rs are met.” <br />According to LUBA No. 2012-039 Final Opinion & Order: "City cannot rely on non-binding expressions of <br />intent from an application to ensure that approved standards are met." <br />EC 9.8320 (4) <br />(b): Tree Preservation <br />The Staff Report (p. 21) borrows language directly from applicant that "trees are in various forms of condition <br />from good to poor. Many of the trees have not been actively maintained for decades." This is not expert <br />opinion, as there is no certified arborist on the development team, and should not be taken as such. Removal of <br />these trees would subject the trees along the north side of the PUD within Hendricks Park to increased wind- <br />throw damage. <br />(c): Restoration or Replacement <br />According to city planning staff, the PUD site lies within the city's acknowledged Goal 5 inventory per the <br />April 12, 1978 Scenic Sites Working Paper. The level of tree removal allowed with this tentative PUD is not <br />consistent with the acknowledged level of protection for the features, namely the view from lower elevations. <br />EC 9.8320 (5): The PUD provides safe and adequate transportation systems through compliance with the <br />following: <br />(b) Safe and adequate transportation systems for pedestrian, bicycle and transit circulation.. as <br />well as to adjacent and nearby residential areas, transit stops etc. <br />2 <br /> <br />