diameter and under in diameter diameter and over trees, very large <br />trees 36 inches in <br />diameter and over <br />Current total: 454 Current total: 115 Current total: 298 Current total: 77 <br />Remove: 55 Remove: 21 Remove: 54 Remove: 14 <br />Discretionary: 164 Discretionary: 45 Discretionary: 127 Discretionary: 37 <br />Conservation: 235 Conservation: 49 Conservation: 117 Conservation: 36 <br />(tech felling -10) (tech felling -7) (tech felling -23) (tech felling -7) <br />50% of trees can be 63% of trees can be 69% of trees can be 75% of trees can be <br />removed (or 229 removed (or 73 removed (or 204 removed <br />trees) trees) trees) <br /> <br />As I argued above, the Applicant could have concentrated townhomes in a small area on <br />on top of the hill (or made other design choices) to ÅclusterÆ development and therefor <br />9.8305 <br />protect the natural features of the site. The Applicant chose not to meet the code. <br />demonstrates that the land on the site, which falls within the South Hill Study area, and <br />largely lies above 901 feet. <br /> <br />9.8320 <br />I argue elsewhere (in the Joint Response Committee document and post-hearing added <br />testimony) that the Applicant has failed to meet the criteria of the South Hills and Laurel <br />9.8320 (2 9.8320 (3) <br />Hill plans ). I have also argued as part ofthat the lots on the eastern <br />side of the site allow for building as high as 47 feet (not the 30 feet asserted by Staff). <br />This does not adequately restrict building height in order to protect the adjacent Ribbon <br />Trail hiking area. I want to point out in more detail how the Applicant fails to meet <br />9.8320 (4) (a) (1) the Protection of Natural Features: significant on-site vegetation, <br />prominent topographic features, such as ridgeline¼. In (2) (a) <br />this section of the code <br />(1) Avoid unnecessary disruption or <br />goes on to state that the development should <br />removal of attractive natural features and vegetation. <br />As the foresterÈs report states <br />(and as the Response Committee argues in the Criteria 4 section of their Response <br />document), The Applicant has chosen to clearcut the ridgeline. <br /> <br />