preservation. Areas included in proposed common open space and within private preservation <br />areas contain the majority of significant trees and vegetation that are suitable for preservation, <br />while also accommodating street extensions, utilities and other infrastructure in a relatively <br />compact manner as necessary to serve a reasonable level of low-density residential development. <br />As stated above, the Response Committee and neighbors disagree that the proposed <br />development ensures "maximum preservation of existing vegetation." They argue extensively <br />that either the property should not be developed at all, or that much more of the existing <br />vegetation must be preserved. However, as discussed above, the property is designated and <br />zoned for low-density residential development, and this policy must be construed and applied <br />within that context. The proposed PUD is designed to maximize the preservation of the site's <br />existing vegetation and to cluster development in areas with less vegetation. While the neighbors <br />would prefer more preservation and less (or no) development, the proposed preservation of <br />approximately 1/3 of the existing vegetation of the site furthers this policy. <br />Laurel Hill Plan <br />The following Laurel Hill Plan policies are also applicable to the proposed PUD. <br />Land Use and Future Urban Des <br />Policy 1: Approval of Valley Development will take into consideration: <br />a. Density. The appropriate density for residential development shall he determined <br />based on 1) the provision of the Metropolitan Area General Plan [MetroPlan] <br />calling for an overall density range of one to ten units per acre; and 2) provisions <br />of the South Hills Study, including those limiting density to five units per acre for <br />sites above 500 feet in elevation. <br />h. Size. Large apartment complexes (over thirty-two units) are objectionable because <br />their dominance would alter entirely the character of the Valley. Approval of <br />apartment complexes larger than 32 units will depend upon the feasibility of <br />providing adequate urban services, streets, schools, and transportation. <br />C. Dispersal. Planned Unit Developments composed primarily of multiple family <br />dwelling units shall be separated and dispersed and not abutting. <br />Finding: As discussed above, the South Hills Study refinement plan restricts the density allowed <br />on the proposed PUD site to 5 units per acre. The proposed PUD's proposed density of between <br />2.6 and 2.9 units per acre. Subsections 2 and 3 of this policy are not applicable because the <br />proposed PUD does not propose large apartment complexes and is not composed primarily of <br />multi-family dwellings units. <br />One neighbor argued that the proposed PUD does not satisfy Policy 1(a) because residential <br />development would be visible from the Ribbon Trail. However, Policy 1(a) does not address the <br />location of dwellings; and Policies 1(b) and (c), which arguably could be relate to the location of <br />dwellings in relation to the Ribbon Trail, apply only to multi-family dwellings and is, therefore, <br />not applicable to this application. <br />Policy 5: New land divisions shall he planned to respect the existing topography and <br />Hearings Official Decision (PDT 17-1) 28 <br />