Hearings Official Decision - Laserfiche WebLink

concluded that, in his opinion, "Windthrow does not seem to be a large factor in this location as there are large conifers that exist in thick standards offsite all around the development. * * * The removal of trees on the lots east of Cupola Drive in order to build homes will likely not produce much fear wind throw * * Prevailing winds are typically out of the west to southwest and will be deflected over and above the preservation area. The remaining trees will be well protected on the north, south and east * * Trees removed from the Capital Drive area are not found in significant groupings so it is unlikely that the removal of these trees will have a negative impact on the remaining trees both on and off site." Based on the published studies and analysis by Mr. Mehrwein, it is certainly possible that there could be some windthrow as a result of tree removal on the subject property. However, based on the applicant's arborists assessment of the actual proposed tree removal, it is also possible that there will be none. At issue under this criterion is whether the proposed PUD has been designed and sited to minimize impacts to by avoiding unnecessary disruption or removal of attractive natural features and vegetation. While Mr. Mehrwein and surrounding neighbors would conclude that the applicant could do more to preserve trees and further reduce (or eliminate) the potential for windthrow, the applicant's plan to remove trees necessary for the proposed development demonstrates that is has satisfied its obligation to avoid unnecessary disruption or removal of those trees. As they relate to this criterion, the findings regarding compliance with the South Hills Study policies are also incorporated here. As with those policies, this criterion recognizes the property's zoning, and requires that, within the context of that zoning, the PUD must avoid "unnecessary" disruption. While the Response Committee and other neighbors adamantly oppose disruption of this forested site, this criterion does not preclude development. In fact, the preservation of continuous open space through Tract A and adjoining preservation areas on private property, the location of Cupola Drive along a previously cleared and graded vehicle accessway and the clustering of development within the area of the property with the least vegetation and visual impact, establish compliance with this criterion. The objection as it relates to the applicant's proposed tree preservation plan is discussed below. One individual disputes compliance with this criterion on the basis that the proposed development does not have minimal impact on natural environment because of its impact on Hendricks Park. Mr. Mehrwein also cites the potential impact of tree removal on Hendricks Park and the Ribbon Trail. However, this criterion relates specifically to minimizing the impact to natural features on the proposed development site. Potential off-site impacts are addressed above with regard to the applicable South Hills Study policies. The applicant's proposal development demonstrates compliance with this criterion. (b) Tree Preservation. The proposed project shall be designed and sited to preserve significant trees to the greatest degree attainable or feasible, with trees having the following characteristics given the highest priority for preservation: 1 Healthy trees that have a reasonable chance of survival considering the base zone or special area zone designation and other applicable Hearings Official Decision (PDT 17-1) 35