Final Order - Laserfiche WebLink

Planning Commission's Determination: The Planning Commission determined that The Hearings Official did not err since the ability to waive the requirement for a licensed arborist resides with the Planning Director. EC 9.8310(2)(b) Professional Design Team Designation, states, "Unless waived by the planning director, the professional design team shall consist of at least the following professionals: 1. Oregon licensed arborist...". With the initial application, the applicant requested a waiver by the Planning Director for the arborist requirement, which was granted by the Director. Also, the Professional Design Team Designation is part of the application requirements for the Tentative PUD and not specifically included within the approval criteria, so would not in and of itself serve as a basis for approval or denial. During the open record period, the applicant provided a letter by Kyle King, certified arborist, discussing the condition of the trees on the property, and confirming the Landscape Architect's previous tree assessment as appropriate. The arborist also discusses the loss of trees and its effect on remaining trees both on-site and off-site, wind- throw, and survival of the preserved trees. Ultimately, the Hearings Official agreed with the applicant's evidence over that of the opponents (and did not disregard theirs), which is well within her authority and appropriate in her role as the initial decision-maker (Hearings Official Decision, pages 32-38). Based on the available information in the record, the Planning Commission finds that the Hearings Official did not err with respect to this appeal issue. Appeal Issue #11: EC 9.8320(4)(a)(2) - For areas included on the City's acknowledged Goal5 inventory. The Hearings Official erred by improperly evaluating evidence in support of compliance with this criterion. Appeal Issue #12: EC 9.8320(4)(a)(2) - For areas included on the City's acknowledged Goal 5 inventory. The Hearings Official erred by stating that the evidence suggests there is minimal threat of windthrow for on-site trees and trees within adjacent Hendricks Park. Hearings Official's Decision: The Hearings Official agreed with staff's determination that the site is designated as a Natural Sites of Visual Prominence and Prominent and Plentiful Vegetation in the April 12, 1978 Scenic Sites Working Paper. The Hearings Official also noted that the Metro Plan does not designate any of the subject property as a natural resource area, and that the applicant minimized impacts by avoiding unnecessary disruption or removal of attractive natural features and vegetation. This was accomplished by clustering residential lots and development impacts into areas of previous impact, in less steep terrain, and less dense or otherwise less significant vegetation. The proposal also creates significant preservation areas on the steepest slopes of the site where natural vegetation is most significant and in a natural state. The Hearings Official also discusses the concerns raised by the NRC with erosion, flooding, pollution, tree removal and screening, and the effects of windthrow from the loss of trees. The Hearings Official reviewed both analyses from Mr. Mehrwein, on behalf of the NRC, and from the applicant's arborist, and concluded, "While Mr. Mehrwein and surrounding neighbors would Final Order: Capital Hill PUD (PDT 17-1) Page 17