Based on the available information in the record, and with this modification to Condition of <br />Approval#10, the Planning Commission finds that the application complies with the policy <br />concerning geotechnical evaluation in the Development Standards of the South Hills Study <br />under EC 9.8320(2), as well as EC 9.8320(6) as it relates to the required geotechnical analysis for <br />the proposed PUD. <br />Appeal Issue #6: EC 9.8320(2) - The Hearings Official erred by referencing a <br />preservation area, along the northeast boundary of the subject property abutting <br />Hendricks Park. <br />Hearings Official's Decision: <br />The Hearings Official found the proposal was consistent with South Hills Study development <br />standard encouraging adjoining developments to 'cluster' open space. She found that the <br />proposed PUD enhances the continuous open space of the park and public areas to the east <br />and northeast of the site and states, "The proposed development also includes a preservation <br />area along the northeast boundary of the subject property which abuts the established public <br />open space of Hendricks Park, consistent with the policy language above" (Hearings Official <br />Decision, page 22). <br />Summary of Appellant's Argument: <br />The appellant asserts the Hearings Official erred by stating, "The proposed development also <br />includes a preservation area along the northeast boundary of the subject property which abuts <br />the established public open space of Hendricks Park, consistent with the policy language above" <br />(Hearings Official Decision, page 22). The appellant contends, "There is no separate <br />preservation area along the northeastern boundary of the PUD" (Appeal Statement, page 8) <br />Planning Commission's Determination: <br />The Planning Commission concurs with the findings of the Hearings Official that the inclusion of <br />preservation areas in the PUD is consistent with the policy language of the South Hills Study, <br />"That developments be reviewed to encourage clustering of open space elements of different <br />developments in order to preserve the maximum amount of continuous open space". The staff <br />report referenced this area as follows: "Staff notes that the proposal also includes a <br />preservation area along the northeast boundary of the subject property which abuts the <br />established public open space of Hendricks Park, consistent with the policy language above" <br />(Staff Report, page 12). Staff was referencing the combined preservation areas of Tract A and <br />Final Order: Capital Hill PUD (PDT 17-1) Page 10 <br />