Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Nevada_87_PA-2011-01415
i ITY OF ASHLAND December 1, 2011 Wilma LLC 744 Helman Street Ashland, OR 97520 RE: Planning Action#2011-0141 Notice of Final Decision On November 30, 2011,the Staff Advisor for the Ashland Planning Division administratively approved your request for the following: A Conditional Use Permit to allow a landscape contracting company to utilize the site and remaining building which formerly housed Ashland Greenhouses at 87 West Nevada Street as a temporary/short-term use until the applicants can proceed with the intended construction of the previously approved Verde Village housing development on the property. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single Family Residential; ZONING: R-1-5; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 lE 04 B;TAX LOT: 1100 The Staff Advisor's decision becomes final and is effective on the 13`x'day after the Notice of Final Decision is mailed. i Prior to the final decision date, anyone who was mailed this Notice Of Final Decision may request a � reconsideration of the action by the Staff Advisor as set forth in the Ashland Land Use Ordinance (ALUO) 18.108.070(B)(2)(b) and/or file an appeal to the Ashland Planning Commission as provided in the ALUO 18.108.070(B)(2)(c). An appeal may not be made directly to the Land Use Board of Appeals. Oregon law states that failure to j raise an objection concerning this application,by letter, or failure to provide sufficient specificity to afford the decision maker an opportunity to respond to the issue, precludes your right of appeal to LUBA on that issue. Failure to specify which ordinance criterion the objection is based on also precludes your right of appeal to LUBA on that criterion. Failure of the applicant to raise constitutional or other issues relating to proposed conditions of approval with sufficient specificity to allow this Department to respond to the issue precludes an action for damages in circuit court. I The application, all associated documents and evidence submitted, and the applicable criteria are available for review at no cost at the Ashland Community Development Department, located at 51 Winburn Way. Copies of file documents can be requested and are charged based on the City of Ashland copy fee schedule. If you have any questions regarding this decision, please contact the Community Development Department between the hours of 8:00 am and 4:30 pm,Monday through Friday at(541) 488-5305. cc: Parties of record and property owners within 200 ft i COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel:541488-5305 51 Winbum Way Fax:541-552-2050 Ashland,Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 Plan- www.ashland,or.us ASHLAND PLANNING DIVISION FINDINGS & ORDERS PLANNING ACTION: 2011-01415 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 87 W Nevada APPLICANT: Wilma LLC DESCRIPTION: A request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow a landscape contracting company to utilize the site and remaining building which formerly housed Ashland Greenhouses at 87 West Nevada Street as a temporary/short-term use until the applicants can . proceed with. the intended construction of the previously approved Verde Village housing development on the property. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single Family Residential; ZONING: R-1-5; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 1 04 B; TAX LOT: 1100 SUBMITTAL DATE: October 10, 2011 DEEMED COMPLETE DATE: October 25, 2011 STAFF APPROVAL DATE: November 30, 2011 APPEAL DEADLINE DATE: December 12, 2011 FINAL DECISION DATE: December 13, 2011 APPROVAL EXPIRATION DATE: December 13, 2012 DECISION: The subject property located at 87 West Nevada Street, and is approximately 19,000 square feet in size, generally rectangular in shape, and is zoned R-1.5, Single Family Residential. The .44 acre lot is a portion of the greater 11.64 acre Verde Village housing community that was approved in 2009. The site is relatively flat and has no vegetation on-site with the exception of the Ashland Creek riparian corridor which is located 70 feet.east of the parcel. An existing 800 square foot building sits directly adjacent to the Nevada right-of--way and was previously utilized as offices for the Ashland Greenhouses. Nevada Street is an avenue or collector street under Ashland's Transportation System Plan (TSP), and is currently improved with curbs, gutters, paving and park row planting strips for the majority of the street; curbside sidewalks are in place along the subject property's full frontage. On-street parking is currently available along both sides of Nevada Street.Adequate city services are available within the adjacent rights-of-way to serve the proposal, and already serve the existing office building The application request is for a Temporary Use Permit to utilize the existing building and parcel for a landscaping contracting business. The project also includes using a 504 square foot office trailer and a 600 square foot tent canopy to be placed behind the existing building. The perimeter j of the property will be secured by a slatted chain link that will screen the trailers and equipment, as well as 17 vehicle parking spaces for employees. Within the R-1 zoning district, temporary uses are subject to Conditional Use Permit approval. The application address the potential impacts to the site and surrounding residential use as I PA#2011-01415 87 W.Nevada/MP Page 1 minimal, and less than both the previous Ashland Greenhouses commercial use and the future Verde Village residential use of the property. The application states that vehicle trips will occur in the morning and late afternoon when employees come and leave for work. The proposed hours of operation will be 7:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. in the spring/summer; and 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. in the fall/winter. The majority of the employees will be leaving the site once equipment and orders are received, however a few employees may stay behind to perform office work or work on equipment. In considering impacts of the request, staff noted there could be incidental impacts from the use including noise from working on equipment or dust generated from driving in and out of the site during the summer months, both of these would likely be less of an issue with the proposal than with either the previous greenhouse use or future residential development, and would be subject to the dust abatement and noise regulations under AMC Chapter 9. The application also notes that traffic impacts will be limited to the morning and evening hours only, and because vehicle parking for staff will be housed internally to the site and screened, no additional impacts to the streets are anticipated with the proposal. Ashland Municipal Code Chapter 9.12 regulates the keeping of junk seen from the public right- of-way. AMC 9.12.030 states "it is unlawful for any owner, lessee, or occupant to keep any junk on any lot or premises within the City, or in a building that is not wholly or entirely enclosed". The application states that the piles of concrete and debris are to be kept on the lot for the purposes of reusing them in pursuing LEED certification. While staff supports and appreciates the efforts to create an ecologically conscious community like Verde Village and to retain and reuse these materials on site, the Municipal Code explicitly identifies materials stored for recycling including lumber, wood and other waste materials as junk by,definition and requires that they be hidden from public view. Consistent with the October 20, 2011 letter by Code Compliance staff, these piles of junk must be either hidden from public view (within a building or behind a screen) or removed by May 1, 2012. The applicant has proposed to paint a sign on the building where the previous sign was once placed. Wall signs in conjunction with a Conditional Use Permit are permitted to be no more than 15 square feet and not utilize plastic or be internally illuminated. A separate Sign permit will be required to be obtained before installation of the sign on the building. The application includes a number of self-imposed measures to further limit impacts to the surrounding area such as hours of operation and internal employee parking. In staff's view, the temporary nature of the use proposed, the fact that its impacts are likely to be substantially less than either the previous non-conforming or future proposed residential uses, and the efforts to mitigate potential negative impacts to the neighborhood by the applicants and through the conditions below appears to satisfy the requirements for a Conditional Use permit. The criteria for Conditional Use Permit approval are described in AMC Chapter 18.104 as follows: A. That the use would be in conformance with all standards within the zoning district in which the use is proposed to be located, and in conformance with relevant Comprehensive plan PA#2011-01415 87 W.Nevada/MP Page 2 policies that are not implemented by any City, State, or Federal law or program. B. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, paved access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property. C. That the conditional use will have no greater adverse material effect on the livability of the impact area when compared to the development of the subject lot with the target use of the zone. When evaluating the effect of the proposed use on the impact area, the following factors of livability of the impact area shall be considered in relation to the target use of the zone: 1. Similarity in scale, bulk, and coverage. 2. Generation of traffic and effects on surrounding streets. Increases in pedestrian, bicycle, and mass transit use are considered beneficial regardless of capacity of facilities. 3. Architectural compatibility with the impact area. 4. Air quality, including the generation of dust, odors, or other environmental pollutants. 5. Generation of noise, light, and glare. 6. The development of adjacent properties as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan. 7. Other factors found to be relevant by the Hearing Authority for review of the proposed use. The application with the attached conditions complies with all applicable City ordinances. Planning Action 42011-01415 is approved with the following conditions. Further, if any one or more of the following conditions are found to be invalid for any reason whatsoever, then Planning Action #2011-01415 is denied. The following are the conditions and they are attached to the approval: 1) All proposals of the applicants shall be conditions of approval unless otherwise modified herein, including but not limited to there being no retail sales on site, that company and employee vehicle parking be provided as described, and that perimeter fencing and screening be installed as proposed in the application. 2) The temporary use of the site shall be limited to the .44 acre parcel identified in the application submittal, and any expansion beyond this .44 acre parcel shall be require a modification to this Conditional Use Permit approval. 3) That the applicants shall obtain any building or electrical permits deemed necessary by the Building Division for the modifications to the buildings proposed. The applicants shall provide an approved Electric Service Plan from the City of Ashland Electric Department for the proposed temporary use prior to obtaining electrical permits. Any requirements of the Building Division at the time of building permit issuance, including but not limited to required accessibility or egress improvements shall be conditions of this approval. Additionally, approved addressing meeting the requirements of the Engineering and Fire Departments shall be installed prior. to commencement of construction or use. PA#2011-01415 87 W.Nevada/MP Page 3 4) That the piles of wood, concrete and other junk stored on-site must be either hidden from public view(indoors or behind screening) or removed by May 1, 2012. 5) A separate fence permit shall be obtained for the perimeter fencing around the property and in accordance with AMC 18.68. The fence permit shall detail the height, placement, and type of screening proposed in a manner consistent with the application and compliant with AMC 18.68. 6) That prior to the installation of any signage, the applicants shall obtain a separate sign permit. All signage shall comply with the limitations of AMC 18.96, including the limits on signage in residential areas found in AMC 18.96.070.13. ,-'gill Molnar,;Director Date Department of Community Development PA#2011-01415 87 W.Nevada/MP Page 4 ITY OF October 20, 2011 ASHLAND WILMA 744 Helman Street Ashland OR 97520 re: 87 Nevada Street, Ashland Dear Mr. and Mrs. Williams, am writing to relay complaints from neighbors in the area of your property at 744 Helman, regarding debris piles of lumber and concrete rubble. AMC 9.12.020 — Keeping Junk- Exposed to View Unlawful - It is unlawful for any owner, lessee, or occupant to keep any junk on any lot or premises within the City, or in a building that is not wholly or entirely enclosed except doors used for ingress and egress. It is unlawful for any person, their agent or employee, to keep any junk on any street or other public property. While we appreciate your intentions that the materials were being stockpiled for reuse in the Verde Village Project, the lack of certainty over the timing of future project phases necessitate that the City act upon these Citizen Complaints. To comply with the Ashland Municipal Code the concrete piles and lumber piles must be removed or screened from view from any adjacent properties or public right-of-ways. Please contact me immediately to let us know when the vehicle removal and junk clean- up will begin so we can track this work through completion. The deadline will be six- months from today; or Tuesday, May 1, 2012 for the junk removal to be completed. Thank you for your anticipated compliance. Please feel free to contact me at 541-552-2044 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Amy Gunter Assistant Planner guntera@ashland.or.us Department of Community Development 20 E.Main Street Ashland, Oregon 97520 Tel:541/488-5305 Fax: 541 4488-6006 TTY: 800/735-2900 www.ashland.or.us P—WPlanning Department,51 Winburn Way,Ashland,Oregon 97520 CITY F%a 541-488-5305 Fax:541-552-2050 www.ashland.or.us TTY: 1-800-735-2900 ASHLAND NOTICE OF APPLICATION PLANNING ACTION: 2011-01415 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 87 West Nevada OWNER/APPLICANT: Wilma LLC DESCRIPTION: A request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow a landscape contracting company to utilize the site and remaining building which formerly housed Ashland Greenhouses at 87 West Nevada Street as a temporary/short-term use until the applicants can proceed with the intended construction of the previously approved Verde Village housing development on the property. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single Family Residential,ZONING:R-1-5;ASSESSOR'S MAP:391E 04 E; TAX LOT: 1100 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: October 25, 2011 DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION OF WRITTEN COMMENTS: November 8, 2011 I, PA#2011-01415 ----- — — --- – I — J87 W NEVADA ST s SUBJECT PROPERTY 1 ------ T" i, Property lines�refor re)erence arty,rwt sm(eaLle O 15 30 60 Faa! The Ashland Planning Division Staff has received a complete application for the property noted above. Any affected property owner or resident has a right to submit written comments to the City of Ashland Planning Division, 51 Winburn Way,Ashland, Oregon 97520 prior to 4:30 p.m. on the deadline date shown above. Ashland Planning Division Staff determine if a Land Use application is complete within 30 days of submittal. Upon determination of completeness, a notice is sent to surrounding properties within 200 feet of the property submitting application which allows for a 14 day comment period. After the comment period and not more than 45 days from the application being deemed complete, the Planning Division Staff shall make a final decision on the application. A notice of decision is mailed to the same properties within 5 days of decision. An appeal to the Planning Commission of the Planning Division Staff's decision must be made in writing to the Ashland Planning Division within 12 days from the date of the mailing of final decision. (AMC 18.108.040) i The ordinance criteria applicable to this application are attached to this notice. Oregon law states that failure to raise an objection concerning this application, by letter, or failure to provide sufficient specificity to afford the decision maker an opportunity to respond to the issue, precludes your right of appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals(LUBA)on that issue. Failure to specify which ordinance criterion the objection is based on also precludes your right of appeal to LUBA on that criterion. Failure of the applicant to raise constitutional or other issues relating to proposed conditions of approval with sufficient specificity to allow this Department to respond to the issue precludes an action for damages in circuit court. A copy of the application,all documents and evidence relied upon by the applicant and applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost and will be provided at reasonable cost, if requested. All materials are available at the Ashland Planning Division, Community Development&Engineering Services Building,51 Winburn Way,Ashland,Oregon 97520. If you have questions or comments concerning this request,please feel free to contact the Ashland Planning Division at 541-488-5305. Documentl CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS 18.104.050 Approval Criteria A conditional use permit shall be granted if the approval authority finds that the proposed use conforms, or can be made to conform through the imposition of conditions, with the following approval criteria. A. That the use would be in conformance with all standards within the zoning district in which the use is proposed to be located, and in conformance with relevant Comprehensive plan policies that are not implemented by any City, State, or Federal law or program. B. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, paved access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property. C. That the conditional use will have no greater adverse material effect on the livability of the impact area when compared to the development of the subject lot with the target use of the zone. When evaluating the effect of the proposed use on the impact area, the following factors of livability of the impact area shall be considered in relation to the target use of the zone: 1. Similarity in scale, bulk, and coverage. 2. Generation of traffic and effects on surrounding streets. Increases in pedestrian, bicycle, and mass transit use are considered beneficial regardless of capacity of facilities. 3. Architectural compatibility with the impact area. 4. Air quality, including the generation of dust, odors, or other environmental pollutants. 5. Generation of noise, light, and glare. 6. The development of adjacent properties as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan. 7. Other factors found to be relevant by the Hearing Authority for review of the proposed use. Documentl AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF OREGON ) County of Jackson ) The undersigned being first duly sworn states that: 1. 1 am employed by the City of Ashland, 20 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon 97520, in the Community Development Department. 2. On October 25, 2011 1 caused to be mailed, by regular mail, in a sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid, a copy of the attached planning action notice to each person listed on the attached mailing list at such addresses as set forth on this list under each person's name for Planning Action #2011-01415, 87 W Nevada. Sign re of'Employee G:Icomm-dWplanningTonms&HandoutslAffidavit of Mailing—Planning Action Notice.doc I PA-2011-01415 391E04BD 2010 PA-2011-01415 391E04B 700 PA-2011-01415 391E04BD 3600 BINGHAM MICHAEL S/ELIZABETH DELSMAN JOSEPH W/ELAINE M GIRARD BRENDAN 50 W NEVADA ST 555 FAIRVIEW ST PO BOX 1192 ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 PA-2011-01415 391E04BD 3700 PA-2011-01415 391E04BD 3200 PA-2011-01415 391E04B 1100 MURPHY SUSAN ANN ET AL NEVADA STREET CHURCH/CHRIST WILMA LLC 4178 KAMALANI LN 1125 PARADISE LN 744 HELMAN ST PRINCEVILLE HI 96722 ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 PA-2011-01415 7 Kerry Kencairn Landscape Architecture 10-24-2011 545 A Street#1 87 W Nevada Ashland OR 97520 l INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY Map Maker 1 Application . Property Data Online Legend Highlighted Feature thebutfer 1.4 4 1 4 " theBuHerTarget 1414 1411 4 141 141 Tar Lot Outlines Tax Lot Nurnbers 1417 r�w - A����-�r..,sue/i.�✓t'yz���s ny�5�'� �t /p�?✓'��yf'a��l1ti�. 4�.-f�rr3 _4"�� A �Ig.""y'"z�"•� l,„. ���'`�a. 'i.� �r `r� N,�,/r� j '��`�a/1�,ie'���e r�"1r�"�J'�' ����Sr�f��� ?��� ��� ��✓ lbw 4-.c���� �e3'�.��y b>7zy���s�����. �1� - - ) Y" S�'rS. 36 /hr%ylf7�y�9 xY 3';y:„T"'3r �.'$ 1 +'n', j�.�/ 2 � 1 'y✓I' S'S ��:.x IN :"✓� /�4�r`r� ✓ of cSrf,.a 3-g�' ry�4�§3 r�,�z"�c�,r��1r s���r`y� � �/r£��rr lr�i'.. - �* z � ��`�slar� ���✓ �,s ��5r. �c=� nYfi �e � � yr S �a '>x� .,v us T5/�E'rte? t'�n.''r�xS s'`l✓�'/7 y.'`w.'r"` ( R c a 2t Y r1/ 3400 160 � V. 1 iue^�,�1�" �3'Y�'2 y`a�`��"Ery IS .>�%^r Y�?r`',/l` r�i^�F'`_"h,�i�O' ��5 �„✓*"a�,"E.0 :at` � � ✓1 i t t ' �'-as ry.- �, y,� ✓ wig � �� F a Y � r [ t g ✓ 1 r/ 8 / y��a � r 1 1 3,�Azyr w z Dm PAIN Dy 2000,,�,._, / „�i"�. r/ ✓�„ �3�.� ��/��' a „,,;,�,:rvy ,.. 1 i 64 I JACKSON CITY © report This map is based on a digital database compiled by Jackson County From a variety of sources.Jackson County cannot accept responslbily for errors,omissions,or positional accuracy.There are no -d � warranties,expressed or implied. Please recycle with colored office grade paper Created with MapMaker Map created on 18/24/2911 9:45:38 AM using web.jacksoncounly.org Project Information This application is for a Conditional Use Permit to allow a temporary use in an existing R-1-5 zone in the form of the re-establishment of a discontinued non-conforming use and converting it to a lesser-impact non-conforming use. The intent of this Conditional Use Permit is temporary in nature until the housing market stabilizes and the applicants can proceed with the intended construction of Verde Village. Legal: 39 1 E 04B 1100 Address: 87 W. Nevada Street Owner: Wilma LLC Applicant: Wilma LLC Agent/Planner: KenCairn Landscape Architecture 545 A Street Suite 1 Ashland, Oregon 97520 (541) 488-3194 Zoning Designation: R-1-5 Lot Area: approximately 100.36' x 183.63' x 204.34 .44 acre Using tax lot # 1100 Applicable Ordinances: Chapter 18.20 R-1 Single Family Residential Chapter 18.68 General Regulations Chapter 18.92 Off-Street Parking Chapter 18.96 Sign Regulations Chapter 18.104 Conditional Use Permits Chapter 18.108 Procedures Project Overview Generally The proposed project is for a landscape contracting company to re-occupy the existing building located at 87 W. Nevada previously used as Ashland Greenhouses. The proposed use is of a less-intense use than the previous non- conforming retail use and the possible impacts to the exiting neighborhood are minimal. In addition, the use will be temporary until the housing market stabilizes allowing for the construction of the approved Verde Village. The previous greenhouse facility was located on 11.64 acres had 32 greenhouse structures, a barn, an office trailer, a single family home plus a permanent office building. None of these structures were screened from view of the neighborhood. The proposed project will use only .44 acre of the 11.64 site and will be located at the SE corner. This entire area will be screened from view. Structures will include the existing permanent building which will be used for storage, one temporary 12' x 50' tent to cover vehicles & equipment, and a 12' x 42' office trailer which currently exists elsewhere on the Verde Village site. The proposed project will actually help the visual look of the current site minimizing the current impact of the site on the neighborhood until construction of the permanent Verde Village begins. The previous greenhouses were a non-conforming retail usage, which created an enormous amount of vehicular traffic in and through the neighborhood. The proposed less-intense non-conforming use will have no retail sales. The temporary use will be for a landscape contracting business where the employees arrive in the morning and then leave the site to provide landscaping services on other sites. They return in the late afternoon to return the equipment and then leave for home. From a traffic perspective, this proposed temporary use will be highly compatible with the surrounding residential uses as the only traffic created will be in the morning and in the evening, much the same as the proposed Verde Village. In fact, the approved usage of Verde Village will have more vehicular impact on the existing neighborhood than this proposed temporary use. We will discuss this in more detail in the Findings & Fact. The previous retail greenhouse employed from eight to twenty employees who remained on site from lam to 6pm seven days a week. The proposed business will employ from eight to seventeen persons who will not remain on site during business hours. There may be one or two employees who occasionally stay on 'NJ'+ ,� site to do office work or repair equipment. This is a significant reduction in impact compared to the previous use as well as the future use of Verde Village where you will have 68 units when the project is built out. The previous greenhouse would typically receive over one hundred retail customers per day. The proposed landscape business will not have any retail customers. This again shows the minimal impact this use will create on the existing neighborhood. The approved Verde Village use will create more of an impact on the existing neighborhood because of the increase in traffic and the number of people who will be living within the 68 units. The previous greenhouse used 5 trucks, which were in and out of the business and through the neighborhood numerous times during the day doing deliveries and pick-ups. In addition, one bobcat and one forklift were used continually on the site. The proposed use will be using 10 trucks, numerous lawn mowers and weed eaters, and two tractors, all off-site. Even though the amount of equipment for the proposed use is greater than the previous use, all of vehicles and the equipment leave the site each morning and return each evening. They will not be using the equipment on site creating noise in the neighborhood nor will trucks be coming and going at all times during the day. All equipment will be stored on site under the temporary 12' x 50' tent and on the graveled parking area. In addition, all of this will be screened from view of pedestrians and vehicular traffic using slatted chain link fence. The previous greenhouse's hours of operation were 7:30am to 6:00 pm during the spring & summer; daylight only during the fall and winter months. In addition they were open seven days a week. The proposed use will have much less of an impact with spring/summer hours from 7:00 am to 3:30 pm and fall/winter hours from 8:00 am to 4:30 pm Monday thru Friday. The business will be closed on weekends.. The proposed landscape contracting business does not intend to have any exterior lighting. The signage will be a painted sign on the existing building where the previous sign existed. The proposed improvements to the site include moving the existing mobile office trailer behind the existing permanent structure, and erecting a temporary tent behind this same building. Gravel parking will be provided to the north of the existing building for. Slatted fencing will be erected from the edge of the existing building and surrounding the gravel parking area as well as the temporary tent and mobile trailer. There will be a gate on the eastern side of the fence with access from Helman Street, and a gate on the southern side of the fence accessed from the existing driveway on Nevada Street. Impact Considerations The impact of the proposed temporary use will be minimal to the surrounding neighborhood. There will be approximately 2 hours each day where traffic will be increased more than it currently is. The times,will be in the morning as trucks leave the facility and again in the evening when trucks come back to the facility. These trucks are normal size pick-up trucks with small trailers carrying lawn mowers and landscape tools,'not heavy equipment trucks and trailers. The traffic impact to the existing neighborhood will be greater when Verde Village is built out. Please see the attached "Capacity and Access Analysis" for Verde Village. Vehicular Parking Area: The proposed parking area will remain in gravel as per staff's suggestion. The entire area will be screened from view with a slatted chain-link fence much the same as the temporary location of the Ashland City Fire Department. Screening The entire .44 acre site will be screened using slatted chain link fence much the same as the temporary location of the Ashland City Fire Department. Debris Removal The debris that exists on the Verde Village site must stay per conditions of the LEED certification for the project. The various rocks and debris are reusable materials that will be used for rock wall construction. Status of Verde Village Verde Village is by no means being abandoned by Greg & Valri Williams. The project will be accomplished once the housing market returns. Tree Preservation/Protection There are no trees currently located on the site. Neighborhood Outreach Greg Williams is currently connecting with neighbors to let them know about the proposed temporary use. Fin Ings of Fact Chapter 18.20 Single Family Residential The purpose of the R-1 district is to stabilize and protect the suburban characteristics of the district and to promote and encourage a suitable environment for family life. The site for the proposed landscape facility is located in an R-1-5 zone that has been approved as a Planned Unit Development called Verde Village. 18.20.030 Conditional Uses The following uses and their accessory uses ARE PERMITTED when authorized in accordance with Chapter 18.104, Conditional Use Permits. L. Nonconforming use or structure changes required by Section 18.68.090. Section 18.68.090 Nonconforming Uses and Structures C.RACTIVATION. A non-conforming use, which has been abandoned for a period of more than six (6) months may be reactivated to an equivalent or more restricted use through the Conditional Use and Site Review process. In evaluating whether or not to permit the reactivation of a non-conforming use, the Planning Commission, in addition to using the criteria required for a Conditional Use Permit and Site Review, shall also use the following additional criteria: 1. That any improvements for the reactivation of the non-conforming use on the site shall be less than fifty (50%) percent of the value of the structure. The value of the structure shall be determined by an independent real estate appraiser licensed in the State of Oregon. The value of the improvement shall be determined based upon copies of the contractor' s bid for said improvements, which shall be required with the Conditional Use permit application. Personal property necessary for the operation of the business or site improvements not included in the structure shall not be counted as improvements under this criterion. This use is not proposing ANY permanent improvements on the site. All improvements will be temporary in nature. The temporary tent, mobile trailer and all equipment are personal property necessary for the operation of the business. Any site improvements will be mandated by City Ordinance. 2. An assessment that the traffic generated by the proposed use would not be greater than permitted uses on the site. In assessing the traffic generated by the proposed use, the Planning Commission shall consider the number of vehicle trips per day, the hours of operation, and the types of traffic generated; i.e., truck or passenger vehicle. The Planning Commission shall modify the Conditional Use Permit so that the operation of the non-conforming use is limited to the same traffic impact as permitted uses in the same zone. The traffic created by the proposed temporary landscape contracting business would consist of 10 vehicles arriving in the morning with 10 trucks leaving directly afterwards. These same 10 trucks return in the late afternoon and 10 vehicles leave the site directly afterwards. This takes place only Monday thru Friday. The traffic created by the previous non-conforming retail business included as many as 100 vehicles coming and going between the hours of lam and 6pm seven days per week. The previous use created a much greater traffic impact on the neighborhood. The traffic that will be created by the approved Verde Village will also be a greater impact on the neighborhood. As can be seen from the attached "Capacity and Access Analysis" approved for Verde Village, each single family home can generage up to 10 trips per day, each townhome close to 6 trips per day and apartments 6 to7 trips per day per unit. 3. That the noise generated by the proposal will be mitigated so that it complies with the Ashland Noise Ordinance, Chapter 9.08.170, and also that it does not exceed the average ambient noise level already existing in the area, as measured by this standard. The proposed temporary use will have normal size pick-up trucks that are found in neighborhoods through-out the city. They will not "idle" or be left unattended. The noise will be no greater than what currently exists in the neighborhood. 4. That there will be no lighting of the property which would have direct illumination on adjacent uses and that there would be no reflected light from the property greater than the amount of reflected light from any permitted use in that same zone. The proposed use will not have any exterior lighting. 5. In a residential zone the findings must further address that such reactivation will further implement Goal VI, Policy 2, Housing Chapter of the Ashland Comprehensive Plan. Goal VI, Policy 2, Housing Chapter of the Ashland Comprehensive Plan states: `2. Using the following techniques, protect existing neighborhoods from incompatible development and encourage upgrading: a. Do not allow deterioration of residential areas by incompatible uses and developments. Where such uses are planned for, clear findings of intent shall be made in advance of the area designation. Such findings shall give a clear j rationale, explaining the relationship of the area to housing needs, transportation, open space, and any other pertinent Plan topics. Mixed uses often create a more interesting and exciting urban environment and should be considered as a development option wherever they will not disrupt an existing residential area. b. Prevent inconsistent and disruptive designs in residential areas through use of a limited design review concept, in addition to using Historic Commission review as part of the site review, conditional use permit, or variance approval process. c. Develop programs and efforts for rehabilitation and preservation of existing neighborhoods, and prevent development, which is incompatible anddestructive." The proposed landscape contracting business is a temporary use, which is allowed within the R-1-5 zone with a Conditional Use Permit. The approved residential development is not being abandoned. Because the use is temporary in nature, the policies of the Comprehensive Plan are being upheld. 6. Nothing herein shall apply to non-conforming signs, which are governed by the provisions of Section 18.96.150 of this Code. There will be one sign located on the front of the existing building. It will conform to Section 18.96.150 of this code. M. Temporary uses. The definition of a temporary use is as follows: `A short-term, seasonal, or intermittent use. Such use shall be approved by Conditional Use Permit only, with such conditions as the Commission deems reasonable in accordance with the Conditional Use standards." The proposed use meets the criteria of a short-term use. Once the housing market returns and financing is available, the residential project will begin construction and this use will be discontinued. The intent of this permit is NOT to create a permanent landscape contracting business at this location. This can be shown by the use of a temporary tent for storage: the use of a mobile office trailer; and the continued use of the permanent structure that currently exists on the site. No permanent improvements to the site are proposed for this temporary use. Chapter 18.104 Conditional Use Permits 18.104.050 Approval Criteria A conditional use permit shall be granted if the approval authority finds that the proposed use conforms, or can be made to conform through the . imposition of conditions, with the following approval criteria. A. That the use would be in conformance with all standards within the zoning district in which the use is proposed to be located, and in conformance with relevant Comprehensive plan policies that are not implemented by any City, State, or Federal law or program. The proposed use is in conformance as temporary uses and the re-instatement of a non-conforming use or one of a stricter nature are allowed through the conditional use process and the criteria for the conditional use have been met. B. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water,.sewer, paved access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property. All water, sewer, electricity, urban storm drainage, transportation, and paved access to the site are existing. There are no plans for additional construction as this business is temporary in nature. C. That the conditional use will have no greater adverse material effect on the livability of the impact area when compared to the development of the subject lot with the target use of the zone. When evaluating the effect of the proposed use on the impact area, the following factors of livability of the impact area shall be considered in relation to the target use of the zone: 1. Similarity in scale, bulk, and coverage. The proposed temporary Lancscape Contracting business is smaller than either the previous non-conforming retail greenhouse use and the future Verde Village j residential development. The previous use covered 11.64 acres. Verde Village will cover 10.4 acres. The proposed temporary use will use .44 of a acres. 2. Generation of traffic and effects on surrounding streets. Increases in pedestrian, bicycle, and mass transit use are considered beneficial regardless of capacity of facilities. The traffic impact is dramatically less when comparing the Ashland Greenhouse non-conforming use to the proposed temporary landscape contracting use. The previous Ashland Greenhouses could see hundreds of visitors each day. The proposed use will have no retail trade at all. Trucks will leave in the morning and return in the afternoon in such the same manner as a residential use when residents leave for work in the morning and return home in the evening. The traffic impact of the temporary use will be much less than the approved Verde Village traffic impact. Please see the attached "Capacity and Access Analysis" which has been approved for Verde Village. 3. Architectural compatibility with the impact area. There will be no new structures built for the proposed temporary use. j 4. Air quality, including the generation of dust, odors, or other environmental pollutants. Because the entire site will be graveled, and the vehicles used are ordinary pick- up trucks that are found in residential districts, dust, odors or other environmental pollutants will not be as issue. 5. Generation of noise, light, and glare. No outside lighting is being proposed for this project. The vehicles uses for the temporary use will create the normal noise found in residential districts. 6. The development of adjacent properties as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed use does not effect the development of the adjacent property because the use is temporary and once the adjacent property is ready to be developed this use will be discontinued. 7. Other factors found to be relevant by the Hearing Authority for review of the proposed use. There are other factors that staff believes to be relevant. These have been addressed in the Background section of this document. 18.92.020 Automobile Parking Spaces squired Uses and standards are as follows: E. Unspecified Uses. Where automobile parking requirements for any use are not specifically defined in this section, such requirements shall be determined by the Staff Advisor based upon the most comparable use specified in this section, and other available data. The proposed temporary use will provide 17 parking spaces. There will be between 8 to 17 persons employed by the landscape contract company. The parking area will be graveled in accordance with the staff's comments stating: "Given that the nature of the proposal(is) temporary and that it seems preferable not to make more permanent improvements for a temporary, non-conforming use, staff believes that retaining the vehicular parking area in gravel can be found to be appropriate." All parking will be screened by the use of a temporary slatted chain link fence. i DOG PARK ROAD E r __________________ / — _ — — _ _ _ — _ — _ — El a i E N t ix 1 c 2c 3c 4c r I 17'-6" 20' 5c 6c 7c 8c � l i m/ C N 2' x50' I— ° °- temporary tent 23'-6" w Z �, x mm/ cQ N CD ® \ I C x \ 0 a- ' 12' 42' Cn co ca relo ated trailer m \ m I C° 3 IV j gate 0— \V < CD FP tit '' � — :: _ Kl,!"j`t tit , �♦��' � ;y��,`�, ��i�,,,...:,..,`y............. ....::::..:. ..t/ j �`y '�����5�����' \`,. 1 / to w. // ��Pik#: / / + m o WILMA LLC p CAROLS COLORS YARD 87 WEST NEVADA STREET s 'c° s=°yam Tel:541Aa9.ai94 15AIlrest KenCairn Fax:541.552.9512 Ashland,OR 97520 ASHLAND OREGON ! cT b Landscape.Architecture CelC541.501.5559 keny®kencalrnlandscape.com wwxx�,c�.wa ue.� i E I J £ fE l I SIN £ { (I W I�N IFi ----------� Ail ' X 1749.5 e ii ✓� �. [[ x / E s k f � ,� I \ I t� �� y� 3�� � � � •r �i I} l j�,f"'• ,� � $;e Rm 'j k k y I d / + j IL ® \ < x m + m T. 1 o v� WILMA LLC ® T CAROLS COLORS YARD > �M 87 WEST NEVADA STREET 4 $ =��a Tel:541.488.3194 645ASireat KenCairn FaX:541.552.9512 Ashland,OR 97520 ASHLAND OREGON e bl C•f �� gn Landscape Architecture Cell:541.801.5559 keny®kencairnlam£scape.com X 1726 r � LANDS APPROVED EXISTING BARN TL 800 EXISTING OFF CE TRAILER I pull ' • r ' I - \0� • IMMEM\\O\\\\\\\\ / n MY \\\\\\00\\\\\\\" v \\ J \\0 \\ \\O \ l•> O wal jal IN ♦: � A it \ �� .. . � . .,, , MEN A FT A. CN. IV sm f Sgt` , 4 � P 1 CI 3 I jUNE 7, 2007 ismi S .i:.. ..; �...,> - 3: 4 , v 3 ' i 't E.'z f ..''',¢1 3 AX, 33 i 5� i -'.�: .. NMI ADDENDUM. TO r VERDE VILI GE IN. ACCES.SANAI IS � F 3 "S,F 2 y t l �' , .:,E d` J}z..:i C . :t..?ate IN""!E "E-:,> t 3 t" EXECUTIVE SUMMARY DESCRIPTION This report addresses revisions to the"Verde Village Capacity and Access Analysis" dated August 7, 2006, completed by JRH Transportation Engineering, as it corresponds to comments made by the City of Ashland and changes made to the site plan. The original TIA included the analysis of 60 residential units; revisions to the site plan result in 68 residential units. Appendix A contains the comments made by the City of Ashland and the response by JRH. RESULTS A performance analysis was completed for the intersections of Nevada Street at Helman Street and Nevada Street at Oak Street. The performance analysis of all intersections within the study, area shows that under the Build condition no degradation in level of service in comparison to the No-Build condition occurs due to the additional trips produced by this development. All study area intersections perform at a LOS B for the Build condition. i I i i JRH TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING Verde Village I June 7,2007 1 1.0 TRIP GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION The revised site plan increased the number of residential units from 60 to 68. The revised site plan is shown in Appendix B. Vehicle trips generated by the development were determined using the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 7th Edition. The Land Use Code 210- Single Family Residential was used to determine the entering and exiting vehicle trips during the PM peak hour. Of the 68 residential units, 15 will be townhomes,and 14 will be duplex units. Given the nature of the development and the proximity to local attractors,it is assumed that all residential units will have trip generation characteristics similar to those of single-family detached housing. As a result, traffic generated by the 68 units is calculated using the rate for the single-family units. Table 1 below illustrates the trip generation. Table l: Trip Generation .,,:w>,x,<,ac s j,�?,i.,.,.I>r,y�s s,r•,.✓;�..v.:.,c..;•fac:r:r,-...e3i;,.l.w:.Y/..,<,..s 3,Z,.<,>.3>..v':.;.s.,Y:..y s./z,.:.�g•,�.../,,..x.N7N ap:x.y./�,/�,smf,,,..�..u.•.�'z;.s r,:.-;•�:,,•.i.Y 3,e•.;:,.;;,.,.v.,.;w,,.FY/w5'.y,..y.,..iG c:�:.[>�s.i�sr�g cc£[,a.:,:�.,;•,:Y y.vvi.:%g,'< . s .. zt9�s ` .� . /✓✓<•« ri �:.y;1 •✓ r g �11�. sOSE am 1� ..A•A£'s.cl Md y rI•^s i,i"/%�1✓✓fn✓i; l!s,f�4/-.„/y./.ij3.,..<r�,,'S://%s,s'.s�✓,r ",':�•x r,€:r4f f5�15. Singie ramify (2a°1fl} X75°In) (63°I°} (37�1�) l3n�ts,. mom * ln(T)=0.92ln(x)+2.71 ** T=0.70(x)+9.43 *** ln(T)=0.901n(x)+0.53 Currently,on the southeast portion of the site there exists the Ashland Greenhouses. The proposed residential development will replace the existing greenhouses. As a result, the traffic generated by the greenhouses will be removed from the surrounding street network. On the day the intersections were counted for this study,the existing nursery generated 3 exiting trips and 12 entering trips during the PM peak hour(4:30PM—5:30 PM). It is likely that additional counts would reveal more balance between entering and exiting trips at the nursery. As a result, and in order to be appropriately conservative,the analysis will assume the existing nursery generates 3 exiting and 3 entering trips in the peak hour. The nursery will no longer operate once the housing is developed; therefore, the housing project will receive a credit of 3 exiting and 3 entering trips in the peak hour analysis. The PM peak hour LOS analysis will use 45 entering trips and 25 exiting trips. The following intersections were studied as part of this analysis: • Nevada Street at Helman Street/Alemda Street Extension • Nevada Street at Oak Street Trips generated by the development were distributed throughout the existing street. network based on existing traffic patterns. As a worst case, it was assumed that all of the new trips would enter and exit the development via an improved northern leg of Helman at Nevada.A vicinity map illustrating the site location and studied intersections is shown in Figure 1. Distribution of development trips is illustrated in Figure 2. JRH TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING I Verde Village I June 7,2007 1 2 ,.w � iv � �� I i l✓ � Jrl,.✓" z had A /...:...::.:....:::::..........::..: ;...........,. —...... p S T ,s` • Karr rI '; �LDER;a���� a � `"'•,. f W NEVADA ST 4 t ......ff i eaEVnnti a€ j' SHERIDAN£5T. .wk GRANT ST RANDYI„ST",: ♦s ! i a TUCKED,,: :. a m.ST.:. ,> WILEYn ST. S _ � C �0�1 MAPLE i�t g! >....: °o � coa.®ee ;��,, ORq a ;o � � y .. ' \ / � rrEi�irrNE"•,,,, � .r � `/zw�' rnAman 3 VISTA <«:,, t ! < N7MEq .. 3��fk PA P fc'``1 " - :Mx2wrta ~ c f ERSEY,STN' �,3 , : c�t f f <. G�TRq<1� / ,1vnu„Mwr+ w ,,.s•F` p t �i � 9�-- JP,i f;� d'91iF R z ',w r;F'r ���' sz m <o ?> ,�,,,,. eye sf f^ R ;va�x DR. O y ` w s t O9F,✓ O <up ,�, _ i \�� ., f O? O MuNSauaa sew w iAomm 3 ' d r✓ 1 F fl w .q j s r fr € 2VAN o v %�Fi]�q ,� 7'y y,L1 W es` onatm std g j t_: E �� �'^>� Nuntµ•...�,_.:,:,rf � ,;/�/ of 3 L� tip., `� 2 �=z � j � � euaEKnJ y'#'m I r>.� £ � sz/ >^•� '�"0�.9 'P9�' � .✓»,;; �A..i{ r�. 3E � .,<^�:� � jp ,mac cE ""F' i 'c d r �.Y/ >'`✓ may { �7,i pp s ,::� ...aw,. 8 MWTVIEW)f !J c mEw oR A S/ P ' AMAIN„ �s €� S € s ` >y { g5 "tea P o € pt EaL y y },µz I o ERp° yg A LITHIA MOLD Figure 1:Vicinity Map ! PARK € Mmwu j ' Q Studied Site i �3i s' G_G� Intersections b .�� I uK+w Q j RH TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING . s 4765 Village Plaza Loop,Sulte 201 Eugene,Oregon 97401(TEL.)541.687.1061 www.jrhweb.com 6/6/07 ',.. I \ , \ O } l W , • r f i ..... ~� ry� .,....�rye.._. � U.�"o v:.,„.......,.w................... .......,..„.>..,. m `x y j 1[� Kar d faIDER` c If „.,y 7, W NEVADA iM”$T E3LN NEVADAw„. .„,„..................Ntvaw,„„„.•„,,.,,., r I 4'�' CAMBRIDGE SHERIDAN€€ST „,. N” RANDY{ST:,.1. ST. ,.,DTIS „ a MAPLE ST. �f ib CICit n s' m 18 °Og t Y4MEH t >.ww u J�MyFgs { e .caswx [ 9t"'`� +) f j / PATiEli50N f 1 � M 6 y y q cREEK M 9 0 SEENA w s, pQ;O F z q d i f I fl „• ..,.;EVAN as ” qt ,. z �€/ �°"”` ”' s�•,. 1 C' k €L„ ?�.w. f 0ACKID ST, 1. l it 5 Z �A •.z I NUI E e F� f f Eu g n 1� is✓rnni;iay.4 r s A. Jk tar,,ak r yf I y' �' .d t ,• 6EACH s L b .:z..,z Hro,n..zinryc....:..:r a £� #MoNnaEw f r,lr c amEw oa i GAVE s �5 ' MAIN b€ j l i j s� °a ER ' I¢ gg A LITHIA Figure 2: PM Peak Hour Development PARK o Trip Distribution Site Studied Intersections f z ( b JRH TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING 1 4765 Village Plaza Loop,Suite 201 % i) Ig Eugene,Oregon 97401(TEL.)541.687.1081 kt fF www.jrhweb.com 6/6/07 2.0 TRAFFIC COUNTS AND ADJUSTMENTS JRH took traffic counts at the intersections of Nevada/Helman and Nevada/Oak on May 31, 2006. From these counts, a seasonal adjustment factor has been applied to represent the anticipated traffic volumes on the roadway during the peak driving period. The raw traffic volumes and peak season traffic volumes are included in Appendix C. The traffic counts taken at the intersection of Nevada Street and Helman Street capture the traffic entering and exiting the dog park(located to the north of the development), vehicles accessing the greenway, and vehicle accessing the greenhouses. The reduction taken in traffic for the trip distribution represents the traffic generated by the greenhouse only, as it will be removed with the proposed development. Figure 3 illustrates the peak season traffic volumes. As shown in the figure, there is an estimate of 46 vehicles accessing the dog park and greenway(minus the 6 vehicles accessing the greenhouses). PM peak hour counts and subsequently a PM peak hour analysis was performed for this proposed development. Typically,the highest traffic volumes on the roadway occur during the PM peak hour. Table 1 illustrates that during the PM peak hour the development will generate 33 percent more traffic than during the AM peak hour. As the traffic volumes are anticipated to be at the highest during the PM peak hour, this will represent the worst case scenario for intersection performance; therefore,AM traffic counts were not taken, and an AM performance analysis was not performed. 3.0 EXISTING INTERSECTION PERFORMANCE Performance measures were evaluated according to the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM)method implemented by SYNCHRO Version 6. The following table summarizes the existing performance of the studied intersections. Both intersections currently are unsignalized, the reporting Level of Service is for the critical movement, the movement with the highest delay. Appendix D contains the Synchro outputs. Table 2: Existing Intersection Performance £ ��:Ss .'C ,S"•��". �'/.Y;•'<�oF n�9••3f„,;.sY.,.Y,•.�.Gea..;�X�%ss,�u,'•�,?•�''�'3,'�,3:",s`�X' � .FJa�F aR£ 3.u5+rA^<°"'sf?�.''F.gn,�-i„ng�. (£.t�3 ;.>r.,;3.i>,F�-r;::r.s�;�...>{,< ,'zx;?�✓,:, ,sv.� � �i �.yy -,v 33yv.r^, .ia'” •�. � r �s.�4.a:: ,,..n^ ., ,.d, a.>>�;..�.iu s�r.< ;z.�u, °33s�,%n;<v,�:#%,•w 5; r<s�:C�,• ._:^:3'::3.,3;..:.,.,,.,�i�s�a.5<:..,,4•xsnsr.;;a, .:.c....,i".. ....< ,..,... ,......�>,"..•..." ,_.,..<...,s....�.,5,,.,...,3/.., /,. .........,.:.•...•^.is.,c.� s£�s,.,..<..¢„x':.1a:..,>,.»a �>�,�:.,a.<x ..:<si+J$r,„�:ssss•rvs,,..,g : 11 ,,.#� .,.:.,:>;�=s.<,;.s e,".>s;»,,a s,#,.,�:....,:>•,r.�;e.•. ..,ad� .K.<-F,,..,,i<..aeYbz;-":3,i��1 s ;�<.,<Au:., h,s `.g':��:%�:%/>>:�:' ...E..�". „^,Y.h.es<s„..,.., > %:•££,.,c.. s.,d f. <�, #:>�h.<is s...>.M .,> :��:��:z".,. :: ,.�"> .:.},... .<a��.x�ss...a>,.<'<a::��:>:a.z.>> Fssr:.r�.> e.�<: ,..J", is, s ,.:'�:<..sss,.,, 7c.�,3^,_ ,>T.x,>,�r:.si:r• f�k:. s•£Eis•;�:<...w ,••$..:E,x£I." > Wiki.,",'4'Y,•,.••y. .r Y�.�..>'+.s., +<C4.b � i,,2:. `�'.r.3.. -o£�•. £s.t'''.¢??$" ,/....<.. £,� :.:i£„. >s: ss::<' get i s•;?.:g,. wk. ,,.r, �,#•,. ..£ ia's`.s': a>?t;^'.o.h. :ss5 .•���, ':�ic� .xl...¢ ,/� 3JS<.•ss• :i�:”. ..�i "n/i„i c a$.: 2 f,s• ayz�.n �"��. „t,... s:«f.•..,..r,.:C.`s"S i ?sa>:<s'-^�<?,>'.?>%i=ii s x i �6G;^` •,E':'a.� ...:r.s>'kS." ��(( ::E>`': �{,?$ „,^,F..o 3' ,�' .?,...d,.,,f,. .9�: pp .�b,.... :;l.,:, si�,,/S> <.,.�..> „��3''r. `C ..:Z. ».tYsi'•ai .>;%1l<�=z>:✓>:G'3.@�:., °.::,:.�<M�z<M<.:�>v"�'�4ius�F.>.;;;:;�';;ro.�v:z✓53:,�'�a��u�'u#s>3,.•c,"zs?:�.»-.:.:°# 'a:��z::v:'1:v:;�F�.,�>?»�2rx>�>�..ra»:�r•:,u:��.>:»�:��',.. ,...fya��P�.:;v;",.�„3.�'3,� Nevada Street of Helman Streef Soutflbound B V , i i JRH TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING Verde Village I June 7,2007 1 5 i �CA'!A ., ..... FIX t ,✓ � t yELMEDA` m; a t� ti 7 DI�LDEEi1ga a WeNEVADA ST. s LN ,NEVADA f ~ '».�' ..,..,,,•,.,..::.,.::,NEVAan•••...,,.••••,:.,. CAMBRIDGE ST 1 S SHERIDAN ST.•.••.•„ ., ,.,•.:,,•.•. •..�.. a € fl gc a H w : RANDY ST. F m TUCKEI GRANT ST e �..,,,,.• ,,,.•,,,•••.•.>.,• € 1 I Ig ' I OTIS ST, WILEYyST .` O'w �. 3iyr MAPLE E ST 3 yf a CI(3 j ,t t / ✓ �, � ;. 5 u n o 10r S ><dew f�Qj1 £{f 4wr \, n O Z •� 61 y 0 F4i qfr 7 �^T` d' 7-4 Z vAMER 1 18 � WOS + L Z Jl 4 s NFRSFrfsr 1 0. TRO's, ` ,.,•,<. 4 + 1 1d �F ..> W £eArnnsdv 30 +1 t Ir+ a o y'� 55 N o a ,. .,,.,,µ�.,,,,...u,,., z. 3 a 14 '� ,FNT / I HERSY SST 48 W o A111, r° z�K orr. €5 t` <' `.� pQl`\.�✓/ t // `sf x 1 2`"M O lw GREM 'N J # M DR SEEM w. I(!, ("0 j i a p ,j r zg W or VeE?+• .. kf �f £aj S�Z ? �j d tj .wEURE A € I £ ✓ .:�. s NUREY 's df ff c �X f j ,.y'Y>3./ /`�/' u f ��/I ;� /`y � ®z,w� / ,s. F.L• soc;,f a i 4 9 �h•:t, • ., �• `� IMONnaEw�/r I .€ �ciamEw a i # rEOra I I ALM¥ � F E LITHIA € ` Nou Figure 3: Existing PM Peak Hour PARK MIRK! o}f TrafficVolumes Studied Site t Est s> Intersections t! I JRH TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING € { s 4765 Village Plaza Loop,Suite 201 , £ Eugene,Oregon 97401(TEL.)541.687.1081 ,r wwwjrhweb.com 6/6/07 4.0 YEAR OF COMPLETION YEAR 2010-ANALYSIS The anticipated year of completion and full occupancy of the development is year 2010; therefore, a performance analysis was completed for the year 2010. To determine the year 2010 traffic volumes, a yearly growth rate was determined using data obtained from ODOT's Transportation Planning Analysis Unit. The ODOT Transportation Demand Model indicates the average growth rate for roadways within the study area is 1.6 percent, for a conservative analysis a 2 percent per year growth rate will be applied to the studied intersections to determine the year 2010 background traffic volumes. Figure 4 illustrates the year 2010 background traffic volumes. The development traffic volumes are added to the 2010 background traffic volumes to represent the year 2010 total traffic conditions after the completion of the development. The 2010 total traffic volumes are included in Figure 5. A performance analysis was conducted for the year 2010 traffic conditions with and without the proposed development in place. The performance analysis was conducted using the software program Synchro. The results of the analysis are included in Table 3. The results are reported for the critical movement,the movement with the highest delay. Appendix.E contains the Synchro outputs. Table 3: 2010 Intersection Performance •,..z.,r ..T'•;•rs•:,Fn": ,��:rrr:s.r!rrs?�Y:.,� .•art7-::s ,>,:r�<. :^d-�%':.V:s;:�,,,;^"v;nss;:. <��.!... s �< .,..,r,,.,,T ,..P.,S,: .:„>.r::..�.:<.,•.�•a•,.<t >>,.•<,:>.,•.o,,..,••,•,.•••.•.,,•:•• ,.�,,.. .s ...• ,,..� ✓�.. ,r3 ..,f,��"”, ;�.� .,>%.:�,✓,ir:h..c.„ti.,.<,.r.F?. s� �_.,.3.,.,_,s,.,.„c.i..c.> i.,,, ._.,..•....�..�<., .�........ .... ...,,•.�•. ,. z.;•_..M<.�„!Y � <,,,.r<.,yi,�}i,W,.✓s.r✓.n ...€,..,« .•r��.,.,i'?"„'%�<?i• .•,.•,...• n.....,,r<.r....,€:,✓<f>,,,,,..:•.<•>:�.,�....,,.,.,.,.,...,•..�w,�....:�:�. ,„�: •. •�;:x...,.,,.z.�€.,fs.Q,.s,. .ter„ .<c<is./>��x>6 .�•.zs sf >.ar 3, ...s%...,z :.</ �t �;••� £.,,,,;t.:•< :>4.::i<: �>.£•: ;, >'-7rr a� �.•,i� .,.e,, .zy.G.,: ,,.,;��•-x, ,.n< ? �:e c s-r::: .�:f.r�,,<:sraJ�.,, �.,a.., ,:,Y,,c . fir£<�s%�,,a•✓� s.r. �.'=.:a�. �>>..x �., ..�.s.,W:wc.<u;.,..�>,.>«x;3.z„�� �>�Y ,�',7�5��:z".rw•�.€�<.;c:s;:s':sutfze�,...uL•,us:..<..>.x,<:fw�w::. .<�<.>xG>u;>.«<..s<w,:;;:�::t�,,..�" :>z:cs����.w:sti c�...:. .�ar,M<H•!« Nevada Street a:He[man Street IRi�rff�bound. B Northbound B Neua��Strut l teak Street....,..... . 1N�st�c�un� B ...: �tUes�?purld ' JRH TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING Verde Village I June 7,2007 1 7 onnr?w'sa / . 1� ✓.;"" pens .crz","z%✓., l r , -Z 1 I " " ti _ S —...... y� LMEDA \ w KEW W.1" g WIfN,EVADA , ST£�iLN 4 "rEVAU1 \ Neann w,., SHERIDAN g ST ~ CAMBRIDGE?ST IGRAN7'µST. RANDY \` g ff _ .. 4. t °a f ..•'' ST £ uk OSIS ST. WILEY„ST a MAPLE,ST 3fo g1,,, <, �R. 5 uxu m �D o 10 , .< `\ co 2 3 hsin 66 y:,O�Y/p i I y f �. v N 2 W _ +j L+ x' 19 sT `J 1 a1�L+ -C'2 eti tiFySFY 5VF i p� Pnrvu z 1 +1 t'� s � t 32 15 '� Fy/ f / C HERSEY ST 52 o0 0o2' W;A G :MIN� •• Mu"sau ° sf r,l�w« gti Cw agaosr£ j' € Z' EUFEM, t� ,f.m•.£, -.;m � �v,...� ,,.., F ya-^ � •'�`?,T Y`'@.,. `�C @ G � '� � 3 I � [jar � yu riY sf H 1 \�aEgrai# ' � ^;>sra < ffi.v� £ x uttsw•� -,f•ni.x Inorrnn7v / ! # arvrnEw En, Avg �o z ft ¢ C f E S ' 9 % i F ., IOWA g ,G.E'?:DE V&�.k..fjjtsa'�E ', { , F LITHIA t<g "°"� Figure 4: 2010 PM Peak Hour 1 PARK 't i , \•^ I '^ o Background Volumes } f M , M Site Q Studied i Intersections JR.H TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING 4765 Village Plaza Loop,Sui[e 201 y Fk I ? Eugene,Oregdn 97401{TEL.]541.697.1061 www.jrhweb.com Em III j 6/7/07 -4. &p 1 u / n. ^'4 kr WNEVADA sµST E?LN :. � L� i exven ( . yh w.......,....,."EVAea a;�, _ £ -<, ..1 CAMBRIDGE 1ST. I ,.,.,•,<�, ,,,<.,� i}" - , SHERIDAN •;GRANT 5T ` RANDY::ST::L>„ TUCKEq s _ e OTIS ST. WILEY ST r ws w W Ei .ng4s € �` < > N 5 rn rn -t-28 Fr`ST w `de r' \ ^ 2 r O tiF r 2 3. wsra � H/p aZ , +) X-19 STf / t +) L+ "r 2 t r 13 1 1 t�F S<" rPA N _€ 35, 1 15 -!1, a v FryT y' 4 €' HERSEY{ST a f 58 o f'�i qVF qq 01 �� Iq e £quy�1 t�Z 5 AV� CO,< 6: t ao ravers N sEVUw ` 7TH/q T kf k �� F s 1 v gI Qa "T 4F w`It a iLy s d Q3 �� j r C oacH o sr t s �f f f r� f ti l 3 °A` 5 AG3 1 MONTME js }Sy L y LN IOWA -1-11-1.1 VERDE VILLAG E ; g £ e i;� ff r Ig Y' € £ •. �H=Y LITHIA Figure 5:201 OTota1 PM Peak Hour PARK Traffic Volumes Site Studied I ''•. s Intersections i JRH TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING 4765 Village Plaza Loop,5uite 201 Eugene,Oregon 97401(TEL)541.687.1081 www.jrhweb.com 6/7/07 5.0 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS This report addresses revisions to the"Verde Village Capacity and Access Analysis", dated August 7, 2006, completed by JRH Transportation Engineering, as it corresponds to comments made by the City of Ashland and changes made to the site plan. The original TIA included the analysis of 60 residential units; revisions to the site plan result in 68 residential units. Completion of the proposed development is anticipated for the year 2010. This report includes year of completion analysis, year 2010, for the roadway network within the study area with an existing condition analysis performed for the year 2006. A performance analysis was completed for the intersections of Nevada Street at Helman Street and Nevada Street at Oak Street. The performance analysis of all intersections within the study area shows that under the Build condition no degradation in level of service in comparison to the No-Build condition occurs due to the additional trips produced by this development. All study area intersections perform at a LOS B for the Build condition. I i i JRH TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING Verde Village I June 7,2007 1 10 APPENDIX A cil.� or ASHIaNU co �ti� ��nFNTs JRt � RESI 'oNSE CITY COMMENTS/JRH RESPONSES The following outlines the comments made by the City of Ashland upon review of the "Verde Village Capacity and Access Analysis"performed by JRH Transportation Engineering, dated August 7, 2006. In addition, a response to the comments by JRH is provided. City of Ashland Comment#1: The TIS submitted on Spetember 26,-2006 included in the application is based on 60 residential units whereas the proposed development includes 69 units. JRH Response to Comment#1: The current site plan includes 36 detached single-family units, 15 townhomes, and 14 duplex units, for a total of 68 units. The analysis performed in the addendum calculates the impacts on the intersections for the completion of 68 residential units. City of Ashland Comment#2: The traffic generated by the town homes is based on an average of 5.86 trips per day per unit. In contrast, single family homes are projected to have 10 trips per day per unit and the apartments are projected to have 6 to 7 trips per day per unit. Staff questions whether the townhomes will produce any less vehicle trips per day than the cottages, which are of similar size. JRH Response to Comment#2: JRH performed the trip generation for the development using the rate for single-family detached units for the entire 68 residential units. As 29 of the units are multi-family homes, the trip generation rate for the single-family units is higher, resulting in a more conservative analysis. City of Ashland Comment#3: The total average daily number of trips for the project is not discussed, and the am and pm peak hour counts are not identified. JRH Response to Comment#3: Table 1 of the addendum shows the daily(ADT)trip generation for the proposed development. The PM peak hour traffic counts are provided in Appendix C. The PM peak hour traffic volumes,which have been adjusted to represent the peak season volumes, are shown in Figure 3. AM traffic counts, and subsequently an AM analysis were not performed for this study, since the PM traffic volumes are higher and represent a worst case scenario for the intersection performance. JRH TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING Al City of Ashland Comment#4: Several other components of a TIS that are typically included are not addressed- trip distribution and assignments including existing, development alone, no-build scenario, and build scenarios. JRH Response to Comment#4: As part of this addendum, JRH provided the trip distribution and assignment in Figure 2. The existing traffic volumes are provided in Figure 3. The No-Build volumes are included in Figure 4. The Build traffic volumes are included in Figure 5. City of Ashland Comment#5: The application describes existing trips to the greenhouse, but there is no clear indication if this includes traffic going to and coming f om the dog park/greenway parking lot. Staff believes the dog park and greenway trip generation must be included in the TIS. JRH Response to Comment#5: The traffic counts taken at the intersection of Nevada Street and Helman Street capture the traffic entering and exiting the dog park(located to the north of the development), vehicles accessing the greenway, and vehicles accessing the greenhouses. It is estimated that 3 trips entered the greenhouses and 3 trips exited the greenhouses during the PM peak hour. All other traffic is assumed to be accessing the dog park and greenway. The reduction taken in traffic for the trip distribution represents the traffic generated by the greenhouse only, as it will be removed with the proposed development. Figure 3 illustrates the peak season traffic volumes. As shown in the figure, there is an estimate of 46 vehicles accessing the dog park and greenway(minus the 6 vehicles accessing the greenhouses). JRH TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING A2 I } } I SITE PL ............ i i z } I s } t i I I i 1 . .. ...... tW f-IM Amm ................... wi ........ low Zt" oil, r ............... IIV .......... ............ ................. .. .......... . .. ........ JEW . .................. Now iO Oz. ................ ................ ............ ONE -as Oil! ............. nn x fn, `1 t 1, "', ;fir y 71 lips BMW co BMW .... ...... .......... m lot ............. ... ti �..................... ad ..................... ............... .......... ................... ... ....... ...... L,?............ ig g Li LA IN ... imp NEW ROVER ISM E D .1., ,/ A P N COUNT11jATA. IBM ism ,No k . i 7 i 3 1 i I i °orinnv°o °o 'Inv°o o N u)IN u1 o IN U'J IN N N = .22.22 0 = O O O O O N O M O O O N m a O 7 0 7 7 8 7 x 7 7 ui o �E E m m F--- B E=;f`r(mONI� EE E �m7<N<r Wmmio EErnm `}�ar iimm m� 7NNmNmm7 NO u) N<<l.-ACS,":<<mp m n m W m m N r m mr 7 N L N<N< <N< o CND ODm m� n p <�W d d ° 7 U W O <N 3 0 J : 3 o J •_i_.._..._ E j .<-W it)C^ :rm Eo Z o C+Y RQ:No Q F a Q F N W N n Mrc?:lD.m m m W <W n m o m o Z muui MMM o°� Z Nm oom 70 L m ftl m fl>m N m 0 L W r N m m]'H 2 7mm m O N Q Q mNSS m�*:.ua.mN rmooc^c*.mm mr °•°� ,a,m o4a o v O m l p R N':N N N O W r 7•N i ti 7 m E NSIRN<N p E! p m C) N N m m m o W o m o n o �F 2 0 poi'- o .-p ° E p r m W Z m (lfbifJ <7 _ m(Np o p7 O N m0 W 7 O O O �2 L O <W< K K L N m N N N m � U Q G. m p 7 W U.U m Np' o q W o. <W a H Q ' o p o N N O O N in <o Cl y O r tV J EjJN W fS O'mm O? Nu° 0 N R 9 y 2 u o N ° m N t o ZF°07Mi�YY i`M00 �>~O O "Y'YS:N o L pl r 0 0° Z N N O O N K � 7 m m m 7 m N 7 o 2~ Q Q I N m 0 O m 0 rn r 0 0 0 N N o O N O D J p O J z 7 Ne+'q"(Ct,ip-0< Z� m mill r4m Om E ° O E m N i�srEtN7 m o LE t" vumi o��o LLm mNE 000wtl �t« �� omtil N m x m m o O o m° v m m o o m <N r o 4 N co a s o Z oN oN m m !gg 4?oN E o xx �u' .env o o E a > o in.rs cnv m v77+t of u3 'ui ui o E z 777vtn u3-ui ui w> aNi o d d N li V N N N LL a o E x E E a v o E E a _ Y N m > > m > E > j p y Z >= a v N Z x o N m N U E o N o C Y N E Y Y N Y r E m m m m y ax N x a. m oin P _ ° m a.a Na m a JRH Transportation Engineering C1 A D s cY r N'C vF ir. *Kr` IUT MR EXISTING ANALYSIS DOE. em, 1-�M Urisign.al€zed 1nfersectio; Cap-z. city Art rysis f _ 4�, a ! Lanes Conhiqour,-,!fions ..; Sign Control r re,rs Free Strom kt,-,ta.tT'"s. Na lh) 4. 65 14 18 G1 10 r2 Its °'�1 1 15 3 �) x {{ 64 .16 .a . 0 :q.5 .€ :L of-:. 'j,hC�>sg yf"„, # ;, '{ ;�9 H udy i�I G4r Fate i,yp 1,) `0 64 .1 6 21 71 1 7 t L 6 12. 7 3 Pedestrians Lane Width.(f). Percent Bioc1ta.g Right&um. flat+: tcrN Median type None None Median sw sage' eh) Upstream signal(ft) pX pa 3:.7 I Lirt'.block r vC.Corrfliming volurfe 83 so 212 205 72 222 2.Oa r VC1: Slam, 1 Cor-If vor =;rim'?, stage 2 comf vo[ *vG unblac ed gel 83 21? 206 72 222 208 77 t qin g le( 4,1 ..1 71 6._ 6..2 7:.1 6,5 62 tc,2 ac 2 5 qq PO queue fr e% 100 09 95 98 98 98 97 100 cM capaa ty fvehdh) Isis isle 718 6 990 r o3 $77 qt DirN"Lri E� Volume Let 5 21 37 12 Volume trig-it 16 12 16 3 Volume to Capacity 01:00 OADI 0,09 U5 Control Delay( ) 0A 1.,6 10.2 0- Labe LOS A A B i ApproaOi Delay(s) CIA 1.6 10.2 1 0_3 Approach LOS ttertitr Average DMay Intersee ion.C citF L:ltil ti ? :eft J =.1 Level of;emd Analysis Period (,rnin) I I I I i t°{iv.av1 l nst nal zed Intersection.Qapa. ity Ana Syrichro 6) Pepv,,[ 1 HTt'2nsportat n Engineeriiiq Page 1 JRH Transportation Engineering D1 l arms, Volumes, `3 hiiings I-, Nevada & t tall.a:n Ideal Flom. (uplipf.) 1800 1800 s0 18010 1 000 180Q 1800 1 �?� (��� 1� �.: 1 }�O 1 0 15 J #5 15 15 15 5 Lane I-(tri. Factor 1,00 1 00 fM 1.,00 1,00 U-0 1, 10 1-.100 1.G0 1,1130 1-00 1.010 Fft Protected Q 0;47 0.990 0-972 0,982 Oka-, roll) 1 0 0 €- f- 0 0 165 s '. Flo Parmitled 0,99.7 0,990 4W2 0.,98 Head.way�Factor 1.013 1,00 1,00 1.x;:1 IM 1,00 €;0 0 1.0=0 1M 100 1 10 0 Link 1pe-rrztrittrt t2 >�...r.'�- r38 ;5 `t l tnt..Dist nc (1t) 2822 720 261 1 76 f,ravei £ h ice.SNP :. v.: 8,9 6,0 Peak Hour Factor 6) 0.MR 0,86 0,86, 0.86 0 US 0,4fiSs 0,86 t. 0:,8 t6 (x.13?' C {* Lane Group Flow 3Y f 0 85 0 0 � 104 0 0 65 t�rxr. 1r.rrl Free InlerM rya 1` } 3; fEri Control Type.*; Un ign rlized Intersection Capa bty Ublixation 23.2% €firs Level oA ervice A Analysis P riot Fmll'-n1 -5 I i I I i i Lanes,''olunl s, s mina ynr_>hro 6 Report. Existing Conditions Page T JRH Transportation Engineering D2 2. Nevada & Oak 61'71200 Lane Cor-f4ura,"I'lon Sign CohtrrA* Stop tap Fee Free Vo Wme(vehlh+) 30. 3 48 ss��.i€'.. 2 '4-w log 10. 2 1.06 45 Peak f"1 fir'Factor r.1,P 0,8 �':n€ 01,8 lV 0,87 0,$7 Ct.8 k�..j �a` 0,87 3 n7 Houdy flow rate(,{ kr, Wiz , 2 z5 2 2 12 11 1:22 �� Pecir"-m lens Late Width t.ft) Walking eed r Percen'Blockage Right tumff.I?€ (.Ee _.). Median type None None Upstream signal 3 t I p:atC7on unblockef vC,conftl,:fing voFuttae 386 3SR 148 489 408 13.1 174 137 vc I, 3ha w 1 =nf Vol VC2.,Stage 2 can,f Vol 38 ,'i88 148 4139 408 131 174 lzr ' pO queue free% 19� St 4 100 100 9.5 100 oM cap ci y,;veh N 553 527 9-0 `9 515 M 1403 14�� Volume Tc4al 93 7 186 Volume Left 34 2 49 2 Volume fight: -5 2 11 2 CSH, 715 586 14313 i44 ,V0I U me to Ca pa c,ity 0,15 Cj,01 0,04 01:00 Queue Length M'.) 11 0 Control Delay(S, %8 11,2 2.. X1:1 L pane LOS B A, Approach Dajay -s 101$ r,1<2 2.2 01 Approach, LAS 8 B 6te€`£se �toCi Intersect, Capa ,ty.ffttf_fl on; a e ► !!Level of Sevvice a Analysis Period (min.) 15 I HL.M Unsignalized Inlersectio n Caper s y i l y4-is Synchro 6 Report Jf.H Transporlatilon Engineering JRH Transportation Engineering D3 Lanes, Volumes, Tfmin:gs 2: Nevada & Oak ��.� Lane Configunafions 4, 4* 4 44 (deal Flow(vphpl) 18,00 180 €f it 1800 1800 1 St�q 1 0 1aF0 0 fp%) i8on 1 � 180 Turning S �;e4i fi flat!, t5 1� 1,s 1 � ( 1 [Lame Utf.I Factor 1:100 t:0 1,°z0 I' �1. . 1. �� � '18'i�? ",.� 1,00 1,00 1_0;t 1:.01 Fal on,Tii Fif Prot Wed 0-962, 0,999 td, 1: �..k�n� r.i{:�;,��� 0 1593 t,1 0 165 0 `i:i 1 8 a 0 16 92 0 Fit Permitted 0,984 0,987 0 9K�r S.-aid, Rfow..g )' 5.3 0 1658 0 11 1728 0 i.;t 1 i� ?,:. 13 Headway Factor 11:00 1,00 1,00 1m 1.00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1.00 1>0 t i ,rik p tit; rn h 25 25 25 Link Dist nc (ft), 720 258 CO2. 263 t€btimeN 1aI 1 i k L? ai' 3 £ x i J 4« E .. 2 e 5 Peak Hyrr Ftorrrr C5 A.dl< Flow('Vph) 4 3 5- 2 2 2 49 146 11 2 122 Fi t Lane Group��}J4'v :�� ? 0 192: 0 6 18' 0 Cy, 1 ,z r9grt Control step Stop t=ree Free area`T'�?pP<. ether Control pe' E..�r'malafizes Interjection iapaidty Utilization Im,0% ICU Level o£Service AnnIysis, Tf0rd M i i0 I! i i i ynchro 6 Report Existing Condit ons page 1 JRH Trarrsporlation Engineering JRH Transportation Engineering D4 Tamhums NNE APPENDIX E s Y \ CHhO OU TPUTS WIN SIX YELP. 2010 ANALYSIS MOM oil n. Ga.pacit, 1. Nov-ado & 1de1marl Mole &wS t (gn Control Flee P re e Stop Stop VOJUfM�f vef i.) 60 15 19 60- 1 3A 10 1 10 1 Peak.How Fac.Q 0:81,5 0186 086 0,86 0,86 r-. 6 f 86 0,86{6 " � 0,856,85�� 0,8-5 0,86 ova Hourly how rate (,¢ph) 6 70 17 22 77 12 40 12. 17 12 19 edess r?,*wi Lane Width(ft) Oialkhg Speer,(Ws',[ Flaroont Blockage RIght turn *t are(veh Median type (';lone None Median sto �ge veh) Upstream signal(ft') p platbon unblocked' c, Conflicting volume 88 87 230 223 78 240 226, 83 C11, stage 1 writ vol V 2,etage 2:Gord Vol vCu, unb o kRd +to> 88 87 230 223 8 240 2-2.6 8 t single(S) 4:1 4.1 6,6 61 i:.1 i3:. a.2 tc, 2 stage, '5 tl~tz1� 2.2 2" ,5 4.0 3 315 4..G ��''}}. F queue free ����3 •t� 99 94 198 98 9B i, �I OD 6: 664 982 682 661 977 Voltarrie Left 6 22 40 12 Volume Right 17 12 1.7 3 c E3 H 1507 1509 746 692 Vol U.Me to C.a 1t� 0,00 0.01 :09 0"05 Queue Length rafts 1# 1 8 m Control Delay( ) O,5 'l.;6 10:3 10,5 Lane LOS A Approadlt Belay (s) ?: 1.,6 103 10.5 Approach LOS B i ruorog e Delay 41 r t r a u.l apalcity (AliZation 233% ICU Level of Servhoe A Analysis Period (minj 15 I i Verde"pillage DeveloPment Synchro 6 Report 21310 No Rtt ad Page .GRH Transportation Fr4ogineerim JRH Transportation Engineering E1 Lanes Volumes, t I: Nevada gt� It3a r'< 1T tE r Lane,✓� e } .a i 3tf�wa G3 ag iT.x.i:„ war �'�+)• q i'a. ldea Floe (vphpsl 1 80IG 1800 1 800 1 Soo 180 1'x:00, 1800 1800 1800 18101 1800 1800 - ?E I iJ I#it> �r xfi ?nl�ri; 3 1 1 I s. ( 1.3 5 (W :5 Lane t 1. Fni r is r€::� 1,00 I'D 1. 0 1, 0 1..0 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.�i"t 1,00 1M, itkProty dod 0 997 of,99 0 0,972 0 9.8 3 Sate . Flow F t<'Dti 0 1!°4.`> ( .1 2',; j >. c h a4'd. z low tP Fr irII. ; ;0 q 7 1::6 0 1 f 0 . 0 +659 0 t q 1 0 Hea "'ay Factor 1,x{0 1.0+0 1.00 1.00 1 00 1,0 1. 0 1:00 1.00 11,00 1,00 1.00 Link Speed (frtph) 2.5 t.ink D etance(tx) 262 2 261 1,6 Peal£ i°our F ctor 0-as 1.,1 0,8fN 0.86 0.8 0,86 0.86 0.8t'6 G.86 0 8T r€tip s Adj. Flow(Vprf) 16 70 17 221 77 12 40 1 17 12 19 3 mane Caa£5i p)='I'ow vp!hd 11) xtw; 0 0 all 0 61 0 0 34 0 Sign Control Free Str p Stop Area Tyre: Other Control Type', Unsfgn.�afized 4 stern-e"tiort Ca ✓`dty Utilization 2 j:•°e% IC l: r l c.. al siz Period +~fit:,) 1 M i I I I V rde Village Developm nt, Synchro Re of t X010 No Buiid Pag 1 JRH Tf nsportabon :ngi Bering JRH Transportation Engineering E2 HCM Unsignahzed hitersecdon Capacity Analysis, 2: Nevada. & Oak 45M M1,17 .............. 1A 4— u. N Lane 44 4- Stitt.Control -Stop Stop Sri a Free, e, Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% volurnel(velhfih,� 32 2 2 2 2 47 118 10 2 114 48 8,7 '17 1,87 '!7 Pemw Flow Farl.,,,,,, 187 0.87 P-� 0,87 0,8 7 0,8' 0,..d 0.87 0,E 0,87 Hourly.,flow rate,(.vpb) 37 3 61-0 2 2 2 54 136 11 7 i3i S 5 P e de,s t r 11 a n F Lane Width Percent WaG1t:9e Right,turn flare(vehq f4edlan bq)n None None Medilari stf-,fage veh) Upstream signal(ft) pX, platemn unbloCked vC... conflictrng vcfltvme 44f 418 159 474 440 141 1845 147 n"vot stage I cu vC2, stage 2 coriT Vol Eta tj., --unblocked'vol 41B 418 159 474 440 -1141 1186 147 tC, sinvie(s) 7.1 6 5 6,2 71 6,5 62 4A 4A t :,2 i"s) W.fs) 3,5 4,,0 31:3 31-5 4,0 3,3 21 12 r'o aueue free % 93 99 93 99 100 100: 96. 100 014 cap-a6lity(vehl1-i) 527 504 887 460 490 906 138*8 1436 �rtit tea . ........... .... ................... ....... ................ -w - Volume Tot al 100 7 201 1 9 Vo-tume Left 37 2 54 2 Vokne Right 60 2 1 55 c8H 694 559 1388 1435 Volunle to Capacity 0,14 0,01 0,.04 n-00 Q..ieue. Uength ft, 13 1 3 0 Control Delay (S) !IA 111,5 23 0-1 Lane LOS B P, A A Approach Delay 111 11,5 2.3 01. Approacin.LOS B B Average Defy 3.Et In ersoction-Capacity fillization 36,9% t Lvve[olf Serv�lce A Verde'Vill age bevejopmnent Ssyncohro 6 Repoi� 2010 No Built Page JRH Transportation Engineering JRH Transportation Engineering E3 Lanes, Volur e , Tlrrings Z Nevada & Oak e;_7 7 0 tt t-�r� �.,�t"€�i L�Ure°3�{Cr�F GW •Sga' i� k,3}a k,'48,� Ideal Flow(v.phpl) 1800 1800 100 180; 1.800 1800 1801 41800 18010 1800 180.0 1800 Turning &xet1 `36) 16 15 €5 16 16 `l,x i s La*rfe- 1 di, Factor 1,00 1,00 1.:00 1,00 1,00 100 1,00 1;00 1,00 1.00 1,00 1,00 lY rt 0 .1 :1 0,01 0.993 € 961 FIt P ,ecte 0.982 0.934 0,987 0,99:9 aa f,.t, hlo w(P( J5, t1 1593 01 0 1658 01i 0 1'730.,€.3 0 0 169 #, Fit Permitted 0:982 0.984 0,98 a` OMO .z`.altd. Flov ': erm) 0 1559 0 0 1656 0 € 0 0: ;ale. �'° `�" � �►I�i�' � t� '$ it Headway Factor 1,00 1.:00 1:.0io 1 1,0ru .0'0 1-00 1..tto 1 m 1:.00 1,00 T,' 25 25 Ur*Distance(ft) 20 x.58 2:92 263 7Tr ved Time 1�;,r. 7,0 8..t:) 7:.2; Volume(V h) 32 3 52 2 47 116 10 2 114 4 Peak E•[o4r Factor C18 :.,87 0,85 7 0,8d SO,87 .j 8 0,8 1 0,87 €,87 0,87 0,.8 Mi.. Flo- ��f�1�7� 3 G �2j Z 2 64 13 11 2 131 5 Lane Group Plow�a'�,'6ph) 0 1CIO 0 0 } r6 Fr }1) 201 0 0 1a �J Sig"("On'C I u p top r"'rek»'". Free: 1rsttet€a Srnrr� , ,area Type:: 0the Co rtroI Type.,p`., U is.irgn lized I ltemection Capacity Utilization on "5:9%6 ICU Lev et of Service A Analysis Pe-riod(min,) V15 I i IvIercle V&.Ix#age Developmerft Sy:r'chro 6 Repoft 2010 No-Budd Page 1 JRH Transportation rag€ne'erin JRH Transportation Engineering E4 HCr,vl Unsignalized Interse-c-td on Capao-ity Analysfs 1, Nevada & Helman 617V2M7 t .............. Lane c"onfigurabons 44 Sign Control Frea Fre� Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Vol.ume we1 lh' 13 60 is 19 66 2,81 J 29 157 19 - Peak.How Fae,6r .8 k 0.86 -l 1681 0-8W 0.8 -3,816 08,6 0.86 0,86 '86 0,86 005 0 L HourlY flow rate,(.Yphl is 70 17, 77 33 40 34 17 .221, 334 Pedesvlans* Lane Mth (ft) Speed t*Pv-t',,, Pertent Blockage Right tum Claire (veh) lvledfan type I None None Median storage vehl-*J upstream signal"(ft) pX, pl.,zitoon unblocckf.3d v conflicting volume 109 87 270 2 627 '78 280 2:55 93 vCI, stage I -.Li if vol vC2, stage 2 conNol: vOu. unblocked vol 105) 87 270 262 7B 280 255 93 tc, FJ ngfe:() 4,1 4,1 7A 6.5 62 7,1 6.5 6,2 tc, 2 stage,(S) W(S) 2,2 2.2 3,5 4,0 33 16 4,D 2513 PO queuet ftea% 99 99 84 95 9a 96 1-1:5 99 CM cappacity, 1481 1509 638 627 982 621 633, 964 .......... V-01U MOT Otai 1.02 131 91. 63 Volume U4i 15 22 -0 22 Volume Right 1*7 a3 17( 7 oSH p, 1509 1-r.G' Volume t-0 capac-fty c"M 0,01, 0,13 0.10 Queue Length (ft) I I 11 8 Control,Delay(s'k 1,2 1-3 11,1 11A L'arle LOS A Al B B Appmach Debay(s) 1' 1,3 111 11-1 Approaoh WS eraige Delay 5,2 4.0 fty -H at 0. 22,4*Au ICU Level of ServifCle A interser.1i n,Capa 6 Wi z A n Anallysis Period (min) ........... ........................ Verde Village Development Synchro 6 .eport 20 110 Btdfld P aa,'e 'I JRH Transpodabon Engineering JRH Transportation Engineering E5 L n.es, Volur e=s, Timings .1' Nevada & Heiman 6/712007 L.-r,t ';tea..f.gara#io1:1 41 41� 4� 44, lir evi F ���� o} 1 1; 00 80a `80 180 1800 1:800 ilia 18t�3 1800 � ���� 1 �0 1800 r il. Factor. t.�a �: Ut �.00 1:00 1':00 1,00. 1 1!,00 too 1,00 1.00 1.010 1,0 1-00 Fri 0:,-978 0,966 0,97 0 9185 —3 OM2 0,978 0,963 Said, Firm-f prw, 0 1714 0 } ��y 1 0 n 1683 0 0 V09 0 Fit.Remitted O'l-O 0 992 0,978 U93 Headway Fac gar 1..00 too 1,00 "Fart 1:00 '1.00 1.00 1"Do 1.rJ0 '1.001 i. 'm I' lJnk Speed�:' Phl 2wE t�1 20 20 Unk Distant (ft') 282 712 2151 17s <•. 19 29 6 Labe Group Flue rvp 0 �2 F 0 132 C 0 94 L 0 v^.:E r Sign control Free Free t' p estop tr '6rr fidill@, MR Are-a.Type-, Other Control j yp,, : Li isig n alfzed Inte,merfion{,epkity Utiirzatl n 22,4% ICU €evel of Service A Ii i `ourde Village I eve-:oF pent Synchro 6 Report 2010 Sudd page. 1 JRH Transportation Engineering JRH Transportation Engineering E6 J-VA Unsigna4zed Inte-rsection Capacity Analysis 2, Nevada & Oak .......... Lane c, Sign,Control stop $top =me Free Grado 0% .0% 0% 3,5 '31 58 2 2 2 56 118 io 2 114 57 Peak Hour Fact", Hourly fiavle rate f,*Vph) 40 3 67 2 2 2 e44 136 1 1 2 131 66 Pedestrians Lane'Width(.f.0 "Atalking, Speed(1111'sl Pement,Bb,-kage R I g h t t L f m E@ Median type None None Upstream signal pX, plah7mn unblockod-, VC, C0nf,iGt"V.n-q Volumc� 442 444 164 5507 471 -141 197 147 NCI, stage I oorOvol vCZ stage 2 cony vol v0u, unblooked-vol 442 444 1634 507 471 'W 197 14 7 te, Single(S) 7,11 6Zi 6,2 7A 6Z 6,2 4.1 . 4,1 tc, 2 stage(51, t,F (s) 3:5 4,0 13 3,5 4.0 3,3 2,2 22 P-13 qiueue tree 92 99 92 99 100 100 95 1 OD oM capar-ity evehlb) 503 484 88 1 42-2 467 3 7 F3 1435 ................ ... ........ . ........ -g! VOW e-T01,A] 110 7 211 199 volu..tm,� Left 40 2 64 2 VDIume Right 67 2 11 86 ,;SH 678 534 13743 1435 Volu.m.ee to Capacity 0,16 0,01 0,0,5 0-00 Quave Length (ft) 14 1 4 .0 Control Delay�S� `1,33 1:1.,8 2.6 01 Laine LOS B A A Approach Delay(s) 11.3 11.4 2,6 0,11 Approacli LOS a B Average Delay 3 6 .1 Intersection capnity ut11 Ization, 387% ICU Level of Service A analysis Period i".M-10) 15 .................. Verde Village,Deve.lopment Synchro 6 Report 20-10 Boflid Page I AH Transporta.tion E give ening JRH Transportation Engineering E7 Lanes, ` �r�y y�pp��»(�3� es, Timings , Lame Confg-urations. 41+ alp .}cies l t i .k (a' h jai') t g 1800 18D 18 1800 1800 1800 11,900 1 00 1 Boo 18100 1800 15 15 € a.n Ut"I'L FaQuir 1.00 1.00 ILOO 1,00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1,00 1..00 1,00 1.00 1."0 Fit Pmt cfed 0.91'82 0,985 Sat.;: r -,,,,"t`:E ot) 11591 0 0 1.658 CI_ 0 17:12 tT 0 16:4 it�Y. t It Permitted. (1.962 q OAR84 OM5 0.91x€ Saki. Fa W�.P*e*rM), 0 591 �� In 16.5.el 0. 0 1726 0 0 16j"?`t�a#", 0 .Hea.dt.vaq Ffor 1.00 1,0 1_00 1,0 1,00 1.00 'DO i M" 1.00 100 1,0-0 1.0 I2fi rp 25 25 25 25(i h Link Distance(ft) '720 258 Volume(vph) Pe3ak Hour Factor 0,87 0, 0. ! 54 0.:8.4 wi S7 0,87 ,87 0,87 0,87 0,87 0.87 Ph 2 66 Sign Contra Stop wP Free Frye lrtret, rt" rngr Cnru roi Type-!: Unsia l�t d I i i I I i i I 20 1 G B u.-Ild Page 1 JRIA T mnsportatbn Engineering JRH Transportation Engineering Eg I ENGINEERING I g ��7 EUGENE 9 FKY y /y t� q} f T ... C. .:'i iE 5, V!f,;i:.,f e.Ph.fjwG .d...:£.I R��' ,y " ,eye yg Eugene, Oregon 97401 MEDFORD y 11.75 East Allhadn Street, Suite i I i Planning Division ZONING PERMIT APPLICATION CITY OF 51 Winbum Way,Ashland OR 97520 FILE# ASHLAND 541-488-5305 Fax 541-488-6006 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT 2,a L� Lel,)�ia DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Pursuing LEED@ Certification? ❑YES ❑ NO Street Address lj e, Assessor's Map No,39 1 E Tax Lot(s).. Zoning r?, — Comp Plan Designation. APPLICANT Name L Phone Z- 71-� E-M a i I C,t'P(4 J Address city zip PROPERTY OWNER Name _L1LL�_1___yL_f2_1 Phone E-Mail Address City zip SURVEYOR,ENGINEER,ARCHITECT6ANDSCAPE ARCHITECT,OTHER Title Name one it -Mail Address City Zip Title Name Phone E-Mail Address City Zip i hereby certify that the statements and information contained in this application,including the enclosed drawings and the required findings of fact,are in all respects, true and correct. /understand that all property pins must be shown on the drawings and visible upon the site inspection. In the event the pins are not shown or their location found to be incorrect, the owner assumes full responsibility, /further understand that if this request is subsequently contested, the burden will be on me to establish: 1) that/produced sufficient factual evidence at the hearing to support this request; 2) that the findings of fact furnished justifies the granting of the request; 3) that the findings of fact furnished by me are adequate;and further 4) that all structures or improvements are properly located on the ground. Failure in this ragar N res f mgst kely in not only the request being set aside, but also possibly in my structures being built in reliance thereon being required to kle removed at in xpen a any doubts,i am advised to seek competent professional advice and ass' tance, Applicant Date As owner of the p dpey evolved in this request, I have read and understood the complete application and its consequences to me as a property weer. Propert� � nerysSqniature (required) Date I — I [To be completed by City Stafq Date Received r , Zoning Permit Type Filing Fee$ OVER 0 COocuments and SettinL,,s\iucasa\Desktop�Zoning Permit Application.doc �x.� �� ��'r�/,...v.�i"�- rf'r� ,-,z." r'��' a:,rm" ... _ � ;.� _J• ,�. � �.. w� ,. .W a a„ r����✓�'' �%",,�� rr; ,::r�y:-'�f�'�`:,..i�� `3.~ �" c. ,�'.U.:,.:, .,, � ;; .rte.;,", ,;; r' ,..�' �4 'b�" .n i�?i -.��r �; . r Job Address: 87 W NEVADA ST Contractor: ASHLAND OR 97520 Address: C A- F Owner's Name: WILMA LLC Q Phone: Customer#: 06473 N State Lie No: P WILMA LLC T ' City Lie No: L Applicant: 744 HELMAN R Address: ASHLAND OR 97520 } C C Sub-Contractor: A; Phone: (541)261-2712 T Address: N'' Applied: 10/11/2011 T Issued: R Expires: 04/08/2012 Phone: State Lie No: Maplot: 391 E04B1100 City Lie No: DESCRIPTION: CUP for temporary use for a landscape business 1%ALUATI9N Occupancy Type Construction Units Rate Amt Actual Amt Constuction Description Total for Valuation: j[7-77 MECHANICAL.. ,: ELECTRICAL i STRUCTURAL. ' PERMf T FEE:DETAIL';"°" Fee Description Amount Fee Description Amount i Conditional Use Permit Type 1 963.00 CONDITIONS OFAPPROVAL - i i i i COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tel: 541-488-5305 20 East Main St. Fax: 541-488-5311 Ashland,OR 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us Inspection Request Line: 541-552-2080 I -ASH LAIN D"'11