Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Jefferson_777_PA-2011-01699
I CITY OF ASHLAND February 15,2012 Craig Bramscher 550 Clover Lane Ashland OR 97520 RE: Planning Action 42012-01699 Notice of Final Decision At its meeting of January 24,2012,based on the record of the public meetings and hearings on this matter,the Ashland Planning Commission approved your request for a Site Review Approval for the property located at 763 & 777 Jefferson Avenue--Assessor's Map#39 lE 14 AC; Tax Lot 101 & 102. The Ashland Planning Commission approved and signed the Findings, Conclusions and Orders document, on February 14, 2012. The Planning Commission decision becomes effective on the 13`h day after the Notice of Final Decision is mailed. Approval is valid for a period of one year. Please review the attached findings and conditions of approval. The conditions of approval shall be met prior to project completion. Copies of the Findings,Conclusions and Orders document,the application and all associated documents and evidence submitted, applicable criteria and standards are available for review at the Ashland Community Development Department, located at 51 Winburn Way. This decision may be appealed to the Ashland City Council if a Notice of Appeal is filed prior to the effective date of the decision and with the required fee($318), in accordance with Chapter 18.108.110(A)of the Ashland Municipal Code, The appeal may not be made directly to the Land Use Board of Appeals. The appeal shall be limited to the criteria listed in Chapter 18.108.110 of the Ashland Municipal Code,which is also attached. 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 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel:541-088-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax:641-552-2050 Ashland,Oregon 97520 TTY; 800-735-2900 mmashlar dorms j SECTION 18.108.110 Appeal to Council. A. Appeals of Type II decisions - shall be initiated by a notice of appeal filed with the City Administrator. The standard Appeal Fee shall be required as part of the notice. All the appeal requirements of Section 18.108.110, including the appeal fee, must be fully met or the appeal will be considered by the city as jurisdictionally defective and will not be heard or considered. I. The appeal shall be filed prior to the effective date of the decision of the Commission. 2. The notice shall include the appellant's name, address, a reference to the decision sought to be reviewed, a statement as to how the appellant qualifies as a party, the date of the decision being appealed, and a clear and distinct identification of the specific grounds for which the decision should be reversed or modified, based on identified applicable criteria or procedural irregularity. 3. The notice of appeal,together with notice of the date,time and place to consider the appeal by the Council shall be mailed to the parties at least 20 days prior to the meeting. 4. A. Except upon the election to re-open the record as set forth in subparagraph 4.B. below,the review of a decision of the Planning Commission by the City Council shall be confined to the record of the proceeding before the Planning Commission. The record shall consist of the application and all materials submitted with it; documentary evidence, exhibits and materials submitted during the hearing or at other times when the record before the Planning Commission was open; recorded testimony; (including DVDs when available), the executed decision of the Planning Commission, including the findings and conclusions. In addition, for purposes of City Council review, the notice of appeal and the written arguments submitted by the parties to the appeal, and the oral arguments, if any,shall become part of the record of the appeal proceeding. B. The Council may reopen the record and consider new evidence on a limited basis, if such a request to reopen the record is made to the City Administrator together with the filing of the notice of appeal and the City Administrator determines prior to the City Council appeal hearing that the requesting party has demonstrated. a. That the Planning Commission committed a procedural error, through no fault of the requesting party, that prejudiced the requesting party's substantial rights and that reopening the record before the Council is the only means of correcting the error; or b. That a factual error occurred before the Planning Commission through no fault of the requesting party which is relevant to an approval criterion and material to the decision; or C. That new evidence material to the decision on appeal exists which was unavailable, through no fault of the requesting party, when the record of the proceeding was open, and during the period when the requesting party could have•requested reconsideration. A requesting party may only qualify for this exception if he or she demonstrates that the new evidence is relevant to an approval criterion and material to the decision. This exception shall be strictly construed by the Council in order to ensure that only relevant evidence and testimony is submitted to the hearing body. COMMUNRY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel:541-488-5365 51 Winbum Way Fax;541-552-2050 Ashland,Oregon 97526 TTY: 806.735.2966 wtiwr.ashland.or.us I - Re-opening the record for purposes of this section means the submission of Additional written testimony and evidence, not oral testimony or presentation of evidence before the City Council. C. Oral argument on the appeal shall be permitted before the Council. Oral argument shall be limited to ten(10)minutes for the applicant,ten(10)for the appellant, if different, and three (3) minutes for any other Party who participated below. A party shall not be permitted oral argument if written arguments have not been timely submitted. Written arguments shall be submitted no less than ten(10)days prior.to the Council consideration of the appeal. Written and oral arguments on the appeal shall be Iimited to those issues clearly and distinctly set forth in the Notice of Appeal; similarly, oral argument shall be confined to the substance of the written argument. D. Upon review, and except when limited reopening of the record is allowed, the City Council shall not re-examine issues of fact and shall limit its review to determining whether there is substantial evidence to support the findings of the Planning Commission, or to determining if errors in law were committed by the Commission. Review shall in any event be limited to those issues clearly and distinctly set forth in the notice of appeal. No issue may be raised on appeal to the Council that was not raised before the Planning Commission with sufficient specificity to enable the Commission and the parties to respond. E. The Council may affirm, reverse, modify or remand the decision and may approve or deny the request, or grant approval with conditions. The Council shall make findings and conclusions, and make a decision based on the record before it as justification for its action, The Council shall cause copies of a final order to be sent to all parties participating in the appeal. Upon recomimendation of the Administrator,the Council may elect to summarily remand the matter to the Planning Commission. If the City Council elects to remand a decision to the Planning Commission, either summarily or otherwise, the Planning Commission decision shall be the final decision of the City, unless the Council calls the matter up pursuant to Section 18,108.070.13,5 , F. Appeals may only be filed by parties to the planning action. "Parties" shall be defined as the following: 1. The applicant. 2. Persons who participated in the public hearing, either orally or in writing, Failure to participate in the public hearing, either orally or in writing, precludes the right of appeal to the Council, 3. Persons who were entitled to receive notice of the action but did not receive notice due to error. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel:541ABB-5305 51 Winbum Way Fax:541-552-2050 Ashland,Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us f BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 24,2012 IN THE MATTER OF PLANNING ACTION#2011-01699,A REQUEST FOR SITE REVIEW APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT TWO, TWO-STORY BUILDINGS OF 14,857 SQUARE FEET AND 18,805 SQUARE FEET FOR THE }FINDINGS RESEARCH DESIGN,MANUFACTURING OF PROTOTYPES, WAREHOUSING, )CONCLUSIONS STORAGE AND ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES FOR THE PRODUCTION OF } AND ORDERS BRAMMO ELECTRIC MOTORCYCLES AND PRODUCTS. THE BUILDINGS WILL BE LOCATED AT 777 JEFFERSON AVENUE. A PRIVATE DIRT TEST TRACK TO FURTHER THE RESEARCH AND DESIGN IS PROPOSED FOR 763 JEFFERSON. APPLICANTS: Brammo Motorsports LLC -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- RECITALS: 1) Tax lot#101 and #102 of Map 39 1 14 AC are located at 763 and 777 Jefferson Avenue and are zoned M-1,Industrial. 2) 'The applicants are requesting Site Review approval to construct a 14,857 square foot two-story and an 18,805 square foot two-story building for the research, design, associated testing and administrative offices for Brammo Motorsports located at 777 Jefferson. The application also includes a request for Site Review approval to construct a dirt test track for the development of Brammo Motorcycles. Site improvements are outlined on the plans on file at the Department of Community Development. 3) The criteria for Site Review approval are described in Chapter 18.72.070 as follows; A. All applicable City ordinances have been met or will be met by the proposed development. B. All requirements of the Site Review Chapter have been met or will be met. C. The development complies with the Site Design Standards adopted by the City Council for implementation of this Chapter. D. 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 improvements in the street right-of-way shall comply with the Street Standards in Chapter 18.88, Performance Standards Options. (Ord. 2655, 1991; Ord 2836 S6, 1999) 4) The Planning Commission, following proper public notice, held a public heating on January 10, 2012 at which time testimony was received and exhibits were presented. The Planning Commission approved the application subject to conditions pertaining to the appropriate development of the site. Now, therefore, the Planning Commission of the City of Ashland finds, concludes and recommends as PA 02011-01699 February 14,2012 Page 1 i f follows: SECTION 1. EXHIBITS For the purposes of reference to these Findings, the attached index of exhibits, data, and testimony will be used. Staff Exhibits lettered with an "S" Proponent's Exhibits, lettered with a"P" Opponent's Exhibits, lettered with an"O" Hearing Minutes,Notices,Miscellaneous Exhibits lettered with an"M" SECTION 2. CONCLUSORY FINDINGS 2.1 The Planning Commission finds that it has received all information necessary to make a decision based on the Staff Report,public hearing testimony and the exhibits.received. 2.2 The Planning Commission finds that the proposal to construct a 14,857 square foot two- story and a 18,805 square foot two-story building for the research, design, associated testing and administrative offices for Brammo Motorsports located at 777 Jefferson Avenue and a dirt test track for the research and the development of Brammo Motorcycles at 763 Jefferson Avenue meets all applicable criteria for Site Review approval as described in Chapter 18.72. 2.3 The Planning Commission finds that the proposal satisfies the approval requirements for Basic Site Review. Given the location of the property and the Industrial (M-1) zoning designation, the project is subject to Ashland's Basic Site Review Standards, as well as additional requirements relating to water resource protections, parking lot landscaping, bicycle parking and the provision of refuse and recycling areas. The Planning Commission finds that the proposal meets all applicable ordinance requirements of the City of Ashland with the attached conditions of approval. The Site Plan provided delineates the proposed building location, design and associated site improvements, The Planning Commission finds that the proposed building complies with the side and rear setback requirements of the underlying M-1 zoning district. The Commission finds that the building's fi•ont setback of 25-feet with the entrances placed approximately 25-feet beyond that meet the basic setback of the zone but exceed that of the Site Design and Use Standards. The Commission further finds that Ashland Municipal Code 18.112.070 provides that where two requirements imposed by.code are found to be in conflict, the more restrictive requirement shall govern, and as such the site is subject to the 25-foot fi-ont setback of the M-1 zone, not the 20- foot setback called for in the Site Design and Use Standards in accordance with AMC 18.112.070. The Commission further finds that the solar calculations provided with the application demonstrate compliance with the applicable Solar Access Standard B. PA#2011-01699 February 14,2012 Page 2 Consistent with the aforementioned standards, the Commission finds that applicant has presented a project with a prominent street presence. The Commission further finds that the proposal responds well to its zoning designation by providing an architecturally interesting, pedestrian orientated,. research, design and manufacturing facility. The new building provides a level of urban design that is compatible with Ashland's Site Review requirements. The design incorporates a small public plaza space with bio-swale planters in response to the large required front setback in the M-1 zone and the pedestrian orientation requirements of Basic Site Review standards, The Planning Commission finds that the proposed dirt test track is a permitted use in the Industrial Zoning District. The Commission finds that the track is to support the research and manufacture of a permitted use in the zone. The Planning Commission finds that there is generally a certain level of external impacts associated with the Industrial Zone from noise, traffic and other outdoor uses, similar to vehicle sales and storage yards, building materials sales yards, asphalt batch / mixing plants, trucking and other freight stations and facilities and the track will not have a greater impact that the large number of uses permitted in the Industrial Zone. The Planning Commission finds the applicants' proposed maintenance including watering and raking of the track and the Planning Commission added conditions of approval regarding the restriction on gas powered motorcycles and neighbor notification in advance of testing electric motorcycles versus gasoline engine motorcycles meet the applicable ordinance requirements of the City of Ashland and address the concerns from neighbors concerning the impacts from testing motorcycles. The Commission finds that the Ashland Municipal Code relating to nuisances effectively provides for the enforcement of the Noise Ordinance (.AMC 9.08.170) and the ordinance regarding Dust and Track out(AMC 9.08.060) should any issues regarding the test track arise, The Planning Commission finds that proposed structures, parking lots and other associated site improvements are outside of the existing Conservation Easement for Knoll Creek. The Commission further finds that Ashland Municipal Code's Water Resource Protection Zone Chapter (18.63) provides adequate protections for the preservation of the wetland located at 763 Jefferson Avenue which is to be encircled by the dirt test track and the required minimum 20- foot buffer. The Planning Commission finds that approximately 17 percent of the parcel at 777 Jefferson Avenue is to be provided in landscaped area, in large part due to the presence of Knoll Creek, The Commission finds that a screened trash and recycling area will be provided at the south end of the Building B, and that site lighting will be pedestrian scaled and will comply with "dark sky" requirements as well. The Planning Commission finds that existing water, sewer, storm sewer, electrical services and paved access are in place and serve the subject property and were recently installed to meet the capacity of the proposed development when Jefferson Avenue was installed in 2011. The applicant's site plan,details the placement of a stormwater dentition bioswale at the rear of the property with two small bio-swale planters at the front of the structures. Final engineered calculations demonstrating that post development peak flows will not exceed pre-development levels and an identification of any necessary water quality mitigation measures will be provided PA#2011-01699 February 14,2012 Page 3 prior to development of the site. 2.4 Off-street parking spaces are situated to the side of the structure and will be landscaped in accordance with the City's landscaping standards for parking areas. The Planning Commission finds that the "Industrial Use" parking requirements, which call for a number of parking spaces equivalent to the lesser of one space per two employees on the largest shift or one parking space per 1,000 square feet of floor area will provide adequate parking for the proposed industrial, manufacturing and offices uses. The Planning Commission finds that while the application indicates that 46 parking spaces are required to serve 46,442 square feet of warehouse use based on a warehouse standard parking and has identified 46 standard parking spaces,two fleet vehicle spaces and the maximum ten percent overage with 52 parking spaces to be provided on site, calculating the parking requirements based on one space per two employees on the largest shift, plus one space per company vehicle, is a more appropriate basis for determining required parking for the proposal here. The Commission further finds that the Off-Street Parking Chapter (AMC 18.92) limits parking provided to no more than ten percent above what is required for the use. This limitation avoids an auto-centric focus in development, while reducing the overall amount of paving installed, thus reducing the heat-island effect of summer sunlight reflecting off of asphalt while also allowing precipitation to be absorbed directly into the ground rather than creating excessive run-off and the associated water quality impacts. The Commission therefore finds that the parking proposed is significantly more than necessary for the current use proposed and the current number of 45 employees. The Planning Commission finds that the number of parking spaces provided should be reduced to include only the 29 spaces in the main parking lot between the buildings at 777 Jefferson and the seven parking spaces to the west of Building A necessary to accommodate the number of employees proposed, with the remaining parking to be installed during a later phase should the nature of the use intensify or the number of employees increase. A condition to this effect has been included to require a revised site plan reflecting a phased installation of the site's parking, with the remaining parking area currently identified to be instead reserved in landscaped area to allow future installation of the additional spaces should the demand or the nature of the use in place change. 2.5 The Planning Commission finds that a total of 18 trees which are six-inches in diameter- at-breast-height (d.b.h.) or greater have been identified on or near the subject property. These include oak, pine and poplar on the subject properties. The application proposes to retain and protect all but two dead trees. The Planning Commission finds that AMC 18.61.035.G. notes that dead trees are exempt from Land Use regulations and are not subject to Tree Removal Permits. SECTION 3. DECISION 3.1 Based on the record of the Public Hearing on this matter, the Planning Commission concludes that the proposal for two, two-story buildings of 14,857 square feet and 18,805 square feet for the research, design, manufacturing of prototypes, warehousing,,storage and administrative offices for the production of Brammo Electric Motorcycles and a dirt test track for the testing of Brammo Electric Motorcycles, the associate parking areas and landscape installation is supported by evidence contained within the record. PA#2011-01699 February 14,2012 Page 4 Therefore, based on our overall conclusions, and upon the proposal being subject to each of the following conditions, we approve Planning Action#2011-01699. Further, if any one or more of the conditions below are found to be invalid, for any reason whatsoever, then Planning Action #2011-01699 is denied. The following are the conditions and they are attached to the approval: 1) That all proposals of the applicant shall be conditions of approval unless otherwise modified here. 2) That the plans submitted for the building permit shall be in substantial conformance with those approved as part of this application. If the plans submitted for the building permit are not in substantial conformance with those approved as part of this application, an application to modify this Site Review approval shall be submitted and approved prior to issuance of a building permit. 3) That a sign permit shall be obtained prior to installation of any new signage. Signage shall meet the requirements of Chapter 18.96. 4) That the dirt test track shall be maintained in accordance with the findings and shall not be used for competitions, shows or other public events without a Modification of this Site Review approval. 5) The applicant shall submit a dust mitigation plan addressing the mitigation aspects of the test track such as the fi'equency of water, the application of a dust abatement product and a contact of Brammo Motorsports for any compliance related issues. 6) That the applicant shall provide advance notice to the adjacent property owners regarding any proposed use of the test track by a gasoline powered motorcycle. 7) That prior to the submittal of a building permit: a) That a stormwater drainage plan, including details of on-site detention for storm water and necessary water quality mitigation, shall be submitted for the review and approval of the Planning, Building, and Engineering Divisions. Post development peak flows shall be demonstrated to be less than or equal to pre-development levels. b) A final utility plan for the project shall be submitted for the review and approval by the Planning, Engineering and Building Divisions prior to issuance of a building permit. The utility plan shall include the location of connections to all public facilities in and adjacent to the development, including the locations of water lines and meter sizes, sewer mains and services,manholes and clean-outs, storm drainage pipes and catch basins. Utility installations, including any necessary fire protection vault, shall be placed outside of the pedestrian corridor, and necessary public utility easements on the property shall be shown on the building permit submittals. c) The applicant shall submit an electric distribution plan including load calculations and locations of all primary and secondary services including transformers, cabinets and all other necessary equipment. This plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning, Engineering and Electric Departments prior to building permit submittal. Transformers and cabinets shall be located.outside of the pedestrian corridor, in those areas least visible from the right-of-way while considering the access needs of the Electric Department. PA#2011-01699 February 14,2012 Page 5 d) The building permit plan submittals shall include lot coverage calculations including all building footprints, driveways,parking, and circulation areas. These plans shall demonstrate that at least 15 percent of the site is surfaced in landscaping, and that at least seven percent of the parking lot area is provided in required parking lot landscaping, as required in the Site Design&Use Standards. e) The building permit plan submittals shall include and sample exterior building colors and materials for review and approval of the Staff Advisor. The exterior building materials and paint colors shall be compatible with the surrounding area and consistent with those described in the application materials. 8) That prior to the issuance of a building permit; a) That a Verification Permit in accordance with 18.61.042.11 shall be applied for and approved by the Ashland Planning Division prior to site work, storage of materials and/or issuance of a building permit. The Verification Permit is to inspect the identifications the installation of tree protection fencing to protect the trees to be retained. The tree protection fencing shall be installed according to the approved Tree Protection and Removal Plan, inspected and approved by the Staff Advisor prior to site work, storage of materials and/or issuance of a building permit. b) That silt fencing or other erosion control methods to protect the Knoll Creek corridor and the wetland shall be installed and inspected by the Staff Advisor prior to the issuance of the building permit or prior to any site work. The silt fencing shall be installed in accordance with best management practices. c) The applicant shall provide the approved Landscape/Irrigation Plan which addresses the Water Conserving Landscaping Guidelines and Policies of the Site Design and Use Standards, including irrigation controller requirements to allow multiple/flexible calendar programming with the building permit submittals, d) All exterior lighting shall be appropriately shrouded so as not to permit direct illumination of any adjacent land. Lighting details, including a scaled plan and specifications detailing shrouding, shall be submitted to the Staff Advisor for review and approval with the building permit submittals. e) At the time of building plan submittal,the bike rack details and shelter details shall be submitted for review and approval by the Staff Advisor. The building permit submittals shall verify that the bicycle parking design, spacing, and coverage requirements are met in accordance with 18.92.040.1. f) Mechanical equipment shall be screened from view from Jefferson Avenue. The locations of mechanical equipment and any associated screening shall be shown on the site plan and elevations in the building permit submittals. g) That the buildings shall meet Solar Setback B in accordance with 18,70.040.B. The PA 92011-01699 February 14,2012 Page 6 building permit submittals shall demonstrate compliance with Solar Setback B. h) The requirements of the Ashland Fire Department shall be satisfied, including that all addressing shall be approved prior to being installed; that fire apparatus access be provided and necessary fire apparatus easements identified and recorded; that adequate fire flow be provided and maintained; that fire sprinklers, hydrants, a Knox box, and/or an FDC be installed; and that an approved walkway to accommodate fire fighter access around and between both buildings be maintained. A Knox Box for the gate at the test track driveway entrance shall also be provided. i) A revised site plan detailing a phased parking installation shall be provided for the review and approval of the Staff Advisor, In the initial phase, parking to be installed for occupancy of the building would be limited to the lot between the buildings and the seven spaces west of Building A. The remaining 18 parking spaces in the southeastern portion of the site are to be reserved in landscaped area pending future installation in a second phase should the parking demand or the nature of the use change to necessitate their installation, j) That a management plan for the long-term preservation of the wetland and the required 20-foot wetland buffer consistent with 18.63.120 on Tax lot 101 at 763 Jefferson shall be provided for review and approval by the staff advisor. 9) That prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy: a) That the screening for the trash and recycling enclosure shall be installed in accordance with the Site Design and Use Standards. i b) All required parking areas excepting the spaces directly to the south of Building B shall be paved and striped. The additional spaces up to the maximum of 40 maybe installed when they become necessary. c) All landscaping and the irrigation systems shall be installed in accordance with the approved plan, inspected and approved by the Staff Advisor prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. That at the time of planting and prior to the issuance of a final certificate of occupancy, not less than two inches of mulch shall be added in all non-turf landscaped areas in the developed area after the installation of living plant materials. d) That required bicycle parking spaces according to the approved plan and in accordance with design and rack standards in 18.92.040.I and J, inspected, and approved by the Staff Advisor prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Inverted a-racks shall be used for the bicycle parking. i Planning Commission Approval Date PA 92011-01699 February 14,2012 Page 7 98 PA-2011-01699 391E14AC 700 PA 2099-01699 391E14AB 2100 ASHLAND RECREATIONAL PROPERTIES rt ASHLAND PROPERTY INVESTORS LLC ON 's 670 SUPERIOR CT STE 110 CIO ASHLAND TENNIS&FITNESS CLUB 0 MEDFORD, OR 97504 735 JEFFERSON AVE ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2011-01699 391E14AC 1900 PA-2011-01699 391E14AC 100 DA 2011 01699 39IE14 G 5W ASHLAND WAREHOUSE PARTNRSHP BRAMMO INC PO BOX 43 550 CLOVER LN PO SOX 92 MEDFORD, OR 97501 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND,-�vR 97620 PA-2011-01699 391E14AB 2300 PA-2011-01699 391E14AC 900 PA-2011-01699 39IE14BA 700 DAVIS ROY J TRUSTEE ET AL DWAIN&BUD LLC IPCO DEVELOPMENT CORP 5205 ROOSTER LN 801 AVENUE C 640 TOLMAN CREEK RD SOMERSET, CA- 95684 WHITE CITY, OR 97503 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2011-01699 391E14AC 1100 PA-2011-01699 391E14AC 600 KNOX MARK L ET AL MORRIS ROBERT GENE TRUSTEE ET AL . .... 700 MISTLETOE RD 106 PO BOX 850 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 975209 Aw PA-2011-01699 391E14AC 200 PA-2011-01699 391E14AB 2200 PA-2011-01699 REEEK RONALD YERBA PRIMA INC JOHN YUNG,CEO RAY KISTLER 709 WASHINGTON ST 740 JEFFERSON AVE 545 A STREET,STE 3 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2011-01699 PA-2011-01699 PA-2011-01699 LAURIE SAGER JIM HIGDAY Peter Finkle 700 MISTLETOE RD, STE 201 HARDEY ENGINEERING &ASSO. 785 Beach St ASHLAND, OR 97520 2870 NANSEN DRIVE Ashland OR 97520 MEDFORD, OR 97501 18 2-15-2012 NOD 777 Jefferson Av Brammo I i i E f CITY OF SHLAN ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES January 10, 2012 CALL TO ORDER Chair Pam Marsh called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m,in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street. Commissioners Present: Staff Present. Mick Church Bill Molnar, Community Development Director Michael Dawkins Derek Severson,Associate Planner Eric Heesacker Amy Gunter,Assistant Planner Richard Kaplan April Lucas,Administrative Supervisor Pam Marsh Debbie Miller Melanie Mindlin Absent Members: Council Liaison: Russ Silbiger, absent ANNOUCEMENTS Commissioner Marsh welcomed Richard Kaplan to the Planning Commission and provided an overview of the upcoming meeting schedule, She also asked for a volunteer to attend the next Chamber meeting and Commissioner Miller offered to attend. Community Development Director Bill Molnar commented on the,Economic Development Strategy and noted the Chamber of Commerce is working on a local survey of businesses. He stated this will be kicking off soon and the findings will be presented at a future Study Session. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approval of Minutes. 1. December 13,2011 Regular Meeting. Commissioners Dawkins/Heesacker m/s to approve the Consent Agenda,Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed 5.0. (Commissioners Kaplan and Church abstained] i PUBLIC FORUM I No one came forward to speak. TYPE II PUBLIC HEARINGS A. PLANNING ACTION:#2011-01576 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 1554 Webster Street(on the Southern Oregon University campus) APPLICANT:American Campus Community Services DESCRIPTION, A request for Site Review approval to construct a new single-story dining hall near the intersection of Wightman and Webster Streets,two new four-story residence halls near the Intersection of Webster and Stadium Streets,two parking lots and associated site improvements on the Southern Oregon University campus at 1554 Webster Street.Also included are requests for Conditional Use Permit approval to allow buildings that exceed the maximum length and vary from the locations identified in the SOU Masterplan and to exceed the 40 foot height allowance in the SO zoning district,and a request for a Tree Removal Permit to remove 18 trees that are 18-inches in diameter-at-breast-height or greater. The application involves the demolition of five residences and their associated accessory structures near the intersection of Webster and Stadium Streets to accommodate the proposed Ashland Planning Commission January 10, 2012 Page 1 of 8 development. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Southern Oregon University;ZONING: SO; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 391E 10 CD;TAX LOT: 4200. (Continued from December 13, 2099 meeting) Commissioner Marsh read aloud the public hearing procedures for land use hearings. Ex Parte Contact Commissioner Kaplan performed a site visit and reviewed the previous meeting documents and video. Commissioner Mindlin performed a site visit. Commissioner Heesacker reviewed the SOU Master Plan. Commissioner Church performed a site visit, reviewed the previous meeting documents and video,and received clarification from staff regarding the SOU Master Plan. Commissioner Dawkins performed a site visit. Commissioner Marsh performed a site visit and had two brief conversations regarding the public hearing and approval process. Staff Report Associate Planner Derek Severson provided an update of the issues raised at the December 131h public hearing. 1) Sense of Entry/Relationship to the Street and Better Address Length and Articulation Guidelines. Mr. Severson stated the applicants have redesigned the building in response to these issues and have added an arched element; broken up the height with additional dormers; added a plaza area;and added a walkway that connects to the Greensprings Complex. He stated staff is supportive of these revisions and believes the revised proposal better addresses the standards. 2) Transportation and Parking Demand Management. Mr. Severson reviewed the exhibit that was presented at the Transportation Commission hearing,which outlines the current and proposed parking supply, and clarified resident students will not be allowed to park in commuter lots elsewhere on campus. He also commented on the shift in resident population to the north side of campus and stated the application focuses on crossing treatments so that students can safely cross Siskiyou Blvd. 3) Pedestrian Safety. Mr. Severson stated staffs concern was ensuring there is big picture consideration of the circulation changes in shifting the student life zone to the north side of Siskiyou and how they will fit within the fabric of campus and the community. Staff also requested the applicant clarify what improvements will occur, by whom,and when. Mr. Severson noted the Pedestrian Circulation Plan presented by the applicants and aiso reviewed the recommended conditions of approval submitted by the Transportation Commission. He noted that one of the Transportation Commission's recommendations is to install full width sidewalks and parkrows along Ashland Street; however,this would require the removal of at least 29 trees,and these improvements could potentially be disturbed when the multi-use building goes in along the Ashland Street frontage. Mr. Severson stated for these reasons,staff is recommending the Ashland Street sidewalk improvements be delayed until the installation of the future mixed use building. 4) issues Raised by the Commission. Mr. Severson reviewed the five issues raised by the Commission at the December hearing: 1) Parking, including the future Student Recreation Center and event demand,2)Sidewalks on the north side of Ashland Street, 3)Sidewalks on both sides of Stadium Street,4)the Ashland Street crossing at Stadium Street,and 5)Sidewalks on the east side of Wightman. He stated the applicants are now proposing sidewalks and parkrows along the full length of Stadium Street from Webster to Ashland Street;and in terms of the crossing,the recommendation from the Transportation Commission is to install audible RFBs and additional signage. He stated if feasible,the applicants are also considering median treatments and adjusting the location of that crossing to address concerns with the left hand turn movements out of the Market of Choice shopping center. In terms of the Wightman Street corridor, Mr. Severson stated the applicants have presented an alternate design that would widen the sidewalks along the Dining Hall frontage. 5) Tree Commission Recommendations. Mr. Severson stated the Tree Commission did not review the applicant's newest submittals, but they are supportive of the j application and recommend the following: 1)that the existing,established trees along the Wightman and Ashland Street frontages not be removed,2)that an arborist be present at all times during the sewer line installation on Iowa Street and supervise the hand excavation within the root zones of Trees#200 and#201,and 3)to take extra effort to save Tree#200, but they recognized that this proposal may necessitate the removal of Tree 9201. 6) Applicants Requested Revisions, I Mr. Severson stated the applicants have requested revisions to the conditions proposed by staff. 1) Condition#1 —the applicants have requested the LEED requirement be revised to require them to submit the materials for LEED certification within an agreed upon timeframe, rather than setting a deadline for obtaining approval.2)Conditions#5i and#7d—the Ashland Planning Commission January 10, 2012 Page 2 of 8 applicants have asked that the requirement for stairway access be removed and that the requirement for radio coverage be based on testing and supplied if needed as a condition of occupancy. Mr. Severson stated staff is comfortable with the revisions as proposed. Mr. Severson concluded his presentation and stated Staff is supportive of the application and are recommending approval with the conditions as outlined. Questions for Staff Suggestion was made for the applicant to install a crossing treatment for the FrancislSiskiyou crossing, including audible RFBs. Concern was expressed regarding the Stadium Street crosswalk and it was questioned whether there are other treatments that could be done. Public Works Director Mike Faught addressed the Commission and stated one idea is to extend the median and to prohibit left hand turns from the shopping center; however, more outreach with the community and surrounding business owners would need to be done before a change like this was implemented. Recommendation was made for the TDM strategies to focus on outcomes rather than monitoring behaviors. Suggestion was also made for the excessive signage along Siskiyou to be reviewed and to consider removing those that are not legally required. Applicant's Presentation Kurt SchultzlSERA Arch itectslThanked the Commission for their comments made at the first hearing and reviewed some of the changes that have been made to the design, including: 1) Enhancing the pedestrian connectivity throughout the site, including the addition of an Ashland City Street Standards sidewalk with parkrow along both sides of Stadium Street from Webster to Ashland, with the exception of a small segment in order to preserve several mature trees, 2) Changed the residence hall design to create significant entries and added dormers to break up the roofline, and 3) Created a pedestrian crossing across the new parking lot to new stairs and also created a new pedestrian circulation path that connects to the Greensprings Complex. Other modifications include the addition of landscape islands in the parking lot and additional landscape screening around the trash compactor. Mr. Schultz reviewed the Pedestrian Circulation hierarchy diagram and identified the primary and additional circulation paths for the Commission. He also commented on the proposed alternate treatment for Wightman,which would widen the sidewalks along the Dining Hall frontage. He stated this would require the removal of four Sycamore trees, however 5-foot tree grates would be installed and new street trees planted. He stated their preference is to retain the original design, however they have presented this alternate for the Commission's consideration. Mr.Schultz agreed with staffs concerns regarding the installation of wider sidewalks along Ashland Street and noted the issues with the number of trees that would need to be removed and the grade changes. He stated their preference is to install the Ashland Street improvements with the development of the future multi-use building,which will include underground parking. Mr. Schultz concluded his testimony and noted several members of the design team are here to answer any questions the Commission may have. Questions of the Applicant Comment was made questioning if the Mediterranean design style for the buildings is something the university will stick with. Mr. Schultz explained when the university was first developing several buildings were done in this style; however,in the 1960s and 1970s a different style was used. He stated the university does not want to create the type of institutional looking buildings used in the 60s and 70s,which is why they are going back to the design roots of the campus. Mr. Schultz provided an explanation of where the bollards on Webster would be placed, and also clarified where ADA parking would be located. Comment was made expressing concern that the Greensprings Complex does not front the quad,which was the original design in the Master Plan. Mr. Schultz commented on the integration of the Greensprings Complex and stated they have created an outdoor area along the walkway from the Greensprings to the Dining Hall. Mr.Craig Morris added that 1%of the construction costs will be allocated to art, and commented on the landscaping and exterior art that will be located along the promenade and inside the quad. Ashland Planning Commission January 10, 2092 Page 3 of 8 Comment was made questioning if there is a treatment that could be done to the Ashland Street sidewalk that would improve the drop hazard until the full improvement takes place. Comment was made expressing concern with the number of trees to be removed. Mr.Greg Covey explained there are several challenges with this site,and the biggest one is the change in grade. He stated it is impractical to try and save the trees that are very close to buildings, however they will be planting more trees than they are removing, and in the end this will improve the campus tree canopy since more consideration is being taken regarding the species,diversity and location. Comment was made that not all trips to the Dining Hall will be from the dorms, and support was voiced for the alternate Wightman treatment suggested by the applicants. Comment was made expressing concern regarding the adequacy for event parking. Mr. Phil Worth stated they are looking at a small number of events each year that generate a significant parking demand, and the neighborhood,campus and city will likely need to come to an agreement on what parking can be used for these events and what is off limits. Mr. Morris noted the parking lot next to McNeal Stadium is not residential and will remain commuter and staff parking. In terms of the transportation piece, recommendation was made for a more outcome based analysis that measures parking and transportation impacts rather than monitoring the university's use of bus passes,etc. Mr.Worth encouraged the City to move in this direction and stated an outcome based method is very appropriate. He stated the difficulty will be identifying the right outcomes,and selecting outcomes you can confidently measure. The applicant's were asked to clarify their proposed revision to the LEED condition. Mr. Schultz explained the university has no control over how long the U.S.Green Building Council might take to approve their application. Mr. Morris stated they intend to do everything possible to be certified, however their last application took nearly 3 years to be approved and they just can't guarantee how long this process might take. Public Testimony Tom Burnhamf1344 Apple Way/Clarified he is speaking as a citizen and not as a member of the Transportation Commission. Mr. Burnham read his letter that was included in the meeting materials and expressed his concerns with: 1)the safe and efficient crossing of Siskiyou Blvd by pedestrians and cyclists, 2)the accuracy of the pedestrian counts at the intersection of Siskiyou, Wightman and Indiana,and 3)possible problems for pedestrians attempting to get from the north/west corner of Siskiyou and Wightman to the southleast corner of Siskiyou and Indiana. Mr. Burnham also recommended the applicants not discard the idea of a pedestrianlbicycle bridge. He asked that this be put in the plan for future campus development and to set aside the needed space for its construction. He also recommended the applicant's develop plans for a campus shuttle service. Applicant's Rebuttal Craig Morris/Stated the Dining Hall is not the only place for students to eat, and noted the large eating area inside the student union on the south side of campus. He added students that are in class often choose to eat lunch at this location rather than returning to the Dining Hall. Mr. Morris clarified the north side of campus is not the only location where they will develop in the future. He noted the land bank that will be created by the removal of the Cascade Complex and stated they also plan on repurposing the Suzanne Holmes building. The applicants also clarified the issues associated with a pedestrian bridge and explained why this option is not being considered at this time. Advice from Legal_Counsel/Staff Mr.Severson clarified that no comments or concerns were received from the surrounding neighbors and property owners. Deli berationslDecision Commissioner Marsh recommended they address each issue separately as they move towards a decision. Wightman Entry Several commissioners voiced support for the revised proposal submitted by the applicant,which would remove the Sycamore trees and widen the sidewalk along the Dining Hall frontage. Commissioner Miller disagreed and would prefer to retain the trees. Comment was made that the existing Sycamores are pushing up the sidewalk and creating a hazard, and this will only continue if Ashland Planning Commission January 10, 2092 Page 4 of 8 they are left in place.Additional comment was made that the revised proposal will create a much better sense of entry to the Dining Hall. Frances Street Crossing Comment was made that the crossing activity at this location will continue to increase and several commissioners voiced support for installing improvements at this location. LEER Certification Staff clarified they are comfortable with including some flexibility into this condition. Commissioner Marsh commented that the reason the applicant gave for increasing the length of the buildings was for energy efficiency, and she does not believe it is unreasonable to give this condition some teeth. Staff noted LEER certification requires post-construction monitoring and therefore submitting for certification immediately at occupancy is not feasible. Suggestion was made to require the applicant to submit for certification within 12 months of occupancy and receive approval within 36 months.General support was voiced for this condition. Ashland Street Sidewalks It was clarified that the Transportation Commission has recommended the sidewalk be improved to full city standards, however staff is recommending this improvement be deferred. Comment was made voicing support for keeping the trees until such time that development warrants taking them out. Opposing comment was made recommending some type of improvement be done to reduce this hazard and noting that it could be 10-15 years before that frontage is development. Commissioner Marsh commented that while she is resistant to the idea of not requiring new sidewalks,the issues regarding utility placement, trees,and the future design of Ashland Street make holding off on this more appropriate. Stadium Street Crossing Commissioner Marsh clarified the conditions of approval require the applicants to address the crossing. If they come back with a minor change this could be done right away, however any larger changes would need to be looked at in a broader way. Mr. Molnar agreed and stated the business area will want to be consulted before any major changes to that intersection occur,and they will likely have strong opinions about restricting turn movements at that location. Building Redesign and Site Plan Changes The majority of the Commission voiced support to the changes presented by the applicant. Commissioner Miller voiced her appreciation that the applicants added archways, but stated she would have preferred to see four buildings and is uncomfortable with the size of these structures. Commissioner Dawkins stated he does not share the same concerns regarding Greensprings not fronting the quad, and stated he is comfortable with a promenade to connect these areas,Additional comments were made voicing support for the improvements made by the applicants since the last hearing. Commissioners Dawkins/Miller m/s to continue the meeting past 9:30 p.m.Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed 7.0, Commissioner Church commented on the lighting issues along Siskiyou Blvd. He stated the current lighting makes the situation worse, not better,and noted the cobra heads create shadows and make it difficult to see people. Mr. Molnar acknowledged this concern and stated this issue is on the City's radar. Recommendation was made for the Transportation Commission to look into the lighting and signage issues along this corridor. Commissioners DawkinslHeesacker mis to approve Planning Action#2011-01576 and to incorporate the consensus reached by the Planning Commission during deliberations: 1)to incorporate the Wightman improvements along the Dining Bail's frontage as proposed by the applicant,2)to incorporate pedestrian safety improvements to the FranceslSiskiyou crossing as recommended by Kittelson &Associates,3)to incorporate the pedestrian crossing improvements at the Wightmanlindiana intersection,4)to amend the condition regarding LEED Silver certification to require the applicant to submit for certification within 12-months of occupancy and receive approval within 36 months,5) to include the changes to conditions 51 and 7d requested by the applicants and supported by the Fire Marshal regarding rooftop stairway access and radio coverage, 6)to Incorporate a requirement for audible rectangular rapid flash beacons (RRFBs)into all conditions requiring RRFBs, 7)to not require the applicant to replace the sidewalks along the Ashland Street frontage, and 8)to include all other conditions recommended by staff. DISCUSSION: Commissioner Miller stated she is supportive of this project as a whole and will not oppose the motion, but feels strongly that the original design for the Wightman Ashland Planning Commission January 10, 2092 Page 5 of 8 i frontage should be adopted. Commissioner Marsh voiced her desire for SOU to move towards the idea of TDM outcomes and provide baselines to measure. Commissioner Church suggested staff be included in SOU's meeting with RVTD. Roll Call Vote: Commissioners Church, Dawkins, Heesacker, Kaplan, Miller, Mindlin, and Marsh,YES. Motion passed 7.4. B. PLANNING ACTION:#2011.01699 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 763&777 Jefferson Avenue APPLICANT: Brammo Motorsports LLC DESCRIPTION, A request for Site Review approval to construct two,two-story buildings of 14,857 square feet and 18,805 square feet for the research,design, manufacturing of prototypes,warehousing, storage and administrative offices for the production of Brammo Electric Motorcycles&products.The proposed buildings will be located at 777 Jefferson.A private, dirt test track to further the research and design is proposed for 763 Jefferson. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Employment and industrial; ZONING: E-1 & M-1;ASSESSOR'S MAP:391E 14AC; TAX LOT: 101 &102. Ex Parte Contact Commissioners Miller, Heesacker, Church, Dawkins and Marsh performed site visits. No ex pale contact was reported. Staff Report Assistant Planner Amy Gunter presented an overview of the application. She the subject property is located at 763 and 777 Jefferson Avenue, between Oak Street Tank and Steel and the Ashland Racket and Fitness Club, and the applicants are proposing to install two new commercial buildings and a dirt test track. She provided some history of the property and explained this area was annexed into the City as part of a larger parcel in 2006,and clarified the zoning for the two lots are M-1 and E-1. Ms. Gunter noted the subject properties are divided by Knoll Creek,which is a seasonal intermittent ephemeral stream,and during the annexation process a 40-foot wide conservation easement was placed over the creek corridor.She added there is also a delineated wetland on j the property, but it is not considered a locally significant wetland. Ms. Gunter stated two structures are proposed. Building A is the smaller building at 14,857 sq.ft, and Building B is 18,805 sq.ft. She stated both structures are setback 25 feet from the front property line,which is consistent with the requirements of the zone, and the applicants have proposed 52 parking spaces,which is the required amount plus an additional 10%. Ms. Gunter noted the applicants have also requested a phased parking installation in order to prevent an excess of parking that will not be needed for some time. Ms.Gunter commented on the proposed test track and stated the applicants would use the track to test their electric motor bikes. She stated the proposed track would circle the wetland area and staff is recommending a conservation management plan for this area. i Ms. Gunter reviewed the landscape plan, building elevations,and roof design, and stated staff is recommending approval with the conditions as outlined. Questions for Staff Comment was made questioning if the glare from the roofing material would be an issue for other developments in the area. It was also questioned if the swale at the south end of the property is in an appropriate location. The Commission received clarification regarding the location of a path from the sidewalk to the front door,and also received confirmation that the applicants can have more than one curb cut on each lot. Comment was made questioning if there are degradation concerns regarding the dust and potential impacts on the wetland. Ms. Gunter clarified there is a broken irrigation line at the rear of the property,and it is likely this wetland will go away once that line is repaired. Commissioners Dawkins/Church m/s to extend meeting to 10:30 p.m.Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed 7.0. Ashland Planning Commission January 10, 2012 Page 6 of 8 Applicant's Presentation Ray Kistler, Project Architect; Craig Bramsher, CEO of Brammo Motorsports; Brad Barber, Civil Engineer/Mr. Barber addressed the bioswale question and explained by dropping the building they are able to get half of the water from the east building as well as the stormdrain from the center aisle to the bioswale. Mr. Kistler circulated a sample of the siding material and clarified the proposed roofing material is zinc aluminum. He stated this is a highly reflective material, is great on heat gain, and does not fade over time. Mr. Bramsher commented on the history and growth of Brammo Motorsports. He stated their business is expanding, technology is moving very quickly, and it is important that they move quickly from concepts to products. He noted they offer a wide range of jobs in Ashland,from floor level positions to high tech, and would like to continue to grow their company in Ashland. He stated the test track is very critical to their business,as currently they have no way to test these products. Mr. Bramsher stated Brammo currently has 45 employees, but by the end of 2013 they plan on having 250-300 employees. He commented on the proposed track and stated they have eight of these tracks in Europe. He stated the electric vehicles are very quiet and noise will not be a problem,and stated after every session they will water the track to mitigate the dust concerns. He stated they have done this in Europe and it works very well and noted use of the track will be sporadic. Mr. Kistler added they see this track is a temporary use and eventually there will be a building where the track is located. The applicant was asked to comment on how often gas powered vehicles would be used on the track. Mr. Bramsher stated it is difficult to say, but in the last year they have done this once. He estimated this might be done 3-5 times a year, and for only 30-45 minutes each time. Public Testimony Peter Finkle/785 Beach Streetl5tated he is representing Yerba Prima and voiced concern with the proposed test track, Mr. Finkle stated their business is directly across the street from this site and while they support Brammo's expansion they would like for the issues associated with the track to be mitigated. He stated dust in the air would negatively impact people working out at the Fitness Club, and could also impact Yerba Prima's food manufacturing facility. He stated if gasoline powered motorcycles will be running on the track,the Commission should implement some sort of condition to address this. He also requested a condition to make sure dust does not become a nuisance or health issue for the neighboring businesses and patrons. Advice from Legal Counsel/Staff Ms.Gunter suggested a condition for the Commission's consideration to address the dust concerns raised: "The applicant shall submit a dust mitigation plan addressing the mitigation aspects of the test track such as the frequency of water, the application of a dust abatement product, and a contact of Brammo Motorsports for any compliance related issues."Mr. Molnar added that while this property is located in a manufacturing zone,which allows for the most intensive of uses, there are still landscaping requirements to address any buffering issues the Commission may have. Deli berationslDecision Comment was made that the applicants are still required to meet the noise and dust abatement requirements in the nuisance chapter of the municipal code. Staff clarified enforcement of this section of the code is primarily complaint driven and the City would normally not monitor the noise and dust levels unless complaints are received. Commissioners Dawkins/Church m/s to approve PA-2011-01699 with the proposed dust mitigation condition suggested by staff. DISCUSSION. Commissioner Dawkins stated he is not supportive of an additional buffering requirement and stated he is supportive of the dust abatement condition proposed by staff. He added these electric vehicles are extremely quiet and does not believe noise will be an issue. It was noted that this property is zoned M-1, and eventually it will be developed. Commissioner Church stated landscaping will not solve any potential dust issues and the City already has procedures in place to deal with any complaints,should they arise. He stated the Commission could consider adding a condition that allows the City to pull the approval for the track in the event the dust becomes a major problem, but overall he is supportive of this project. Commissioner Miller voiced support for additional buffering between this site and the Fitness Center and recommended they add a condition regarding this. Commissioner Dawkins stated he is not interested in amending his motion to include an additional landscape buffer requirement. Commissioner Marsh asked if anyone had concerns about non-electric vehicles on the test track. Commissioner Dawkins suggested they add a noticing requirement that would require Brammo to notify their neighbors when they plan on running a gas- powered motorcycle on the track. Roll Call Vote: Commissioners Dawkins, Church, Heesacker, Miller, Mindlin, Kaplan and Marsh,YES. Motion passed 7.0. Ashland Planning Commission January 10, 2012 Page 7 of 8 E OTHER BUSINESS A. Pedestrian Places Update Informational item only. No discussion was held. B. BI-Annual Attendance Report(July—December 2010) Informational item only. No discussion was held. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 10.30 p.m. Respectfully submifted, April Lucas,Administrative Supervisor I 1 i i i i I Ashland Planning Commission January 10, 2092 Page 8 of 8 Planning Commission Speaker Request Form 1)Complete this form and return it to the Secretary prior to the discussion of the item you wish to speak about. 2) Speak to the Planning Commission from the table podium microphone. 3) State your name and address for the record. 4) Limit your comments to the amount of time given to you by the Chair, usually 5 minutes. 5) If you present written materials, please give a copy to the Secretary for the record. 6)You may give written continents to the Secretary for the record if you do not wish to speak. 7) Speakers are solely responsible for the content of their public statement. Name ( , (please print Address (no P.O.Box) R 5 Plione�5 14(`" W2 Email (e- t �rt m Tonight's Meeting Date V , Regular Meeting Agenda item number OR Topic for public forum (non agenda item) Land Use Public Hearing For: Against: Challenge for Conflict of Interest or Bias If you are challenging a member(planning commissioner) with a conflict of interest or bias,please write your allegation complete with supporting facts on this forte and deliver it to the clerk immediately. The Chair will address the written challenge with the member. Please be respectful of the proceeding and do not interrupt. You may also provide testimony about the challenge when you testify daring the normal order of proceedings. Written Comments/Challenge: The Public Meeling Lmi,requires that all ch))meetings are Odell to the public, Oregon Ims,does not cilnva),s regltii'e that the pitbliC be pe17)lilte(t io speak. Tlie AShlatld Plali)iiiig Coi)ii)1iSsioi1 geiiei'Cill), iiwiles the public to sl)eak on agenda items and duringpublic f bruin on non-agenda items unless time consirah its limit public lestimony. iNTo person leas aii cibsolitte right to sl)eak oi'participate iii et,ei))phase of a proceeding. Please respect the order of pimeedings for public hearings and strictly follow the Chrections of the presiding Of,Tcer. Pehat,ior or actions which are unreasonably toitd Or ClTsriipfive are (fisresy)egfid, Mid 111(1j�C011Stitute disorderly conduct. Offeildel'S nt'Tll be 1'eCfTTeSted f0 leLTV2 the i'p011l. Comments and statements by speakers do not represent the opunion of the City Council, City Officers or employees or the City of Ashland. Yerba Prima, 740 Jefferson Ave,Ashland,OR 97520 USA 541-488-2228 FAX:541-488-2443 January 10,2012 RECEIVEED TO: Ashland Planning Commission RE: Planning Action#2011-01699 N 10 763 &777 Jefferson Avenue Brammo Motorsports LLC City of AsMand Dear Commissioners, We would like to comment on this request for Site Review approval. First,let me say that we are very pleased that Brammo Motorsports is expanding in Ashland, as that is a benefit for our community in many ways. According to the mailing we received,the plan is to build two buildings on the lot at 777 Jefferson Avenue, and a private, dirt test track on the lot at 763 Jefferson Avenue. Our business is located across the street from 763 Jefferson Avenue. Our comments are about how to mitigate the impact of the dirt test track. As background,this is a light industrial area with several food companies. Our business (Yerba Prima)has been here more than 20 years making dietary fiber supplement products and we are a food processing facility. Yerba Prima offices, our main conference room and our production areas are directly across the street from the proposed dirt test track. There is also another business that makes food products on the same block and the Ashland Tennis and Fitness Club,where people are exercising from early morning to evening,right next to 763 Jefferson Avenue. The way neighboring businesses are situated,it might be easiest to mitigate the impact of the dirt test track by placing the two Brammo buildings along the street and placing the dirt test track behind them along the railroad tracks. That would reduce noise, dust and visual disturbances for the neighboring businesses, and might be a better fit for the area in general. Or perhaps Brammo Motorsports would consider putting the buildings at 763 Jefferson and the dirt test track at 777 Jefferson,which would move it a little further away from the food processing businesses and the tennis and fitness club activity. We see the impact of the private, dirt test track relating primarily to noise and dust, though if events are held there other factors could also come into play. to page 2... I I ASHLAND PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT January 10, 2012 PLANNING ACTION: PA-2011-01699 APPLICANT: Brammo Motorsports LLC LOCATION: 763 & 777 Jefferson COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Manufacturing &Employment APPLICATION DEEMED COMPLETE: January 3, 2012 120-DAY TIME LIMIT: May 2, 2012 ORDINANCE REFERENCE: 18.12 District Boundaries 18.40 E-1 Employment District 18.52 M-1 Industrial District 18.61 Tree Preservation and Protection 18.63 Water Resources Protection Zone 18.72 Site Design and Use Standards 18.92 Off-Street Parking 18.112 Enforcement REQUEST: A request for Site Review approval to construct two, two-story buildings of 14,857 square feet and 18,805 square feet for the research, design, manufacturing of prototypes, warehousing, storage and administrative offices for the production of Brammo Electric Motorcycles & products. The proposed buildings will be located at 777 Jefferson. A private, dirt test track to further the research and design is proposed for 763 Jefferson. I. Relevant Facts A. Background - History of Application In May 2006, an 8.43-acre parcel was annexed into the city limits. The annexed land allowed for the completion of Jefferson Avenue. As part of the annexation request, a Site Review approval with an Administrative Variance for a new 41,000 square foot manufacturing facility; a Physical and Environmental Constraints Review for the Knoll Creek crossing and tree removal request were included. In November 2006, a modification of the approved Site Review was approved. That modification split the single 41,000 square foot building into two smaller buildings and modified the parking lot layout. Planning Action PA#2419-01699 Ashland Planning Division—Staff Report Applicant: Brammo Motorsports LLC Page 1 of 11 In May 2008, the large single lot that was annexed was split into three smaller parcels with Jefferson Avenue bisecting the property. One parcel was to the north of Jefferson Avenue and two parcels, the subject sites were to the south of Jefferson Avenue. Following the annexation, Jefferson Avenue was completed to city street standards with bio-swale park rows and a crossing of Knoll Creek. The street was accepted and adopted by the city in July 2011. B. Detailed Description of the Site and Proposal The subject properties are a combined 5.17 acres and are located at 763 and 777 Jefferson Avenue in southeast Ashland. Tax lot 101, at 763 Jefferson is 2.47 acres and Tax lot 201 at 777 Jefferson is 2.70 acres. The properties are vacant and are divided by Knoll Creek. Jefferson Avenue is paved with curb, gutter, parkrow and sidewalk along the entire frontage of the subject properties frontage. The properties are zoned Industrial (M-1). To the east of the subject property is Oak Street Tank and Steel which was annexed in 1999. To the north is a 2.59 acre parcel that was the part of the original 8.43 acres that were annexed in 2006 and is zoned Employment(E-1). West of the property at 735 Jefferson is Ashland Racquet and Fitness. The railroad right-of-way and E-1 zoned properties are to the south. The subject properties have an approximately three percent slope to the northwest, toward Jefferson Avenue and Knoll Creek from the rear of the parcel. Natural features on the sites include Knoll Creek, dividing the two properties. Knoll Creek is considered an intermittent or ephemeral stream and has a 20-foot conservation easement in place. A delineated wetland (WD#2008-05950) is nearly centered on the lot at 763 Jefferson . Avenue. The creek and the wetland are both subject to the requirements of the Water Resources Protection Zone Ordinance (AMC 18.63). The remainder of the property has grasses, oak and cottonwood trees. The application materials provided identify 19 deciduous trees six-inches in diameter at breast height (d.b.h.) or greater along the southern property line and adjacent to Knoll Creek, 1. Site Review The proposal includes the construction of two structures at 777 Jefferson. Building A is proposed to be a two-story, 19,197 square foot building. Building B is proposed to be two-story, 25,195 square feet. The buildings are both to be a combination of office, research, design, manufacturing and storage. The buildings are oriented toward Jefferson Avenue. The fronts of the structures are both setback 25-feet from the front property line. Because of the building design and the strong building streetwall projection, the actual front entrance of Building A is 50-feet from the front property line and Building B is 58-feet from the front property line. The projection emphasizes the interesting rooflines proposed and the buildings have a modern, European industrial aesthetic. Building A will have a inverted gable, butterfly roof and Building B is proposed to have an peak roof line. The roof design allows for the collection of rainwater. Solar arrays will be Planning Action PA#2011-01699 Ashland Planning Division—Staff Report Applicant: Brammo Motorsports LLC Page 2 of 19 i installed in the future. The average height of both buildings is proposed to be 40- feet. The applicant has also proposed to construct two `stylized' bioswale planters at the front of the building. Clerestory windows run the length of the east and west sides of the buildings. Each building is proposed to have a loading ramp, two bay door on the west side of Building A and three bay door on the west side of Building B. Fifty-two automobile and fleet vehicle parking spaces are proposed to be provided between the buildings, at the rear of Building B and on the west side of Building A. Fourteen bicycle parking are to be provided under the covered front entry area. The exterior building materials include steel siding, standing seam metal siding, zinc-alum roofing and aluminum doors and windows. The colors of the exterior building materials are grays, black and oxide red steel panels. 2. Test Track The property at 763 Jefferson is proposed to have dirt test track constructed for the use of Brammo Motorsports Research and Development. There is a wetland centered on the property, the test track is proposed to encircle the wetland and the wetland buffer. A new driveway curbeut will be installed on Jefferson Avenue to access the site. The track is not for public use and will have a gate installed to prevent unauthorized entry. 3. Tree/Landscaping The applicant has proposed to remove two dead cottonwood trees which are located in the southeast corner of the 777 Jefferson property near the railroad tracks. These trees are not subject to any land-use requirements as they are exempt from the code. The remaining oaks and cottonwoods are to be retained. One street tree in front of 763 Jefferson will likely require removal to permit the installation of the site access. This tree is also not subject to the land-use requirements. Jefferson Avenue was recently improved to city street standards and has the required number of street trees installed across the frontage of the property. The applicant has proposed to retain 19,900 square feet of the parcel at 777 Jefferson as landscaping. II. Project Impact The project requires Site Review approval since it involves the construction of a new buildings in the M-1 zoning district. Site Review procedures require a public hearing before the Planning Commission, for structures greater than 10,000 square feet. Planning Action PA#2011-01699 Ashland Planning Division w Staff Report Applicant; B€ammo Motorsports LLC Page 3 of 11 A. Site Review Requirements of the Employment and Industrial Zoning Districts All of the building square footages are proposed as office, research, design, development, warehouse and light manufacturing of prototypes, which are permitted uses in the M-1 zones. The M-1 zoning district has a minimum front setback of 25-feet from the front property line. As proposed, the buildings design satisfies this requirement with 25-foot front setbacks. The proposed average building heights are 40 feet, which is the maximum building height in the zoning district. The proposal will result in 17 percent of the site being landscaped, which exceeds the 10 percent minimum landscaping requirement of the M-1 zoning district and the 15 percent minimum landscaping requirement for the E-1 zoning district. Site Design and Use Standards The subject property is located within the Basic Site Review Zone. The proposed buildings are designed to provide a primary orientation toward Jefferson Avenue. Each building will have a covered entry and walkway to the sidewalk. Parking is proposed to be located to the sides and rear of the buildings. Internal sidewalks for circulation from the parking lots to the building, parking lot shade frees and landscaped parking lot `fingers' are to be installed. The applicant has also provided three on-site bioswale / stormwater detention ponds. Two are proposed to be located at the front of the buildings and a larger detention pond is proposed along the southern property line. The bioswales in front of the building are at the lowest elevation of the site and the runoff will be filtered and piped underground back to the creek. A landscape plan has been provided; the existing trees that are to be preserved have been incorporated,parking lot landscaping and a landscape area between the building and the street are identified. Basic Site Review Standards (1I-C-1) require that buildings shall have their primary orientation toward the street and accessed from a public sidewalk. Additionally the standards call for building entrances to be located within 20 feet of the public right-of- way to which they are oriented unless the building is not to be accessed by pedestrians, such as warehouses or industrial buildings without attached office space. The required front setback in the M-1 zone is 25-feet from the front property line. In this instance, the structure, which has an approximately 20-foot architectural projection without windows or entrance doors is 25-feet from the front property line and the building's entrance is proposed to be placed approximately 50 and 58 feet from the right-of-way. These buildings comply with the basic setback of the zone, but exceed that required in the Site Design and Use Standards. According to Enforcement section of the Ashland municipal Code, 18.112.070, where conditions imposed by a provision of this title are less restrictive than comparable conditions, imposed by...any other ordinance...or regulation, the more restrictive shall govern. This means that the site is subject to the 25-foot front setback of the M-1 zone,not the 20-foot setback of the Site Design and Use Standards. Planning Action PA#2011-01699 Ashland Planning Division—Staff Report Applicant: Brammo Motorsports LLC Page 4 of 11 The topography of the subject property, the building design and the zone setback all push the structure away from the sidewalk and street. Orientation of buildings to the street and providing pedestrian access from the public sidewalk are fundamental requirements that have shaped commercial developments for the last 30 years. However, staff believes that the building can be found to meet the applicable standards because the standard regarding the more restrictive standard regulates, that the use of the property is in accordance with the zone -and will be industrial nature and fiinction. Additionally, the buildings are interesting architecturally, with varied mass, roof forms, that create a strong sense of entry and comply with the standards for Basic Site review standards for site layout and design. Parking The materials submitted note that based on 46,442 square feet, 46 parking spaces are required at the warehouse standard of one parking space per 1,000 square feet. According to staff's calculations the combined square foot area of the structures is 44,392 square feet. The would require 45 spaces at the warehouse standard. The applicant also has two fleet vehicles. The total number of spaces permitted including the permitted 10 percent overage allows for 50 spaces. There are also five on-street parking credits available to serve the two parcels. The site plan shows 52 parking spaces. Given the nature of the proposed use and because a portion of the each portion of the new buildings area is to provide manufacturing process storage space without a commensurate increase in the number of employees and no on-site retail component, staff believes that calculating the parking requirements based on an industrial standard rather than the office standard is appropriate. As noted in the Site Design and Use Standards, "[b]ecause parking areas are usually large in size to accorrmrodate cars and trucks they are insensitive to the human scale. Additionally, noise, light, heat, and exhaust odors are commonly associated}with parking areas. The ill effects associated tivith parking areas can be mitigated through good design and well placed landscaping." These concerns are the underlying basis for Ashland's parking lot landscaping and screening requirements, and at least part of the reason for the Off-Street Parking Chapter (AMC 1892) limitations which cap parking provided at no more than ten percent above what is required for the use. This limitation avoids an auto-centric focus in development, while reducing the overall amount of paving installed, thus reducing the heat-island effect of summer sunlight reflecting off of asphalt while also allowing precipitation to be absorbed directly into the ground rather than creating excessive run-off and the associated water quality impacts. In staff's view, the parking proposed is more than necessary for the uses proposed, and should be reduced to include the 29 spaces between the buildings and the 7 spaces to the west of Building A. The remaining parking area currently identified could be reserved in landscaped I natural area to allow a phased future installation of the additional spaces should the demand or the nature of the use in place change. A condition requiring a revised site plan reflecting this phased installation for the site's parking is recommended below. Planning Action PA#2011-01699 Ashland Planning Division—Staff Report Applicant: Brammo Motorsports LLC Page 5 of 11 i B. Test Track The proposed dint test track will be located entirely on Tax lot 101 at 763 Jefferson. The track is proposed to be constructed of diet,racked and watered to reduce dust. The products that Brammo Motorsports develops are electric motorcycles which make virtually no sound so noise ordinance issues will not be a problem. The applicant has proposed to gate the access to the test track and to sign it"No Trespassing" so as to prevent unauthorized use. A driveway curb cut will be installed to permit the bikes to be rolled from the adjacent parcel or driven for off-site locations. There will be no creek crossings permitted nor have they been proposed. A delineated wetland (WD##2008-05950) is to be centered in the track with a minimum 20 foot buffer. The applicant has proposed a Conservation Easement. Staff is concerned that a Conservation Easement would unduly restrict the developable M-1 zoned property in the future as removal of conservation easements is a difficult process. Within-the Water Resource Protection Zone code 18.63 there are provisions in place to address wetlands at the time of the parcels development that include reduction in the buffer widths,relocation of the wetland or a Variance if it can be shown that the application of this chapter unduly restricts the development or use of the lot and renders the lot not buildable. At this point unless the applicant insists on a Conservation Easement, providing the required 20-foot buffer and a management plan for the wetland and buffer zone will suffice for protection of the wetland consist with the code while not limiting the future development potential. A condition to this effect has been suggested. C. Landscaping Two dead trees are proposed to be removed. They are exempt for the land use requirements. The remaining trees are proposed to be preserved and protected during construction. The trees are largely on the perimeter of the project at the southeast property line and along Knoll Creek. A significant number of new trees (39) and shrubs are identified for planting on the landscape plans provided. In considering the application, staff noted that there is one large Oak to be retained at the rear of the property near a proposed retaining wall. Given its proximity to the proposed construction, staff recommends that the arborist's recommendations be incorporated and implemented in accordance with the Tree Preservation and Protection Plan to include any additional necessary protective measures which would ensure the trees ongoing viability. Additionally, any disturbance to the Water Resource Protection zone and Conservation Easement for Knoll Creek shall be mitigated in accordance with the proposed landscaping plan. Planning Action PA#2011-01699 Ashland Planning Division—Staff Report Applicant: Brammo Motorsports LLC Page 6 of 11 i III. Procedural - Required Burden of Proof The criteria for Site Review approval are described in 18.72.070 as follows: The following criteria shall be used to approve or deny an application: A. All applicable City ordinances have been met or will be met by the proposed development. B. All requirements of the Site Review Chapter have been met or will be met. C. The development complies with the Site Design Standards adopted by the City Council for implementation of this Chapter. D. 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 improvements in the street right-of-way shall comply with the Street Standards in Chapter 18,88, Performance Standards Options. (Ord. 2655, 1991; Ord 2836 S6, 1999) IV. Conclusions and Recommendations The application includes a request for Site Review approval since it involves the construction of new buildings in the M-1 zoning district. Site Review approvals for structures greater than 10,000 square feet require a public hearing before the Planning Commission. Staff generally believes the proposed building design is appropriate for the area's manufacturing designation, and will complement the buildings in the vicinity. The proposed building is fairly consistent with the City's Basic Site Review Standards. The materials proposed reflect a utilitarian design comprised of metal roofing and siding appropriate to the zoning district. The proposal effectively executes these materials to create an attractive building which relates well to its surroundings. The generous number of clerestory windows provided will supply natural light to the interior spaces, while adding variation to the exterior. The requested Site Review complies with the applicable approval standards and the proposal is consistent with the zoning designation of the property. Brammo Motorsports is a locally-owned internationally-known business that currently employs 90 people. Staff has raised a few issues in the body of this report, including the need to reduce the amount of parking initially provided through a phased parking installation. Overall, however, we believe that the application merits approval and that these issues can be satisfactorily addressed through conditions of approval. We accordingly recommend approval of the application with the following conditions attached: 1) That all proposals of the applicant shall be conditions of approval unless otherwise modified here. Planning Action PA#2011-01699 Ashland Planning Division—Staff Report Applicant: Brammo Motorsports LLC Page 7 of 11 2) That the plans submitted for the building permit shall be in substantial conformance with those approved as part of this application. If the plans submitted for the building permit are not in substantial conformance with those approved as part of this application, an application to modify this Site Review approval shall be submitted and approved prior to issuance of a building permit. 3) That a sign permit shall be obtained prior to installation of any new signage. Signage shall meet the requirements of Chapter 18.96. 4) That the track shall be maintained in accordance with the findings and shall not be used for competitions, shows or other public events without a Modification of this Site Review approval. 5) That prior to the submittal of a building permit: a) That a stormwater drainage plan, including details of on-site detention for storm water and necessary water quality mitigation, shall be submitted for the review and approval of the Planning, Building, and Engineering Divisions. Post development peak flows shall be demonstrated to be less than or equal to pre-development levels. C) A final utility plan for the project shall be submitted for the review and approval by the Planning, Engineering and Building Divisions prior to issuance of a building permit. The utility plan shall include the location of connections to all public facilities in and adjacent to the development, including the locations of water lines and meter sizes, sewer mains and services, manholes and clean-outs, storm drainage pipes and catch basins. Utility installations, including any necessary fire protection vault, shall be placed outside of the pedestrian corridor, and necessary public utility easements on the property shall be shown on the building permit submittals. d) The applicant shall submit an electric distribution plan including load calculations and locations of all primary and secondary services including transformers, cabinets and all other necessary equipment. This plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning, Engineering and Electric Departments prior to building permit submittal. Transformers and cabinets shall be located outside of the pedestrian corridor, in those areas least visible from the right-of-way while considering the access needs of the Electric Department. e) The building permit plan submittals shall include lot coverage calculations including all building footprints, driveways, parking, and circulation areas. These plans shall demonstrate that at least 15 percent of the site is surfaced in landscaping, and that at least seven percent of the parking lot Planning Action PA#2011-01699 Ashland Planning Division—Staff Report Applicant; Brarnmo Motorsports LLC Page 8 of 11 area is provided in required parking lot landscaping, as required in the Site Design&Use Standards. f) The building permit plan submittals shall include and sample exterior building colors and materials for review and approval of the Staff Advisor. The exterior building materials and paint colors shall be compatible with the surrounding area and consistent with those described in the application materials. 6) That prior to the issuance of a building permit: a) That a Verification Permit in accordance with 18.61.042.13 shall be applied for and approved by the Ashland Planning Division prior to site work, storage of materials and/or issuance of a building permit. The Verification Permit is to inspect the identifications the installation of tree protection fencing to protect the trees to be retained. The tree protection fencing shall be installed according to the approved Tree Protection and Removal Plan, inspected and approved by the Staff Advisor prior to site work, storage of materials and/or issuance of a building permit. b) That silt fencing or other erosion control methods to protect the Knoll Creek corridor and the wetland shall be installed and inspected by the Staff Advisor prior to the issuance of the building permit or prior to any site work. The silt fencing shall be installed in accordance with best management practices. C) The applicant shall provide the approved Landscape/Irrigation Plan which addresses the Water Conserving Landscaping Guidelines and Policies of the Site Design and Use Standards, including irrigation controller requirements to allow multiple/flexible calendar programming with the building permit submittals. d) All exterior lighting shall be appropriately shrouded so as not to permit direct illumination of any adjacent land. Lighting details, including a scaled plan and specifications detailing shrouding, shall be submitted to the Staff Advisor for review and approval with the building permit submittals. e) At the time of building plan submittal, the bike rack details and shelter details shall be submitted for review and approval by the Staff Advisor. The building permit submittals shall verify that the bicycle parking design, spacing, and coverage requirements are met in accordance with 18.92.040.I. f) Mechanical equipment shall be screened from view from Jefferson Avenue, The locations of mechanical equipment and any associated Planning Action PA#2011-01699 Ashland Planning Division—Staff Report Applicant: 8rammo Motorsports LLC Page 9 of 11 screening shall be shown on the site plan and elevations in the building permit submittals. g) That the buildings shall meet Solar Setback B in accordance with 18.70.040.B. The building permit submittals shall demonstrate compliance with Solar Setback B. h) The requirements of the Ashland Fire Department shall be satisfied, including that all addressing shall be approved prior to being installed; that fire apparatus access be provided and necessary fire apparatus easements identified and recorded; that adequate fire flow be provided and maintained; that fire sprinklers, hydrants, a Knox box, and/or an FDC be installed; and that an approved walkway to accommodate fire fighter access around and between both buildings be maintained. Including a Knox Box for the gate at the test track driveway entrance. i) A revised site plan detailing a phased parking installation shall be provided for the review and approval of the Staff Advisor. In the initial phase, parking to be installed for occupancy of the building would be limited to the lot between the buildings and the seven spaces west of Building A. The remaining 18 parking spaces in the southeastern portion of the site are to be reserved in landscaped area pending future installation in a second phase should the parking demand or the nature of the use change to necessitate their installation. j) That a management plan for the long-term preservation of the wetland and the required 20-foot wetland buffer consistent with 18.63.120 on Tax lot 101 at 763 Jefferson shall be provided for review and approval by the staff advisor. 7) That prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy: a) That the screening for the trash and recycling enclosure shall be installed in accordance with the Site Design and Use Standards. b) All required parking areas excepting the spaces directly to the south of Building B shall be paved and striped. The additional spaces up to the maximum of 40 maybe installed when they become necessary. C) All landscaping and the irrigation systems shall be installed in accordance with the approved plan, inspected and approved by the Staff Advisor prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. That at the time of planting and prior to the issuance of a final certificate of occupancy, not less than two inches of mulch shall be added in all non-turf landscaped areas in the developed area after the installation of living plant materials. C) That required bicycle parking spaces according to the approved plan and Planning Action PA#2011-01699 Ashland Planning Division—Staff Report Applicant; Brarnmo Motorsports LLC Page 10 of 11 in accordance with design and rack standards in 18.92.040.I and J, inspected, and approved by the Staff Advisor prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Inverted u-racks shall be used for the bicycle parking. Planning Conunission Approval Date Planning Action PA 9 2611-01699 Ashland Planning Division—Staff Report Applicant: Brammo Motorsports LLC Page 11 of 11 3 Amy Gunter From: Justine Bowen-Jones ljkbowenjones @gmail.com] Sent: Monday, January 09, 2012 10:31 AM To: guntera @ashland.or.us Subject: Regarding Planning Action#2001-01699 9 January 2012 In Reference to Planning Action#2001-01699: As members of the Ashland Tennis and Fitness Club (ATFC) Board of Directors, we have been waiting with great anticipation for the proposal by Brammo, Inc. to develop the vacant lot adjacent to ATFC. The two buildings the company intends to build signify impending growth and expansion, which we expect will have positive repercussions for our local economy. However, while we strongly support Bramrno's efforts to expand their business, we are concerned about the proposed dirt track, which will be located closer to AFTC. First, any potential noise coming from the track if non-electric bikes are allowed would impact the environment at AFTC, which has a history of attracting members because of its quiet gym and indoor swimming pool. The pool and fitness classroom would be next to the proposed track. Our second and primary concern is that the track will produce a significant amount of dust from June-October, and, as a result, impact ATFC members. The tennis courts at ATFC are ventilated through a combination of garage doors behind the courts, and ceiling fans. If the proposed track is located next to ATFC, this will dramatically affect the air quality inside the club, making it difficult and unhealthy for both our tennis and fitness members to utilize the facilities. We would like the city to require dust abatement and limit the track to electric bikes only. Sincerely, Ashland Tennis and Fitness Club Board of Directors Jane Van Dyke, President; Charlie Hamilton, Vice President; Susan Fernlund, Treasurer; Justine Bowen-Jones, Secretary; Bonnie Holstein, Director; Alex Knecht, Director; Mark Williams, Director. RECEP 1 ED JAN Oft.of Ash€arid i ASHLAND TREE COMMISSION PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENT SHEET January 5, 2012 PLANNING ACTION: 2011-01699 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 763 & 777 Jefferson Avenue APPLICANT: Brammo Motorsports LLC DESCRIPTION: A request for Site Review approval to construct two, two-story buildings of 14,857 square feet and 18,805 square feet for the research, design, manufacturing of prototypes, warehousing, storage and administrative offices for the production of Brammo Electric Motorcycles & products. The proposed buildings will be located at 777 Jefferson. A private, dirt test track to further the research and design is proposed for 763 Jefferson. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Employment and Industrial; ZONING: E-1 & M-1; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 1 E 14AC; TAX LOT: 101 & 102 Recommendation: 1) For the applicants to perform some restoration of Knoll Creek in between the two parcels. 2) The final track configuration to stay as far away from the tree protection zones (approx S feet) as shown on the landscape plan L-1.1 dated December 2, 2011 3) That the path from the building to the track for motorcycle research not be located within the root zones of the protected trees. 4) Delineate the outside limits of the track with hay bales, or similar material, so that the motorcycles do not damage the tree protection zones. Department of Community Development Tel:541-088-5350 CITY OF 51 Winbum Way Fax:541-552-2050 Ashland,Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 ASHLANU Nv%N .ashland.orms { j \ Planning Department,51 Winburn Way,Ashland,Oregon 97520 C I T Y OF 541-488-5305 Fax;541-552-2050 www.ashland.orms TTY:1-800-735.2900 PLANNING ACTION: #2011-01699 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 763 & 777Jefferson Avenue OWNER/APPLICANT: Brammo Motorsports LLC DESCRIPTION: A request for Site Review approval to construct two, two-story buildings of 14,857 square feet and 18,805 square feet for the research, design, manufacturing of prototypes, warehousing, storage and administrative offices for the production of Brammo Electric Motorcycles & products. The proposed buildings will be located at 777 Jefferson. A private, dirt test track to further the research and design is proposed for 763 Jefferson. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Employment and Industrial; ZONING: E-1 & M-1; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 1E 14AC; TAX LOT: 101 & 102. NOTE: The Ashland Tree Commission will also review this Planning Action on January 5,2012 at 6:00 p.m. in the Community Development and Engineering Services building(Siskiyou Room)located at 51 Winburn Way. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: January 10, 2012 at 7:00 PM, Ashland Civic Center \ " 911JECrP OFfenes fis M 777JE7FEkI n k (?� . {R.N9N bti)FEOASPCw16[lt °�N@ 4 �1 EE¢S47!A� , ka �3 � N i Fil 0 3i 7O 140 NO Notice is hereby given that a PUBLIC HEARING on the following request with respect to the ASHLAND LAND USE ORDINANCE will be held before the ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION on meeting date shown above.The meeting will be at the ASHLAND CIVIC CENTER,1175 East Main Street,Ashland, i Oregon, 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, either in person or 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 const'ttut€onal or other Issues relating to proposed conditions of approval with sufficient specificity to allow this Commission to respond to the issue precludes an action for damages in circuit court. j 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. A copy of the Staff Report will be available for inspection seven days prior to the hearing and will be provided at I reasonable cost, if requested. All materials are available at the Ashland Planning Department, Community Development and Engineering Services, 51 Winburn Way,Ashland,Oregon 97520. During the Public Hearing,the Chair shall allow testimony from the applicant and those in attendance concerning this request. The Chair shall have the right to limit the length of testimony and require that comments be restricted to the applicable criteria. Unless there is a continuance, if a participant so requests before the conclusion of the hearing,the record shall remain open for at least seven days after the hearing, In compliance with the American with Disabilities Act,if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting,please contact the City Administrators office at 549-488-6002(TTY phone number 1-800-735.2900). Notification 72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting.(28 CF 35.102.-35.104 ADA Title 1). If you have questions or comments concerning this request,please feel free to contact the Ashland Planning Division,541-488-5305. SITE DESIGN AND USE STANDARDS 18.72.070 Criteria for Approval The following criteria shall be used to approve or deny an application: A. Ali applicable City ordinances have been met or will be met by the proposed development. B. All requirements of the Site Review Chapter have been met or will be met. C. The development complies with the Site Design Standards adopted by the City Council for implementation of this Chapter. 0. 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 improvements in the street right-of-way shall comply with the Street Standards in Chapter 18.88,Performance Standards Options. i I !i I I 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 December 21, 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 #2011-01699, 763 & 777 Jefferson Avenue. Signature of Employee E I it i na�a 3uz�rza�i r i A 2011,01699 3,9 E'lW 80 PA-2011-01699 391E14AC 700 PA-2011-01699 391E14AB 2100 SHLAIq CITY QF ASHLAND PROPERTY INVESTORS LLC ASHLAND RECREATIONAL PROPERTIES P ` CIO ASHLAND TENNIS&FITNESS CLUB CITY HALL 670 SUPERIOR CT STE 110 �$HLAND, OR 0.520 MEDFORD, OR 97504 735 JEFFERSON AVE ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2011-01699 391E14AC 1900 PA-2011-01699 391E14AC 100 PA-2011-01699 391E14AC 500 ASHLAND WAREHOUSE PARTNRSHP BRAMMO INC BRAMSCHER CRAIG A PO BOX 43 550 CLOVER LN PO BOX 92 MEDFORD, OR 97501 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2011-01699 391E14AB 2300 PA-2011-01699 391E14AC 900 PA-2011-01699 391E14BA 700 DAVIS ROY J TRUSTEE ET AL DWAIN &BUD LLC IPCO DEVELOPMENT CORP 5205 ROOSTER LN 801 AVENUE C 640 TOLMAN CREEK RD SOMERSET, CA 95684 WHITE CITY, OR 97503 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2011-01699 391E14AC 1100 PA-2011-01699 391E14AC 600 2011 01699 397E14gp 10Q KNOX MARK L ET AL MORRIS ROBERT GENE TRUSTEE ET AL OREGON STATt& 700 MISTLETOE RD 106 PO BOX 850 UNK,NOW' ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 NOWN,: PA-2011-01699 391E14AC 200 PA-2011-01699 391E14AB 2200 PA-2011-01699 REEEK RONALD YERBA PRIMA INC JOHN YUNG, CEO RAY KISTLER 709 WASHINGTON ST 740 JEFFERSON AVE 545 A STREET, STE 3 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2011-01699 PA-2011-01699 LAURIE SAGER JIM HIGDAY 777 JEFFERSON 700 MISTLETOE RD, STE 201 HARDEY ENGINEERING&ASSO. 12/21/11 NOC ASHLAND, OR 97520 2870 NANSEN DRIVE 15 MEDFORD, OR 97501 i I i I i 300 104 101 ;'�, 104 INFOWAnONTECIN0l06Y ... 2001 1� S'• ! ...- 4 �...._ Map Maker 1008 !I Applfcat[on 1204 '_, 4 1000 Property Oata onlsno t.egend ate} � 400 I , Selected fentures !_ I Tax Lot Oalllneg l 1 I , 03 Il Tax Lot Numbers 00 � ��... . 1..11201 t.,._..._ 11202%, f ... ... :.:: . t I L1' 'f 21111 .. 7400 i �,( �•... �� -` �. !..._. 1 i o04 �1 1304 15414 ,` ;3100, 700 112�; 7 604 200 `'.. l I ..I 9110 ;o4 14 1 i,, \ 320U' 6504 r!' . 1 , ...:...:..... 1400 2104 601 7 704 LiYV 11 � I k.'. t♦i 32}11 is418 2000 2400 1, 4 l' s 2 •. 4 2Ly , t 1l x(312 ! i�.4 02 II 4 2411' ,04 100 i FF F 4 M .:..1 4902 401 4 `01 i7oo14t1 100 10411 20 102 ri r rl 4 x .. 1304} 2 4 A 1510 4U1 404 700 00 1451416.i134s 4411. i���5 0 1 a 7x114 4A+ 18 „INi 10 1 1 00 {may 2 a: 7400 800.. 110' 3100 I �_. r,f>rf}8 i 1'04 , ..... I 7oi 60,.#141+4, i�i 10 1 4 '00 40 8110 j iz i 1211 I ; 700. 1113, 12Q4,1200,, '1117 r r 1700 II 1i80i 0S r' 102 _ 2000 1;384043911'4100)41h6 X70 j,4 420 � 1. 21 . . , 13111 47041 14 k0 C14 1 208, a rl 4804 1800 207 '�` JACKSON 14s.: 2404 4U'j' 2000 i COUNTY ry OA 'T . - 4 t• :. i i v Thisma �based m a d'g�al database 03 2 p ilt #! 10#1 l4 ( i_ 1040 I $00 03 0 �g'saeC°uy�M IacVCep" ,_ 1 I ,oil 1704 I 0 2,311, {� 2d3i pas onalacturacy Theme --• - xarran�es,expressed or IrcgSed. 1* Plea-a rerydew.h cVVed c'""grade paper Geared Wli MapMaker Map uea:ad m 12J MOli 3.39-M PM using mbjnks0m"ty.prg PROJECT NARRATIVE/FINDINGS 12.02.11 PROJECT NAME: Brammo Inc., Research and Design Facility TYPE OF PLANNING ACTION:A request for a Site Review Approval(Chapter 18.72)for(2) Commercial/industrial buildings in the E-1/M-i Zone District(Chapter 18.40). PROJECT INFORMATION: OWNER: Brammo Inc. 550 Clover Lane Ashland, OR 97520 ARCHITECT: Ray Kistler, KSW Architects 545 A St. Ashland, OR 97520 SURVEYOR: Polaris Land Surveying, LLC PO Box 459 Ashland, OR 97520 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: Laurie Sager Laurie Sager and Assoc. Landscape Architects 700 Mistletoe Road, Suite 201 Ashland, OR 97$20 CIVIL ENGINEER: Jim Higday Hardey Engineering &Associates, Inc. 287o Nansen Drive Medford, OR 97501-0063 PROJECT ADDRESS: I 763&777 Jefferson Avenue I LEGAL DESCRIPTION: 39-1E-14AC Tax Lot 1o1,1o2 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Industrial Manufacturing/Employment ZONING DESIGNATION: M-1/E-i RECEIVED `: la 0 Ashland Fie SITE DATA: Area of Property: Lot 101107,593 S.F.(2.47 acres) Lot 102117,612 S.F.(2.7o acres) Lot 101 to be utilized as Electric Motorcycle Dirt Test Track Development of Lot 102: Pavement(Parking]Walkways/Plaza) 40,888 S.F. 34% Landscape/Recreation 19,90o S.F. 17% Building Footprint 33,692 S.F. 280/0 Lo-Building A Footprint 114,857 S.F. of 33,662 S.F. =44%] Building B Footprint [18,805 S.F. of 33,662 S.F. =56%] PARKING REQUIRED: Total Spaces Required: 46,442 total square footage Industrial Uses: 1 space/l,000 S.F. =46 Spaces +10%of total spaces= 4.6 Spaces +company fleet vehicles= 2 Spaces Total Spaces Allowable = 52 Spaces PARKING PROVIDED: Total Spaces Provided: Off-Street Spaces(Including ADA)=52 Spaces Jefferson Street On-Street Credit= S Spaces(8'-o"x24'-o") Total Spaces Provided =57 Spaces BICYCLE PARKING REQUIREDIPROVIDED: i Total Spaces Required: 1 per 5 req. Parking Spaces =9 Spaces Total Spaces Required = 9 Spaces 50% Sheltered Total Spaces Provided: Total Spaces Provided = 14 Spaces 100%Sheltered r PUBLIC SPACES: 1.432 S.F. Provided at Front of Building(4.2%) SITE DESCRIPTION; LAND USE: In the general area of the subject property there currently exist a variety of industrial&manufacturing occupancies and uses. These range from Modern Fan,Yerba Prima,Ashland Tennis&Fitness Club,Maranatha Foods and Oak Street Tank&Steel(see Vicinity/Zone Map and Aerial Photograph). There is also a combination of zoning districts which include E-1,M-1,and the zoning subsets included in the Crowman Mill Overlay Area. Uses and Zoning Districts immediately adjacent to the subject property are as follows: Forth-Zoned E-1 South-Zoned M-1 West-Zoned M-1/E-a East-Zoned E-1 The subject parcels are Zoned E-i/M-i, at a ratio of proportionally 3o%E-1170%M-1. The purpose of the E-1 District is to provide for a variety of uses such as office, retail, and manufacturing in an aesthetic environment while having a minimal impact on surrounding uses. The purpose of the M-1 District is designed to encourage sound industrial development,while providing a protective environment exclusively for such development. There are no yard requirements for this Zone Designation except those required in the Site Review, General Provisions and Solar Access chapters, specifically a five foot landscaped strip along the south property line,and no further yard requirements. The maximum allowable height of a building is 40 feet. i.oaAerial Photograph .oz Zone Map i PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS: The proposed parcels, located at 763&777 Jefferson Ave., have a combined area of approximately 225,205 S.F.(5.17 acres),and are currently undeveloped. The property slopes down to the northwest at a 3.4%fail,(referto Topographic Survey). Views from Lot sot: Qak9{reet Tank&SLeN...: y;. z.oi View from Southern Extent to North-West 2.02 View from Southern Extent to North 2.03 View from Southern Extent to North-East RIPARIAN CORRIDOR: There is a seasonal creek bed dividing the proposed parcels,and a 20'-0"conservation easement is observed on each parcel(refer to Topographic Survey). Stormwater mitigation facilities, i.e.bioswales and detention methods,will be utilized to clean and dose all stormwater runoff before returning it to the creek bed,thus minimizing the effect on city storm sewers. There is also a delineated wetland centered on Lot so3.and subject to a Water Resources Protection Zone ordinance and a 20'-0"buffer. Views of Riparian Corridor: s.�— „��� }M tE ��,x ,.:o.;: _.Ent 3�. r, � € � � �,,,� •�''.. { �t I, z.01 View of East Riparian Embankment 2.0?View of West Ripa Han Corrid Of/CU lvert 2.03 View of Wetland(Blackberry Bush)T.L.aioa ACCESS TO TAX LOT poi: Vehicle access to the proposed Test Track on T.L.soi will be via Jefferson Avenue. Motorcycles being transported to/from the adjacent property via Jefferson Avenue will either be walked(if not street legal), driven,or loaded onto an adequate transport vehicle. ACCESS TO TAX LOT 102: Vehicle access to the Brammo Research& Design Facility on T.L.102 will be via Jefferson Avenue. There are two entry/exit aprons that will allow for access to the facility and subsequent turn-around for fire- safety vehicles. As the facility will not be used for manufacturing,traffic impact will be minimal as exhibited in the Traffic Impact Analyis,submitted as a part of these findings. s 1 LLi'l Ur Yh%1 [.t.;IIIT]RJO t 15 t, 15 _p \ r tri 1'%+t / F _. — `\ \ w <• I "l JA\7r,aJ tc4k _t stmx s �SE 4tyI5 {IY 5_,� 1 N 4 �. 3,01 Survey of Existing Taxlots 2ioi,&zaoz PROJECT DESCRIPTION: REQUEST; f The applicant seeks approval to utilize Tax Lot 21oi as a Prototype Test Track for the development and practical testing of electric motorcycles. Tax Lot 2102 would be utilized for the site of(2)Research& Design Facilities.These structures would primarily be used for product design development and staging of manufacturing assembly process. The ground floor of each structure would house a product showroom space,with primarily office, light manufacturing,and storage,comprising of the rest of the facilities. 2OJ5 fl Q 2040 14,857 SF 18.805 SF DLDG A FOOTPRINT BLDG a FOOTPRINT OrrncxR�AnaNrrw-o Qi1c5C>H Anp1•yglii O r 2p4 PARC NINO:U-1.E-1 fl s s� ra'e F4 m•aes�-r3 Sl'IAFEi-IS' M'IA:NII-ro' W'UFQ-r5 4.oa_Site Plan of Proposed BrdmmoReSearch&Design Facilities BRAMMO RESEARCH&DESIGN FACILITIES MANUFACTURING I EMPLOYMENT DISTRICT ZONING COMPLIANCE. The proposed usage of the Brammo Research&Design Facilities are in compliance with the M-1]E-1 Zone District(Chapter 18.40)in regard to permitted uses,setbacks, lot coverage, and height. Combined the buildings have a total lot coverage Of 33,692 s.f.,and will have a combined use of office space, research, light duty manufacturing,and storage, all in accordance with the statutes of M-1/E-1 zoning. ,y- . I(f .• yyv�� XNXIIY� X1 'X 1,i i)7it t X 5,oi Site Plan of Proposed Brammo Research&Design Facilities Test Track BRAMMO RESEARCH&DESIGN DIRT TEST TRACK MANUFACTURING/EMPLOYMENT DISTRICT ZONING COMPLIANCE; The proposed usage of the Brammo Research& Design Test Track is in compliance with the M-1/E-1 Zone Dist rict(Chapter 18.40)in regard to permitted uses,setbacks, lot coverage,and height. A driveway curb-cut will allow for access to the Test Track from Jefferson Avenue,and the Track will not infringe upon either the protected conservation easement surrounding the creek or the wetland delineation(WD#o8-o595)found in the center of the site. The track will be maintained with a water i truck to mitigate any dust, prior to usage,and after use the track will be watered and raked to nominal I state. The Brammo Electric Motorcycle in essence,does not create noise. The motorcycles using the track will be entirely electric,and therefore concerns of sound from the track will be non-existent,the motorcycles make no more sound than a conventional bicycle. The track will be utilized for private research only, and therefore will only have small groups of observers recording and analyzing the performance of the motorcycles in a practical application. The motorcycles will be walked from the R&D facility to the track site along Jefferson Avenue, and access to the private test track will be gated to prevent unauthorized use of the facility. ACCESS/PARKING: Access to the Brammo Motors Research& Design Test Track consists of one entrance/exit from Jefferson Avenue. The Research& Design Facility has two entrance/exit aprons both serving Jefferson Avenue. The off-street parking ordinance requires 1 space/1,000 s.f.for industrial/manufacturing or 1 5pace/2 employees,whichever is less. Currently there is accommodation for a total of 52 spaces on the site, assessed at the lesser of the standards(i spate/s,000 s.f.)allocates 34 spaces. The xo%Max.Allowable Parking increase,and company fleet vehicle parking(1 space/company vehicle)allows for the additional i8 spaces. Three of these spaces are ADA compliant,as required per Section 18.92.030. There are 5 additional On-Street parking spaces available,thus bringing the available parking to a sum total of 57 spaces. The Owner may seek to perform a phased installation of the parking, installing the surfacing for expanded parking areas at a later date, based on the growth of the business. LANDSCAPE/OPEN SPACE: The Preliminary Landscape Plan for this application provides all required shade trees for the proposed parking areas. This plan also designates appropriate plantings for the landscape areas adjacent to Knoll Creek and the existing bio-swale along Jefferson Avenue. In addition,the Landscape Plan for the proposed detention areas within the property boundaries shows a combination of plant material that will help to provide filtration for the captured on-site storm water and will provide an aesthetically pleasing landscape for the overall site. The plant material chosen for this project was selected to be drought tolerant, low maintenance and aesthetically appropriate for the project location,the proposed building architecture and its surrounding natural features including views and Knoll Creek. UTILITIES: Existing sewer,water, and storm sewer lines are located within the ROW of Jefferson Avenue and have been stubbed out to the public utility easement. Service connections will be made within the easement for the water and sewer connections. An additional water meter will be installed for the easterly building along with an FDC vault onto the existing water stub. One water meter currently exists which will serve the west building.The electrical/CTVtelephone utilities are located within the public utility easement. The storm drain system will be detained,filtered through bio-swales and then enter Knoll Creek via a energy dissipater. i 3-Phase electrical service will be provided from existing infrastructure stubbed in to the northern border of the site,adjacent to Jefferson Avenue. In preliminary meetings with Dave Tygerson,a vault would be installed adjacent to Jefferson Avenue,and underground service lines would then run along a public utility easement on the Eastern Property Line and connect through the parking corridor to a transformer installed at the southern border of the parking area. This installation would allow for independent 3- Phase service to each of the proposed buildings. TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS: <FOLLOWING ATTACHMENT PER JOHN HARDEY, HEA ENGINEERING> j i Hardey Traffic Engineering Group, LL P.O. Box 876 Medford,OR 97509 541.855.8677 tel November 22, 2011 Email:hardoytfaffiegroup@cleardire.net Jim Higday Hardey Engineering&Associates, Inc PO Box 1625 Medford, Oregon 97501 RE: Brammo Site Plan -Traffic Impacts Dear Jim, Our initial work on this project was to determine if a Traffic Impact Analysis or Traffic Impact Study would be needed for the planning application. The City of Ashland has established three criteria to determine this(noted in italics below). Following each criteria are our comments. 1. Trip Generation Threshold: 50 newly generated vehicle trips (inbound and outbound) daring the adjacent street peak hour; The project as presented to us, has 2 new buildings which will access Jefferson Avenue. The purpose of the project is to manufacture motorcycles. Building"A"will have 21,247 square feet,and 60 employees. Building"B"will have 25,195 square feet,and 30 employees. Using the ITE Trip Generation Manual for Manufacturing(ITF Code 140) Weekday A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour of Generator for both building square footage and employees,the following table was generated. Manufacturing(140)Average Vehicle Trip Ends Peak Hour Average Trip Rate x Factor = Total Trip Ends AM Peak 0,40 90 Employees 36 PM Peak 0.36 90 Employees 32.4 AM Peak 0.73 46.442 Thousand SF 319 PM Peak 0.74 46,442 Thousand SF 34,4 For either AM or PM Peak Hour,the project will not generate more than 50 newly generated vehicle trips during the adjacent street peak hour, therefore does not meet the criteria set forth in Threshold 1. 2. Mitigation Threshold:Installation of any traffic control device andlor construction of any geometric � improvements that will affect the progression or operation of traffic traveling on, entering, or exiting the HTEO-Brammo-Page l highway; The project does not have direct access onto any highway and we are not anticipating installation of any traffic control devices or geometric improvements to any highways therefore the project does not meet the criteria set forth in Threshold 2. 3. Heavy Vehicle Trip Generation Threshold. 20 newly generated heavy vehicle trips (inbound and outbound) during the day; According to information provided to us by the client,this project will only have"2 trucks a day fed-ex/ups deliveries"which will not meet the criteria set forth in Threshold 3. Our work indicates that none of the criteria established in the Thresholds noted above,have been met, therefore no further traffic analysis is warranted. If you have any questions or need additional clarification, please Iet me know. Sincerely, eoD GP � SsU2 C 10419 q� Hardey Traffic Engineering Group LLC John Hardey,PE,PLS OREGON Owner �4rG �se� L RE1tE1VAt:�••3c—�•• File:CADocuments and SetingsVohn HardayWy DocumentslCocel User FilesVohn Fil0f{ardey TrnfEc Engineering Group%rammo.wpd I ITEG-Bratrano-Page 2 ARCHITECTURE: The site of the proposed building is located within the E-1{M-s zone of Jefferson Avenue. The applicant has provided digital renderings as well as exterior design elevations for the proposed building. It is the intention of the applicant to provide a building that references both the character and industrial design aesthetic of European manufacturing facilities,while also utilizing current technologies and methods of sustainable design. Brammo, Inc.is focused on the progression of renewable energy and building systems, in keeping with the development of a carbon-free transportation solution,the building which houses their Research & Development strives to reflect this innovation and desire for excellence. J7 7 ... ...... z x x . 6.oi Building`A'Vilest Elevation 6.02 Building'A'North Elevation n ?� 6.03 Building'A'East Elevation 6.o4 Building'A'South Elevation 6.o5 Building`A'Plan View . ........ ...... ��� W ✓ v 6.o66uilding'A'North-West Perspective f i USAGE; The Brammo Research&Development facilities will function as a multi-tiered space in regards to the development of electric motor technologies,product showroom,office/workspace,and low-impact manufacturing. The ability to design and test the motorcycles on site is essential,as the nature of the Brammo process is experimental and the direct application of theory to real-world performance is necessary for safe and efficient product development. Building A&B, both allow for service truck access and are open in floor plan,allowing for modular development of the interior space,and maximum flexibility depending on the necessary use. " P 7.01 Building'B'West Elevation 7.02 Building'B'North Elevation TRIM 3 ice' 3 a a W ...... -- 7 A l - 7.03 Building'B'East Elevation 7.04 Building'B'South Elevation %F4'01 RY i ' d ICE F-+:fF?a.' a efs iFll nu �� � •.FN]FFLry i� 7.05 Building'B'Plan View i I ! 7.o6Buiiding'KNorth-West Perspective FINDINGS: SITE REVIEW(Chapter 18.72) The planning Staff/Commission can approve a Site Review when the following criteria have been addressed: A. All applicable City Ordinances have been met or will be met by the proposed development. EMPLOYMENT ZONE(CHAPTER 18.40)& MANUFACTURING ZONE DISTRICT(CHAPTER 18.51) PERMITTED USES The City's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map shows the subject property to be roughly 300/0 Employment E-1 and 70%Manufacturing M-1. "This district is designated to provide for a variety of uses such as office, retail ormanufacturing in an aesthetic environment and having a minimal impact on surrounding uses." "This district is designed to encourage sound industrial development in the City by providing a protective environment exclusively forsuch development." The applicant is proposing(2)buildings with 46,442 S.F.of off ice/manufacturing/storage space with industrial mezzanines on the second floor. This proposal is consistent with the City's designation indicated on the Comprehensive Plan Map which is subsequently zoned Employment/Manufacturing. The proposed project is also in conformance with the City's E-1 Zoning Designation,Chapter 18.40.020 which permits outright office, retail,and manufacturing uses. SETBACKS As shown on the Site Plan,the proposed project meets or exceeds the area,width, and yard requirements of the Zoning Designation. A five foot landscaped strip is installed along the abutting property line to the i MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT As shown on the Preliminary Exterior Elevations,the average height of the proposed buildings is 40'-0", which is in accordance with the maximum height requirement of 40'-0". GENERAL REGULATIONS(CHAPTER 18.58) FENCES j r There are no fences proposed on tax-lot 2102. However,there will be a gated entry to the test track and the Jefferson Avenue street frontage will be unaccessible to the general public. VISION CLEARANCE The site plan shows the vision clearance at the driveway apron entrances to Jefferson Avenue to allow for the clear vision triangle requirements. SPECIAL SETBACK REQUIREMENTS The site has no specific setback requirements as an E--1 zoned lot. OFF-STREET PARKING/DRIVEWAY STANDARDS(CHAPTER 18.92) The off-street parking ordinance for industrial/manufacturing usage requires-1 spaces/i,000 S.F. or-1 space/2 employees,whichever is less. In this case, Brammo currently has go employees requiring 45 parking spaces, and the total square footage of the proposed development is 44,392(-1 space/i,000 S.F. for industrial/manufacturing),therefore the lesser of the two being 44 spaces based on total square footage. The applicant is also utilizing the-1o%maximum overage clause allowing for an additional 4 parking spaces, and parking for 4 fleet vehicles,thus bringing the total number of parking spaces to 52. The required ADA spaces for a parking lot of 51-75 spaces is 3,and the applicant is providing 3 ADA spaces each with van accessibility. 14 covered bicycle parking spaces are being provided(-1 bicycle space15 req.auto spaces),which is in accordance with the required statutes of-18.92.040. The applicant is providing the covered bicycle parking spaces at the north entry corner of each building. SOLAR ACCESS(CHAPTER 18.70) The buildings are subject to Solar Setback B,and are in accordance with the required setback as demonstrated: 40'-o°(Height)-16'-0"/.445+(--03)= Required Solar Setback of 58'-0" Both of the proposed buildings on T.L.2102 have a northern property line adjacent to Jefferson Avenue, and therefore the buildings do not infringe upon the required setback statute that shadows are greater than 16'-0"at the Northern property line. SIGNAGE(CHAPTER 18.96) The proposed signage will be incorporated into the entry of the plaza through the usage of a transparent building facade with a metal frame infrastructure referencing the logo of the Brammo logo. The intention is for the signage to be visible within the context of the entry,and allow for flexibility of display options. I 8.ox Building'A'Signage B. All requirements of the Site Review Chapter have been met or will be met. SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS The applicant is providing a Narrative and Findings in addition to exhibits for written documentation. The extent of the Graphic Document includes: Site/LandscapelUtility Plans, Floor Plans, Proposed Colors and Materials,and Building Elevation drawings. This information is provided in the Application Package and addresses the submittal requirements of Chapter 18.72.o6o. LOT COVERAGE/LANDSCAPE/OPEN SPACE The Site and Landscape plans delineate the paving, buildings and landscape areas. The area of paved surfaces is approximately 40,888 S.F.[34%]with 33,692 S.F.[28%]of the site being utilized as building footprint. The E_x zone district requires a minimum of 15%of the lot area to be landscaped,and the M-1 zone district requires a minimum of so%total lot area to be landscaped. As the project is primarily in the M-1 zone[70%+zoned M-1], it still retains 30%of its zoning in the E-1 classification. As such the applicant is providing a.g,goo S.F.of landscaping[17 0/0]to fulfill the requirements of both zones. TRASHIRECYCLING The applicant has located(z)trash/recycle areas adjacent to the southern parking area and the$'-o" buffer zone on the south property line, see fig.4.o-i. The area will be screened from view by a 5'-o"tall metal Jwood sliding gate. LIGHTANDGLARE Pole lights will be installed at 141-0"maximum height will have fixtures directing light downward, per city specifications. I C. The development complies with the Site Design Standards adopted by the City Council for the implementation of this Chapter. [I-C-s.BASIC SITE REVIEW STANDARDS Approval Standard: Development in all commercial and employment zones shall conform to the following development standards: II-C-sa.ORIENTATION AND SCALE Buildings shall have their primary orientation toward the street rather than the parking area. Building entrances shall be functional, and shall be accessed from a public sidewalk. Public sidewalks shall be provided adjacent to a public street frontage. Buildings that are within30 feet of the streetshall have an entrance for pedestrians directlyfrom the street to the building interior. This entrance shall be designed to be attractive and functional,and shall be open to the public during all business hours. As shown on the Preliminary Landscape Site Plan, Floor Plan, and Elevations,the entrance(s)are oriented toward Jefferson Avenue and the public sidewalk. The applicant seeks to preserve the sense of scale in the transition from Jefferson Avenue to the building,and provide an entry area for pedestrians and building inhabitants complete with bicycle parking and sheltered entrances to the building. It is important to the applicant that the site and building be designed to preserve the pedestrian friendly feeling of the street and maintain the integrity of the bioswale element prevalent on the Jefferson Avenue streetscape. The stylized detention ponds and plantings between the proposed buildings and the streetscape will further enhance the overall pedestrian friendly theme that exists in this zone by creating an interesting and aesthetically friendly design for observation as people move past and through the site. 11-C-3-b.ORIENTATION AND SCALE x. One street tree chosen from the street tree list shall be placed for each 3o feet of frontage for that portion of the development fronting the street. Street trees currently exist on Jefferson Avenue as shown on the Preliminary Landscape Plan. 11-C-xc.LANDSCAPING s. Landscaping shall be designed so thatSo%coverage occurs after one year and 90%coverage occurs afters years. a. Landscaping design shall use a variety of low water deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs and flowering plant species. 3. Buildings adjacent to streets shall be buffered by landscaped areas at least lo feet in width,except in the Ashland Historic District. Outdoor storage areas shall be screened from viewfrom adjacent public right-of- ways, except in M-s zones. Loading facilities shall be screened and buffered when adjacent to residentially zoned land. y. Irrigation systems shall be installed to assure landscaping success. $. Efforts shall be made to save as many existing healthy trees and shrubs on the site as possible. The Landscape Plan has been designed so that 5o%coverage occurs after one year and go%coverage occurs after 5 years. The Landscape Plan has also been designed in accordance with low-water usage j standards,which have in effect reduced the potable water use for irrigation by 5o%from a calculated mid-summer baseline case. This will put the landscape irrigation system well within the standards established by the City of Ashland. There are currently xo existing trees located within the area proposed for construction at 777 Jefferson Avenue including; 6—Populus trichocarpa,3--Quercus kellogii and 1—Quercus garryana. In addition, there is s—Quercus kellogii-#g, just outside of the Southern property line which has been identified for protection on the Preliminary Tree Protection and Removal Plan. The design team has gone to extensive effort to preserve all trees identified and has intentionally avoided any unnecessary work within the banks of Knoll Creek. There are a number of naturalized trees within the Knoll Creek banks which have not been identified individually,which will not be impacted by the proposed project. In addition to the trees noted above,there are 8 existing trees located at 763 Jefferson Avenue including; Quercus keno a Po ulus trichocar a and 1- Pinus densiflora. These trees are to be protected 4�- g��,3-- P P , p and preserved. i I II-C-1d.PARKING s. Parking areas shall be located behind buildings or on one or both sides. 2. Parking areas shall be shaded by deciduous trees,buffered from adjacent non-residential uses and screened from non-residential uses. As shown in fig.4.01,the parking areas are located adjacent to the proposed buildings with access off of Jefferson Avenue. There will be deciduous trees planted within the proposed parking islands and along the western edge of the parking area adjacent to Knoll Creek. In addition,there are two proposed retaining walls with a 5'-0"wide planter area(buffer)along the southern boundary,adjacent to the existing property line. II-C-1f. NOISE AND GLARE x. Special attention to glare(AMC18.72.110)and noise(AMC9.08-170(c)&AMC9.oB.x7s)shall be considered in the project design to insure compliance with these standards. The proposed usage of the Brammo Research&Design Test Track is in compliance with the M-1/E-1 Zone District(Chapter 18.40)in regard to permitted uses,setbacks,lot coverage,and height. A driveway curb-cut will allow for access to the Test Track from Jefferson Avenue,and the Track will not infringe upon either the protected conservation easement surrounding the creek or the wetland delineation(WD#o8-0595)found in the center of the site. The track will be maintained with a water truck to mitigate any dust,prior to usage, and after use the track will be watered and raked to nominal state. The Brammo Electric Motorcycle in essence,does not create noise. The motorcycles using the track will be entirely electric, and therefore concerns of sound from the track will be minimal. The track will be utilized for private research only,and therefore will only have small groups of observers recording and analyzing the performance of the motorcycles in a practical application. The motorcycles will be walked from the R&D facility to the track site along Jefferson Avenue,and access to the private test track will be gated to prevent unauthorized use of the facility. In regards to potential glare from the test track,all test bikes will be a matte black finish,and thus negate any issues with surrounding properties and potential glare from the motorcycles while in the testing phase. II-C-xg.EXPANSIONS OF EXISTING SITES AND BUILDINGS i. Forsites which do not conform to these requirements, an equal percentage of the site must be made to comply with these standards as the percentage of building expansion, e.g., if building area is to expand by 25%, then z5VO of the site must be brought up to the standards required by this document. i Not applicable. I I I E D. PARKING LOT LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING STANDARDS Approval Standard:All parking lots,which for purposes of this section include areas of vehicle maneuvering, parking, and loading shall be landscaped and screened as follows: II-D-a..SCREENING AT REQUIRED YARDS s. Parking abutting a required landscaped front or exterioryard shall incorporate a sight obscuring hedge screen into the required landscaped yard. The screen shall grow to beat least 36 inches higher than the finished grade of the parking area, except for required vision clearance areas. The screen height maybe achieved by a combination of earth mounding and plant materials. Elevated parking lots shall screen both the parking and the retaining wall. The Preliminary Landscape Plan complies with the required parking lot screening as outlined above. Prudent use of plant material to screen the proposed parking lots has been incorporated into the proposed design. While the parking areas are at a higher elevation than Jefferson Avenue, retaining walls have not been used to elevate these lots. Natural topography requires that the building and parking elevations be raised. Due to the elevated prominence of the lots,the proposed planting has been designed to adequately screen all parking areas to a minimum height of 36 inches. II-D•2.SCREENING ABUTTING PROPERTY LINES s. Parking abutting a property line shall be screened by s-o"landscaped strip. Where a buffer between zones is required, the screening shall be incorporated into the required buffer strip, and will not bean additional requirement. The Site and Landscape Plans show a 1o'-o"wide buffer(plus 6"curb)adjacent to the east property line. The proposed landscape has been designed to both screen and buffer the parking area from adjacent development. II-D•3.LANDSCAPE STANDARDS: Parking lot landscaping shall consist of a minimum of 71 of the total parking area plus a ratio of s tree for each seven parking spaces to create a canopy effect. The tree species shall be an appropriate large canopied shade tree and shall be selected from the street tree list to avoid root damage to pavement and utilities, and damage from droppings to parked cars and pedestrians. The tree shall be planted in a landscaped area such that the tree bole is at least z feet from any curb or paved area. The landscaped area shall be planted with shrubs and/or living ground cover to assure 6o%coverage within i year and go%within S years. B. All requirements of the Site Review Chapter have been met or will be met. SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS The applicant is providing a Narrative and Findings in addition to exhibits for written documentation. The extent of the Graphic Document includes:Site/Landscape/Utility Plans, Floor Plans,Proposed Colors and Materials,and Building Elevation drawings. This information is provided in the Application Package and addresses the submittal requirements of Chapter:.8.72.060. LOT COVERAGE/LANDSCAPE/OPEN SPACE The Site and landscape plans delineate the paving, buildings and landscape areas. The area of paved surfaces is approximately 40,888 S.F.[34%]with 33,692 S.F.[28%]of the site being utilized as building footprint. The E-1 zone district requires a minimum of 15%of the lot area to be landscaped,and the M-1 zone district requires a minimum of 10%total lot area to be landscaped. As the project is primarily in the M-1 zone[7o%+zoned M-1], it still retains 30%of its zoning in the E-1 classification. As such the applicant is providing a.g,goo S.F.of landscaping[a.7%1 to fulfill the requirements of both zones. TRASH/RECYCLING The applicant has located(z)trashlrecycle areas adjacent to the southern parking area and the 5'-0" buffer zone on the south property line, see fig.4.oa.. The area will be screened from view by a 5'-0"tall metal/wood sliding gate. LIGHTAND GLARE Pole lights will be installed at 14'-0"maximum height will have fixtures directing light downward,per city specifications. C. The development complies with the Site Design Standards adopted by the City Council for the implementation of this Chapter. II-C-i.BASIC SITE REVIEW STANDARDS Approval Standard: Development in all commercial and employment zones shall conform to the following development standards: II-C-sa.ORIENTATION AND SCALE Buildings shall have their primary orientation toward the street rather than the parking area. Building entrances shall be functional, and shall be accessed from a public sidewalk. Public sidewalks shall be provided adjacent to a public street frontage. Buildings that are within 3ofeet of the street shalt have an entrance for pedestrians directly from the street to the building interior. This entrance shall be designed to be attractive and functional,and shall be open to the public during all business hours. As shown on the Preliminary Landscape Site Plan, Floor Plan,and Elevations,the entrance(s)are oriented toward Jefferson Avenue and the public sidewalk. The applicant seeks to preserve the sense of scale in the transition from Jefferson Avenue to the building, and provide an entry area for pedestrians and building inhabitants complete with bicycle parking and sheltered entrances to the building. Landscaped areas shall be evenly distributed throughout the parking area and parking perimeter at the required ratio. That portion of a required landscaped yard, buffer strip or screening strip abutting parking stalls may be counted toward required parking lot landscaping but onlyfor those stalls abutting landscaping as tong as the tree species,living plant material coverage and placement distribution criteria are also met. Front or exterior yard landscaping may not be substituted for the interior parking stalls. The proposed impervious parking area has been calculated at x S.F.,and the proposed parking lot landscaping has been calculated at x S.F. This proposed parking lot landscaping is x%of the total parking lot area. This design complies with the 7%minimum requirement. The proposed landscape areas have been located to provide planting throughout the parking lots. The trees,shrubs,and groundcovers selected for this project comply with the above standards and will provide the coverage required over the allotted amount of time noted above. II-D-4.RESIDENTIAL SCREENING: Parking areas adjacent to a residential dwelling shall be set back at least 8 feet from the building, and shall provide a continuous hedge screen. Not applicable. II-D-5.HEDGE SCREENING: The required hedge screen shall be installed as follows: z. Evergreen shrubs shall be planted so thatSo%of the desired screening is achieved within z years,z00% within 4 years. I a. Living groundcover in the screen strip shall be planted such that z00%coverage is achieved within z years. The Landscape Plan shows compliance with this finding where appropriate. II-D-6.OTHER SCREENING: z. Other screening and buffering shall be provided as follows: Refuse Container Screen: Refuse containers or disposal areas shall be screened from view by placement of a solid wood fence or masonry wall from five to eight feet in height. All refuse materials shall be contained within the refuse area. 3i3 i Service Corridor Screen:When adjacent to residential uses, commercial and industrial service areas shall reduce the adverse effects of noise,odor and visual clutter upon adjacent residential uses. Light and Glare Screen:Artificial lighting shall be so arranged and constructed as to not produce direct glare on adjacent residential properties or streets. j The Site and Landscape Plans show a trash/recycle area to be located to the South of the parking lot, along the Southern Parking Area. This area will be screened with a masonry wall, and steel gate. All wall mounted lighting within the site will be directed towards the ground. E. STREET TREE STANDARDS APPROVAL STANDARD:All development fronting on public or private streets shall be required to plant street trees in accordance with the following standards and chosen from the recommended list of street trees found in this section. II-E-a..LOCATION FOR STREET TREES Street trees shall be located behind the sidewalk except in cases where there is a designated planting strip in the right-of-way,or the sidewalk is greater than 8 feet wide.Street trees shall include irrigation,root barriers,and generally conform to the standards established by the Department of Community Development. NIA Street trees for this project already exist along Jefferson Avenue. II-E-2. SPACING, PLACEMENT,AND PRUNING OF STREET TREES All tree spacing may be made subject to special site conditions which may,for reasons such as safety,affect the decision.Any such proposed special condition shall be subject to the Staff Advisor's review and approval. The placement,spacing,and pruning of street trees shall be as follow: �. Street trees shall be placed at the rate of one tree forevery3o feet of street frontage. Trees shall be evenly spaced, with variations to the spacing permitted for specific site limitations,such as driveway approaches. 2. Trees shall not be planted closer than 25 feet from the curb line of intersections of streets or alleys, and not closer than so feet from private driveways(measured at the back edge of the sidewalk),fire hydrants,or utility poles. 3. Street trees shall not be planted closer than Zo feet to light standards. Except for public safety no new light standard location shall be positioned closer than to feet to any existing street tree, and preferably such locations will be at least 20 feet distant. 4. Trees shall not be planted closer than 2 1/2 feet from the face of the curb except at intersections where it shall be.5 feet from the curb,in a curb return area. 5. Where there are overhead power lines, tree species are to be chosen that will not interfere with those lines. b. Trees shall not be planted within 2 feet of any permanent hard surface paving or walkway.Sidewalk cuts in concrete for trees shall be at least so square feet; however, larger cuts are encouraged because they allow additional air and water into the root system and add to the health of the tree. Space between the tree and such hard surface may be covered by permeable non-permanent hard surfaces such as grates,bricks on sand, orpaver blocks. 7. Trees, as theygrow,shall be pruned to provide at least 8 feet of clearance above sidewalks and 22 feet above street roadway surfaces. 8. Existing trees may be used as street trees if there will no damage from the development which will kill or weaken the tee. Sidewalks of variable width and elevation may be utilized to save existing street trees,subject to approval by the Staff Advisor. N/A Street trees for this project already exist along Jefferson Avenue. it-E-3. Replacement of Street Trees Existing street trees removed by development projects shall be replaced by the developer with those from the approved street tree list. The replacement trees shall be of size and species similar to the trees that are approved by the Staff Advisor. NIA Street trees for this project already exist along Jefferson Avenue. II-E-c,, Recommended Street Trees Street trees shall conform to the street tree list approved by the Ashland Tree Commission. N/A Street trees for this project already exist along Jefferson Avenue. SECTION y8.ft.o8o Criteria for Issuance of Tree Removal Permit. An applicant for a Tree Removal Permit shall demonstrate that the following criteria are satisfied. The Staff Advisormay require an arborist's report to substantiate the criteria fora permit. B.Tree thatis Not a Hazard:The City shall issue a tree removal permit for a tree that is not a hazard if the applicant demonstrates all of the following: x. The tree is proposed forremoval in order to permit the application to be consistent with other applicable Ashland Land Use Ordinance requirements and standards,including but not limited to applicable Site Design and Use Standards and Physical and Environmental Constraints. The Staff Advisor may require the building footprint of the development to be staked to allowfor accurate verification of the permit application;and 2. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on erosion,soil stability,flow of surface waters,protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks;and 3. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on the tree densities,sizes, canopies, and species diversity within Zoo feet of of the subject property. The applicant requests a Tree Removal Permit for the 2—Populus tricocarpa trees,which are dead,and have been identified on the Preliminary Tree Protection and Removal Plan. The design team has worked hard to avoid disturbance to existing live trees and has made every effort to avoid any construction impact to these trees.Tree protection fencing is also shown on the Preliminary Tree Protection and Removal Plan. SECTION-.8.63.080 Water Resource Protection Zone Reductions A Water Resource Protection Zone may be reducer)b}}tip to 25%through a Type I land use procedure, and by greater than 25%and tip to 50%through a Type H land tise procedure to allow alteration within the Water Resource Protection Zone based tipon findings that the following approval criteria have been satisfied A. The proposed use or activity is designed to avoid intrusion into the Water Resource Protection Zone through the itse of up to a 50%reduction of any dimensional standards (e.g, required front, side and rear yard setbacks; required distance between buildings) to permit development as far outside or upland of the Water Resource Protection Zone cis possible. Stich at jttshnent to any applicable dimensional standards shall be reviewed as part of the requested reduction, and shall not be subject to a separate Variance application under Chapter 18.100. Reductions to dimensional standards may not be used to reduce required Solar Access setbacks without evidence of agreement by the effected property owners) to the north through a concurrent Solar Access Variance application as described in section 18.70.060. B. The alteration of the Water Resource Protection Zone is the minim an necessary to effrcierttly perform the proposed activity rnadlor use. The proposed development shall minimize disturbance to the Water Resource Protection Zone by utilizing the following design options to minimize or reduce impacts of development. 1. Multi-story construction shrill be considered 2. Parking spaces shall be minimized to no more than that required as a ntininn nl for the use. 3. Pavement shall be minimized, and all pavement used shall be installed and maintained in a pervious paving material. 4. Engineering solutions shall be used to minimize additional grading andlor fill. C. The application demonstrates that equal or better protection for identified resources will be ensured through restoration, enhancement and mitigation measures. The structures,ftinctions and values of the Water Resource will be restored through the implementation of a restoration and enhancement strategy set.forth in a mitigation plan prepared in accordance with the standards and requirements described in section 18.63.120. D. Long term conservation, management and maintenance of the 4ater°Resource Protection Zone shall be ensured through preparation and recordation of a management plan as described in section 18.63.120.C, except a management plan is not required for residential)},zoned lots occupied only by a single family divelling and accessor},structures. The Brammo Research&Design Facilities and Test Track,are observing all necessary conservation easements surrounding the creek and the delineated wetland(WD#o8-0595). Currently there is a minimum 20'-0"conservation easement surrounding wetland WD#o8-o595,and a 25'-0" conservation easement surrounding the creek. Both the proposed R&D facilities and practice track are in observance and accordance with the Water Resource Protection zone and not seeking a reduction in size or scope. SECTION 18.63.ogo Hardship Variances Hardship Variances shall be processed as a Type II land use procedure. Hardship Variances are not subject to the Variance requirements of Chapter 18.100. The approval authoritl)may dipprove or approve with conditions a request,for a Hardship Variance based upon findings that the following approval criteria have been satisfied. A. The application of this chapter unduly restricts the development oi, use of the lot, and renders the lot not buildable. B. The proposed activity or use of land would have been permitted prior to the effective date of this ordinance. C. The applicant has explored all other reasonable options available under this chapter and throughout the Ashland Land Use Ordinance to relieve the hardship. A Adverse impacts on the structures,functions or values of the resource including water quality, erosion, or slope stability that would result from approval of this Hardship Variance have been minimized and will be mitigated to the greatest extent possible through restoration and enhancement of the TI'ater Resource Protection Zone in accordance with a initigation plan prepared in accordance with the standards and requirements in section 18.63.120. E. Long term conservation, management and maintenance of the Water Resource Protection Zone shall be ensured through preparation and recordation of a management plan as described in section 18.63.120.C, except a management plan is not required,for residentially zoned lots occupied only by a sii7gle family divelling and accessory structures. The Brammo Research& Design Facilities and Test Track,are observing all necessary conservation easements surrounding the creek and the delineated wetland(WD#o8-o595). Currently there is a minimum zo'-o"conservation easement surrounding wetland WD#o8-o595,and a 25'-o" conservation easement surrounding the creek. Both the proposed R&D facilities and practice track are in observance and accordance with the Water Resource Protection zone and not seeking a variance regarding the Water Resource Protection Zone. ?J3HOSWb2i9�JIHNO o = r 2J3NMO w l ll-110VA 1N3WdOl3A34(INV HM:JV3S32i o o .. 'ONI `OHNVd JS a X LU Z Q zg€ p8s CD LU LU CD Q zz �7j��z2-`_:° °wo Z � wow Fn" ;Woo�Fs .,has o a a� w'.p C-) �Nm ¢ a��ap" w - ° =��z. LL c g LL ca LL I— ao a omF z — wJtt J z w U U W s 8 s 8 6 �a 888 sz wd g € �o s ®® 2 Fw�'S'Sa �R 5< as- s- w� .5w ��oxao<22o50 a � X Zw Z.m ui LU Z m LLJ .I J ok L�zz °- F6 t uiuw ¢ G U z °d Z Y 2 ° Z ® J $ffi Sew Iy p' x x x Z m K U o m LLw _I °oi" Q �!O 1a O LLJ F oQS g c VV IJ f '� Lu E Z I =o C) T g� Z F- U U) o �$ ¢ m Q o h ui U O 8 C[ a w ® ~ z - 8 1 a � � g LLz W z mN 2 Q _ W a ~ -1. U oti wv'i C7 C WL ¢ o w < ino w '¢ W w o w? w C7 wO��aLLd J °o rcoo ro sacz Scz boo aL o ss ° s Z U soo Ioswo J J Ui°.Q�ug� UG O vwia U w 4 ? KH\ry w ui w w o $ N Z n �/� w o VJ z Z iomv� O0 ° ° w 8 w w w °ion" W " v co w LL = .m. - � rw �- z 6 O a E U O 'co o w O m rr^^ t - V ('J 2 y � — Z Q U W 3 O O O O O O O O O O z Z 3 � � U w o U > Z r Z ¢¢Z ^LL E _ Q C) UJO�v� W ->oN � UOZmn" F, � � `rte-'S<a N053110'IIN•IIIS'l Sl*llo,,S OV4"VH13 SIHOdS OniNVUS H 0-� NV-lc�Airun v ONICIV&D 44, UJ Z :� c) 0 2 , cm 5 6 a E C) LLI LL C) uj LLT 0 UL), 0 T;l L co -j —LL z 0 C/) Cl) Q CO W < zi A/ LU z L L L ol 4' S, x1l oroe- aaHOSwvaS DIVW = e® a3NMO o J.11-IIOHd 1N�]WdMDA�I4 aNV HO2JH3S�Ia T° 'ONI `ONVMJ9 a„ o N � U a Q 'o I Ir I i / I 1 IwF g F la IooF I IB � z s. sa sa �i Z I 8 i o 1 I m J a LU O w 3 s r( 1 \z i ! il< � o it ��� 1... � r s '1 l t 0 U w 6 6 WZ W Z (A 2 O O J W U?¢ wa u o m¢Qx O x J O a � xOi a ov U 0 m OwZ aza t- z °z $ Boa°° o ° o�°� _ °��-o 8©0®�® d rc w Q o 3zc~z �w ie d Sao A 3ww �dm Z, ZU,a Oj ?ZQ¢4y ZLL¢ w wOr _ K w0� Qm O�70 ' ll Zt� w FZOOo Z Z ? m O O zo 6a w O > >Nxxrw YN U>L�OOw F¢¢ w O �py0�~ a m zz ow � o N2 o° 50 N m $�w< 'Q�wg wo W m w w maw Iwo Qi w.mzof aw-x in a c M.s °o °zmiWZ °�04 K z m z r ESN e e e �,-<e� i° o�r,a .�°mom�' oso� 000c4i ° 3''0 W o �� a-2LLo° �u°,w w� `4 ¢ �,S$F ooz U O " w = w w -- °-°aiNad �a�° a wo�x_ °¢w ¢?i4wrc yo°mr 0 ° H �0�3 m �w'-wwzd - �z U) s W -Z z 0 W w _ .. gg w .. _ N _ mw F �000 raow C7 ? f0 o o xo i z w u x ° �� w w °W ? ] w °� °° �° o00 �wxm Z ¢o a mo .. o o z y } U w i o ° 0 did a " ° ° �i wog 3o�=zQO z%o_o Z v_ w ° 5 ..>o a W. °wN ° ui °<"w+a Q ¢w� oo °yLs° _ J z Z o ¢ U w w rca ii C } U ..Z U O mw Oi H O >� a 4 s Q O K _ O oc_4i Z z Q O w w 0 oy Q K o W� O a W �it�w�g W 400 5 p I .O v_ wGi O G U m2�i- U` 'E a t Q m a w LL 0 H o o ¢ m ° Ni>° m a om z wive m n� 3. mod° Fa rm rx--� to°� v�u avy nuM.0 ww+niai�w,woumv vvuu•+mi ouo.,wfom,wco n�,oreww,vma iw�,wa wo��v nv ..v n, .,nir,o svrowe wn of�owvv rvvwevo,wa,oww,�rvu v�.,w�.wwio,od�owwa�w w�.��w�u wpm+v,�oov•im C� aEHOSNVdS Olvao :.d 3NAAO o All-l]DV=l IN3HJ013AM(INV HO2JV3S3d 'ONI 'OVqVqVZ:JS 0 Fl, S o o A-- o o a- Lu ol E U) < W 60 z M3 C) CA rc w w z o s a o lo Z C) o °O :J < < w Asz sr o J. o w /O ❑ 66 Z ol z 0 15o �8 C) wzz °a L o o U) 0 0- it 0 E CL a3HOSNV'89 01"D m z cl 233NM0 Q zr kllllOVzl I N3NJO-I�IAW(INV HO2JV3SM 'ONCOMMIe o-'01, Z 6 0 P: rs > LLI W 0 co O LU cl Z co co O C7 - O 233HOSINViJS Olv:fo :213NAAO o 0 zr T- kll-lIOVJ IN3VIdO13AM CINV HMJV3S3ZJ ,,O-,ot7 z 0 o w Lu 0 u) LA j, z CD z LL N LW z EL W F- LLI Z O 0 213HOSINb2J8 OlMdO z o q ul 2i3NMO J 1IIIOVJ IN3NJ013A34(INV HOZJV3S3a -ONI `OWWb2j8 "a O _• ui W -- � _= LU Z En CD co C9 Z, � O OJ --................._.. O Q w O CD N O LU Z LU Q - W _ r - - Z LUJ - - r 3NAAO ),Ll-llOVzl 1N3VVJO-13A3C](INV HOZJV3S3i:1 'ONI 'ONNVZJS Lu LLI ui w W 0) 0, 0 p CD (D z I I I z CD (D LU 0 0 w < Z z y < LU W Z z U) of .............. — OaSL6 N00311C)'ONVIHSv Y LOL 311n av0 301311S11AI OOL :V ° o N053NO'a NV HSV S _$ J' m O° 3f N3&V NOSY3ii3 JNI S10311HDA 3dVJSd NVI S31VIDOSSV(INV � t - �g= A1111DVd 1N3Wd013A3d 43NV 830v 31Nf1 ,,, o ° ., S � Jai p c' o -�NI' 9 J N•dld IVAOW18(INV N0I10310Nd 3381 ANVNI WI138d 4 c� v to 3 \ z \ Ivw3a of ' e �e3no �.. Nlvw n of oro+�zi bW38 Oi 000W SlIOtl3n00 $„ \ -------- NOL3310ad 3381 NIbW3a of a0� 009 ldp,+a OOOWWOUOo 11 11 Ola'1Sm � \ I y383GOI 81, tlVOOH �r 0�ryW3a 300 Zn 0 tlCOd 009 av00H01a1 snlndOd Z � ,"l�-• _ Nou v�anoH9laasmnaoe 1 itaOOW o 0_e. oN BNO=Oaa»a_ N° oul-0. a .—I aB ,3a. �'r/� OOON�NOU00 Sp AYOIN3ANI 33tl1 / �/0 1 OOOMNOLt009x °"O �un Ix3 °vo alp as m+1 +uvpwwe m= vnuq+ vgww uwu°po polwa(v oulEwwwuP UWeu w \1 ouMv+v vroieavS •hw 3a 018 w xix.ro..rv+B°wv o=l P;,o °vA°ma1Z �etlwl�pap a�pYa n��°'e��'P+wl+uwlaY n0110310 �j�4 1� ��• NVO NOVI3 Bb \\� NO 310ad vesv vulro a++o a +o 6upuol Iwo po Nv'xw xcm°°°l°w•iee°q.vv x=w uaa°l lr npu °°l nv oupyply wwa PUnvv w° vow Pwuv,eavvaNlswr"mpv=n wivwo lawxa aavu e=p�l vaa 3, /r/�// - 3a i 3388 /,Iwwulwv wuva B Y=v vyelvw luu a+o poe uuynwv ueyx.vwwjo l�4olv�p+au o�y�e=vvmvval vllf j �_.•✓ _ 1� � `•��8.,, *o�ineau � m�� aneNPw uw°+apan�w roa,.rvw+°aa,a eio„o'rtWZ�_m,awa,s aea�varmc3 a- ,`�Ijl, II wl,,,a I II ICI 1 I \\ 3oN3.c31 x l..�uawpz,w.,.,°,,.a,,°ryaaelw�nm�a+o-va ayaao Pau`o". I ! �� \� \``,� S'iIV130 N0110310dd 3]Lt uww^=°lv °N�Nw��n�wc�a°.oPV°lHa w°w=�=�e�e7 1111�I flf-- - �•:\ �tvuw=4lvoP Ywmeuv zuvylcapve�lo oaoccve.vua lou op -�1 \I I alll I III m �� H1�isa oewe wwiwua°aup�°j w 1' II I11 lulvl3n la) oNO„31 oonw°om�a+o,oowo s° 1 �1 -- I oapww poapauw oa m olwa x�P�o oe 111�II�1 UL_ uN313a Id _I �� l°��dyPO�k��w�oo amwoww=a°i�loluai�po I+III\I"- Ill —�� ���� olaon oeowvP wolp lwloa oq llvw a>Imluolaia aawm pw=lw odwvpuvlro I•III I �\� No �`` �� I II IiI I ♦`___--= _--____—_ �'���� ��`� S31ON NOLL03131d 33ii1 . 4{ � -.....9 319e93a\ � � i •.� I an-aNOz Vl yll anw 1se ..._ HSV,ulal � � F—NO U319aa 3381 e. II I 9Nwava 9 I d -- ^ a3waoasNVe1 ` 111IIlil{ ! oavoNV4s s� a '__ ,,- za.lolwi plp] 1 lll;i i `••� - I - 41I't ' VIII�` �'� _ -----------" 1 �•. \ I I 4114 7: �OZ-----' - � -• l y lr ! I' III IIII: vONV1se _ r `III - o0NY16G � S II I eeNBa3ne � —” O � it Itl� wa6 1 cW—� If 1 0350d0ad - OWONVIS[ �� —� 3N10N T,N 0Nb 03A3Atl05 IIdJ .... IooI P33� ,r N --- Y ,.."_-- p lVdl ijIl o_ I I I _ I I i aI d r (I j s3 6(3) 1 `+ I NO 310 o oz;gZ6 N00380'(INVIHSV LO?;3I1fiS'CVOd 3019 lislyq OOZ 3r.NIAV NOS43413r CqZ ONE SIDgi[HZ)NV 9dVOSONVI S3IVIDOSSV CNV AIIIIOVA IN3WdOl3A94 UNY H:MVM� 113OVS giNnvl 'owwv>jg O O -0 z zA, /;i mil ye g' \ `� I I I l / ;-P 2 'I g i2 N S E Hl 9 H Z S2 > oaSLb N053SO'o NV1HS`d r Noe3a0'oNIHSV LOZ 311n aV0 30131151 3f1N3At/NOSa31d3�LL6 :)NJ S1J31IHDNV 3dVJSONVJ S3IVIJOSS 4NV - = bg' _ A1I11�Vd 1N3 Wd 013A3Q dNV HOaV3S3b (V a3GovS -DNJ'owwvag o ^\: NVId 3111 3dVOSONVI AaV1,1IW113ad \tea 9 .'IIII r tVtla Lm�3A. yI \\III 111 IV fly -.- ,\\ SrvVbIInI N33$�du �� 3x3tloNO°c31 �III JII I- sllVm 9NI N I `,` \1111111 --� ,1 •-� 111111�I _ L11 uN�a d �--dvuaelaolsasdsla dlg.I If 1�1i 11 ea s -. x11111 - I III'I- b3N/9 _ orvI1NV�ldb aNV NSVtl1 �� ��_o d 3l - ru UI I 3 Ills I oN iS5 a31Na0j6Nba1 � � � -'\ I `JN Wd ativo d • 16111 - oatl V1S S� -'61HO113lod ONNISI%3 �I IIII IIII - IN°335 d �,I- 1 bMSNlNni3all i i 1 e°yn \ 6l hill l Ilr_i, \ Ikl I 3NO20 Vol ' 3N CNI—I . J 1 I �6d3 ---- — d s s Nb�sa s bd� I b�Nb o� . aE f I� / IF , -oao off°inrcde - r / ,` �� - / r 'au s1HOl3lod � � '•'r li /1 1. 1 - sNVUIm NiNrle aNV - s3lvN.sla1-� - ,�l oa9L6 N003ap'GNV1HSy ?;// c Noo3ap'oNV USy LO?;311nS'OVON 301311SIW OOZ - -'' o t7 0 3NN3Ab'NOSa3dd3('(LI JNI S1J311HJab'3dVJSONV"j S31vIJOSSf/0 N m�'.y f _ A1111JVd 1N3Wd O13A34 4NY HoNv3S3a (Y) a3°JVS 3lallb'j v'� - _ .., 'ONj'owwvag o J I.A"•V.� /;� naa3umoN. vxlvsaeanamovewns NVid 3dV:)SONVI kNvmlwll;adl NI v3alas Na3ns3n, us�onoo vaaales nli—noa IIS31zN3wnsnsioon3se \8LJ �nac 3lo+Oa slavin,Id slxroNaavO a3zllwnivN a3..oaoaa ab]3J 3SN3JNI Srv3aanJ305nL013001b0 N33aJa3n30350dOad l aaliivN tlxn 3dbaON00 H9NIad3w3os ldbN A3ltbn�Nn15 .A3,TOn unSa3CV Oxb Aairv303SO.f0ad �NOIlv00l xNtl0 00380 IOnOCS 03b'vL0 \ HSMa una3ee SNwul�a]a�s bl wa38-3,1nb3s vl=NI a3IHON'.3wv o3WlvnnibN 035odoad O �\ SSbtlJ38SC33 03NYN bS011dS'3T b3atl NOl.rv313C 0350nHH, v,n13S Oa100 NwlnNV v3N10000v3bnld5 S318vn S31tivn S33tl10NLLSIN3 dlSnxloNVN n000Nn0a0 /9:///\''' vLrvvlNbWt3eavJ a,va9N] 13axva olvd3w3IC�av ONVnaiN30350d tld � S31avn S31avn S33tll 133815 ONIi51x3 /� N/� 3NbN NOWVeOJ 3WbN]IiLLN31JS Aa]031MJ I—S 3w,m N-- —.—HISS nao0az» ,oewn.. x(/1 �`\- aN3o3,txina navnlwn3Ne - ox3aal3dei.avawlvaa /�� 11tl1300NI1NVid 0f1?JHS Z / I_11IV130�JNI1Nbld.3TJ1 t'. I \ W 1' - 313 OX 4 wao> 1 ImW nic ann Z \\. aomovwvo d VIII III Ill o3%dwl III II III III-III III III -I ooan3l� u3oxwaandaad.w JI Ill I Ell II1 f : \�� o� �I II II III.III II ll[I If III ccv3a A,tvioi 3e AS i_LI III ,11 f�'\cix 30tla903 IMa a ne�Ol6bOVtlo3oO BNDry l 1111-IIII IIII 0un13aN n H ura Xdol3nOW3a NO III T 711 i1 •�II � I ``\;�. ) nuHCns3u nvxs se,aas �. 3u nvHSllbe do eoiivs3doa II I ` 13nbd31a31na3D rvsios Iialil I- -S 313 \`, .IHJ,nwoNd :nw:zw�inw I L Sanbxs 03arven `-3ax3al3l 3wd0 xs Ne3naev 1 11111 I I - ///•\ rvM _ .LNMOa'd 1008136 X I I �.f_.---��,. �... d.LL:S33a1 �•.\\�\.',� ICI E3xb15000MS I II IIII 1 II / / T � _ \� HaN3n1oit31 orvlaroe rxl tlll � e Iql l s s 33. All,I a d 3 0 IIII ObVO u _ r 30108101Sb3av 0Nlrvv1a03S0eoad Ill 11 101b 8 Cal II, _- •' au$831 a0 _.- /�,\ M ONINOl,03 CNV Ol tro ae SlNVld rt^3N llb Ot AtlbdS a3�0 A'Nd�9 IIII '= dn1 S3]ei� / •'\;'+pa �i'Nn03 bO NtlbB ltn MaW iO[HLm Sb3atl NOlN3l30 NbH1 3Ytl / L3 a3Hl ON1NO,d IN"In'11a31vW IN—dO N0LLtl1 N.— ��Ill! - tllll N33 tl313 � - - .' ~' •- \ 1NV,dllb3n0addv tNH5 v,2811tl13Cb3d S8ntl50NVS33at TlblNVte�f �rvisx3,wnrv3,Hain,HJnOanHi„1nN�s<d,�Ntlrv3,a,oN„b:=N= �,b,ba^3,asn,e,osmia3„b1SNN33aAotl3a,tlsb�y3a3�;rd3�� I� bn bias, aabaN iS= ,- �, 31sb3a.�NiN�,lanaHSaN�33a1„b�nN3,e,osdoLi=oeWOJZI3Jb,e I � Ijll If S310N \ Ii V abd ONYASLLrv3 iot101xvi .. \•..\ ' NN 1 JI VIII 1 Xave aNbnai sun l 1A15a3noJ Sw�alais ti3�1 Oxb S3 a3 s � P VIII '-..,� ___._.._-_ ':i \•'. 411I�� T I ll of II �� ,• III m. ..� � _ \._ 11 .- 't I : f IIII. I � •` ___- 'i � VIII = �oa s bd AiJ�ai �vbise aab Nvut� ... III i II Ij 1 oNl atlnbiN3 -�_._. -.J ., ! dus �`/'�•l 0 ��� it _ axt 8381 l ).'�• /�.:/I?/ 1- - - sNila eo z ariYN�.au1a r l ,”” ar / I 3 x3 � I mo- l / �9 t� � l ✓<t L AL.s331ury33n9a313 __ ni55 N Cabo I -- \ :'.•-•. - 33111�133va0ifl`3 3 .. ani l t � J i N01 N�30 / _ '� 3NI nla3do 1 I I CID I S31—SIT j� x`i — _•__ - �._-_—.__—.—___'__�M.,.._ _—.�_.�---�.� .,.,nrol osa ���'IIar I/�� I t./. / :I,l : -�.._, .. ZONING PERMIT APPLICATION Planning Division ,,(( c r Y Of' 51 Winburn Way,Ashland OR 97520 FILE -ASHLAND 541-488-5305 Fax 541-488-6006 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Pursuing LEEDO Certification? ❑YE5 aNO Street Address �7 ' �P�a�s�� A+��• Assessors Map No.391E I L4 A G Tax Lot(s) /010 /0 2_ Zoning—M_[ 61 _ Comp Plan Designation APPLICANT Name G fZ A 1 lr 1S 4z-A n►t,;6*c rL_ _Phone Sell.�f 8�. q$��$® E-Mail 46,*on4c heel r4onP9v•c,an, Address 550 City A sj-4 t_^m b Zip 411 7 S ZO PROPERTY OWNER Name r-9-'k tW l3 f&-A eA 64*wfl- Phone 5" 1 44$'x• 15'5_5' E-Mail a- c s-, Address 5 o Cc.o% ( tr City Ae f4" JO Zip q 7S*'2a SURVEYOR,ENGINEER,ARCHITECT,LA—NDSCAPE ARCHITECT,OTHER Title Ar MG#1rWC-r` Name PLArwr V&-r- PhoneSq/.Y 60, S ZOO E-Malls o kj'slIVS0�+/1o►4fle.`o o-, Address r- A .- 3 city A-s q"4,yo Zip 175-2 a 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. I 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.I further understand that if this request is subsequently contested,the burden will be on me to establish. 1) that 1 produced sufliclent 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 regard will result most likely in not only the request being set aside,but also possibly in my structures being built in reliance thereon being required to ba Wnse, If i have any doubts,I am advised to seek competent professional advice and assistance. Applicant's Signature Date As rgDjgitall sl ned by Craig 6ram,claer cl lama gfflaWood the complete application and its consequences to me as a property ow ou=Brammo,email=cababrammo.Com, C=US. I Oate:20Ll1j2.0510:57:53-08'00' Property Owner's Signature(required) Date ITo ba mmpet2d by a?f Slag 1 Date Received, / 9 - 2 d l 1 Zoning Permit Type Filing Fee$ 1 �P OVER 0 C::'contnt-deiWannin¢li'oms&SfandnmsWnina Permit Apv]intion,da e s �ry m Job Address: 777 JEFFERSON AVE Contractor: ASHLAND OR 97520 Address: A Owner's Name: BRAMMO MOTORSPORTS LLC O Phone: F N 06556 State Lic No: Customer#: BRAMMO MOTORSPORTS LLC `= City Lic No: L' Applicant: 550 CLOVER LN R Address; ASHLAND OR 97520 A C Sub-Contractor: A Phone: (541)482-9555 Address: N. Applied: 12102/2011 T issued: Expires: 05/30/2012 R" Phone: State Lic No: Maplot: 391el4ac102 City Lic No: DESCRIPTION: Brammo Research& Design Facility UALtJATl�N I Occupancy Type Construction Units Rate Amt Actual Arnt Constuction Description Total for Valuation: MECHANICAL ELECTRECAL STRUCTtJRAt i� RAh T FEE,L3ET ' Fee Description Amount Fee Description Amount Commercial Site Review(type2) 16,913.00 i CNDITfONS OF;APPRQVAL „,, f F f F I COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tel: 541-488-5305 20 East Main St, Fax: 541-488.5311 Ashland,OR 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 umvmasWand.or.us Inspection Request Line: 541-552-2080 C I T Y OF LA