Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStrawberry_541_PA-2012-00981 CITY OF September 12, 2012 Paul Conflitti 8400 126' Place, SE Newcastle, WA 98056 Doug Irvine 2113 Emigrant Creels Rd - Ashland, OR 97520 RE: Planning Action #2012-00981 Notice of Final Decision At its meeting of September 11, 2012, based on the record of the public meetings and hearings on this matter, the Ashland Planning Commission approved your request for a Variance to the lot coverage limitations of the Rural Residential Zoning District for the property located at 541 Strawberry Lane Assessor's Map # 39 lE 08 BD; Tax Lot 102. The Ashland Planning Commission approved and signed the Findings, Conclusions and Orders document, on September 11, 2012. The Planning Commission decision.becomes effective on the 13ffi day after the Notice of Final Decision is mailed. Approval is valid for a period of 12 months. 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 SI Winbum. 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 ($325), 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 To[: 541-088-5305 51 Winbum Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800,735-2900 www,ashland,or.us SECTION 18.108.110 Appeal to Council. A. Appeals of Type 11 decisions - shall be initiated by a notice of appeal filed with the City Administrator. The standard Appeal Pee 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. 1. 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 noticc~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. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tek 641488-5305 51 Winbum Way Fax, 541-552-2050 ` WA I Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 MANF www,ashland.or,us 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 limited 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 recommendation 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 18.10 8.070.B. 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: 541-488.5305 51 Winbum Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY; 800-735-2900 vnmashland.onus BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION September 11, 2012 IN THE MATTER OF PLANNING ACTION #2012-00981, A REQUEST FOR } A VARIANCE TO THE LOT COVERAGE LIMITATIONS OF THE RURAL j RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 541 ) STRAWBERRY LANE. AS PART OF THE REQUEST, THE OWNER OF THE ) FINDINGS, CONTIGUOUS PROPERTY AT 48 WESTWOOD STREET HAS AGREED TO ) CONCLUSIONS DEED RESTRICT THEIR PROPERTY'S ALLOWED LOT COVERAGE TO ) AND ORDERS OFFSET THE ADDITIONAL COVERAGE REQUESTED FOR 541 ) STRAWBERRY LANE. ) } APPLICANT: Conflitti, Paul and Irvine, Doug (applicants) ) Mark Knox of Urban Development Services (agent) ) RECITALS : 1) Tax lot #104 of Map 39 1E 08 BD is located at 541 Strawberry Lane and is zoned Rural Residential (RR-.5-P). Tax lot #102 of Map 39 1E 08 BD is located at 48 Westwood Street and is zoned Rural Residential (RR-.5-P). . 2) The applicants are requesting a variance to the lot coverage limitations of the Rural Residential zoning district for the property located at 541 Strawberry Lane. As part of the request, the owner of the contiguous property located at 48 Westwood Street has agreed to deed restrict their property's allowed lot coverage to offset the additional coverage requested for 541 Strawberry Lane, Proposed site improvements are outlined on the plans on file at the Department of Community Development. 3) The criteria for a variance are described in Chapter 18,100.020 as follows: A. That there are unique or unusual circumstances which apply to this site which do not typically apply elsewhere. B. That the proposal's benefits will be greater than any negative impacts on the development of the adjacent uses; and will f rrther the purpose and intent of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan of the City. C. That the circumstances or conditions have not been willfully or purposely self-imposed. 4) The Planning Commission, following proper public notice, held a public hearing on August 14, 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 follows: SECTION 1. EXHIBITS PA #2012-00981 September 11, 2012 Page 1 For the purposes of reference to these Findings, the following index of exhibits, data and testimony is 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 for a variance to the lot coverage limitations of the Rural Residential zoning district for the property located at 541 Strawberry Lane meets all applicable criteria for a variance as described in Chapter 18.100. 2.3 The Planning Commission finds that the unusual street configuration creates a situation where is it uncomfortable to back an automobile out of the driveway of the subject property. The unusual street configuration is created by the combination of three factors including that the property is located on the curvilinear portion of Strawberry Lane, there is a nearby 90 degree bend in Strawberry/Westwood, and the property is near an offset intersection for Strawberry Lane and Birdsong Lane. The unusual circumstance is exacerbated by a lack of traffic control or caution signs at the transition of Westwood Street to Strawberry Lane, and the nearby intersection of Birdsong Lane and Strawberry Lane. For these reasons, the applicants propose a driveway configuration with a turnaround area so that drivers can exit the driveway in a forward manner with a clear view of any oncoming traffic. Review of city street maps identifies a handful of streets with 90 degree bends throughout Ashland (e.g. Roca, Ashland/Gutluie, Bellview, Cambridge, Glenwood, Herbert/Jennifer/Heather, Village Square, Catalina), however most of these streets are fairly straight, not curvilinear, and it is less common to have an intersection near the 90 degree bend. 2.4 The Planning Commission finds that the applicants' proposed use of pervious paving for the 1,244 square feet of driveway/parking area and pool perimeter is a benefit of the application. This pervious paving should allow storm water to slowly percolate into the soil rather than creating a situation where excess impervious surface creates additional surface runoff that is directed into the city's piped system or into creeks. The applicants propose to install the driveway, parking area and paved area surrounding the pool in "Hydro-Flo Technology Pavers" which according to the application materials allow one hundred PA #2012-00981 September 11, 2012 Page 2 percent surface permeability. As a result, all storm water would flow through the paver areas and percolate into the ground below. The breakdown of the square footage of the proposed coverage indicates that 19 percent of the coverage would include impervious surface in the form of the footprints for the house and garage as well as porches and the swimming pool, and 5.7 percent would be in permeable pavers in the area of the driveway, parking area, and pool perimeter. The application asserts that if the lot coverage calculation were limited to impervious surface, then the proposed home would result in 19 percent coverage, which would fall below the maximum lot coverage of 20 percent of lot area that is allowed in the Rural Residential zoning district. Lot coverage is however specifically defined in AMC 18.08.160 to include parking areas, driveways and other solid surfaces, necessitating the inclusion of the area of permeable pavers in lot coverage calculations. The Planning Commission finds that lot coverage requirements generally serve two purposes. First, historically the coverage of land by buildings and related paving, which essentially equates to the density and bulk of development, has been regulated in residential settings by allowable lot coverage and by requirements to provide minimum depths for front, side and rear yards. This approach developed as early as the 1930's, and resulted in a style and character of development that continues to the present day. Secondly, the amount of land that is not covered by buildings and paving allows for the infiltration of storm water and surface drainage into the ground, and thereby retains them within the existing natural systems. With this in mind, it is in keeping with the neighborhood development pattern to stay within a reasonable proximity of the allowable lot coverage for the district in considering a variance request. The Planning Commission finds that the longevity and on-going functionality of permeable paving systems are directly related to their proper installation, maintenance, and if necessary replacement. The Commission has accordingly included. conditions that. the applicants provide an evaluation of the suitability of the installation from an engineer prior to building permit issuance; provide written verification that the system is installed according to the manufacturer's specifications before the residence is occupied; provide a recorded deed restriction for 541 Strawberry Lane requiring maintenance of the permeable paving system in perpetuity and specifying it is a violation of the planning approval to replace it with any impervious surface. I The Commission further finds that in addition to the use of permeable pavers, the application indicates that the owner of 48 Westwood Street has agreed to limit the future lot coverage on this undeveloped lot to 15.3 percent to offset the additional 43 percent overage on 541 Strawberry Lane. This will be accomplished by a cooperative agreement between the neighboring property owners to place a deed restriction on the contiguous property at 48 Westwood Street. The decrease in lot coverage for 48 Westwood will result in a total amount of lot coverage between these two lots which conforms to the maxiinurn allowed lot coverage for the zoning district. The Planning Commission finds that the combination of the two factors - the pervious paving and the cormnensurate decrease of 4.7 percent in the lot coverage allowed for 48 Westwood Street - will negate the potential negative impacts to the surrounding area. PA #2012-00981 September 11, 2012 Page 3 The Commission binds a benefit of the proposal is that the design of the driveway will allow drivers to exit to the street in a forward manner with a full view of oncoming traffic, hi addition to the unusual street configuration, the driveway will slope downhill fiom the street which will make exiting out of the driveway in a forward manner a further advantage. The property slopes downhill away from the street, and the application states that the home is expected to be slightly below street grade in order to reduce earth movement and retaining walls on the downhill side of the home. In addition, the garage has been designed so that the garage door will not be oriented to the street which is generally considered positive in that it emphasizes the orientation of the home to the street, and makes the garage and auto area a secondary design element. 2.5 The Planning Commission finds that conditions necessitating the variance, the lot location and street configuration, are not self-imposed. In 1986, the city obtained the property that resulted in Strawberry Lane and Westwood being extended and connected. Subsequently, the City constructed the street connections and also divided the area at the northeast corner of the StrawbeiiylWestwood intersection. Birdsong Lane was part of a subdivision that was approved in 1998, SECTION 3. DECISION 3.1 Based on the record of the Public Hearing on this matter, the Planning Commission concludes that the proposal for a variance to the lot coverage limitations of the Rural Residential zoning district for the property located at 541 Strawberry Lane is supported by evidence contained within the record. Therefore, based on our overall conclusions, and upon the proposal being subject to each of the following conditions, we approve Planning Action #2012-00981, Further, if any one or more of the conditions below are found to be invalid, for any reason whatsoever, then Planning Action #2012-00981 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 herein. 2) That prior to the issuance of a building permit for 541 Strawberry Lane: a, That a deed restriction shall be prepared for review and approval of Ashland Planning Division and Legal Department limiting the maximum lot coverage for 48 Westwood Street to 15.3 percent, or to the standard 20 percent coverage allowed less the amount of lot coverage overage on 541 Strawberry, whichever is less, in accordance with City of Ashland Planning Approval #2012-00981. The deed restriction shall include the City as a party with right of approval, and shall be recorded by the applicant. Evidence of the recorded deed restriction shall be submitted to the Ashland Planning Division. PA #2012-00981 September 11, 2012 Page 4 b. That the lot coverage for 541 Strawberry Lane shall be a maximum of 24.7 percent with 19 percent coverage (4,152 square feet) in impervious surface area and 5.7 percent (1,244 square feet) in permeable pavers. The building permit submittals shall clearly indicate the amount of proposed coverage, and delineate the areas of impervious surface area and permeable pavers with total square footage called out. , c. That the permeable paver system shall allow 100 percent percolation of storm and surface water as indicated in the application. The building permit submittals shall include a report fiom a licensed engineer confirming the system will work in the subject location, and any installation requirements necessary to insure the system will function properly. d That a deed restriction shall be prepared for review and approval of the Ashland Planning Division requiring the permeable paving to be maintained to function according to manufacturers specifications in perpetuity, stipulating that the permeable paving must remain in place and it would be a violation of Planning Action ##2012-00981 to remove and replace with impervious paving. e. That an engineered storm drainage plan addressing pre-development and post- development peak flow, and mitigation as required for any increase in post-development peak flow shall be submitted for review and approval of the Ashland Planning and Engineering Divisions. i f. That all conditions of the partition approval, Planning Action 2004-031, including the j following shall be satisfied: i. That a residential sprinkler system shall be installed, and the installation of a new hydrant in the event any building constructed exceeds the minimum distance from existing hydrants. ii. That all new structures comply with City's Solar Access chapter 18.70, and shall meet Solar Standard "A." 1 iii. That final location of the driveway curb-cut is clearly delineated on the building permit submittals, and approved by the Ashland Planning Division prior to the issuance of a Miscellaneous Concrete Permit for installation of the driveway apron by the Public Works Department. i 3) That prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for 541 Strawberry Lane: I a. That all conditions of the partition approval, Planning Action #2004-031, shall be satisfied including the installation of street trees, located one per 30 feet of street frontage, shall be installed along the property's street frontage. Street trees shall be chosen from the Recommended Street Tree List and shall be installed in accordance with the specifications noted in the Recommended Street Tree List, The street trees shall be irrigated. PA #2012-00981 September 11, 2012 Page 5 b. A report shall be submitted from the project engineer or a qualified licensed professional such as a landscape architect verifying that the permeable paving system was installed according to the specifications included in the initial report from the soil engineer submitted with the building permit, Q September 11, 2012 Planning Commission Approval Date ~I i I I E PA #2012-00981 September 11, 2012 Page 6 UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Approval of Findings for PA-2012.00740,160 Lithia Way. Ex Parte Contact No ex parte contact was reported. Commissioners MarshlHeesacker mis to approve the Findings for PA-2012.00740. Roll Call Vote: Commissioners Brown, Dawkins, Heesacker, Kaplan, Marsh, Miller and Mindlin, YES. Motion passed 7-0. TYPE II PUBLIC HEARING A. PLANNING ACTION: PA-2012-00981 SUBJECT PROPERTIES: 541 Strawberry Lane & 48 Westwood Street APPLICANTS: Paul Conflitti and Doug Irvine, property owners; Mark Knox of Urban Development Services as agent DESCRIPTION: The application involves a request for a Variance to the lot coverage limitations of the Rural Residential zoning district for the property located at 541 Strawberry Lane. The maximum lot coverage allowed for the RR-.5 district Is 20 percent, and a 24.7 percent coverage is requested, As part of the request, the owner of a contiguous property located at 48 Westwood Street has agreed to deed restrict their property's allowed lot coverage with a commensurate reduction to offset the additional coverage requested for 541 Strawberry Lane. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION, Rural Residential; ZONING: RR-.5-P; ASSESSOR'S MAP 391 E 08131); TAX LOT#: 541 Strawberry Lane Is Tax Lot 4104; 48 Westwood Street is Tax Lot #102. Commissioner Mindlin read aloud the public hearing procedures for land use hearings. i Ex Parte Contact Commissioners Heesacker, Miller, and Kaplan reported site visits. No ex parte contact was reported. Staff Report Planning Manager Maria Harris stated the application before them is a variance request to increase the lot coverage from 20% to 24.7%, and to offset the increase 48 Westwood has agreed to reduce its lot coverage by 4.7%. Ms. Harris displayed photos of the site and explained the proposal is to develop a single family home; the house, garage, and pool would be impervious, and permeable pavers would be used for the driveway, parking area, and the area around the swimming pool, Ms. Harris reviewed the variance criteria and the information put forward by the applicants. Criterion #1: There are unique or unusual circumstances which apply to this site which do not typically apply elsewhere. Ms. Harris stated the applicants assert the unique or unusual circumstance is a hazard that is created by the street and lot configuration and the lack of traffic control or caution signs. She stated the application states the 90° bend where Westwood turns into Strawberry, the intersection of Strawberry and Birdsong across from the properly, and the location of the lot on the curved portion of Strawberry all contribute to this hazard. For these reasons, the applicants have proposed a driveway with a turnaround area so that drivers can pull out of the driveway in a forward manner so as to be able to see oncoming traffic. 'Ms. Harris stated staff is cautious about using street and lot configuration as a reason for a variance, as there are some unusual street and lot configurations in Ashland, but there are not very many streets that have a 90° bend, plus a curvature in the road, plus an adjacent intersection. She stated for these reasons, staff believes the Planning Commission could make a finding that j this is a unique situation. i Criterion #2: The proposals benefits will be greater than any negative impacts on the development of the adjacent uses; and will further the purpose and intent of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan of the City. Ms. Harris stated staff believes the use of permeable pavers and the decrease in lot coverage for 48 Westwood will negate any negative impacts to the surrounding area. In addition, staff looked at the issue of character and believes the proposed home will fit it with the surrounding area. Ashland Planning Commission August 14, 2012 Page 2 of 4 Criterion #3: The circumstances or conditions have not been willfully or purposely self-imposed. Ms. Harris stated the unusual circumstance stated in the application is the street configuration and the location of the lot, and these items are not self-imposed. Ms. Harris concluded her presentation and noted the minor corrections to the proposed conditions of approval that were distributed at the beginning of the meeting. Questions of Staff Staff was asked to clarify why some of the lots on Birdsong have more than 20% coverage. Ms. Harris explained in performance standards subdivisions the total site is looked at rather than calculating lot coverage per lot, and open space above the minimum required can be allocated back to the lots. Comment was made questioning whether the pavers would stay in place on a slope. Ms. Harris noted the conditions of approval require a licensed engineer to confirm the system will work in the subject location and for certification to be provided that they have been installed properly. It was questioned if the pavers will be 100% permeable as claimed. Ms. Harris stated this would be a good question for the applicant. Staff was asked to comment on the Hitt Road action that came before the Commission a couple years ago, Ms. Harris explained the application for Hitt Road that came before the Commission in 2010 was approved with 47.47% lot coverage. This figure j included a shared driveway that ran through the property and with it removed the coverage was approximately 36%. Applicant's Presentation Paul ConflittilApplicant and Mark KnoxlAppl[cant's Representative addressed the Commission. Mr. Knox explained their variance request is based on the following reasons. 1) the sharp intersection of Westwood and Strawberry, 2) the intersection of Birdsong and Strawberry, 3) the curvature of Strawberry, and 4) the slope of the property. He explained the house is intended to sit back from the street and because of the slope it will be below street grade. He stated it will not be easy to back out of the driveway and see oncoming traffic and because of these factors the owners would like to be able to enter the roadway in a forward manner. Mr. Knox explained the property to the north will be deed restricted to limit its lot coverage and this was done to mitigate the proposed coverage increase for 541 Strawberry. Regarding the 100% permeable claim, Mr. Knox requested some flexibility with this item, He also noted the neighborhood meeting that was held and stated those in attendance were positive about this proposal and the design of the home, Comment was made that the outdoor spaces seem small compared to the house. Mr. Knox stated when they first drew up the plans there was more patio space and the coverage amount was 28%, but as they went through this process they tried to mitigate and request as minimal a variance as possible. Public Testimony Catherine Dimino/423 Strawberry/Read aloud a prepared statement and submitted it into the record. (See attached Exhibit #2012-01) j Applicant's Rebuttal Mark Knox/Stated this is a unique circumstance, there is justification for this request, and cited the four issues mentioned in his presentation. He stated lot coverage is arbitrary and you do not always achieve the best results by having a fixed number. He also explained that 48 Westwood would likely develop as a two-story house with a shared driveway. He stated they believe they have justified the variance straight up, but have included the reduction of lot coverage for 48 Westwood in order to better their chances of approval. Commissioner Mindlin closed the public hearing and record at 8:10 p.m. Deli berationslDecis!on It was questioned if the transfer from 48 Westwood would make that lot smaller than the minimum lot size. Staff clarified they are only transferring coverage, and therefore the lot will still comply with the requirements. Ashland Planning Commission August 94, 2012 Page 3 of 4 Commissioners Heesacker/Marsh m/s to approve the variance for lot coverage and to deed restrict 48 Westwood. DISCUSSION: Commissioner Heesacker stated the variance request is weak, but he supports the two neighbors working together. Commissioner Marsh stated she would be wining to exclude 48 Westwood from this approval, but believes the transfer of densities is a reasonable way to proceed. She also commented on lot coverage and stated in other communities this only applies to the building. Commissioner Dawkins stated he supports the application and the home will fit in with that neighborhood, but does not find the variance argument put forward by the applicant very compelling. Commissioner Brown noted two typographical errors in the revised conditions of approval (2.d "That a deed restriction shall be prepared... and 2.f.iii u... for installation of the driveway apron by the Public Works Department) and Heesacker and Marsh approved this as a friendly amendment. Commissioner Miller voiced her agreement with Heesacker and said she is not convinced by the applicant's argument for the variance, but likes Westwood having a smaller footprint and likes that the owners are working together. Commissioner Mindlin stated it is not appropriate for them to apply pervious pavers as a mitigation factor when this measure was specifically rejected by the City Council a few years ago. She stated the applicants should be looking at other ways to mitigate on site and she is unconvinced by their unusual factors argument. Mindlin stated it appears the commissioners are not convinced the applicants have met the criteria, but support the trade-off between the lots, and asked if there was a way for the findings to capture this. Commissioner Marsh stated she is uncomfortable with this discussion and in order to approve this request they must find the applicant has met the criteria. She stated it is not the strongest argument she has seen, but believes the street layout is unusual, the benefits will be greater than the impacts, and the conditions have not been self imposed. Roll Call Vote: Commissioners Kaplan, Marsh, Brown, Miller, and Heesacker, YES, Commissioners Dawkins and Mindlin, NO, Motion passed 5-2. Request was made for staff to put lot coverage and permeability back on the agenda for further discussion. Ms. Harris clarified this is on the list of discussion items for the Unified Code Project. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, April Lucas, Administrative Supervisor i I f 1 3 t E Ashland Planning Commission August 14, 2072 Page 4 of 4 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' coMUnefits 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. G) You may give written comments 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. Nam j ICS ~t et t YV~ 1 ~Vo- (please print) r.. J a vv, Address (no P.O. Box) ! . PI1011 2 5 L~ Z- Email '.jr Y'1'? i rAD C..:.' 6 r . . Tonight's Meeting Date u c[ Regular Meeting Agenda item numbei- V 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 form 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 during the normal order of proceedings. Written Comments/Challenge: e? co 02/4(1, The Public Meeting Law requires that all city meetings are open to the public. Oregon latw does not alhmrys require that the public be permitted to speak. T{1e flshlrnld Plalnling ComJnission gefter•rrtlj) invites the public to speak on agenda Items and during public foi-itin on non-agenda items unless tune constraints hinit public testhnony. No person has an absolute right to speak or' participate in every phase of a proceeding. Please r'esl)ect the of-dei- of pi-oceedrngS for- piiblic hear•nJgs and strictly follolt, the directions of the presiding (?fficer. Behavior or actions rt,hich are unreasonably loud or disruptive are disi-espec(ftd, and may constitute disorderly conduct. Offenders it,ill be requested to lem,e the room. Comments and statements by speakers do not represent the opinion of the City Council, City Officers or employees or the City of Ashland. City of Ashland August 14, 2412 Planning riAfhft RXtirnis Z.O X42, Catherine Dimino M ONL 423 Strawberry Lane"? ~'2 STAFF Re: PA 2012-00981 Four (4) lots were created as part of a rolling partition that came before the Planning Commission in 2004 and 2007. There were neighbors who expressed a number of concerns at the initial meeting (please see May 11, 2004 Planning Commission Regular Meeting minutes). The city partitioned the lot so they could sell 4 legal lots. When addressing partitioning in 2004, Director McLaughlin mentioned that the property is relatively fiat, and there are no significant natural features. The 2004 staff report stated that "Each lot complies with the minimum lot size." Regarding this application, the proper thing to do is to apply for a lot line adjustment. However, I assume that's not possible since 48 Westwood would fail to meet the city's code for the minimum lot size (18.16.040 A). Where does the code allow the city to transfer lot coverage to other lots that have been partitioned? I understand transferring coverage to lots in the same subdivision is allowed when there is/are.common open space. area(s). By transferring lot coverage via a deed restriction, this is .effectively changing the minimum lot size. If the variance for 541 Strawberry Lane has merit, there is no need to encumber 48 Westwood Street. The variance code (18.100.020 C) requires that the circumstances or conditions have not been willfully or purposely self-imposed. Regarding whether this is self-imposed, there are other designs that allow the applicant to exit the lot without backing out. The question is a tradeoff [ between what is important to homeowners of a lot. Do they want a larger driveway, a different driveway design, a large home, swimming pool, etc.? The variance code also states (18.100.020 B) that the proposal's benefits will be greater than any negative impacts on the development of the adjacent uses; and will further the purpose and intent of this ordinance-and the Comprehensive Plan of the City. Encumbering 48 Westwood Street is 7 Planning Department, 51 Winbui, ay, Ashland, Oregon 97520 C I T Y O 541-488-5305 Fax: 641-552-2050 wwVashland.or,us TTY: 1-800-735-2900 PLANNING ACTION: PA-2012-00981 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 549 Strawberry Lane & 48 Westwood Street OWNERIAPPLICANT: Paul Conflitti and Doug Irvine, property owners Mark Knox of Urban Development Services as agent DESCRIPTION: The application involves a request for a Variance to the lot coverage limitations of the Rural Residential zoning district for the property located at 549 Strawberry Lane. The maximum lot coverage allowed for the RR-.5 district is 20 percent, and a 24.7 percent coverage is requested. As part of the request, the owner ofa contiguous property located at 48 Westwood Street has agreed to deed restrict their property's allowed lot coverage with a commensurate reduction to offset the additional coverage requested for 541 Strawberry Lane. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Rural Residential; ZONING: RR-.5-P; ASSESSOR'S MAP 391E 08BD; TAX LOT 541 Strawberry Lane is Tax Lot #904; 48 Westwood Street is Tax Lot #102, ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: August 1, 2012 at 7800 PM, Ashland Civic Center PA #2012-00981 SUBJECT PROPERTY _ 48 WESTWOOD ST FA 02012-00981 SUBJECT PROPERTY 1~3 541 STRAWBERRY LN tit 1 j tiTM,S'~ EPJiYi r.! f tl - ~ 1 ti I 0 12525 ~SfI Feet F~+d • -4 fe r-fCa Cc MlY. na a 0100Mc 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, Oregon. 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 constitutional 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. 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 reasonable cost, if requested. All materials are available at the Ashland Planning Department, Community Development and Engineering Services, 51 Winbum Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520. During the Public }searing, 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 Administrator's office at 541-488-6002 (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 CFR 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. VARIANCE 18A 00.020 Application The owner or his agent may make application with the Staff Advisor. Such application shall be accompanied by a legal description of the property and plans and elevations necessary to show the proposed development. Also to be included with such application shall be a statement and evidence showing that all of the following circumstances exist: A. That there are unique or unusual circumstances which apply to this site which do not typically apply elsewhere. 8. That the proposal's benefits will be greater than any negative impacts on the development of the adjacent uses; and will further the purpose and intent of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan of the City. (ORD 2425,1987). C. That the circumstances or conditions have not been willfully or purposely self-imposed. (ORD 2775,1996) E i I I ASHLAND PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT August 14, 2012 PLANNING ACTION: 2012-00981 APPLICANT: Paul Conflitti (applicant, 541 Strawberry Lane) Doug Irvine (applicant, 48 Westwood Street) Mark Knox of Urban Development Services (agent) LOCATION: 541 Strawberry Lane (39 1E 08BD Tax Lot 4104) 48 Westwood Street (39 1E 08BD Tax Lot #102) ZONE DESIGNATION: RR-.S-P COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Rural Residential, Performance Standards (P) Overlay APPLICATION DEEMED COMPLETE: August 6, 2012 120-DAY TIME LIMIT: December 4, 2012 ORDINANCE REFERENCE: 18.16 Rural Residential 18.100 Variances REQUEST: The application involves a request for a variance to the lot coverage limitations of the Rural Residential zoning. district for.the property located at 541 Strawberry Lane. As part of the request, the owner of a contiguous property located at 48 Westwood Street has agreed to deed restrict their property's allowed lot coverage to offset the additional coverage requested for 541 Strawberry Lane. 1. Relevant Facts A. Background - History of Application I In 1986, the City of Ashland acquired a 12.67 acre lot which was later divided into several larger parcels (PA 86-129 and PA 86-128), one of which was subsequently divided to create four Y2 acre lots including the subject properties at 541 Strawberry Lane and 48 Westwood Street. The original 12.67 acre parcel was acquired to serve in a land trade with a property owner on Hitt Road for the siting of a City water reservoir. As part of the planning actions in 1986, the City provided a street dedication for Westwood Street F and Strawberry Lane along the west and south sides of the subject properties and reserved ten acres for use as a park/natural area. The ten-acre portion from this original action is located west of Westwood Street, remains in City ownership, is identified as a natural area on the open space plan, and includes the western fork of Weights Creek. Planning Action 2012-00981 Ashland Planning Division -Staff Report Applicant: Urban Development Services[Conflitli Page 1 of 8 i In 1999 and 2000, the Ashland Parks & Recreation Commission considered the 2.09-acre parent parcel of the four properties at the northeast corner of the intersection of Westwood/Strawberry for inclusion in the 2000-2010 Open Space Plan. The Commission determined that given the ten-acre piece to the west which had already been created as parks property there was limited value in acquiring additional park land. Therefore, although nominated, the parent parcel was not included in the Parks and Open Space Plan. In February 2004 the city filed application PA-2004-031 for a three-lot partition of the parent parcel which created the property at 541 Strawberry Lane. That application was called up to a public hearing, but was ultimately approved by the Planning Commission in June 2004. In June 2007, the city filed an application PA-2007-00980 to further divide one of the parcels created as part of the 2004 partition, which created the property at 48 Westwood Street. That application was administratively approved for review at the July 10, 2007 Hearings Board meeting, but was subsequently called up to a public hearing by a neighbor. The application was ultimately approved in October 2007. There are no other planning actions of record for this site. B. Detailed Description of the Site and Proposal Both properties are located near the intersection of Westwood/Strawberry, on the east side of Westwood Street. The properties as well as the surrounding area is located in the Rural Residential zoning district. The property requesting the Variance to the lot coverage requirements is located at 541 Strawberry Lane (Tax Lot #104), and is generally rectangular with the exception of the curved frontage along Strawberry Lane. The parcel is vacant, one-half acre in size, and is described by the applicants as containing no notable natural features.with the.exception of two small trees. The parcel has an approximate 13 percent northeast slope. The property transferring lot coverage is located at 48 Westwood Street (Tax Lot #102), and is trapezoidal in shape. The parcel is vacant, one-half acre in size, and is described by the applicants as being devoid of any significant natural features such as trees, creeks or rock- outcroppings. The parcel has air approximate ten percent northeast facing slope, The Proposal The application proposes a cooperative application which would increase the lot coverage of 541 Strawberry Lane from the permitted 20 percent up to 24.7 percent by providing a commensurate reduction in the lot coverage that would be allowed on the contiguous property at 48 Westwood Street. The net lot coverage for the two parcels, when considered together, would not exceed 20 percent. j 1 As part of the proposal, the property at 48 Westwood Street would be deed restricted with the lesser coverage, and the property at 541 Strawberry Lane would limit all lot coverage besides the proposed buildings and swimming pool to permeable "Hydro-Flo Technology Pavers". Planning Action 2012-00981 Ashland Planning Division - Staff Report Applicant: Urban Development Services/Confllt€i Page 2 of 8 The application explains that the additional coverage is to construct a single-story home which would accommodate aging in place for a family member with accessibility constraints. The breakdown of the square footage of the proposed coverage indicates that 19 percent of the coverage would include impervious surface ( at total of 4,152 square feet for the house, porches, garage and swimming pool), and 5.7 percent would be in permeable pavers (a total of 1,244 square feet for driveway/parking area, pool perimeter). The perimeter area around the pool is to provide an ADA-accessible surrounding walkway. 11. Project Impact The proposed variance results in an increase in lot coverage from the allowed 20 percent of 4,356 square feet to the proposed 24.7 percent of 5,396 square feet. The proposed increase in lot coverage is 1,040 square feet, or an approximately 24 percent increase in the allowed coverage. Chapter 18.108 Procedures specifies that a variance that increases lot coverage 10 percent and over requires a Type II procedure. Since the proposal is to increase the allowed coverage by 24 percent, the application requires a Type II procedure with a public hearing at the Planning Commission. A. Variance Staff's evaluation of the project is organized below using the approval criteria for a variance. 1. That them am unique or unusual circumstances rphich appl3) to this site rphich rio not typically apply elseWiel'e. The application states that the unique or unusual circumstance is "a hazard for drivers" that is created by the street configuration and "lack of traffic control or caution signs" surrounding 541 Strawberry. The intersection of Westwood Street and Strawberry Lane is described as "a 90 degree intersection, but without any traffic control or caution signs." Additionally, the curve in Strawberry Lane adjacent to the frontage of 541 Strawberry, and the nearby intersection of Birdsong Lane and Strawberry Lane are described as creating two additional conflict points. For these reasons, the proposed driveway has been configured with a turnaround area so that drivers can pull out of the driveway in a forward manner so as to be able to see oncoming traffic. In a review of the city street map, there are a handfirl of streets with 90 degree bends throughout Ashland (e.g. Roca, Ashland/Guthrie, Bellview, Cambridge, Glenwood, Herbert/Jennifer/Heather, Village Square, Catalina). Most of these streets are fairly straight, and not curvilinear, and it is less common to have an intersection near the 90 degree bend. Planning Action 2092-00981 Ashland Planning Division - Staff Report Applicant: Urban Development Services/ConPitt! Page 3 of 8 2. That the proposal `s benefits will be greater than any negative impacts on tine development of the adjacent uses, and W11 farther the purpose and intent of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan of the City. The proposal is to install the driveway/parking area and paved area surrounding the pool in "Hydro-Flo Technology Pavers" which according to the application materials allow one hundred percent surface permeability. As a result, presumably all storm water would flow through the paver areas and percolate into the ground below. The breakdown of the square footage of the proposed coverage indicates that 19 percent of the coverage would include impervious surface (house, porches, garage and swimming pool), and 53 percent would be in permeable pavers (driveway/parking area, pool perimeter). The application asserts that if the lot coverage calculation were limited to impervious surface, then the proposed home would result in 19 percent coverage, which would fall below the maximum lot coverage of 20 percent of lot area that is allowed in the Rural Residential zoning district. Lot coverage is defined in 18.08.160 as "Total area ofall buildings, parking areas, driveways, cis well as other solid stir faces that will not allow normal water infiltration to the ground. The coverage is exI)ressed cis a percentage of such are in relation to the total gross area of the lot or site. Landscaping which does not negatively impact the natural water retention and soil characteristics of the site shall not be deemed part of the lot or site coverage." Porous Solid Surface is defined in 18.08.601 as "Porous solid surface is a permeable surface built with an underlying stone reservoir, that temporarily stores surface r°unoffbefore it infiltrates into the subsoil. Porous solid sun faces include pervious asphalt, pervious concrete, grass or permeable pavers, or decks that allow runoff to infiltrate the subsoil beneath the deck. " In addition to the use of permeable pavers, the application indicates that the owner of 48 Westwood Street will agree to limit the future lot coverage on this undeveloped lot to 15.3 percent to offset the additional 4.7 percent overage on 541 Strawberry Lane. This will be accomplished by a deed restriction on 48 Westwood St. Staff concurs that the use of pervious paving (i.e. porous solid surface using the Ashland Land Use Ordinance terminology) for the 1,244 square feet of driveway/parking area and pool perimeter is a positive aspect of the application. Presumably, the pervious paving will allow the water to eventually percolate into the soil rather than creating a situation where excess impervious surface creates additional surface runoff that is directed into the City's piped system or creeks. Furthermore, the decrease in lot coverage for 48 Westwood will result in a total amount of lot coverage for the two lots that will conform to the maximum allowed lot coverage for the zoning district. In Planning Action 2812-08981 Ashland Planning Division -Staff Report Applicant: Urban Development ServiceslConflitti Pago 4 of 8 Staff's opinion, the combination of these two factors - the pervious paving and the decrease of 4.7 in the lot coverage for 48 Westwood - will negate a negative impact to the surrounding area. In terms of the function and longevity of the pervious paving, there are the issues of installation, maintenance and replacement. Staff's understanding is that the installation of pervious paving is an important part of making the system functional properly. For that reason, a condition has been added requiring that the applicant submit an evaluation by a soil engineer prior to the building permit being issued, and verification that they system is installed according to the manufacturers specifications before the residence is occupied. The more long term issues are the maintenance of the permeable paving, and assurances that the permeable paving will stay in place rather than be removed and replaced with traditional impervious paving at a later date. A condition requiring a deed restriction on541 Strawberry Lane is suggested requiring the maintenance of the permeable paving in perpetuity, and specifying it is a violation of the planning approval to replace it with impervious surface. The application indicates the owner of 48 Westwood is willing to agree to a deed restriction limiting the maximum lot coverage to 15.3 percent. In theory, this mechanism will work to insure the lot coverage between the two subject properties is capped at 20 percent. Hoxvever, in staff's experience, over time as the property changes ownership, the history and reason for the decrease in coverage will become less clear. Not only does the use of a deed restriction shift the administrative burden from the private property owner to the city government, it may lead to another variance request in the future. The application identifies a list of other benefits of the proposal including the deed restriction on 48 Westwood Street resulting in a shared driveway configuration with the adjacent flag drive to the north (also an undeveloped parcel), the single-level home that will not block neighbors views, the garage door not being oriented to the street on the proposed home at 541 Strawberry, the use of a 12-foot wide driveway opening, pursuing LEER certification or as close to certification as financially feasible, orientation of the home to obtain as much passive solar as possible, and a home with less square footage than neighboring properties. In staff's opinion, the other benefits identified in the application are less obvious. The property at 48 Westwood Street has an approved individual driveway, and is not required to share the flag drive to the north. However, it. does appear that 48 Westwood Street has an access easement to use the flag drive should that avenue be pursued. Additionally, the height and size of the proposed home at 541 Strawberry Lane could potentially change over time. Planning Action 2012A981 Ashland Planning Division - Staff Report Applicant: Urban Development Services/Conftitti Page 6 of 8 3. That the ci►emnstances or conditions have not been ivillfully or purposely self imposed. The unusual circumstance cited in the application is the street configuration located on the frontage and near 541 Strawberry Lane. There are three factors that contribute to the unusual circumstance the location of the lot oil the curvilinear portion of Strawberry Lane, the proximity to the 90 degree bend where Strawberry Lane turns into Westwood Street, and the location of the intersection of Strawberry Lane and Birdsong Lane across the street from 541 Strawberry. Clearly, the lot location and street configuration is not a self-imposed condition. In 1986, the City obtained the property that resulted in Strawberry Lane and Westwood being extended and connected, Subsequently, the City constructed the street connections and also divided the area at the northeast corner of the Strawberry/Westwood intersection. Birdsong Lane was part of a subdivision that was approved in 1998, III. Procedural - Required Burden of Proof The criteria for Variance are described in AMC 18.100.020 as follows: A, That there are unique or unusual circumstances which apply to this site which do not typically apply elsewhere, B. That the proposal's benefits will be greater than any negative impacts on the development of the adjacent uses; and will further the purpose and intent of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan of the City. C. That the circumstances or coiiditions havc not been willfully or purposely self- 1 imposed. IV. Conclusions and Recommendations Should the Planning Commission decide the variance is warranted, staff believes findings could be made to address the approval criteria. Staff is somewhat cautious about using the lot and street configuration as the "unusual circumstance" given the hillside nature of Ashland results in the fairly regular occurrence of nontraditional street and lot configurations. However, in this case, there does seem to be a somewhat unusual circumstance in having three factors combined in one location the placement of the lot on the curvilinear portion of Strawberry Lane, the nearby 90 degree bend in Strawberry/Westwood, and the offset intersection of Strawberry/Birdsong nearby. With the reduction in the lot coverage of 48 Westwood Street to offset the overage on 541 Strawberry Lane, the maximum lot coverage of 20 percent for the Rural Residential zoning district is satisfied. As a result, there aren't any obvious negative impacts of the proposed development on adjacent uses. Additionally, the use of permeable paving further offsets the impacts of the additional coverage on 541 Strawberry, and staff concurs that the design of the driveway to allow drivers to pull out into Planning Action 2012-00981 Ashland Planning Division - Staff Report Applicant: Urban Development ServiceslConflitti Page 6 of 8 I the street in a forward manner is beneficial. Finally, the lot and street configuration is not self-imposed by the applicants. In staff's opinion, the area northeast of the corner of the Strawberry/Westwood intersection is somewhat unusual for the Rural Residential district in that it is relatively flat and lacking physical constraints (e.g. steep slopes, drainages or creeks, large stature trees). The Ashland Comprehensive Plan describes the "low-density residential" designation, essentially the long range plan equivalent of the rural residential zoning, as a predominance of single-family homes with lower density that is necessary for several reasons, including areas: 1) with slopes of 30 to 50 percent, 2) that are dissected by gullies and drainage areas, 3) with access problems, 4) that are at the urban-woodland interface, and 5) with limited public facilities including paved access, sewer, water and other necessary public facilities. The four lots at the northeast corner of the Strawberry/Westwood intersection have lesser slopes, around 10 to 13 percent, than the 25 percent threshold for hillside development. While Wrights Creek is to the west of Westwood Street, the subject lots do not contain any creeks or drainages, and there are few trees on the subject properties. Certainly, the character of the development in the general area - having sizeable homes located on larger lots with ample landscaping or natural area surrounding the residences - is similar to other areas located in tlue Rural Residential zoning district. Lot coverage requirements generally serve two purposes. Historically, the coverage of land by buildings and related paving, and essentially the density and bulk of development, has been regulated in residential settings by allowable lot coverage and requirements for front, side and rear yards. This approach developed as early as the 1930's, and resulted in a style of development that continues to this day. Additionally, the arnount of land that is not covered by buildings and paving allows the infiltration of storm water and surface drainage into the ground, and thereby into natural systems. In this respect, it is in keeping with the neighborhood development pattern to stay within a reasonable amount of the allowable lot ..coverage for the district Staff recommends the following conditions be attached to an approval. 1) That all proposals of the applicant shall be conditions of approval unless otherwise modified herein. 2) That prior to the issuance of a building permit for 541 Strawberry Lane: a. That a deed restriction shall be prepared for review and approval of Ashland j Planning Division and Legal Department limiting the maximum lot coverage for ~ 48 Westwood Street to 15.3 percent, or to the standard 20 percent coverage allowed less the amount of lot coverage overage on 541 Strawberry, whichever is less. The deed restriction shall include the City as a party with right of approval, f and shall be recorded by the applicant. Evidence of the recorded deed restriction shall be submitted to the Ashland Planning Division, b. That the lot coverage for 541 Strawberry Lane shall be a maximum of 24.7 percent with 19 percent coverage (4,152 square feet) in impervious surface area and 53 percent (1,244 square feet) in permeable pavers, The building permit. Planning Action 2012-00981 Ashland Planning Dlvisson - Staff Report Applicant: Urban Development ServicestConflilti Page 7 of 8 i submittals shall clearly indicate the amount of proposed coverage, and delineate the areas of impervious surface area and permeable pavers with total square footage called out. c. That the permeable paver system shall allow 100 percent percolation of storm and surface water as indicated in the'application. The building permit submittals shall include a report from a licensed soil engineer confirming the system will work in the subject location, and any installation requirements necessary to insure the system will firnction properly. d. That a deed restriction shall prepared for review and approval of the Ashland Planning Division requiring the permeable paving to be maintained to function according to manufacturers specifications in perpetuity, stipulating that the permeable paving must remain in place and it would be a violation of Planning Action 2012-00981 to remove and replace with impervious paving. e. That all conditions of the partition approval, Planning Action 2004-031, including the following shall be satisfied: i i. That a residential sprinkler system shall be installed, and the installation of a new hydrant in the event any building constructed exceeds the minimum distance from existing hydrants. ii, That all new structures comply with City's Solar Access chapter 18.70, and shall meet Solar Standard "A." iii. That final location of the driveway curb-cut is clearly delineated on the building permit submittals, and approved by the Ashland Planning Division prior to the issuance of a Miscellaneous Concrete Perm it for installation f the driveway apron by the Public Works Department. 3) That prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for 541 Strawberry Lane: a. That all conditions of the partition approval, Planning Action 2004-031, shall be i satisfied including the installation of street trees, located one per 30 feet of street frontage, shall be installed along the property's street frontage. Street trees shall be chosen from the Recommended Street Tree List and shall be installed in accordance with the specifications noted in the Recommended Street Tree List. The street trees shall be irrigated. b. A report shall be submitted from the project soil engineer or a similarly qualified professional such as a landscape architect verifying that the permeable paving system was installed according to the specifications included in the initial report i from the soil engineer submitted with the building permit. Planning Action 2012.00981 Ashland Planning Division Staff Repot Applicant; Urban Development Services/Conflittl Page 8 of 8 RECEIVrD Auk`, ; t URBANDEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC LAND USE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES August ISt, 2012 Strawberry Lane & Westwood Street Neighbors I Subject: Neighborhood Meeting - 5:30 to 6:00 p.m. on Wednesday, August 8th, 2012 Regarding: Map and Tax Lots, 391E08BD #104 and 102 i Meeting to be held along street - at corner of Strawberry Lane & Birdsong Hello, j I My name is Mark Knox and I'm a local Land Use Planning Consultant working with your future neighbors, Paul and Barbara Conflitti, who desire to construct their home at 541 Strawberry Lane (see attached map). The purpose of the meeting is to explain their proposal in detail and to address any questions you may have regarding their application to the City of Ashland. Simply put, Paul and Barbara desire to build a single story home and garage, but due to the nature of the driveway and single level floor plan, the proposed home exceeds the allowable lot coverage by 4.7%. The applicants are requesting a Variance from the City of Ashland land use code in order to construct the home, which they believe is very compatible to the neighborhood's architecture, scale and size. As such, please refer to the attached map, site plan and elevation of the proposed home. 1 don't expect the meeting to last longer than 30 minutes. However, if for some reason you can't attend the meeting or will be outside the area, please feel free to contact me at 541-821-3752. I look forward to meeting and/or talking with you. Sincerely, Mark Knox Urban Development Services, LLC Phone: 541-482-3334 Fax: 541 -482-3336 gldap jnl ~j [5 £r. s 41JON yr a5ua;a311.e(pnndij•9..._.,ly_-oi` ` f o c ijE ;~uaurasba aprs~r © dJ \ N ti Q N N ' JAN N} U It CL 0 O. Q L n J N i Lj 1 Q} t tt7 i ~ t 1 y.+ i C5 1 LO F v n~ Ali '£f W g _ Q tom/ 0 1 i - e' V 04 u 3 O Z tf1 3f f O Q O- t - -L _ ge y e f ~ f 1 31 P - C 1 0,2 1 , } 1 ~ Y I O ~ z O- dl i ~1 Z ❑ E 1 rx r ~ Q = as 3: -14 Ln m 4f 44 -4 u. U CD x E 1 O ~ O U3 X N~ l0 O O ~4 1 E 1 E 111 it 1 U w (EeM AJUOSetU Ij 9 sl II _ d If to t N Iss ~p `1 N i UO o a3ua~ jAuln 41 5'9 2u13SIX3 m ~ L[1 tildap and li 9pf t E' ~►m Gunter From: Amy Gunter [guntera@ashland.or.us] Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2012 4:40 PM To: 'paulc6463@yahoo.com' Cc: 'Derek Severson', V Knox' Subject: 541 Strawberry Dear Mr. Conflitti, I wanted to convey the comments that the Planning Division received from the Water and Electric Departments that may have an impact on your proposed home construction. According to the Water Department (Steve Walker- 541-488-5353) the water meter on Strawberry near the southwest corner of the property is used by the property at 551 Strawberry and a new water service (1" for sprinklers) may be necessary. Additionally, the Electric Department (Dave Tygerson - 541-488-5357) indicated that a'transformer may be necessary if the cabinet is over utilized. You will want to contact those specific departments if you have any additional questions. Thank you. Amy Amy D. Gunter, Assistant Planner City of Ashland, Dept. of Community Development 20 E Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 . phone: (541) 552-2044 fax: (541) 552-2050 TTY: (800) 735-2900 This email transmission is official business of the City of Ashland, and it is subject to Oregon Public Records law for disclosure and retention. If you have received this message in error, please contact me at (541) 552-2044. Thank you. i I i i I I I AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF OREGON ) County of Jackson ) The undersigned being first duly sworn states that: 1. I am employed by the City of Ashland, 20 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon 97520, in the Community Development Department. 2. On July 25, 2012 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 #2012-00981, 541 Strawberry & 48 Westwood. Signature of Employee Daument1011N2012 PA-2012-00981 391 E08AC 107 PA-2012-00981391 E08BD 103 PA-2012-00981 391 E08AC 205 BARNES KENNETH JISUZANNE H BRYANT DAVID R DRESCHER ALLEN G TRUSTEE ET AL 523 STRAWBERRY LN PO BOX 250 131 BIRDSONG LN ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2012-00981 391E08BD 102 PA-2012-00981 391E08BD 107 PA-2012-00981391E08AC 106 DRRAM LP LAWRENCE RG & LC REV TRUST ET AL LAYSER GAIA/BORGIAS DARREN D R R ASSET MANAGEMENT INC 490 STRAWBERRY LN 503 STRAWBERRY LN 4100 NEWPORT PL 400 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 PA-2012-00981 391 E08AC 210 PA-2012-00981391 E08AC 211 PA-2012-00981391 E08BD 200 PITBLADDO RICHARD RESNICK ALLAN I & LYNN I LIVING TR ROBERTS JEFFREY 5389 FAIRFIELD WAY 191 BIRDSONG LN KENNETH/KASHUANA L FORT MEYERS, FL 33919 ASHLAND, OR 97520 402 N LAUREL ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2012-0098139IE08AC 203 PA-2012-00981391E08BD 101 PA-2012-00981 SHOLEM CONSTANCE W TRUSTEE WESTRIDGE TERRACE LLC URBAN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC 121 BIRDSONG LN 250 SUNNYVIEW ST 485 WEST NEVADA ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2012-00981 PA-2012-00981 541 Strawberry PAUL CONFLITTI DOUG IRVINE 8400126TH PL SE 2113 EMIGRANT LAKE RD 7125!12 NOG NEWCASTLE, WA 98056 ASHLAND, OR 97520 14 i I i i i E i i [ • 04 rl NFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 07 906 f 205 1200 1000 400 Map Maker Applicatlon 1 Property Data Onltno Lvgond 13 Wedod Features E ~ 3 Tax lol Ouftlnos k Tax Lot Numbers 1 i31# ` ~ r l t 10i log 1U1 107 1011 - ~ ~ 109 102 105 10~b 5-TP'Fi v LN 103 104 3. 204 i 202 20 211 lid s~ d, 2011€ 210 ;i 204 2" ~ I r' F, 208 i 21 a JACKSON COUNTY Oregon I ~ This rtdp is based on a dgllakdafabase f s.. comPed t: Jac~on Cou !y Faoa a variety ' ~ ~ ~ cfseurres Jac'vson OOU. iy canno3 accept res sb'y or errors wnssans, or ,il}F posibna€accuracy. There are no ~ -G _ Iff «ar:CP5. Expressed orlmp:.ed. Created w44V pl.+a<er Idap aealed on 7124+263214:44:L~6 Ald us:n~wab Jacksorrcounty.ug F:aase recyc~ x-th m'orerJ cCrta gals parr v l \ U w 00 O w F ~ ®0- F00l;.~iP t.} pS~ co 0 * Iwo-2oo cn ®w aM ()0 L_ f J 1! ~ ? I \ 1 n f i I LL. 1S QOOMISAN1 L N (V O PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND FINDINGS OF FACT ~ j t h{. }y THE PROPOSAL IS FOR A CO-APPLICATION BETWEEN THE APPLICANT AND THE PROPERTY OWNER OF 48 WESTWOOD STREET AND 541 STRAWBERRY LANE. SUBMITTED TO CITY OF ASHLAND PLANNING DEPARTMENT ASHLAND, OREGON SUBMITTED BY URBAN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC. 485 WEST NEVADA STREET ASHLAND, OR 97520 1lpage I. PROJECT INFORMATION: PLANNING ACTION: The proposal is for a joint application between the applicant and the property owner of 48 Westwood Street (TL 102, below) and 541 Strawberry Lane (TL 104, below). Both individuals desire to work together to increase the permissible lot coverage on 541 Strawberry Lane by reducing the available lot coverage on 48 Westwood Street. L iot 02 € E io. 04 , r i 211 Y , i i LEGAL DESCRIPTION: 391E 08BD TL #102 and 391E 08BD TL 9104 E APPLICANT & OWNER: LAND USE PLANNING: Paul Conflitti Urban Development Services LLC 8400 126t" PI SE 485 W. Nevada Street Newcastle, WA 98056 Ashland, OR 97520 Doug Irvine 2113 Emigrant Creek Road Ashland, OR 97520 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low-Density Residential 2 Page ZONING DESIGNATION RR-.5 (Rural Residential %2 acre (21,780 sq. ft.) minimum lot size) MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE: 20% (all impervious surface area - house footprint, driveway, sidewalks, pool, etc.) TOTAL LOT AREA: 48 Westwood Street: .50 acres (21,780 sq. ft.) 541 Strawberry Lane: .50 acres (21,780 sq. ft.) APPLICABLE ORDINANCES: R-R Rural Residential District, Chapter 18.16 Variances, Chapter 18.100 ADJACENT ZONING/USE: WEST: RR-.5; Rural Residential District EAST: RR-.5; Rural Residential District SOUTH: RR-.5; Rural Residential District NORTH: RR-.5; Rural Residential District SUBJECT SITE: RR-.5; Rural Residential District II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: i The following information has been provided by the applicants and land use consultant to help the Planning Staff, Planning Commission and neighbors understand the proposed project. In addition, the required findings offact have been provided to ensure the proposed project meets the Criteria as outlined in the Ashland Municipal Code (AMC), Section 18.100.020. Property Description: 48 Westwood (TL 102): The parcel is vacant and void of any significant features such as trees, creeks or rock-outcroppings. The parcel has an approximate 10% north-cast facing slope with a neighboring flag lot to the north which will one day provide driveway access to another vacant parcel to the east. The property is somewhat rectangular in shape, but for a slightly angled rear property line. 541 Strawberry Lane (TL 104): This parcel is also vacant, but other than one small tree near the front southwest corner and another small tree on the front southeast corner of the property, it is I void of any trees or significant natural features. The property has an approximate northeast slope of 13%. The parcel is generally rectangular, but for a portion of the lot that is curved due to the Strawberry Lane alignment. Overall, the surrounding properties generally consist of 1/2 acre parcels consistent with the area's RR-5 zoning (see insert above). The two subject parcels, as well as TL 103 and 105, were originally a single parcel subdivided by the City of Ashland and later sold to the current property owner in exchange for 9.6 acres of property on lower Clay Street that now accommodates a 60 unit affordable housing development and future park lands. 311'age i ~ ~ ec W { TL 104 - Looking North (troin Strawberry Lane) `1'L 104 - Looking South (fron► TL 102) Proposal: The proposal is a co-application between the applicant and the property owner of 48 Westwood Street and 541 Strawberry Lane who desire to work together to increase the permissible lot coverage on 541 Strawberry Lane by reducing the available lot coverage on 48 Westwood Street. The amount of lot coverage to be transferred from the Westwood lot to the Strawberry lot would be 4.7% (1,040 sq. ft.) of the lot's 20% maximum lot coverage allowance for the RR-5 zoning district. The proposal requires a Variance in order to exceed the zones maximum 20%, regardless if there is actually "no net increase" as described below, No Net Increase: It's important for the decision making entity to understand the purpose of the request is to not build a larger home on the Strawberry Lane parcel, but instead a home that is similar in size of its surrounding neighbors except that instead of multiple stories, the proposed home will be single-story that can accommodate a family member with accessibility constraints. Further, because of this later factor and the parcel's close proximity to the Westwood/Strawberry intersection, the garage and driveway have been slightly enlarged to accommodate a vehicle that can exit onto the street in a safe and forward manner. Finally, because of the desire of the applicant and property owner's efforts to work together, there will be "no net increase" of lot coverage between the two properties and thus the zone's 20% maximum lot coverage will be maintained. As proposed, the Westwood lot would have a 15.3% maximum lot coverage and the Strawberry lot a 24.7% maximum lot coverage. The table below illustrates the proposed lot coverage allocation and that no net increase in lot coverage is being requested. Table A Proposed Lot Coverage Modification *no net ain proposal) Property Lot Area Allowed Coverage Proposed Lot Coverage (20%) 48 Westwood Street 21,780 sq. ft. 4,356 sq. ft. (20%) 3,316 sq. ft. (15.3%) 541 Strawberry Lane 21,780 sq. ft. 4,356 sq. ft. (20%) 5,468 sq. ft (24.7%) *20% average 41P6a~~e Purpose of Request: As stated above, the applicant desires to construct a single-story single family residence with a detached garage as depicted on the attached preliminary site plan and conceptual elevation plan. The home and its various accommodations have been designed to accommodate an "aging in place" opportunity for a family member who has accessibility constraints. The applicant's proposed lot coverage is as follows: Proposed Coverage: Impervious Surface Areas Single Level House: 2,925 square feet (45' X 65') Front & Back Porches: 192 square feet Garage & Studio/Office: 660 square feet (30' X 22') Swimming Pool: 375 square feet (15' X 25') Total: 4,152 sq. ft. (19%) Permeable Pavers (Hydro-Fla Technology Par,ers): Parking Plaza & Driveway: 968 square feet Pool Perimeter (3' ADA): 276 square feet Total: 1,244 sq. ft. (5.7%) Total: 5,396 sq. ft. (24.7%) Undesired Scenario: If it wasn't for the driveway's location near the intersection of Westwood and Strawberry, as well as the offsetting relationship with both Birdsong Lane and the curving alignment with Strawberry Lane, a typical two-story home could be built on the subject property and meet the zone's lot coverage requirement. However, if this was the case, the home could be significantly larger at approximatel}, 7,972 square feet and significantly less compatible with the neighborhood. Further, the home wouldn't meet the various environmental and pedestrian friendly qualities the proposal is attempting to complete which are described on the following pager In this undesired alternative, the home's lot coverage could be, based on a simple schematic that incorporates the lot's dimension and grade as well as the reorientation of the garage and driveway, as follows: Proposed Coverage: Impervious Surface Areas N Story Level House: 3,189 square feet (3,189 X 21/2 = 7,972 sq. ft.)' Impervious Driveway: 600 (30' wide x 20' deep) Front & Back Porches: 192 square feet Swimming Pool: 375 square feet (15' X 25') Total: 4,356 sq. ft. Total: 4,356 (20%) NOTE: It should be understood by the decision making body the above undesired scenario is meant to illustrate that "lot coverage" is not always the best regulating tool to limit a site's disturbance, minimize a home's mass or create a preferred street pattern. In fact, under current code, the subject lot could be 100% disturbed and re-graded without permits. It could have a 30' wide "unarticulated" garage door facing the street/sidewalk. And, it could have an undesirable building mass and height. All of which are non-regulated and non-discretionary factors. Lot In this hypothetical scenario, the home would have two floors and a daylight basement and remain in compliance with the City's Solar Access Standards. 5 11'a ,e coverage is simply a tool to limit impervious surface areas so that storm water systems are not overburdened and underlying aquifers can be replenished. Neighborhood Context: Attached is an exhibit of property data and house photos of the four adjacent properties with built homes. The data was collected from the City of Ashland, Jackson County Assessor's and on-site field observations (from the adjacent public rights-of-way). The intention of the exhibit was to identify the context of the neighborhood in order to compare with the application. In the end, it was determined there are many variables that shape a neighborhood and lot coverage is not necessarily the primary factor. In fact, of the four homes, the average house size was 3,458 square feet or approximately 500 square feet greater than the proposed house. The average lot size was .4925 acres and the average lot coverage was 4,870 square feet or 23% compared to the RR-5 zone's maximum 20%. In other words, the proposed house is smaller in square footage, but its impervious surface area is greater simply because of its single level floor plan. Benefits & Mitigations: There are numerous benefits to the proposal and mitigation efforts by the applicants that should be considered, but the pri mry benefit is to provide an opportunity for safer vehicular egress from the subject property. The applicant's desire to not back their autos into the street near an approximate 90 degree bend in the street due to safety concerns and mobility issues will hopefully provide the necessary justification for the exception, but there are numerous other factors that should also be considered: 1) The driveway area and perimeter pool path will be permeable cobble stone pavers allowing 100% surface permeability and thus the proposal has actually LESS impervious surface area than permitted; 1 2) By transferring an equal percentage of lot coverage from the Westwood Lot to the Strawberry Lot, there is "no net gain" of impervious surface area. This fact, as well as the point above, creates a lot coverage amount significantly less than permitted for the zone and instead of two lots each having a 20% impervious surface lot coverage, one lot will have a 19% and the other 15.3% impervious lot coverage; 3) The use of permeable surface materials are more costly to the homeowner, but the f continuous use and encouragement of such materials by municipalities will not only help E produce a lower price (supply and demand), but it will lessen a number of environmental impacts often associated with typical impervious surface areas such as storm water quality, erosion and surface heat gain (see attached brochure on proposed Hydro-Flo Technology Pavers); 4) The use of the Hydro-Flo pavers will allow 100% percolation and recharging of underground aquifers. Installation of pavers will be completed by certified installers and approved prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy Permit. 5) It is likely the reduction of lot coverage on the Westwood property will result in a shared driveway configuration with the adjacent flag lot to the north (TL 105) and thus reduce an additional curb-cut along Westwood Street. Reduced curb-cuts are a positive pedestrian contribution and a typical regulation of the City's Land Use Ordinance and policy of the Transportation System Plan; 6 11' ~i e 6) A single level home on the Strawberry Lane property will clearly produce a result far more preferable to the surrounding neighbors when compared to a two-story home which would likely block views of the areas surrounding hillsides and open spaces; 7) The applicants have attempted to create a more pedestrian friendly streetseape by orientating the garage's door away or perpendicular to the sidewalk. Thus, instead of a massive void of a garage door along the sidewalk or automobiles stacked between the garage and sidewalk, the proposed garage has windows on its front fagade and landscaping between the garage and sidewalk to help soften its facade; 8) The throat of the driveway where it meets the street is narrowed to only 12' increasing the home's presence and the not the driveways; 9) The application creates an opportunity for neighborhood involvement and public discretion which often creates an environment where the applicant puts forth efforts that are not typically required. In this case, the applicant desires to construct a residence on the Strawberry Lane parcel that includes advanced conservation technologies that is not only energy efficient, but with a goal of pursuing LEED certification or as close to certification as financially feasible. 10) The added increase in lot coverage requested is only 4.7% which is the minimum necessarty to achieve the applicant's desired result. Since the pre-application conference on June 6t', 2012, efforts have been made to reduce the desired coverage from 8% to 4.7% as well as obtain a small percentage of coverage from an adjoining property owner which will actually create less pervious surface overall (see point #2 above). The applicants believe this valiant effort is consistent with past Planning Commission and City staff efforts (see attached excerpt from March 18, 2008 First Reading on proposed Land Use Ordinance Amendments2) to allow some flexibility when considering alternative materials. Although not adopted, the intended code approved by the Planning Commission and recommended for approval by the Planning Department Staff would have allowed up to five percent (5%) of the lot area to have pervious (porous) solid surfaces for areas such as paths, patios, decks and similar surfaces. In this vein, the applicants believe the applicant's proposal is consistent with past land use strategies the Planning Commission and staff intended to utilize to provide some level of flexibility and in-return create a positive result. 11) Due to the sites slight grade and the applicants desire not to overly create numerous retaining walls on the downhill side, its expected the home will sit slightly below the street grade in order to reduce earth movement and nestle into the slope. In doing so, the driveway will also sit slightly below street grade and thus further justifying the need to exist the site in a forward mariner. 12) The orientation of the home is intended to obtain as much passive solar as possible. The orientation and added windows help create a home that is not only attempting to be energy efficient, but also articulate and attractive. 13) The subject home has less square footage than the neighboring properties. The intent of the owners is to not build a large house or a house size based on future resale possibilities, but a house that fits their accessibility needs and a house that is well designed and constructed. If necessary, the homeowner is willing to record a deed restriction memorializing the increased coverage as well as the lot's retention as a single level building site. 2 This particular provision was later reinoved froth consideration by the City Council during Second Reading. 711'~atjc. t Precedents: There have been similar planning actions relating to lot coverage exceptions or transfers in the RR-5 zone and each have gone through a similar discretionary process. Most of these requests have related to Performance Standard Subdivisions or modifications, but because they are within close proximity to the subject property, they are relevant to the application and the applicable criteria in that a number of these surrounding properties have a coverage that exceed the zone's maximum threshold in some cases significantly more than the proposed. A small example includes: 137 Sunnyview Street: Lot coverage transfer (from neighboring property) 423 Strawberry Lane: Lot coverage transfer 163 Hitt Road: Lot coverage exception Falling Acorn Estates (Hitt & Strawberry) Lot coverage transfers (from neighboring property) Strawberry Meadows (Birdsong Ln) Lot coverage transfers (from neighboring property) Future Considerations: The property owner and applicant are aware that "one day" the zone's maximum lot coverage may change as Ashland continues to incorporate performance standard provisions within the municipal code. Although this particular provision was later withdrawn by the Council as a last minute decision during their Second Reading, the intent of this type of provision was clearly evident during the 2008 Land Use Ordinance update when the Planning Commission approved and Planning Department staff recommended an ordinance that sought- out the use of alternative surface materials by allowing a 5% exception for pervious surface materials. Further, the recent adoption of the Croman Mill Plan as well as the Pedestrian Places Ordinance includes provisions that address environmental and microclimatic impacts on surface parking areas that attempt to encourage creative and alternative construction practices that are more environmentally friendly. As such, in the event a similar approach is adopted and available, the property owner of TL 102 "may" desire the ability to apply for the exception with the understanding the lot coverage (or portion thereof) transferred to TL 104 would be returned to TL 102 as long as it could be illustrated the associated environmental or microclimatic improvements on TL 104 comply with the current code provisions. Deed Restrictions: Prior to issuance of a building permit, the property owner and applicant are willing to record a deed restriction memorializing the lot coverage transfer noted herein. III, FINDINGS OF FACT: The following information has been provided by the applicants to help the Planning Staff, Planning Commission and neighbors better understand the proposed project. In addition, the required Endings of fact have been provided to ensure the proposed project mects the Variance criteria outlined in AMC 18.100.020. For clarity reasons, the follotiu~ing documentation has been fbrntatted in "outline" fibril i0th the City's approval criteria noted in BOLD font and the applicant's response in regular font. Also, there are a number of responses that are repeated in order to ensure that the findings of fact are complete. A. That there are unique or unusual circumstances which apply to this site which do not typically apply elsewhere. 8111a There are unique or unusual circumstances associated with the subject property (TL 104) which do not typically apply elsewhere due to the fact Westwood Street and Strawberry Lane meet at a 90 degree intersection, but without any traffic control or caution signs. Further, the curvilinear nature of Strawberry Lane and the off-setting location of Birdsong Lane create two additional conflict points, but when combined with the intersection and lack of control signs, it creates a unique circumstance the applicant believes is a hazard for drivers, especially for drivers with slower reactions or those with mobility constraints. That said, this condition would be significantly improved if the site was designed to allow vehicles to exist onto the street in a forward manner. B. That the proposal's benefits will be greater than any negative impacts on the development of the adjacent uses; and will further the purpose and intent of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan of the City. The applicant believes the proposal's benefits will be greater than any negative impacts on the development of the adjacent uses and contend the proposal will have no impact whatsoever on adjacent uses. The request is being accompanied by a conceptual home design the applicant is committed to building. The home has an articulating design, is single-story with a horizontal volume and has shallow roof lines that neither produces a visual impact onto adjoining neighbors nor causes a neighbor's views to be lost beyond what a typical home complying with all land use codes would generate. In reality, the property owner's willingness to reduce lot coverage on the adjoining parcel in order to compensate for the gain on one lot creates a "no net gain" scenario. Further, the applicant's commitment to use 100% pervious surface materials for those areas beyond the building footprint produces more groundwater regeneration than intended by code. The proposal will further the purpose and intent of the ordinance and the City's Comprehensive Plan as there is not only "no net gain of lot coverage; but actually a "reduction" in pervious surface area due to the use of pervious surface materials. Overall, the applicant believes the proposal directly and/or indirectly relates to the following Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies: Goal 1V (Environmental Resources) Policy 6: Prevent development and land inanageinent 18.81, practices tit~hich result in rabid runoff and accelerated erosion; Policy 7: Require site preparation procedures and construction practices iMich rninirnize erosion and sedimentation. Policy 8: Protect essential hillside drainage areas for 18.84, absorption of storm runoff, and other areas subject to severe soil erosion, unless control can be established. Policy 9: Incorporate site drainage practices that reduce runoff velocity) and volujne, by utilizing the natural properties of the soils and vegetation in conjunction with sound engineering practices. Policy 13: Use development performance standards based oil the natural topography, drainage, soils, lot coverage, and densities in place of arbitrary subdivision standards to ensure that natural features are an integral part of the design phase of future developments. Note 1: The applicant contends the act of applying for an exception to the standard, an arbitrary standard by most accounts, is creating a proposal that far exceeds standard development practices and instead 9 1 P a g C produces a performance standard environment that addresses many of the goals, policies and unwritten efforts the City has long practiced. Policy 16: Maintain and improve the quality of both surface and ground water resources, and prohibit new practices and developments which cannot meet water quality standards. Policy 40: Zone all lands which have a slope generally greater than 30% for development will have no more than 2 dwelling units per acre or 20% lot coverage by impervious surfaces. Note2: A point of observation is the subject property's slope is approximately 10 to 13% with a base density of 2 dwelling units per acre and thus is less susceptible to erosion issues. Policy 41: Encourage educational programs docionenting the value of Ashland's environmental resources and cut=rent trends in their qualio3. Policy 43: Continue to strengthen the site revieiv process to assess accurately the enviromnental impact and ensure that changes in land use acknowledges limitations and opportunities of the site and have as little detriniental impact as possible. Goal VI (Housing) Policy 3a: Regulation of residential uses shall be designed to complement, conserve and continue the aesthetic character of Ashland through use of the following techniques: a) Slope protection and lot coverage per forinance standards shall be used to fit development to topography, generally following the concept that density should decrease with an increase in slope to avoid excessive erosion and hillside cuts. This objective shall be used consistent with the desire to preserve land by using the smallest lot coverage possible. Note4: With the request for the exception, the proposed application becomes a discretionary action and thus subject to performance factors such as storm water management, erosion control methods and water quality standards. Without the application, an applicant could propose a far different and less conscientious design as previously described in the body of this document. Policy 3c: Performance standards shall be used to regulate new development in Ashland so that a variety of housing tyres built for the site and imaginative residential environments inay be used to ......reduce cost and improve the aesthetic character of new developments and decrease the use of traditional zoning and subdivision standards. Goal IX (Public Services) Goal 23: Ensure that all neiv developments include a drainage system which protects adjoining property as much as possible. Goal 24: Encourage drainage systems that utilize natural drainage ways and minimize the amount and rate of sin face runoff Goal X (Transportation) To provide a transportation systein which is safe, diversified, cost and envirownentally efficient, emphasizes alternate anodes of transport, meets the needs of the transportation disadvantaged, and enhances the local economy, scenery and neighborhoods. Goal 4a: Maintain carrying capacity and ease of movement of arterials and other streets by the use of limited access through the site review process. Goal Sa: Encourage Street design improvements which will speed and smooth the flow of trciffic. Goal 6d: Minimize conflicts between transportation types, especially 11,hen those conflicts create a particularly hazardous area. Goal XI (Energy, Air and Water Conservation) 101Page Goal XI-3 (Ness, Housing) a): The City's Super Good Cents new hone certification program has been very successful in encouraging nest, energy efficient electrically heated hornes to be built. Tire shall continue to aggressively market this program and assure its continued success. b) Some new hornes are not built to the efficiency levels of Super Good Cents hornes. Efforts shall be made to educate all builders in the benefits of energy conservation and encourage higher levels of conservation in all nest, homes. c) New hornes and apartments are being built which do not utilize the latest technological advances in water constaning devices. The City shall use any legal means to insure that only water conserving equipment be installed in new construction. This should be done to acconmrodate growth ivith lesser inererrrental ivater demand and also to eliminate the need to return to these hornes later to retrofit them with water conserving devices. d) Passive solar design and sun tempering are very cost effective in netiv home construction, They shall be encouraged in new housing developments and individual houses. Goal 8b: The future ivill be quite dynamic and volatile in the energy arena. The City needs to actively keep abreast of new advances in technology and ernrbrace and encourage ones tivhich can benefit water conservation, air qualio} energy, conservation or production. c) Smart hornes, computer and other new electronic devices ivill require a higher level of electric service and expertise than currently required. The City has to take yvhatever° rrreasures necessary to ensure that this quality electric service and expertise is available for our citizens. Additional Benefits of the Proposal: 1) The driveway area and perimeter pool path will be permeable cobble stone pavers allowing 100% surface permeability and thus the proposal has actually "less" impervious surface area than permitted; 2) By transferring an equal percentage of lot coverage from the Westwood Lot to the Strawberry Lot, there is "no net gain" of impervious surface area. This fact, as well as the point above, creates a lot coverage amount significantly less than permitted for the zone and instead of two lots each having a 20% impervious surface lot coverage; one lot will have a 19% and the other 15.3% impervious lot coverage; 3) The use of permeable surface materials are more costly to the homeowner, but the continuous use and encouragement of such materials by municipalities will not only help produce a lower price (supply and demand), but it will lessen a number of environmental impacts often associated with typical impervious surface areas such as storm water quality, erosion and surface heat gain (see attached brochure on proposed Hydro-Flo Technology Pavers); 4) The use of the Hydro-Flo pavers will allow 100% percolation and recharging of underground aquifers. Installation of pavers will be completed by certified installers and approved prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy Permit. 5) It is likely the reduction of lot coverage on the Westwood property will result in a shared driveway configuration with the adjacent flag lot to the north (TL 105) and thus reduce an additional curb-cut along Westwood Street. Reduced curb-cuts are a positive pedestrian contribution and a typical regulation of the City's Land Use Ordinance and policy of the Transportation System Plan; 6) A single level home on the Strawberry Lane property will clearly produce a result far more preferable to the surrounding neighbors when compared to a two-story home which would likely block views of the areas surrounding hillsides and open spaces; 11 ~l'a~e 7) The applicants have attempted to create a more pedestrian friendly strectseape by orientating the garage's door away or perpendicular to the sidewalk. Thus, instead of a massive void of a garage door along the sidewalk or automobiles stacked between the garage and sidewalk, the proposed garage has windows on its front facade and landscaping between the garage and sidewalk to help softcn its facade; 8) The throat of the driveway where it meets the street is narrowed to only 12' increasing the home's presence and the not the driveways; 9) The application creates an opportunity for neighborhood involvement and public discretion which often creates an environment where the applicant puts forth efforts that are not typically required. In this case, the applicant desires to construct a residence on the Strawberry Lane parcel that includes advanced conservation technologies that is not only energy efficient, but with a goal of pursuing LEED certification or as close to certification as financially feasible. 10) Due to the sites slight grade and the applicants desire not to overly create numerous retaining walls on the downhill side, its expected the home will sit slightly below the street grade in order to reduce earth movement and nestle into the slope. In doing so, the driveway will also sit slightly below street grade and thus further justifying the need to exist the site in a forward manner. 11) The orientation of the home is intended to obtain as much passive solar as possible. The orientation and added windows help create a home that is not only attempting to be energy efficient, but also articulate and attractive. 12) The subject home has less square footage than the neighboring properties. The intent of the owners is to not build a large house or a house size based on future resale possibilities, but a house that fits their accessibility needs and a house that is well designed and constructed. If necessary, the homeowner is willing to record a deed restriction memorializing the increased coverage as well as the lot's retention as a single level building site. C. That the circumstances or conditions have not been willfully or purposely self-imposed. Tire combination of the lot's close adjacency to the Westwood Street and Strawberry Lane intersection and its close adjacency to the Birdsong Lane intersection where is meets with a curvilinear portion of Strawberry Lane has not been willfully or purposely self-imposed. The applicant has explored alternative driveway locations, but the same general safety concerns and conflict points remain. As such, the goal of the applicant is to construct a single-story single family residence with a detached garage as depicted on the attached preliminary site plan and conceptual elevation plan in order to provide for safe egress of the site which will help accommodate an "aging in place" opportunity for a family member who has accessibility constraints. 121l1agc; o gldap iol :u LS • a ~`1141. cu It . aqua} aaf41e1 P004 -4 S-9 E y 'cu $ N pacuasba aprs~f 'r r° o m o r 9~4d C) ~ 3• ~a ~ c a ~ rl r R O N to 'LA ~ s °;E a y cx T a Q LO k .k •f i 1 ~ G 31 yy~~~rr lY i tD t Ap..:>... FI ~ P. i p1 2~ e li J-s ~E ? - N Lil {w 11 In 1{ O N _ f' ~ 1 r i CL 1 , ~ e ~ w ift •-i - ! 1 k 1 it ~ U ~1 ¢ Q / i _ y-~ l ~-yy (v N Ij (D _0 $ o x i O 17 Ei Q Z) Q In h N is CD O v O f~ - (D 4- rv U i E i t), r kO j O iryk 11 1 d1 , N ' 3 fleet Aauosew j! 9 J I V1 f i11 j ~.3 ~ y 10 1 1 W0,3j JAUFA 4) S'9 2u14slXI ;1 Q yIdap 101 t) StrT ' m N w CD 4 C) a r, u. c v ~n C~ L m ~5 0 v I!I P I 656.62 WESTWOOD STI _ o1.V €16.06 124.00 1 n o C> Q 14520 !J o ~O ° N o 0 O C1J v v ~Y r f l/ 145.42 W 14520 \/t EE gV C) r^ C J 'b✓ fn cn O ' \ Y 0 N 0 co (D ~ P1 C1t a m N ~ m Or w ~ 1 U N c 3's fl V C1 D 56.89 W N 138.00 ~ ~ ~ 0: BOYANEA ~.a SEE MAP 39 1 E 08AC Q ~ r 'I 1 It $ff ~11{~.1 INFORMA7iON TECHNOLOGY Map Maker ~.i Application i I Property Data Ont€ne Legend i Highllghted Feature T 1 ~ _ I axLatOuUines ' ~J~t~ - - , it 1 11~ WIG 4441 I IE Tax Lot Numbers f i#i } f - I i s f2 FU ~ ~ it i I I j i~~U = ~ ~ ~ E'I 1 EEC 1 i ~ i If o ' s 10~ ` i I I I I ''x{11 I i4~ t I 107 1€111 _ I, # } ` 06 { 0 i ' a ~ li J i 1 1 i . i (iE 211 I f z a 504 I 3 f _ j 2141 f I i t~ a` 20 t i0 i JZ , 20'U O _ a3 I!i 2l8 21 I tiG 60 I I .51,11 7 ! 2U7 Us ' 21 ii JACKSON COUNTS!' ,I ;i 20t 2{{ } (r t ! g 0 FI j j Th:'s map fs based err a d.g':,2l da~basa E ma pp.W by Jackson Ca My From a v (,"aty I of sources. Jnkt n C-My w,not eccepl ~ ~ y respn~sLyfa errws.em'ssons. or post'~onst semess, There ere no ri3TarF_~5, ESpte55Ed IN Illj}!;°d, 1 Crea!c-d xRh Vapllaker flap peaked o.~51f020329:59:35 AM usrg x2b.(ac~axounry org ~y FieasF e.^r~e!a :oi~h eo',red of:ce grmictaper O r O 1 1' ~ ~ j1 ~ ff! ~ ter f f } t t ; r ~r i i P 333 t ~ 1 ~ S f r~ ' f f +f. rg a i .f s .S ~ ieJ f~ t , i!1 i. N 3' f [y~~ i ~r £ t Vl _ f~f fi+r f= ~a~ t~ ~1 f F? ff Q ? y 1 i 1 f:'~ r• fr` - ~ i 0 Jf i~ i f 11 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Ashland conducted a public hearing on the above- referenced amendments on December 18, 2007 and left the record open until January 15, 2008. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Ashland has determined that in order to protect and benefit the health, safety and welfare of existing and future residents of the City, It Is necessary to amend the Ashland Land Use Ordinance In manner proposed, that an adequate factual base exists for the amendments, the amendments are consistent with the comprehensive plan and that such amendments are fully supported by the record of this proceeding. NOW THEREFORE, THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1, Section 18.08.019 Definition: Accessory Residential Unit, is added to the Ashland Municipal Code, and reads as follows: 18..08.019 Accessory Residential Unit. A second dwelling unit either attached to a single family dwelling or located on the same lot with a single family dwelling and having an independent- means of access. SECTION 2, Section 18.08.078 - Definition: Basement, is added to the Ashland Municipal Code, and reads as follows: 18.08.078 Basement. That portion of a building with a floor-to-telling height of not less than 6.5 feet and where fifty percent (50%) or more of its perimeter walls are less than six 6 feet above ni3tural grade and does not exceed twelve (12) feet above finish grade at anypoint. SECTION 3, Section 18.08.090, Boarding-room house, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.08.090, Boarding-room house. A dwelling or part thereof, other than a hotel or motel, where lodging with or without means Is provided, for compensation, for three (3) or more persons, for a minimum period of thirty (30) days. SECTION 4, Section 18.08,160 - Definition: Coverage, lot or site, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.08.160, Coverage, lot or site. Total area of all struetures, buildings, parking areas, paved driveways, a's well as --er other solid surfaces seil disturbances that will not allow normal water Infiltration to the ground. Up to five percent 5% of the lot area having porous solid surfaces, such as paths, patios, decks, and similar surfaces is exem t from lot gQvergge requirements. The coverage Is expressed as a percentage of such area in relation to the total gross area of the lot or site. Landscaping which does not negatively Impact the natural water retention and soil characteristics of the site shall not be deemed part of the lot or site coverage. SECTION 5, Section 18.08.256 Definition: Floor areas, gross habitable, is added Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments First Reading: March 18, 2008°p. 2 - 1!r . MIT * No 8-9 aggregate bedding course Hydra-flog Technology Pavers F - rte: L~`~ls L _ - 1 ~-'Lw Y, ] • Y• . No 57 stone open-graded base t * No 2 drain stone Stabilizer Fabric Sub base - varies with design (if recommended by soil engineer) - I s Native Soil * Aggregate depth to be created Subgrade determined by a qualified ManutadviedIntheUSA soil engineer US Patent # 7927037 B2 Canadian Patent #2746731 Hydro-FIW,Technology Pavers Perforated DrainPipe as %1 . s t required F{= a k Yyi : r F.- .`~p1 .i'~'~ rte'. ` h i n - 54 Please Cconsult a certified soil engineer prior t0 installation of permeable pavers as ninny things affect drainage. Some of these are: I_aW use • Vegetation • Soil type • Drainage area and pattern. e Slope. ~ Basin shape Topography • Natural conditions (ponds, etc.) For additional information or samples please contact; Pacific Interlock Pavingstone Co. PA CI + ~ Pacific Interlock Pavi» gstone Co. 1195 S. 9e Anza Blvd. #B 1895 San Felipe Road San Jose, CA 959291 Hollister, CA 95023 408-257-3645 PAVINDSTOME live. 831-637-9163 www.pacintoriock.coni H, Jltollo olvv we "wadable in sevielai stylos '110 8 r:olots, _ in 60min or 80min siza';,Call for spi'vific infolmathm as vvtYl as _ cu ptorn co/or avaikibility _ is twoo, l'€ n i TsrF€fr~r# 1YF, i 5(1?,'1?1 fi)',#,, s,1F?;!(?,ti' ~`Sf<7?L CGfr:.- .r:.' „ f FS#cJ1e St~rl~; I_ t;t~F?1r' ~ Sfo~tf ffr~lrri frst~~#r* _ _ ~~r3~t(3~i#(ii1eS t 1 _ { ~ e f;.5tair' P!ir.'. t.l1116•~.'f ti~i# - t'!ir' S'C i 3kt^.1S i j flavin Mfr .t F j"} Il,/r (if. ;k C1mt4t1d1r I l}E'1 ,rEfLlt: 1, es th"Ifn i i,) No No r E r':.( [_cssthan 1' , f''Jcs P« No OldiCIa!v Ile] ll'r,qh,IIo f-'Ei cf, ~`~•~;%i iIIIE 1I iI i(Ifidof"litt' 11iMet te Hydro-Flo Pavers i rl{i Y("s Yt2, iii - TRUE NATURE KimberlyTrtte,MI,A NA ` CA I,attdscape Architect H5596 TRUE ' ° TrtteNature Dcsigmcom June 16, 2011 RU': N(mmination/Pacife Interlock Hydro Ho Pavers To Whom It May Concern: I recently specified the 1406c Interlock I lydro-110 p avers for the l,ibraaty I'la" por hmi of the Infrastructure Renewal Project at the: University of Clalifontiq Santa Bat•baw (10WHY As part of the camlws' overall sustainability prog~t•aata), over 16,0I10 SF of pcrtncablc pave r5 were installed td) replace aged, cracked concrete that. was removed as pan of a new 49" morna drain line installation. The campus community is vvq pleased with the new permeable pager plaza, The key component that led the design team to select the Hydro-Flo paver is the lack of rack joints, making it ideal for a pedestrian environraaent, such as the Library Plaza at I.VSK \Ve like ' floc: pavers because they have been demonstrated tat reducc up to 80c',4, of total suspended solids in stoma water rrtnoff, a key objec:tivu as floe plaza "area (mains to the Cara pus lagoon which currentl)' has high sediment and nutrient issues, Due to the site gcology and need to support enae.rgency vchicks, this installatioaa has an under-drain system discharging into as designed rain garden, then ulttnamely to the campus l ignon and Pad ific Occan. During rain events, it is r possible to set hom c_lt hr aiid clesiii the AGO uatir i•tai'i0V fri:itii 16 prirle.c.t site, is. It also aiddus out for several days after larger rain events, tnitn.icking a t-norc taatural hydrologic condition. The ~Library Plaza site is very flat, and previously experienced major drainage and ponding problems k after rain events. "Mat probicna has disappeared after the insm%uhmi of the hydraPI'low pavers, nwalcing the plaza both attractive nand safe. I The product, uxhich Nve understand is rnaatttfacrured with some recycled content and is 1(I0%,) j recyclable, is also, extremely strong and durable, perfect for the fire lane - requirement in this public plaza location, 'I-he JOW SRI index is also a benonftt for the. occupants in the surrounding buddurgs and library. Another key factor in deciding, to use an interlocking paver systein is the ability to ren"e"ge and replace existing paver units when accessing underground utilities, virtually elitninating future waste generation associated With routine utility maintenance and upgrade. Also, if seeding occurs, the base can be mcompacted and the same l wcm reinstalled, reducing or elin-iitait-ing the need for new inputs and waste gene.raadon. I ann very pleased ttrith the look auacl performance of the Hydro-11) product, and would red;on1me;ttd and specify it on future projects. Because it is made locally in northern California, the carbota footpri.tit to have the product d elivcred to our project sites is reduce(] -is compared !frith several other larger permeable paving ri- anufacturcrs. I greatly appreciate thc env iron nicn tat benefits of this product, and hope that is begins to be Wider' used throughout thd: st;tte fi.ar its 1'rue Nature 526C IiolliW Ave. We 230, Goleta, CA 9M I I POM 770-2100 King(a;1"a°ate~Fatitrci7csigat.ec>t3t TRUE NATURE s Kimberly Tnic, AAA CA Landscape Architect fl5596 rtteNatttrenesigmcom Pai:iltc IntctlOCk 1-1y-dro-Flo PAV('rs june 16, 2011 Page Iwo potontiaal try decrease urbaala tacm-point Soul-ce storfa► water n1noff polltati<-~n, incru;lsc €,rofandwater rech,m-ge pc,tcntiaL and iali nk n attmd lavclrugmO is Ts6aTc r.atc_s. Mcase feel free to contract tree Avitla any clu"tions regarding this project and the Ilse of tile pavcrs. 5ineerek, r Kimberly Troc, MLA Principal, L.,an€lscapc Architect i '1'a e Nafmv 5266 ffolfisfcr Ave.. Sulk 231 Gddj CA 93" 1 PO Q770-2100 Kira(t-vTYueN,a1umDesipxmn Proposed & Adjacent Properties Lot Coverage Information (City, County Records & Site Observations*): * Estimated based on field observations lik7 ~ 1 102 IG3 .,F> -n 541 Strawberry Latte /G~ IGJ (Tax Lot #104) j2i y - 3rRa,~Tyar ~ l.'~t j i 311 J I fI I r 4 Proposed Coverage: Impervious Surface Areas Single Level House: 2,925 square feet (45' X 65') Front & Back Porches: 192 square feet Garage & Studio/Office: 660 square feet (30'X 22') j Swimming Pool: 375 square feet (15' X 25') Total: 4,152 sq. ft. (19%) Permeable Pavers (Hydro-Flo Technology Pavers): Parking Plaza & Driveway: 968 square feet Pool Perimeter (3' ADA): 276 square feet Total: 1,244 sq, ft. (5.7%) Total: 5,396 sq. ft. (24.7%) 1 503 Strawberry Lane Year Built: 2004 (2 stories) House: 2,999 sq. ft. Lot Area: .67 acres Required Lot Coverage: 5,837 sq. ft. (20%) Existing Lot Coverage: 5,276 sq. ft. (18%) Impervious surface area = 2,600 sq. ft. (ground floor*) 641 sq. ft. garage 2,03 5 sq. ft. of driveway/ patio/ sidewalks . .,.E ~ S t 4r`_ LL X234 a~~,y_~ ~~~+L,~~# rodp Y ~h~.~ F 1-1f ZV )r 551 Strawberiy Lane Year Built: 2009 (2'/i stories) ..House: 3,481 sq. ft, Lot Area:.50 acres Required Lot Coverage: 4,356 sq. ft. (20%) Existing Lot Coverage: 4,275 sq. ft. (19%) Impervious surface area = 1,800 sq. ft. (ground floor*) 816 sq. ft. garage j 1,659 sq. ft, of driveway / patio / sidewalks Note: Has unfinished basement-not included in sq. ft. S ►rx ky 4 r'; Its IK , 2 121 Birdsong Year Built: 2005 (1 story) House: 2,688 sq. ft. Lot Area:.41 acres Required Lot Coverage: 3,571 sq. ft. (20%) Existing Lot Coverage: 4,326 sq. ft. (24%) Impervious surface area = 2,688 sq. ft. house (ground floor*) 608 sq. ft. garage 1,030 sq. ft. of driveway / patio / sidewalks Notes: Developed as part of a PUD F ~ ,as l xs 191 Birdsong Year Built: 2008 (212 stories) House: 4,665 sq. ft. Lot Area:.39 acres Required Lot Coverage: 3,397 sq. ft. (20%) Existing Lot Coverage: 5,602 sq. ft. (33%) Impervious surface area = 3,288 sq. ft, house (ground floor`) 654 sq. ft. garage 1 1,660 sq. ft. of driveway f patio l sidewalks Notes: Developed as part of a PUD a Yd j:- I r t _ _ t^rs 3 _ .fat yi Ir ? t I.j I J. i i i i r ~I d ZONING F ' :+1 MS'UIIEiL'Y11Y. 0fi. r. ir',k F'kv" '3'E).r1f l~ ...s 4°;I D fl, Fri arc-+ir.,;r:X, - 1. ;~In~11_ - (i:YfC.• ilr4-,::I~.a;[=still ~5~1~ ~ E.d?''J rf l9x J`.1~.± ~w.7....._.Col.'1 €~:~J•ir ~ . f'~•. ~i; r•4~r~c~e_41~p~i~~, }!~°t_L,9'1~>~~i'i 17Fl13s~}w J r ~ R>~,~ l f r ~ 3~ p4~ ~'~r~''•• ~ ..'J! "g•~~rfr;a~ tt~~r _,~f_ ~~Po- 4 ^.'ii~~" J .s,~ i~ . 3r. zp ,~Jl;la'a~ g~::°~'~pk~,~,a~'l.'~ `.~...'-'_Wj~'_ ~'-J~~_,_~.-__.•_ [~Ig'•=~L~~S ~p',,::dF ----_------F:~i~-.. =fix . S~~ +ri ~Ie;H•rLiak~.klal''7'=',49`r;S.51'.7.14i1P[! ti]lnl!-l,4F1,]71'..'}~.p:;•~.illta•fr<.C'iii€:-.i11ti1_C';3t'i5~5~Y;~7!r*kl3ric,°.`:'.:. ,n.e lb7 i.i"k"':i ~i'P'V.l~~td ~"s~C~~.:gS_;'6'i§T.'.S~.If.>35 sltleil:l~~!+J:4~y'"~1d`,15:;+., i~,7ct~pw::a'4:'.{Y5'J::'.-- ~1!"r:1,itS1•:fl7jifA-.7t ,'.".{1!':IM E~'~`~).' ~i _-k'1d15 9_S 5 !7.a f y.lF f i 3"s, i F ~9Yti :5:'ar:Y:4::IN fsl:}'k#k'i:~~{: ~ i i~i'Y x'i1S' f ~~al st,'°{ S I l ,~t E ~,v .a Iikti: C sl~k' Shy 1 ~ ~ P~ i• ti',1'kT g',h~ 1-: ~1 e~'? Y c~: Y: lili►c Il tS:11,'.*;:~+.a~;>SI'dlefa'Iti:1.11t;U~S:'^.1':Y''?f^;27i1~1f¢y~i~:'!~OS,?~..t di ,~~!1''lt°=4at;fi'4~'JPliii}e71J'n`~•S.`lli,9;"Si^~'Sk%'a~3}r,' ~'`!la::.<<t~~l'.9'4'il~t"tS~r9Q;':7!R~t^.~+114#:ftiLi{1it'3' .1r~la'>',1\'.`.ci:.'1T[r:aA:.~SS.'415'~l1(kypl~`'+r,~!iti1t111#,;:fr:` Fti~+.,Ei ~}'~:}i'91t1•Y': L'i"1'h'v aY~j bl f'}~:41111,•E..i~'Al~~$:}~L'1E.,e~~:~i:•E!E...f;~F.'~'.S•1~~~:J~~}$5'CI~I,~A4:.H~}+5', i~L~Fr:t ii~i~Fi "Er.~e~~.` '.+f •t,: Ca,r,`,~YrR, 3113'AlV.ft1) II -.lerr' 'i a''FSxt:;~~.,1' •1~`.ta~'.in~':ta~i:?4s4',fi I s r- ~tti i.t,iFy'.:'E-:ir~r:~l;~'~'S1JF;'~li.U~f15I73;+,:'3; ! I>`LEI ti':-:1 fit.' :1Il~l.citi.'l tali f'F•'4^k;,{'' C~1E:#:`f,14`:.YF:I 1`..~ ;'_4af':#j_~','_N5l1f z7r! bz iY t",ti~-~e F€fD tiF fad C3~'lFilll'13 I rli+ <ra~ 1.1"' i1 r _ Dial" ~A Is1,. ~aedd#,,[t,iAl ::.dY-I~ 1.7a' •14 E }'fit.....°_.--.-. 1~.~9_li ;'7f I• i.t}.`. ,y •1.6 t. a r r+E i.i:~ a i ~ f+: Mal I Job Address: 541 STRAWBERRY LN Contractor: ASHLAND OR 97520 Address: C` A Owner's Name: IRVINE DOUG/DIONNE 0 Phone: P Customer 06898 N State Lic No: P PAUL A CONFLITTi T City Lic No: L Applicant: R` Address: A -C' C Sub-Contractor: A Phone: (408) 761-5686 T Address: N Applied: 07/24/2012 0 T Issued: R Expires: 01/2012013 Phone: State Lic No: Maplot: 391e08bd104 City Lic No: i DESCRIPTION: variance - Determined to be a type 2. Additional fee required. $982 pad on PA-2012-00981. Balance owed on this permit $988. VALUATION Occupancy Type Construction Units Rate Amt Actual Amt Constuction Description Total for Valuation: MECHANICAL . . ELECTRICAL STRUCTURAL PERMIT FEE DETAIL Fee Description Amount Fee Description Amount Variance (Type 2) 988.00 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL i I I COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tel: 549-488-5305 20 East Main St, Fax: 541-488-5311 Ashland, OR 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 ewm.ashland.or.us CITY OF Inspection Request Line: 541-552-2080 -As Hy LAN jLj LAI .l iE',~1uoFl~~~,iUl&dlcYclf arr„1, ~~~(,,_+~zaz,l~~i Job Address: 541 STRAWBERRY LN Contractor: ASHLAND OR 97520 Address: C A P' Owner's Name: IRVINE DOUG/DIONNE O, Phone: Customer 02188 N State Lic No: P MARK KNOX, AICP T City Lic No: L Applicant: ! Address: A- C C Sub-Contractor: A Phone: T Address: N Applied: 07/06/2012 0 T Issued: Expires: 01/02/2013 R Phone: State Lic No: Maplot: 391e08bd104 City Lie No: DESCRIPTION: variance I VALUATION Occupancy Type Construction Units Rate Amt Actual Amt Constuction Description Total for Valuation: MECHANICAL i i ELECTRICAL STRUCTURAL PERMIT FEE DETAIL Fee Description Amount Fee Description Amount Variance (Type 1) 982,00 h CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL { COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tel: 541-488-5305 20 East Main St. Fax: 541-488-5311 Ashland, OR 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 4wnv,ashiand.or.us Inspection Request Line: 541-552-2080 CITY OF