Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutThird_140-142_PA-2013-00836 j CITY ASHLAND July 26, 2013 Notice of Final Decision On July 26, 2013, the Community Development Director approved the request for the following: Planning Action: PA-2013-00836 Subject Property: 140-142 N Third Street Applicant: Ann and Martha McIntyre Description: Request for a Residential Site Review approval to construct a new residential dwelling unit at the rear of the property adjacent to the alley for the property located at 140 and 142 Third Street. The existing second dwelling unit located directly behind the front residence will convert to a guest house. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low- Density Multi-Family Residential; ZONING: R-2; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 lE 09BA; TAX LOTS: 8200. The Community Development Director's decision becomes final and is effective on the 13th day after the Notice of. Final Decision is mailed. Approval is valid for a period of 1 year and all conditions of approval identified on the attached Findings are required to be met prior to project completion. The application, all associated documents and evidence submitted, and the applicable criteria are available for review at the Ashland Community Development Department, located at 51 Winburn Way. Copies of file documents can be requested and are charged based on the City of Ashland copy fee schedule. Prior to the final decision date, anyone who was mailed this Notice of Final Decision may request a reconsideration of the action as set forth in the Ashland Land Use Ordinance (ALUO) 18.108.070(B)(2)(b) and/or file an appeal to the Ashland Planning Commission as provided in ALUO 18.108.070(B)(2)(c). The ALUO sections covering reconsideration and appeal procedures are attached. The appeal may not be made directly to the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals. If you have any questions regarding this decision, please contact Amy Gunter in the Community Development Department at (541) 488-5305. cc: Ann and Martha McIntyre Parties of record and property owners within 200 ft COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel: 541488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us SECTION 18.108.070(B)2 Effective Date of Decision and Appeals. B. Actions subject to appeal: 2. Type I Planning Actions. a. Effective Date of Decision. The final decision of the City for planning actions resulting from the Type I Planning Procedure shall be the Staff Advisor decision, effective on the 13tl' day after notice of the decision is mailed unless reconsideration of the action is approved by the Staff Advisor or appealed to the Commission as provided in section 18.108.070(B)(2)(c), b. Reconsideration. The Staff Advisor may reconsider Type I planning actions as set forth below. i. Any party entitled to notice of the planning action, or any City Agency may request reconsideration of the action after the decision has been made by providing evidence to the Staff Advisor that a factual error occurred through no fault of the party asking for reconsideration, which in the opinion of the staff advisor, might affect the decision. Reconsideration requests are limited to factual errors and not the failure of an issue to be raised by letter or evidence during the opportunity to provide public input on the application sufficient to afford the Staff Advisor an opportunity to respond to the issue prior to making a decision. ii. Reconsideration requests shall be received within five (5) days of mailing. The Staff Advisor shall decide within three (3) days whether to reconsider the matter. iii. If the Planning Staff Advisor is satisfied that an error occurred crucial to the decision, the Staff Advisor shall withdraw the decision for purposes of reconsideration. The Staff Advisor shall decide within ten (10) days to affirm, modify, or reverse the original decision. The Staff Advisor shall send notice of the reconsideration decision to affirm, modify, or reverse to any party entitled to notice of the planning action, iv. If the Staff Advisor is not satisfied that an error occurred crucial to the decision, the Staff Advisor shall deny the reconsideration request. Notice of denial shall be sent to those parties that requested reconsideration. c. Appeal. i. Within twelve (12) days of the date of the mailing of the Staff Advisor's final decision, including any approved reconsideration request, the decision may be appealed to the Planning Commission by any party entitled to receive notice of the planning action. The appeal shall be submitted to the Planning Commission Secretary on a form approved by the City Administrator, be accompanied by a fee established pursuant to City Council action, and be received by the city no later than 4:30 p.m. on the 12th day after the notice of decision is mailed. ii. If an appellant prevails at the hearing or upon subsequent appeal, the fee for the initial hearing shall be refunded. The fee required in this section shall not apply to appeals made by neighborhood or community organizations recognized by the city and whose boundaries include the site. iii. The appeal shall be considered at the next regular Planning Commission or Hearings Board meeting. The appeal shall be a de novo hearing and shall be considered the initial evidentiary hearing required under ALUO 18.108.050 and ORS 197.763 as the basis for an appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals. The Planning Commission or Hearings Board decision on appeal shall be effective 13 days after the findings adopted by the Commission or Board are signed by the Chair of the Commission or Board and mailed to the parties. iv. The appeal requirements of this section must be fully met or the appeal will be considered by the city as a jurisdictional defect and will not be heard or considered. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel: 541-488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.onus ASHLAND PLANNING DIVISION FINDINGS & ORDERS PLANNING ACTION: PA-2013-00836 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 140-142 N Third Street O"ER/APPLICANT: Ann and Martha McIntyre DESCRIPTION: Request for a Residential Site Review approval to construct a new residential dwelling unit at the rear of the property adjacent to the alley for the property located at 140 and 142 Third Street. The existing second dwelling unit located directly behind the front residence will convert to a guest house. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low-Density Multi-Family Residential; ZONING: R-2; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 1E 09BA; TAX LOTS: 8200 SUBMITTAL DATE: June 13, 2013 DEEMED COMPLETE DATE: June 25, 2013 STAFF APPROVAL; DATE: July 26, 2013 FINAL DECISION DATE: August 3, 2013 APPROVAL EXPIRATION DATE: August 3, 2014 DECISION The subject property is located at 140 and 142-N Third Street. The subject and adjacent properties are zoned R-2, Low Density Multi-Family Residential and are located within the Ashland Railroad Addition Historic District. The parcel is 7,100 square feet in size and is located on the east side of Third Street, between B and C Streets. The parcel has alley access on along the east property line. The subject property has an approximate three percent down slope to the north. There are number of small, volunteer plum trees along the south property line towards the rear of the property and some larger stature deciduous trees near the primary, residence near Third Street. The trees at the front of the property will not be affected by the development at the rear of the property. The applicant has requested approval to remove the four plum trees. The property contains two residential dwellings. There is a 832 square foot, single story, small, hipped-roof wood frame bungalow at the front of the property constructed in 1941. The existing home is designated as the Newell & Beulah Whetstone Rental House in the Ashland Railroad Addition Historic District inventory document and is considered `Historic Contributing'. The house retains high integrity and effectively relates to its historic period of development. Directly behind the primary residence is a 500 square foot concrete block building that had been converted to a residential unit at some time in the past, it was likely a garage. At the rear of the property adjacent to the alley is a single car garage that is on both the rear and the south (side) . property lines. The garage is a pre-existing, non-conforming structure as it does not comply with the setbacks required in today's codes. The applicant has proposed to shore up and rehabilitate the structure as it is in disrepair but the garage will stay in its current location and will not change in size, shape or use. The project requires a Site Design Review approval since it involves the construction of a new second dwelling unit. The Site Review approval criteria require that the proposal comply with PA #2013-00836 140 -142 Third Street/adg Page 1 applicable ordinance, the Site Review for Multi-Family Development chapter and the Site Design and Use Standards. The permitted density of the parcel.is two units. Two residential units ate proposed. The existing rental directly behind the primary residence on Third Street is proposed to be modified and the kitchen cooking facilities will be removed. The structure is allowed as a guest house for use of guests of the tenants at the property, or can be used as detached living space. It is not permitted for short term accommodation or as an additional rental. A condition of approval to this effect has been added. The applicant has proposed a 1,082 square foot, single-story bungalow with a small front porch that will face the alley. The unit is proposed to be historically compatible with the existing structure using horizontal lap siding, historically appropriate trim sizes and profiles, energy efficient. double hung or casement windows. The City of Ashland Historic Commission reviewed the proposal at their July 3, 2013 meeting and recommended that the applicant provide a clear vertical separation between the windows between four and one half to six. inches. in width and that consistent header and door heights be shown and that the double hung windows be consistent heights. The Maximum. Permitted floor area for the parcel is 2,414 square feet. The proposal complies with the permitted floor area for the parcel. The two dwelling units, one unit with three bedrooms and the new unit with two bedrooms require four parking spaces. There is an existing surface parking space in the driveway accessed from Third Street, the applicant has proposed two surface parking spaces adjacent to the existing single car garage accessed from the alley, and the property with more than 22-feet of uninterrupted curb frontage qualifies for an on-street-parking credit. The applicant has not indicated the surfacing method of the parking spaces, according to the Ashland Municipal Code, all required parking areas shall be paved with concrete, asphaltic, pervious paving or comparable surfacing. The parking spaces shall be surfaced in accordance with the code. prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the new dwelling unit. Additionally, the existing non- conforming garage is shown as a parking space. Due to the size of the garage and that ample parking is available on-site and with a street parking credit; it is unlikely that a vehicle will park in the garage. Staff received a written comment expressing concern about the use of the garage as a vehicle parking space and the availability of adequate back-up space for the new parking spaces. The applicant has proposed the required number of parking spaces which comply with the backup dimension to meet the proposed use of the site. Additionally, the garage has been standing for at least 50-years as evidenced in historic aerial photographs and has functioned as a parking space. Staff does not believe that the garage should be prevented from use if the property owner decides to use it as a parking space at any point in the future. As proposed, there is not a path from the vehicular parking spaces to the front units, a footpath will be required. This will be required to be shown on the building permit submittals and installed prior to the certificate of occupancy, a 'condition to this effect has been added. The applicant has proposed to provide five bicycle parking spaces in the re-habilitated garage. The application addresses that adequate capacity of public services is available to the site. Electric service to the existing second unit exists on-site. Since no new service will be required, the applicant is not required by code to modify the existing services to underground. New water and sewer lines are also proposed for the units and identified on the site plan provided. There is available water and sewer service in the adjacent public right-of-way. The applicant will be PA #2013-00836 140 -142 Third Street/adg Page 2 required to address storm drainage and catchment for the parking areas at the rear of the property. One of the public comment letters received from a number of neighbors stated that vehicle traffic on Third Street is a concern and the letter states that there is concern about additional traffic generated by the proposed dwelling unit. Based on the most recent traffic counts (2002) the section of Third Street from C to B had 953 vehicle trips per day. Third Street is identified as a Neighborhood Street with 1,500 or less motor vehicle trips per day and is fully improved along the property frontage with curb; gutter, sidewalks and a parkrow. According to the International Traffic Engineer (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, multi-family residential developments with two bedrooms generate approximately six to twelve vehicle trips per day. The new unit will not have a significant impact on the number of vehicle trips per day and due to the presence of a previous second unit on the property, the new units' impacts will be negligible. The applicant has proposed to provide individual trash and recycle areas adjacent to the units. The containers are shown within the required setback areas and within the three foot fire fighter pathway. The container placement shall be out of the three-foot setback and screened from the right-of-way. There are no street trees in front of 140 / 142 Third Street. The application includes a conceptual landscape plan and the applicant plans to upgrade the landscaping as part of the proposed development. The application was reviewed at the July 3, 2013 City of Ashland Tree Commission meeting and they recommended a final landscape and irrigation plan, mitigation trees in accordance with AMC 18.61.084 and that a street tree be planted in the parkrow. Staff finds that the construction of a new, second residential unit, converting the existing second unit to detached living / guest space and associated site improvement complies with the requirements of the Ashland Municipal Code and the Site Design and Use Standards for Multi- Family development in the Historic District. The application with the attached conditions complies with all applicable City ordinances. The criteria for Site Reviews Approval are described in AMC Chapter 18.72.070, as follows: A. All applicable City ordinances have been met or will be met by the proposed development. B. All requirements of the Site Review Chapter have been met or will be inet. C. The development complies with the Site Design Standards adopted by the City Council for implementation of this Chapter. D. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, paved access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property. Planning Action 2013-00836 is approved with the following conditions. Further, if any one or more of the following conditions are found to be invalid for any reason whatsoever, then Planning Action 2013-00836 is denied. The following are the conditions and they are attached to the approval: PA 92013-00836 140 -142 Third Street/adg Page 3 1) That all proposals of the applicant shall be conditions of approval unless otherwise modified here. 2) That the plans submitted for the building permit shall be in substantial conformance with those approved as part of this application. If the plans submitted for the building permit are not in substantial conformance with those approved as part of this application, an application to modify the current Site Review and Conditional Use permit approvals shall be submitted and approved prior to issuance of a building permit. 3) That all conditions of the Historic Commission as detailed in their recommendations from the July 3, 2013 meeting shall be conditions of approval where consistent with applicable Site Design and Use Standards with the final approval of the Staff Advisor. 4) . That all conditions of the Tree Commission as detailed in their recommendations of July 3, 2013 meeting shall be conditions of approval where consistent with applicable Site Design and Use Standards and with final approval of the Staff Advisor. 5) That building permit submittals shall include: a) That the proposed surfacing method and proposed drainage system for the required parking area shall be submitted to the Planning and Building Divisions and the Public Works and Engineering Department for review and approval. If the applicant selects pervious pavement a drainage plan for the parking area including the specs for the drainage catch basin shall be provided. b) That the building materials and the exterior colors shall be identified in the building permit submittals for the review and approval of the Staff Advisor to demonstrate compliance with Site Design and Use Standards requirements that the materials and colors be compatible with the surrounding area. c) That the exterior lighting shall be directed onto the property and shall not directly illuminate adjacent proprieties. Exterior lighting details shall be provided on building permit submittals. d) That a revised landscaping and irrigation plan in accordance with the Site Design and Use Standards, including plant species, size of planting, coverage details. The landscaping and irrigation plan shall include the landscape buffers, mitigation trees for the plum removals, the street tree and a larger stature deciduous shade tree for the parking area at the rear of the parcel. 7) That the tree protection fencing shall-be installed according to the approved plan prior to any site work, storage of materials or issuance of the building permit. The tree protection shall be inspected and approved by the Ashland Planning Department prior to site work, storage of materials and/or the issuance of a building permit. 8) That prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy: a) That the required two parking spaces for the new unit shall be installed in accordance with the approved building permit plans. The path connecting the parking area to the PA #2013-00836 140 -142 Third Street/adg Page 4 sidewalk on Third Street be installed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. b) That wheel stops a minimum of four inches tall by six feet in length shall be installed at the front of the parking spaces in accordance with AMC 18.92.080.E.5. c) Required bike parking shall be installed prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. d) That the landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in. accordance with the approved plans. e) That an opportunity to recycle and trash site shall be located on the site, in conformance with 18.72.040 and in accordance with the approved plans prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy for the second. f) That the kitchen cooking facilities shall be.removed from the existing cottage space. That a No Kitchen / No Rental deed agreement shall be signed and recorded prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy for the second unit (new construction). Z'z Marra Harris, Planning Manager Date Department of Community Development PA #2013-00836 140 -142 Third Street/adg Page 5 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 26, 2013 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 PA-2013-00836, 140-142 N Third. Signature of Employee i DocumenQ 7/26/2013 l I i PA-2013-00836 391 E09BA 6700 PA-2013-00836 391 E09BA 6400 PA-2013-00836 391 E09BA 8400 ADAMS JUSTIN RIPETERSON-ADAMS BABBITT JANE BRUNSTON TRUSTEE ROBERT C MIRA B 366 B 26927 BELLFOUNTAIN RD 363 B ST ASHLAND OR 97520 MONROE OR 97456 ASHLAND OR 97520 PA-2013-00836 391 E09BA 7800 PA-2013-00836 391 E09BA 6500 PA-2013-00836 391 E09BA 6800. COPILOW SIDNEY TRUSTEE ET AL DEMARINIS SUSAN K TRUSTEE ET AL DI LORETO DANTE' 888 TIMBERLAKE DR 145 NORMAL AVE 11845 W OLYMPIC BLVD 1125W ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 LOS ANGELAS CA 90064 PA-2013-00836 391 E09BA 8800 PA-2013-00836 391 E09BA 8500 PA-2013-00836 391 E09BA 7500 EGAN TRACY ANN LIVING TRUST ETIENNE ROBERT P TRUSTEE ET AL FINNEY DENISE K TRUSTEE ET AL 111 N THIRD ST 143 THIRD ST 225 OHIO ST ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 PA-2013-00836 391 E09BA 8000 PA-2013-00836 391 E09AB 8200 PA-2013-00836 391 E09BA 8700 FITZGERALD MARTHA D GOLDMAN MARTINIGREENE HARRIET HOYT MICHAEL G TRUSTEE ET AL 114 3RD ST 161 FOURTH ST 285 SURREY DR ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 JACKSONVILLE OR 97530 PA-2013-00836 391 E09BA 7400 PA-2013-00836 391 E09AB 8500 PA-2013-00836 391 E09BA 7600 HUNTER PRISCILLA TRUSTEE ET AL JAVNA GORDON LANG PHILIP C 143 FOURTH ST 460B ST 758 B ST ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 PA-2013-00836 391 E09BA 8200 PA-2013-00836 391 E09BA 7700 PA-2013-00836 391 E09BA 8600 MCINTYRE MARTHA M TRUSTEE ET AL ORE SHAKESPEARE FEST ASSOC PATRICK HARLEY BEAUMONT TRUSTEE 58 FOURTH ST P 0 BOX 158 ET AL ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 72 DEWEY ST ASHLAND OR 97520 PA-2013-00836 391 E09BA 8300 PA-2013-00836 391 E09AB 8300 PA-2013-00836 391 E09BA 8100 PRITZKER STEVEN R SMITHTON ROBERT LEE TRUSTEE ET SPEICHER GWEN E 1477 5TH AVE AL 138 THIRD ST SAN FRANCISCO CA 94122 PO BOX 1856 ASHLAND OR 97520 ROSS CA 94957 PA-2013-00836 391 E09BA 6600 PA-2013-00836 391 E09BA 8101 PA-2013-00836 391 E09BA 6701 TARDIFF PETER J TRUSTEE ET AL WEISSHAAR DANA YORK ELIZABETH G 386 B ST 112 PEACH WILLOW CT 640 PRACHT ST ASHLAND OR 97520 LOS GATOS CA 95032 ASHLAND OR 97520 24 140 Third NOD 7-26-13 7/8/13 Gmail - App: re 140-142 N. 3d St. I App: r 140-142 N. 3d to Bob Etienne <bobetienne@gmail.com> Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 8:14 PM Draft To: amy.gunter@ashland.or.ur Dear Amy, Thanks for returning my call on the 5th and for the information you provided. The undersigned neighbors to the proposed construction are concerned about the general appearance of our neighborhood (streets and alleys) and the number of vehicles that will be added given the proposal in either iteration... two 2 bedroom units plus guest house or one three bedroom and one- 2 bedroom unit. Each of us have spent or are spending substantial amounts of time and money upgrading our homes (rather more than we are likely to recover) and we have no little concern about the impact of less than caring renters ...or less than caring owners for that matter. One trip down our block illustrates the point. You have advised me that the new owner(s) of 140-142 N. 3d have kept a rather strict eye on her tenants at a nearby location ...but she lives there which makes it substantially easier to police. The planned addition will produce additional and larger bedrooms as perhaps as many as six to eight vehicles compared to the two vehicles that previously were there. It is not uncommon for one bedroom to produce two vehicles when students are the tenants. ! fi The additional vehicles would add to an already often overloaded parking venue (especially on first Fridays and weekends when we serve the theater goers). The situation has already worsened with the new construction and loss of parking on Lithia between 1st and Pioneer. On the block of N. 3d between B and C Streets, including lots adjacent to the corners are twenty sites (see ! enclosed map); seven of the lots are owner occupied, eleven are rentals and two are devoted to the B&B which is owner occupied... though she rents and resides in the lot next to the B&B and part of the complex. All of the lots on the odd numbered side of 3d Street and three of the four corner lots on the primary block provide off street parking. On the other hand, one rental has five motorcycles and a flat-bed truck parked on the street and driveway and another has two cars and a motorcycle on the street or grass between the street and the sidewalk. Said rental also has a massive water truck parked in the back alley filling two to three parking spaces diagonally. The rental at 156 N. 3d has 4 units and one off street parking space. A fourth rental (on B Street has four to five cars regularly parked on the street ...the latest having been towed there. Per a letter dated November 15, 2012 from the Ashland City Administrator to one of us...it is not against the law j to park on the street and just leave it there...." Because of this code structure we see vehicles parked on the streets for weeks without being moved. One such vehicle, owned by a renter on the even numbered side, was parked in front of 143 and 155 N. 3d, not running, for several months during 2012-2013 although its owner had replaced it with a new vehicle. Thank you for considering our concerns, Bob and Suzanne Etienne Pete and Mari Tardiff Tr cy Egan 143 N. 3d Street 2f 6` B S reef lack Swan Inn 111 N. 3d Street ~.mr Q > / e http"s°: mail.. goyle.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&ik=1110c51J2&Nek---pt&search=drafts&ms 3fc16c07358ab44&dsgt=1 1/2 f /19 C 7/8/13 Gmalll p: re 14 142 3d St. a_. x z i r i i i i e~ https://mail.g oog le.com/mail/u/O/?ui=2&ik=1110c51 e22&tiev,=pt&searcli=drafts&msg =13fel6cO7358ab44&dsq t= l 212 ~ I v `J' 1 { y Q,t a.) ~cW r 1 { e " t{ E 6r I CJ ~ ~ -L)7)bst ? "sue iu~ ) ) `s r a it N rN ; ~ . y / . ~ C'r.~ Cq _ I S_ i~ i p , a C s I: 1 1 l pk I 6 o t t' 'f, t 143 Fourth Street Ashland, Oregon 97520 5-8 July 2013 City of Ashland Planning Division 51 Winburn Way Ashland, Oregon 97520 Hello, Amy Gunter and Planning Officers: My name is Priscilla Hunter. I am the resident and property owner at 143 Fourth Street and owner and innkeeper of Beau Soleil Vacation House, a family cottage also used for tourist lodging at 145 Fourth Street. Both houses sit on the double lot just across the alley from the rental property at 140-142 Third Street now owned by Martha McIntyre. I have lived at my present address since I took out a mortgage on my house in 1989. This letter is in regard to Planning Action PA-2013-00836 for Tax Lots 8200 as described in a Notice of Application for a Site Review that I received from the City about eight days ago on 28 or 29 June 2013 and a corrected Notice of Application that I received on 3 July 2013. I write to you about some of the proposed site changes at 140-142 Third Street that have been proposed by Ann and Martha McIntyre, as affected by Code 1872-070, Section D. I believe this code regards the effects of the McIntyres' site changes on my property and its value. I was advised by Ms. Amy Gunter to reference this code but have not yet been able to go myself to the City offices to see the language of that code for myself, so I follow her counsel in this matter as I write this letter. I also have not yet had sufficient time before the submission-of-comments deadline of 4:30 pm on 9 July 2013 to arrange for helpful photos to accompany my comments in this letter. I hope to be able to provide them as an addendum before the meeting of the final decision makers on this application, providing the place, date and time of that meeting are made available to me. [NB: Digital photos of problem areas have been obtained and will be sent to the Planners by email, along with a copy of this letter.--PH] I point out that the two weekends, one the long Fourth of July weekend, that have occurred since I began to try to understand the implications of the first notice of application and the conditions and implications of the information in them for my property, have interfered with the normal opportunities I might 1 have had for getting advice for or discussing with anyone or preparing my comments on these issues. First in my comments regarding the McIntyres' application to change the property at 140142 Third Street, I want to say that I am generally happy about and encouraged by improvement to the rear of that Third Street property, such as the ones that the McIntyres propose to effect. The back yard of their rental property is fully visible from the back of my property, to me and others, such as guests staying at Beau Soleil. Some or all of the back yard as well as its back fence and a weed patch in front of that fence are unavoidable sights when anyone enters or leaves my property walking or driving down the alley or looks out windows on both levels of my guest cottage or sits on the cottage deck off the upstairs bedroom. I sincerely welcome the proposed removal of the wide swath of weeds that usually have filled the back part of the 140-142 Third Street grounds by the alley on our side of the back fence of that property. It is of interest to note that this strip of land has also occasionally been used through the years by owners and tenants of 140-142 Third Street as a single parking space lying parallel to the alley and has presented no problem to me or my property. I do however have three serious concerns about the changes currently proposed by the McIntyres for 140142 Third Street. Two Concerns One of these concerns is in regard to a specific characteristic of the location of the new spaces for tenant parking that will lie across from my property and off the alley between the old garage and the neighbor's wooden fence. Another concern is in regard to the designation of the old garage as a parking space in the application documents and so potentially in future interpretations of the function of the old garage. The old garage is already a non-conforming structure, due to its location on the property and in relation to neighboring properties. It is designated as a "third" parking space in the official site review documents, though the site diagram shows that at the moment it is to be used for the parking and storage of up to five bicycles. The documents also state that there will be additional bicycle storage spaces not shown on the site diagram and they are to be located outside the garage somewhere. I will give more information about these parking areas further on. The Third Concern: In a Nutshell 2 The third area of concern I have I will address fully in this section. It is my concern for the further degradation of the potential beauty of the alley neighborhood and of its attractiveness to me, to clients of my vacation house Beau Soleil, and to pedestrians and drivers in the alley' between the McIntyres' and my properties caused by the potential overhead placement of electric, telephone and cable lines from the Mclntyres' proposed new residence and accessory buildings to the main utility line in the alley. The lines already coming from the McIntyres' property and surrounding ones--except from my property, where all lines have been buried since 1999-are increasingly an ugly tangle. (See photos.) There has in fact been a gradual increase of electric, cable and/or telephone services to the residences and buildings on the McIntyres' and other properties adjacent to the alley and their attachment to the utility lines and the utility pole located at the south corner of the McIntyre's south-side neighbor's property. These lines obstruct and negate the view of the beauty of natural vistas that should be available to guests from the back windows, deck, and parking space of my cottage Beau Soleil as well as to all of us who frequent the famous little alleys of Ashland, including ours, which lies between Third and Fourth Streets As I write this letter, I have as yet not found an opportunity to speak with either Ms. Gunter or Ann about the McIntyres' plans for the disposition of their new and existing utility lines. So I include this concern in my letter of comment to the City Planners along with, on the one hand, a request to the Planners and the City Council to consider this matter in its making of policies regarding residences and lodging houses in the Railroad district. On the other hand, I would like to formalize my request to the McIntyres to take the worthwhile trouble and accept the minimal expense of connecting their new tenants, as well as the existing primary residence on their property on Third Street, to city and private utilities by the underground route. And, although we have not yet had an opportunity to discuss it, I am optimistically hopeful that the Mclntyres will have already seen the value of burying the utility lines as I am proposing, since Martha McIntyre already owns at least one other double-lot rental property with several units on it in Ashland and seems to have an eye for purchasing rental properties downtown and in the historic Railroad District. I think the move to bury utility lines, which in this case would be made during the major construction project that the McIntyres are proposing with regard to the back yard of 140-142 Third Street, should be found to be reasonably inexpensive to do, as I found it to be when I remodeled the old building that turned out to be my vacation house, Beau Soleil in 1999. Apart from the implicit important safety concerns, burying utility lines is also a simple way of increasing and preserving the value of a property. 3 I will attempt to speak with Ann McIntyre and/or her mother myself about this before I must submit these comments to the City tomorrow. Whether I can arrange that conversation or not, I hereby request that they have agree to bury the cables and wires from the buildings on their property at 140-142 Third Street, including the existing "primary residence," and thereby open up for their tenants and mine the beautiful view of the hills and trees around our properties. I will now address my concerns about the Mclntyres' current plans for parking in the site review PA-2013-00636 concerning the proposed revisions to property at 140-142 Third Street. Parking Concerns At the time of Ann's visit the other day, she showed me the diagram of the planned construction at 140-142 Third Street and, though there were no indications of sizes or dimensions of any of the planned or existing objects visible by me in the new site plan, she assured me and I trust that their plans meet City codes. The site diagram I briefly saw that morning showed two separate parking areas that she and her mother are proposing to make at least technically available to tenants, primarily but, by necessity, not exclusively for the proposed new two-bedroom dwelling. These two areas--area one, the wide area now partially occupied and limited by the east fence (which I will address first), and area two, the old garage (which I will address second)-also presumably will not be prohibited to tenants of the primary residence or even of other guests, should the planned remodeled studio- with-bath, currently still a studio apartment, be used as an additional or guest bedroom by any of the tenants of either of the two houses that will be on the property. (I believe, that there will be a total of five or six bedrooms available for occupancy on the McIntyre property on Third Street. Five covered and an unspecified number of additional bicycle-storage spaces are included in the written plans for the site revision. This all suggests that parking for this property will at all times be at a premium and that all available spaces may and probably will be heavily used. I see two problem areas at 140-142 Third Street that involve parking in these areas and threats to my property Area 1> The Problem and Solutions. The principal area designated as an immediate parking area in the McIntyres' plans has been briefly discussed with Ms. Gunter and with Ann McIntyre and continues to concern me as a threat to the physical property and my business of Beau Soleil Vacation (louse and to the value of my property in general. It is concerns the distance between my property 4 and the end of the McIntyres projected open parking spaces. This parking will apparently be perpendicular to the line of the alley, though neither the site diagram or the written plans seem to address this question. The two spaces that are supposed to be put into this area, I believe it was indicated to me by Ann McIntyre, will lie parallel to the existing old garage that abuts their property line on the south side and the neighbor's fence on the north side. (See photos.) I am also aware of the city requirements and standard allowance of a minimum of 22 feet for vehicles exiting a parking space, and both Ann and Ms. Gunter have assured me that the owners' approved plan complies with the required provision of 22 feet of distance between the rear of the proposed two-car parking area and an obstacle in the vehicle's exit path. Nonetheless, I request that the McIntyres' plans for parking in this area be altered if necessary, in order either to increase the distance between the rear of this parking area and my property line or to resituate the designated spaces in this area to insure that parking will be at an oblique angle rather than parallel to the old garage and the neighbor's fence to ensure the protection of my property. I ask that the proposed parking spaces that the Mclntyres intend to provide tenants in this area be designed with front-end barriers that situate parked vehicles at an oblique angle to the alley, the old garage and the neighbor's fence, decreasing difficulties of backing out of and driving into these tenant parking spaces and the likelihood of those vehicles approaching my property directly. If after reviewing these comments it is the McIntyres' plan to continue to allow vehicles to park parallel to each other and to the old garage on one side and the neighbor's fence on the other, I ask that the distance of "driveway" on their own property be increased to at least 12 feet between their property line and the end of this proposed parking area. This will more safely accommodate the exiting of tenants' vehicles from these parking spaces on the property across from my cottage. It is important to know that the area of my property affected by this parking area is at my west property line where, adjacent to the alley, there is a maintained and landscaped plant bed about three feet deep that abuts the rear of my vacation house, Beau Soleil. This bed is edged by a low, narrow (5") concrete rim that marks my west property line paralleling the alley. This bed is an obstacle that in effect provides no physical protection from the trajectory of a vehicle exiting the parking area in question and that will necessarily be moving in the direction or my plant bed and the building itself if the vehicle is parked parallel to the old garage on the south and the neighbor's fence on the north. I believe that both the bed and the building on my property are seriously jeopardized by cars exiting the parking area opposite them. Tenants' vehicles, in 5 the best of circumstances may need to come into or dangerously close to that planting area and, depending on the size and design of the car, to Beau Soleil itself. Any error in judgment by a driver exiting this parking area from a position parallel to the old garage and the neighbor's fence spaces poses a serious threat to my property, the well-being and security of my guests, and my property value. Area 1. Reasons for Concern. This situation has been taken up as a serious issue by me in part because of my own thirteen years of experience of driving into and of backing out of my carport into the alley in order to get to B and C Streets. Those 13-years of experience entering and exiting my carport have involved my own compact cars. My carport was a new parking space built in 1999 at the time of the remodel of the building and business now called Beau Soleil. It sits directly opposite the Third Street building (the old garage) that is located on the McIntyre property's east boundary. The carport was constructed far enough into my back yard to allow for more than 24' of back-up space from the end of that parking place to the old garage that sits right on the boundary of the Mclntyres' Third Street property. What my experience has shown me is that-even with the existing 27 or so feet of back-up space from my carport to the old garage-getting even my small cars to clear my carport (and any guest's vehicle that may be parked parallel to it) and into the correct angle in the alley to turn the car into driving j position, requires both great care and almost all of that more than 24-foot distance. This distance includes 12 feet of "driveway" on my property as well as the apparent 12 feet across the width of the alley, and whatever remaining j distance is in the city's usually invisible berms between the respective properties and the edges of the alley. (These berms are concealed by the alley's distortion, beginning at the neck of the T, by overhanging trees that push the alley traffic and consequently the path of the alley away from the alley's real west edge and toward an artificial east edge that reduces the width of the berm on my side of the alley. See photos.) I In fact it has been necessary, when backing even my compact cars from my carport, for the driver to allow a corner of the rear of the vehicle (and the wheel that sits right under that corner) to come very close to (say, within a foot or two of) the old garage. This is due to the delayed angling of my car caused, I believe, by the principal carport posts. A guest's vehicle parked parallel to my carport could cause the same effect. I believe that the same difficulties I have just described would also apply in the case of parallel parking that might be located perpendicular to the alley behind the McIntyres' Third Street property. That is to say, more than 24' and not 22' 6 would also seem to be the minimum distance needed to completely negotiate even a compact vehicle's backing up toward my house and into the alley from the proposed new parking area. I believe this because the proximity of existing structures such as the old garage and the neighbor's fence, as well as of other vehicles parked parallel to them will compromise the angle of a vehicle's turn out of the proposed parking area. I compare these conditions to those affecting my own backing from my carport in order to drive down the alley. The side of my carport, for example, presents a certain impediment to my backing up and turning into the alley that prevents its easy execution using the even more than of 24 feet available for maneuvering my compact. This is similar to the impediment to backing out that I believe will be posed to the new parking spaces on the McIntyres' property if more than one vehicle is parked parallel to the North wall of the old garage on the south side of the proposed parking, and by the existing north fence that runs parallel to these parking spaces or to one car by another car parked in these two spaces and parallel to those two limiting structures. In addition, judging from the parking spaces and habits of tenants at the neighboring apartment complex on B-Street, who park along the Fourth Street "arm" of our T-alley, I think it is important that you know that the McIntyres' proposed parking area directly across the alley from my cottage in point of fact seems to be wide enough and will probably in the end be used for three rather than two parked cars or vehicles if they are permitted to park parallel to the old garage and the neighbor's fence on the north. It is also important to consider that in that same leg of our T-shaped alley, vehicles exiting the B-Street apartments' parking area (which is about the same width as the area proposed for outdoor parking by the Mclntyres' plan) accommodates more than two vehicles and they have several times collided with and caused repairs to be made to my north neighbor's fence. These conditions and the potential threat to my property that they pose will clearly be exacerbated when the vehicles involved are not compact cars, but vans, trucks or SUVs. Therefore, I believe that McIntyres complying with the current legal requirement of 22' is insufficient protection of my property in this specific instance because of existing and projected limiting "walls" of buildings and other structures and of the McIntyres' tenants' parked vehicles. I sincerely believe that the required 22' in this case will not be sufficient to protect my property and that adherence to the letter of the rule in this case would leave me very vulnerable to likely damages to my property, including to the cottage itself. 7 And I therefore ask in this instance that the McIntyres agree and make any adjustments to their plans that would be necessary in order to resituate these two spaces back further into their yard to leave more than 24' between my property and the foot of the open parking spaces on the alley behind their Third Street property; or to eliminate the direct trajectory of tenants' vehicles toward my property Beau Soleil and its plant bed. Area 0 The Problem. During Ann's visit to me at my house last week, she also indicated that she believed she and her mother were required by the city to provide a third parking space to meet the requirements for approval of the two- bedroom residence at 140-142 Third Street, though she believed they had the option to never actually malce the third space available to tenants on the property. In their original proposal, that is to say in the submitted written documents, the McIntyres identified the location of that third space as inside the old garage. This designation of parking for a car or other motorized vehicle does not appear on the official site diagram that Ann showed me. But it is present as such in that part of the McIntyres' written plans I was provided in an email from the City last week. I must object to approval of the stated plan for a (potential or actual) parking space for vehicles such as a car, truck, or van in the old garage now or anytime in the future. The McIntyres have designated the old garage as a vehicle parking space. That building is, of course, already a non-conforming building and could in no way meet even the 22-feet of driving distance required for vehicles exiting it. I therefore request that the old garage be prohibited as the site of a parking space. Conclusion I have spoken twice with Ms. Gunter about my concerns relevant to the McIntyres' currently stated plans for accommodation of parking and once mentioned my concerns for increasing proliferation of overhead utilities wires and cables that accompany the arrival of more tenants at 140-142 Third Street. I should also say that my previous conversations with both Ms. Gunter and Ann McIntyre occurred before I measured my own parking and use areas adjacent to the alley. Subsequent to those conversation, these measurements have reinforced my anxiety about the proposed plan for parking on the McIntyres' property. i 8 In my first talk with Ms Gunter, I also mentioned my concern about the esthetic degradation of the alley already caused by existing overhead utility lines and that would be magnified by new overhead lines from the McIntyres' Third Street property However, Ms. Gunter and I did not discuss this further because time has been limited and parking issues seemed to be more crucial for our mutual understanding and dominated the two conversations we were able to have. The McIntyres have also already been made aware of my two concern about their parking plan, Ann having dropped by and surprised me with a quick visit to my home one day and taken the brief minutes she had available at the time to hear my concerns about their planned parking. Now that I feel able to articulate for myself all my concerns about new parking and utility lines that have been suggested by the Mclntyres' submitted request for a site revision, I will attempt to address my concerns by phone or in person to Ann and/or Martha McIntyre and to Ms. Gunter before I must submit these comments tomorrow, Tuesday 9 July 2013. 1 will also email a copy of this letter and photographs to Ms. Gunter to submit for consideration to the Planning Commission. I hope that it will be clear in my comments that my first priority as a property owner and small business owner must be to protect my property and the value of it. But another very high priority for me is to contribute to the creation and maintenance of a healthy and safe environment and a friendly atmosphere in our part of the Railroad District. I have cheerfully changed or rearranged decisions about the construction that has taken place on my property through the 33 years I have lived at 143 Fourth Street. Often these changes and accommodations of others' needs have cost more money than I originally planned or even necessitated an increase in the amount I would have to borrow. Or they have created some other significant loss to my own interests. But in consideration of my neighbors and passers-by, I decided to make many changes because they seemed the right thing to do in consideration of others. For example, in 1999, I remodeled the funky old two-story pink house built in 1948 that is now my guest house Beau Soleil, a transient lodging accommodation that now sits in a reduced area of the original structure's footprint. As a safety precaution, given the tight proximity of property lines and traffic on our alley, I voluntarily moved the original rear (West) wall three feet back from the property line at the edge of the alley and put in a plant bed extending to my property line to mark the alley edge. The true lines of the alley 9 had become extremely distorted through the many decades of traffic following the path of least resistance around encroachments of grassy areas and untrimmed tree limbs at other properties along the alley. At that same time, as a courtesy to my then north-side neighbor's written concern to the planning commission that my planned remodel of the old pink house would block their solar access. Therefore, aware of the tight proximity of all buildings and property lines surrounding and affecting my property, I agreed to move the North wall of my remodeled building three feet back from its original position on the property line adjacent to the fence on the north side of my property. In short, by both these reductions of the actual footprint I would build within, I gave up a good deal of grandfathered living space in the remodel, which I would have loved to have, but it seemed the fair thing to do. In addition, when I built a side deck on the south side of my house, although my south-side neighbor's main roofline extends a number of inches (about 6" I believe) onto my property, I voluntarily agreed to keep my new structure and plantings well (two feet or a little more, I believe) within the perimeter of my property boundary to allow walking space for my neighbors beside their house along that side. Finally, after expressing the concerns addressed in this letter, I want to thank you for your thorough and fair consideration of them. Thank you. Cordially yours, Priscilla Hunter 541-482-1931 hunter@jeffnet.ortg ADDENDA: accompanying photos showing the areas covered in my comments about impact of the new construction and use of 140-142 Third Street. The photos were taken and entailed to me by a fi iend and have now been forwarded to the City Planners in two emails sent 9 July 2013: "Pictures 1 of 2" 1. low 5" rim on my property line with adjacent plant bed behind Beau Soleil and across from proposed "two-car" parking at 140-142 Third Street 2. close back (west) view of Beau Soleil 3. corner view of southwest side and back of Beau Soleil and the alley graded up to my property line 10 4. the old garage sitting on the west and north property lines of 140-142 Third Street and a new metal plate for some reason now in the alley 5. view 1 of my carport in relation to Beau Soleil and the old garage at 140- 142 Third Street 6. view 2 of same 7. view 3 of same, parking space for Beau Soleil visible 8. view of the alley with neighbor's fence and overhanging trees that distort the real size and location of the alley, looking into the "T" to Third and Fourth Streets 662 of 2" 1. the old garage at 140-142 Third Street and the fence and graded area that indicate the proposed new parking area for tenants 2. view 1 utility wires in the alley in relation to 140-142 Third Street in relation to utility wires and pole 3. view 2 utility wires from 140-142 Third Street and their neighbors' residences and buildings 4. view 3 of same 5. angle of the old garage and fence at 140-142 Third Street 6. a dear the photographer lilted 7. angle of the fence at 149-142 and the north-side neighbor's fence to and along their east property line i i i I I i i i i HISTORIC COMMISSION Meeting of July , 2013 PLANNING APPLICATION VI PLANNING ACTION: PA-2013-00836 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 140-142 N Third Street OWNER/APPLICANT: Ann and Martha McIntyre DESCRIPTION: Request for a Residential Site Review approval to construct a new residential dwelling unit at the rear of the property adjacent to the alley for the property located at 140 and 142 Third Street. The existing second dwelling unit located directly behind the front residence will convert to a guest house. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low-Density Multi- Family Residential; ZONING: R-2; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 1 E 09BA; TAX LOTS: 8200 The City of Ashland Historic Commission recommend approval of the proposed plans with the following recommendations: x That clear vertical separation between the windows between 4'/ to 6 inches be provided. c That consistent header and door heights shall be provided. That the double hung windows shall be consistent heights. r I I i i Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305 20 East Main St. Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us L ASHLAND TREE COMMISSION PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENT SHEET July 3, 2013 PLANNING ACTION: PA-2013-00836 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 140-142 N Third Street OWNER/APPLICANT: Ann and Martha McIntyre DESCRIPTION: Request for a Residential Site Review approval to construct a new residential dwelling unit at the rear of the property adjacent to the alley for the property located at 140 and 142 Third Street. The existing second dwelling unit located directly behind the front residence will convert to a guest house. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low-Density Multi-Family Residential; ZONING: R-2; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 lE 09BA; TAX LOTS: 8200 RiECOMMENdmiON: The Tree Commission recommends removing the requested Plum tree with the following conditions: A revised tree identification and landscape plan be submitted with the building permit, and include size-specific notations and irrigation plans to be reviewed and approved by staff advisor. ® Mitigate removed tree with one of the three options listed in AMC 18.61.084. * Street Tree be chosen from the Recomrmided Street Tree guide and planted accordingly. Department of Community Development Tel: 541488-5350 1 fit' F 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 , Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 LAP I www.ashland.or.us Array Gunter. From: Annie McIntyre [annieday64@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, July 01, 2013 12:52 PM To: amy.gunter@ashland.or.us Subject: Tree removal addendum July 1, 2013. Addendum to written findings o Tree removal at 140 and 142 N. r t®, Ashland, We would lie permission to remove four plum trees on the out property line between the studio is is existing, a propose secondary it. These Plum trees were of planted they were volunteer accidents provided by it droppings. T They will of reduce the tree diversity as there are several more plum trees o the other side o the property i e® Only one oft the four trees is larger the inches, but it directly i the way oft the southwest corner oft the new proposed unit. All the trees i that area are a tangled mess. They reduce natural light fort the studio, provide a huge sticky fruit mess, and kill the under structure plantings with the plum fall. the trees are of removed, it will significantly a aversely affect the proposed site of the e secondary it® We want to provide as c usable open space, a as much privacy between units as possible, as well as a at around each unit. T The trees would prevent this. l CITY OF { Planning Department, 51 Win,--..l Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520 541-488-5305 Fax: 541-552-2050 www.ashland.or.us TTY: 1-800-735-2900 -ASHLAND NOTICE OF APPLICATION Corrected Notice ® See Criteria on back PLANNING ACTION: PA-2013-00836 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 140-142 N Third Street OWNR/APPLICANT: Ann and Martha McIntyre DESCRIPTION: Request for a Residential Site Review approval to construct a new residential dwelling unit at the rear of the property adjacent to the alley for the property located at 140 and 142 Third Street. The existing second dwelling unit located directly behind the front residence will convert to a guest house. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low-Density Multi-Family Residential; ZONING: R-2; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 391 E 09BA; TAX LOTS: 8200 NOTE: The Ashland Historic Commission will also review this Planning Action on Wednesday, July 3, 2013 at 6:00 PM in the Community Development and Engineering Services building {Siskiyou Room), located at 51 Winburn Way. NOTE: The Ashland Tree Commission will also review this Planning Action on Wednesday, July 3, 2013 at 6:00 p.m. in the Community Development and Engineering Services building (Lithia Room) located at 51 Winburn Way. NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: June 25, 2013 DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION OF WRITTEN COMMENTS: July 9, 2013 i ~ ~ FAST y iz- Cz° I_ i N The Ashland Planning Division Staff hdo received o cumplete application for the property noted above. Any affected property owner or resident has a right to submit written comments to the City of Ashland Planning Division, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520 prior to 4:30 p.m. on the deadline date shown above. Ashland Planning Division Staff determine if a Land Use application is complete within 30 days of submittal. Upon determination of completeness, a notice is sent to surrounding properties within 200 feet of the property submitting application which allows for a 14 day comment period. After the comment period and not more than 45 days from the application being deemed complete; the Planning Division Staff shall make a final decision on the application. A notice of decision is mailed to the same properties within 5 days of decision. An appeal to the Planning Commission of the Planning Division Staff's decision must be made in writing to the Ashland Planning Division within 12 days from the date of the mailing of final decision. (AMC 'i 8.108.040) The ordinance ciiteria applicable to this application are attached to this notice. Oregon law states that failure to raise an objection concerning this application, by letter, or failure to provide sufficient specificity to afford the decision maker an opportunity to respond to the issue, precludes your right of appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals' (LUBA) on that issue. Failure to specify which ordinance criterion the objection is based on also precludes your right of appeal to LUBA on that criterion. Failure of the applicant to raise constitutional or other issues relating to proposed conditions of approval with sufficient specificity to allow this Departmentto respond to the issue precludes an action for damages in circuit court. A copy of the application, all documents and evidence relied upon by the applicant and applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost and will be provided at reasonable cost, if requested. All materials are available at the Ashland Planning Division, Community Development & Engineering Services Building, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520. If you have questions or comments concerning this request, please feel free to contact the Ashland Planning Division at 541-488-5305. GAcomm-de0planningTIamdng Actions\Noticing FolderWailed Notices & Signs\2013\PA-2013-00836 140 Third.doex SITE DESIGN AND USE STANDARDS 18.72.070 Criteria for Approval The following criteria shall be used to approve or deny an application: A. All applicable City ordinances have been met or will be met by the proposed development. B. All requirements of the Site Review Chapter have been met or will be met. C. The development complies with the Site Design Standards adopted by the City Council for implementation of this Chapter. D. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, paved access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property. All improvements in the street right-of-way shall comply with the Street Standards in Chapter 18.88, Performance Standards Options. i I I I i i Wcomm-dev\planning\Planning Actions\Noticing FolderWailed Notices & Signs\2013\PA-2013-00836 140 Third.docs f II T - Planning Department, 51 Winbi„„ Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520 CY OF 541-488-5305 Fax: 541-552-2050 www.ashland.or.us TTY: 1-800-735-2900 -ASHLAND NOTICE OF APPLICATION PLANNING ACTION: PA-2013-00836 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 140.142 N Third Street OWNERIAPPLICANT: Ann and Martha McIntyre DESCRIPTION: Request for a Residentia("Site Review approval to construct a new residential- dwelling unit at the rear of the property adjacent to the alley for the property located at 140 and 142 Third Street. The existing second dwelling unit located directly behind the front residence will convert to a guest house. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low-Density Multi-Family Residential; ZONING: R-2; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 391 E 09A; TAX LOTS: 8200 NOTE: The Ashland Historic Commission will also review this Planning Action on Wednesday, July 3, 2013 at 6:00 PM in the Community Development and Engineering Services building (Siskiyou Room), located at 51 Will Way. NOTE: The Ashland Tree Commission will also review this Planning Action on Wednesday, July 3, 2013 at 6:00 p.m. in the Community Development and Engineering Services building (Lithia Room) located at 51 Winburn Way. NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: June 25, 2013 DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION OF WRITTEN COMMENTS: July 9, 2013 T r , The Ashland Planning Division Staff has received a complete application for the property noted above. Any affected property owner or resident has a right to submit written comments to the City of Ashland Planning Division, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520 prior to 4:30 p.m. on the deadline date shown above. Ashland Planning Division Staff determine if a Land Use application is complete within 30 days of submittal. Upon determination of completeness, a notice is sent to surrounding properties within 200 feet of the property submitting application which allows for a 14 day comment period. After the comment period and not more than 45 days from the application being deemed complete, the Planning Division Staff shall make a final decision on the application. A notice of decision is mailed to the same properties within 5 days of decision. An appeal to the Planning Commission of the Planning Division Staffs decision must be made in writing to the Ashland Planning Division within 12 days from the date of the mailing of final decision. (AMC 18.108.040) The ordinance criteria applicable to this application are attached to this notice. Oregon law states that failure to raise an objection concerning this application, by letter, or failure to provide sufficient specificity to afford the decision maker an opportunity to respond to the issue, precludes your right of j appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) on that issue. Failure to specify which ordinance criterion the objection is based on also precludes your right of appeal to LUBA on that criterion. Failure of the applicant to raise constitutional or other issues relating to proposed conditions of approval with sufficient specificity to allow this Department to respond to the issue precludes an action for damages in circuit court. A copy of the application, all documents and evidence relied upon by the applicant and applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost and will be provided at reasonable cost, if requested. All materials are available at the Ashland Planning Division, Community Development & Engineering Services Building, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520. If you have questions or comments concerning this request, please feel free to contact the Ashland Planning Division at 541-488-5305. GAcomm-dev\planning\Planning Actions\Noticing Folder\Mailed Notices & Signs\2013\PA-2013-00836 140 Third.dr AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF OREGON ) County of Jackson ) The undersigned being first'duly sworn states that: 1. 1 am employed by the City of Ashland, 20 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon 97520, in the Community Development Department. 2. On June 25, 2013 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 #2013-00836, 140 Third Street. Signature of Employee G:lcomm-devlplanninglTemplateslTEMPLATE-Affidavit of Mailing-Planning Action Notice.dot 6/25/2013 I PA-2013-00836 391 E09BA 6700 PA-2013-00836 391 E098A 6400 PA=2013-00836 391 E09BA 8400 ADAMS JUSTIN R/PETERSON- BABBITT JANE BRUNSTON TRUSTEE ROBERT C ADAMS MIRA B 366 B 26927 BELLFOUNTAIN RD 363 B ST ASHLAND OR 97520 MONROE OR 97456 ASHLAND OR 97520 PA-2013-00836 391 E09BA 7800 PA-2013-00836 391 E09BA 6500 PA-2013-00836 391 E09BA 6800 COPILOW SIDNEY TRUSTEE ET DEMARINIS SUSAN K TRUSTEE DI LORETO DANTE' AL ET AL 11845 W OLYMPIC BLVD 1125W 888 TIMBERLAKE DR 145 NORMAL AVE LOS ANGELAS CA 90064 ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 PA-2013-00836 391 E09BA 8800 PA-2013-00836 391 E09BA 8500 PA-2013-00836 391 E09BA 7500 EGAN TRACY ANN LIVING TRUST ETIENNE ROBERT P TRUSTEE FINNEY DENISE K TRUSTEE ET 111 N THIRD ST ET AL AL ASHLAND OR 97520 143 THIRD ST 225 OHIO ST ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 PA-2013-00836 391 E09BA 8000 PA-2013-00836 391 E09AB 8200 ;PA-2013-00836 391E09BA 8700 - FITZGERALD MARTHA D GOLDMAN MARTIN/GREENE HOYT MICHAEL G TRUSTEE ET 114 3RD ST HARRIET AL ASHLAND OR 97520 161 FOURTH ST 285 SURREY DR ASHLAND OR 97520 JACKSONVILLE.OR 97530 PA-2013-00836 391 E09BA 7400 PA-2013-00836 391 E09AB 8500 PA-2013-00836 391E09BA 7600 HUNTER PRISCILLA TRUSTEE ET JAVNA GORDON LANG PHILIP C AL 460 B ST 758 B ST 143 FOURTH ST ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 PA-2013-00836 391 E09BA 8200 PA-2013-00836 391 E09BA 7700 PA-2013-00836 391 E09BA 8600 MCINTYRE MARTHA M TRUSTEE ORE SHAKESPEARE FEST PATRICK HARLEY BEAUMONT ET AL ASSOC TRUSTEE ET AL 58 FOURTH ST P 0 BOX 158 72 DEWEY ST ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 PA-2013-00836 391 E09BA 8300 PA-2013-00836 391 E09AB 8300 PA-2013-00836 391 E09BA 8100 PRITZKER STEVEN R SMITHTON ROBERT LEE SPEICHER GWEN E 1477 5TH AVE TRUSTEE ET AL 138 THIRD ST SAN FRANCISCO CA 94122 PO BOX 1856 ASHLAND OR 97520 ROSS CA 94957 PA-2013-00836 391 E09BA 6600 PA-2013-00836 391 E09BA 8101 PA-2013-00836 391 E09BA 6701 TARDIFF PETER J TRUSTEE ET WEISSHAAR DANA YORK ELIZABETH G AL 112 PEACH WILLOW CT 640 PRACHT ST 386 B ST LOS GATOS CA 95032 ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 24 1.40 Third NOC 6-24-13 !j gE,E IE 8700 ~e"4 PN LIII' a P ; 3 1 d a I n. a 0300 6701 "0. MAD 0 s lea, P9 P , E 3k 8 1 alas 1 ' tt, P¢ I MID tt A d ni`~Y y 9 E} a iP i e d> liter k slot 9p ~1 gR& - P b 4 r A E t f e P BIB uu D. P - f i Hu u-u,.a a ♦GG 1 I Tuesdav June ?5 9013 10137•57 AM ,4rny Gunter From: Annie McIntyre [annieday64@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, June 24, 2013 4:49 PM To: Amy Gunter Subject: Note for plans Amy, We will not peruse a C.U.P. for commercial space for the studio> Please consider it detached living space for the use of our tenants. It will become thier guest house, or a master suite. Thank you for all your time earlier. You are a pleasure to work with. Annie Owner McIntyre Interiors http://mcintyre-interiors.com 541 621-5096 i i McIntyre Project: 140 and 142 Third Street Conditional Use Permit and Site Review Applications: McIntyre Project Project Description and Summary: Location: 140 and 142 Third Street Property: Map - 391 E09BA Tax Lot - 8200 Zoning: R-2, Historic District Lot Dimensions: 50'x 142' Acreage: .163 acres (7,100 s.f.) Existing and Proposed Structures: Description Existing Proposed 1. Main house - single story, 3-bedroom 832 s.f. 832 s.f. residential unit 2. Studio (renovated) - single story, 600 s.f. 500 s.f. proposed commercial use 3. Garage renovated - single car 365 s.f. 365 s.f. 4. Secondary unit (new)- 1 story, 2 n/a 1082 s.f. bedroom Summary: - The proposed project includes the: o Genv en-of the-secondary dio un O-a-commercta use`througgh--.--- -a-Conditional Use Permit o The secondary unit will be renovated as described below o A third structure for residential use will be designed and built at the rear of the property o The existing garage will remain as is. o All relevant site design and building codes will be met. The existing single-story main house fronting Third Street will remain as is. i The existing studio unit will be renovated as follows: - Most of the more recent rear addition will be removed, retaining existing full bathroom (new flooring, window and doors, fixtures, and plumbing as needed). - The area where the removed space was located will be converted to open exterior porch. - The proposed size of the studio will be reduced from 600 s.f. to 500 s.f. - The unit will be evaluated for possible upgrades to structure, keeping existing windows and doors where possible, flooring, electrical and lighting, and plumbing and fixtures. - -This application proposes to change this unit to commercial use. The new secondary residential unit will have the following features: - One-story , with two bedrooms, one full bath - 1082 s.f. + open covered porch, approximately 125 s.f. - Earth Advantage design and construction - Wood-framed construction, passive solar, slab on grade The existing garage will remain as is. The building will be evaluated for possible upgrades to structure, garage door, door and window, and roofing. Lot Coverage: Description Existing % Proposed % Lot Size 7,100 s.f. 100.0% 7,100 s.f. 100.0% Lot Coverage: Structures, 1,833 s.f. 25.8% 3,073 s.f. 43.3% Porches Total Impervious Surfaces 1,878 s.f. 26.5% 3,118 s.f. 43.9% Pervious spaces 5,222 s.f. 73.5% 3,932 s.f. 56.1% Historic Compatibility and Coverage: - The renovated and new structures will use materials and design details consistent and compatible with the existing main house and scale and design of the neighboring houses and structures. - Th existing studio unit (conve d to commercial use via CUP) will be re no d as follows: o Re existing painted exterior walls. Replace shake siding at rear with izontal wood siding to ma main residential unit. o Existing windo be evaluated and repla energy efficient to match existing style a eded, o Remove most of rear addi i etaining bathroom at t ' ocation. See site plan and exterior elevatio more information. The new second residential unit at rear of property to include the following design elements. o Horizontal lap-siding or corrugated metal siding o Historically appropriate trim profiles and sizing o Architectural-grade asphalt roofing shingles o Energy efficient, double hung or casement windows o Siding, roofing, trip, exterior door color to be complimentary to existing units and neighborhood o Scale to be complimentary with existing low-profile structures on property and in neighborhood. Maximum Permitted Floor Area (MFPA): - The maximum house (project) size is calculated to be 2,414 s.f. for R-2 zoned property. - Existing Main House (832 s.f.) Unit (500 s.f.) New Residential Unit (1,082 s.f.) Garage - not included in calculation (365 s.f.) Solar Access: - Property width at N/S direction = 50' o Setback Standard B is used. - Estimated building height at roof peak (5 1/2 in 12 roof slope) for first floor and loft = 22' - Little or no slope to property - Calculations o SSB = 24-16/.445 = 18' setback from north property line. o Proposed peak of new unit will be approximately 25' from north property line. - See plans and elevations for additional information. Trash and Recycling: - Adequate space will be provided for each unit of the proposed project and screened as required by code. Trash for the front two units will be collected at the street, and the trash and recycling for the new rear unit will be collected along the alley, if possible. - See plans and elevations for locations and more information. Utility Connections: - Existing utility connections are in place for water, gas, sewer, storm-water, and electrical for both existing units to remain. - New connections for utilities will be provided for new rear residential unit. - Utility metering will remain separate for each unit, but will be ganged as required by City of Ashland and Avista. - See plans for location of existing and new utility metering. - Storm water from the existing structures will continue to drain towards Third Street. No existing city drains are in the street, however, and water flows on the surface towards A Street. - For the new residential unit, a self-contained barrel reserviors will be provided from roof drainage. Details and specifications will be provided with permit drawings. i Parking: - A total of (5) spaces will are proposed for this project. Although per code and calculation, the number is 5.75 or 6 spaces is required, it is proposed that this development can make use of joint-uses, as the residential and commercial uses do not overlap and hours of use are generally mutually exclusive. o Main house (2 spaces) 0 o Second Residential unit (2 spaces) - (1) On-street parking space - (1) Off-street parking space adjacent to main house - (1) Space within existing garage (2) Spaces at rear of property adjoining alley with adequate back up of 22 ft. and turn-in dimensions from alley. See site plans for parking locations. Parking Area Buffers: - The existing side yard off-street spot will be maintained as is. The space is accessed directly from Third Street. There is currently a two-foot buffer and low fence at the property line. - The two open off-street parking spaces at the rear of the property will be screened by an existing 6 ft. fence to the north; a 6 ft. hedge and arbor to the west separating the open yard space and parking area, and the existing garage to the south. - See plans for more information and dimensions. Bicycle Parking: - A total of (5) covered, bike spaces will be provided in the existing garage at the rear of the property. - Access will be provided to the garage for all tenants. - ring k-iWi-be-pr o emiat ~~Gkedrbutw&motlxreevered_ Landscaping and Irrigation: - Landscaping Plan - see attached plans for scope and location of existing and new landscaping elements. - Trees o Existing trees in the construction zones will be protected with fencing and signage during project. Existing trees are identified on the attached plans o A new park row tree will be selected and planted along Third Street. The species will be Idaho Locust (Robinia pseudoacacia idahoensis) o Irrigation Plan - see the attached plans for scope and location irrigation plan. Additional design details and specifications will be provided in the building permit drawings. Fire Protection: The furthest corner of any structure is less than 150' for a hose to reach from the street. See plans for location and dimensions. I i City of Ashland - Land Use Codes 18.24 R-2 Low Density Multiple-Family Residential District 18.24.020 Permitted Uses The project proposes the following uses: - Existing Main Unit - Residential - New Rear Unit - Residential - Renovated Studio Unit - Commercial via CUP o Uses and occupancy to be limited to professional offices or clinics for an accountant, architect, attorney, designer, engineer, insurance agent or adjuster, investment or management counselor or surveyor, or similar uses and occupancies. 18.24.040 General Regulations A. Permitted Density and Minimum Lot Dimensions a. The minimum lot area for 2 residential units shall be 7,000 s.f. The project site is approximately 7,100 s.f. B. Lot Depth a. The project site has lot line dimensions of 142 ft. deep and 50 ft. wide. D. Standard Yard Requirements for sites within a Historic District. a. The project site and development will meet the requirements of this section as follows i. Front yard (min. 20 ft.) - actual is 33 ft. ii. Side yards (min. 6 ft.) - actual is 6 ft. at new residential unit. The existing secondary unit has an existing side yard of 2'-6" at the j south property line and the existing main house has a side yard of 4'-6" at the north property line: The new residential structure will have side yards of 6 ft. at both north and south properly lines. iii. Rear yard (min. 10 ft.) - actual is 30 ft. to new single story residential unit E. Distance Between Buildings a. The distance between the primary residential unit and the renovated commercial unit will be maintained at 2'-8" (existing condition) b. The distance between the secondary unit and the new residential unit will be9ft. F. Maximum Height a. The existing structures will be approximately 22' in height at its highest roof peak. G. Maximum Coverage a. The proposed lot coverage for this project will be approximately 27% for all impervious surfaces and building footprints, b. If required, the rear parking area will be re-surfaced with pervious paving materials or pavers. c. See the previous section on page 2 on Lot Coverage for more information. H. Outdoor Recreation Space a. The proposed project site will have approximately 22% of outdoor recreation space. See plans for locations. 1. Maximum Permitted Floor Area a. The calculated allowable MPFA is 2,414. The proposed project will not exceed this amount. See previous section on MPFA for more information. 18.61.200 Tree Protection o Existing trees in the construction zones will be protected with fencing and signage during project. Existing trees are identified on the attached plans 18.70 Solar Access See Solar Access section in this document for calculations for the proposed project and refer to attached plans and elevations for more information regarding location and heights of structures. See plans and elevations for more information. 18.92. Off-Street Parking Five spaces are proposed (5) spaces for this development. The total calculated parking is calculated below. - Existing main residential unit (3 bedrooms) 2 spaces - New rear residential unit (2 bedrooms) 1.75 spaces - Renovated unit for commercial use (1 space per 350 s.f.) 2 spaces o Uses and occupancy to be limited to professional offices for an accountant, architect, attorney, designer, engineer, insurance agent or adjuster, investment or management counselor or surveyor, or similar uses and occupancies. - Total spaces = 5.75 spaces (6 spaces) - The property has one credit for a single on-street parking space - The project seeks to designate parking needs per a "Joint Use of Facilities". There are two residential units that will primarily have parking needs from 5:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m. and a single commercial unit that will have designated and posted hours of 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. The applicant will provide details in the leases for each tenant. - Because of the mixed and joint use of the development, 5 total parking spaces are proposed. I 18.92.060 Bicycle Parking The total calculated parking is calculated below. See bicycle-parking section earlier in this document for proposed parking, coverage, and location. SITE DESIGN AND USE STANDARDS SECTION II Approval Standards and Policies A. Ordinance Landscaping Requirements a. The minimum requirement for a. R-2 site is 35% landscaping. b. This project will provide approximately 55% of landscaping and pervious surfaces. c. The final landscape plan will meet all requirements and guidelines of Section B of the Site Design and Use Standards for a multi-family residential development including: i. Compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood ii. Use a combination of lawn, ground cover, trees and shrubs, and pavers iii. A new park-row tree as required by code. See plan for type and location of new tree. The species will be Idaho Locust (Robinia pseudoacacia idahoensis) II-13-1 Orientation II-B-1 a) The existing residential structure and the converted commercial unit are oriented towards Third Street. II-B-1 b) The existing main residential structure is set back 33' 11-13-1c) - The existing residential unit and the converted commercial unit can be accessed via the street and sidewalk. - The new residential unit will be primarily accessed from the parking area on the alley. - See parking section of this application and site plans for location of parking areas. II-13-2 Streetscape II-B-2a) A new street tree will be added to the park row, offset from the existing magnolia tree in the front yard. The tree will be selected from the recommended street tree guide and sized and placed to accommodate future growth, street parking, and pedestrian traffic on the adjoining sidewalk. II--2b) The existing landscape includes lawn area, shrubs, front and side yard mature deciduous tress, low shrubs, and building base plantings. II-B-3 Landscaping II-B-3a) II-B-3b) II-B-3c) II-B-3d) II-B-3e) II-13-3~ - The landscape will include a variety of grass, ground cover, shrubs and trees, existing screen fencing to compliment the existing in-place landscaping. - New irrigation system will be installed to cover the entire property. - Healthy existing trees will be maintained and protected during construction. - A new park-row tree will be added, and the existing front yard trees, shrubs and grass will be maintained. - The parking area off the alley will be screened by a six-foot solid fence on both neighboring property lines, as well as from the rest of the property to the west. - See plans for more information on landscaping and irrigation. II-B-4 Open Space II-B-4a) II-13-41b) II-B-4c) - The proposed property and development will have approximately 23% of the site allocated to open and recreation space. See the attached site plan for more information. II-B-5a) Multiple deciduous trees currently exist along the south property line for shading and natural climate control II-B-6 Building Materials fl-13-6a) Building materials and paint colors should be compatible with the surrounding area and will include: o Commercial accessory unit ■ Maintain existing painted brick walls on north, west and south elevations. ® 5" wood lap siding on east elevation bump-out (maintained from existing building) ® Existing architectural roofing to remain ® If needed, replace damaged existing windows with energy- efficient windows with similar style and dimensions to existing. ® See elevations for more information and appearance. o Existing Main Residential Unit ® To be maintained as is o New Rear Residential Unit ® One-story, with standard gable-roof ® Siding to be either vertical corrugated steel or 5" horizontal lap siding ■ 4" flat trim at all building corners, and around doors and windows. ® Casement or double-hung, double-pane, vinyl windows ® Exterior building colors to be consistent with neighborhood. ® Architectural grade asphalt shingles ® Slab on grade floors ® Passive solar features D. Parking Lot Landscaping and Screening Standards II-D-2 Screening Abutting Property Lines 1. The proposed parking area at the alley will be screened on the north and west by a six-foot solid fence, and to the south by an existing garage. II-D-4 Residential Screening 1. The proposed parking area will be set back from the new residential unit by at least 10-feet and will screened by use of a 6-foot fence. II-D-6 Other Screening 1. All individual trash and recycling bins will be screened from the street by a combination of existing or new structures and fence and shrubs. See plans for location of trash and recycling bins. E. Street Tree Standards II-E-1 Location for Street Trees 1. The required new single street tree will be placed in the 10-foot wide park row adjacent to the street. The tree will be staggered and offset from the existing front yard magnolia for adequate clearance. See site plan for location. SECTION IV Historic District Development A. Development in Ashland's Historic District 1. See previous sections on historic compatibility and usage of materials. 2. See plans and exterior elevations for scale, massing, materials, and building heights. (:Ixa) IE06-f09-IkS (nx:on) f'1f':3f-Ib5 wuagxax~a.~jgna w ~ ozs_c ~o~avo 'aNV~ss- '*.~avas _voi -rro aos tie 07-9L6 `d® `Q {VIII-IS'd I D _Q ? 1EAHIS CHIH1 FK / Ob G L z =o djo IvIlvs JIuH9ml 133a1SCIHIHl-03kH1NIOIN os 3k pj N~IVIV ) 2 co C ~ ~44~j Z 4U6-IU9-lt'S [a>~o~)ZLL£iPb-[65 m>-q>rz[xsiu qw o ~i.e aoo_ao 'c[.~ rr •lasxzs rn Pu o s vex w m s 035L6 HO '4NVIHSV o ! 1 1 U 21 w ° = 133HIS (IUIH1 ZbL / Ot L r w 133a1S CIUIH1 AH klNIOW lOffV,TVs iluaq02I °oo N w - j I I I y I I I I m I I b I I I I I J I I I I i I I ~ I I W I O-,o5 I -_aNnc 3Acq_v l '~1a1~31a - - II II III I I G~I~~ I I` m (x I I - _ I ~ 1 I P-,L I pzd ~~l°3 I O I K~~ S I d INU' i O I oyQ LL ~ ° ) O WdW I I W I mI~N /.-t. ~ o o rc ==°sy I i ~ ° wow I w~ ~ N~o 30 wow rcw2 - _ ~ - ~ w n ' o /fig r~n ~ i w a ~ / ¢ I 7 = U n/ O m m n g4 I s N IZ 1 P - YO ~ ui ~ ) F m a li li I~ y N I / KZ o 1~ W J li Y N O N w IL w_ i 1 - / I WN m0 V I S mN0 N O 6~° / o I iz1~ 46 Z ~ n O ~ N p r / I N>= w Z N Q F. F fO ~o I / ~ z eon w=w w ad Q "~L ° 4 14 K d N i I n r-L, m 1L V ~¢~W OQ K Q - E N m p17 zw d w w O N ¢ Uai a zLLZ d=~ mf _m I I I l o -NO 4~~ d< ~ = I I I I w I Woo .11 Xw I Q I I _ m E w a I I I I $ o° ~ z m i n ~ o rc I I I I~ I a ~ w m ~ Q F O O O III I o O m ¢ Q ILO w ¢ o u7 s o ¢ O W w o II i zz~ o z X30 ¢m II N 9~ o V9 W I I~ O 6~/ Z m Xwf ~ OvLL D ~wj JK Q _ I p w OWE ei~~Ow w pNK m -w'ti wdz zzOw n KKi W ?Q QUO U op;O p Q OO < ~rL ¢ Q~ U FYO~ w °KI 4 FUw O' - I .,U C2.v .II~ E VO-[ ¢ NV2¢ N KQ¢ mKW ry O°6' I'¢7e Ali W ~~E WIl]KN ZQ71~L .W.. WNZ ° ° N N V 3Nn aalvnn - dla .e ~ tl]M]SAHVIINVS-SS..9 3NIl SVS V1Sl~ G. - \~Q A(-y h~==i sac-iar~>s ;nf~rl zccc-zar~ns W~Tv=~a~a ate, k 'o~ OL5L4~N\O)'J31i0'aNl'~S[SV 1'S~33H15N01Nf'f`O~N/0/5 m`; Q7CJL.6 HO`aNe-IHSy 133l91S4aIHl Zbt/017 N ✓ I ~l V W o~ 0 o <z ~ z~ r z lS~ d1IE]HISGHIHl-3HALNIC)W - ,~OQ~'IF~S ,I, 2I~~02I ~ wm wm NQ y VQ i I I III v~~ ~ OOJ OI O IO' \ I O w I ® ~ IOI ° zaw I 'g\ ww I v1 0 i ~ m W mW V°~ I- _ awe I I I n~oo s~~d ouai lI ' I OQO 00=~w I O N o I ~ o I ICI ~ h o 0 0 m 01 \ ~ ~~Y~ z i ° 'I ;O¢p N ~ O _ zUmw I I ~k o0 ~p I n n,9 ~ a ma I I w i c7 ND SI-W6 NW I I LL I I Q. J zaQ ozrc~z <z I ~ I I I I ~ ° Wow s~ z I I I ~mF mv_ I I I I I L z ~K~U zK NwZ Y~~N~ d zNCI Z~ZjQ WW II~I~ I ~ p II J I 1 1 \ \\\\\~~\~~I 11 1 10 I ~ ~ II I I i ~ 0 rc Y K 6 d W \,<<yGf 4ieo<-iosws r.,°oq zu. ~sr-°rs m-yrR:~ao, ,a~ zscc oo~o 'aw-ixsv '.ca~xss .~+o~~~o eas 02SL6 HO'aNVlHSb' T- - 6 1 I tj wa;o 133UISM41HlZbI/Obl ' P JJOCIV'TVS IXF[902i s$oo~h 133HlSdtllHl 3LIJINIM Q ~ p LU~ z p w Ow Nz 4? d ° ®z ~p kn w0 YO S 0 LU Y- 7' L~- (3 Viz two <F- v~ ~-erz ILW Q ~V v~ 1~ ~00 N~ rp~ Hl1 zpz ~0 tu t U- 0~ L-w ==w Hkf) 1O Hd ~w Fed °nV1L NpF =N N~ x Ulp~~ U1~0~} NQ ~ tnF~ x~m0 Xpd z XX X~NO XOpw Xw wddl lu LED nH ww wddF w~~ n LUV if) wwrb( z Q _ z ~ ~ Q o II ~ _ W fl U ~ ~ If o r - LLI U W ~I < ® -j i- ® U TE > C!3 ® - Q z > W o ~ z ° W z W ~ - W J W _ U) U) Q W N L b-,Z L \4gG' O 'L OZSL6 }jp .aNVIHSV p - 133a1S aalHl Zt l Otl ~ 4 _L il C1 V LL' o z v' o ~ y o s% AJOCV-1vS i1x1jaMi aaooo~< 171DUISClUH1 AlHAINI0N oww K0 a ~z z ~d z v w Z W W Ji-L p N Q H . Q v l~ N Z X wL 4= YO ~O -v KZ w0 p~? LLw ~wQ uz d z Ovm ro z FQx 0~0 z0v Np m rxQ Oz4 ~wQ Hs=w ~mL > - ~ F:w Nb~ KD~ s-V Nd1vQ1~ KX~ Ci ~N 6) w<V zm ~~0 ww~ wQQ~ Zjutu~ en 7LuV LL, U11=- w~ I- Z - Z ~ J ~ _ Q O II U w - i w it 2 T ~ T p J C) uj Q J ~ ~ U Q U) - p - p Z w z p w w Lu CO 7- LU [r p z N qk~T y==7 asoc-rurrrs (a~oN zcrc-zao-zcs mo>,i,~t.py: c ~ d~ r. o~suo `a~o7xsr 'a3xus NO`a t~»eos OZSL6 a0 `❑N'd~HSb' 1 1 I U J Ll 13EIa1SGHIH1Zbl/0bG - 1JOQV'IVS luHao2I laaalsaaiHl MlkiNION x' z \ F ~Olu ~~p p dw Ll L ~~~w Z ~N~g N =Z Op~~ 0 (3 i4 ~z ~,3pzlLw~ JQm VO NL~m13 x Z wIY~- m 2 HJ K~ F ~J~OF-I-~ Q~H N to ~Q~U T-Ow(3,) O p~Q >j -1Ul-1 ZQO~~N1L Z>XF- IIl X~F~- O ~ r Q H LU z w c) ® U) CO LU w z z 0 Q w J w ® uN o~ o~ ~OF ®m ~~N op x=,0 OZ 9N~ ~d ~~V't Gr1 !445-t09-LTS ;son) LL4-2.4bIb5 worVae~cc~gaH o OESIL Nn'Yi)iC'QNVIFISV ',L'22YLSNOI.NL'D N OZ5L6aO'4NV'IHSV C 0 1 1 1 i4 D N b ¢zo 133J1S0}J IHlZbObl N ~S -4 oQv-ivS I~I-JgON s° 133alSGUH-L 3bl1NI~W ~ z 9\6 ulz Q JU z m Q 001LL11 0 Q =@~QZW W}- WQ = v UJOFF~ m ? N Q ¢sOw0o~ KaT-1m:q() 0 0 o z = z40Oi~ z> in 0 o-s O Z If I -r Q LLI ~ J LL! Q ~ U LLI Z 1 z LLI J LlJ I V g~~ fV~ „b/6 Z-, l Z ~q'4~'~ (m=) icon-Gov-ws utc-zss-ivs co=q==.r..p¢o, x _c -~o~ano 'aNV~HS `.ca=_u~s .~-ozvrn sos oZSL6 }i0 `ONV-IHSV 0 1 D-A 11 U D~j V 133Ei1S aaiHI 2111 i 0111 N o !S y~ d jO CT 'TVS I ~IHS02I s o o o m 133a1S 4HIHl 3HhLNIOW ' In Oq ®z z~ Q~0 OO O Qyy = p7 p] i O z J Q I- Lu LU Q ~ `U L!J cc z z O Q Lu J LU t- CO \~~GT - (Iiaa) L4J~ [09-[>x (a„on; ZLGCi69-L95 w4a-4asulxa~jga~ oesu ruooaxo'acuvxxsv{ •.a+nrasnowL~~sos ry OZ5L6 F1O'4N1f1HSt/ o l b w° z 133»1S UUIH1 ?M I OM m z ,LI.30(IV'IVS JuHgOx 133H1S4NIH1 3li)1NIOW rs z -5j Till z Yz~Z % A ~wd~ z z~ ~On a O z~ Q d =>rzzw~~ onn = ~J~OFN~ ~z N < LLI ~t0a O wmOO~~~ z = z4v~~Nw z> in 0 w ® cn ui cl: w z z 0 a w J w T „L l-,9l .b/6 Z-~ L Z \•FwjT U (Caa) I506-I69-[TS (m!o,.J ZLLE-ZYYIYS mo~yan~mv~goa F '_Jd~ ece No~sao•a sv i sno.ltun~sos _ 13EHIS aIH1M410K - 133UISa8IHL 38),INIOW F IL „O-,E l a - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Q m w Q Y ~ U y Q W m C1 w m N ~ O R' Q - J N b F W +A ~ W x s m O F V, Q' m' F W J _ Q O N N p C', LLJ ~p Ii U) LLI LL 0 cc V 1 th z O u ZO > V Ili ntd aii V ZONING IT APPLICATION Planning Division - \ 51 Winburn Way, Ashland OR 97520 CITY ',-3 ASHLAND 0 F 541-488-5305 Fax 541-488-6006 FILE P,+ 00 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT C '`t t DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY j Pursuing LEED® Certification? ❑ YES ❑ NO Street Address Assessor's Map No. 391 El ~j 16A ~9 Tax Lot(s) Zoning Comp Plan Designation APPLICANT Name! Phone E-Mail Address L ~t; , j c .t vL- City (t ?l%~: eta Zip. PROPERTY OWNER Name 01 1r7Y l' 4`[Al l < _ Phone 6, % E-Mail - Address 1 Lt_"(, City Zip i SURVEYOR ENGINEER ARCHITECT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OTHER I Title Name Phone E-Mail I Address City Zip Title Name Phone E-Mail Address City Zip i I hereby certify that the statements and information contained in this application, including the enclosed drawings and the required findings of fact, are in all respects, true and correct. I understand that all property pins must be shown on the drawings and visible upon the site inspection. In the event the pins are not shown or their location found to be incorrect, the owner assumes full responsibility, l further understand that if this request is subsequently contested, the burden will be on me to . establish; 1) that l produced sufficient factual evidence at the hearing to support this request; .2) that the findings of fact furnished justifies the granting of the request; 3) that the findings of fact furnished by me are adequate; and further 4) that all structures or improvements are properly located on the ground. Failure in this regard will result most likely in not only the request being set aside, but also possibly in my structures being built in reliance thereon being required to be removed at my expense, If I have any doubts, I am advised to seek competent professional advice and assistance. Applicant's Signature Da As owner of the ProPertY involved in this request, 1 have read and understood the complete application and its consequences to me as a property owner. Property Owner's Signature (required) Date [To be completed by City Staff] I Date Received L 3 Zoning Permit Type ~H Filing Fee $ OVER - G.Acomm-devlplanninOocros & HandoutAZoning Pex-mit Applicatiomdoe f-A Job Address: 140 THIRD ST Contractor: ASHLAND OR 97520 Address: C A Owner's Name: ANN/MARTHA MCINTYRE C Phone: P Customer 06023 N State Lie No: P ANN/MARTHA MCINTYRE T City Lie No: L., Applicant: 156 SEVENTH ST R I Address: ASHLAND OR 97520 A C C Sub-Contractor: A Phone: (541) 621-5096 T Address: N Applied: 06/13/2013 C T Issued: Expires: 12/10/2013 R Phone: State Lie No: Maplot: 391 E09BA8200 City Lie No: DESCRIPTION: site review for the addition of 2 units VALUATION Occupancy Type Construction Units Rate Amt Actual Amt Constuction Description I Total for Valuation: MECHANICAL ELECTRICAL STRUCTURAL PERMIT FEE DETAIL Fee Description Amount Fee Description Amount Residential Site Review 1,177.00 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL I i COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tel: 541-488-5305 20 East Main St. Fax: 541-488-5311 Ashland, OR 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us Inspection Request Line: 541-552-2080 CITY F ASHLAND