Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPinecrest_913_PA-2015-00576 CI'T'Y E -ASHLAND June 3, 2015 Notice of Final Decision On June 2, 2015, the Community Development Director approved the request for the following: Planning Action: 2015-00576 Subject Property: 913 Pinecrest Terrace. Applicant: Suncrest Homes LLC Description: A request for a Physical & Environmental Constraints Review Permit to construct a new single family residence and associated site improvements on Hillside Lands for the property located at 913 Pinecrest Terrace. The proposal includes the removal of 35 oak, madrone and pine trees located within the building envelope or within the area to be excavated for the construction of the driveway, patio and landscaped areas. . COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single-Family Residential; ZONING: R-1-10; ASSESSOR'S MAP 39 1E 15BC; TAX LOT: 2700 The Community Development Director's decision becomes final and is effective on the 12th day after the Notice of Final Decision is mailed. Approval is valid for a period of 18 months 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) 18.5.1.050(F) and/or file an appeal to the Ashland Planning Commission as provided in ALUO 18.5.1.050(G). 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: Parties of record and property owners within 200 ft COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel: 541-488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.orms t x SECTION 18,5.1.050 Effective Date of Decision and Appeals. E. Effective Date of Decision. Unless the conditions of approval specify otherwise or the decision is appealed pursuant to subsection 18.5.1.050,G, a Type I decision becomes effective 12 days after the City mails the notice of decision, F. Reconsideration. The Staff Advisor may reconsider a Type I decision as set forth below, 1. Any party entitled to notice of the planning action, or any City department 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. 2. Reconsideration requests shall be received within five days of mailing the notice of decision. The Staff Advisor shall decide within three days whether to reconsider the matter. 3. If the 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 days to affirm, modify, or reverse the original decision, The City shall send notice of the reconsideration decision to affirm, modify, or reverse to any party entitled to notice of the planning action. 4. 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. G. Appeal of Type I Decision, A Type I decision may be appealed to the Planning Commission, pursuant to the following: 1. Who May Appeal. The following persons have standing to appeal a Type I decision. a. The applicant or owner of the subject property, b. Any person who is entitled to written notice of the Type I decision pursuant to subsection 18.5.1.050.B, c. Any other person who participated in the proceeding by submitting written comments on the application to the City by the specified deadline. 2. Appeal Filing Procedure. a. Notice of Appeal. Any person with standing to appeal, as provided in subsection 18.5.1.050.G.1, above, may appeal a Type I decision by filing a notice of appeal and paying the appeal fee according to the procedures of this subsection. 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, If an appellant prevails at the hearing or upon subsequent appeal, the fee for the initial hearing shall be refunded. b. Time for Filing. A notice of appeal shall be filed with the Staff Advisor within 12 days of the date the notice of decision is mailed. c. Content of Notice of Appeal. The notice of appeal shall be accompanied by the required filing fee and shall contain. I. An identification of the decision being appealed, including the date of the decision, ii. A statement demonstrating the person filing the notice of appeal has standing to appeal. iii. A statement explaining the specific issues being raised on appeal. iv. A statement demonstrating that the appeal issues were raised during the public comment period. d. 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. 3. Scope of Appeal. Appeal hearings on Type I decisions made by the Staff Advisor shall be de novo hearings before the Planning Commission. The appeal shall not be limited to the application materials, evidence and other documentation, and specific issues raised in the review leading up to the Type I decision, but may include other relevant evidence and arguments. The Commission may allow additional evidence, testimony, or argument concerning any relevant ordinance provision. 4. Appeal Hearing Procedure. Hearings on appeals of Type I decisions follow the Type II public hearing procedures, pursuant to section 18.5,1,060, subsections A - E, except that the decision of the Planning Commission is the final decision of the City on an appeal of a Type I decision, A decision on an appeal is final the date the City mails the adopted and signed decision. Appeals of Commission decisions must be filed with the State Land Use Board of Appeals, pursuant to ORS 197.805 - 197.860. r COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel: 541-088-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us ASHLAND PLANNING DIVISION FINDINGS & ORDERS PLANNING ACTION: PA-2015-00576 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 913 Pinecrest Terrace APPLICANT: Suncrest Homes LLC OWNER: Thomas Dobry DESCRIPTION: A request for Physical and Environmental Constraints Review approval to allow for the construction of a new single family residence. The request includes approval for development on Severe Constraints Land and a request to remove 35 trees greater than six-inches in diameter at breast height. The subject property is located at 913 Pinecrest Terrace. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single Family Residential; ZONING: R-1-10; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 lE 15BC; TAX LOTS: 2700 SUBMITTAL DATE: March 30, 2015 DEEMED COMPLETE DATE: May 1, 2015 STAFF APPROVAL DATE: June 4, 2015 FINAL DECISION DATE: June 16, 2015 APPROVAL EXPIRATION DATE: December 4, 2016 DECISION The subject property is a vacant, heavily wooded, .82 acre (35,719 square foot), trapezoidal in shape, parcel. The property is located on the west side of the Pinecrest Terrace. The lot is on the uphill side of the street. The slope of the parcel requires a Physical and Environmental Constraints Review Permit because the majority of the property is greater than 25%, some portions of the site are greater than 35% slope but the proposed home construction and driveway access does not encroach into those areas. The proposal is to construct a new two story residence. The applicant's have demonstrated compliance with the design standards and there are no continuous horizontal planes are greater than 36', they also have proposed using stepped footings, utilizing below grade rooms, and there are no continuous vertical planes greater than 20' and less than the maximum height of 35' from natural grade. The house has been designed to not cast a shadow higher than a 6' fence would at the North property line. A Geologic Investigation Report was submitted with the application completed by Marquess & Associates, Inc., to review the proposed residence and retaining wall designs. The report identified the constraint issues listed in the Hillside Ordinance (seismic factors, erosion control, slope stability, storm water etc.) and specifically lists the appropriate mitigation requirements for the construction. The Geotech report provides recommendations for foundation design, retaining wall specifications, drainage, and erosion control measures. The report also discusses the need for periodic inspections in order to assure compliance with the Geotechnical Expert's findings and recommendations. The findings and recommendations of the Geologic Investigation dated January 16, 2015 by Marquess & Associates, are conditions of the Physical and Environmental Constraints Permit approval, and thus, must be instituted with the development of the lot. The utilities exist within the adjacent rights-of-way, downhill of the property to service the parcel. The utilities are adequately sized for a new single family residence. There are 35 trees proposed for removal on the lot. The trees proposed for removal are a mixture of Madrone, Oak and Pine. The majority are between four to eight inches in diameter at breast height. PA #2015-00576 913 Skycrest/adg Page 1 There is an 18-inch DBH Pine and three; ten inch DBH Madrones proposed for removal. These are the only substantial trees. All of the trees are within the building envelope for the property. The proposed tree removals are the minimum necessary in order to construct the house, garage and driveway. At their May 7, 2015 meeting the City of Ashland Tree Commission reviewed the proposal and recommended that the applicant mitigate the removal of the 18-inch Pine (#90 on tree survey), a condition to this effect has been added. The applicant has provided a Landscape and Irrigation Plan that provides an erosion control seed mix for the areas between the retaining walls on the downhill side of the structure and a detailed landscaping plan for the remaining areas of the site. It is Staffs opinion that the proposal meets the requirements of the Physical and Environmental Constraints chapter for Hillside Development including Severe Constraints and that with the conditions of the previous approval this project can be found to comply with the requirements. The criteria for a Physical Constraints Review Permit are described in AMC Chapter 18.3.10.050, as follows: A. Through the application of the development standards of this chapter, the potential impacts to the property and nearby areas have been considered, and adverse impacts have been minimized. B. That the applicant has considered the potential hazards that the development may create and implemented measures to mitigate the potential hazards caused by the development. C. That the applicant has taken all reasonable steps to reduce the adverse impact on the environment. Irreversible actions shall be considered more seriously than reversible actions. The Staff Advisor or Planning Commission shall consider the existing development of the surrounding area, and the maximum development permitted by this ordinance. The application with the attached conditions complies with all applicable City ordinances. Planning Action 2015-00576 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 2015- 00576 is denied. The following are the conditions and they are attached to the approval: 1) That all proposals of the applicant shall be conditions of approval unless otherwise modified here. 2) That the foundation shall be designed by an engineer or architect with demonstrable geotechnical design experience in accordance with 18.3.10.090.C. 3) That a Construction Permit for the new driveway curbcut shall be applied for an approved by the City of Ashland Public Works and Engineering Division. The curbcut shall be no more than 18- feet in width. 4) That prior to the submittal of a building permit: a) That the applicant submit an electric design and distribution plan including load calculations and locations of all primary and secondary services including transformers, cabinets and all other necessary equipment. This plan must be reviewed and approved by the Electric Department prior to the building permit submittal. Transformers and cabinets shall be located in areas least visible from streets, while considering the access needs of the Electric Department. b) That the storm drainage plan shall be designed, constructed and maintained in a manner that will avoid erosion on-site and to adjacent and downstream properties in accordance with 18.62.080.C.1. The storm drainage plan shall be submitted for review and approval to the Ashland Engineering and Building Divisions prior to application for a building permit. PA #2015-00576 913 Skycrestladg Page 2 C) That written verification from the project geotechnical experts addressing the consistency of the building permit plan submittals with the geotechnical report recommendations (e.g. grading plan, storm drainage plan, foundation plan, etc.) shall be submitted with the building permit submittals. d) That exterior building materials and paint colors shall be compatible with the surrounding landscape to minimize contrast between the structure and the natural environment. Sample exterior building colors shall be provided with the building permit submittals for review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. e) Solar setback calculations demonstrating that the proposed construction complies with the Solar Setback A along with elevations or cross section drawings clearly identifying the highest shadow producing point(s) and their height(s) from natural grade. f) That the recommendations of the Ashland Tree Commission, with final approval by the Staff Advisor, shall be incorporated into the Landscape and Irrigation Plan. 5) That prior to the issuance of a building permit: a) That the fire prevention and control plan for wildfire lands in accordance with 18.3.10.100.B shall be implemented prior to the issuance of a building permit. b) That the temporary erosion control measures (i.e. silt fence and bale barriers) shall be installed according to the approved plan prior to any site work, storage of materials, issuance of an excavation permit and issuance of a building permit. The tree protection and temporary erosion control measures shall be inspected and approved by the Ashland Planning Division prior to site work, storage of materials, the issuance of an excavation permit, and/or the issuance of a building permit. c) That all erosion control measures required by the project geotechnical expert including but not limited to erosion netting / fabric installed on the downhill side of the construction area shall be installed and inspected prior to issuance of a building permit and maintained throughout the duration of the construction. d) That a Verification Permit shall be applied for and approved by the Ashland Planning Division prior to site work, excavation, and/or storage of materials. The Verification Permit is to inspect the identification of the tree to be removed and the installation of tree protection fencing for the trees on and adjacent to the site. The tree protection shall be chain link fencing six feet tall and installed in accordance with project landscape architect proposal. e) That a preconstruction conference to review the requirements of the Hillside Development Permit shall be held prior to site work, the issuance of an excavation permit or the issuance of a building permit, whichever action occurs first. The conference shall include the Ashland Planning Division, Ashland Building Division, the project engineer, project geotechnical expert (i.e. Marquess & Associates), the general contractor and their excavation sub contractors, etc. The applicant or applicants' representative shall contact the Ashland Planning Division to schedule the on-site preconstruction conference. 6) That prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy: a) All service and equipment installation shall be installed according to Ashland Electric Department specifications prior to certificate of occupancy. b) The landscaping and irrigation for re-vegetation of cut/fill slopes and erosion control shall be installed in accordance with the approved plan prior to issuance of the certificate of PA #2015-00576 913 Skycrest/adg Page 3 occupancy. Vegetation shall be installed in such a manner as to be substantially established within one year of installation. C) That a representative of Marquess & Associates, Inc. shall inspect the site according to the inspection schedule of the engineering geology report created by Marquess & Associates, Inc., included in the application and dated January 2015. Prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy, Marquess & Associates Inc. shall provide a final report indicating that the approved grading, drainage and erosion control measures were installed as per the approved plans, and that all scheduled inspections were conducted by the project geotechnical expert periodically throughout the project. 7) That all measures installed for the purposes of long-term erosion control, including but not limited to vegetative cover, retaining walls and landscaping shall be maintained in perpetuity on all areas in accordance with 18.3.10.090.B.6. r Bi olnar, irector / Date Department Community Development PA #2015-00576 913 Skycrest/adg Page 4 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF OREGON ) County of Jackson ) I i E The undersigned being first duly sworn states that: 1. I am employed by the City of Ashland, 20 East Main Street, Ashland, I Oregon 97520, in the Community Development Department. r 2. On June 3, 2015 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 #2015-00576, 913 Pinecrest Terrace. Signature of Employee Documend 61312015 ti PA-2015-00576 391 E15 301 PA-2015-00576 391 E1513C 3010 PA-2015-00576 391 El 513C 3011 BLEIWEISS PETER RICHARD TRUSTEE BONNEY JULIA A BOWLUS ROBERT G TRUSTEE ET AL 955 PENNY DR 980 PENNY DR 1131 HIGHWOOD DR ASHLAND, OR97520 'ASHLAND, OR97520 ASHLAND, OR97520 PA-2015-00576 391 El5BC 3009 PA-2015-00576 391 E1513C 2403 PA-2015-00576 391 E15BC 2700 COOPER JAY W DE ROUCHEY LOUIS/AMANDA DOBRY THOMAS M TRUSTEE ET AL 945 PENNY DR 891 ROCA ST 1725 BRISTOL ST ASHLAND, OR97520 ASHLAND, OR97520 ASHLAND, OR97520 PA-2015-00576 391 E15BC 2800 PA-2015-00576 391 El 513C 2600 PA-2015-00576 391 El5BC 2500 DOWNS JENNIFER DUNCAN JOHN R TRUSTEE ET AL HESTER FREDERICK C/CARLENE 880 PINECREST TERRACE 903 PINECREST TERR 820 PINECREST TERR ASHLAND, OR97520 ASHLAND, OR97520ASHLAND, OR97520 PA-2015-00576 391 El5BC 3002 PA-2015-00576 391 E15BC 2400 PA-2015-00576 391 E1513C 2401 JONES JEREMIAH ALLEN KINARD AMY E MILLS EDWIN/MARTINA 921 PINECREST TERR 875 ROCA 805 PINECREST TERR j ASHLAND, OR97520 ASHLAND, OR97520 !ASHLAND, OR97520 PA-2015-00576 391 E15BC 3003 PA-2015-00576 391 El 513C 3004 j PA-2015-00576 391 E15BC 2402 NORTH JAMIE/BROWN ERIK PERINA HELENA SALLEY KAREN/LARRY LAITNER 920 PINECREST TERR 900 PINECREST TERR j 801 PINECREST TERRACE ASHLAND, OR97520 ASHLAND, OR97520 ASHLAND, OR97520 PA-2015-00576 391 E15 300 PA-2015-00576 PA-2015-00576 STUBBLEFIELD DANIEL JNIVIAN E SUNCREST HOMES LLC JIM HIBBS 1111 HIGHWOOD DR j PO BOX 1313 1585 SISKIYOU BLVD ASHLAND, OR97520 ~j TALENT, OR 97540 ! MEDFORD, OR 97504 PA-2015-00576 :I PA-2015-00576 CHAD BRANCACIO j 913 PINECREST TERRACE PO BOX 7973 6/3/2015 NOD KLAMATH FALLS, OR 97602 19 j t v C I T Y S ASHLAND TREE COMMISSION Minutes May 7, 2015 CALL TO ORDER - Chair Gregg Trunnell called the meeting of the Ashland Tree Commission to order at 6:00 p.m. on May 7, 2015 in the Siskiyou Room of the Community Development and Engineering Services Building located at 51 Winburn Way, Ashland, Oregon. Commissioners Council Liaison Ken Schmidt Carol Voisin, absent Gregg Trunnell Staff Russ Neff Derek Severson, Associate Planner Casey Roland Carolyn Schwendener, Admin Christopher John Pete Baughman, Parks Liaison Zechariah Heck, Assistant Planner APPROVAL OF MINUTES Neff/Schmidt m/s to approve the minutes of the April 9, 2015 Tree Commission meeting. Voice Vote: All Ayes, minutes were approved as presented. PUBLIC FORUM No one present spoke. TYPE 1 REVIEWS PLANNING ACTION: PA-2015-00510 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 843-855 Liberty St OWNERS/APPLICANTS: James Juarez (855 Liberty Street) Charlie Hamilton/Suncrest Homes (843 Liberty Street) DESCRIPTION: A request for a Physical and Environmental Constraints Review Permit to allow for the construction of a fire apparatus access turn-around on hillside lands to serve the properties at 843 and 855 Liberty Street. The request also includes a request to remove one tree, a 19-inch diameter at breast height Pine Tree. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Rural Residential & Woodland Residential; ZONING: RR-.S-P & WR; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 391 E 16AC; TAX LOTS: 201 & 202 All of the Commissioners did a site visit, and Roland noted that he had previously climbed this tree and others on John Baxter's property. Associate City Planner Derek Severson gave a staff report. He explained that this application is for a Physical and Environmental Constraints Review Permit (P & E) to construct a fire truck apparatus turn-around within an area that exceeds 25% grade and is on the City of Ashland's adopted Hillside Lands Overlay Map. Included in the hillside development permit is also a request to remove one 19" diameter Pine Tree located in the area of the turnaround. The proposed location for the turnaround is necessary in order to serve the two lots and minimize the disturbance in the area. Mark Knox, Urban Development Services was present to represent the applicants. Mr. Knox called attention to the fact that the fire department required a fire truck turnaround for these two properties before they could begin development. Due to the dimensional requirements of the turn-around, the necessary retaining walls and the physical constraints of the area surroundings, the Pine Tree will need to be removed as it sits at the edge of a cut bank with some exposed roots and is directly within the cut area. Mr. Knox said there had been some discussion regarding an easement with the neighbors at 831 Liberty. If the neighbors granted an easement there is a possibility of adjusting the turn-around area which might allow the tree to be saved. It was suggested that an arborist look at the tree and the exposed roots to confirm whether it could be saved or not and if the tree roots could be avoided during construction. John Baxter and Kelly Weisheipl 831 Liberty Street spoke. Mr. Baxter expressed their concern over the removal of the Pine tree. He conveyed that the area has had a beetle infestation in combination with drought killing some of the trees but this particular Pine Tree appears to be healthy. If at all possible they would like to see it saved. Mr. Baxter pointed out that he and Ms. Weisheiple recently met with the applicant, Mr. Hamilton, to discuss the possibility of an easement on their property. An easement might allow adjusting the configuration of the turn-around possibly then saving the tree. Mr. Hamilton assured them he is open to the possibility of an easement and reconfiguration of the turn-around but would like to have a decision made this evening regarding the tree removal in order to move forward with the project n the event the easement does not work out. Roland/Neff m/s to approve the plan as is with the caveat that somebody goes back out to review the plan for any adjustments that could be made with an easement so that the tree can be saved. If it's determined that the tree is to be removed the Commission recommends mitigation on the site. Voice Vote: All Ayes, motion passed PLANNING ACTION: PA-2015-00576 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 913 Pinecrest Terrace APPLICANT: Suncrest Homes DESCRIPTION: A request for a Physical & Environmental Constraints Review Permit to construct a new single family residence and associated site improvements on Hillside Lands for the property located at 913 Pinecrest Terrace. The proposal includes the removal of 35 oak, Madrone and pine trees located within the building envelope or within the area to be excavated for the construction of the driveway, patio and landscaped areas. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single-Family Residential; ZONING: R-1-10; ASSESSOR'S MAP 391E 15BC; TAX LOT: 2700 All the Commissioners did a site visit. The Commissioners expressed their confusion over which trees were being removed because a great deal of the trees were marked though the application just stated the removal of 35 trees. Severson gave a staff report explaining this planning action is a Physical & Environmental Constraints Review Permit as the applicants are requesting to construct a new residence on Hillside Lands. Applicant Charlie Hamilton was present to answer questions. Mr. Hamilton confirmed there would be a tree protection plan done and tree verification before any of them will be removed, and that only 19 trees were proposed for removal but that some clustered trees were identified based on their multiple trunks in the inventory. Mr. Hamilton explained this property is .8 of an acre. Originally the owners of the property were interested in splitting the lot but then realized the creation of the required road would take out a great deal of trees. The applicants then made the decision to not divide the lot and put the house close to the street in order to preserve as many trees as possible. The Commissioners acknowledged their appreciation that the owners made a great effort to save trees. Roland noted that Tree #90 was a great specimen and that its removal was unfortuneate; it was noted that this was considered a significant tree based on its diameter and would be mitigated. Schmidt/John m/s to approve the tree removal as presented with mitigation of the one large tree (#90). Voice Vote: All ayes, motion passed. PLANNING ACTIONS: 2015-00194 & -00195 SUBJECT PROPERTIES: 545-550 Holly Street APPLICANT: Jennifer Davis (545 Holly Street) Chad Brown & Trisha Vaughn (550 Holly Street) DESCRIPTION: A request for a Hazard Tree Removal Permit to remove five trees from the property located at 545 Holly St, including three cottonwoods and two elms, and a request for a Hazard Tree Removal Permit to remove one approximately 18- 2 inch diameter breast height Cottonwood for the property located at 550 Holly Street. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Multi-Family Residential; ZONING: R-2; ASSESSOR'S MAP 39 1 E 09DB; TAX LOT: 8900 & 90002. All the Commissioners did a site visit, and Roland noted that he had previously done work on these properties. Severson gave a staff report. He explained that this is a request for a Hazard Tree Removal for five trees located at 545 Holly and one 18"diameter cottonwood located at 550Holly. The applicant has concerns that the drainage has destabilized the root systems. Other trees in the neighborhood have recently fallen. The neighbors across the street have expressed concern that the trees might fall and damage their homes. Consequently they are encouraging the removal of the trees. Applicant Trisha Vaughn 550 Holly Street was present to answer questions. The Commissioners agreed that these trees are a hazard and could fall at any time. The applicant isn't sure at this time what to plant. The Commissioners were concerned that when the trees are removed erosion problems might begin. They suggested putting trees back in order to hold the bank in. The agreed not to require one for one mitigation, but recommended that appropriate riparian vegetation be planted following tree removal to help stabilize the bank on the subject properties. Commissioners noted that a mitigation plan to address bank stability should be provided addressing proposed plantings and might best incorporate geo-jute matting to stabilize the bank until plantings can establish themselves. Appropriate mitigation plantings could include, but would not be limited to, Oregon Ash or River Birch. Trunnell/ Roland m/s to approve the application as presented. Voice Vote: All Ayes, motion passed DISCUSSION ITEMS Downtown Beautification Project - Landscape Architect Kerry KenCairn is consulting with the City of Ashland on the Downtown Beautification project. Ms. KenCairn gave a presentation explaining three proposed projects for the downtown area. • Winburn Way Tree located in front of Gateway Realty's office - This project will create more soil volume for the tree that is located there by expanding the planter area by approximately four feet on the sides without changing grades. The plan is to remove all the concrete surrounding the tree along with the bench and put the footing for the new bench under the sidewalk thus providing more soil under the tree, giving more space for the tree. The goal is to maintain a sitting area. • Pioneer at Lithia Way - The goal is to redesign the corner area. There is a seat/retaining wall, small planter and a larger planter up against the building. Re-doing the retaining wall will provide a small amount of landscaping area. Ms. KenCairn said the plan is to remove three trees and plant two giving them more soil volume. The trees currently there are challenged due to lack of enough water. • Pioneer Parking lot - The plan is to replace the trees with American ash, adding walkways and a barrier along the sidewalk to discourage people from walking through that area. The Commissioners discussed the different tree options for replanting. Ms. KenCairn said they are open to recommendations. She confirmed there will be trunk protection of the trees until their crown can take over by themselves. The Commissioners expressed their concern over the watering of the new trees during a drought. Ms. KenCairn acknowledged the planting will take place in the fall. Some suggestions were, planting in grow bags/gaiters for the slow release of water. NEW BUSINESS ITEMS FROM COMMISSIONERS Parks Department arborist Peter Baughman said the Arbor Day Tree planting at the new Ashland Creek Park located at 27 E Hersey went great. He thanked everyone who made it down to take part. Currently he is hand watering the tree and taking good care of it until irrigation is installed. City Planner Zachariah Heck was the only person representing the Tree Commission at the Earth Day celebration. Heck pointed out that his mother is a teacher and gave him tree books to hand out to kids along with Douglas Fir tree cookies. Next year he would like to encourage some of the Commissioners to attend who could provide more information about trees. rh 3 G Severson announced the City is planning a volunteer appreciation day on August 30, 2015 at Oak Knoll golf course. Anyone that serves on a Commission will be invited. Severson confirmed at this time there is no application for the removal of the Clay street tree. He also announced that in the next month or two Heck will be the new Staff Liaison for the Tree Commissioner. Severson briefly outlined the guidelines in regards to expressing public opinion about any proposal the Commission is likely to hear as a Tree Commissioner. When Land Use Actions come before the Commission there are strict City and State guidelines in terms of how to review the action. The Commission's decision is to be transparent and occurs based on j information everyone has access to at the meeting. If as a Commissioner you come to the meeting and have already pre judged the application and you are not able to make a decision based on what happens in the meeting then that's getting rid of the transparency of that process. Severson asked the questions "Have you formed an opinion before the meeting?" "Is everyone considering the request based on the same information?" The concern is for the integrity of the process in the Commissioners' quasi-judicial roles, and he emphasized Commissioners must make clear any bias at the beginning of the meeting and not be a part of the discussion if they cannot rule impartially. Severson emphasized that the process needs to be handled correctly so that if any project gets challenged it needs to be challenged on the facts not on a procedure error on somebody's part. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 7:40 p.m. Next meeting: June 4, 2015 Respectively submitted by Carolyn Schwendener 4 I ~ I I II I li I ii II s I 23 ~ ~ ~ it I I , r I I 1 i r" ~ r III 1 , x ~ ' I II I lil ~11~1 920 II II i ( I I f II I I I I I f i _ 's. .r O i AA ~ r I I ~Wa III j 913 r I , r 1 1 rill a 0 - ~239 ' I Property lines are for reference only, not scaleable 0 5 10 20 Feet - _ - - - ` - - - - - - r--- - - - - 1, d I' -1 - ' ~ ~ . I I I .I- - I ~ " - ~ , f. ( It 945. ` _ ~ 11,114 I ~ I -11 "I a. ~ o j I a 1~ 900 U ' ~ r '4 ' k v _ it a d~ . l 1 , n r I1~ < - L "L x 1_ , , , - j - o' - - , I ~ - I / . ~ I - - z I - 1~ . -77y'_--l-- - - - - f d 't L . a:~ ! • i - t i/ 4 t1 , t e~ t ' a I`I ' 7 .1 II I'll ,S 51k, , , ~1 ~ ~F - 3 :1 Irv X „ - , - I ~ ~ I , ~ I. ~ - I - .k7, 4' , 1 ate. A, 3' ,F ' Yam af'~ 4.1 * 1 ~a~ re - "~I L,. ) 1t•. s '-r"s 1!`.-_ _ ; v -C , j i- 903 ! i~ Ir - 't° , - I I 1- , . ~ ~ - ~ ' , t , a vs~~ r R . 1x e,,. r° t - : a n L* ~ - )~f _t '~7 . I " " -1 ~ ~ - - ~z , ~ I - - . I " ~ . , ~ , , ~ - ' ' ~ . ' I Y ~ 7 , I ' J , ' I ~ , . . , , , . . ~ . 1, ' ~ - . , " I , - ~ ' ~ -1 - - ~ - ~ I i 'L , - %4~~Z" 4'L - , . - - ) - ~ P f A.. - +k sat, ' .I - a„ t i-w. F~ d .q. , , 'L , 4 , . I r M~ i N I , I - h 7 sr , 955 ;t .,f y i e. . „ E ~r .zw.. " L. , . 3.'r. 1 ~.3s, . r '$x F: e , 14 v 1- 1~ z ~1 f H > f P I 1 ' v F",_ : - s - - r - - ~ y,. y .,I I ;p '4" a "f;. ~ w h.yi3 Y... I I. n'`~ a 4'r( _ ^r I - 4 r ' S iti . s Fib F . C c ~ s! x _ ' r j t ~ ~ i ~tqJ if^rv til 1 t. ll_ ' s ' 4` S t f 1 , r ra i. r , J 1 IR n , - f w - I J ~ - I ' " ~ ~ ~ I - I , ~ I- " . I ' - ' I ~ , - - ' " ' ~ x, , - . . , - : . ~ 1, ~ I . . ' 805 d, JiJ• y ya / s "a, '`a - i. _ 913 q'~ ''o-~ '.S, .r. - ;1 ~ 'I R;~~ , - I " ' , 4 . V , I . . I I - ~ I j . ~ I 1, I - - -w- w 4 1 I ~ - - , , y t r . r t, y. I_ ,N ' . - t _ { a. @", i --'I I"' ' - n. p, t kC _ j t:' 1-'''' . .~}`lb".a Q' j. 7' .,I die I b: ta. w x g~,~t . • A~ \ - ire i • p ; ar _ : 1 ~ YI k F :I » ' f . Jb... ..m'` .li t 1 - 11 .7. J't gY .''u W' Y. - - I ' . ol , , ~ . ~ -1 - , a w +4 q~ E J y : itd..: y ' x'-;..:. ,yi: t 4 A_. »s,. „ I i 7~V 'fiH1 ,4 '>N _ ,a,L 1'r -~.c ::i , . t i' 'z:. 1'n+:x- , w t'Y' cb.. r I 3~~' f t '>N ~.„'!1'r ,E d i. •'P 'wyJ c m.V. :cu. yV ; . ,::7,-- .9 m . t.f. ..s -a-:;:. 1- F." ',:.1.. 1 lw 4 ,L.1 R 3' 1 1, 1 J 't~. f, : W y ,4'4 r 6 . e` ,c t .t r. . a~ <r':.., 1 x "s s ' ~?a' _ :1? d' t -`i' ) rr+ ,a ; e Jr'., `k, . , I: 1. - `s - -T, , tzy,_- t ' !/1'. `:3:i" a N erg h 7 a d.', _ 3e- =,'s jai t ` h:_f r. a i ' " -,1 '1 mc - fir' i 4-` y.. l v p e ,tyt.. aP ± I ~f' r. ! I' < ..a '•J .c' t':- - r~: Y'e`a" '.'r .j t . t , sp I } f X 1. -€Qa. r / gg ` c ; -r ~Ft, •'s X1,'9 u~'' > r i , ,1 " . R d: a w „ I~ _ i• •n , t.~ •rx. „ , ? -'~1` :y4 . 7 i ~ ! J'~.te- .~,~ik'k. r~~ ~J .aft h «_#.f~1;da tf, , q -....mot:. ` a, k; cg a F l y ' ''j- y, j'4 ` M ` I _J { r r _ '.,..v... t , S 1'... £ 'r I, t.., ' w5~ 3.. „ .n , _ Gil 1 ter,: , x a. 4 Y> ' 1 1 ,r. IYA 1 ' /.i„ ir 1, p... i , sH , ik: ,a~.~y. ,.h ,G:''P... 'lfl Sr . `'Sp • = „ " . t' , . „ 1 f ,..ti _ , , - ' ' ,`e rtA. ~ ,'e*'t, _11" s :L " ' Q• i 11 x5 , -.a'. > S, , Ift ? - .,..4. - , .t~.. w n` T J w_ d I' "r ' f - p'` ' y : ,,,f. ' 7T' 11;'.I 1 ` ,r . , a v., 8. _ _ .'',f.i_ - rr ~ '3 i w', J.- :nxla5... .r!: '4 I a µ u% r f... `4" I :r" .,,fig Pr ,.a f r`Ir..: r, ,1 r, 1 .a. J~ 'r:r c .:.e d, i' n - ,L:,r e,... _4' ~.`'-~.:A ',Y ,.e +I , j c VM1 I~.i ;,•t~ i Hr r4 r ua~, -.._'u. ~ J it i, , r { -(t . _J vl- ..:<s. ...tII ':l 'J Y'`.,1 ! ,'rl .a:. .1~ 1. r.it, W . S .t, _ ti. F y fL _ .s "t'r' ~h; 2s: • r, W ' • , -i 11 " Jx' ti.. I ^.-..F r A.qq,A~~ i.{" hT'Ir ',j p' f {yy?. r. ,r - "ky f` If) z } g~4 '4„_5 'ma. t 1':' " SS ',fr rr'Y' k ~1 a Fl;` 't •f? 1 •m.. ' g9~ u~r: a, .y _ r r,Pi.,,, . , 5~ - vY t .1.:4 x -.,1 w. -r. L Y ~I. a,t' " 3 , t. br' P S f. ' - " ~ / ' , s I , - , , 4, . 921 1 ~ , / " •'4'•r w ';t'a .iL. :'r' . "'V' _ : 77. '-r r 801 S >xi^ Y Vii. T n _ '~t... a; , , 4 .i k. $t ! 4 e,. `'.j r ,!3' i ' a k'. ' . ,.1. r',,~r' 4 _Iw a 1 _ . . y. " w~ * ! ..f 'b+ .1 yr v sr .f W+ 'ij; 3a rr F,rl' 4 , ~ t . 1 . 1 " `t T5,, ~ ~ „ ",[r._.: )7' . x .J. , C Y }p , ~a ,,~'J i r ~7 J 1~, ' ' A Fl .p ' 1 I .i 5 II f' k(d. 1~ 'M'LA 2 ! ,4 - 4 ...,-F ( I'r• '1 " 4_~ ~L' ~._-C'~ ~ P~l , ,L' 1~4 ~ 't, - - ' ' ' ' 5 Y -k i 4 r R y- i..s >i,- r°}-f. e r, 1•.y:s~ y v;d' ,tia ~rrt'7_'I 1 />T r. J' ~Y ,4 y,~. s.I~. ¢ ♦ 'f 3 ~~[x["'1 :4u IV -1 I ® = - , ~ , 4 A ~ ~~f 1 7~ L! i P f :r^ F2 . r h r., I ....1N71' f 1, 4'', d r ` - r:,a r T I , , / k-,--- ' - 1~ I I ft k, , - ~ _'..:1- ~ 1, - ~ - I - E: t - 1 ' _ - ' I I I , . - ' ' - I I 1:1 Z_1 ~ I .:Fv: 3 4 4., k p ii + a. I- r 6 3 a k ` t `i z" , t S r "t w ` , " , % ~ -l", - , ~ I I ; , , , , ~ - - . , 4~ " _ 4 Property lines are for reference only, not scaleable 0 1020 40 Feet _ Planning Department, 51 Wln.,_...i Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520 C I T Y E 541-488-5305 Fax: 541-552-2050 www.ashland.or.us TTY; 1-800-735-2900 NOTICE OF APPLICATION PLANNING ACTION: PA-2015-00576 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 913 Pinecrest Terrace APPLICANT: Suncrest Homes DESCRIPTION: A request for a Physical & Environmental Constraints Review Permit to construct a new single family residence and associated site improvements on Hillside Lands for the property located at 913 Pinecrest Terrace. The proposal includes the removal of 35 oak, madrone and pine trees located within the building envelope or within the area to be excavated for the construction of the driveway, patio and landscaped areas. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single-Family Residential; ZONING: R-1-10; ASSESSOR'S MAP 391 E 156C; TAX LOT: 2700 NOTE: The Ashland Tree Commission will also review this Planning Action on Thursday, May 7, 2015 at 6:00 PM in the Community Development and Engineering Services building (Siskiyou Room) located at 51 Winburn Way. NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: May 1, 2015 DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION OF WRITTEN COMMENTS: May 15, 2015 LLI ~ f LL1 Q) w - QL 0 2040 80 Feel 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 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. Y PHYSICAL & ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRt"ITS 18.3.10.050 Approval Criteria An application for a Physical Constraints Review Permit is subject to the Type I procedure in section 18.5.1.050 and shall be approved if the proposal meets all of the following criteria. A. Through the application of the development standards of this chapter, the potential impacts to the property and nearby areas have been considered, and adverse impacts have been minimized. B. That the applicant has considered the potential hazards that the development may create and implemented measures to mitigate the potential hazards caused by the development. C. That the applicant has taken all reasonable steps to reduce the adverse impact on the environment. Irreversible actions shall be considered more seriously than reversible actions. The Staff Advisor or Planning Commission shall consider the existing development of the surrounding area, and the maximum development permitted by this ordinance. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT FROM THE UNIFIED LAND USE ORDINANCE 18.5.7.040.B Criteria for Issuance of Tree Removal Permit B. Tree Removal Permit. 1. Hazard Tree. A Hazard Tree Removal Permit shall be granted if the approval authority finds that the application meets all of the following criteria, or can be made to conform through the imposition of conditions. a. The applicant must demonstrate that the condition or location of the tree presents a clear public safety hazard (i.e., likely to fall and injure persons or property) or a foreseeable danger of property damage to an existing structure or facility, and such hazard or danger cannot reasonably be alleviated by treatment, relocation, or pruning. See definition of hazard tree in part 18.6. b. The City may require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each hazard tree pursuant to section 18.5.7.050. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit. 2. Tree That is Not a Hazard. A Tree Removal Permit for a tree that is not a hazard shall be granted if the approval authority finds that the application meets all of the following criteria, or can be made to conform through the imposition of conditions. 1. The tree is proposed for removal in order to permit the application to be consistent with other applicable Land Use Ordinance requirements and standards, including but not limited to applicable Site Development and Design Standards in part 18.4 and Physical and Environmental Constraints in part 18.10. 2. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks. 3. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes, canopies, and species diversity within 200 feet of the subject property. The City shall grant an exception to this criterion when alternatives to the tree removal have been considered and no reasonable alternative exists to allow the property to be used as permitted in the zone. 4. Nothing in this section shall require that the residential density to be reduced below the permitted density allowed by the zone. In making this determination, the City may consider alternative site plans or placement of structures of alternate landscaping designs that would lessen the impact on trees, so long as the alternatives continue to comply with the other provisions of this ordinance. 5. The City shall require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each tree granted approval pursuant to section 18.5.7.050. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit. GAcomm-dev\planning\Planning Actions\Noticing Fotder\Mailed Notices & Signs\2015\PA-2015-00576 Pinecrest.doex 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 May 1, 2015 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 1 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 #2015-00576, 913 Pinecrest Ter. i Signature of Employee Documend 51112015 I PA-2015-00576 391 E15 301 PA-2015-00576 391 E15BC 3010 ! PA-2015-00576 391 E156C 3011 BLEIWEISS PETER RICHARD TRUSTEE BONNEY JULIA A BOWLUS ROBERT G TRUSTEE ET AL 955 PENNY DR 980 PENNY DR 1131 HIGHWOOD DR ASHLAND, OR97520 ASHLAND, OR97520 ASHLAND, OR97520 PA-2015-00576 391 El 513C 3009 PA-2015-00576 391 El 513C 2403 PA-2015-00576 391 E15BC 2700 COOPER JAY W DE ROUCHEY LOUIS/AMANDA DOBRY THOMAS M TRUSTEE ET AL 945 PENNY DR 891 ROCA ST ,1725 BRISTOL ST ASHLAND, OR97520 ASHLAND, OR97520ASHLAND, OR97520 PA-2015-00576 391 El 513C 2800 PA-2015-00576 391 E15BC 2600 PA-2015-00576 391 El 513C 2500 DOWNS JENNIFER DUNCAN JOHN R TRUSTEE ET AL . 'HESTER FREDERICK C/CARLENE 880 PINECREST TERRACE ' 903 PINECREST TERR !820 PINECREST TERR ASHLAND, OR97520 ASHLAND, OR97520 'ASHLAND, OR97520 PA-2015-00576 391 El 513C 3002 PA-2015-00576 391 El 513C 2400 PA-2015-00576 391E15BC 2401 JONES JEREMIAH ALLEN KINARD AMY E 'MILLS EDWIN/MARTINA 921 PINECREST TERR 875 ROCA 805 PINECREST TERR ASHLAND, OR97520 ASHLAND, OR97520 !i ASHLAND, OR97520 PA-2015-00576 391 E15BC 3003 PA-2015-00576 391 El 513C 3004 PA-2015-00576 391 El 513C 2402 NORTH JAMIE/BROWN ERIK PERINA HELEN A SALLEY KAREN/LARRY LAITNER 920 PINECREST TERR 900 PINECREST TERR i '801 PINECREST TERRACE i ASHLAND, OR97520 ASHLAND, OR97520 ASHLAND, OR97520 PA-2015-00576 391 El5 300 PA-2015-00576 PA-2015-00576 STUBBLEFIELD DANIEL JNIVIAN E SUNCREST HOMES LLC JIM HIBBS 1111 HIGHWOOD DR ! PO BOX 1313 11585 SISKIYOU BLVD ASHLAND, OR97520 TALENT, OR 97540 MEDFORD, OR 97504 PA-2015-00576 - 5-00~;7 Co CHAD BRANCACIO j PO BOX 7973 KLAMATH FALLS, OR 97602 I~jl j i i ' t t LEGEND GENERAL NOTES SUNCREST HOMES LLC 1x 913 Plnecrest Terrace Ashland, OR 97520 0 ~_~ma _ o Jo LIJ DRAWING INDEX 0-0 Ill~~(I ~ moo, coal mEE SNPeaurePUr! V ~ gg~•+ SIa1.5101. SI03. F Sl OND-SAlIR1G PLAA'S 0 4) ~ AI01, AI 01 FIiS1 L 5ECONO RC OR PWIi (Q Q Al a3 LOWER IEVEI PLAN mvn ` S ®i~o qal/B LoVGS~EOP-AAn9 CC,P < m U Lq v•A4 t DESIGN CRITERIA ~ 6- 21- _ .v.~.e - r- It 03 W M LU ENERGY CODE Z 0 c T LL l ABBREVIATIONS Title Site Plan m,..h g...-, . 0001 , 'o - - - - - - - - 01 U N _j 0 v 01 ~ Na 0 ' W0~ a 0-0 1 i C ~ Q mil _ ~ { I ~ a = O m I . , LU I Um U z0 c 2 Second Floor Framing Pla S a I Vim. § 1 _ _ _ : First Floor II & 2nd Floor Framing w- a ° • r First Floor Framing Plan Plans - 02 NOTES z.- 01 J a o^ J Lo Vl 0^. 0 i NtOQ 5 1 1 7G Lo 4 ® =4s s~rte n I/1&P- l Wall Section, Vault x r c 'u 0 Il. \ l V r0 U Z 0 o o n a v ~•u=cY i ~ ~ a J ® IPP uuu , g ~ F Y ® litx F - ~G 6.rtR1' IG•® ~ f . o= 4 e FlrsJ Floor Plan I 1 - } Main Level Floor Plan I~.T.ypical Wall Sact,on,_Flai, A101 - - - - - - 5 04 Q E y u j i7 2 I tn N O . I J O0 P Q I 01 W 0Y a I ~0 0 I ~ ~ s t a LO a ,A W I LL ~ I 0 Z0 d i.__.______________ - _ - - _ - - - - - _ I ,I I I I~Lower Level Plan 0 3 Lower Level Floor Plan A103 - - - - - - - - - - vii - f LiC =vY _l o IN LOU W Logo ~a am N m~ 3 Rear Elevation , ` 0 m - ..t- .f DEL' - 1- - Elevations /Left Elevation__ - A202 - - - - - - - - - / 1366 / 2364 q i.~ omiv , , ~ , ' ~ 362 ~ ,r\ "-+'+rhM faa? r Grading Zone . 258 may A _ J EPPINK _ PARTNLRS INC N"N of~ r / r 6 FT. niWt N£N ~ Patla ~ t POST eaaaai fL6A t"°~ / 2m M.:n P r am~ms no BewHon» gcrmv A-A DOBRY RESIDENCE ZSSIOhp as wn O TomBDarsey E,obry a o.+v i A - Fran[ Entrance r tf aqz%- - _ Walk and a~. PWtK.'w+Pa avy_z:~i-' u.:,"°...~:,ew ~ ,•a~ Landscape / rJ / Pinecresl Terrace EP-1 I t i f i P ~ t 4 1 ' ~y P ,r,P r P d i - a t l (E / t Y d PPPd P 7~ 9 - m ~P rFd d / '~t s f ? T rill M. s T 0 / i 0 P ~ 1 f f t ° SUNCREST HOMES LLC ,a s 1'1. PO Box 1313, Talent, OR 97540 a 1 Suncrest Homes a 541.535.8641 ;ti 913 Pinecrest Terrace, Ashland, OR 97520 charllchamlkon`mlchaclthlrklil E. Building Location crud Design Standards. All buildings and buildable areas proposed for Hillside Lands shall be designed and constructed in compliance with the following standards. 1. Building Envelopes. All newly created lots, either by subdivision or partition, shall contain building envelopes conforming to the following standards. a. The building envelope shall contain a buildable area with a slope of 35 percent or less The area where the house is place is less than 35% slope see attached slope analysis provided by Friar & Associates. I b. Building envelopes and lot design shall address the retention of a percentage of the lot in a natural state as required in 18.3.10.090. B. 3. This is a pre-existing lot neither new building envelope nor lot design is being created with this application. c. Building envelopes shall be designed and located to maximize tree conservation as required in 18.3.10.090.D.3 while recognizing and following the standards for fitel reduction if the development is located in Wildfire Lands. This is a pre-existing lot neither building envelope nor lot design is being created with this application. d. It is recommended that building envelope locations should be located to avoid ridgeline exposures, and designed such that the roofline of a building within the envelope does not project above the ridgeline as illustrated in Figure 18.3.10.090.E.I.d. Figure 18.3.10.090.E.I.d. This is a pre-existing lot neither building envelope nor lot design is being created with this application. 2. Building Design. To reduce hillside disturbance through the use of slope responsive design techniques, buildings on Hillside Lands, excepting those lands within the designated Historic District, shall incorporate the following into the building design and indicate features on required building permits. a. The height of all structures shall be measured vertically from the natural grade to the uppermost point of the roof edge or peak, wall, parapet, mansard, or other feature perpendicular to that grade. Maeimnnn hillside building height shall be 35 feet As shown on the submitted plans no part of this house is taller than 35 from existing grade b. Cut buildings into hillsides to reduce effective visual bulk. Split pad or stepped footings shall be incorporated into building design to allow the structure to more closely follow the slope. ii. Reduce building mass by utilizing below grade roonns cut into the natural slope. The garage of the home was cut into the slope and the remaining foundations are stepped up the hill to reduce the building mass. c. A building step back shall be required on all downhill building walls greater than 20 feet in height, as measured above natural grade. Step-backs shall be a minimuan of six feet. Decks projecting out from the building wall and hillside shall not be considered a building stepback. No vertical walls on the downhill elevations of new buildings shall exceed a maximum height of 20 feet above natural grade. WARRANTY DEED-1(3, N $ /.f Trn,.,s sY ENTltint JACKSON COUNTY TITLE Co. 121 E. 6th St., Medford, Oregon Phone SPliny 3.4551 Vol, ,Page.-,.-- KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, That. _ . in consideration of....Ten.,•(10.,00)- - - Do grantor IQ S, - - l r And..-other--.good--anc):--valuable consideration to ..her_ paid by RICHARD..B....TE(O~YE__.an.4(..GLOHx_A.. ORPF...............-............ husband and wife, grantees, do.-On hereby grant, bargain, sell and convey unto the said grantees, as tenants by the entirety, their heirs and assigns, all the following real property, with the tenements, hereditoments and appurtenances, situated in the County of...... jaekson---...................... and State of Oregon, bounded and described as follows, to-wit; Commencing at a point in Section 15, Township 39 ur South, Range 1 East of the Willamette Meridian, y Jackson County, Oregon, which point bears N. 890 461 E. 660.0 feet from the West Quarter Corner 3 . ' of said Section; thence North 100,0 feet to O the true point of beginning; thence North 148.93 feet; thence East 209.66 feet; thence along the are of a 220.37 feet radius curve left, (the rJ long chord of which bears S. 290 11.65 E. 170.15 feet), a distance of 174.75 feet; thence S. 890 fa 461 W. 294,14 feet to the true point of beginning, w containing 0.82 acres, more or less. ALSO granting a strip of land 47 feet in widths I: along the entire easterly line of the above _ described property for mutual road purposes. T ALSO granting an easement along the Asa: g present travelled route from Emma Street to the above described property, said easement terminating when a dedicated Street is constructed to the above described tract. To Have and to Hold the above described and granted premises unto the said grantees, their heirs and assigns forever, as above stated. And the grantor...... dce-s__covenant that _she_is.... ...lawfully seized in fee simple of the above granted premises free from all incumbranr_es---------------- and that ._..s.. .P will and.....heY heirs, ex(?Uflars and administrators, shall warrant and forever de- Eu j fend the above granted premises, and every part and parcel thereof, against the lawful claims and de- U mands of all persons whomsoever. e.1 Z Witness.---.TPY..----......hand.--- and seal ....this.../,,? .doy of-......Augus.t.................. 1 19.62. a 125. of ' GC'~LG ---------------------------(SEAL) STATE OF OREGON, _.----(SEAL) County of a cks - - °-----o----n-----------°-- - z BE IT REMEMBERED, That on this ..1i2..:= day of-...-..._.............. }1>Lnl13t-----,---_ A. D. 19.6.2.., before, me, the undersigned, a.._...N2t~ y-•Pu}J• i.e...•..••-__. in and for sold ' County and $(hte, personally appeared the within named ..___-RELFN_NIALZ.~...a__k77 S10W w 18 - - who.......... --known to me r to'be,the ides tical.individual......-- described in and who executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to: me that :...`sh$...: executed the same freely and voluntarily. i - U IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and seal-the day and year last above written. w o L.._.1 W N)otary Pubfie-f r Oregon. ® o C J u l„ F My Commission Expires ..;.f.c z d.~ ! RETURN TO f Q E,w 49 Stale of Oregon Ceunly of Jackson ss. -Y 1 hereby c¢rtify that the within instrument of wri Ing w s received and u r q* < filedY.? „o ..r t?. 19~Zand (s a j7.l ~/I. the.... .day of. o recorded iJ%S....-/LJ...-a Records for a7 ckson Cou f/y Oregon, f In U ✓1~7. l7,fl w. E6untY Clerk Dy} f':e. Deputy . ` a This Physical and Environment Constraints permit Application is for the construction of a single family home on 913 Pinecrest Terrace. The property legal description is 391E15BC TL 2700. This property is .82 of an acre and is zoned R-10. The owners of the property have carefully looked at all of their options for developing this parcel and at this time have chosen to place a home in the location that has the least impact on the property. The location of the home as submitted is the least impact in terms of number of trees impacted and amount of grading and retaining that would be required. The first option they considered was building a home on the Western side of the utility easement that bisects the property, but as you can see on the topographical map submitted which shows this potential driveway coming in from the SE corner of the lot and Pinecrest Terrace. This driveway although possible would impact over 30 trees and require an enormous amount of excavation and retaining. Although not as dramatic of a location on the property the owners have elected to place the home close to Pinecrest Terrace. There are a number of benefits to this location: this area is already fairly open with about 10 trees being impact plus there will be substantially less excavation and retaining required to complete this home. The location of the home as proposed doesn't prevent the future development of the parcel in the future by possibly obtaining an access easement from the property owner to West or in the worst case the driveway as shown on the topographical map. i Rick Swanson from Marquess & Associates has been to the site and evaluated the site for the proposed construction (the applicant has included his report with this application). A topographical & tree study was completed by Friar & Associates together with a slope analysis and has been submitted with this application. An arborist report has also be provided with this P&E application. As for the house itself, the owners have been careful to follow the hillside ordinance design standards so no continuous horizontal planes are greater than 36', using stepped footings, utilizing below grade rooms, no continuous vertical planes greater than 20'and less than the maximum height of 35' from natural grade. The solar shadow has also been taken into account and the house as designed won't cast a shadow higher than a 6' fence would at the North property line. Please see below for adherence to all applicable sections. 18.3.10.090 Development Standards for Hillside Lands It is the purpose of the Development Standards for Hillside Lands to provide supplementary development regulations to underlying zones to ensure that development occurs in such a manner as to protect the natural and topographic character and identity of these areas, environmental resources, the aesthetic qualities and restorative value of lands, and the public health, safety, and general welfare by insuring that development does not create soil erosion, sedimentation of lower slopes, slide damage, flooding problems, and severe cutting or scarring. It is the intent of these development standards to encourage a sensitive form of development and to allow for a reasonable use that complements the natural and visual character of the City. A. General Requirements. The following general requirements shall apply in Hillside Lands. 1. Buildable Area. All development shall occur on lands defined as having buildable area. Slopes greater than 35 percent shall be considered unbuildable except as allowed below. Exceptions may be granted to this requirement only as provided in subsection 18.3.10.090.H. a. Existing parcels without adequate buildable area less than or equal to 35 percent shall be considered buildable for one unit. The surveyor Friar & Associates has provided a slope analysis of the site and the house is being placed on slopes that are less than 35%, see attached slope analysis map. b, Existing parcels without adequate buildable area less than or equal to 35 percent cannot be subdivided or- partitioned. NA 2. Timing oflmprovements. For development other than single family homes on individual lots, all grading, drainage improvements, or other land disturbances shall only occur f •om May I to October 31. Excavation shall not occur during the remaining wet months of the year. Erosion control rneasuures shall be installed and functional by October 31. Up to 30 day mod f cations to the October 31 date, and 45 day modification to the May I date may be made by the Planning Director, based upon weather conditions and in consultation with the project geotechnical expert. The modification of dates shall be the nainirnurn necessary, based upon evidence provided by the applicant to accomplish the necessary project goals. This application is for a single family so the above section does not apply 3. Retention in natural state. On all projects on Hillside Lands involving partitions and subdivisions, and existing lots with an area greater than one-half acre, an area equal to 25 percent of the total project area, plus the percentage figure of the average slope of the total project area, shall be retained in a natural state. Lands to be retained in a natural state shall be protected from damage through the use of temporary construction fencing or the functional equivalent. For example, on a 25, 000 square feet lot with an average slope of 29 percent, 25%+29%=54% of the total lot area shall be retained in a natural state. The retention in a natural state of areas greater than the minimunn percentage required here is encouraged. The subject lot is .82 of an acre with an average slope of 30% so 25 +30 equals 55% of the lot must be retained in a natural state which means 16,073 Sq. Ft (45% of .82 of an acre) can be house or landscaping. The main level of the house occupies 1,942 Sq. Ft. The driveway is 600 sq. Ft. the walkway up to the front door another 150 Sq. Ft. so this application involves only 2,667 sq. ft. of non natural- well under that allowed. I 4. Grading - Cuts. On all cut slopes on areas classified as Hillside Lands, the following standards shall apply. a. Cut slope angles shall be determined in relationship to the o pe of materials of which they are composed Where the soil permits, limit the total area exposed to precipitation and erosion. Steep curt slopes shall be retained with stacked rock, retaining walls, or functional equivalent to control erosion and provide slope stability when necessary. Where cut slopes are required to be laid back (PI or less steep), the slope shall be protected with erosion control netting or structural equivalent installed per manufacturers specifications, and revegetated. There are no cut slopes that will be exposed to neither precipitation nor erosion. The regrading in the backyard will have erosion control netting see plans for erosion control and landscaping at retaining walls. b. Exposed cut slopes, such as those for streets, driveway accesses, or yard areas, greater than seven feet in height shall be terraced. Cut faces on a terraced section shall not exceed a maximum height of five feet. Terrace widths shall be a minirnunrr of three feet to allow for the introduction of vegetation for erosion control. Total curt slopes shall not exceed a maximumr vertical height of 15 feet. The top of cut slopes not utilizing structural retaining walls shall be located a minimum setback of one-half the height of the curt slope f •arn the nearest property line. There are no exposed cut slopes nor driveway retaining walls greater than 7', nor any cut slopes closer than one-half its height to a neighboring property line. See plans for layout and heights. c. Cut slopes for structure foundations which reduce the effective visual bulk, such as splitpad or stepped footings, shall be exempted f -om the height limitations of this section. The subject home utilized stepped foundations to reduce the visual bulk of the home. ti This lot was created in Aug of 1962, this section is not applicable. 8, Site Grading. The grading of a site on Hillside Lands shall be reviewed considering the following factors. a. No terracing shall be allowed except for the purposes of developing a level building pad and for providing vehicular access to the pad. The cuts associated with this project are all for providing vehicle access to the pad, and for creating a level building pad. b. Avoid hazardous or unstable portions of the site. Rick Swanson of Marquess & Associates evaluated the site and in his reports states "No sign of hillside instability were observed". c. Avoid hazardous or unstable portions of the site. e. Building pads should be of minimuun size to acconunodate the structure and a reasonable amount ofyard space. Pads for tennis courts, swimming pools and large lawns are discouraged. As much of the remaining lot area as possible should be kept in the natural state of the original slope. 9. Inspections and Final Report. Prior to the acceptance of a subdivision by the City, signature of the final survey plat on partitions, or issuance of a certificate of occupancy for individual structures, the project geotechnical expert shall provide a final report indicating that the approved grading, drainage, and erosion control measures were installed as per the approved plans, and that all scheduled inspections, as per 18.3.10,090.A. 4j were conducted by the project geotechnical expert periodically throughout the project. This section is NA since this application is for a single family home only. C. Surface and Groundwater Drainage. All development on Hillside Lands shall conform to the following standards. 1. All facilities for the collection of storrrrwater runoff shall be constructed on the site and according to the following requirements: a. Stormwater facilities shall include storm drain systems associated with street construction, facilities for accommodating drainage from driveways, parking areas and other impervious surfaces, and roof drainage systems. All roof drains and foundation drain will connect to the City storm drain system via a curb hole in Pinecrest Terrace b. Stormwater facilities, when part of the overall site improvements, shall be, to the greatest extent feasible, the first improvements constructed on the development site. Foundation drains will go in prior to the backfrll of the foundation and the roof gutters will be installed as soon as practicable. c. Stormwater facilities shall be designed to divert surface water away from cut faces or sloping surfaces of a fill. All stormwater facilities are underground and collect storm water and take to the City storm drain system. d. Existing natural drainage systems shall be utilized, as much as possible, in their natural state, recognizing the erosion potential from increased storm drainage. yt 18.3.10.100 Developtttettt Standards for Wildfire Lands A. Requirements for Subdivisions, Performance Standards Developments, or Partitions. 1. A Fire Prevention and Control Plan shall be required with the submission of any application for an outline plan approval of a Performance Standards Development, preliminary plat of a subdivision, or application to partition land where the site contains area designated as Wildfire Hazard. This application is for the construction of a single family home section A of 18.3.10.100 is not applicable. B. Requirements for Construction of All Structures. 1. Applicability. All new construction and any construction expanding the size of an existing structure shall have a fuel break as defined below. 2. General Fitel Break Requirements. A fitel break is defined as an area that is free of dead or dying vegetation, and has native, fast-burning species sufficiently thinned so that there is no interlocking canopy of this type of vegetation. Where necessary for erosion control or aesthetic purposes, the fitel break may be planted in slow-burning species. Establishment of a fitel break does not involve stripping the ground of all native vegetation. Fitel breaks may include structures, and shall not limit distance between structures and residences beyond that required by other sections of this ordinance. The applicant has met with Fire Marshall Marguerite Hickman and walked the property, reviewed the staked out location of the house and the trees to be removed. Fire Marshall Hickman indicated that there may be the additional trimming of some branches and that once the house is up and framed the distance will be easier to determine. There may couple of additional small conifers that will need to be removed but again that will be determined at time of walk-thru. 3. Primaty Fuel Break. A primary fuel break will be installed maintained and shall extend a ntinimtun of 30 feet, or to the property line, whichever is less, in all directions around structures, exchtding fences, on the property. The goal within this area is to remove ground cover that will produce flame lengths in excess of one foot. Such a fitel break shall be increased by ten feet for each ten percent increase in slope over ten percent. Adjacentproperty owners are encouraged to cooperate on the development ofprintary fuel breaks. The applicant has met with Fire Marshall Margueritte Hickman and walked the property, reviewed the staked out location of the house and the trees to be removed. Fire Marshall Hickman indicated that there may be the additional trimming of some branches and that once the house is up and framed the distance will be easier to determine. There may couple of additional small conifers that will need to be removed but again that will be determined at time of walk-thru. 4. Secondary Fitel Break. A secondary fitel break will be installed maintained and shall extend a minirnton of 100 feet beyond the primary fuel break where surrounding landscape is owned and under the control of the properly owner during construction. The goal of the secondary fuel break is to reduce f tell so that the overall intensity of any wildfire is reduced through fuels control. The applicant has met with Fire Marshall Margueritte Hickman and walked the property, reviewed the staked out location of the house and the trees to be removed. Fire Marshall Hickman indicated that there may be the additional trimming of some branches and that once the house is up and framed the distance will be easier to determine. There may couple of additional small conifers that will need to be removed but again that will be determined at time of walk-thru. 5. Roofing. All structures shall be constructed or re-roofed with Class B or better non-wood roof coverings, as determined by the Oregon Structtaral Specialty Code. All re-roofing of existing structures in the Wildfire Lands area for which at least 50 percent of the roofing area requires re-roofing shall be done under TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY located In tde RV.. g~4 0l Sec. Iq T.99S, RI$. AJC G`Ity al ok nd leaisan County, Oregon i I ell n !aG&YR • - m s/a• w~u wu t wsrc ua wn ♦t;fr.s rsrsse mx mrnss fs,a5~e I - nl0 - _ 'ter 3`. ..m u~_ - w a,o xer ru ue ac a,-,rssr.csn 3 w0 O ~ ~ ~ ~ ears Or aseaucs~ O~ rMa w yp ° m sc~ mu 5R ` IL ssvermv~ndusrzn r.nw. rar t ~ 5 roxroux n isee,r. a m-r eA ~ PAVPdRlY PONO.G rt- i \ e a a m a.ua.,CX'Gf + era. TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY Ixa[ed M Me N! 1 4 a Sec. lq T.99S, .¢l&. AM ~y blilend - r ~m c neey, a ~n I C C3 00 t= M, a „O O i , _ cc - u4m`~"~m,Ex' asw . rcv uc ao-.mx w.ca s ~ O ~ spa or er-axucs~ O rcv,vnxa ar 3 o aP m~ g e rs'sav~9rm>~n~mu r ~4~ \ rn~ ar yr ra n• \ PROPZFZY ZOXA4` a e n s 0 i! t E E VOICE OF TREE CARE ~jJanuary 20, 2015 Suncrest Homes P.O. Box 1313 Talent, OR. 97540 To Whom It May Concern: The following is a report for the proposed Pinecrest Terrace site and grading plan. (Ashland Oregon) The site plan has many trees of different species. I am recommending removal of the following, trees because they are either in the envelope site for the proposed house or in the area of excavating of the driveway, patio and landscape construction. Trees to be removed are as follows: Suncrest Site Plan numbers #1 6-8"dbh Madrone. # 69 6"dbh Oak. #13 8"dbh Oak. #70 3-8"dbh Oaks #63 8"dbh Madrone. #71 10"dbh Madrone. #64 6"dbh Madrone. #72 8"dbh Oak. #65 10"dbh Madrone, #73 7"dbh Madrone, #74 3-8"dbh Madrones. #94 3-8"dbh Madrones. #90 18"dbh Pine. #95 4-6"dbh Oaks. #91 3-6"dbh Oaks, #96 8"dbh Madrone. #92 4-7"dbh Madrones. #97 2-10"dbh Madrones. #93 2-7"dbh Oaks. If you have any questions please don't hesitate to contact me, my cell phone number is 541-821-8733. Sincerely, Clarence V. Wangle Certified Arborist # PN-0518A President, Beaver Tree Service Inc. Beaver Tree Service Inc. Portland Metro Office: Corporate Office: CCB # 173614 7085 SW 1751" Ave 270 Wilson Rd. Tax ID It 20-5639553 Beaverton, OR 97007 Central Point, OR 97502 info@beavertree.net go Ina I eavartree.net suzie bea-vertree.net (503) 224-1338 (541) 779.7072 A S S O C I A T E S P 541-772.7115 F 541-779-4079 1120 EAST )AC KSON PC) BOX 490 M1D1 _)RI), UR 97501 _ EMAIL: info;n~matrcEuc s,com WF.B: n~~~r.i~t<irdues .e<in~ January 16, 2015 Charlie Hamilton i Sunerest Homes PO Box 1313 J Talent, Oregon 97540 RE: GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT PROPOSED RESIDENCE AT APN 391E15BC 2700 PINECREST TERRACE ASHLAND, OREGON MAI JOB NO. 14-1189 Dear Mr. Hamilton: Introduction We are pleased to present our geotechnical investigation report for the proposed residence at APN 391E15BC 2700 on Pinecrest Terrace in Ashland, Oregon. The purpose of this investigation was to determine the prevailing subsurface conditions at the site and develop earthwork and foundation engineering recommendations for the development. The proposed residence will have a main floor level at about elevation 2358 and this floor will extend across the entire residence. At the west (right) side of the residence, a basement level garage with a slab-on-grade floor established at about elevation 2346 will be constructed below the main floor. A second-story level will be constructed over the main floor in the center of the residence. The main floor will be a structural wood floor. Existing site grades vary from about elevation 2353 to about elevation 2362. Excavations on the order of 14 feet high will be required at the rear of the proposed garage. Elsewhere, excavations will be on the order of 4 to 6 feet deep for building foundations and crawlspaces. This report has been prepared for the specific use of Sunerest Homes and their designers in accordance with generally accepted soil and foundation engineering principles and practices. No other warranty, either expressed or implied, is made. In the event that any substantial changes in the nature, design, or locations of the structures are planned, the conclusions and recommendations of this report shall not be considered valid unless such changes are reviewed and the conclusions of this report are modified or verified in writing. It should be recognized that changes in the site conditions may occur with the passage of time due to environmental processes or man-made changes. Furthermore, building code or state of Charlie Hamilton Suncrest Homes January 16, 2015 Page 3 of 8 The surficial deposit of loose to medium dense silty sand varied from 3.0' to IT thick. The underlying decomposed granodiorite bedrock was very highly weathered and substantially stronger than the overlying silty sand. The bedrock was hard to dig with the mini-trackhoe and resulted in practical excavation refusal at a depth of 4.0 feet at Pit 2. The silty sands and granodiorite bedrock materials are considered to have a very low to low expansion potential based on our past experience with similar earth materials. i C. Groundwater No free groundwater was observed in the test pits during excavation. Fluctuations in the groundwater level at the site may occur, however, because of variations in rainfall, temperature, runoff, irrigation, and other factors not evident at the time our observations were made and reported herein. Conclusions and Recommendations From a soil and foundation engineering standpoint, it is our opinion that the proposed residence can be constructed as proposed provided the recommendations contained in this report are incorporated into the design and construction of the project. Site Conditions. The site is mantled with 3.0' to 3.7' of loose to medium dense silty sand followed underneath by granodiorite bedrock. In order to promote uniform and firm bearing for all building foundations, we recommend excavating down to the granodiorite and backfilling, where necessary, back up to bottoms of footings with structural fill. This will provide good uniformity for the foundations and will minimize the potential for differential settlements. Foundations. The proposed residence may be supported on conventional footing foundations bearing either directly on the granodiorite bedrock or on structural fill underlain by granodiorite bedrock. The recommendations presented in the remainder of the report are contingent on our observation of the earthwork and subsurface conditions and building pad construction. A. Earthwork 1. Areas to be developed should be cleared of trees, tree rootballs, brush, etc., and stripped of topsoil and any remaining obstructions and vegetation. Holes resulting from removing underground obstructions in areas to be improved should be cleared out and backfilled in accordance with the recommendations presented below. 1 Charlie Hamilton Suncrest Homes January 16, 2015 Page 5 of 8 8. All fill should be moisture-conditioned, placed, and spread in a manner that will prevent segregation and compaction should be performed with a heavy self- propelled vibratory roller where possible. The compaction should be evaluated by nuclear gauge density testing and/or by proofrolling with a loaded ten-yard dump truck where appropriate. 9. Utility trenches should be backfilled with compacted fill placed in lifts not exceeding eight inches in uncompacted thickness, except thicker lifts may be used with the approval of the soil engineer provided satisfactory compaction is achieved. The trench backfill should be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction. Jetting of backfill to obtain compaction should not be permitted. 10. Grading and earthwork should be monitored and tested by our representative for conformance with the project plans/specifications and our recommendations. This work includes site preparation, site excavation, selection of satisfactory fill materials, and placement and compaction of the subgrades and fills. Sufficient notification prior to commencement of earthwork is essential to make certain that the work will be properly observed. B. Foundations 1. Building footings should bear either directly on the granodiorite bedrock or on structural fill bearing on the bedrock. All existing loose to medium dense silty sand should be removed from beneath building footings. 2. Footings should bear at least twelve inches below adjacent finished grade. Footings located adjacent to utility trenches should have their bearing surfaces below an imaginary 1.5;1 (horizontal to vertical) plane projected upward from the edge of the bottom of the trench. Footings should also be deepened as necessary to provide at least 7' of horizontal confinement as measured horizontally from the toe of the footing to the nearest slope face. Footings supporting significant lateral loads, such as wall footings with keys, should be provided with additional horizontal confinement equal to 7' plus the key depth. 3. Footings can be designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 3000 psf for dead plus live loads. This pressure may be increased by one-third for short term loading. All footings should be provided with sufficient reinforcement to provide structural continuity. 4. Lateral loads can be resisted by friction between the foundation bottoms and the supporting subgrade. A friction coefficient of 0.35 can be used. In addition, a !G Charlie Hamilton Suncrest Homes January 16, 2015 Page 7 of 8 Surcharge loadings and saturated backfills should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. 2. The preceding pressures assume that sufficient drainage is provided behind the walls to prevent the build-up of hydrostatic pressures from surface or subsurface water infiltration. Adequate drainage may be provided by means of 3/a" drain rock material enclosed in a filter fabric and a 4" diameter rigid perforated pipe placed at the base of the wall. The draimock should extend up the walls to within one foot of the finished grade. The drain pipes should be tied into closed pipes that discharge downslope of the wall. 3. The backfill placed behind retaining walls should be fully granular and compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction using light compaction equipment. Interior walls should be thoroughly waterproofed and the waterproofing should be protected with protection boards or similar. E. Site Drainage 1. Positive surface gradients of at least five percent on porous surfaces and two percent on paved surfaces should be maintained away from the building so that surface water does not collect in the vicinity of the foundations. Water from roof downspouts should be collected into closed pipes that discharge the water in an approved manner downslope of the home. 2. A foundation drain should be placed adjacent to the perimeter building footings, where retaining wall backdrains are not required, to control moisture beneath the foundations. The perimeter drain should be set as low as practical to obtain maximum drainage control. F. Plan Review and Construction Observation 1. We recommend that we review the final development plans for the residence, garage, and pool. We should also be retained to provide soil engineering monitoring and testing services during the grading, foundation installation, and subdrainage installation. This will provide us the opportunity for correlation of the soil conditions found in our investigation with those actually encountered in the field, and thus permit any necessary modifications in our recommendations resulting from changes in anticipated conditions. PRIMARY DIVISIONS GROUP SECONDARY DIVISIONS SYMBOL GRAVELS CLEAN GW Well graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or GRAVELS no fines. J a ° MORE THAN HALF (LESS THAN poorly graded gravels, or gravel-sand mixtures, little OF COARSE 5% FINES) GP or no fines. a FRACTION IS GRAVEL GM Silty gravels, gravel-sand-silt mixtures, :2 6 z non-plastic fines. LLJ U_ W LARGER THAN WITH Z O z N Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures, Q ¢ cn No. 4 SIEVE FINES GC plastic fines. z SANDS CLEAN SW Well graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines. SANDS W ¢ MORE THAN HALF (LESS THAN Poorly graded sands or gravelly sands, little or ~ Fz g OF COARSE 5% FINES) SP no fines, Q Wq: to FRACTION IS SANDS SM Silty sands, sand-slit mixtures, non-plastic fines SMALLER THAN WITH No. 4 SIEVE FINES SC Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines. cn W SILTS AND CLAYS ML Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour, silty or oW clayey fine sands or clayey silts with slight plasticity, X V) LIQUID LIMIT IS CL Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly Q W clays, sandy clays, silty clays, lean clays. Q ¢ - LESS THAN 50% W = <n OL Organic silts and organic silty clays of low plasticity. 0 Z ¢ N ° Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine Q N SILTS AND CLAYS MH sand or silt soils, elastic silts. °D a 6 W o z LIQUID LIMIT IS CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays. Z_ a a GREATER THAN 50% W OH Organic clays of medium to high plasticity, organic silts. HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS Pt Peat and other highly organic soils. UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (ASTM D-2487, U.S. STANDARD SERIES SIEVE CLEAR SQUARE SIEVE OPENINGS 200 40 10 4 3/4" 3" 12" SILTS AND CLAYS SAND GRAVEL COBBLES BOULDERS FINE MEDIUM COARSE FINE COARSE GRAIN SIZES ANDS & GRAVELS BLOWS/FOOT SILTS & CLAYS STRENGTH BLOWS/FOOT VERY LOOSE 0 - 4 VERY SOFT 0 - 1/4 0 - 2 LOOSE 4 - 10 SOFT 1/4 - 1/2 2 - 4 MEDIUM DENSE 10 - 30 FIRM 1/2 - 1 4 - 8 STIFF 1 - 2 8 - 16 DENSE 30 - 50 VERY STIFF 2 - 4 16 - 32 VERY DENSE OVER 50 HARD OVER 4 OVER 32 RELATIVE DENSITY CONSISTENCY tNumber of blows of 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches to drive a 2 inch O.D. (1-3/8 inch I.O.) split spoon (ASTM D-1586). +Unconfined compressive strength in tons/sq. ft. as determined by laboratory testing or approximated by the standard penetration test (ASTM D-1586), pocket penetrometer, torvane, or visual observation, P 541-772-7115 M TO iORM AM ffr LM DRAWING F541-771A079 T 1120 FASFJACKSON 110t 2 ti i. a PO BOX 490 W0F0RD OR97501 Pcrest Terrace ~1~lLSj J L- SS J.IAIL. 1-..uaa1. m Ashland 1 Oregon C ` 1' MM JOB NO. 1+1189 DRAWN R$ d ISSUE DATE Jan 2015 auc m RS OF 2 DWGS i D. Tree Conservation, Protection and Removal. All development on Hillside Lands shall conform to the following requirements. 1. Inventory o Existing T rees. A tree survey at the sane scale as the project site plan shall be prepared, which locates all trees greater than six inches diameter at breast height (DBH) identified by DBH, species, approximate extent of tree canopy. In addition, for areas proposed to be disturbed, existing tree base elevations shall be provided Dead or diseased trees shall be identified. Groups of trees in close proximity (i. e., those within five feet of each other) may be designated as a clump of trees, with the predominant species, estimated number and average diameter indicated All tree surveys shall have an accuracy ofphis or minus two feet. The name, signature, and address of the site surveyor responsible for the accuracy of the survey shall be provided on the tree survey. Portions of the lot or project area not to be disturbed by development need not be included in the inventory. Friar and Associates was hired to do a complete tree study which identified 128 trees on this parcel (see attached). The owners then looked at the possibility of splitting this .82 acre parcel - many different options were considered. First the possibility of putting two skinny long lots that both had access from Pinecrest, but to the North there is an utility easement that cuts across and into the property and to the South the slope increases above 35% so there is not reasonable room to place two homes. The Second option was putting a driveway in that would allow access to the rear portion of the lot. This driveway was designed and although possible it would required a huge amount of excavation, retaining walls and tree removal. Over 27 trees would have to be removed just to put the driveway in, not to mention the large cut and retaining that would be necessary to put this driveway in. With this option there would still need to be a large number of trees cut with each of the two homes that would be built. The third option involved is just putting one house in and placing it in such a way as to have the fewest trees removed. This application requires the removal of 19 trees which is 30% less than what which would be required for just putting in the driveway if the two lot option was chosen. The owner's choice to place just one home on the property and retain over 85% of all the existing trees on the tree survey in the applicant's option is to be applauded; preserving the natural beauty of the property was paramount. 2. Evaluation of Suitabilityfor Conservation. All trees indicated on the inventory of existing trees shall also be identified as to their suitability for conservation. When required by the hearing authority, the evaluation shall be conducted by a landscape professional. The following factors shall be inchided in this determination. An arborist was out to the site to evaluate both the trees that are to remain and those that had to be removed because of the construction of the single family home. No trees were identified to be removed other that those required for the construction of the home. No hearing authority has requested any additional evaluation. a. Tree Health, Healthy trees can better withstand the rigors of development than non-vigorous trees. b, b. Tree Structure. Trees with severe decay or substantial defects are more likely to result in damage to people andproperty. i c. Species. Species vary in their ability to tolerate impacts and damage to their enviromnent. d Longevity. Potential Iongevhy. e. Variety. A variety of native tree species and ages. f. Size. Large trees provide a greater protection for erosion and shade than smaller trees. 3. Tree Conservation in Project Design. Significant trees (N,o feet DBH or greater conifers and one foot DBH or greater broadleaj) shall be protected and incorporated into the project design whenever possible. Per the tree survey and the arborist report no significant trees are being removed. justified by findings of fact, the hearing authority may approve the removal of trees for one or more of the following conditions. a. The tree is located within the building envelope. Friar and Associates was hired to do a complete tree study which identified 128 trees on this parcel (see attached). The owners then looked at the possibility of splitting this .82 acre parcel - many different options were considered. First the possibility of putting two skinny long lots that both had access from Pinecrest but to the North there is an utility easement that cuts across and into the property and to the South the slope increases above 35% so there is not reasonable room to place two homes. The Second option was putting a driveway in that would allow access to the rear portion of the lot. This driveway was designed and although possible it would required a huge amount of excavation, retaining walls and tree removal. Over 27 trees would have to be removed just to put the driveway in, not to mention the large cut and retaining that would be necessary to put this driveway in. With this option there would still need to be a large number of trees cut with each of the two homes that would be built. The third option involved is just putting one house in and placing it in such a way as to have the fewest trees removed. This application requires the removal of 19 trees which is 30% less than what which would be required for just putting in the driveway if the two lot option was chosen. The owners choice to place just one home on the property and retain over 85% of all the existing trees on the tree survey in the applicant's option is to be applauded, preserving the natural beauty of the property was paramount. b. The tree is located }within a proposed street, driveway, or parking area.. c. The tree is located within a water, sewer, or other public utility easement. d. The tree is determined by a landscape professional to be dead or diseased, or it constitutes an unacceptable hazard to life or property when evaluated by the standards in 18.3.10.090. D. 2. e. The tree is located within or adjacent to areas of cuts or fills that are deemed threatening to the life of the tree, as determined by a landscape professional. j 6 Tree Replacement. Trees approved for removal, with the exception of trees removed because they were determined to be diseased, dead, or a hazard, shall be replaced in compliance with the following standards. The applicant is not planning on replacing any of the trees to be removed because there are still 109 trees on the site together with the fact that this parcel is in the wildfire zone and adding additional fuels into this environment is not a sound practice. The applicant met with Fire Marshal Marqueritte Hickman. We reviewed the location of the house and discussed primary and secondary fire breaks, Marshal Hickman indicated some additional thinning of existing trees would be necessary. Adding additional fuels via tree replacement doesn't make sense since we would probably have to thin them out anyways. a, Replacement trees shall be indicated on a tree replantingplan. The replantingplan shall include all locations for replacement trees, and shall also indicate tree planting details. b. Replacement trees shall be planted such that the trees will in time result in canopy equal to or greater than the tree canopy present prior to development of the property. The canopy shall be designed to mitigate of the impact ofpaved and developed areas, reduce surface erosion, and increase slope stability. Replacement tree locations shall consider impact on the wildfire prevention and control plan. The hearing authority shall have the discretion to adjust the proposed replacement tree canopy based upon site-specific evidence and testimony. c. Maintenance of replacement trees shall be the responsibilhy of the property owner. Required replacement trees shall be continuously maintained in a healthy manner. Trees that die within the first five years after i TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY lace [ed la tLe NX t I of Sec 1q G T.99S, Rly. )fY ~j N AsLlead Jeclsm Camty, 7, .r ~ tLC&VR • . m. ary" o+~x Fr • Fusrc t~P u..n awtcs .z.eze F&t rs,nsa 45i15)B - i¢ na iii[ att . - I (ICtE~ - ~~i araiF[~[vM FIDts~w Ino i~•i Rx Fm IXi ai-Ir35.. C~sD. aO m OQ O ~ i ~ D ~ ~ asss ar aslxArs~-nc Fzr.,r Fca ccc o,-.n~z 4%.co. O - - - r...c umc.~ n ne w.r 7 ~ \ w e Mass v mus ~a nc'~ai)~ d m Ell- FSIi1fl5 i n O ~ O -0 4 g1yATAH DASL+Jf . ds i~Aa ~ ID~1'af Yt'ISW.Am.T. F.xF nA roXNII.P AT64YALa rm ~°Y`^~•2. ~ \ PAGPLRLI'LOND,~ a-t-5 \ J • a n ~ av' - l I .M-ARQd J E S P541-772-7115 F541-7/79-4079 1120 CAST )AC KSON PO BOX 190 NIEDFORD, OR 97501 L ASSOCIATES" i N C FMAIL. inFc);~i»axdurss.cc~m WEIR: ~xrtirt~=.n~irquess.c{_~m January 16, 2015 Charlie Hamilton Sunerest Homes PO Box 1313 Talent, Oregon 97540 RE: GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT PROPOSED RESIDENCE AT APN 391E15BC 2700 PINECREST TERRACE ASHLAND, OREGON MAI JOB NO. 14-1189 Dear Mr. Hamilton: j I Introduction We are pleased to present our geotechnical investigation report for the proposed residence at APN 391E15BC 2700 on Pinecrest Terrace in Ashland, Oregon. The purpose of this investigation was to determine the prevailing subsurface conditions at the site and develop earthwork and foundation engineering recommendations for the development. The proposed residence will have a main floor level at about elevation 2358 and this floor will extend across the entire residence. At the west (right) side of the residence, a basement level garage with a slab-on-grade floor established at about elevation 2346 will be constructed below the main floor. A second-story level will be constructed over the main floor in the center of the residence. The main floor will be a structural wood floor. Existing site grades vary from about elevation 2353 to about elevation 2362. Excavations on the order of 14 feet high will be required at the rear of the proposed garage. Elsewhere, excavations will be on the order of 4 to 6 feet deep for building foundations and crawlspaces. This report has been prepared for the specific use of Sunerest Homes and their designers in accordance with generally accepted soil and foundation engineering principles and practices. No other warranty, either expressed or implied, is made. In the event that any substantial changes in the nature, design, or locations of the structures are planned, the conclusions and recommendations of this report shall not be considered valid unless such changes are reviewed and the conclusions of this report are modified or verified in writing. It should be recognized that changes in the site conditions may occur with the passage of time due to environmental processes or man-made changes. Furthermore, building code or state of Charlie Hamilton Suncrest Homes January 16, 2015 Page 2 of 8 the practice changes may require modifications in the recommendations presented herein. Accordingly, the recommendations of this report should not be relied on beyond a period of three years without being reviewed by a geotechnical engineer. Method of Investigation Two exploratory test pits were excavated on January 8, 2015, in the building pad area with a mini-trackhoe. The approximate corners of the proposed building were staked in the field to help us locate our test pits. A key describing the soil classification system and soil consistency terms used in this report is presented on Drawing 1, Logs of the exploratory test pits are presented on Drawing 2. Samples of the soil materials from the pits were returned to our laboratory for moisture content testing and these results are shown on the test pit logs. i' Site Conditions A. Surface The property is undeveloped, except for a GTE utility and easement, and covered with a growth of trees, brush, and weeds typical of raw hillsides in Ashland. The property is bounded by Pinecrest Terrace on the east, by residences on the north and west, and by undeveloped hillside land on the south. The ground surface generally slopes uphill to the west with an approximate gradient of 18 percent and uphill to the southwest with an approximate gradient of 38 percent. An existing 8 feet high cutslope forms the front (east) boundary of the site. This cutslope was probably excavated many years ago as part of the construction of Pinecrest Terrace. Most portions of the cutslope are very steep with slopes of 03:1 or 0.8:1 (horizontal to vertical). Based on our nearby test pits, the slope materials are probably comprised of loose to medium dense silty sands in the upper half of the cutslope and weathered granodiorite bedrock in the lower half. No groundwater seepage was observed in the cutslope. The cutslope is generally lightly vegetated except for a few spots (smaller than one square yard in surface area) where recent minor slippage has occurred. Based on the small deposits of slope debris at the toe of the cutslope, past slippages over the years have resulted in the deposition of one to two cubic feet of soil behind the street curb per lineal foot of curb. In general, the overall stability of the cutslope appears adequate, however, the slope face is very steep and subject to raveling and minor' slippage. No signs of hillside instability were observed at the site except for the minor slippages on the cutslope. B. Subsurface The test pits generally encountered two layers of earth materials: a surficial deposit of silty sand followed underneath by decomposed granodiorite bedrock. i Charlie Hamilton Suncrest Homes January 16, 2015 Page 3 of 8 The surficial deposit of loose to medium dense silty sand varied from 3.0' to 3.7' thick. The underlying decomposed granodiorite bedrock was very highly weathered and substantially stronger than the overlying silty sand. The bedrock was hard to dig with the mini-trackhoe and resulted in practical excavation refusal at a depth of 4.0 feet at Pit 2. The silty sands and granodiorite bedrock materials are considered to have a very low to low expansion potential based on our past experience with similar earth materials. C. Groundwater No free groundwater was observed in the test pits during excavation. Fluctuations in the groundwater level at the site may occur, however, because of variations in rainfall, temperature, runoff, irrigation, and other factors not evident at the time our observations were made and I reported herein. Conclusions and Recommendations From a soil and foundation engineering standpoint, it is our opinion that the proposed residence can be constructed as proposed provided the recommendations contained in this report are incorporated into the design and construction of the project. Site Conditions. The site is mantled with 3.0' to 3.7' of loose to medium dense silty sand followed underneath by granodiorite bedrock. In order to promote uniform and firm bearing for all building foundations, we recommend excavating down to the granodiorite and backfilling, where necessary, back up to bottoms of footings with structural fill. This will provide good uniformity for the foundations and will minimize the potential for differential settlements. Foundations. The proposed residence may be supported on conventional footing foundations bearing either directly on the granodiorite bedrock or on structural fill underlain by granodiorite bedrock. The recommendations presented in the remainder of the report are contingent on our observation of the earthwork and subsurface conditions and building pad construction. A. Earthwork 1. Areas to be developed should be cleared of trees, tree rootballs, brush, etc., and stripped of topsoil and any remaining obstructions and vegetation. Holes resulting from removing underground obstructions in areas to be improved should be cleared out and backfilled in accordance with the recommendations presented below. t Charlie Hamilton Suncrest Homes January 16, 2015 Page 4 of 8 2. Excavations Beneath Building Footings and Slabs. We recommend removing the loose to medium dense sands from beneath building footings and building slabs to expose the underlying bedrock. In footing areas where the excavations to bedrock are deeper than the proposed footing bottoms, these deeper excavations should be backfilled back up to design grade with structural fill. These excavations below the bottoms of footings should be widened to be at least 2' beyond the sides of the footings and slabs. Excavations into the bedrock sand will likely require -a toothed bucket; however, all excavations for footing bottoms should be finished with a smooth edged bucket to remove loosened material. Because the site grades are relatively steep and the top surface of the bedrock is also likely sloped downhill, the bottoms of the footing excavations should be stepped downhill resulting in level benches for the stable placement of fill. After the excavations are completed we should be called out to observe the subgrade conditions prior to placement of any structural fill or concrete forms. After observation and recompaction of the subgrades, the excavations may be backfilIed with structural fill. 4. In general, subgrade soils should be recompacted prior to placing fill. If the subgrade is firm, excavated cleanly, and undisturbed by the excavation work, the soil engineer may waive the requirement for recompaction of subgrade. The recompaction should consist of moisture conditioning the soils to approximately three percent above optimum and compacting them to at least 95 percent relative compaction as determined by ASTM Test Method D698. Compaction should be performed using heavy equipment such as a self-propelled vibratory compactor. 5. In order to achieve satisfactory compaction in the subgrade and fill soils, it may be necessary to adjust the soil moisture content at the time of construction. Soils which are too dry will require the addition of water while scarification and aeration will be required for soils which are too wet. 6. High quality structural fill materials, such as 3/4"-0 or 4"-0 crushed rock, should be used beneath building footings and building slabs. On-site silty sand should not be re-used as structural fill beneath building footings and slabs. 7. Structural fill should be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction as determined by ASTM Test Method D698. Fill material should be spread and compacted in lifts not exceeding eight inches in uncompacted thickness. The compaction of the fill, thickness of lifts, and control of the moisture content should be monitored and tested by our field representative. i Charlie Hamilton Suncrest Homes January 16, 2015 Page 5 of 8 8. All fill should be moisture-conditioned, placed, and spread in a manner that will prevent segregation and compaction should be performed with a heavy self- propelled vibratory roller where possible. The compaction should be evaluated by nuclear gauge density testing and/or by proofrolling with a loaded ten-yard dump truck where appropriate. 9. Utility trenches should be backfilled with compacted fill placed in lifts not exceeding eight inches in uncompacted thickness, except thicker lifts may be used with the approval of the soil engineer provided satisfactory compaction is achieved. The trench backfill should be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction. Jetting of backfill to obtain compaction should not be permitted. i I 10. Grading and earthwork should be monitored and tested by our representative for conformance with the project plans/specifications and our recommendations. This work includes site preparation, site excavation, selection of satisfactory fill materials, and placement and compaction of the subgrades and fills. Sufficient notification prior to commencement of earthwork is essential to make certain that the work will be properly observed. B. Foundations 1. Building footings should bear either directly on the granodiorite bedrock or on structural fill bearing on the bedrock. All existing loose to medium dense silty sand should be removed from beneath building footings. 2. Footings should bear at least twelve inches below adjacent finished grade. Footings located adjacent to utility trenches should have their bearing surfaces below an, imaginary 1.5:1 (horizontal to vertical) plane projected upward from the edge of the bottom of the trench. Footings should also be deepened as necessary to provide at least 7' of horizontal confinement as measured horizontally from the toe of the footing to the nearest slope face. Footings supporting significant lateral loads, such as wall footings with keys, should be provided with additional horizontal confinement equal to 7' plus the key depth. 3. Footings can be designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 3000 psf for dead plus live loads. This pressure may be increased by one-third for short term loading. All footings should be provided with sufficient reinforcement to provide structural continuity. 4. Lateral loads can be resisted by friction between the foundation bottoms and the supporting subgrade. A friction coefficient of 0.35 can be used. In addition, a Charlie Hamilton Suncrest Homes January 16, 2015 Page 6 of 8 passive pressure equal to an equivalent fluid pressure of 300 pcf can be taken against the sides of footings poured neat or against compacted fill. 5. Foundation settlements are expected to be within tolerable limits for the proposed construction. Post-construction differential movements of the foundations are expected to be less than 1/2 inches over a horizontal distance of 50 feet. C. Slabs-On-Grade 1. All garage slabs and any building slabs should be underlain by at least one foot of compacted 3/a"-0 crushed rock, except as discussed below in Item C-2. All existing loose to medium dense silty sand should be removed from beneath these slabs and be replaced with structural fill. 2. The garage slab will be established well below exterior site grades and as a result, should be underlain by an underllab drainage system. This slab should be underlain by at least ten inches of mechanically tamped free-draining 3/a" crushed rock (no fines, no round rock) over non-woven, minimum 4 ounces per square yard, filter fabric over subgrade. Three-inch diameter perforated rigid PVC pipes should be placed within the free-draining crushed rock layer. The pipes should be placed flat on two inches of free-draining 3/a" crushed rock and form a grid system of interconnected underdrain pipes. The pipes should start 2' inside of the retaining wall footings and be spaced no more than 8' apart in an X-Y pattern across the entire slab. The pipes should be plumbed to a solid pipe sloped at least 2 percent to drain downslope of the residence. The free-draining 3/a" crushed rock will act as a capillary moisture break to help! decrease moisture through the slab. A waterproofing membrane should also be incorporated into the design to seal off the slab. A vapor barrier may also be used beneath the slab. 3. All slabs should be reinforced in accordance with the anticipated use and loading, but as a minimum, slabs should be reinforced with sufficient rebar or equal for temperature and shrinkage control. D. Retaining Walls 1. Retaining walls should be designed in accordance with our footing design recommendations as discussed above. Unrestrained walls with level to gently sloping (less than 25 percent slopes) backfill surfaces should be designed to resist an equivalent fluid pressure of at least 40 pcf. Where restrained, walls should be designed for an equivalent fluid pressure of 60 pcf with similar backfill surfaces. These pressures do not account for any surcharge loadings or saturated backfills. . t, V Charlie Hamilton Suncrest Homes January 16, 2015 Page 7 of 8 Surcharge loadings and saturated backfills should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. 2. The preceding pressures assume that sufficient drainage is provided behind the walls to prevent the build-up of hydrostatic pressures from surface or subsurface water infiltration. Adequate drainage may be provided by means of 3/a" drain rock material enclosed in a filter fabric and a 4" diameter rigid perforated pipe placed at the base of the wall. The drainrock should extend up the walls to within one foot of the finished grade. The drain pipes should be tied into closed pipes that discharge downslope of the wall. 3. The backfill placed behind retaining walls should be fully granular and compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction using light compaction equipment. Interior walls should be thoroughly waterproofed and the waterproofing should be protected with protection boards or similar. E. Site Drainage 1. Positive surface gradients of at least five percent on porous surfaces and two percent on paved surfaces should be maintained away from the building so that surface water does not collect in the vicinity of the foundations. Water from roof downspouts should be collected into closed pipes that discharge the water in an approved manner downslope of the home. 2. A foundation' drain should be placed adjacent to the perimeter building footings, where retaining wall backdrains are not required, to control moisture beneath the foundations. The perimeter drain should be set as low as practical to obtain maximum drainage control. F. Plan Review and Construction Observation 1. We recommend that we review the final development plans for the residence, garage, and pool. We should also be retained to provide soil engineering monitoring and testing services during the grading, foundation installation, and subdrainage installation. This will provide us the opportunity for correlation of the soil conditions found in our investigation with those actually encountered in the field, and thus permit any necessary modifications in our recommendations resulting from changes in anticipated conditions. I Charlie Hamilton Suncrest Homes January 16, 2015 Page 8 of 8 Please contact this office if you have any questions regarding this report. PRQ,~~~i . Very truly yours, GIN 6885 41~ 1 MARQUESS & ASSOCIATES, INC. E= _ oR~GOI3 (~L i T. 21, ~~~A. SuV P'~5o Rick Swanson, P.E., G.E. Civil Engineer 16885 EXPIRES: 6.30- u / 6 RS/ler Copies: Addressee (1), also by email Attachments: Key to Boring and Pit Logs, Drawing 1 Logs of Pits 1 and 2, Drawing 2 PRIMARY DIVISIONS GROUP SYMBOL SECONDARY DIVISIONS GRAVELS CLEAN GW Well graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or GRAVELS no fines. J of o MORE THAN HALF (LESS THAN Poorly graded gravels, or gravel-sand mixtures, little p oa OF COARSE 5% FINES) GP or no fines. ~ U) d FRACTION IS GRAVEL GM Silty gravels, gravel-sand-silt mixtures, 0 z non-plastic fines. t w LARGER THAN WITH Z o z N Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures, Q LL < in No. 4 SIEVE FINES GC plastic fines. = w _ SANDS ACLEAN NDS SW Well graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines. fW ¢ 0 cn MORE THAN HALF (LESS THAN 5% FINES) SP Poorly graded sands or gravelly sands, little or 0~ FF g OF COARSE no fines. O w~ to FRACTION IS SANDS SM Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures, non-plastic fines U SMALLER THAN WITH No. 4 SIEVE FINES SC Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines. V) SILTS AND CLAYS ML Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour, silty or -I wo clayey fine sands or clayey silts with slight plasticity, ~5_ of U) U) ~3 !tl LIQUID LIMIT IS CL Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly Lp = N uw-i LESS THAN 50% clays, sandy clays, silty clays, lean clays. OL Organic silts and organic silty clays of low plasticity. z a < N SILTS AND CLAYS MH Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine d sand or silt soils, elastic silts. W o z LIQUID LIMIT IS CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays. iZ GREATER THAN 50% OH Organic clays of medium to high plasticity, organic silts. HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS Pt Peat and other highly organic soils. UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (ASTM D-2487 U.S. STANDARD SERIES SIEVE CLEAR SQUARE SIEVE OPENINGS 200 40 10 4 3/4" 3" 12" SILTS AND CLAYS SAND GRAVEL COBBLES BOULDERS FINE MEDIUM COARSE FINE COARSE GRAIN SIZES ANDS & GRAVELS BLOWS/FOOT SILTS & CLAYS STRENGTHS BLOWS/FOOT VERY LOOSE O - 4 VERY SOFT 0 - 1/4 0 - 2 LOOSE 4 - 10 SOFT 1/4 - 1/2 2 - 4 MEDIUM DENSE 10 - 30 FIRM 1/2 - 1 4 - 8 STIFF 1 - 2 8 - 16 DENSE 30 - 50 VERY STIFF 2 - 4 16 - 32 VERY DENSE OVER 50 HARD OVER 4 OVER 32 RELATIVE DENSITY CONSISTENCY tNumber of blows of 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches to drive a 2 inch O.D. (1-3/8 inch I.D.) split spoon (ASTM D-1586). *Unconfined compressive strength in tons/sq, ft, as determined by laboratory testing or approximated by the standard penetration test (ASTM D-1586), pocket penetrometer, torvane, or visual observation. P 541-712-7115 KEY T)0 BOPJNG AND Prr LOGS DRAWII IG ml_ wh F 541-779-4079 Lot r. IllO FAST JACKSON l.ot -391E1~71C G(w _ PO BOX 490 y FOFO0.D OP,97501 PLnecrest Terrace MAR ~ 1 czWE m; Ashland Oregon - MAt )OS Na 141189 DRAWN M • IN MM DATE Jan 2015 CIMMD M OF 2 DWGS TEST PIT 1 (located at rear of right side of proposed building footprint) SILTY SAND (SM), brown, loose to medium dense, moist 1' *9 2, X 3' 4 X GRANODIORITE, decomposed, in-place, speckled brown and gray, very dense excavation, hard dig with mini-trackhoe with smooth 18" bucket Bottom of test pit = 4.7' I TEST PIT 2 (located at front of left side of proposed building footprint) SILTY SAND (SM), brown, loose to medium dense, moist is- I *9 2, X 3'- 6 4' GRANODIORITE, decomposed, in-place, brown, very dense to hard excavation, hard dig with mini-trackhoe with smooth 18" bucket Bottom of test pit = 4.0', practical excavation refusal at 4' *moisture content in percent P 541-7R-9715 DRAWING F541-779-4079 y g }ry~Pits tid 2 LL10.1ACKSON Lot MEMC L+I U~ FO BOX490 MARS S _o~ a0.975o1 Pmectest Tice & ASS OC-J*`rFS Ashland Oregon MM )OS Na 141189 DxAwrt RS I '„4 -wssrax~r~•r-m~a-m7n y EDATE j3II 215 QiA~:FD lam' OF 2 DWGS D. Tree Conservation, Protection and Removal. All development on Hillside Lands shall conform to the following requirements. 1. Inventory ofExistin Trees. rees. A tree survey at the same scale as the project site plan shall be prepared, which locates all trees greater than six inches diameter at breast height (DBH) identified by DBH, species, approximate extent of tree canopy. In addition, for areas proposed to be disturbed, existing tree base elevations shall be provided. Dead or diseased trees shall be identified Groups of trees in close proximity (i. e., those within five feet of each other) may be designated as a chimp of trees, with the predominant species, estimated number and average diameter indicated. All tree surveys shall have an accuracy ofplus or minus ttivo feet. The name, signature, and address of the site surveyor responsible for the accuracy of the survey shall be provided on the tree survey. Portions of the lot or project area not to be disturbed by development need not be included in the inventory. Friar and Associates was hired to do a complete tree study which identified 128 trees on this parcel (see attached). The owners then looked at the possibility of splitting this .82 acre parcel - many different options were considered. First the possibility of putting two skinny long lots that both had access from Pinecrest, but to the North there is an utility easement that cuts across and into the property and to the South the slope increases above 35% so there is not reasonable room to place two homes. The Second option was putting a driveway in that would allow access to the rear portion of the lot. This driveway was designed and although possible it would required a huge amount of excavation, retaining walls and tree removal. Over 27 trees would have to be removed just to put the driveway in, not to mention the large cut and retaining that would be necessary to put this driveway in. With this option there would still need to be a large number of trees cut with each of the two homes that would be built. The thud option involved is just putting one house in and placing it in such a way as to have the fewest trees removed. This application requires the removal of 19 trees which is 30% less than what which would be required for just putting in the driveway if the two lot option was chosen. The owner's choice to place just one home on the property and retain over 85% of all the existing trees on the tree survey in the applicant's option is to be applauded; preserving the natural beauty of the property was paramount. 2. Evaluation o Suitabilityfor Conservation. All trees indicated on the inventory of existing trees shall also be identified as to their suitability for conservation. When required by the hearing authority, the evaluation shall be conducted by a landscape professional. The following factors shall be included in this determination. An arborist was out to the site to evaluate both the trees that are to remain and those that had to be removed because of the construction of the single family home. No trees were identified to be removed other that those required for the construction of the home. No hearing authority has requested any additional evaluation. a. Tree Health. Healthy trees can better withstand the rigors of development than non-vigorous trees. b. b. Tree Sb,ucture. Trees with severe decay or substantial defects are more likely to result in damage to people and property. c. Species. Species vary in their ability to tolerate impacts and damage to their environment. d. Longevity. Potential longevity. e. Variety. A variety of native tree species and ages, f. Size. Large trees provide a greater protection for erosion and shade than smaller trees, 3. Tree Conservation in Project Design. Significant trees (h4,o feet DBH or greater conifers and one foot DBH or greater broadlea)) shall be protected and incorporated into the project design whenever possible. Per the tree survey and the arborist report no significant trees are being removed. a. Streets, driveways, buildings, utilities, parking areas, and other site disturbances shall be located such that the maxinnmr number of existing trees on the site are preserved, while recognizing and following the standards for fuel reduction if the development is located in Wildfire Lands. b. Building envelopes shall be located and sized to preserve the maximum number of trees on site while recognizing and following the standards for fitel reduction if the development is located in Wildfire Lands. c. Layout of the project site utility and grading plan shall avoid disturbance of tree protection areas i Friar and Associates was hired to do a complete tree study which identified 128 trees on this parcel (see attached). j The owners then looked at the possibility of splitting this .82 acre parcel - many different options were considered. First the possibility of putting two skinny long lots that both had access from Pinecrest but to the North there is an utility easement that cuts across and into the property and to the South the slope increases above 35% so there is not reasonable room to place two homes. The Second option was putting a driveway in that would allow access to the rear portion of the lot. This driveway was designed and although possible it would required a huge amount of excavation, retaining walls and tree removal. Over 27 trees would have to be removed just to put the driveway in, not to mention the large cut and retaining that would be necessary to put this driveway in. With this option there would still need to be a large number of trees cut with each of the two homes that would be built. The third option involved is just putting one house in and placing it in such a way as to have the fewest trees removed. This application requires the removal of 19 trees which is 30% less than what which would be required for just putting in the driveway if the two lot option was chosen. The owner's choice to place just one home on the property and retain over 85% of all the existing trees on the tree survey in the applicants option is to be applauded, preserving the natural beauty of the property was paramount. 4. Tree Protection. On all properties where trees are required to be preser ved during the course of development, the developer shall follow the following tree protection standards, a. All trees designated for conservation shall be clearly marked on the project site. Prior to the start of any clearing, stripping, stockpiling, trenching, grading, compaction, paving or change in ground elevation, the applicant shall install tree protection fencing in accordance with 18.4.5.030. C Prior to any construction activity, the shall be inspected pursuant to section 18.4.5.030.D. b. Construction site activities, including but not limited to parking, material storage, soil corirpaction, and concrete washout, shall be arranged so as to prevent disturbances within tree protection areas. c. No grading, stripping, compaction, or significant change in ground elevation shall be permitted within the drip line of trees designated for conservation unless indicated on the grading plans, as approved by the City, and landscape professional If grading or construction is approved within the drip-line, a landscape professional may be required to be present during grading operations, and shall have authority to require protective measures to protect the roots. d Changes in soil hydrology and site drainage within tree protection areas shall be minimized. Excessive site run-off shall be directed to appropriate storm drain facilities and mvay ftonr trees designated for conservation. e. Should encroachment into a tree protection area occur which causes irreparable damage, as determined by a landscape professional, to trees, the projectplan shall be revised to compensate for the loss. Under no circumstances shall the developer be relieved of responsibility for, compliance tivith tl7e provisions of this chapter. 5. Tree Removal Development shall be designed to preserve the maximum number of trees on a site. The development shall follow the standards for fitel reduction if the development is located in Wildfire Lands. When justified by findings offact, the hearing authority may approve the removal of trees for one or more of the following conditions. a. The tree is located within the building envelope. Friar and Associates was hired to do a complete tree study which identified 128 trees on this parcel (see attached). The owners then looked at the possibility of splitting this .82 acre parcel - many different options were considered. First the possibility of putting two skinny long lots that both had access from Pinecrest but to the North there is an utility easement that cuts across and into the property and to the South the slope increases above 35% so there is not reasonable room to place two homes. The Second option was putting a driveway in that would allow access to the rear portion of the lot. This driveway was designed and although possible it would required a huge amount of excavation, retaining walls and tree removal. Over 27 trees would have to be removed just to put the driveway in, not to mention the large cut and retaining that would be necessary to put this driveway in. With this option there would still need to be a large number of trees cut with each of the two homes that would be built. The third option involved is just putting one house in and placing it in such a way as to have the fewest trees removed. This application requires the removal of 19 trees which is 30% less than what which would be required for just putting in the driveway if the two lot option was chosen. The owners choice to place just one home on the property and retain over 85% of all the existing trees on the tree survey in the applicant's option is to be applauded, preserving the natural beauty of the property was paramount. b. The tree is located within a proposed street, driveway, or parking area.. c. The tree is located within a water, server, or other public utility easement. d, The tree is determined by a landscape professional to be dead or diseased, or it constitutes an unacceptable hazard to life or property when evaluated by the standards in 18.3.10:090.D.2. e. The tree is located within or adjacent to areas of cuts or fills that are deemed threatening to the life of the tree, as determined by a landscape professional. 6. Tree Replacement. Trees approved for removal, with the exception of trees removed because they were determined to be diseased, dead, or a hazard, shall be replaced in compliance with the following standards. The applicant is not planning on replacing any of the trees to be removed because there are still 109 trees on the site together with the fact that this parcel is in the wildfire zone and adding additional fuels into this environment is not a sound practice. The applicant met with Fire Marshal Marqueritte Hickman. We reviewed the location of the house and discussed primary and secondary fire breaks, Marshal Hickman indicated some additional thinning of existing trees would be necessary. Adding additional fuels via tree replacement doesn't make sense since we would probably have to thin them out anyways. a. Replacement trees shall be indicated on a tree replantingplan. The replantingplan shall include all locations for replacement trees, and shall also indicate tree planting details. b. Replacement trees shall be planted such that the trees will in tinge result in canopy equal to or greater than the tree canopy presentprior to development of the properly. The canopy shall be designed to mitigate of the impact ofpaved and developed areas, reduce sinface erosion, and increase slope stability. Replacement tree locations shall consider impact on the wildfire prevention and control plan. The hearing authority shall have the discretion to adjust the proposed replacement tee canopy based upon site-specific evidence and testimony. c. Maintenance of replacement tees shall be the responsibility of the propero; owner. Required replacement tees shall be continuously maintained in a healthy manner. Trees that die within the first five Years after initial planting must be replaced in kind, after which a new five year replacement period shall begin. Replanting must occur within 30 days of notification unless otherwise noted. 7. Enforcement. a. All tree removal shall be done in accord with the approved tree removal and replacementplan. No trees designated for conservation shall be removed without prior approval of the City. b. Should the developer or developer's agent remove or destroy any tree that has been designated for conservation, the developer may be fined up to three times the current appraised value of the replacement trees and cost of replacement or up to three times the current market value, as established by a professional arborist, whichever is greater. c. Should the developer or developer's agent damage any tree that has been designated for protection and conservation, the developer shall be penalized $50.00 per scar. If necessary, a professional arborist's report, prepared at the developer's expense, may be required to determine the extent of the damage. Should the damage result in loss of appraised value greater than determined above, the higher of the hvo values shall be used i I i -`moo '-J tau 3 E R E ICIA.qVOICE CP TREE CARE January 20, 2015 i ? Y, Crp-t)rt (2 C C, Suncrest Homes P.O. Box 1313 Talent, OR. 97540 To Whom It May Concern: The following is a report for the proposed Pinecrest Terrace site and grading plan. (Ashland Oregon) The site plan has many trees of different species. I am recommending removal of the following trees because they:are either in the envelope site for the proposed house or in the area of excavating of the driveway, patio and landscape construction. Trees to be removed are as follows: Suncrest Site Plan numbers #1 6-8"dbh Madrone. # 69 6"dbh Oak. #13 8"dbh Oak. #70 3-8"dbh Oaks #63 8"dbh Madrone. 471 10"dbh Madrone. #64 6"dbh Madrone. #72 8"dbh Oak. #65 10"dbh Madrone. #73 7"dbh Madrone. #74 3-8"dbh Madrones, #94 3-8"dbh Madrones. #90 18"dbh Pine. #95 4-6"dbh Oaks. #91 3-6"dbh Oaks. #96 8"dbh Madrone. #92 4-7"dbh Madrones. #97 -2-10"dbh Madrones. #93 2-7"dbh Oaks. If you have any questions please don't hesitate to contact me, my cell phone number is 541-821-8733. Sincerely, Clarence V. Wangle Certified Arborist # PN-0518A President, Beaver Tree Service Inc. t k Beaver Tree Service Inc. Portland Metro Office: Corporate Officer CCB.# 173614 7085 5W 175*h Ave 270 Wilson Rd. Tax ID 4 20-5639553 Beaverton, OR 97007 Central Point, OR 97502 lnfo6Dbeavertree.net joeltabeavertree.net suzie@beavertree.net (503) 224-1338 (541) 779-7072 _s i j i i t .1275 SURVEY NO i .1991 DATE: August, SURVEY FOR: Bap Freund ff 909 Pine Crest Terrace 1 Ashland, Oregon Ran e'1 j Quarter of Section 15, Township 39 South,Jacksori . LOCATION: Northwest Q in the C9.ty of Ashland, jl East, Willamette Meridian, { County, Oregon: ii shown.- PURPOSE: To monument the boundary. line s own. a 111 u PROCEDURE: I located control established in survey no. 86 and set monuments as shown on the-attached map, The Basis of Bearings is the west line of Section 15 s BASIS. OF BEARINGS: per Survey no. 11186. SURVEYED BY: James Andrews ackson 837 E. MUdford, Oregon 97504 RECEIVED REGISTERED i PROFESSIONAL Date By L LN,- SURVEYOR This survey Consists of: 1 sheet(s) Map O LLEY G fire Pw"e~(Si N'o: i2}: 4. su LESS ANDREWS JACKSON COUNTY 26 SURVEYOR e. I~ i a. Streets, driveways, buildings, utilities, parking areas, and other site disturbances shall be located such that the maximum number of existing trees on the site are preserved, while recognizing and following the standards for fuel reduction if the development is located in Wildfire Lands. b. Building envelopes shall be located and sized to preserve the maximum number of trees on site while recognizing and following the standards for fitel reduction if the development is located in Wildfire Lands. c. Layout of the project site utility and grading plan shall avoid disturbance of tree protection areas Friar and Associates was hired to do a complete tree study which identified 128 trees on this parcel (see attached). The owners then looked at the possibility of splitting this .82 acre parcel - many different options were considered. First the possibility of putting two skinny long lots that both had access from Pinecrest but to the North there is an utility easement that cuts across and into the property and to the South the slope increases above 35% so there is not reasonable room to place two homes. The Second option was putting a driveway in that would allow access to the rear portion of the lot. This driveway was designed and although possible it would required a huge amount of excavation, retaining walls and tree removal. Over 27 trees would have to be removed just to put the driveway in, not to mention the large cut and retaining that would be necessary to put this driveway in. With this option there would still need to be a large number of trees cut with each of the two homes that would be built. The third option involved is just putting one house in and placing it in such a way as to have the fewest trees removed. This application requires the removal of 19 trees which is 30% less than what which would be required for just putting in the driveway if the two lot option was chosen. The owner's choice to place just one home on the property and retain over 85% of all the existing trees on the tree survey in the applicants option is to be applauded, preserving the natural beauty of the property was paramount. 4. Tree Protection. On all properties where trees are required to be preserved during the course of development, the developer shall follow the following tree protection standards. a. All trees designated for conservation shall be clearly marked on the project site. Prior to the start of any clearing, stripping, stockpiling, trenching, grading, compaction, paving or change in ground elevation, the applicant shall install tree protection fencing in accordance with 18.4.5.030. C Prior to any construction activity, the shall be inspected pursuant to section 18.4.5.030.D. b. Construction site activities, including but not limited to parking, material storage, soil compaction, and concrete washout, shall be arranged so as to prevent disturbances within tree protection areas. c. No grading, stripping, compaction, or significant change in ground elevation shall be permitted within the drip line of trees designated for conservation unless indicated on the grading plans, as approved by the City, and landscape professional If grading or construction is approved within the drip-line, a landscape professional may be required to be present dining grading operations, and shall have authorio) to require protective measures to protect the roots. d Changes in soil hydrology and site drainage within tree protection areas shall be minimized. Excessive site ram-off shall be directed to appropriate storm drain facilities and away from trees designated for conservation. e. Should encroachment into a tree protection area occur which causes irreparable damage, as determined by a landscape professional, to trees, the projectplan shall be revised to compensate for the loss. Under no circumstances shall the developer be relieved of responsibility for compliance with the provisions of this chapter. 5. Tree Removal. Development shall be designed to preserve the maximum number of trees on a site. The development shall follow the standards for fuel reduction if the development is located in Wildfire Lands. When initial planting must be replaced in kind, after which a new five year replacement period shall begin. Replanting must occur within 30 days of notification unless otherwise noted. 7. Enforcement. a. All tree removal shall be done in accord with the approved tree removal and replacementplan. No trees designated for conservation shall be removed without prior approval of the City. b. Should the developer or developer's agent remove or destroy any tree that has been designated for conservation, the developer may be fined up to three times the current appraised value of the replacement trees and cost of replacement or zip to three times the current market value, as established by a professional arborist, whichever is greater. c. Should the developer or developer's agent damage any tree that has been designated for protection and conservation, the developer shall be penalized $50.00 per scar. If necessary, a professional arborist's report, prepared at the developer's expense, may be required to determine the extent of the damage. Should the damage result in loss of appraised value greater than determined above, the higher of the hvo valises shall be used I' M"r7ebw WUNPARY SURVEY w W. "Thom R Ls o ' sdtu0s 1 If a T 1395:@ R. vet sect <9 in the pity of Asj~~J od.., 4,aak ion A pYR egg. ~ ~IOtt ~ ~ 5~q1.~' ~~pw Q~ f a:7' POOL, ~ AST D, R..) ~ L /kf flScAp' E49EMC'NT,:.r 1 t}P~fna S7~P7l~t~ AR Dross: Cop Jkmof~'G. 4W: r_ "'AND ,S CIS I.'a" .46 Cy . } ' :F S,al ' ~.YcA. •J j'' 1* Id LAM ur f_ 1,411~1~ `An ~C010DRED C6R.D Csc: dR aT~ no. ts QvmrARmss-WEST uNE S£aTtCN ffCI lu C C to PER SURVEY Na 11106 41 +kE~ - I -7~ lyv 175.9 b Ing a a. dACJSON This sov.its 0: ~ AY~'.7, ' N MEWi'AfRD, OR E00 i 1/ ~Q["her d, tr f~9"d ~M. x:73 - 66 n f6 ~p(g) Notaa~ i ~~Y + S p t~fa1> -ON CqU TY 4VEYOR Y t TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY Located in the N K 114 of Sec. 15, T,39S, RIE,. W,M City of Ashland Jackson County, Oregon TREE TABLE fw u. Enn a mm8 uxecim i rnE 1 }6' MMRGFS 10' YNttfiE Id' WKS 6' VNPC6 6'FR 12 MNAtlS { 12' WK 10' Y.Ultlfi B' 0.4K 6' W% 6 A' OAK }Y O?n6 10' MYS 10 WVNtl•£ 6' MK Y OP% ~ }IY YACRRtS 75 III WS IB' W% 17' LEG^END.* 47 0 FD. 5/A° IRON PoN & PfASTIC CAP MKD ANDREWS LSI626 PER FS}2758, F512578 OJ LE SEE TREE E LE LAN fAND5C4PE EAS EASETdENi PER DOC. 87-07612, ORJCO. e-GTE- GA5, PHONE & POWER LINES IN 10' WIDE PUE PER DOC. 91-16851, ORJCO. TELEPH NE 2-1 X EPEOESTAL. 2154 TELPED0 FENCE 0IN 94.43 -W- WATER UNE. -SS- SEWER LINE. SSCO SANITARY SE7YER CCEANOUi. { 1Y Il -G- GAS LINE _L AC 10 EP EDGE~OF PAVEMENT. loi 11 SE SLOPE EASEMENT PER OASA MAORONA SUBDMSION. DE J I n e>E O f12- c~Kr a BAS OF BEARINW~vp 6' w 6 vw,e«s TRUE MERIDfAN Ai 1HE N-S CEN'TER(INE OF SECTION I5 AS DERIVED FROM THE NATIONAL n (v) z 6 e v ~ OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION b91 (mY 115 a w (FORMERLY COAST AND GEODETIC SURVEY') 5 0°~ 01 1 IsA Y r aw n wrans SURVEY NET ESTABLISHED IN 1968 AND FILED g }a aixs I Y,ra«s IN THE OFFICE OF THE JACKSON COUNTY n h e• w•aval.£ SURVEYOR. THE REFERENCE LINE FOR BEARING ax0 A ~j O 26) gzsY) ~7)~ (rovb) s~ (90 1 SE i wwnaii CONTROL IS THE NORM LINE OF SUBJECT 6 121 11 J TT 6 06) PROPERTY AS SHOWN ON FILED SURVEY NO. 6 YO FO12578 IN THE OFFICE OF THE JACKSON 12-3 z 6~ ii ways COUNTY SURVEYOR. FS11186 6<> en (14) 1Y Rm) p a6 mQ w ' },e FsLEM77ON DATUM' B 0 a4) NCID 1929 ADJUSTED PER ASHLAND BM 17A u) / UNIT OF AMSUREYENP FEET CONMUR R17 MAL 2 FEET Z_~l 2-'u o~ PROPERTYZOMNG' R-1-5 9 ICY fu~t r( b' Lz L' a Im \ \ \ S~ \ h saae ` 7th ~ L / "e 7~ m,r. ,;10' ( U Ip (aa I's) fa la 7 ~ ~ \ e an nom) \ / N89b752"W w) 301.7 0 (IaI pn \ v , \ \ kV 1o a TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY W2 xu _ R,_S!3,RED gY,aA C PROFESSIONAL J9IEI5" TL2700 f s"" t 10 "'I zo so LAND SURVEYOR SUNCREST NOMES, LLC^tl ar: ml J~~ P.O. BOX 1313 Lkl{~,/k TALENT, OR 97520 : -GON ,ear 17.1986 LJ. FRW2 & ASSOCWTES P.G. eola9ac v JWFS E 11905 a a a7V0 uro im/: I-- ewexu w¢: a-w-18 Sni78E m 7m sn66t 1 01 r. 2 B 4 5 ryVryl~ . W 1 I E L D D iiilll=== I 0 P L 0 U U r1 O V N MEE TAME L = WWI FS12578 ^ - y V) a~.F a Lq J (y) III (y) Lo 9 ~ I 0 l Z C IL COPYRIGHT NOTICE a PINECREST TERRACE TREE SURVEY f ISSUE: 29MARI5II FILE NUMBER: SCH_Pineaei1 16MAR15 DRAWN BY: RGS T PLOT SCALE: 1/4•=1'-0' PLOT DATE: 29MARI5 PLOT TIME: 9:00 PM ( A A SHEET TIRE e ii I 2 6 4 5'i.. I'. EROSION SILT FENCE DETAIL o, 266 2364 Netting used to s1a61fiza SIL FENCE 9PE7 A0'p WET ROW XNT grading zone FAERC To BE E HACTEO i GEOTE%1hE FILTER i %!ughoutcunstnction " A OUNDO 1 FElIf ` / POST , oSi m ~rm,t e VA\ e2 j ,wPPml FEB. N #'r9st i Grading Zone / ` , . . . . . . sWRAf®FD vECITAT~CN PLAN VIEW 2368 I COUPLER AT S FENCE ONTS A _ J EPPINK i PARTNERSINC nroeaa Re~li Oeelgn ~ ~ - p\j\r\ \ J ' \ \ \ \ L tlaPa lvchltecWn _ Trad tlonei Tvvrn Planning ' BO TOM OF FENCE A o-..lawd~ 6 FL CROUNU LINE FRONT VIEW FLTER FA RIC m. -d e.y~n -,n, .na a:. ,a r Patio's POST BACKFILL / FLOW " e ni. 0« GROUND LINE Id.o. o, a PoiTkcy 1'd v vgmenl~ nl MY f / - 6"x6a oM1 De al l"e elwel of or aria only Mwgj aleerWTA nten , INC ANCHORTRENCH EPPN PAR"TNER9 / ©r f01e J c-- PAn ne, NC / 2358 Main Floor FILTER FABRIC Elevation EXTENDS INTO TRENCH / - - - - - _ SECTION A-A DOBRY / / RESIDENCE Pinecresl Terrace Ashland, Oregon 2396_Garage Floor Elevation _ _ 2356.10 Foyer Elevation / 2346 T- % l •1 Concrete Retaining Wall v TapofWall level 1235tap) ~ Tam & Dorsey Dobry Newrel and Na6va Planting l•2 235567, s- t tq ° Landscape with automated system, sI111e z' T ` - - f Erosion Control Silt , . 3 r Fence at Top at Cut gadng line NP A Driveway - ~ Front Entrance T Purred Concrete Btak Walk and i~ - dae Hp. r -7 MNC'w confrmalavaticne in field) ok _ Landscape RQA, t (Top C ens 2ns) oe :,a F Natty al a n and Native Planting I rid pe " 15 -16. -17 -16 -19 • 3 Final Planting Plan to be determined pd., to nstallation, yp. : I - ' '-10 '-11 12 13 M - - - - • , . - - - 2342.5 - . ~ Landscape Plantings to ~ i i. / have automated imgationayatem Installed, lyp. - N? Natural Stmetlered J retaining wall ooo Emslori Control Silt Or- "Pence at Top of cut r, JTE grading line, lyp. k.c Ely Pinecrest Terrace March 18, 2015 LIP-1 t 2 3 4 5 CIO _ FOUNDATION NOTES FOUNDATION NOTES'.; I.Mfaal'mgs to bear on sold, und.hnbed,non-e6poruivesol acompaated MMM shuciuolfg. 0 2. Concrete slobs to be place ! over 6"of314' cmhed rock decomposed granite of shuctuol fR asrequlned. Compact o2 M to 95%derelty. 1 0 B. Concrete to develop N8 slrenglh ot3,DW psi of 28 doys.Agederiw wpased slab work to be ai eanewed. I ~11/~ 4. Reinforcing bas to be deformed conlam'rig to ASTM SpocilkafwnA-6 25. t y111. 1 Ir Welded wire fabric to conform to ASTM Specifeat'an 185. tli 5. Verify locations of ut§ty servke entrances, provide sleeves and black outs as 99 regcled for eachicot telaphae,CAN, gas, water, sewer, fumace, dryer and t O1 01 O range vents, etc. See floor non mechanical and electrical &M. Ell 6.Relnfarcesg basin loetings to have 8'coverage p 7. Al mud sas to havem*nmum two anchor bolls per board and be no more v S than 12' from end of booms. 8, Grout a9 cels of concrete masonry. Grout to Alld-n 2000 psi. mmnwm at L. fu7 strength. (Concrete masonrvb otaffonal to concrete stem 0 - b I r - 'I m II cl, h I I R a Nt - - " tour a;ovE ri Lr) r - - - - - l- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 7 i F I~:I I':I l,l I;I ~ ~ I 4 mo I~ l m 1 I I''I ~ O r- ~ I ro n I s-to' T-laic 2s'-~'~ I Ir'I 1 I I ~ + y0 ~I 4 zio I:I I"I I I'+I ~ N deb G wire I RET w~ewaLHns .wF (D 00 < ou - - _ - - ' L- a I C - LO Xoz r ---t r- 7 ! I .L II~r~1'I / L 6 NO`i CO-1- SL46 ON I r In ~ ~ u r l o 0~TO uuu~e m 3~ I I~ 6I'iLL catr I I I I I+ I I :l el vavaR aa~e I I I I ~ ~ r L I o ^W, L0 F - - - 2X6' CgNI' WA,L I I, I I- x N I I I' I o oN r-a~a co,NDNUaus I I I ~ I + o I: 6 rsu t roLr I ~ cane Fcnnn'6 I: I! I ~ L I ro I V G02EA¢0E2 _ U I M - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ili I` I L I r - ~ I 16td' to sa><• , lei ~ i ~a h ft I' L- -a r ' - - - - - - I ~ EFLOOR I I I I I / I oaaa Fouwo noN war L I II ! I I I I ~ t-z CROSS HATCH A;Z I - r r-----------------------r 6 COPYRIGHT NOTICE o r.l r ---7, B ti I.`I 1l 4 I ' I I'il I;I m B m - I ' E~'6In~EEZEO RFVVrnN~ D I I WV V-=- wierz I L .l L L Q 0 l Q i 10-0 6A Z 25'-6' ul w O Zr d Q i iTd 16-0" 33'-0 Q o Z ~ G 66-0' Q¢rc w0 f I ~pP m3 0 a m ~f ISSUE: 29MAR15 'w00 a17; FILE NUMBER: SB ~3i SCH Pnecres126MAR15 a Oo,~ow DRAWN BY. RGS - 6Zmn4~0 PLOT SCALE: 114'= I'-0' f GROVIpE 15F VENiI +1TIOV FOR B l,3 0 0 Z 0 w PLOT OAIP 29MAR E+CH 150 ~F OFCkAW ECPLE ~z Zl9 D PLOT TIM E: 9:00 Phundation Plan ,~~o=m A i 5 Fole.l/4.-1-0 - ~o~w0 SHEEP 711LE p A 1 2 3 4 8 SCALEMEEEi 16 wgppa~ 03°-EE° Foundation I m3~w° Plan npp°a~ ~ooww S101 2 3 A 5 i II I 2 B 4 5 F806 L t 1(y~_'11! s Jt- L-v wL cR css RIM ec<R k ~ 71 1 i Us vsu _ N E ~ C~ lJ I I I FA65 Y 4 tY I^ I II FE10 Yp Q I FA16 ~ I I[ I I I ! &:.r;.il j O !B/14 iO:NCUEEGROOVE _ RATED f i 3/4"SHCAh:ING SU (E`lP0_URE 1) j i FB19 !i 31 C 1J N F815 I FD11 c{. I 55W BELOW, j 58\V BE~V, V rALIO BLCGeINO i `OIJ081AGK41'G - eae o en Ale 0 L0 P-----. _ _ - i - IE ~ ~ !f 11 II i€ 3t II O N f I EI li a i n/ 7S " FB14 0 it II C__,i LLL V t a 1 oa 1- I ~ o i I t-- I I F If if II ii I! o VI ~f 612( ~bm~ 5, ~i CD Q f i; o of !I II _ ' I C FA13 I{ N f ii C 1 L'' 0 D f I I C) or) r' Q v f E 3 F809 FA09 I / L _ . s ter}' L ! II (i ~ r V r sswe_ww. t- j € I { scut BLOCwNG tq X 1{ r' E f 1 G4VTUVER BAY -I e A so oBONG I ~ V m U Z O I_ _._a.__ _ _ _ C BLOCK OUT FRYING M FNAC { 1 ~I i ^1 11 ff MECNMiGAL CHAS-c5. ! 1 i J CEP CH45E5 CLEa.40 PLL i ~ { I ~ ~ I ELECTWCaLff PLUMBING ELMEN75 i I P I, if I r' 1 " 2 Second Floor Framing Plan - Scale.l/4 I'{Y' i i 0 0 l CN 1 2 3 4 B SCALE IN FEET 16 € SBWeEtAV, 1 N D I wuo etocwNG I COPYRIGHT NOTICE B /v 3Ga SNOATH4 CSUREi)T~o 1 B I C ~ ~ II f I I k OBwsf= OCA { soup BLOCarJG I h _ _ { d eaa 0 I b {k ~ I k u 4 U p li I ° I ~I ~ I/ _ a fHOJ i I C71 d 5BW EELOJ✓, ' { I i ~i,m e!ac~NG r o y I i /I I ~ I i f M SCHISSUE: P(29MARI5 I FILE iMBER: FBO] FA02 ; . . I 91 o- . - - ~ ( SCH nenesl 26MARI5 'I D { A DRAWN BY: RGS 0 PLOT SCALE: 114'=1'-0' L-J"11 _2I I I I PLOT DATE: 29htAR15 ! PLOT TIME: 990 PM t l A SHEET MILE' First Floor I II I! & 2nd Floor a m i n g 5L0cK OUT F-IN'G IN NV4C FrPlans ELSE RKAL ff R.UMBI:N'G ELBMEYTB First Floor Framing Plan ffME~~I L-3 Scale: 1/4 V-0" 1 2 3 4 B SCALE IN FEET Id S OL 1 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 L ~jj U 0 C D D W L AA BB (7 m /al u I 0 i U WN15OELaW 'n LO uM1'E.F RaaF EHEaTHIn'G I.\ /,t 1 1 \ / I I V\ i - A-- - W L-j 'I ~-C i L I v ~cq Q I AvV `nI / ,4/ 1 I III \ ,I I i' I \ f I II I U i 4 n- I L \ f W ~ Lo - - Il I I } l vvv ! - _ v 0 4 V~ v Tns asE oz Eau<L aaoF -yrnlnQv v N 1 \ ~i I.. 3 1 I vv I -II / p v I r' i \ it i I ~ v , / rc~ ~ vv i l I vv ~ j COPYRIGHT NOTI~cE B Fo~~` _ v\ d IY o a r M BB Q /DI Tol f " ISSUE:29MAR15 I` f ROOF TFU=s DE~IGM1ED MOENGINE'J~CD BY wwUF.~GTI;Ert v j FILENUMBER: I TRUu DR4\ViW5TO 8E ~UeNfiTEO TO r_-ENE44. CJNT2^GTO2 - FOR~-IE V 'NO PFFRrNAL SS REQUIRED. SChLP necres3_26MAA15 0 Roof Framing Plan DRAYNBY:RGs - 5caie: l/4"=1-0" PLOT SCALE: 1/P=1'-0 1 2 S 4 8 SCALE IN FEET 16 PLOT DATE: 29MAR15 FLOT TIME: 9:00 PM A A SNEETTILE Roof Framing Plan S 103 2 3 4 5 I 2 'q - 3 4 CO`1CO..RE SHINGL5 5 Vd NOTES S~FELr v/ro o_B oa E°uAL RODE SFIEn7nINe DIMENSION PLAN NOTES T`pT @x'oc 9t CEU-NG Ma AS REQ., 5'cE ROOF PLAN. Z I.~t¢Imrwo6;zx5°@2a'ocaleo •c lvaer wfcc:caage:2xb"^aId°oc, uNa. }a 'I, 2. Inteporpndii6'as 2A 6'16°OC. UNO (Urdess Noted 3therw69). 1 RI9 RBERGL4555ATT FLAT I 3, Vent range hood to outside. Vent 80 CFM exhamtlam looutside wfT'DIA dUCI. CONTNUOUS VAR BAORIER (U 4. Provide mokM¢resUlanfgypswn board olhlblshowerwahlscati _/e' GYP5UM WALLaoARD / ~~.~I~L L 5. A9 work to conform to current lnternafirwl lag Famly D,ve6flg Coda to ` !~I UUt amended and adopted by the Slate of Oregon. 5' ALUM. GUTTEa FP5C14 SEE#, D1 '.Walk ore dmemioned'face to face"or framkg. Inteia"waD unless .led otherwise -oE ZxO'RAFTER TAIL Y ~n dl F'~ ( ~1 t shownos31Wnches Eiit.n.wa8 sh-nasb oche, l V, BLDCI:W'GMAIUNGAS FCJ. { 1Wblda'vff¢BS Ne,Mwn`nomild)widthxheghl) VMfy,n'ngwith ScRFE\ED EAVE VENi11ATION \ 1 monufactuer of,electetlwndma 51"iPEorr-5 FfCH 2x BLDDIN'G 1 1 /~1 8.Ochen design provided by supplier, Verity window occfun on kitchen plan .•`~'v (U) `RW-• D before slating construction. 9. Can31NCt1011 fhalbe in oc<adance with a7 opp0CObelednd. S=E EI-I NOWC-S FOR - D State at Oregon and clafent birWing code, of the munkpolty, for whtk'AI ExTER10R SIDIl.'G SREGTpN _ this pun Is being coNtNcted Verify local Coflefvrah WMrnJ AWR°VED WEATHER Bq'ZRIER I .k'd before c a '1M0 OSS WALL SHEATHING 10 L ( N , 10 Refer lo Trans Joist out M M1l cngs'natolmbno PoClficrno 1far hlsl~oRan azxo"LCwN GDFD2 IN OR BTR PBERGLA55 naa WALL 6I_ULEUIINAGTION catch of a9 en R21 ~d gaeae rafters, purl and Wfack 12'GYPSUM\VALI~gOD V boorps. 11nd HVAron a Chases: Panning p d'«kand oBm¢chaA'<al a SEE DWC and HVAC chases, Keep chases contractor r clear of f f all a8 pkxnbng andelectinu #A20i 12. Braced Wa3Panek: Provide braced wag Panek lOWPlln coniknwu,N i sheathed wall according fable R602105. O SUPPORT FlBERGLg55 EATT INSULATION N WiTW INE LATTICE SUFFGFLT @ 1200. AA BB INSTALLED FROM A00VE. 'd V V) I I ~ ~ I as/2A TaNGUE E GROOSE SaAN RATED =KcATFIE'(ExPGGUREg ® O v, I NAILED AND GLUED TP JOIST - ' Eq•-0' LD OR EQUAL JOIST SYSTEM 1 n V I l- oil EQUAL W J0151 r R38 FIBERGLas_e BA7T INSULATION j EN O 7-0' 16' a' t3 ~ b^-0' 9'4' J-O' 31-0' I 6'-6 8'-0' WISHER ar 51YPSON MSA MUCSILLS'CHOR tt4 REB>R HORIZONTAL TOW f LL (3)30-,-CG GR>Dc VARIS 6' MIN BELDV/ TO.V _ I"IA1VT>IN I2 YIN COVEROVE¢FOOTING. ( Z\) ,{•/i:. r GRADE TO 5L0PE1WAY FRD" 7ERRAGE FGUN'DATICN FOR POS- DRAKE .I 0 113 ° li X~.I 1 In m MIV o r to i TT d STOR~FPNT UN^' DW j Yd n7 in 1(Dr Q C KITCHEN (a)3ossc 6,v TAIJ_REJUFORCeDCCr.'cRSrE E W STEM WA_ wYf48 RVERTICAL, 46' OG ON 0 I(1 ` 111 Fi30 - p 1'-4'x6' CON7IN0005 COrN'GRETE FOOTING } \V/(2) #4 ai 10.1' ON UNLY5TUR5ED (2)30500 / IIYI ® n ~ I6 / m VE' WIN— SEAT 1 Soft- OR cGMaALTED P11- iA ~p Y -y-f`I~ I U Ib LO '1 O d 6 I6\~• Za I DE51: 61'0.L POLYETHYLRo VAP"i2 Bq¢WER 1~ \ F 4 R5 OvER3'CRU_H'cD OCI BASE 1 r L PROV6JE 15 ISO _F OF CRA caawL_ TI_ SFOR ~ ~ GFFIGE i E~PACE ~ //r"~~ 'I~ n' 1O-li' T Ia-0 INJ 5'-2(; m i4'-0' POoo BRACED W.4L PANES IN CONT6N000S_Y SHE W 1Y q'MED WALL ''((1 V/ F- < r r ' I of ACCORDING TO TABLE RE02I05 r Q DINING 46 u OWNERSSUTE 3 T kTsai Wall Section, Vault n1 0 4 Sca IT I'-0' 31AM5 L I . , N ~ I 2 4 SCALEWFEEF 8 I .1 U TER z m U RAC E 4 1i3d - ` COMPOS11E 51IN'GIfS ~ _T L 71`6 J OSB OR Sol, ^L ROOF SHEATHING I ;:0 2X RAFTER@x'oc 1 0 2x CEAJNG I'A5 REQ 0 SCFw II 4 r10WER _ I f3L' /3020A x'28 r d P6 W I BW N CONTINUOUS Ago B SEE ROOF ALAN. mL-suRRO ND T-1k I 50 Q ARRIER N , II A r 1I 30ARD "E' FIT 3/&'GYPSUHW 11 1 LLO 10-0 Id-0' S.. TA' 0 T- K' 2U 4-O' 5 vz 4~~ i J-]IX1OSE12 GERA~TER TAZ SEE#4OI m in ] Z I F EfLOCRINGN4LING AS REG. J/ by d " I I n GALLERY 7 1j ~REENEDEAVEVEN 1.-Ttl COPYRIGHTNGTICE 0 O 5 d I FEZ a' 1 2B d E 511'FSON A35 Ev+GH 2K BLOCI:ING ° B 3 i 6' - N e1 3 LAUN y ° 0 SEE ELEVATION I W05 FOR ExTEWOie 51DI\G SELEGTON IUI - ~ p 106 ~ d 806Y APFROVED WEATHER BACWER B n RVr~~y,' -o Tn6o5B wAU-sHEA1HIUC- 14'-6' - 1O-0' $D 3 24 1'-5 3-zlv' 3' 6'-6 4 / O 6""'" { h 2X6' GCFp2 OR BTR \VALL F2AM4\G s 1- 0 I; 46 _m11 m R210tDV✓N IV gBERGLA55IN5UII+TIGN ENTRY In =24 ° yr GYPSUnwAUeaARD s=_E CwG l 26 BATH wool ►o- FAMILY 4 zm 3 d N WIC he fl 103 ~235a10 Fr 0 c I "0 i C V LLO 26 / 304G~ 3cacC 3O40G F SUPPORT FBERGLg55 FiATT WSUTATON h t In Y WIWIN'E L ATTICE SUPPORT. 12 OG. 0 1 0om~ Q n INSTALLED F- IEw 'b m m u'j' f j STORE UNn ~ro46 4-h!-'UE 3 GROOEE SPAN , JOISNAILED ANlD DOLU GLUTO O L015T i PQRC.H LP pR EOUAL JGiST SYSTEI'I _ D OR EQU4 RIM JOIST m ~ R39 FiSERGLA55 BATTINSULATON IPI --020 1, 2356 FF - Y m Q PR ANOHE T BS 20G' SUL PLATE F O.'CHOR BOLTS @ 6' OG u'13' SG. GALV. (3L'OSOF,v/302OA T W#4ARE'E Rcr S'MFSONT TO W a' 3'-0' 3'-0' B' o' -D. #4 REBAR HORZONTAL GW ISSUE: 29MARI5 I,. RILE NUMBER: GRADE VAWr5 6 MIN BELOW T-V SCR-Pine-s! 26A7ARI5 M NTAIN 12 PON COVER OVEO F007IN'G- T-0' 1]-0' 10.0 6-0' T-6' 2S•{~ GRADE TO SLOPE,A-Y FROM I DRAWN BY: RGS FOUNDATON FOR POER DRAINAGE. - 19 MIN PLOT SCALE: 114'=1'-0' Z PLOTDATE:29MAR15 B xKO R MI GIN Ac - c J bz F PLOT TIME: 9W PM ff MECHMIGAL CHSSES. 6'V x X' TALL REINFORCED COLS 0 n.. ? STEM WF A II I-EEP CHYEG CLAR O' 4LL 99 SOIL OR CNi V/DI SCO VERTI.7E HOC ON ~ First Floor Plan EIS 9l A 13 4e. 1/4 =1'-0'6 SCALEWFEET I6 ELECTRVLE RUi`telN'G 1942SF~ Main Level Mk1 POLYETNYLEON FlvDR E~R gR5_D T-4' SHEETTITLE ICI OVER3 CRU.,HCO ROC' 'BASS D' aR Oe I SF 150 5F OF VEMIIATIpN FOR Floor Plan EACH CRAWL SPACE PROVIDE BRACED WALL PANELS IN CANIINUOUSLY SHEATHED WALL AC CORDING TO TABi-E .o21aS - InTypical_Wall Section, Flat AIOI Scala 1/2'-V-9 3JIN15 I 2 4 SCALE INFER 8 2 3 4 5 t i I 2 g q V~ . I I ^ ® r AA BB [A 701 701 D j ) 'E Yoa D 1 it >3=a I U"4' S o ~ a t r _ I 0 - --I r 1 R l /v llJl _ ~SOG 30506 - q _J 0 k I ~L ~ BEDROOM #GS ~ o I r ~ 11V 3020C L 011 rK BEDRCIOM #2 a 9'-s q a .c so \I ~_a ~AT}1m ii / :i b t- I C: \0 N , I fi \ 60 > II / ~ I O O /l1 vJ \ I I I / E i U/ C Q s5 n _kl ! I 0 Pl SU cng - C, {1 / l a( MM v- ---~Vv II / II 0 Lr) U I I; I v v I N \ V I / L 2B l n m \ / I y I O I I I / I~ o N i\ Y ~ 0 q so J-OFT r_.. i---a J r vWWW! Cr) F m 6~ edBl+ vees5 4 n -w d ^ , rl, N I I 11 ~ I ~C ' ze ~ I ss I ~ vIII v~i € 1 I nn11 Iy \ \ II 9h !i O W BATH u z -1 II . ; ` ` `III I' - !Iv lI I n -r* BEE)ROCIt'i #1 rc I N f E \ m 20, / 1 tl' ~ v v I / 1 I I it Ix v I F r• . @ 13N ATK l I 'f / / I / 13'-z/,' .1 ~-f'-1 7a'v .m I II vvf~ I COPYRIGHT NOTICE I II 11 / II ~ ~ I vvI ~ _ B //Ii (e~oaoc :'I fl eozcc \ 1 I it Q \ . \ l9 I it/// f_~I v I a i u, T-0' ,a-a zb z-oz-6~ w yraa'-6' S.6' ' Q o la- '4'4 LS-6' s[ Q F aa4 ~ ISSUE:29MARI5 FILE NUMBER: BLCC,:OUT F24MI\'G IN HVPL SCH Pinecresl 26MARI5 ,1 EMEQ-;PNYf,L GFWEES. AA BB KEEP C4ASE5 CLE4¢OFP1L 7DI 01 DRAWN BY: RGS Second Floor Plan EL-FUCA s. PLraf- ELEMENTSPLOT SCALE: 1/4- V-0' 982 I~ SF PLOT DATE:29MAR13 1 2 3 6 8 SCALE IN FEfi Id PLOTTIME. 9:00 PM A S _-.J A SHEET TIRE Second Floor Plan I Al 02 I 2 B 4 6 II 2 4 5 ~q ^V^)~ W y, ~ l ~i tA L ~I D u D L L N L U AA BB a Ta O U 4 i ~ -------------a V) 011 3Xd ( Uj EI LL c 0C) SHOP r I I m °03 I . ~ E I ®2'465 F1 } ♦(1 f I GARAGE I O O ~octi3es is ttvi: x I 1 aR.-eva¢nTOw ewe Lr) !I i\ it t' Cl) `I--- ENTRY r ' I r: B ~ °vz 42346s FF 1 i(Y ~ d co - - - - - - - - - o----------------- - - I u li -'m I Z o C D IL I E; I tI o - ® _ 1 BD - I C I I ~ ! m 1 , COPYRIG HT~NOTICE B it (I Id.-_-_AI ( B !I 11 I I I 1 I 1 ~ 0 i M Be 7UI 70 Pz°NDE 15F 1rcNlIl4T10N FOR 0 Lower Level Plan 1 x Scale 1/4"=1'-0" - 167 SF Q 1 1 2 3 4 8 SCALE kJ FEET 76 F k t ISSUE:29MAR15 FILE NUMBER: SCH_Ph- I1 26MAR15 l DRAWN BY: RGS PLOT SCALE: IIS=1'd' PLOT DATE 29MARI5 i PLOT TIME*. ?.GO PM A SHEET TITLE Lower Level j Floor Plan A] 03 2 3 4 5 t. II ' 2 3 I 4 AA a8 ^ E 01 7BI t~Y U E VV UA), D W t E 1'x6 FA5CIA, HORIZ JJGRT J lQ rr , ~ 11 6 2 1 I L i - p c6 10 t - _ _ _ 3'J-YE4R ARGHfTEGNRAL G-WpE _ , ~OMGOSI,E541NGLF5 i V - - _ - - - r 0 _ - _ FP.=CIiiGVFTER 1 L`~I/ ^ ( C__J 4,I LL T ~1 V 11^ J O CI 0 P F I ~ ~ _ IE-.:_~ I I 5NC..0 IX-fERYJR EURF 4E 4 I\ 0 31305^F ~ei3~, 7 MT L` AL GRADE 23S4 ~ O I r I O - FOR -0W¢(%CUWTYJNS _ I _ ` - - C-BADE VARIES, SEE arse CLAN N , V y y WVDI\G-~ O `~J VL 00 Q C Front Elevation SOLAR SETBACK CALCULATIONS 1 - - - W.445*S-SSB C - Lo 14'4l.44511-0II51 5S9 1 2 3 4 87.4735-18,45s -_SB B SCALE IN FEET Id LO I CONCRETE RETAINING\VALi-VPWES Lo I , } ' p AA sa ~ I U Q of m CID U CIN - 1 _ COPYRIGHT NOTICE U\ 4 2 \~G 9 B I t D t. L j r-t0' S'-a' r-10' T-10 , ~ 5L Q V '05DF wnn OA O i 2355 FF _ - _ _ _ _ L - J y , IS.SLE29MAR15 ' - - - - - - T-(-' FILE NUMBER; SCH PK1eCtesl-26MARI5 ( F c DRAWN BY; AGS l' L j PLOTSCALE:1l4'=1'-0 la j PLOT DATE: 29MARIS PLOT TIME 9:00 PM j A SHEET TITLE I h I I I I I I I 34G FF- = = Elevations _Right_Elevation I2 III - S.I. 114" i-0° li 1 2 3 4 8 SCAIEINFEEi 16 A201 2 3 4 5 5 a S f/^E~'' W L BI al - - 12 \ 011, r L r_,o s p~ U v-, - ~ .EC.,. ~ sTUCC^_ExrEwc¢EUFFP cE 9 ~d % c ~ro-IrE wuc-I c"DE VA¢I_S. SEE SITE FLON O b V) I I ~ i i I... I I I I i I I i I I A/1 \ 0 C I I 1 M I I I I ______________-i `M I I I r I I ~ BB i ~ Im ~ rm r ~ W(y) N x 3 Rear Elevation U L C. m - - Swle:Iro- r-07 12 3 4 8 SCNEINFffi I6 O d - \101 I ~ ~ I I COPYRIGHT NOTICE B - B i I-,c r--IO, 1-I~ Q ..G 0 F jai x:22 P o ` oP ISSUE:29MARI5 ~I FILE NUMBER II .,,4 ec~{. SCH-Pmecresf „26MARTS r J DRAWN BY: RGS I I PLOT SCALE: 1/4- l'-04 - PLOT DAPE:nMARis r~ T` --------------J Pl0rTIME: 9.W PM A SHED TnE A Elevations n Left Elevation S 714 =1'-0' 1 2 3 4 B SCALEIN FEET I6 A202 5 2 3 4 I 2 3 4 5 U) _ W 1 1 U s W I L l o N ~ I I f U _ l r F V) 011 I ♦ - \ W ry P r V I LOFT BEDROOM #3 BAIT{ Z zap cos F, 0 'Mn t n nn,,♦ s- - - - l r L GALLERY DINING KITCHEN W.LG. OFFIGE n/ r + no m nz obo dt ® LL1 x ~I V CD U zsse FF _ - - mss FF 6--• _ _ 0 i i r J' 4 ENTRY SHOP GARAGE SHOP °O2 °33 om 7 - COPYRIGHT NOTICE ~zsws ~z s c FF , ,yT , Irz•Trvax ~~SFE ~ Fl25F~A¢4TON GWB _ I , r . 2465 Fr ♦t . - _ - B 2'46 FF .-r i I Building Section AA 2 Building Section BB w L Sale: 1/4 1'-0-0' 5 ale. U4 = I'-0" o ~ 1 4 3 4 8 SCAIf IIJ FfB 16 1 4 3 4 B SCALEUI FEES I6 u I f I i ISSUE:29MAR15 111E NUMBER: I SCHLPi-.,.,t26MAR15 j ~4 ll DRAWN BY RGS PLOT SCALE: I/4'>I'-0' : PLOT DATE: 29MAR 15 - PLOii4ME,9:C0 PM,__ A A SHEET ME i i Building Sections ~ I A701 2 3 4 S i I I 2 3 4 Al y BB U/ L AA DI BI ~ }f FMMi i I t 1 ~ G= _ _ _ \n\ `~I N P I HO?IZ SOFT-fr D D 711 L - F"I )j{ s r I G 6 - j b n_ U m - ~G ' .CWGY`>'f = - 3?YUFAQCHRECNF.~L :RME - - O'+C_ = _ PO-I-E -HINGE _j 0 CN I I ~ , ~ m sncco ocrEwczwr,Face j ~ ^ ~ I,' d~o o I sos ®ao4 UJ 1 1 - IC ff 1 n S6 F c - - 1 - n- L~~._ - - 1 - wF_-zaLA¢ccOV.'rv~~.s O r V 1 - I = = = h u~ - - - -Rn F'AQ EE. SEE SI iE RaN B o .42 ~ I I c W CO I I L^N[X\G t 1.'. 4.6'14U SSO1C70 `i0 / Front Elevation 6 C 1 01.4?35 1845 558 U I 1 2 9 4 B SCALE IHPEtI 16 4) , CONOkEI': FETNNING \UPll,VPAES \ L I ~ V Lu co LO NNO1 c I _ Z0 0- OL ! --7 COPYRIGHT NOTICE ~ = I r_tv - - - =G oc = T -I r IG - B 0 f.i00 BI I 'O>G OA < a F - - z 35 FF B--'I~-- - - - _ - - - - - MSUE:29MARI5 B FILE NUMBER PN2"M 26MARIS pRJA'NNBY: RGS i 1______---- -i PLOT SCALE: l/4'=7'-0' I PLOT DATE: 29MARI5 , I PLOT TINAE:?.-00 PM V I A SHEET TITLE I I A _ I I - i Elevations rt----------- Right Elevation A201 I'I f 5 114°-T-O" 1 2 8 4 B SCALEINfEE7 16 3 4 B 2 . _ - _ 3 4 5 ry~ry~~ W i 0 ~ : r L j - •~.'B = 3 1-t0' r-10' p~ I h D _ n = - 1` STUGG^ Ed'~i SVkFA,E - - - _ - 3D-Yc>k APGHNEGNkaL .k>DE i ~ ._T CDMP'JEff`c 5F8NC-IES _j i r FA~>JGVTTFR 0 - 1 T ~ ~ r ~ C-k>DE VAWEE. SEESfrE FLMI e-F I r ^ . , F[[FF~'--Y II~1{B(F~y IF{`L5 l.. t :1 f _I'J _j I (V „ F. ...~r F~ 11 f 7 ^ 2355 FFY - _ _ _T' - 7777 t -I 4- I I I ; I O ~ W i I I ; I I I I 1 L I I 1 1 c Lo F_ Or) I I ~ - V0 ) r I 1/1 v r ` J 01 CI ' C I (1) LO I I r I I I Rear Elevation 1 Z v 4 8 SCALEINFEEi 16 Z 0 Im Ei~ L ~a woman 6~= s - COPYRIGHT NOTICE m M~ r B L-J B U 0 h _ L 0 v 0 - G rc - - O G I h ~ I : L~ OEM, 4SLE.29MAR1$ PILE NUMBER: - „ SCHLPI-. t?6MAR15 hl%v~ DRAWN BY: RG5 I II PLOT SCALE: 114-1'-0' I I T` ~i PLOT DATE 19MARI5 PM PLOTTIME 9U0 A SHEET TIRE A I Elevations ! Left Elevation _-7 I 1 2 3 4 B SCALEIN FEET I6 A202 1 3 4 5 l I°• 3 4 5 _ / ® S III G = ~L II I - - il N L 0 C _ LO O oroc via 4 LOFT BEDROOM #3 4 BAH C rte X02 ~O~ m 206 ~1 W 1 f G '2 - rz s - - I- r L~ b GALLERY DINING KITCHEN § WIC. OFFICE N r- 4-- FIT n2 DBO ~1 10e 1t3 LL N zsBFF z=eEF _ - - - - - Z0 EL m - _ _ 1 SIT 3a SO 11r`I L - LI r- M~ ENTRY SHOP - III I~ r 4 tc< ~r r GARAGE SHOP A T Y L- r St c v 5' 1 1 ooz oa3 a g 7 c r = i + I III 1 oa3 I I COPYRIGHT NOTICE i 'I 23465 FF 23165 FP + Y 7 ~A ! ~ 5 L. 1 I L I II a l I ' ~ ~ ~ ~ i l1- u'I ~~II IiI a r ~ vu~rtt ` hl~. aa=s e>noN~ws ~z3~s~ 1 ~l1 ' I~ ~ - B III ~i I+Ir, i ll., ~ + T~J ~ S1 '1 11= 1 I z~6s~ I L+~r+ i11 + +I r _ ~.1 r'L '-1 r~~- ~ o r. t Ir tr ~ i s i t-II~I I,,. -1 e y 1 L _ 1 TIU_I 1 L,1 _I. .ice -4 A-IM 11 -70 .1 _f p 1= it 1 = L II I' J T : Itr•..+~Lr I. ,,r .:::-I ,II II-Lr~-'J all. II .,-.II ~r,~-1.=1 r..-11k :1=:1. -,1 ~+1';~11f= I '.1 .,I,._1:~-:II ' I:.,.-.IL 1 ! -~r..=1~`lu~'~II'c ~:1~ Lam; . x~+ lh r1:C, 1=,~+P~_L. I+--+. I ~:Ir-.!~ Building Scole.Il4 -I'-0"-- ISCale: 1/4°= I'-0" p 1 2 3 4 B SCALE kJ FEET 2Budding Section BB 16 1 2 3 4 B SCAlEWFEEI 16 I I Q F ISSUE:29MARI5 FILE NUMBER. SCH Pnecfesl„46MARIS 'I r f-, DRAWN BY: RGS t PLOT DATE: 29MkR15 PLOT TIME: 9:00 PM A SHEET TfTLE III p Building Sections i. i A701 2 3 5 u 1 Planning Division I t , 'l P LI T IN C t t v O 'F- 51 Winburn Way, Ashland OR 97520 S H LAN D 541-488-5305 Fax 541-488-6006 FILE ~ - _ DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT t fa d t t DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Pursuing LEED® Certification? ❑ YES I] NO Street Address ` C 7 C f C Assessor's Map No. 39 1 E 1 Tax Lot(s) d Zoning Comp Plan Designation esk ~1 t APPLICANT Name ~)U f cr'e~E i °Cafyr U -C Phone ~`t ~E-Mail 5 4~~ 4 r~ ti Address l , city I fl_1 ~ Zip ~t$ PROPERTY OWNER Name ~r tab e~ t ~ Phone 2-4w 7-W,51-Mail I st a l t~, V --t Address city Zip SURVEYOR, ENGINEER ARCHITECT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. OTHER Title, r r, Name . , , Phone ~ - -ja --Mail Address 1 'i Title s Name(4 c („r, ~ r p _ Phone rt l 61~ ° c 1 a icy,. 'E-Mail i6o Address city 1 r~tit, zip iI LP 0 ° 1 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 t understand that all property pins must be shown on the drawings and visible upon the site inspection. In the event the pins are not shown or their location found to be incorrect, the owner assumes full responsibility. I further understand that if this request is subsequently contested, the burden will be on me to establish: 1) that /produced sufficient factual evidence at the hearing to support this request; 2) that the findings of fact tumished fusUrlos the granting of the request; 3) that the findings of fact famished 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 r quesi being set aside; but also possibly in my structures being built in reliance thereon being required to be removed at my expense,,,ff have any-do `6, l am advised to seek competent professional advice and assistance. (r ~ ~ Applicant's !gnature Date As owner of the property involved in this request, /have read and understood the complete application and its consequences tome as a property ner. Property Owner' Signature (required) Dafe , rro bec .PNted by City stab) Date Received - , 7_oning Permit Type Filing Fee OVER P6 i5?I~IIIIIt-08P1pIflMIH,P,~J imnS X Hmri4mWr,mm! Permit AppIioiioaJoc Job Address: 913 PINECREST TER Contractor: ASHLAND OR 97520 Address: A C P Owner's Name: THOMAS/DORSEY DOBRY 0 Phone: P Customer 07579 N State Lic No: L SUNCREST HOMES LLC T City Lic No: Applicant: PO BOX 1313 R Address: TALENT OR 97540 A C C Sub-Contractor: A Phone: (541) 535-8641 T Address: N Applied: 03/30/2015 T Issued: Expires: 09/26/2015 R Phone: State Lic No: Maplot: 391 E15BC2700 City Lic No: DESCRIPTION: P & E VALUATION Occupancy Type Construction Units Rate Amt Actual Amt Constuction Description Total for Valuation: MECHANICAL ELECTRICAL STRUCTURAL PERMIT FEE DETAIL Fee Description Amount Fee Description Amount Physical Constraints Permit 1,012.00 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 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 OF