The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMountainS_399_PA-2015-01792 ,d-[T F October 23, 2015 Notice of Final Decision On October 23, 2015, the Community Development Director approved the request for the following: Planning Action: 2015-01792 Subject Property: 399 S. Mountain i Applicant/Owner: Jason Eaton, Conscious Construction/Eric Shubert Description: A request for Site Design Review to add one residential unit to the subject property. The application includes a demolition of an existing garage and a removal of one tree with a diameter at breast height of 8 - 12 inches. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Southern Oregon University; ZONING: R-2; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 lE 09DD; TAX LOT: 1000. The Community Development Director's decision becomes final and is effective on the 12"' 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 Plam- ing 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 Zechariah Heck, in the Community Development Department at (541) 488-5305. cc: Parties of record and property owners within 200 ft COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel: 541A88-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 ( 7 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 1.. SECTION 18.5.1.050 Type I Procedure (Administrative Decision with Notice) 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 malting 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. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel: 541-488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 T? Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 ~ E ASHLAND PLANNING DIVISION FINDINGS & ORDERS PLANNING ACTION: PA-2015-01792 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 399 South Mountain Ave APPLICANT: Jason Eaton, Conscious Construction, Inc. OWNER: Eric Subert DESCRIPTION: A request for Site Design Review to add one residential unit to the subject property. The application includes a demolition of an existing garage and a removal of one tree with a diameter at breast height of 8 -12 inches. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Southern Oregon University; ZONING: R-2; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 lE 09DD; TAX LOT: 1000. SUBMITTAL DATE: September 21, 2015 DEEMED COMPLETE DATE: October 1, 2015 STAFF APPROVAL DATE: October 23, 2015 FINAL DECISION DATE: November 4, 2015 APPROVAL EXPIRATION DATE: May 4, 2017 DECISION The subject property is approximately 8,600 square feet, oriented east/west and fronts the west side of South Mountain Street. There are two structures on site, a 1,060 square foot main residence and a detached accessory structure of approximately 650 square feet. The residence was originally constructed circa 1907, according to Jackson County records. There is some landscaping on the property, including an eight-to-twelve-inch diameter at breast height (DBH) prunus serotina and an 18-inch DBH Acer macryphyllum. The subject lot is zoned R-2 and abuts the Southern Oregon University (SO) zoning district to the east and south. Currently, there is no off-street parking provided on the lot. The application is for residential Site Design Review to add an additional unit to the property. According to the Land Use Ordinance in 18.2.5.080.D, an 8,600 square foot lot allows two units to be located on the property if all other applicable requirements can be met. To that end, the property owner is requesting to construct a second unit and provide off-street parking for both units. The applicant states Earth Advantage certification will be pursued for the new unit. As previously mentioned the underlying zoning district for the subject property is R-2, multifamily residential. In the Land Use Ordinance, Table 18.2.5.030.A lists general standards for the City's residential zones. The application does not involve any changes to the lot area or lot width/depth. As detailed in the applicant's site plan, the new construction is further than 80 feet from the front property line, 10 feet from the Henry Street side property line and six feet from the northern property line. The carport opening is setback more than 20 feet from the property line adjacent to Henry Street. The proposed unit is located 10 feet from the rear property line. The application identifies the proposed second unit's building height as 18 feet and the height for the carport is eight feet. However, for the purposes of building separation and overall maximum building height, Staff realized the applicant is defining building height incorrectly. Height of a building is defined in 18.6 as, "The vertical distance from grade or ground level to the highest point of the coping of a flat roof or to the deck line of a mansard roof or to the average height of the highest gable of a pitch or hip roof." Therefore, Staff calculated the height of the proposed unit as 13.25 feet and the height of the carport as eight feet. The maximum height for the zone is 35 feet, or 2'/z stories. Moreover, as detailed PA #2015-01792 399 S Mountain St/zgh Page 1 4 , f in 18.3.9.070, the proposal has a building separation requirement of 6.625 feet. 'I he site plan shows compliance with this requirement as buildings have an eight-foot separation. Lastly, the application lists impervious surfaces and states the total is 3,313 square feet, or 38% of the lot. Outdoor recreation space is listed as being 1,000 square feet, or 11 % of the lot. As presented the application complies with all of the applicable provisions of the R-2 zoning district. There are no applicable overlay zones for the subject property, per section 18.3 in the Land Use Ordinance. As proposed, the new unit is orientated toward Henry Street and is connected to the right of way via a paved walking path. The proposed carport is located to the side of the new unit and to the back of the existing unit. The opening of the carport is identified as being more than 20 feet away from the Henry Street right of way. The application states two street trees will be planted to meet the street tree standard in 18.4.4.030.E. A total of 11% of the site is to be preserved for open space, in addition to another 51% of the lot to be landscaped with deciduous and evergreen flora. This equals a 62% total of the lot as pervious, landscaped area, surpassing the minimum requirement of 35% in the R-2 zoning district. Recycle and refuse areas are identified to the west of the proposed carport. From the site plan, it appears the recycle and refuse areas are screened appropriately, per 18.4.4. As previously mentioned, the application states 1 I% of the lot will be dedicated to open space to surpass the eight percent minimum. Standard ratios required for automobile parking are detailed in the Land Use Ordinance in Table 18.4.3.040. As presented, the applicant's proposal requires a total of four parking spaces (two spaces for the existing residence and 1.5 spaces for the proposed 500 square foot second unit). The proposal includes the construction of a 625 square foot carport to cover three vehicle parking spaces and three bicycle parking spaces. On-street parking credits are not allowed within 200 feet of the SOU zone, which is located directly across South Mountain Avenue. Therefore, the proposed second unit will need to be less than 500 square feet to meet the parking requirements of the Land Use Ordinance. As proposed in the site plan the parking area design complies with the standard auto space dimensions and back-up maneuvering space. Standards for distances from driveways and intersections are met as presented. The application includes details about their approach to meet parking construction, including drainage plans. Pedestrian access and circulation provisions are complied with by providing a safe, efficient and continuous walkway throughout the property and connection to Henry Street and South Mountain Avenue. The application meets the minimum requirement for parking lot landscaping and screening by providing an eight-foot setback between structures with a hedge screen and a six-foot setback from the neighboring property to the north. Furthermore, the applicant's state all exterior lighting will provide for pedestrian safety and crime prevention, while minimizing light spillover unto adjacent properties. Lastly, the applicant mentions fencing to be installed at some point after construction. It should be noted that a fence permit is required to install a fence, and, as proposed, a solid seven-foot tall fence is not permissible. Tree preservation and protection is addressed in the applicant's narrative and landscape plan. A Primus serotina on the western edge of the property is to be removed as the tree is located within the proposed building footprint. Tree protection fencing is identified around two trees on the neighbors property and around the 18-inch diameter at breast height Acer macryphyllum (maple tree). An arborist report is included in the application which states specific recommendations to mitigate any damage to the maple tree. Staff encourages the applicant to follow all recommendations of the arborist and to allow the arborist to provide additional suggestions, such as a "floating" sidewalk within the drip line of the maple tree to mitigate the damage done by standard practices for installing sidewalks. PA #2015-01792 399 S Mountain St/zgh Page 2 The application was reviewed by the Tree Commission during their regular meeting on October 8, 2015. The Commission had a few recommendations and were supportive of the application. Conditions of approval have been added below addressing their comments. With Site Design Review, applications are required to bring street frontages to current standards. Regarding this application, upgrades to Henry Street, a "neighborhood street", would require a seven- foot park row planting strip with irrigated street trees and a five-foot wide sidewalk. If any additional right-of-way is necessary to accommodate such improvements, the Land Use Ordinance requires the property owner to dedicate more land, or, provide an easement for the improvements. Moreover, a variation from these standards requires an Exception to Street Standards, per 18.4.6.020.B.1. Citing space limitations, the applicant requests an Exception to Street Standards. Currently, the subject property's southern property line is five feet from the existing curb. This presents a demonstrable difficulty in meeting the aforementioned requirements. If the applicant is allowed to install a five-foot wide sidewalk, without a park row, along their Henry Street frontage, the outcome is preferable to what currently exists (no sidewalk). Furthermore, the adjacent property at 1069 Henry Street does not have a sidewalk or park row. The closest sidewalk begins on tax lot 1100, owned by Ashland School District #5, which starts as a curbside sidewalk then branches off to allow a park row. Staff feels that allowing the applicant an Exception to Street Standards is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty. This exception is consistent with the purpose of providing a safe environment for all users, in addition to the enhancement of neighborhood livability. The criteria for Site Design Review are described in AMC Chapter 18.5.2.050, as follows: A. Underlying Zone: The proposal complies with all of the applicable provisions of the underlying zone (part 18.2), including but not limited to: building and yard setbacks, lot area and dimensions, density and floor area, lot coverage, building height, building orientation, architecture, and other applicable standards. B. Overlay Zones: The proposal complies with applicable overlay zone requirements (part 18.3). C. Site Development and Design Standards: The proposal complies with the applicable Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4, except as provided by subsection E, below. D. City Facilities: The proposal complies with the applicable standards in section 18.4.6 Public Facilities and that adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, electricity, urban storm drainage, paved access to and throughout the property and adequate transportation can and will be provided to the subject property. E. Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards. The approval authority may approve exceptions to the Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4 if the circumstances in either subsection 1 or 2, below, are found to exist. 1. There is a demonstrable difficulty meeting the specific requirements of the Site Development and Design Standards due to a unique or unusual aspect of an existing structure or the proposed use of a site; and approval of the exception will not substantially negatively impact adjacent properties; and approval of the exception is consistent with the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design; and the exception requested is the minimum which would alleviate the difficulty.; or 2. There is no demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements, but granting the exception will result in a design that equally or better achieves the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design Standards. The criteria for Tree Removal are described in AMC Chapter 18.5.7.040.13, as follows: B. Tree Removal Permit. 2. Tree That is Not a Hazard. A Tree Removal Permit for a tree that is not a hazard shall be granted i PA #2015-01792 399 S Mountain St/zgh Page 3 if the approval authority finds that the application meets all of the following criteria, or can be made to conforin 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. The criteria for an Exception to the Street Design Standards are described in AMC Chapter 18.4.6.020B, as follows: a. There is demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements of this chapter due to a unique or unusual aspect of the site or proposed use of the site. b. The exception will result in equal or superior transportation facilities and connectivity considering the following factors where applicable, i. For transit facilities and related improvements, access, wait time, and ride experience. ii. For bicycle facilities, feeling of safety, quality of experience (i.e., comfort level of bicycling along the roadway), and frequency of conflicts with vehicle cross traffic. iii. For pedestrian facilities, feeling of safety, quality of experience (i.e., comfort level of walking along roadway), and ability to safety and efficiency crossing roadway. c. The exception is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty. d. The exception is consistent with the Purpose and Intent of the Street Standards in subsection 18.4.6.040.A. The application with the attached conditions complies with all applicable City ordinances. Planning Action #2015-01792 complies with all applicable City ordinances with the imposition of the conditions attached below. Therefore, Planning Action #2015-01792 is approved. If any one or more of the following conditions are found to be invalid, for any reason whatsoever, then Planning Action #2015-01792 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 specifically modified herein. 2. That the plans submitted for the building permit, unless modified herein, shall be in substantial conformance with those approved as part of this application. If the plans submitted for the building permit are not in substantial conformance with those approved as part of this application, an application to modify the Site Design Review approval shall be submitted and approved prior to issuance of a building permit. PA #2015-01792 399 S Mountain St/zgh Page 4 K. 3. That the square footage of the second unit shall be less than 500 square feet to meet the required parking ratio for the proposal. Verification that the new unit is less than 500 square feet shall be confirmed prior to building permit issuance. 4. Solar setback calculations demonstrating that all new construction complies with Solar Setback Standard A in the formula [(Height - 6)/(0.445 + Slope) = Required Solar Setback] and elevations or cross section drawings clearly identifying the highest shadow producing point(s) and the height(s) from natural grade shall be provided prior to building permit issuance. 5. That storm water from all new impervious surfaces and runoff associated with peak rainfalls must be collected on site and channeled to the City storm water collection system (i.e., curb gutter at public street, public storm pipe or public drainage way) or through an approved alternative in accordance with Ashland Building Division policy BD-PP-0029. On-site collection systems shall be detailed on the building permit submittals. 6. That a drainage plan be for the parking areas shall be submitted at the time of a building permit for review and approval by the Ashland Building Division. 7. That a revised Tree Protection Plan consistent with the standards described in 18.4.5 be submitted for review by the Staff Advisor prior to the issuance of a building permit. The plan shall identify the location and placement of fencing around the drip lines of trees identified for preservation. The amount of fill and grading within the drip line shall be minimized. Cuts within the drip line shall be noted on the tree protection plan, and shall be executed by handsaw and kept to a minimum. No fill shall be placed around the trunk/crown root. Any deviations from the plan shall be considered a violation of the Planning Application approval and therefore subject to penalties described in the Ashland Municipal Code. 8. That the tree protection fencing shall be installed according to the approved plan prior to any site work, storage of materials or issuance of the building permit. The tree protection shall be inspected and approved by the Ashland Planning Department prior to site work, storage of materials and/or the issuance of a building permit. 9. That all recommendations of the Ashland Tree Commission (listed below), where consistent with the applicable ordinances and standards and with final approval of the Staff Advisor, shall be conditions of approval unless otherwise modified herein. a. That the applicant mitigate damage to the maple tree by starting a water program as soon as possible; b. That an arborist be on site during construction near the maple tree; c. That a preliminary excavation trench of proposed cut for parking/driveway shall be done by hand which will identify potential issues with maple and that any problematic roots are cut clean by an arborist. 10. That a minimum of two street trees shall be installed on the Henry Street frontage prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the new unit. All street trees shall be chosen from the adopted Street Tree List and shall be installed in accordance with the specifications noted in Section E of the Site Design and Use Standards. The street trees shall be irrigated. 11. That an updated landscaping plan, per recommendations by Staff, be submitted for review and approval by Staff in conjunction with an application for building permits. 12. That all landscaping in the new landscaped areas shall be installed according to the approved plan, and tied into the existing irrigation system, prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. PA #2015-01792 399 S Mountain St/zgh Page 5 k, { 13. The inverted ii-racks shall be used for the bicycle parking. All bicycle parking shall be installed in accordance with design and rack standards in 18.4.3.070 prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy. The building permit submittals shall verify that the bicycle parking spacing and coverage requirements are met in accordance with 18.4.3.070. 14. That the screening for the trash and recycling enclosure shall be installed in accordance with the Site Design and Use Standards prior to the issuance of certificate of occupancy. An opportunity to recycle site of equal or greater size than the solid waste receptacle shall be included in the trash enclosure in accordance with 18.4.4.040. 15. That the new driveway approach be permitted through the Engineering Division. The driveway is required to be separated from existing driveways by a minimum of 24-feet and further than 35- feet from intersections, per City Street Standards. Only one driveway approach is allowed on a single tax lot. The driveway approach shall not be greater than 18 feet in width. 16. That all necessary building permits, including permits for the new electrical service to the new unit, and system development charges for water, sewer, storm water, parks, and transportation shall be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit. 17. That all exterior lighting shall be directed on the property and shall not directly illuminate adjacent proprieties. 18. That any fences to be installed on the property shall meet the standards in 18.4.4.060, and, before installation, shall be applied for and approved by Planning Staff. R ~ti~ i m Z j. 2~ r S B' Molnar, DireCt07- Date 1 epartmen of Community Development PA 92015-01792 399 S Mountain St/zgh Page 6 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF OREGON ) County of Jackson ) The undersigned being first duly sworn states that: 1. I am employed by the City of Ashland, 20 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon 97520, in the Community Development Department. 2. On October 23, 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 #2015-01792, 399 S. Mountain. Signature of Employee Documentl 10/23/2015 S PA-2015-01792 391 E09DD 5800 -2015-01792 391 E09DD 700 PA-2015-01792 391 E09DD 1001 OREGON STATE 1 E JAREZ REALTY LLC CULMER CARITA MARIE TRUSTEE ET AL ROE BOLSTA DEAN OF ADMISSIONS i7 SW COQUILLE DR 1069 HENRY ST 1250 SISKIYOU BLVD ALATIN, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2015-01792 391 E09DD 1000 2015-01792 391 E09DD 6199; PA-2015-01792 391 E09DD 1100 SUBERT ERIC M TRUSTEE ET AL )SS WILLIAM HILALA 0 SCHOOL DISTRICT 5 2828 KAPIOLANI BLVD ADDRESS SUPPLIED, 0 HONOLULU, HI 96826 PA-2015-01792 ~-2015-01792 391 E09DD 600 JASON EATON CONSCIOUS INTON-VOSS CHARLOTTE CONSTRUCTION 1 SOUTH MOUNTAIN AVENUE PO BOX 3205 3HLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 399 S Mountain NOD 1012312015 6 i I f j ASHLAND TREE COMMISSION PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENT SHEET October 8, 2015 PLANNING ACTION: PA-2015-01792 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 399 South Mountain Ave APPLICANT: Jason Eaton, Conscious Construction, Inc. OWNER: Eric Subert DESCRIPTION: A request for Site Design Review to add one residential unit to the subject property. The application includes a demolition of an existing garage and a removal of one tree with a diameter at breast height of 8 -12 inches. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Southern Oregon University; ZONING: R-2; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 lE 09DD; TAX LOT: 1000. The Tree Commission recommends approving the application as submitted along with specific recommendations below: 1) That the applicant mitigate damage to the Acer macryphyllum (maple tree) by starting a water program as soon as possible; 2) That an arborist be on site to supervise any construction near the Acer macryphyllum; 3) That a preliminary excavation trench of proposed cut for parking/driveway shall be done by hand which will identify potential issues with Acer macryphyllum and that any problematic roots are cut clean by an arborist. Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5350 CITY OF 51 Winbum Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 NvNv%v.ashland.or.us Planning Department, 51 Winbu n Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520 C I y 541-488-5305 Fax: 541-552-2050 www,ashland.or.us TTY: 1-800-735-2900 NOTICE OF APPLICATION PLANNING ACTION: PA-2015-01792 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 399 S Mountain Ave OWNER: Eric Subert APPLICANT: Conscious Construction, Inc. DESCRIPTION: A request for Site Design Review to add one residential unit to the subject property. The application includes a demolition of an existing garage and a removal of one tree with a diameter at breast height of 8 -12 inches. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Southern Oregon University; ZONING: R-2; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 391 E 09DD; TAX LOT: 1000. L: NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: October 1, 2015 DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION OF WRITTEN COMMENTS: October 15, 2015 SUBJECT PROPERTY 399 PA- S Mountain Ave PA•2016-01792 ' Z gy` _ ~ Q HENRY ST V' 1:480 Cinch=40 feet y_ft 'rSHLAND M r Y A.i«m w~'W" M'aiaa .rro "ice .n..m n<x,a>o.m.KMr is n.akaror..sw~...am.uuno.. The Ashland Planning Division Staff has received a complete application for the property noted above. Any affected property owner or resident has a right to submit written comments to the City of Ashland Planning Division, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520 prior to 4:30 p.m. on the deadline date shown above. Ashland Planning Division Staff determine if a Land Use application is complete within 30 days of submittal. Upon determination of completeness, a notice is sent to surrounding properties within 200 feet of the property submitting application which allows for a 14 day comment period. After the comment period and not more than 45 days from the application being deemed complete, the Planning Division Staff shall make a final decision on the application. A notice of decision is mailed to the same properties within 5 days of decision. An appeal to the Planning Commission of the Planning Division Staff's decision must be made in writing to the Ashland Planning Division within 12 days from the date of the mailing of final decision. (AMC 18.108.040) 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. G:\comm-dev\planning\Planning Actions\Noticing Folder\Malled Notices & Signs\2015\PA-2015-01792.docs SITE DESIGN AND USE STANDARDS 18.5.2.050 Approval Criteria The following criteria shall be used to approve or deny an application: A. Underlying Zone: The proposal complies with all of the applicable provisions of the underlying zone (part 18.2), including but not limited to: building and yard setbacks, lot area and dimensions, density and floor area, lot coverage, building height, building orientation, architecture, and other applicable standards. B. Overlay Zones: The proposal complies with applicable overlay zone requirements (part 18.3). C. Site Development and Design Standards: The proposal complies with the applicable Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4, except as provided by subsection E, below. D. City Facilities: The proposal complies with the applicable standards in section 18.4.6 Public Facilities and that adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, electricity, urban storm drainage, paved access to and throughout the property and adequate transportation can and will be provided to the subject property, E. Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards. The approval authority may approve exceptions to the Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4 if the circumstances in either subsection 1 or 2, below, are found to exist. 1. There is a demonstrable difficulty meeting the specific requirements of the Site Development and Design Standards due to a unique or unusual aspect of an existing structure or the proposed use of a site; and approval of the exception will not substantially negatively impact adjacent properties; and approval of the exception is consistent with the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design; and the exception requested is the minimum which would alleviate the difficulty.; or 2. There is no demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements, but granting the exception will result in a design that equally or better achieves the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design Standards. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT' 18.5.7.040.13 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. Exception to the Street Design Standards -18.4.6.020.13 1. Exception to the Street Design Standards. The approval authority may approve exceptions to the standards section in 18.4.6.040 Street Design Standards if all of the following circumstances are found to exist. a. There is demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements of this chapter due to a unique or unusual aspect of the site or proposed use of the site. b The exception will result in equal or superior transportation facilities and connectivity considering the following factors where applicable. i. For transit facilities and related improvements, access, wait time, and ride experience. ii. For bicycle facilities, feeling of safety, quality of experience (i.e., comfort level of bicycling along the roadway), and frequency of conflicts with vehicle cross traffic, iii. For pedestrian facilities, feeling of safety, quality of experience (i.e., comfort level of walking along roadway), and ability to safety and efficiency crossing roadway. C. The exception is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty. d. The exception is consistent with the Purpose and Intent of the Street Standards in subsection 18.4.6.040.A. GAcomm-de0planningTIanning Actions\Noticing Polder-Wailed Notices & Signs\2015\PA-2015-01792.docs AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF OREGON ) County of Jackson ) I c The undersigned being first duly sworn states that: ip 1. 1 am employed by the City of Ashland, 20 East Main Street, Ashland, i Oregon 97520, in the Community Development Department. 2. On October 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 G 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 #2015-01792, 399 S Mountain. t' Signature f Employee DocumenQ 10/1/2015 PA-2015-01792 391 E09DD 700 PA-2015-01792 391 E09DD 1001 PA-2015-01792 391 E09DD 5800 ALVAREZ REALTY LLC CULMER CARITA MARIE TRUSTEE ET AL OREGON STATE OF 9967 SW COQUILLE DR 1069 HENRY ST RON BOLSTAD-DEAN OF ADMISSIONS TUALATIN, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 1250 SISKIYOU BLVD ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2015-01792 391 E09DD 6199 PA-2015-01792 391 E09DD 1100 PA-2015-01792 391 E09DD 1000 ROSS WILLIAM H/LALA 0 SCHOOL DISTRICT 5 SUBERT ERIC M TRUSTEE ET AL NO ADDRESS SUPPLIED 0 2828 KAPIOLANI BLVD HONOLULU, HI 96826 PA-2015-01792 391 E09DD 600 PA-2015-01792 WINTON-VOSS CHARLOTTE JASON EATON CONSCIOUS 361 SOUTH MOUNTAIN AVENUE CONSTRUCTION ASHLAND, OR 97520 PO BOX 3205 ASHLAND, OR 97520 I 399 S Mountain NOC 10/1/15 5 E I t EI I( 4F` f I 1- Il (H II 40, 1 i i I 4- - 'f! IM ~~Yr~a,•aY;-~1 O PT ~1lk d11} 6 jj 0 i II !i Il II IP if (,V4 - , - iritten Findin S Conscious Construction, Inc. Jason Eaton ISO Box 3205 Ashland, OR 541973 8889 Owners Eric Subert 399 S. Mountain Ave. Ashland, OR 808 228 5944 Overview: We are requesting that you review our proposal for a 500 sf residence to be located in the west portion of reap 39 1E 09 at 339 S. Mountain St. The intent for the residence is to provide housing for the property owner's uncle. The 0.20 acre property is on a corner lot, has 1 existing 1060 sf residence on it and is zoned R-2 as are the majority of surrounding properties. We are proposing a single story structure on the west portion of the property behind the existing residence but facing Henry Street. Access to the residence will be via the proposed relocated curb cut that runs east-west along Henry Street. We are also proposing a carport that will provide parking for three vehicles and three bikes. Given the size and location of the existing residence on the site and the orientation and slope of the property, we are able to meet our standard and solar setbacks, lot coverage requirements, E wl l),rking requirements while providing ample outdoor space and privacy for both the existing and proposed residences. The proposed residence has been designed to complement the existing residence which is a simple cottage style home with a pitched roof and a front entry porch. The proposed residence will be wood frame construction with wood siding. We will not pursue LEER certification but will pursue Earth Advantage certification for the proposed residence. Our goal is to save the mature Big Leaf Maple on the site, however; due to the parking requirements of three cars with 22' dear back-up space on paved surface utilizing only one curb cut, etc. and the requirement to install a 5' wide sidewalk along the south property line, i he tree will be impacted by construction to a greater degree than we would like see. The attached arborist report speaks to that as well. We are unable to develop the property while still meeting all of the other site requirements in regards to building setbacks, solar access setbacks, parking, etc., without impacting the tree as we have shown on the plans. We ask that you consider this tree's health in your decision to require the three parking spaces as well as the requirement to install the sidewalk on the south property line. Installation of a 5' wide sidewalk along Henry Street will place the sidewalk on the south property line and bring it to within 3' of the existing rr-i,lrncc. In addition, there is no sidewalk to the west to connect up to requiring pedestrians to wi.llk on the street before reconnecting the sidewalk near Lincoln Park. 18.2.6.030 ® Underlying Zone Provisions: Zoning is R®2, building height is 18' and carport height is proposed setbacks area as follows: Front 124', South Side 10', North Side 6' (to carport), Rear 16', Solar access setbacks are as follows: 287" to ridge of house and 4'6" to ride of carport. Impervious lot coverage is 38% and 62% of the lot will be landscaped. Three vehicle parking spaces are proposed as well as three covered bike spaces. 18.4.2 ® i°i i _ n , , . a, and Design- The proposed SO® sf residence will face Henry Street and have its primary entrance facing Henry Street as well. Vehicle and bike parking will be placed between the proposed residence and the existing residence providing easy, safe access from the residences to the street/sidewalk and the parking area. Vehicle and bike parking will be housed under a proposed flat roof carport that will have security lighting in the carport as well at both entry gates leading to the back/side yards and at all entry doors. There will be a minimum of an g' planting buffer i between the residences and the parking area. The proposed carport will be located 28' north of the south property line and will allow 22' clear back up space for each parking space. The carport will be constructed using steel past and beams with architecture to minimize the visual impact of the structure. In addition, the existing gig Leaf Maple on the site will provide amble screening of the carport from the street. Since there is not enough room between the required sidewalk and the property line to install a park row, we are proposing to place two street trees on our client's property to meet the intent of the Street Standards, one Persian parrotia at the southwest corner of the property and one Acer griseum at the southwest corner of the proposed driveway, both trees are on the Recommended Street Tree Guidry. There is already a substantial Rig Leaf Maple located along I It;f rry Street as well. The only otl wr suitable location for a street tree would be in tl 1(z sc(m rl, east corner of the property; however, given its proximity to the intersection of Sot ith Mountain Street and Henry Street, a 25' setback from the curb in bath directions would place the tree in the middle of the existing entry walk to the existing residence. Recycle and trash receptacles for the proposed residence are shown at the northwest corner of the carport inside the fenced back yard. For the existing residence, they are shown at the northwest corner of the house, inside the proposed fenced area. The proposed plan provides 11% recreation space designated for the proposed residence. The cxi,_; if ig residence currently is surrounded by lawn proving additional open space and play areas for the residents of the main house. 18.4.3 ° parking, Access, and Circulation- The existing residence on site requires two off-street parking spaces and the proposed 500 sf unit requires one parking space for a total of three required spaces. Vehicle and bike parking will be placed between the proposed residence and the existing residence proving easy, safe access from the residences to the street/sidewalk and the parking area. Vehicle and bike parking will be housed under a proposed flat roof carport that will have security lighting in the carport as well as at both entry gates leading to the back/side yards and at all entry doors. There will be a minimum of an 8' planting buffer between the residences and the carport. The proposed carport will be located 28' north of the south property line and will allow 22' clear back up space for each parking space. The existing residence on site requires 1.5 sheltered spaces and the proposed 500 sf unit requires one sheltered space for a total of three required spaces. There are two designated storage lockers at the north end of the carport intended for bike parking and storage. The third covered space will be provided between the storage lockers. We are requesting to remove the existing curb cut and install a new 18' curb cut approximately 23' to the east allowing us to meet all applicable parking requirements. The driveway and parking area will be paved with concrete and will be a minimum of 15' wide where is meets the sidewalk and flaring to 29' wide to allow adequate back up space for each of the three required parking spaces. We will meet the vision clearance restrictions by installing plant material near the sidewalk intersection that will grow to less than 24" tall at maturity. The driveway will slope at no greater than 4% to the north to allow positive drainage away from the sidewalk and residences. Where the concrete meets the storage lockers at the north end of the carport, strip drains will be installed and tied into the storm drain. We are proposing to use potted plants along the carport to meet our required landscape for the parking area. It is a narrow space with challeni;inf, light conditions. Potted plants with the proposed deer fence/screening as a b` ,:r', i )p wilt To soften the visual impact of the parking area and the carport itself will provide shade for the parking area. We will have security lighting in the carport as well at both entry gates leading to the back/side yards and at all entry doors to comply with 18.4.4.050. 18.4.4 - L `r Lighting, and !ninge We are proposing to designate 62% of the lot to landscaping, open space, and play areas. For all areas requiring plant material we are proposing to use a variety of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs that are drought-tolerant, deer resistant, and low-maintenance. The plant material shall be not less than 50 percent coverage within one year and 90 percent coverage after five years. We are proposing to place two street trees on our client's property to meet the intent of the Street Standards, one Persian parrotia at the south-west corner of the property and one Acer griseum at the south-west corner of the proposed driveway, both trees are on the Recommended Street Tree Guide. The street trees will be planted on the north side of Henry Street which runs east-west. Any tree that we plant there with the intent of someday forming a deciduous canopy over the street would be entirely too large for the site and would pose structural issues for the foundation of the proposed residence. We are instead proposing multi- branching trees that will serve as a screen between the busy street and the proposed residence as well as the Parrotia providing shade for the proposed residence from the hot, west sun. i We are proposing 11% of the total parking area to be designated as parking lot landscaping. This is in addition to the required 8' planting buffer we are providing between the driveway/parking area and the residences. We are proposing to use potted plants along the carport to meet our required landscape for the parking area. It is a narrow space with challenging light conditions. Potted plants with the proposed deer fence/screening as a backdrop will serve to soften the visual impact of the parking area and the carport itself will provide shade for the parking area alleviating the need for additional shade trees. In addition, the existing Big Leaf Maple will provide the driveway and carport with amble shade from the east and partially from the south. Recycle and trash receptacles for the proposed residence are shown at the north-west corner of the carport inside the fenced back yard. For the existing residence, they are shown at the north-west corner of the house, inside the proposed fenced area. The heat pump unit for the proposed residence will be located on -the east side of the house inside the proposed fencing. The proposed roof carport will have security lighting in the carport as well as at both entry gates leading to the back/side yards and at all entry doors. The lighting on i l-w entry F;. ites and entry doors will be dark sky certified. Fencing will be installed at the locations shown on the Site Plan, will be 7' tall and wood constructed. We will obtain a fence permit prior to installing the fence. *See Tree Protection and Rei,ioval Plan. We are proposing to remove a multi-branched 8®12" DBH Prunus serotina that is in poor condition per AMC 18.5.7.020 0.3. "Removal of trees in multi-family residential zones on lots occupied only by a single family detached dwelling and associated accessory structures, except as otherwise regulated by chapters 18.3.10 Physical and Environmental Constraints and 18.3.11 Water Resource Protection Zones", we are not required to obtain a tree removal permit. We are proposing to protect three trees, two on the property to the west, and one large Rig Leaf Maple near the existing residence on the property. The two trees on the neighboring property are old apple trees in poor health with one of them already partially falling over. We intend to ask the neighbor if she would like us to protect the trees or remove them for her at our cost. For the time being we are planning to install 6' tall chain-link tree protection fence at the west property line to protect the trees from construction damage. We also show tree protection fencing around the Big Leaf Maple. Our goal is to save the mature Big Leaf Maple, however; due to the parking requirements of three cars with 22' clear back-up space on paved surface utilizing only one curb cut, etc. and the requirement to install a 5' wide sidewalk along the south property line, the tree will be impacted by construction to a greater degree than we would like see. The attached arborist report speaks to that as well. We are unable to develop the property while still meeting all of the other site requirements in regards to building setbacks, solar access setbacks, parking, etc., without impacting the tree as we have shown on the plans. We ask that you consider this tree's health in your decision to require the three parking spaces as well as the requirement to install the sidewalk on the south property line. 18.4,6°040 - 5tr ° ird Design: We are asking for an exception to the Street Design Standards pertaining to the required 7' park row adjacent to the required 5' sidewalk. The property line is only 5' from the existing curb and therefore only allows for a 5' sidewalk. Installation of a 5' wide sidewalk along Henry Street will place the sidewalk on the south property line and bring it to within 3' of the existing residence. We are proposing to install two trees on the property that will act as street trees. The front area will also be landscaped per the Planting Plan to provide vegetative screening between the proposed residence and the sidewalk/street. "ft e^~,~'1'r, CASEY P. ROLANDTRE CARE j+ Pkone: 541-488--0782 ® ccb# 1861 0 I September 22, 2015 i I' To whom it may concern: I was recently contacted by Kelly Eaton in regards to reviewing a building plan for the Subert residence at 399 S.Mtn St. in Ashland, Or. After reviewing the sit and grading plan as well as the demolition and tree protectionlremoval plan, it is my opinion that the 18" D.B.H. Acer macrophyllum will be negatively impacted by the proposed driveway, 6-7" cut in grade, and parking area slab to be poured within 10' of the trunk and root collar of this tree. I would recommend a root protection zone of at least 12' radius from the root collar minimum, and then an installation of permeable pavers, with the remaining radii mulched with medium to fine wood chips 3-4" . In addition, the installation of a sidewalk along the southern edge of the tree will have a somewhat negative effect to this tree as a cut in grade will performed there as well. This tree is in good condition at this time, and had been properly maintained, but would benefit from an application of mulch within the root zone, and possibly infrequent but deep irrigation during the hot summer months. If you have any questions or concerns regarding this matter, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Casey P. Roland Thant You for rwur f5usine5sl Job Address: 399 MOUNTAIN AVE S Contractor: ASHLAND OR 97520 Address: C A Owner's Name: ERIC SUBERT O Phone: P Customer 04495 N State Lic No: P CONSCIOUS CONSTRUCTION T City Lic No: L R Applicant: Address: A. C C Sub-Contractor: A Phone: (541) 973-8889 T Address: N Applied: 09/21/2015 0 T Issued: R Expires: 03/19/2016 Phone: State Lic No: Maplot: 391E09DD1000 City Lic No: DESCRIPTION: Residential Site Review VALUATION Occupancy Type Construction Units Rate Amt Actual Amt Constuction Description i i Total for Valuation: I MECHANICAL I ELECTRICAL i A STRUCTURAL PERMIT FEE DETAIL Fee Description Amount Fee Description Amount Residential Site Review 1,012.00 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL i, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tel: 541-488-5305 20 East Main St. Fax: 541-488-5311 4 Ashland, OR 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us Inspection Request Line: 541-552-2080 CITY OF I, : PROJECT IPJr01;(1Ai10N PROPERTY 01100. ERIC SUBERT LOT COVERAOFI SOLAR CALCULATION: 399 S. MOUNTAIN ST ASHLAND OR 808 228 5944 EXISTING RESIDENCE 1060 SF <2 BEDROOM> SETBACK STANDARD B! PROPOSED RESIDENCE 500 SF BEDROOM> H-6I.445 + S ® SSB RESIDENCE: DFSIGNERICONTRACTOR: CONSCIOUS CONSTRUCTION PROPOSED CARPORT 625 SF 18-61,445 + 0,04 PO BOX 3205 ASHLAND OR PROPOSED DRIVEWAY 113 SF 26,92' FROM NORTH PROPLINE TO i i 541913 8889 PROPOSED PATHSIPATIOS 415 SF EASTIWEST RIDGE JASON&ESIGNBUILDASHLAND,COM TOTAL IMPERVIOUS 3313 SF <38%> CARPORT: SITE AND BUILDING DATA: LANDSCAPING 4359 SF 010 8.61,445 + 0.04 T ~ TOTAL SP OF OPEN SPACE 1000 Sr 010 LESS THAN MIN STANDARD SETBACK LOCATION MAP 39 IE 09 TAX LOT 1000 DEDICATED PARKING LANDSCAPE 86 SF <1130 DESIGN CRITERIA LOT SIZE 0.20 ACRE - 8112 SF TOTAL SF OF LANDSCAPE AREAS 5445 SF <62%> k ZONING R-2 <SAME AS SURROUNDING SEISMIC DI PROPERTIES> PARKING WIND 90 MPH EXPOSURE B OCCUPANCY MULTI FAMILY RESIDENCE SNOW LOAD 25# /SF CARPORT 3 SPACES FOR VEHICLES FLOOR LIVE LOAD 40# /SF EXISTING I STORY RESIDENCE 1060 SF BIKE PARKING 3 COVERED SPACES FOR BIKES FLOOR DEAD LOAD 10 ISE EXISTING GARAGE TO BE REMOVED 600 SF TOTAL SF ALL <E> STRUCTURES 1660 SF I w~ <E> GARAGE TO REMAIN PROPERTY LINE 160' \ `PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION \ / a ENTRANCE WITH 6" GRAVEL \ / m PROPOSED CONCRETE OVER FILTER FABRIC INSTEAD 600F WASHOUT LINED OF 8" TO REDUCE IMPACT ON <E> WATER METER CARAe[ Y0 PE REVISION DATE. m WITH PLASTIC EXISTING ACER MACRYPIIYIIUM <E>MALUSTO REMAIN, _fl j RfVIOVED Lu 10" DOH, IO' CROWN DIA, PROPOSED IN POOR 6ONDIT1014 POTRA-POTTY DRAWN BY' KAE TREE PROTECTION ° v LI LB : i FENCE SCALE; ~ II I II~ ~I A AGAVATION IepPOSEO 11X171"16'0' <E> MALUS TO REMAIN; FOOTPRINT j e11; BENCE, I ~ 24X3h 1 48-0' EKCAVA ION 8" DON, W CROWN DIA. x PATIOS, AND FOOTPRINT IN POOR CONDITION I ~ VIALKWAYS <F> I RESIDENCE d fl- Lp TO REMAIN I / II OPOSED ~ FF105.96 <E> PRONOS SEROTINA TO BE a All DRIVEWAY I S'ID' REMOVEN MULTI BRANCHED I ; 8-12" DBH,12' CROWN DIA, IN POOR CONDITION ! 1 ~ I I °UGNs7RUO7mN- ~ I„ ' <E> FIRE HYDRANT ENTR(;LICE WITH 6" GRAVEL OVER <E) STORM DRAIN } FN STRAW COVER OVER FILTER FABRIC DISTURBED AREA; TYP, ° 6KOAVATIUL I ROPER r,rINEStl I,> SIDEWALK SIDEWALK FOOTPRINT FOOTPRINT BIU BAGS AT 010-BAGS AI- CE>GURB CUT TO RIGID PIPE IN TREE <E> ACER MACRYPNYLLUM <E> ELECTRICAL RIO-BAGS FOR INLET PROPERTY LINE CURB CUT; TYP, BE REMOVED AND CUTTER BEDDED PROTECTION TO REMAIN; 18" DBIL METER PROTECTION RELOCATED IN CLEAN ROCK FENCE CROWN 20' DIA. SEPTEMBER 21, 2015 - ° WENRY STREET 0IC ~a JTIO , EROSION j COil'6'ROI, AND TREE -1° II PROTECTION/REMOVAL PLAN <E> OARACE <F> 102 IF' I"~T, RETAINING WALL AT LnSC OF FELICE D' FI i 4lP U! B'^ 5 + +TPI 101 TW 104 a PROPERTY LINE TW 105 of ;O°WOSED LANDSCAPE 7 498 RAISED BEU OR IITF. OR AR<l _ i r 104 j N CORAL IVE CRAVE[ , ° EKSE'(INO a_ I' _v SPACE <P7 ~03 <P) 12" RT I 105 <V> 1 I 101.$6 \ \ RETAINING WALLI BIKE COVtRID BIKE AT BASE OF FENCE STORAF°` PARKING RKING ~TnLd;F ~ y- 48 RAiS~D BED TV] LOS ' l~ -STRIP DRAIN ` WATER RATIO SEVIrR STORM DRAIN TO STREET f < 104.1' TS 106.16 + 10 APPLE FLAT ROOF <P7 DECORATIVE G CARPORT I'll fit 3 rR GRAVEL WITH POT '(ED 10625 PARKING SPACES - T y PLANTS FOR LANDSCAPE TW 105 + LANDSCAPE PARKING RGQ ' AREA CONCRETE ° (D DEER FENCE WALK AND STEPS <P7104 <P) 500 SF / <E> RESIDENCE RESIDENCEFF / DEER I i!u FF105,96 <E, APPLE 106,75 <E> 104 ~a. ~ MIN SE ACK (P) COO'CRE T DRIVEWAY LEO Ffl REVISION DATE: EIGHT 41' ' ~ 111 l'i !;1 C0 i )UR MAJOR ~ a 17, 106 105.891<E7 <P7 6 t$TERIOR i. <P7IOS, . ~a CO 'OUR MINOR FIKTOTAL PlTOIkR MAJOR - DRAWN BY: LANDSCAPE BUFFER CO OUR MINOR kAE TW TOP OF WALL TS TOP OF STEP LE: BS BOTTOM OF STEP SCALE: 0 \ \ r _.u 2036 I'=4'-O' <E> MAPLE LANDSCAPE <P) . AREA tO6 7E71GS w LANDSCAPE C4PATHTF LANDSCAPE - a w LANDSCAPE / ` •I;IIEPd ✓\~~/~i V v ~T AREA AREA BUFFER ELECIR1Cfl kt? IUS.StK PROPRiv LINE <E> 106 F9ETER <F> CURB CAT TO BE REMOVED AND RELOCATED yAµ SEPTEMBER 21, 2015 RELOCATED to CURB CUT HENRY STREET <F> GARAGE 12 P.1'. RETAININO WALL AT PAP" OF FENCE DI; ER FlPROPERTY LINE III SiID LUTU f 1A;I;°IA <Pa 9E,; RAISED f!i 1) ~ GRA'll• CSI'; - _ DLCORATP, h GRAVEL OATES 12" LIAM AT MET 00 LAIlDSUPA SIPPLY OR EQUAL 6POINEN NENIIGCKTO ULPLANWITH TINCAREIABS RETAIP9N0 VAll COVERED PIKE STORn(;1 AT BASE OFFENCF Pf' PARKING LOCKER ~ r;ikUDEDRIPiRRISAI~ONTDAtLOTNER <P)4k8RAISED BED ! Pl'IR.ARM3310BFORONATOITUR€VEA61E L FUTURE f P> WNW AND FUTURE BACK GARDEN. 1ANDSCAPEDAREA CONCRETE -11-1--1--i PATIO w i APPLE FIAT ROOF DEGORAEIVE c CARPORT 101T11 3 GRAVEL WITH POTTED I PARKING SPACES EP FUTURE PLANTS FOR LANDSCAPE ' LANW,APEDAR(; PARKING REQ. r:ONCRETE DEER PENCE S WALK APLD STEPS FUTURE LAMMED AREA 500 SE \1 <E) RESIDENCE RESIDEIICF FF / P7 DEER PkNul FE 105,46 <E) APPLE 106.73 Ifif 6Y CtON5 1 CAL 10 hlrf!A IUD 4 DIFLORA, 0 N 9GAl ~ KABFLIAURANUIMJuSf f SCAR&ATESf E.R IGA1 REVISION DATE: DRIVEWAY AY AC m~. --I-ABEHACRANDIFLORR,39AL l HAVANDOIA63",,',IGAL fy- j , `d L°NICA! ,~S I 'IIIOII IE1,ICAl dl ~,~r;E1'I:1N , It DRAWN BY; ~ l 140PUORBIA RUBY 01.01d, I CAL L E (~AS~ 100 I sul , i LOVE, I CAL RAF PPARROTIA P@R31GA, 8-~' NULT( r. L is COtP) -1'1~I10 I'I'SNIN€',iOAI NOMORBIAROBY610d,ICA1 fib AO SCALE: 00" 11Kf7 ° P~ 3.0REN TE81ACEA, I CAL ~A 1 V.4K ,1 =4 0' ,r A( <E) MAPLE -1-ABENAORANDIFLOPA, CAL AO hLRVANDUTACR4SSO,iCAl~°-~ Y CONCRETE a ~V (r P I TPCTf,O&A i CAL AS ,E S PATH 3 RiVr.S VAROAR VAI IEY, 2 OA[ FR AO ~f \Is FLECTRICAL BV. OVI tll;l 11RU8Y6lOW,iCAE 11 9FiLR I„ PROPERTY LINE <E ) ELLCTRICAL ° IF III;IRb II''~ q ~ i7l 7 ,I 911fUk IIU,A t),lf, 'II I ~I:-1 Ir ~I l,l';li I1!'I METER n IIIAUL !'11p ! U!;;' El IP~fui~V i nl~ 1',lllll <E> CURD CUT TO d BE REMOVED AND RELOCATED RELOCATED 18' CURB COT „EPf 21, 20I5 0FTIRY STREET g~ ggq° ggy u~ l 91B" 9'-8° ry ~ NENBRINEROOF w RIB KYO000 SIIEMNO <P) BIKE STORAGE LOCKER (P> COVERED BIKE PARKING BIKE STORAGE LOCKER STEEL BEA4 N S° T S' M 8!Po" <P) PLAT ROOF CARPORT STEEL POSTS WITH B PARKING SPACES REVISION DATE; `r ! f DRAWN BY: KAE ~AR{URT STAB fllilS ORA9E i _ e 0' V BY it, SCALE: TNIORENSUE; TYP. VARIES 314- RASE a iPICNE~ SlA9~ 4 TYP, CARPORT ELEVATION FOAL IIAI7 I" m 2'-0" _ t 26361" P-O" ems' 9 CARPORT PLAN VIEW SCAIE 11x11 I" = 4'-0" SEPTEMBER 21, 2015 24x361" W 2'-0" k 4 C, RP RT PLAN 1 I f j STANDING SEAM ROOF 12' EAVE5 N W EAVES ON BUMPOU7 10112 TRUSSED ROOF i 2112 S71Gk-FRAMED ROOF 2x6 FASCIA CONTINUOUS GUTTER u I ~ sr j j I 3'6" PLATE HEIGHT THROUGHOUT - i `rd ' I 6x6 CEDAR PORCH POSTS GA5 FP VENT MST CONCRETE PORCH NORTH $LAD STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF ® E 1i# FELT III IWIIII 1111 2 RS SIDING 1x22 SATTO BATTONS X12 "OG - -BIRDBL06KWIVENT U1 d Kp ® ~1 ~ U9 EXPOSED SOFIT a" U) m 1x3 WINDOkWOOR CASINGS AND Ale PLYWOOD CORNER BOARDS t~ MANUFACTURED TRUSS ROOF FOAM PINE SEAL- CONTINUOUS GUTTER -9 0 IL SOUTH CEILING BOARD I TYVEK DRAIN6VRAP 216 FASCIA BOARD R-38 HD BATT INSULATION R-21 BATT INSULATION a" ROUGNSAWN BRCK€NRIDGE Wf 1N2 BATTONS @ 12" Ot. u~ tn 2x6 DF #21B id2" DRYLVALL J BOLTS @ 4' OX, P.T. PLATE OVERHANGS FOOTING I" Q a~ d v FOAM SILL SEAL ta- 1 -6 2 6 ° e METAL FLASHING ( A ~a fl iSHGRADE u- z CONCRETE FOOTING m #3 REBAR @ 16" 04 1S FOAM I e LANDSCAPE FABRIC <0 #4 REBAR IN FOOTING 3" PERF PIPE 11- 1 1 VAPOR BARRIER \-WASHED DRAIN ROCK COMPACTED 1" GRAVEL BASF 2 DETAIL ~ 1 015 EAST NTS ELEVATIONS i t CE? OACdAGE _ yy IC" P.T. REIAIPdiMG~s. 6~iIL TPA"IOFfENCE DEER FENCE PROPERTY MIE n <P3 4X8 RINSED PEA ; GR, II -OR MOLE DRIP %ONE EGO GRAVEL O PO a_ D ~~ATIdE IA P>,R P I~--~, RE , AT E TA OF FE BIKE COVERED BIKE BIKE STORAGE PARKING STORAGE ST 08 RAISED BED El ! _ T6V~ P,O F.a AT TO f \ RPBN R _ j CONCRETE ~ - t PATIO tj k ,r TALDRIP ZONE <Ey J SLEEVE fl S• APPLE m- i FIAT ROOF / DECORATIVE 0 BGQ CARPORT WITH 3 GRAVEL WITH POTTED EP PARKING SPACES ~ PLANTS FOR LANDSCAPE ~ IRRIGRTItsHLEGE,ND ; J PARKIN REQ. ~J ,i MRI~IIIHE-~ SCHEDULE 40PYC I T ( _TE r DEER FENCE - WALK ,,:4STEPS , n LATERAL LINE SCNEDdPLE 90 PVC " u P,0,0, P014NIT OF _T'. I II 1 R T NHNTERPROCCOISTROLIER RESIDENCE FF BIRD IPll6NE DRIP CONHR06 ZONE KIT ' ESI NC SF / GOER FENCE M PICE RAW C 2075PRFI <E> APPLE AU6,7y C) "HUT O F VALVE ®~--a---s-tr- ORPdA,MENIAIDRIP ZOE CONCRETE I K RENCED PRESSURE BACKFLOW PREVELITER REVISION DATE: K a. 6 GP:: q DRIVEWAY k7 0 ~ ~ RPBV UHKIQSMODEl~t70SS4 > CP> STONE P"IT III o ZONE NUMBDRIUSE TYPE DRAWN BY: aC SLEEVE - 3" '4303A WIIER PIPE KAI. XB IOPC EMITTERS [ COVERED SCALE. PORCH W17l'=9' Xr NOTES k t <E> MAPLE RAMBIRD LANDSCAPE DRIPLINE XF SERIES BLMNK tK~ ~ RAINBIRD LANDSCAPE DRIPLIME XQ DISTRIBUTION ~°y ~~y> ~ TUBtMG <P) _ RAMBIRD LANDSCAPE XF INSERT FITTINGS m _ U CRETE - :RAINBIRD LANDSCAPE HERI-BUG IOPC EMITTERS <1.0 GPH> a PA CH N \ K' RIEEVE IRO PSI AS PROVIDED BY CITY OF ASHLAND. PRV TO D 7 _ I > Xt REDUCE PRESSURETO EOPSI. VERIFY fRESSPREAT P.O.C. LOX I o ®R S BEFORE INSTALLATIO0. PROPERTY LINE LOCATIONS OF PAAINLINE, LATERALS, AND VALVES ARE DIAORANATIC ONLY AND SHOULD BE LOCATED THESE IN ~ ~ PLANTING AREAS WHERE FEASIBLE, DO NOT LOCATE L VALVE BOXES UN EP DPIPLIN OF TREES WHERE FEA3IBI. <E> CURB CUT TO 1 BE REMOVED AND RELOCATED NOVFfi BER 3, 4013' RELOCATED 13,CURB6UT ~e< IENRY STREET B j Si~ ~ r :t 1 , IE Tax Lugss AR _ P d Bona T-4 - -41 Add- C4a Vie' rx;~ s A m CRY Zip No at i try tl wolidth '00 spt, In I,, i P( ait, ~szr r~3rft f ~i~uent bter~a~ ~arslo rrtn to g~ Owl nrot ~n t x In ant ' z °y Ire r, t ;nq Witt in reugn thereon being Pngvtr to N, j 7,•a% t arse w€ w tp f feed nd Ur, " tho r 041ploto apppt'gpon and e t n to rag r is r, propo `ty t°A~e r Date R TV Hil1 CAP' a ~ ( CITY F A File Checklist ASHLAND Planning Action No. Planner: Related Planning Action Files: TYPE I ACTIONS: TYPE II ACTIONS: Please verify the following documents are included in the file: Pre-Application Materials ❑ Pre-Application Materials Applicant's Submittals ❑ Applicant's Submittals Public Notice / Notice of Mailing / Mailing List / ❑ Public Hearing Notice / Notice of Mailing / Map / Affidavit of Mailing Mailing List / Map / Affidavit of Mailing Advisory Commission Recommendation(s) ❑ Public Input / Correspondence 11 Public Input / Correspondence ❑ Staff Report / Exhibits ❑ Notice of Decision / Staff Findings / Mailing List ❑ Advisory Commission Recommendation(s) / Meeting Minutes ❑ Planning Commission Minutes I ❑ Notice of Decision / Signed Findings / Mailing List Please verify the following actions have been completed: ,l Duplicate items have been removed. Documents that do not belong in the final record have been removed. 171 Items have been organized in reverse chronological order. Permit has been closed out in Eden. Was this Planning Action Appealed? ❑ NO Local Appeal Deadline: ❑ YES (Complete Backside of Form) Planner's Signature Date TO BE COMPLETED BY PLANNING SECRETARY: Are there any map changes? ❑ YES ❑ NO Has Engineering been notified? ❑ YES ❑ NO (New Subdivisions) File has been scanned into LaserFiche? ❑ YES ❑ NO PDF has been placed in PA file on the G: drive? ❑ YES ❑ NO I. r Secretary's Signature Date