HomeMy WebLinkAboutMorton_0_PA-2015-01987
CITY F
ASHLAND
I
December 21, 2015
Notice of Final Decision i!
I
f
On December 21, 2015, the Community Development Director approved the request for the following:
Planning Action: 2015-01987
Subject Property: 0 Morton Street
Applicant: Charlie Hamilton/Suncrest Homes
Description: A request for a Physical and Environmental Constraints Review permit
and Variance to lot coverage in order to construct a single family residence. The proposed
building footprint may impact trees on the site. However, no tree removals are requested.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low Density Residential; ZONING: RR-.5;
ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 lE 16AC; TAX LOTS: 442.
The Community Development Director's decision becomes final and is effective on the 121h 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 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: 541488-5305
1
5 in urn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 \
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900
www.ashland.or.us _ \ J
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 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.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel: 541488-5305
51 Winbum Way Fax: 541-552-2050
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900
www.ashland.or.us
f;
ASHLAND PLANNING DIVISION
i
FINDINGS & ORDERS
PLANNING ACTION: PA-2015-01987
SUBJECT PROPERTY: 0 Morton Street
OWNER/APPLICANT: Charlie Hamilton/Suncrest Homes
DESCRIPTION: A request for a Physical and Environmental Constraints Review
permit and Variance to lot coverage in order to construct a single family residence. The
proposed building footprint may impact trees on the site. However, no tree removals are
requested.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low Density Residential; ZONING: RR-.5;
ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 lE 16AC; TAX LOTS: 442. f
SUBMITTAL DATE: October 19, 2015
DEEMED COMPLETE DATE: October 23, 2015
STAFF APPROVAL DATE: December 21, 2015
APPEAL DEADLINE (4:30 P.M.) January 4, 2016
FINAL DECISION DATE: January 4, 2016
APPROVAL EXPIRATION DATE: July 5, 2017
DECISION
This application pertains to tax lot 442 in the 39 lE AC442 Assessor's Map, which is part of the Park
Estates II Subdivision. The subject property is located on the northwest side of Morton Street, near the
intersection with Ashland Loop Road. Though the subject property is only 10,339 square feet, or,
approximately .24 acres, the property is within the RR-.5 zoning district which has a half acre
minimum lot size. The lot has hillside slopes in excess of 25%, which slope southeast toward Morton
Street.
Currently there are no structures on the property. There is an existing curb cut on the western street
frontage of the property. Several trees exist on site, three ponderosa pines (Pinus pondersa), a Douglas-
fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) and a Pacific madrone (arbutus menziesii). The Ponderosa pines are
required to be preserved as part of the original subdivision approval. The madrone tree will be
preserved as a street tree. Another natural feature is a large granite boulder near the property line with
879 Morton Street.
The application involves a request for the following permits/reviews: 1) a Physical and Environmental
Constraints Review to construct the proposed 1,856 square foot residence; and 2) a Variance to lot
coverage requirements in order to develop the property as proposed.
The intent of the Physical and Environmental Constraints Overlay (18.3.10) is for appropriate
development on hillside lands that will protect the aesthetic and natural qualities of the land while
protecting adjacent properties from erosion, sedimentation and slope failure. In Staff's review, the
applicant's proposal has addressed potential negative outcomes on the impact area and has
appropriately minimized the adverse impact.
PA #2015-01987
0 Morton Streer/zgh
Page 1
i
The materials provided in the application note all grading, retaining wall design, drainage and erosion
control plans have been reviewed and approved by a geotechnical expert. A stamped geotechnical
report is accompanied in the application. The report states the property is suitable for development of
the proposed single family residence. The application asserts the building foundation will be
engineered and that a geotechnical expert will provide periodic inspections to verify development
requirements are met and the integrity of the hillside is not compromised. Furthermore, the applicant
lists steps the project team will take to ensure measures to mitigate potential hazards are implemented.
The proposed development and its impact on the surrounding area environment have been considered
as evident in the application. Through the placement of the structure, accompanied geotechnical report
and tree protection plan, Staff feels the applicant has made reasonable steps to reduce potential
negative impacts on the environment. The applicant's assert that no irreversible adverse impacts to the
environment will occur.
The applicant's proposal occurs on lands that have a buildable area with hillside lands of less than 35-
percent. The building footprint complies with all setbacks for the zone. In addition the footprint does
not encroach into a public utility easement on the south side of the property. Trees listed as being
preserved in the landscape management plan of the original subdivision are to be protected and
retained as part of this application. There is one exposed cut associated with the development, located
near the uphill side of the driveway. The applicant states the cut will be retained with "stacked block
landscape retaining walls". The site plan identifies this wall was being three-feet tall. However, the
application narrative states this wall will be seven-feet tall. A condition has been added below to
ensure that the retaining wall is terraced in compliance with the hillside design standards. The
application also states the terraced areas will be vegetated with ornamental plants and seeded with
native plant mixture.
An arborist report and tree inventory is included in the application. The report details prescriptions for
tree protection during site construction. The applicant explains all conifer trees near the residence will
be preserved. The application mentions several small madrone and oak trees that have resprouted from
a past removal. Though these trees will be removed because of their location within the building
footprint, they are not regulated by the Physical and Environmental constraints overlay because they
are less than six inches in diameter.
The Tree Commission reviewed the application during the November 5, 2015 regular meeting. The
commission approved the plans as submitted and recommended all prescriptions by the project arborist
be followed. A condition has been added below to this affect.
The proposed residence is primarily a single level building with a below-grade garage. From Morton
Street, the east elevation and downhill side of the building, the structure appears to be two stories. The
height of this elevation is approximately 17 feet from natural grade. The second, higher level roof is
setback over eleven feet from the front fagade and is 19 feet tall from natural grade. No elevation of the
building is greater than 35 feet above natural grade. All horizontal building planes are less than 36 feet
in length. Furthermore, the design incorporates roof forms and lines that are broken into smaller,
irregular series. The design is found to comply with the required building design standards for hillside
developments.
PA #2015-01987
0 Morton Street/zgh
Page 2
{
To meet development standards for Wildfire lands, the applicant asserts all standards will be complied
with, including tree pruning below roof levels, maintenance of grass and removal of small diameter
ladder fuels. Furthermore, the structure has a metal roof that is stated to be fire proof.
A component of the application is a Variance to lot coverage maximums. The application argues, "The
surrounding properties, all constructed under permit with the City of Ashland provide the baseline for
the `maximum development' permitted by ordinance." A spreadsheet is included in the application
which explains the square footage of adjacent properties and their associated lot coverage calculations.
A majority of the neighboring lots exceed lot coverage for the RR-.5 zoning district. The applicant
asserts this is a justifiable reason to allow the proposal a Variance to lot coverage requirements.
Further, the applicant states their comparatively smaller lot coverage, "translates to significantly less
irreversible site disturbance" when compared to other properties in the same impact area.
The applicant has provided information explaining why the Land Use Ordinance does not account for a
special circumstance of the subject property. In this case, the applicable zone is RR-.5, which has 20-
percent lot coverage maximum. The subject lot is approximately 10,339 square feet. Under the RR-.5
zoning standards, this would mean approximately 2,068 square feet could be covered with impervious
surfaces. As proposed, the development will cover 2,382 square feet, or, about 3-percent over the
allowable maximum. The applicant states the difference will be 9-percent over the allowable, which is
a different calculation than what Staff calculated. Either way, the increase in lot coverage seems
reasonable for the unique situation.
Through information provided by the applicant, Staff has determined the applicant has created a design
that is reasonably the minimum necessary to allow the property to be developed. For no foreseeable
reason is the applicant's proposal creating a more significant negative impact on the area's natural
resources or adjacent land uses. Lastly, the requested Variance does not seem to be self-imposed as the
applicant and property owner were not involved in the original approval of the subdivision. If so, it
seems that a performance standard lot coverage would have been applied for because of the small lots
in the development.
There were no public comments received during the notice period.
The approval criteria for a Physical & Environmental Constraints Review Permit are detailed in
AMC 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 approval criteria for a Variance are detailed in AMC 18.5.5.050 as follows:
1. The variance is necessary because the subject code provision does not account for special or unique
physical circumstances of the subject site, such as topography, natural features, adjacent
c,
PA #2015-01987
0 Morton Street/zgh
Page 3
t
development, or similar circumstances. A legal lot determination may be sufficient evidence of a
hardship for purposes of approving a variance.
2. The variance is the minimum necessary to address the special or unique physical circumstances
related to the subject site.
3. The proposal's benefits will be greater than any negative impacts on the development of the
adjacent uses and will further the purpose and intent of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan
of the City.
4. The need for the variance is not self-imposed by the applicant or property owner. For example, the
variance request does not arise as result of a property line adjustment or land division approval
previously granted to the applicant.
In staff s assessment, the proposal has been carefully thought out to minimize the disturbance of the
hillside lands. Based on the material submitted, the application with the attached conditions complies
with all applicable City ordinances. Therefore, Planning Action #2015-01987 is approved with the
following conditions. If any one or more of the following conditions are found to be invalid for any
reason whatsoever, then Planning Action #2015-01987 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 applicant follows all recommendations described in the report by Canopy, LLC. The
project arborist should inspect the site during excavation to ensure tree protection measures are
complied with.
3) That before building permits are issued, specifications are submitted detailing the height of the
proposed retaining wall which shall comply with the standards set forth in the Physical and
Environmental Constraints ordinance (18.3.10).
4) That the plans submitted for the building permit shall be in substantial conformance with those
approved as part of this application. If the plans submitted for the building permit are not in
substantial conformance with those approved as part of this application, an application to
modify the PSO Modification and Physical and Environmental Constraints Permit approval
shall be submitted and approved prior to issuance of a building permit.
5) That a preconstruction conference to review the requirements of the Hillside Development
Permit shall be held prior to site work or the issuance of a building or excavation permit,
whichever action occurs first. The conference shall include the Ashland Planning, Building,
Engineering and Fire Departments; the project engineer; project geotechnical experts
(Marquess and Associates, LLC); landscape professional; arborist (Christopher John); and
general contractor. The applicant or applicants' representative shall contact the Ashland
Planning Department to schedule the preconstruction conference.
6) That temporary erosion control measures be maintained on-site during site preparation. Such
methodologies to include, but no be limited to, hay bales, silt fencing or functional equivalent.
7) That a Verification Permit shall be applied for and approved by the Ashland Planning Division
prior to tree removal, site work or storage of materials. Trees on site shall be identified by
number, those to be removed marked with flagging tape, and access to the site provided. The
Verification Permit is to inspect the identification of the trees 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 the Tree Ordinance.
PA #2015-01987
0 Morton Streebzgh
Page 4
Replacement trees to mitigate the trees removed shall be planted, inspected and approved by
the Staff Advisor within one year of the removal.
8) That the tree protection and temporary erosion control measures (i.e. silt fencing, bale barriers,
etc.) 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 erosion
control measures shall be installed as identified in the Applied Geotechnical Engineering report
revised June 3, 2015. The tree protection and temporary erosion control measures shall be
inspected and approved by the Ashland Planning Department prior to site work, storage of
materials, the issuance of an excavation permit, and/or the issuance of a building permit.
9) That building permit submittals shall include:
a. Identification of all easements, including public and private utility easements, mutual
access easements, public pedestrian access easements, and fire apparatus access
easements.
b. Solar setback calculations demonstrating that all new construction complies with the
applicable Solar Setback Standard in the formula [(Height - 6 or 16)/(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.
c. Lot coverage calculations including all building footprints, driveways, parking, and
circulation areas.
d. 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.
10) That a drainage plan for the project be constructed in accordance with the plans approved by
the Engineering and Planning Division.
11) Prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy the applicant shall submit a written report from the
project geo-technical engineer indicating required erosion control and slope stability measures
have been installed per approved plans.
12) That a final storm drainage plan for the driveway shall be provided for the review and approval
of the Ashland Building, Planning and Engineering Divisions prior to the issuance of an
excavation permit or commencement of any site work. 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 18.3.10.090.C
13) A final erosion control plan shall be provided for the review and approval of the Planning,
Building and Engineering Divisions prior to the issuance of an excavation permit or
commencement of any site work. Any temporary erosion control measures (i.e. silt fence or
bale barriers) shall be installed according to the approved plan prior to any site work, storage of
materials, or issuance of an excavation or building permit. Erosion control measures shall
consistent with the recommendations of Applied Geotechnical Engineering, and shall be
inspected and approved by the Staff Advisor prior to site work, storage of materials, the
issuance of an excavation or building permit. The landscaping and irrigation for re-vegetation
PA #2015-01987
0 Morton StreeVzgh
Page 5
of cut/fill slopes and erosion control shall be installed in accordance with the approved plan
prior to final sign-off on the driveaway. Vegetation shall be installed in such a manner as to be
substantially established within one year of installation.
14) A written verification from the project geotechnical expert addressing the consistency of the
permit submittals with the geotechnical report recommendations (e.g. grading plan, storm
drainage plan, foundation plan, etc.) shall be submitted with the excavation or building permit
and prior to any site work.
15) That the project's geotechnical expert shall inspect the site according to the inspection schedule
of the engineering geology report by Applied Geotechnical Engineering. Prior to issuance of
certificate of occupancy, the project's 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 were conducted by the project geotechnical
expert periodically throughout the project.
16) That all measures installed for the purposes of long-term erosion control, including but not
limited to vegetative cover, rock walls, retaining walls and landscaping shall be maintained in
perpetuity on all areas in accordance with AMC 18.3.10.090.B.7.a.
17) The requirements of the Ashland Fire Department, including: fire hydrant distance and
clearance; fire flow; addressing; fire apparatus access and turn-around; firefighter access
pathways; Fire Department work area; fuel break; non-combustible roofing materials; and an
approved Fire Prevention and Control Plan for Wildfire Lands shall be complied with prior to
issuance of permits or the use of combustible materials, whichever applicable. Fire Department
requirements shall be included on the engineered construction documents. ote: If this
project takes place during fire season restrictions and is on lands protected by the Oregon
Department of Forestry or within 118 of a mile of ODF protected lands, applicant should check
ODF restrictions at www. swofire. com or call (541) 664.3328).
C Z. 2 Zo sue'
Al Moln , Director Date
Communi Development Department
PA #2015-01987
0 Morton Street/zgh
Page 6
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING
I
F
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 December 21, 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 #2015-01987, 0 Morton Street.
&W age
Sign ure of Employee
Documentl 12/2112015
PA-2015-01987 391 E16AC 416 PA-2015-01987 391 E16AC 420 PA-2015-01987 391 E16AC 421
BAILEY MAUS CONNER JUDY F TRUSTEE DAWSON WILLIAM G TRUSTEE
811 MORTON ST 880 MORTON ST 6401 NW 54TH WAY
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 GAINESVILLE, FL 32653
PA-2015-01987 391 E16AC 411 PA-2015-01987 391 E16AC 440 PA-2015-01987 391 E16AC 443
DE LAMATER ANNE DUGGAN PATRICIA A FERGUSON JOHN PHILIP
PO BOX 282 925 MORTON ST 209 DESERT VIEW ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 LAS VEGAS, NV 89107
PA-2015-01987 391 E16AC 400 PA-2015-01987 391 E16AC 437 PA-2015-01987 391 E16AC 419
FISCHER GUERIN A TRUSTEE GATES WILLIAM H ET AL KNOROSKI JOHN J TRUSTEE
836 MORTON ST 1015 MORTON ST 864 MORTON ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-2015-01987 391 E16AC 439 PA-2015-01987 391 E16AC 436 PA-2015-01987 391 E16AC 438
LEE BRIAN LINDSEY ROBERT L/MARA K MAHER JOHN M/AMY L
973 MORTON ST 1023 MORTON ST 999 MORTON ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-2015-01987 391 E16AC 434 PA-2015-01987 391 E16AC 435 PA-2015-01987 391 E16BD 600
MARX DOLORES C MARX DOLORES C MCLAUGHLIN KEMP J/MICHELE
1035 MORTON ST 1035 MORTON ST GUIDOTI
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 980 MORTON ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-2015-01987 391 E16AC 444 PA-2015-01987 391 E16BD 700 PA-2015-01987 391 E16AC 442
MOORE MICHAEL PATRIDGE WILLIAM C/BARBARA J STEELE SAMANTHA
827 MORTON ST 950 MORTON ST 1020 WILDWOOD WAY
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-2015-01987 391 E16AC 441 PA-2015-01987 391 E16AC 418
STOCKING HOLLYMON THOMAS MICHAEL DORSEY 0 Morton
1421 BRUCE AVE TRUSTEE 12/21/2015 NOD
GLENDALE, CA 91202 828 WATERLINE RD 23
ASHLAND, OR 97520
DESIGN RESIDENTIAL MARQUESS & ASSOCIATES
PO BOX 8062 ATTN: ERIC SWANSON
MEDFORD, OR 97501 1120 E. JACKSON ST.
MEDFORD, OR 97504
CHARLIE HAMILTON
328 TALENT AVE
TALENT, OR 97540
1`
Planning Department, 51 Winbu o Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520 I Y >F
541-488-5305 Fax: 541-552-2050 www.ashland.or.us TTY: 1-800-735-2900
AND
NOTICE OF APPLICATION
PLANNING ACTION: 2015-01987
SUBJECT PROPERTY: 0 Morton
OWNER/APPLICANT: Charlie Hamilton/Suncrest Homes
DESCRIPTION: A request for a Physical and Environmental Constraints Review permit and Variance to lot
coverage in order to construct a single family residence. The proposed building footprint may impact trees on the
site. However, no tree removals are requested. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low Density
Residential; ZONING: RR-.5; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 391 E 16AC; TAX LOTS: 442.
NOTE: The Ashland Tree Commission will also review this Planning Action on Thursday, December 3, 2015 at 6:00 PM in the
Community Development and Engineering Services building (Siskiyou Room), located at 51 Winburn Way.
NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: November 20, 2015
DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION OF WRITTEN COMMENTS: December 4, 2015
SUBJECT PROPERTY
M
39 1E 16AC 442
PA-2015-01987 r-
z
~ M \
Q
1:952 clrv oc
1 inch = 79 feet ASHLAND
41. plnp is .<hemaUC Ony.nd bean nowamnly ofat<ura<y.
9 :o » td to Frt s An lealun., alrv<Nns, lac Niue...... oI-d..y l..W..
should be lnd,,endenlh, f ld-Medfor eshfance snd/orloeallon.
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.
OCY
PHYSICAL & ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTI. 4TS
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.
VARIANCE
18.5.5.050 Approval Criteria
1. The variance is necessary because the subject code provision does not account for special or unique physical circumstances of
the subject site, such as topography, natural features, adjacent development, or similar circumstances. A legal lot determination
may be sufficient evidence of a hardship for purposes of approving a variance.
2. The variance is the minimum necessary to address the special or unique physical circumstances related to the subject site.
3. The proposal's benefits will be greater than any negative impacts on the development of the adjacent uses and will further the
purpose and intent of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan of the City.
4. The need for the variance is not self-imposed by the applicant or property owner. For example, the variance request does not
arise as result of a property line adjustment or land division approval previously granted to the applicant.
GAcomm-deOplanningTianning Actions\Noticing Folder\?vIailed Notices R Signs\201STA-2015-01987.docx
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 November 20, 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 j
i
`s
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 #2015-01987, 0 Morton.
V 9~aw
boin f .
Sig ture of Employee
Documentl 11/19/2015
PA-2015-01987 391 E16AC 416 PA-2015-01987 391 E16AC 420 PA-2015-01987 391E I 6AC 421
BAILEY MAUS CONNER JUDY F TRUSTEE DAWSON WILLIAM G TRUSTEE
811 MORTON ST 880 MORTON ST 6401 NW 54TH WAY
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 GAINESVILLE, FL 32653
PA-2015-01987 391 E16AC 411 PA-2015-01987 391 E16AC 440 PA-2015-01987 391 E16AC 443
DE LAMATER ANNE DUGGAN PATRICIA A FERGUSON JOHN PHILIP
PO BOX 282 925 MORTON ST 209 DESERT VIEW ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 LAS VEGAS, NV 89107
PA-2015-01987 391 E16AC 400 PA-2015-01987 391 E16AC 437 PA-2015-01987 391 E16AC 419
FISCHER GUERIN A TRUSTEE GATES WILLIAM H ET AL KNOROSKI JOHN J TRUSTEE
836 MORTON ST 1015 MORTON ST 864 MORTON ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-2015-01987 391 E16AC 439 PA-2015-01987 391 E16AC 436 PA-2015-01987 391 El6AC 438
LEE BRIAN LINDSEY ROBERT L/MARA K MAHER JOHN M/AMY L
973 MORTON ST 1023 MORTON ST 999 MORTON ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520
'PA-2015-01987 391 E16AC 434 PA-2015-01987 391 E16AC 435 PA-2015-01987 391 El6BD 600
MARX DOLORES C MARX DOLORES C MCLAUGHLIN KEMP J/MICHELE j
1035 MORTON ST 1035 MORTON ST 1 GUIDOTI
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 980 MORTON ST
'ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-2015-01987 391 E16AC 444 PA-2015-01987 391 El 613D 700 PA-2015-01987 391 E16AC 442
MOORE MICHAEL PATRIDGE WILLIAM C/BARBARA J 'STEELE SAMANTHA
827 MORTON ST 950 MORTON ST 1020 WILDWOOD WAY
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-2015-01987 391 El 6AC 441 PA-2015-01987 391 E16AC 418
STOCKING HOLLYMON THOMAS MICHAEL DORSEY 0 Morton
1421 BRUCE AVE TRUSTEE ; ! ,11/20/2015
GLENDALE, CA 91202 828 WATERLINE RD
23
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-2015-01987 PA-2015-01987
DESIGN RESIDENTIAL MARQUESS & ASSOCIATES
PO BOX 8062 ATTN: ERIC SWANSON
MEDFORD, OR 97501 1120 E. JACKSON ST.
MEDFORD, OR 97504
PA-2015-01987
CHARLIE HAMILTON
328 TALENT AVE
TALENT, OR 97540
i
y
•
a
z
k
_
712
2121
2122
a1.
ism
J
414
'433 417
4315
, r
a,
ys
1411 402
~
w 444
437 o _,3
40 AS
s
AD 436
440 4"
419
J
419
,i 410
4M
42 421
_i
4
4
425
f
I: <
424
k
S
t=
4n
k
Q
fg$
Y
FINDINGS OF FACT
PHYSICAL AND ENVIONRMENTAL CONSTRAINTS REVIEW PERMIT
FOR
DEVELOPMENT OF A PROPERTY WITH HILLSIDE LAND
SUBJECT PROPERTY
0 Morton Street
39 1E 16AC #442
PROPERTY OWNER
Samantha Steele
Charlie Hamilton
APPLICANT
Charlie Hamilton
Suncrest Homes
i
Page 1 of 14
Subject Property
Address: 0 Morton Street
Map & Tax Lots: 39 IE 16AC #442
Property Owner: Samantha Steele
1020 Wildwood Way
Ashland, OR 97520
Applicant: Charlie Hamilton
Suncrest Homes
328 Talent Ave.
Talent, OR 97535
Geotechnical Expert: Marquess & Associates
Rick Swanson
1120 E Jackson, Medford OR 97504
Medford, OR 97501
Comprehensive Plan Designation: Rural Residential
Zoning: RR-.5
Lot Area: 10,326.6 /.237 ac.
Request:
Request for Physical and Environmental Constraints Review Permit for the construction of a new
single family residential home on land that has more than 25 percent slopes. The request includes
a Variance request to exceed the maximum permitted lot coverage of 20 percent in the zone.
Property Background:
The subject property is located on the north side of Morton Street, uphill from the intersection of
Waterline Road. The property is part of the Park Estates II Subdivision, a Performance Standards
Subdivision, created in 1986 (PA84-071). Morton Street is improved with curb and gutter along
the frontage of the parcel. The subject property is zoned Rural
Residential (RR-.5). All of the properties in the vicinity are also
zoned RR-.5. The adjacent properties are occupied by single family
homes and associated accessory structures.
The property is 10,326 square feet in area and is vacant of structures.
I
Page 2 of 14
The lot slopes uphill away from the street. The average slope of the property is between 25 - 28
percent. The area of proposed development is in areas of the property where the slope ranges
from 26 to 33 percent. For the purposes of the solar setback calculations, the lot is subject to
solar setback standard A and has a 14.5 percent slope uphill to the north.
There are five trees on the site. There are three larger stature Ponderosa Pines (Pines ponderosa)
along the north property line that were required to be preserved as part of the subdivision. These
trees measure 22-inches, 18-inches, and 13-inches in diameter at breast height (DBH). The two
largest trees are moderately healthy, the smaller tree is in moderate-poor health. There is also a
small, 5-inch DBH Doulas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) close the proposed residence which will
be removed. It is less than the regulated DBH. There is a 12-inch DBH Madrone (Arbutus
menziesii) in the front yard setback near the street that will be preserved as part of the site
development and will be utilized as the street tree. In addition, there are a number of stump
sprouted madrone and oak clumps in the middle of the buildable area. These stumps appear to
have been created around the time the lot was being marketed for sale in the 1980s but.then after
30 years, have grown multi-stemmed trees.
Project Proposal:
The request is to construct a new single family residential home on the vacant lot located
between 879 and 843 Morton Street (tl #442). The site is one of the last vacant lots in the Park
Estates II Subdivision.
The proposed residence is a 1,856 square foot single story structure cut into the hillside with a
498 square foot side-loading garage in the basement level. The driveway access is proposed to
utilize the existing driveway curbcut. The subject property has slopes of more than 25 percent
and is therefore subject to the Physical and Environmental Constraints section of the Ashland
Unified Land Use Ordinance for Hillside Development.
Additionally, a Variance to the lot coverage standards is requested. The maximum lot coverage
in the zone is 20 percent. The requested lot coverage is 23 percent. This is consistent with other
lot coverages on the adjacent properties that are in the vicinity of the property.
Findings addressing the approval criteria for Hillside Development and the approval criteria for a
Variance to lot coverage are addressed below.
Physical and Environmental Constraints Review Permit for Hillside Development:
18.3.10.050 Approval 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.
Page 3 of 14
The proposed residence is sited in a manner to preserve and protect the three large Ponderosa
Pine trees on the property while not disturbing areas with more than 35 percent slope. The
applicant has considered the impacts to the adjacentproperties, by designing a single level
residence with a cut pad foundation and a low pitch roof. This reduces the building height and
mass, limiting impacts to nearby areas. The residence is proposed to be setback from the front
property line at 15-feet, the minimum setback in the zone. The south side yard setback at ten feet,
is the minimum allowed due to a Public Utility Easement. The minimal setbacks on the front and
side yard minimize the area of site disturbance. Additionally, the structure is located as close as
practicable in the areas of the site that are the least steep and lack trees. The proposed driveway
has minimal length and width when compared the driveways on the adjacent properties.
Through the application of the requirements of the Hillside Ordinance, the oversight of a
geotechnical expert, a structural engineer, implementation of the erosion control plan and tree
protection /preservation, potential 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.
The developable area of property exceeds 25 percent slopes. Portions of the property exceed 30
percent slopes. The proposed residence is in the areas with the least amount of slope while.
retaining trees that were protected cis part of the Park Estates Subdivision. It is the applicant's
understanding that there were building envelopes as part of the subdivision but those have yet to
be located. It is clear from the subdivision file that the three large pines near the north property
line were required to be preserved as part of the lot development.
Due to the proposed placement near the street, minimal retaining walls are necessary. The
applicant has proposed a landscape block retaining wall on the south side of the structure
adjacent to the driveway to create an access path to the residence.
The residences foundation will be engineered and the geotechnical expert will provide periodic
inspections of the site to verify the development requirements are being complied with. Erosion °
control silt fencing is proposed along the east property line parallel to the street and along the
side property line. Bio-bags will be placed in the street gutter to protect the storm drain system.
During construction, a gravel track-out pad at the driveway intersection with the street is also
proposed.
All erosion control measures will remain in place throughout the duration of the site work
portions of construction. The tree protection fencing will remain in place throughout the
duration of construction or until the exterior of the structure is completed and no additional site
disturbance is occurring.
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.
I
Page 4 of 14
The Staff Advisor or Planning Commission shall consider the existing development of the
surrounding area, and the maximum development permitted by this ordinance.
Due to the proposed placement, geotechnical oversite, structural engineering, tree protection
and preservation all reasonable steps have been taken to reduce adverse impacts on the
environment. By utilizing a cut foundation, limitation on impervious surfaces, minimal setbacks
and tree preservation all site disturbance the applicant does not find that irreversible adverse
impacts to the environment will occur. Site disturbance from construction will be re-vegetated
with native grass seed mix.
The applicant finds that the surrounding properties, all constructed under permit with the City of
Ashland provide the baseline for the "maximum development " permitted by ordinance. The
surrounding properties in the impact area, also approved with the same conditions of approval
f -om the Park Estates Subdivision.
The average amount of impervious area on the adjacent properties is significantly greater than
what is proposed in this application. The proposed development has 2,382 square feet of total
impervious areas, including the footprint of the residence. By comparison, the average amount of
impervious area on adjacent properties is 3,898 square feet. This considerably smaller amount j
of impervious area translates to significantly less irreversible site disturbance.
18.3.10.090 Development Standards for Hillside Lands
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.
The subject property does have areas greater than 35 percent but all proposed development is to
occur outside of the areas that are greater than 35 percent. It is the applicant's understanding
that building envelopes were provided with the original subdivision but those are not able to be
located. The three pine trees along the north property line were required to be preserved as part
of the subdivision and the proposed residence footprint does allow for° an adequate protection
zone.
B. Hillside Grading and Erosion Control. All development on lands classified as Hillside shall
provide plans conforming to the following items.
1. All grading, retaining wall design, drainage, and erosion control plans for development on
Hillside Lands shall be designed by a geotechnical expert. All cuts, grading or fills shall conform
to the International Building Code and be consistent with the provisions of this ordinance.
Erosion control measures on the development site shall be required to minimize the solids in
runoff from disturbed areas.
Rick Swanson from Marquess and Associates has reviewed the grading, erosion control,
drainage and retaining wall plans that have been designed by himself and others with
demonstrable expertise in the development of Hillside Lands. The plans provided demonstrate
compliance with the standards from the Land Use Ordinance.
Page 5 of 14
2. Timing of Improvements.
This proposal is exempt f -om this section of the code.
3. Retention in natural state.
This proposal is exempt from this section of the code,
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 type of materials of which they
are composed. Where the soil permits, limit the total area exposed to precipitation and
erosion. Steep cut 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 (1:1 or less steep), the slope shall be protected with erosion control
getting or structural equivalent installed per manufacturers specifications, and revegetated.
The proposed structure is cut into the hillside leaving few exposed cut slopes. The one area of
exposed cut on the uphill side of the driveway will be retained with a stacked block landscape
retaining walls that will be terraced in a series of "steps " to provide access to the f -ont door of
the residence.
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 minimum of three feet to allow for the
introduction of vegetation for erosion control. Total cut slopes shall not exceed a maximum
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 cut slope from the nearest property
line.
The only proposed retaining wall on the site is adjacent to the driveway. The height of the cut is
approximately seven feet. The cut will be terraced in compliance with the code. This is the access
to the entrance of the residence so the cut will be terraced to create a stair step up to the
structure.
c. Cut slopes for structure foundations which reduce the effective visual bulk, such as split pad
or stepped footings, shall be exempted from the height limitations of this section.
The proposed residence is cut into the hillside.
d. Revegetation of cut slope terraces shall include the provision of a planting plan, introduction
of top soil where necessary, and the use of irrigation if necessary. The vegetation used for these
areas shall be native, or species similar in resource value to native plants, which will survive,
help reduce the visual impact of the cut slope, and assist in providing long term slope
stabilization. Trees, bush-type plantings, and cascading vine-type plantings may be appropriate.
Page 6 of 14
All terraced areas will be revegetated with ornamental plants. The areas directly adjacent to the
residence where the soil has been disturbed are proposed to be re-seeded with native plant
mixture,
S. Grading - Fill. On all fill slopes on lands classified as Hillside Lands, the following standards
shall apply.
a. Fill slopes shall not exceed a total vertical height of 20 feet. The toe of the fill slope area not
utilizing structural retaining shall be a minimum of six feet from the nearest property line.
No fill slopes are proposed. All fill areas are proposed to be retained
b. Fill slopes shall be protected with an erosion control netting, blanket or functional
equivalent. Netting or blankets shall only be used in conjunction with an organic mulch such as
straw or wood fiber. The blanket must be applied so that it is in complete contact with the soil
so that erosion does not occur beneath it. Erosion netting or blankets shall be securely
anchored to the slope in accordance with manufacturer's recommendations.
No un-retained fill slopes are proposed.
c. Whenever possible, utilities shall not be located or installed on or in fill slopes. When
determined that it necessary to install utilities on fill slopes, all plans shall be designed by a
geotechnical expert.
The utilities are not being installed on fill slopes. They are proposed to be installed from the
southwest corner of the structure out to Morton Street right-of-way where the stub-outs for
water, sewer and electric are located
d. Revegetation of fill slopes shall utilize native vegetation or vegetation similar in resource
value and which will survive and stabilize the surface. Irrigation may be provided to ensure
growth if necessary. Evidence shall be required indicating long-term viability of the proposed
vegetation for the purposes of erosion control on disturbed areas.
No un-retained fill slopes are proposed.
6. Revegetation Requirements. Where required by this chapter, all required revegetation of cut
and fill slopes shall be installed prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, signature of a
required survey plat, or other time as determined by the hearing authority. Vegetation shall be
installed in such a manner as to be substantially established within one year of installation.
The landscaping proposed for the retained areas and areas of disturbance are proposed to be
installed prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy.
7. Maintenance, Security, and Penalties for Erosion Control Measures.
a. Maintenance. All measures installed for the purposes of long-term erosion control, including
but not limited to vegetative cover, rock walls, and landscaping, shall be maintained in
I
Page 7 of 14
perpetuity on all areas which have been disturbed, including public rights-of-way. The applicant
shall provide evidence indicating the mechanisms in place to ensure maintenance of measures.
The landscaping will be maintained in perpetuity.
b. Security.
The subject lot is not subject to this section of code as it existed prior to January 1, 1998.
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.
Two short terraces constructed of dry stacked landscaping blocks are proposed on the downhill
side (west) of the driveway providing the access "stairs " to the residence. The proposed
residence is cut into the hillside and virtually at grade on the uphill side of the structure.
b. & c. Avoid hazardous or unstable portions of the site.
Based on the Geological Report from the original subdivision there are no hazardous or
unstable portions of the site. There is no physical evidence on the site of any hazardous or
unstable portions of the site.
d. Building pads should be of minimum size to accommodate the structure and a reasonable
amount of yard 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.
The proposed structure has a small footprint by comparison to those in the impact area. No
formal yard space is proposed. Areas of disturbance will be re-seeded with native grasses post
construction, and, the majority of the site will be retained in a natural state.
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.4.j were conducted by the
project geotechnical expert periodically throughout the project.
The final inspection report completed by the geotechnical expert will be provided prior to the
issuance of the certificate of occupancy.
Page 8 of 14
C. Surface and Groundwater Drainage.
The surface and groundwater drainage on the site will be directed into the city's storm drain
system. When the subdivision was developed, all necessary infrastructure was constructed to
sustain all of the lots in the subdivision.
D. Tree Conservation, Protection and Removal. All development on Hillside Lands shall
conform to the following requirements.
1. Inventory of Existing Trees.
See the attached Tree Inventory and report completed by Christopher John, Arborist from
Canopy LLC. Details. regarding the protection and the excavation methods around the trees to
be preserved is addressed in the report. A large portion of the site is not affected by the proposed
development and therefore is not included in the inventory,
2. Evaluation of Suitability for Conservation.
I
See the attached Tree Inventory and report completed by Christopher John, Arborist from
Canopy LLC. Details regarding the protection and the excavation methods around the trees to
be preserved is addressed. A large portion of the site is not affected by the proposed development
and therefore is not included in the inventory.
3. Tree Conservation in Project Design.
All conifer trees that are near the proposed residence are proposed for preservation. The site
layout including utility installation are in the areas of least disturbance and will not have
negative impacts on the preserved trees. The minimum number of trees are proposed for
removal. The trees proposed for° removal are smaller in stature, not subject to the hillside or tree
removal ordinances.
4. Tree Protection.
A six-foot chain link fence is proposed to be installed at or near the dripline of the three
Ponderosa Pine trees and the 12-inch madrone tree. The arborist report has a general tree
protection zone identified that speaks to one foot per inch DBK The arborist report details the
construction methods in the areas adjacent to the trees.
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 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.
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.
Page 9 of 14
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.
The site access, driveway and the placement of the resident are all in response to the site
topography and the locations of the trees. The clumps of small diameter oak and madrone trees
that are stump sprouts, the five inch pine are within the building envelope for the new structure.
The three larger stature Pine trees near Morton Street are going to be preserved as part of the
development.
There are numerous oak, madrone and pine trees within 200 feet of the subject properly. The
trees are within the buildable area and following removal the structure will be constructed
therefore there will be no erosion from the tree removals. There are no surface waters present
that would be affected by the tree removal and the trees are not part of a wind break.
The subject property is within the wildfire hazard zone and the removal of small diameter,
interlocking canopy, ladder fuels is encouraged by the City ofAshland and the creation of a
defensible space is required by the Oregon Department of Forestry on properties that are within
mile for the urban wildfire interface. The removal of these trees achieves wildfire fuel
reduction requirements.
6. Tree Replacement.
No trees are proposed for removal that are subject to the requirements of this chapter.
E. Building Location and 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.
The structure is within the building envelope that was proposed as part of the Park Estates
subdivision. Additionally, the proposed residence adheres to the yard setbacks allowed by code,
by the Public Utility Easements on the property, the Solar Setback ordinance and by the required
tree protection zone.
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. Maximum hillside building height shall be 35 feet.
A single story residence cut into the hillside with a below grade garage is proposed. The
proposed residence is less than 35 feet in height.
b. Cut buildings into hillsides to reduce effective visual bulk.
1
Page 10 of 14
i. 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 rooms cut into the natural slope.
The residence is cut into the uphill slope on the property. The garage is below grade and the
upper level utilizes the garage roof as an outdoor deck for the residence.
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 minimum of six feet. Decks
projecting out from the building wall and hillside shall not be considered a building step-back.
No vertical walls on the downhill elevations of new buildings shall exceed a maximum height of
20 feet above natural grade.
i
The vertical walls are less than 20 feet as measured f tom natural grade (see attached
elevations). At finished grade one wall is 21 feet, 9-inches tall, from natural grade though the
wall is less than 19 feet tall. Additionally, this wall is setback from the front facade of the
structure by 16 feet further minimizing the height of the structure. The proposed deck facing
Morton Street is on the roof of the garage below and is 8 -foot. by 11 foot providing a significant
step back.
d. Continuous horizontal building planes shall not exceed a maximum length of 36 feet. Planes
longer than 36 feet shall include a minimum offset of six feet.
There are no horizontal building planes that exceed 36 feet are proposed
e. It is recommended that roof forms and roof lines for new structures be broken into a series
of smaller building components to reflect the irregular forms of the surrounding hillside. Long,
linear unbroken roof lines are discouraged. Large gable ends on downhill elevations should be
avoided, however smaller gables may be permitted.
The residence is proposed to have various low pitch, shed style roofs. The shed roof or mono-
roof (single pitch) provides for various roofing masses over the various portions of the structure.
The majority of the roof is pitched towards from the front facade of the structure, meaning you
see the roof projecting away. The roof over the south end of the residence is pitched away f rom
the front facade, you see the underside of the eave. The irregular, mono pitch roof is more in
keeping with the irregular forms of the hillside that a typical gabled roof. The proposed roofing
creates unique shapes and patterns for the home's exterior that reflect the irregular forms of the
hillside. No large gable ends are proposed on the downhill elevations. Additionally, the driveway
is below a cantilevered portion of the main floor of the residence. The various building sections
break up the massing of the font of the residence creating interest on the public street. The
structure is more modern that the existing residences in the subdivision. Many of the existing
residences have tall, downhill wall gable ends, projecting decks and large, two vehicle garages
visible f om the street.
Page 11 of 14
f. It is recommended that roofs of lower floor levels be used to provide deck or outdoor space
for upper floor levels. The use of overhanging decks with vertical supports in excess of 12 feet
on downhill elevations should be avoided.
The roof of the below grade garage is providing for an 8' X 11 ' deck area off of the kitchen. No
overhanging decks are proposed
g. It is recommended that color selection for new structures be coordinated with the
predominant colors of the surrounding landscape to minimize contrast between the structure
and the natural environment.
Natural colors selected from the predominant colors of the surrounding landscape will be used
for the exterior paint finishes. The metal roof will be painted and not reflective galvanized metal.
F. All structures on Hillside Lands shall have foundations designed by an engineer or architect
with demonstrable geotechnical design experience. A designer, as defined, shall not complete
working drawings without having foundations designed by an engineer.
The foundation will be designed by an engineer. The engineered foundation will be provided
with the building permit set..
G. All newly created lots or lots modified by a lot line adjustment must include building
envelopes containing a buildable area less than 35 percent slope of sufficient size to
accommodate the uses permitted in the underlying zone, unless the division or lot line
adjustment is for open space or conservation purposes.
This section is not applicable. The subject lot was created in 1986
18.3.10.100 Development Standards for Wildfire Lands
8. Requirements for Construction of All Structures.
Compliance with the development standards for wildfire lands will be implemented on-site prior
to introduction of combustible construction materials. Trees will be limbed up above the roof, the
grass will be mowed and small diameter ladder fuels will be removed. Additionally, afire
resistant metal roof is proposed.
Lot Coverage Variance:
Variance Approval Criteria 18.5.5.050
1. The variance is necessary because the subject code provision does not account for special or
unique physical circumstances of the subject site, such as topography, natural features,
adjacent development, or similar circumstances. A legal lot determination may be sufficient
evidence of a hardship for purposes of approving a variance.
Page 12 of 14
The maximum lot coverage in the RR-. 5 zone is 20 percent. The proposed development of the
residence and driveway is nine percent over the maximum of 20 percent. (10, 326 X. 20 = 2,065
sf allowed; 2,382 sf proposed (206512382 = 8.6)).
The subject property is part of a larger subdivision that was created in the mid-1980s. The
subdivision, was approved through the Performance Standards criteria and the area of the
subdivision was derived from lots that were zoned R-1-7.5, R-1-10 and RR-. 5. The proposed lot
coverage shown in the subdivision approvals was an estimated average of residence footprints,
garages, driveways, streets and sidewalks across the three zones. Additionally, as part of the
Park Estates Subdivision (I and II) large tracts of open space were provided.
Since the subdivision was through the Performance Standards option, the lot area for the
individual parcels is significantly less than allowed with the base zoning. If the subdivision were
approved today, the applicant would likely have requested a "performance standard lot
coverage " allocation because of the large areas of undisturbed open spaces and the smaller than
lot sizes than required by the base zone.
In this case, the lot is zoned for a half-acre minimum (21, 780 sj) but the lot is just over 10, 000 sf.
A 21, 780 sf lot would allow for up to 4,350 sf of coverage, none of the parcels in the subdivision
are % acre in area. A spreadsheet using data f •om the Jackson County Assessor's office that
details the Gross Habitable Floor Area (GHFA), and the lot coverages from the structure(s),
driveways, patios, etc. was created. It demonstrates that the proposal is significantly less than
the surrounding properties. As shown on the spreadsheet, the average lot area for properties that
are within 200 feet of the subject site are. 31, the subject parcel is.24; the average GHFA is
2,609 sf, the proposed residence is 1, 856 sf; the average impervious area is 3,898, the proposed
impervious area is 2,382 sf. (See attached Lot Coverage Summary).
The applicant has proposed a residence at the minimum setbacks for the zone and still does not
meet the maximum lot coverage. The applicant has proposed a residence that is 1, 000 sf smaller
than the average residence in the zone and still does not meet lot coverage. The applicant has
proposed impervious surfaces that are 1,516 sf less than the average in the zone and still does
not comply with maximum lot coverage in the zone.
Based on the information provided on the attached spreadsheet of the properties within 200 feet
of the subject site, within the same subdivision it appears that though there is not expressly a
performance standard lot coverage, it is clear that the previously approved homes do not comply
with the City standards. The applicant has proposed a smaller residence with less disturbed
area, less mass and the minimum setbacks and finds that the request is due to the lot area being
significantly less than allowed by the zone that is creating the need for the Variance. The
proposed significantly smaller home with significantly less disturbed area is unique to the
adjacent development that was developed under the same circumstances.
2. The variance is the minimum necessary to address the special or unique physical
circumstances related to the subject site.
Page 13 of 14
t '
The proposed structure with just eight percent over the maximum lot coverage in the zone is the
minimum necessary to have a modest sized residence at the minimum setbacks to reduce
disturbed areas.
3. The proposal's benefits will be greater than any negative impacts on the development of the
adjacent uses and will further the purpose and intent of this ordinance and the Comprehensive
Plan of the City.
The proposed residence and the eight percent lot coverage request will not have any negative
impacts on the development of the adjacent properties. The request will allow for the
construction of a new single family residence on a parcel that was created nearly 35 years ago
thus furthering the intent of the Comprehensive Plan by allowing residential development in the
residential zone.
4. The need for the variance is not self-imposed by the applicant or property owner. For
example, the variance request does not arise as result of a property line adjustment or land
division approval previously granted to the applicant.
The requested variance to exceed the lot coverage by eight percent is not self-imposed. The
applicant and property owner did not create the lot and they did not provide for an average of
lot coverage across numerous zones that had no real connection to the development of the
parcels as evidenced by the attached spreadsheet of data pertaining to the real lot coverages in
the impact area.
Conclusion:
i
In conclusion, the applicant's find that the proposed moderately sized, single family residence
will be a welcome addition in the neighborhood. The original geotechnical report has indicated
that the areas selected for development are suitable and the applicant's geo-tech has
recommended erosion control, foundation type and retaining wall design.
The site is one of the last remaining vacant lots from a 1980s subdivision. Though the house
design is more modern than many of the homes in the subdivision, the existing residences could
be described as eclectic. Additionally, all reasonable steps necessary to prevent negative impacts
to adjacent properties and the environment for the development of the site have been factored
into the site design and placement of the residence.
The applicant finds that all of the applicable City of Ashland requirements have been met or can
be met through the imposition of conditions of approval.
Attachments:
Site plans
Elevations
Lot Coverage Summary
Geo-Tech letter and erosion control plan
Arborist Report
Page 14 of 14
m -4
N N I"~ o~ W
Nw O W 000 00 ~ W w w w O
w N O lD 00 -I 0) .P O 0
o ~
O
Lq 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
CH (n 0)-IN ww N0) N ~~Niw wwwNw w
N w w w w w (A m
F, 1~ V~(A m
W Ul W O W lrn w o w 0 W
0) a) Ln P to a) w P w 4-1~ w Ul M W v
000 000 N O Lo ,000 WW Ln UNi J 0 w w
a) a) da C p N 0) N :r-,, 0) p 00 tll :p O 00
G1
N N N W N N N N W. N N W N N N N
V ~1 0, 0 00 0l lG w kA .6a to m w w w of V1
O w I-, N ®1 00 N .p w H 0 of V Ul N
Ut p W p d. .P .P N W. m .la O 4 m 1-h O
t/f
w
U)
® o
w f°f
Ill
O F~ N ~a N W F~ W N N N F-, W N W F A N
O O lO O O .A dl O W V W tD. W (B N 0)
~i W N l0 d= w to O O m O N Ul W 00 N
w Ul m .P 0o V 0o N N w N 00 00 V Cti O O
e
0 In
wA ® m
ffi (A m
~ N N N N N F-, W N N N W N F-~ H W W
w w m N N O w W W In y W 0 W ~I 4- P 0
Ln N~~ O WO UNl O w NP m m O w O m M V Ili
® C
r m
0
6u <
00 PIT
~ W .p W~ W W W W W W W .p W N O~ PY1
N w 0 w .P L n W .p w l~D W QNq1~ W W W W l0D
w V V N w w w N U, W w p w m m 0 J ~
n m
® O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
N N W H W iw m tJ W w w W W (w N W m
to N O 00 N In w O Ul Ul .p hH O w 00 P
W Ul O N p w Ul m Ul w t N N %I V V <
1-4 U1 ~-A Ul Ul 4 w 0 .p N N N w w w Ul Un p~
F- Ul a, Q1 00 Ol N N v 41 N h-, ~I w w w Ul 0
00 O O P. N Ul N Ut N 00 0l w ~I O I, Ul 0)
I-A LO Q1 N V 00 w w w O 0 N 00 N rn N
I-A m 0 al J v w w w N w w .p w w .p C)
00 AN W W 00 N N W J W O w ~I N N Dl
< rn
M
F°fl
®
N l w O LM C
60 N
l0 U1 Dl U 7 C~17 p O N 00 p
ilo~- L P I
i
0 ,
CANOPY LLc The Care of Trees
157 Max Loop Talent, OR 97540
(541) 631-9000
August 19, 2015
Suncrest Homes
328 Talent Ave
Talent, OR 97540
RE: Tree Protection Plan for 843 Morton St, Ashland
Overview
Canopy LLC was contacted to provide recommendations for the protection of established trees at 843 Morton St prior
to a proposed construction project on the property.
Trees Affected
There are 3 native ponderosa pine (Pious ponderosa) trees just outside of the building envelope which may be affected
by construction activities, especially excavation. They measure 22inches, 18inches, and 13inches in diameter at breast
height (DBH). They are all located along the Northeast border of the property. The 2 largest trees are moderately
healthy, the smallest is in moderate-poor° health. There is also a small (5inch DBH) Doulas fir tree close the envelope
which should be removed.
Construction Management
Tree Protection Zone: It is recommended that a tree protection zone be established around the root zone of these trees
before any construction, excavation, land clearing, or grading begins. It is recommended that for every inch DBH,
soils should not be greatly disturbed for 1 foot from the trunk of the tree. For example, on an 18" DBH tree, excavation
should not occur within 18 feet of the trunk. However, in the course of excavation it may be the case that there are
little or no significant roots present at this distance. At which point an arborist may be consulted and may advise that
digging closer to the tree will not have negative impacts.
Soil Compaction: To avoid soil compaction, heavy materials should not be stored, vehicles maneuvered or parked,
grade changed, or paved surfaces constructed within the tree protection zone. If for construction ease, it is necessary
for vehicles or machinery to access the area, a layer of mulch (6"-12" deep) should be applied for vehicles to drive on.
This mulch layer should be reduced to a depth of 3"-4" upon project cornpletion.
Root Protection: If excavation is necessary at or near the tree protection area, avoid cutting roots over I "diameter
where possible. If larger roots are severed during construction at the protection area, it is recommended that they be
out "cleanly" with a saw or bypass pruners (as opposed to being left "torn" by machinery). If excavation or trenching
needs to occur in the protection area, it is recommended that you contact myself or another certified arborist for
additional evaluation and options.
Mulch and Water: A layer of mulch can be of great benefit before, during, and after construction. It is advisable (but
should not be considered imperative) that a P-4" layer of mulch be added to the root zone of each tree. If construction
is occurring during the driest months of August and September, it is recommended that the trees receive a deep
watering 1-2x per month, especially if heavy traffic and/or excavation is occurring during this time.
Conclusion
While there can be no guarantees in matters of this nature, due to unknown and uncontrollable factors, the
recommendations outlined above should provide a reasonable assurance that the trees will not be critically impacted by
construction activities. These recommendations are based on professional standards in the field of arboriculture,
scientific study, municipal guidelines, and professional experience. Feel free to contact us should anyone need
clarification or guidance about these recommendations.
Sincerely,
Christopher John
Canopy LLC
ISA Certified Arborist: WE-9504A
i
i
i
I
2 [ t;, e
n t !i °(!U3111e~ Iit0 al; 11 1t~ C, ~ItY(C_i'(1 AVN )i1~r~hC IE: 1" 71
A S 5 C7 C I 1 t. I N C P 541-772-7115 F 541°779-4079 1120 LAST JACKSON P0 BOX 490 MEDFORD, OR 97501
EMAIL: inFc>~~m;uyucs .c~mi WEB:
Date: September 25, 2015
To: Charlie Hamilton
From: Rick Swanson, P.E., G.E.
Re: Residence on Morton Street
Ashland, Oregon
MAI Job No. 15-1142
As requested, we have reviewed the attached erosion control plan prepared for the subject
development. As part of this review, we have had some discussion regarding the subject plan
and the proposed development, and we have visited the site. The silt fencing, trackout pad, and
biobag protection of the street curb and gutter appear to be adequate for the site.
Please contact this office if you have any questions regarding this letter.
Attachment: erosion control plan
P R
GiE~ ,
a w 15685
ax>;corr
2 -1,
S
''I L8. 6-iU
NOTES:
Li iii
WEST ELEVATION
DATE: CHANGES
i
TITLE:
ELEVATIONS
i SCALE: 118" = T
FILE:
SUNCREST/MORTON ST.
DR --157717:
JWr 10112/15
b
CHECKED BY: DATE;
CB 10117{15
DRAWING INDEX NO.
® 42.2
17~, SHEET 4 OF 9
Q PROJECT:
TP - r. 01 S.F.D.@
MAP 391E 16AC, TL 442
S.S.B.CALCS; FOR: SUNCREST HOMES
m 34BO
H 6'/.445 +,145 = SSB q
18.75'- 61,59 = 21.61' 2458F.F: MAIN- _ CUSTOMER/
GEN.CONTRACTOR
ACTUAL = 23'3" SUNCREST HOMES
328 TALENT AVE.
TALENT, OR 97540
541.944-3976
OWNER:
SUNCR ST HOMES
S,S,B,CALCS:
2049 F.F: BAS M NT H 6'/.445 +,145 =SSB 328 TALENT AVE.
15.88'- 61.59 =16.75' TALENT, OR 97540
NATURAL GRADE ACTUAL= 16.75'
design residential
NORTH ELEVATION Design Residential, Inc.
P.O. Box 8062
Medford, OR 97501
541-608.39561 fax:608-0112
www.d esignresldenlial.biz
NOTES:
0 2 1`5
WEST ELEVATION NATURAL GRADE
D TE: CHANGES
TITLE:
ELEVATIONS
SCALE: 118" =1'
FILE:
SUNCRESTMORTON ST,
DRAWN B:
JW1 1M12115
m - CHECKED BY: DATE,
CB 10112116
- DRAWING INDEX NO,
A2.2
L SHEET 4 OF 9
9 PROJECT:
4 o m
MAP 39 1 E~13AC,TIL442
.M- a FOR: SUNCR ST HOMES
H-6'1.445+.145=SSB
18.75'- 61,59 = 21,61' - - 2458 F.F-MAIN_. . _ cusTOMEw
ACTUAL = 23'3° GEM CONTRACTOR
SUNCREST HOMES
328 TALENT AVE.
TALENT, OR 97540
541-944-3976
q S.S. B.CALCS: SLINCREST HOMES
m 2449 F,F: BAs M NT 328 TALENT AVE.
H-6 /.445+,145=SSB
15.88'- 6 I.59 = 16.75' TALENT, OR 97540
25NA AVERAGE cRao DE ACTUAL= 16.75'
design residential
dvn4nva~~rrx uo!!Pr.!m:
NORTH ELEVATION Design Residential, Ino
P.O. Box 8062
Medford, OR 97501
541.60639561 fex:608-0112
www.designresldential,6lz
i ,
,a71 d .Cr 1'LHdY
Lot 6, Block 5 of PARK ESTATES, PHASE 11 &
located in the ME i14 of Sec. 16 T,39S, RJR, D.M.
City of Ashland Jackson County, Oregon
A
48 LaAp p1~
J / 1)9
O
Id A~ ^%F
E G~NTVB•
9yp~ "i`^ f PD. 5/0" IRON PIN & PLASTIC CAP MKO, KAUDLE PLS1622 PER PF2,
Rn. a a FO, 2" BRASS DISK IN MONUMENT BOX PER PE2•
uAA1
y2A ® SET 2X7 H09 & 2' LATH ON PROPERTY LINE,
r PE2 PARK ESTATES PHASE It.
ORJCO ~ 6FP7D1N, RECORDS OF d4,@If50N COUNT(, OREGON,
W,M. BASIS OF AF,'ARING'&
CENTERLINE OF MORTON STREET PER PARK ESTATES, PHASE U.
UNIT OP MEASUREMENT - FEET
MVATION BATIM
f ._,y~y'--_,_,^c_,_, s-^' NGVO 1929 AAIUSTEO PER CITY OF ASHLAND SM PA.
^ ✓ 10'
IAP
~r
4e~•~"'- ~ A ~ N6S~U7 f ~ ~ \ a OW 7`µ,)g `
w,.,s+=~.~ d9 pp ea+
1 ti e A4Y °°m--
4611 AMl AWI a,,,..-4,'^v°
~w, .=z_._=_:„~_ S'UB•~,L~AAINOS uiryaauil:
mp-
MORTON ~ - _
174,46
STREET -
eRG MR
REGISTERED SITE PLAN
PROFESSIONAL nsrr's uw L:''
LAND SURVEYOR 39IE16AC IL442
Tae SUNCREST HOMES, LLC
_ PO BOX 1313
oReoou TALENT, OR 97640
• y.ucs c losesP•d FRIAR & ASSOCIATES ➢.C.
REWM DAM 6-38-17 , A OOkstMtttl uW 9KhittRS kOh tsi
\ A 4,w tAAi. 1514,
NOTES: tc 5~)
LOT COVERAGE: 1
op TOTAL LOT: 10326 SQ. FT,
COVERAGE: 2382 SQ. FT.
$ 23%a
t U)
t (N4 + P
~e
' Fy ~y N64'16'50"lu x_ P
~0
7
R -0 7 m y 791,8,lei)
t>SJ ~ ER
p® i1
P I 4 lo' FUR ee ' °
vd 3'ORAVEL b
kD a~ P I L a RE WITH NATIVE 60 d ® t
Qv , I f RABSE 6,A _
AS DIBTU , v p " 1 TP"~ 1 U)
u i W9 d r Ld
m 1WN.f~UO tlY , g14tl.f1P N atmenr9,a tauhv ~ I 1
N~ ffi, Aga WB " ygy LL PAv ✓ BIO-BA w
p f
GI 1S'. R 'STACK ~1
co ETW... _ a `~b
„a~A
4" SHALE TRACKED OUT
PAD INSTALLED PRIOR
CONSTRUCTION ~'OM I 1 n'
ro 0
U91 g r~ '
I BUILDING FOOTPRINT y A~~
, 387930-FT;UNDERROD
I DRIVEWAY / VIII/ 1
336 SQ. FL \ll
COVERED BY
~ NOT
HOUSE
I ESEED WIT NATIVE
n 1 , GRAS S, AREAS D TURBED BY
t4ao &
16' CONSTRU ON
5
I ~D 0 RG( III A OG
(f L k TE, CHANGES
FiIMf~GNI I
" t44e N E1 ,E1 WITH NA UE li
3 ASSES, REAS DISTU ED B I
COISTR CTION GARAGE UNDER TITLE:
SITE PLAN
~h SCALE: 1116" =1'
0 LY I A FILE:
y yip` 1 SUNCRESTWORTON ST,
)446
DRAWN BY: UAlt:
611 Hi FFi "kV(~
4 99~ tcnsanaico ESEEDWIT 14ATIVE JWT 10112118
4 ea mw.<e GRASS S,AREASDI TURSED13Y
w f0 ONSTRUCT N o CHECKED BY: DATE:
t° a b CB 10112115
a v4 N , f ma W,
DRAWING INDEX NO.
I I
1 AO" 1
9
BIO-BAG I EROSION tfRO i i We SHEET OF
FEN PROJECT:
MAP 38 SE 18A@C, TL 442
" v v eiwa A FOR: SUNCREST HOMES
rRANg ~
~4Na
CUSTOMER/
GEN.CONTRAC
CONTRACTOR
a 04
SUNCREST HOMES
328 TALENT AVE.
TALENT, OR 97540
541.944.3976
OWNER:
SUNCREST HOMES
328 TALENT AVE.
TALENT, OR 97540
design residential
Design Residential, Inc.
P.O. Box 8062
Medford, OR 97501
541-608.3956 Irelr.6o&-0112
www.designresidential.biz
NOTES:
-000
N
LOT COVERAGE:
TOTAL LOT: 10326 SQ. FT.
COVERAGE: 2382 SQ. FT.
23%
t
24 + X11 VJ
34
A N54'16'60"W
I 4
4% r _ .29 45d5) 0
3'OVEL b RESE WITH NATIVE A 'A = RASSES,A AS DISNR - - < U)
~BN r &
Gx v . ee 1 ® W
m~ vrsarr.
"uY Z _ ;j 1 41) 6L
BIaeA W
ILL w
tl sn,sx v 1$lgx E WT K r$ g d" u j z
.o Z) _ _ y2
4°SHALE TRACKE WAIFA DOUT .f.. co ~+I
PAD INSTALLED PRIOR
CONSTRUCTION =0 / N
m / l m ~ L6
2432 , ^u 1
/ BUILDING FOOTPRINT T
~187g SQ. FT, UNDER ft00 d g I'
VEAY /
j B W,
j NOT OVERED BY $
SE
ESEED WIT NATIVE
q / ( t' W G S S, AREASD TURBED BY ~'1 I
a4so $ 1 y ~,~i CONSTRUC ON t
z j 16'• ~;i N1 t
ry o
4p
eel . ~m DATE: CHANGES
n i
P~ JQ eA ~6
® z44e RES ED WITH A VE
SSES, REAS DI TU EDB OA(tAGE UNDER
CO 8TR C
TITLE:
SITE PLAN ~r
® ly / SCALE: 1/16" =1'
FILE:
qS SUNCREST/MORTON ST.
2445 `n h y ,Sx(x4 F uM. ~ulcs 1 D 8
9 e 1 ESEEDWIT THE s DATE:
v ~ ~ i' s=c sswu ~ GRASS S, AREAS DI TURBED BY JWT 10/12/16
I
ONSTRUCT N 1 CHECKED BY: DATE:
' x mwce, dfarn, A C GB 10/12115
s, q 4 DRAWING INDEX NO.
4 A0,1
BI08AGS EROSION SHEET 1 OF 9
4
1444 FEN
&1E ~ PROJECT:
s S.F.D.@
s srwa s MAP 391E 1SAC, TL 442
I ry a a i 40 FOR: SUNCREST HOMES
CUSTOMER/
b GEN. CONTRACTOR
SY ~I- SUNCREST HOMES
328 TALENT AVE.
S n J S TALENT, OR 97540
541-944-3976
` R I (I OWNER:
n' S SUNCREST HOMES
JJJ 328 TALENT AVE.
J-) n TALENT, OR 97540
it design resG1 F~~ idential
Design Residential, Inc.
P.O. Box 8062
N ~1 Medford, 608.39OR 87501
541500~39551fax:600-0112
tww.deslgnresidentlal.blz
- NOTES:
,
0
BASEMENT
498 SQ. FT.-GARAGE
TE: CHANGES
BASEMENT
FLOOR PLAN
SCALE: 118" =1'
FI E;
L:~ 4'-0° 4'•a" SUNCRESTIMORTON ST.
8'-0'x4'-0' DRAWN BY: -DATE7
dwr 10112/15
CHECKED BY, DATE:
13'4' 21'-5° 23'-0" os 10112/15
DRAWING INDEX No.
58'•0" A1,1
SHEET 9 OF 9
PROJECT:
MAP 391E 16AC, TL 442
FOR: SUNCREST HOMES
GARAGE BASEMENT CUSTOME
GEN,CONTRAC
TOR
SUNCREST HOMES
328 TALENT AVE.
TALENT, OR 97540
541.944.3976
OWNER:
SUNCREST HOMES
328 TALENT AVE.
TALENT, OR 97540
design residential
Design Residential, Inc.
P.O. Box 8062
Medford, OR 97501
541.60&39561 fax:608-0112
www.desig nresidential.6iz
NOTES:
58'4'
27'•8" 30'-4"
2*aW 4'.0' 2.W 7W V.0' a4W 2'.61 T.0'
ti V ASTER
BATH ao
12'6"X 6'6"
MASTER BEDROOM
W X 167" 19'•0" 11'4"
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
D.
" W.I.C. W. 12'6^x9'9" _ M M DECK
100 SQ. FT.
MAIN FLOOR
1856 SQ, FT,-LIVING
N
x
I'
498SQ,FT-GARAGE
ii C ERED
ii PORCH e GALLERY
6' §
I. X8'
ii 1o'zAxs ^ EATING LIVING
10' X 10' 14' X 14' on q _mT1_: CHANGES
r^°
ITLE:
§ $ MAI~FLOOR
N BEDROOM #2 N PLAN
§ OFFICE I
1o'S"x11'1" P ,
14'X13'
ANTRY - q SCALE: 118"=1'
y 8-4"X811011
H
B L nEF ® FILE:
SUNCREST/MORTON ST.
DRAWN B.
L ISLAND JWr 10112/16
%
2•0'N2'•0' T4''"2'-0 0 NS r4B J
Z91 CHECKED BY: DATE:
iv D® on zrls
e'V x 4'4r I DRAWIN®I
NOEX No,
L-A0,1
1a'•o" 14'-0" KITCHEN § DECK 4 SHEET 1 OF 9
14'x14'8" 8'X1D' PROJECT:
S.F.D @
MAP 391 E 16AC, TL 442
FOR: SUNCREST HOMES
~wmo,y a oO.W`--_
CUSTOMER/
a m K4'."
35'•0" 15'•D" 6'•0" GEN. CONTRACTOR
SUNCREST HOMES
328 TALENT AVE.
TALENT, OR 97540
58'•D^ 541-944-3976
MAIN FLOOR OWNER:
SUNCREST HOMES
328 TALENT AVE.
TALENT, OR 97540
design residential
Design Residential, Inc.
P.O. Box 8062
Medford, OR 97501
541.606-39561fac606-0112
www.designresidenflal.biz
a ~ c
i
~ K
i
i
~ I
-99 9
omN a sy
co
WONe pb g~' _
O ~;;WN K~ }8Sc
J f¢..~ ~a
pV r
s s-s d
o~yn F _ w ,E
6
-I
_ m
ate...
44T" $
jt
Qom. 4
i'
Non
i
t it
,
O D
1030
E
S
3 ~ }
trt ~x ~ ( 9
r
t
X
(
,
i { e V' 0 ti 2 1
o(j
'
5 2
a Y 4
Y
,
I i I i , t
,
f i x
811 ( a ~ ,
I
i E
1 i
r
1
,
i
i
r ~ 11, 1 I
t ~ ri r I ~ ~ ~
# 1 `s
+ c : i r r ! i~ 3 i
i
19023
{
< J
i 7
f
t
r lj 'ii~r 1 t ~ 9
a2~
:
e
1010 P t f f 1s7~ i 11 ~0~ 1 i t
r ~ t I ~e I
t 1 I I t t itx ~ i r N( s ! { ( I
t
/ ~ ~ rr r
r
t r ~ b ~ f t r f i 1 t, l f i. +j
t 9095 f l c
,
F
r /r if rr ;
I
r ,
r'
r
f
i
~ r
;
P j
J t 1' 1 1 t, jl 1 rit f p
84
p,
If r d y
1 x Nr
t ~I 1
r t~ f i a r 1 ~ r f' f(
r
f
r
t it
r d
' 999 I i
,
r
r
d
1
r
,
r t _ x
i
836
r
i
{ j}
6
/ o
It
s i it
~t
'
c
i
#
r
:
a,
t
( ~ + # 970 ~ y
~
1 3 1' j + r k i i `y~ f o
4 s rVo, ~ s t` ~ I r ~ ~ ; 6 1~ ,r ~ 0 ~ 1 1 1 f b
' 'y 'i' I ! NW
14
, g
E
p ,
~ ' { b ~ E s i t ? x ~ ~ i ~ 1 I 1 ~ ~ ~ I ( 4 8~9
1~I5 Sam:
1:480 N
1 inch m 40 feet 2 Z~~'
s,f~% r w E Mapping is schematic only and bears no warranty of accuracy.
025 Feet s All features, structures, facilities, easement or roadway locations
should be independently field verified for existence and/or location.
Planning Division ZONING PERMIT APPLICATION
C 17 Y 0r 51 Winburn Way, Ashland OR 97520 r
LAN D 541-488-5305 Fax 541-488-6006 FILE pc~i~ b(~]
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT P& E for Hillside Development; Variance to Lot Coverage
DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Pursuing LEEDO Certification? ❑ YES ❑ NO
Street Address 00 MORTON STREET
Assessor's Map No. 39 1 E 16AC Tax Lot(s) 442
Zoning RR-.5 Comp Plan Designation RURAL RESIDENTIAL
APPLICANT
Name CHARLIE HAMILTON / SUNCREST Phone 541-531-8641 E-Mail charliehamilton2277@gmail.com
Address 328 TALENT AVE. City TALENT Zip 97540
PROPERTY OWNER
Name CHARLIE HAMILTON Phone 541-944-3976 E-Mail charliehamilton2277aamail.com
Address 328 TALENT AVE. City TALENT Zip 97540
SURVEYOR, ENGINEER, ARCHITECT, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OTHER
Title DESIGNER Name DESIGN RESIDENTIAL Phone 541-608-3956 E-Mail John@designresidential. biz
Address PO BOX 8062 City MEDFORD Zip 97501
Title GEOTECH Name MARQUESS & ASSOC. Phone 541-772-7115 E-Mail rick@marquess.com
Attn: Eric Swanson
Address 1120 E Jackson Street City MEDFO-RD Zip 97504
l 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 /understand that all property pins must be shown on the drawings and visible upon the site inspection. In the event the pins are not shown or their
location found to be incorrect, the owner assumes full responsibility, l further understand that if this request is subsequently contested, the burden will be on me to
establish;
1) that l produced sufficient factual evidence at the hearing to support this request,,
2) that the findings of fact furnished justifies the granting of the request,,
3) that the findings of fact furnished by me are adequate,, and further
4) that all structures or improvements are properly located on the ground.
Failure In this regard will result most likely in not only the request being set aside, but also possibly In my structures being built in reliance thereon being required to
be removed at my expense. lfl have any doubts, I am advised to seek competent professional advice and assistance.
Applicant't,Signature Date
As owner of the property involod-in this request,, ! have read and understood the complete application and its consequences to me as a property
owner,
Property Owner's Signature (required) Date
fro be completed by City Sfafq
i
l y?0
Date Received 101+16 Zoning Permit Type ®d Filing Fee $ 1 y 1-2
OVER ►1
GAcomm-dev\planning\Fonns & Handouts\Zoning Pennit Application.doc gg
I
L 9 LL3
i
I
Job Address: 0 TBA Contractor:
ASHLAND OR 97520 Address:
C
A Owner's Name: SUNCREST HOMES LLC 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: 10/19/2015 0
T Issued:
Expires: 04/16/2016 R Phone:
State Lic No:
Maplot: City Lic No:
DESCRIPTION: 0 Morton. Type 1 PA for variance and P & E
VALUATION
Occupancy Type Construction Units Rate Amt Actual Amt Constuction Description
Total for Valuation:
MECHANICAL
ELECTRICAL
STRUCTURAL
PERMIT FEE DETAIL
G
cr
Fee Description Amount Fee Description Amount
Variance (Type 1) 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 C I T Y OF