Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWimer_432_PA-2015-01892 `t December 22, 2015 Notice of Final Decision On December 22, 2015, the Community Development Director approved the request for the following: Planning Action: 2015-01892 Subject Property: 432 Wimer Street Applicant/Owner: Advantage Building and Design/Steven & Wendy Clouse Description: A request for a Physical & Environmental Constraints Review Permit to construct a new single-family dwelling on Hillside Lands for the property located at 432 Wimer Street. I The proposal involves the removal of 11 trees. In addition, there are requests for Exception to the Development Standards for Hillside Lands to allow the downhill wall height to exceed 20 feet on the i` South side and to exceed the 36 foot horizontal plan on the East side of the dwelling. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single-Family Residential; ZONING: R-1-10; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 lE 05CD; TAX LOT: 502, The Community Development Director's decision becomes final and is effective on the 12t1i 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 Mark Schexnayder in the Community Development Department at (541) 488-5305. cc: Parties of record and property owners within 200 ft COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel: 541-488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 I 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 IT 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 ( , Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 ` - 3 AIS I % t. ASHLAND PLANNING DIVISION FINDINGS & ORDERS PLANNING ACTION: PA-2015-01892 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 432 Wimer Street APPLICANT: Advantage Building and Design OWNER: Steven & Wendy Clouse DESCRIPTION: A request for a Physical & Environmental Constraints Review Permit to construct a new single-family dwelling on Hillside Lands for the property located at 432 Wimer Street. The proposal involves the removal of 11 trees. In addition, there are requests for Exception to the Development Standards for Hillside Lands to allow the downhill wall height to exceed 20 feet on the South side and to exceed the 36 foot horizontal plan on the East side of the dwelling. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single-Family Residential; ZONING: R-1-10; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 lE 05CD; TAX LOT: 502. SUBMITTAL DATE: October 2, 2015 DEEMED COMPLETE DATE: November 20, 2015 STAFF APPROVAL DATE: December 21, 2015 FINAL DECISION DATE: January 2, 2016 APPROVAL EXPIRATION DATE: July 2, 2017 f DECISION The property located at 432 Wimer Street is located on the South side of Wimer Street, West of its intersection with Thornton Drive and East of its intersection with Pape Street. The property is rectangular shaped and roughly 0.58 acres in area, and is zoned R-1-10 (Single-Family Residential). The property is mostly oak woodland with about half of the lots slope in excess of 25 percent. The application involves a request for a Physical & Environmental Constraints Review Permit to allow the construction of a new single-family dwelling on Hillside Lands for the property located at 432 Wimer Street. The application includes requests for Exceptions to the Development Standards for Hillside Lands to 1) allow a downhill wall height to exceed 20 feet on the South side; and 2) to allow a horizontal plan to exceed 36 feet on the East side. The proposal also involves the removal of 11 trees. c A Physical and Environmental Constraints Review Permit for the Development of Hillside Land is required because the proposed single-family dwelling will be constructed on hillside lands with slopes in excess of 25 percent, The intent of the Physical and Environmental Constraints Overlay (18.3.10) is for appropriate development within hillside lands that will protect the aesthetic and natural qualities of the land while protecting adjacent properties from erosion, sedimentation and slope failure. The application notes that the applicants are proposing an Exception to the Development Standards for Hillside Lands because the site is unique in that it is on a South facing exposure with a large number of trees in steep terrain near the North and East property lines. The materials explain that the applicants propose to have an approximately 40 foot long driveway leading to a parking and turnaround area in front of the building envelope at the North side of the property nearest Wimer Street. The application materials further note that the driveway and building envelope location were chosen to protect the largest and healthiest oak trees near the North and East lot lines on the property. The applicants PA #2015-01892 432 Wimer/MMS Page 1 t emphasize that there are a significant number of existing trees on the site, and that the proposed driveway and building envelope preserve most of them. The East wall of the proposed dwelling will help retain the hillside on that side of the structure because, as the applicant and geotechnical engineer note, there is erosion taking place on the driveway uphill. This condition along with the location of many healthy trees seem to justify an exception to the Development Standards for Hillside Lands to exceed a 36 foot unbroken horizontal plan. The South wall of the proposed single-family dwelling will exceed a maximum height of 20 feet from natural grade; however, the portion of the wall that will exceed this requirement and built to a height of 22 feet is located on slopes less than 25 percent and as such meets the intent of this Development Standard. The materials provided note that the proposal is for the creation of a driveway and building envelope on a pre-existing lot of which approximately half will be located on slopes over 25 percent, and that the applicants will develop only one unit due to a lot configuration with no ability to partition. The application includes a geotechnical study and notes that all grading, retaining wall design, drainage and erosion control have been designed and reviewed by a geotechnical expert and an erosion control plan has been included in the submission. The geotechnical report concludes that the property is suitable for development of a single-family dwelling, and notes that the main geotechnical considerations for development are the surficial soils consisting of silty sand soils with underlying granite and the native slopes in the vicinity of the proposed home site are relatively uniform and show no indications of deep- seated slope failure. The report concludes that if the recommendations for development are followed, it is the geotechnical expert's option that there is no significant risk of slope instability on the lot. The application also recognizes that the hillside regulations include a requirement that on projects involving existing lots with an area greater than one-half acre, an area equal to 25 percent of the total project area plus the percentage figure of the average slope shall be retained in a natural state. In this instance, the application notes that lot coverage will not exceed 18 percent and 82 percent of the property area will be retained in a natural state with full development of the site. The application speaks to the grading standards of the ordinance as well, noting that the proposal would include cut slopes that will be retained with walls and stacked block. The tallest retaining wall will be seven feet tall in order to avoid the unnecessary encroachment into the tree protection zone that terracing would require. The application explains that cut slopes are to be re-vegetated with native erosion control hydro-seeding and low growing, native ground cover plants. The project will use some fill slopes, all of which are to be held by new retaining walls. Most utilities are to be installed within the driveway grade and will not be associated with fill slopes. If necessary, water and sewer utilities will be installed from the Northeast corner of the structure to the Northeast corner of the lot and will not disturb fill slopes. The application materials note that the nearest city storm drain connection is at the corner of Wimer Street and Thornton Street. Due to the distance from the proposed development alternative methods for stormwater facilities are being explored. One option is a dry well with a detention pond and leach field; however, if the engineered system is deemed unfit, then the stormwater will be piped from the site into a new line that will extend from the corner of Wimer Street and Thornton Street. Storm facilities and accommodation for future storm facilities are to be the first improvements developed on the site. A condition has been included below to require that the applicants provide a final stormwater drainage plan for the review and approval of the Public Works, Engineering, Building and Planning Departments prior to installation, and that. Public Works permits be obtained for any work to occur within the public right-of-way. PA 42015-01892 432 Wimer/MMS Page 2 The application materials provided include a tree inventory, which includes an assessment of the existing trees. The inventory shows approximately 32 trees greater than six-inches in diameter at breast height (DBH) on the property. Of the 32 trees 14 are proposed for removal. The application emphasizes that significant trees are to be preserved wherever possible and notes that the removals are based on the trees being either within the proposed building envelope or within the area to be graded for the driveway. The application suggests that while the driveway and building envelope were selected largely in response to slope issues, they also seem to be the best locations for preserving trees on site. The applicant requests that no mitigation trees be required because the property has many trees remaining on-site and is within wildfire lands. The Tree Commission considered the request at its regular meeting on November 5, 2015. The Hillside Development Standards provide for only limited circumstances where tree removal is appropriate, and these include the establishment of building envelopes and driveways. The Tree Commission recommended approval for the request, and suggested that an arborist oversee any excavation near tree #2 on the tree inventory (PL 1.0). In addition, the Tree Commission recommended mitigation for all trees listed in fair, good, or excellent condition in the tree inventory plan (PL 1.0). Staff have included conditions to require that tree protection fencing is installed for trees to be preserved, flagging tape used to identify trees to be removed, and access to the site provided to allow the Staff Advisor to conduct a Tree Verification inspection as required by code before any site disturbance. The approval criteria for a Physical & Environmental Constraints Review Permit are detailed in AMC I 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 k surrounding area, and the maximum development permitted by this ordinance. The approval criteria for an Exception to the Development Standards for Hillside Lands are detailed in AMC 18.3.10.090.H as follows: 1. 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. 2. The exception will result in equal or greater protection of the resources protected under this chapter. 3. The exception is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty. 4. The exception is consistent with the stated Purpose and Intent of chapter 18.3. 10 Physical and Environmental Constraints Overlay chapter and section 18.3.10.090 Development Standards for Hillside Lands. The approval criteria for issuance of a Tree Removal Permit are detailed in AMC 18.5.7.040.B as follows: 1. Hazard Tree. A Hazard Tree Removal Permit shall be granted if the approval authority finds PA #2015-01892 432 Wimer/MMS Page 3 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 f 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. Conclusion and Conditions In staff's assessment, the proposal has been carefully thought out to minimize the disturbance of the site and its trees. Based on the material submitted and the text above, the application with the attached conditions complies with all applicable City ordinances. Therefore, Planning Action #2015-01892 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 #2015-01892 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. PA #2015-01892 432 Wimer/MMS Page 4 f 2) That the property owner shall sign in favor of Local Improvement District (LID) for future street improvements, including but not limited to paving, curb gutter, storm drainage, sidewalks and undergrounding of utilities for Wimer Street prior to the issuance of excavation or building permits or commencement of site work. Nothing in this condition is intended to prohibit an owner/developer, their successors or assigns from exercising their rights to freedom of speech and expression by orally objecting or participating in the LID hearing or to take advantage of any protection afforded any parry by City ordinances and resolutions. 3) 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, building 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. 4) Public Works permits and associated inspections shall be obtained for any work to occur within the public right-of-way. 5) 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, building 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 of cut/fill slopes and erosion control shall be installed in accordance with the approved plan prior to Certificate of Occupancy. Vegetation shall be installed in such a manner as to be substantially established within one year of installation. 6) That a preconstruction conference to review the requirements of the Hillside Development Permit shall be held prior to site work, 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; landscape professional; arborist; and general contractor. The applicant or applicants' representative shall contact the Ashland Planning Department to schedule the preconstruction conference. 7) That a Verification Permit shall be applied for and approved by the Ashland Planning Division prior to excavation permit, building permit, 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. 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 dated September 26, 2015. The tree protection and temporary erosion control measures PA #2015-01892 432 Wimer/MMS Page 5 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) 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 and building permit and prior to any site work. 10) That the geotechnical expert from Applied Geotechnical Engineering shall inspect the site according to the inspection schedule of the engineering geology report by Applied Geotechnical Engineering included in the application and dated September 26, 2015. Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy, Applied Geotechnical Engineering 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. 11) 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. 12) That to the greatest extent feasible route all utilities outside of tree protection zones. Installation within tree protection zones shall be done in accordance with an arborist's recommendations report submitted with the building permit. 13) That a revised tree protection plan to include utilities and building footprints shall be submitted with the building permit. 14) That one mitigation tree shall be planted with the purpose of on-site slope stabilization for tree #28 on the tree inventory (PL 1.0). I` December 22, 2015 (Bill oln ,Director Date ty Development Department i PA #2015-01892 432 Wimer/MMS Page 6 PA-2015-01892 391 E05CD 408 PA-2015-01892 391 E05CA 1101 PA-2015-01892 391 E05CD 501 BREAZEALE JOSEPH H/MAREN B BREWER RICHARD L CHIGNELL KIMBERLY A 1759 WESTWOOD DR 425 WIMER ST 507 GRANDVIEW DR CONCORD, CA 94521 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2015-01892 391 E05CD 502 PA-2015-01892 391 E05CD 402 PA-2015-01892 391 E05CA 702 CLOUSE STEVEN/WENDY GETZOFF HOWARD/LYNN W GIBB C PETER PO BOX 343 779 WRIGHTS CREEK DR 435 THORNTON WAY CARY, NC 27512 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2015-01892 391 E05CA 706 PA-2015-01892 391 E05CD 409 PA-2015-01892 391 E05CD 406 HANSON BRUCE B TRUSTEE ET AL HULSE JAMES L/LINDA RAE JONES RICHARD J/LEIGH E 419 WIMER ST 416 WIMER ST 705 WRIGHTS CREEK RD ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2015-01892 391 E05CD 405 PA-2015-01892 391 E05CD 500 PA-2015-01892 391 E05CA 701 KITZMAN DAVID M MCDONALD WILLIAM J TRUSTEE JR MILLS FAMILY TRUST ET AL 1780 NE BEULAH 720 GRANDVIEW DR 451 THORNTON WAY ROSEBURG, OR 97470 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2015-01892 391 E05CD 411 PA-2015-01892 391 E05CD 412 PA-2015-01892 391 E05CD 410 ROBBINS EUGENE ET AL ROBBINS EUGENE K/BRODERSEN SPRAGUE ANN ET AL BONNIE 635 WRIGHTS CREEK DR 635 WRIGHTS CREEK RD 827 ST ANDREWS WAY ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 EAGLE POINT, OR 97520 PA-2015-01892 391 E05CA 705 PA-2015-01892 391 E05CD 401 PA-2015-01892 STEINSIEK BILL/JILL T VAN VLECK JON TRUSTEE ET AL ADVANTAGE BUILDING DESIGN 430 THORNTON WAY 869 WRIGHTS CREEK DR PO BOX 964 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 I PA-2015-01892 PA-2015-01892 ! 432 Wimer KENCAIRN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING NOD 12/22/2015 545 A STREET, STE 3 1314-B CENTER DR, #452 18 ASHLAND, OR 97520 MEDFORD, OR 97501 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 December 22, 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 #2015-01892, 432 Wimer Street. I ON an mv Signat e of Employee Documend 12/2212015 } 'Chnic . a 7ineering i &Y Geologic Consulting September 26, 2015 Advantage Building and Design P.O. Box 1014 Medford, OR 97501 SUBJECT: Geotechnical Investigation 432 Wimer Street Ashland, Oregon At your request, Applied Geotechnieal Engineering and Geologic Consulting LLC (AGEGC) has completed a geotechnical investigation for the proposed single4amily home to be built at 432 Wimer Street in Ashland, Oregon. The intent of our work is to provide design recommendations for design and construction of the new home. Our work included a review of available geotechnical and geologic information for the property and vicinity, a ground-level reconnaissance of the property and vicinity, a test pit exploration, and engineering analyses. This report describes the work accomplished and provides our recommendations for development of the property. We understand the new home will consist of single-family, wood-frame structure. Due to the existing slopes, the new home will require concrete cantilevered retaining walls as part of the structure. In addition, due to the moderate slopes along the driveway location, retaining walls will be required to retain cut on the uphill side of the driveway and fill along the downhill side of the driveway. SITE DESCRIPTION A licensed geotechnical engineer and geologist provided by AGEGC completed site visits to the property in June and September 2015. The site is undeveloped, slopes down to the southwest, and is wooded with oaks. The slope is relatively uniform (hummocky topography was not observed). The site is bound on the north by Witner Street and on the east and west by residential driveways. During our reconnaissance in September 2015, significant damage was observed to the asphaltic concrete driveway on the east (uphill) side of the property. The cause of the damage could not be determined during our site visit. Indications of groundwater springs or seepage were not observed on the lot. Indications of deep- seated slope instability was not observed on the lot. A shallow test pit was completed on the lot during our June site visit. Surficial soils consist of silty sand soils (decomposed granite). Geologic maps of the area indicate the site is underlain by granite, Native slopes in the vicinity of the proposed home site are relatively uniform and no indications of deep-seated slope failures were observed We anticipate that groundwater typically occurs at depths of greater than 10 ft; however, perched groundwater likely occurs at the top of the weathered granite during periods of heavy and/or extended rainfall. T 02 21115 4116-15 432 wimer CONCLUSIONS A®a ®b dD."n e h L_ In our opinion, the property is suitable for development with the single-family residence. If our geotechnical recommendations for development of the lot are followed, in our opinion, there is no significant risk of slope instability on the lot. Recommendations for development and erosion control of the lot are provided below. Lot Development 1) Final graded slopes on the lot should be no steeper than 2H:1 V. Temporary cut slopes up to 12 ft high completed during dry weather may be excavated at a slope of/214:1V. All fill slopes should be overbuilt a minimum of 2 ft beyond final grades then trimmed back to design elevations using a trackhoe equipped with a smooth-lip bucket. The disturbed silty sand soils are highly susceptible to erosion and should be revegetated as soon as practical. Prior to placement of any fill, the ground surface in the fill area should be stripped of organics and loose surficial soils. The strippings are not suitable for use as compacted fill and should be removed from the site or used in landscaped areas. Slopes that will receive fill should be benched with relatively flat areas during fill placement. The benches should be a minimum of 12 ft wide. 2) Fill placed within 2 ft of driveway areas, the house footprint, retaining walls, and concrete flatwork should consist of compacted, structural fill. The on-site soil (without deleterious material) may be used as structural fill if properly moisture conditioned and compacted; however, it is typically not practical to use the on-site materials as structural fill during periods of wet weather. Structural fill may also be constructed of imported granular fill, such as 3/4- and 4-in.-minus crushed rock. Structural fill must be compacted to at least 95% of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 698, at a moisture content within 3% of optimum. Landscaping fill should be compacted to at least 90% of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 698. The ground surface within all areas to receive fill should be stripped of surficial organics prior to placement of the fill. 3) Structural loads may be supported on continuous spread footing foundations founded on stiff native, undisturbed silty sand soils or on structural fill over undisturbed stiff native soils. We recommend that pad foundations not be used for support of the residence. Foundation excavations should be completed using a backhoe or trackhoe equipped with a smooth-lip bucket. Spread footing foundations may be designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of up to 2,000 psf. This allowable soil bearing pressure assumes all footings will be founded as recommended in this report. The minimum width of any footing should not be less than 12 in., and footings should be established a minimum of 18 in. below the lowest adjacent exterior grade. 4) The site should be graded to provide positive drainage away from footings and exterior walls. Subsurface drains (foundation drains) should be provided adjacent to all exterior foundations. S) Concrete slab-on-grade floors should be underlain by a minimum of 9 in. of %-in.- minus imported crushed rock. We recommend installation of a moisture retarding membrane under the concrete slab to minimize wicking of moisture up through the 2 0 ' 4116-15 432 Wimer slab. The garage floor slab will be located below adjacent exterior grades. To reduce the risk of hydrostatic pressure on the underside of the slab, we recommend drain pipes be installed in the aggregate base for the slab on about 10 ft center to center spacing. The drain pipes should be hard-piped to drain into the storm water system. 6) We understand that retaining walls will be constructed as part of the site grading for the home and driveway. The following embedded wall design recommendations assume that the wall backfill consists of clean granular material (sand or crushed rock) within at least 2 ft of the wall, the backfill is compacted to 90 to 95% of ASTM D 698, the backfill is level within 10 ft of the wall, and the embedded wall is fully drained, i.e., hydrostatic pressure cannot act on the wall. Walls that are allowed to yield by tilting about their base (cantilevered retaining walls are typically considered yielding) should be designed using a lateral earth pressure based on an equivalent fluid having a unit weight of 35 pef We further recommend that horizontal earth pressures due to surcharge loads be taken as an additional uniform horizontal pressure (rectangular pressure diagram) of 0.5 times the intensity of the surcharge load acting over the entire height of the wall. Horizontal shear forces can be resisted partially or completely by frictional forces developed between the base of spread footings and the underlying soil and by passive soil resistance. The total frictional resistance between the footing and the soil is the normal force times the coefficient of friction between the soil and the base of the footing. We recommend an ultimate value of 0.4 for the coefficient of friction; the normal force is the sum of the vertical forces (dead load plus real live load). 7) We estimate that relatively hard granite occurs at a depth of greater than 40 ft at the site. In our opinion, seismic design for the new home can be completed based on a Site Class C material. 8) The project geotechnical engineer should complete site visits on an intermittent basis to observe and evaluate site stripping, benching for fills, fill placement and compaction, and foundation excavations and subgrade prior to placement of concrete for the foundations. The owner and/or project earthwork contractor should advise the geotechnical engineer when this work will be started and as it is ongoing. is t> 02 2015 3 4116-15 432 Wimer Erosion Control The intent of the erosion control plan is to decrease erosion and off site migration of soils. This can be accomplished by decreasing surface water runoff by means of vegetation, hay bales and rock coverings or checkdams; holding the soil in place by establishing a vegetation cover as soon as practical; and by directing surface water flow away from areas disturbed by construction activities. Gutters and downspouts should be installed as soon as practical during construction. 1) We anticipate that a portion of the property will be disturbed during construction of the proposed structures, driveway, and site grading including the backyard fill. Landscape areas on the lot where the vegetation is disturbed or removed should be revegetated as soon as practical. The silty sand (decomposed granitic soils) is easily eroded when disturbed by construction activities. Mulch consisting of either straw, wood cellulose fiber or other similar materials can be placed in areas where landscaping will not be established prior to September 15. If required, the mulch should be applied at a rate of approximately 2,000 pounds per acre. Downspouts and other drains should be connected (bard-piped) to the storm water system as soon as practical. 2) We recommend all exposed soil areas (all graded areas) be graded such that surface water upslope of the disturbed area is directed away from the exposed soil. Any surface water flow on the exposed soil should move as sheet flow rather than concentrated flow. I 3) Runoff from the disturbed portion of the site may contain some soil material. To further reduce the risk of sediment leaving the site during periods of wet weather (typically winter and spring months), small settling basins can be installed at the start of the wet season below the site at the discharge end of graded areas, ditches and swale areas. Straw bales should be staked along the downhill edge of the settling basin. Water can be discharged from the settling basin using 4-in.-diameter flex pipe. The settling basins should be installed no later than September 30. i 4) Straw bales or silt fencing should be installed along the downhill edge of the proposed construction. The silt fence should be embedded at least 4 in. into the ground and should be staked in place. The straw bales should be placed end-to-end and staked in place to prevent separation between the bales. The silt fence and straw bales should be placed to direct surface water runoff from the site towards the settlement basins. 5) During construction and prior to establishment of the site landscaping, the erosion control measures roust be monitored and will require periodic maintenance. Maintenance may include removal of sediment from upslope of the straw bales or silt fence, removal of sediment from the settlement basins, and the placement of additional straw bales or sediment fence. The amount of required maintenance of the erosion control measures will decrease significantly as the landscaping becomes established. 6) The project geotechnical engineer (or person the owner designates as responsible for the erosion control measures) should evaluate the erosion control measures periodically during construction, including on about September 30 and after stone events. 4 ! Q 4116415 432 wiener LIMITATIONS This report has been prepared to aid the owner's design team in the design and construction of the proposed home on the referenced building lot. The scope is limited to the specific project and location described hercin, and our description of the project represents our understanding of the significant aspects of the project relevant to the design and construction of the proposed structure. The conclusions and recommendations submitted in this report are based on the information described above, It should be understood that variations in subsurface conditions may be present away from the test pit location. If subsurface conditions different than those described in this report are encountered during construction, AGEGC should be notified to evaluate and change our recommendations as needed. We have performed these services in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices in southern Oregon at the time the study was accomplished. No other warranties, either expressed or implied, are provided. Please contact AGEGC if you have any questions or require additional information. Sincerely, Applied Geotechnical Engineering and Geologic Consulting LLC Robin L. Warren, G.E., R.G. 0 PRO FFS Principal 45PE Tr' I r R N 0 l'25,~~~ r ® L. W P¢~ Renewal: June 2016 02 ~tSs i 5 KenCairn Landscape Architecture 7 22 16 20 10 18 23 23 0 9 19 24 31 c 8 20 25~ N.. - AVI,LRAISCOY ~21 26 CONG E1E0n14ENIA" _ - . ~-32 aAU11111 Ongn 301.33 ELEVATION c PLAN 174 pp 6 a ~e ~~Q 545 A ST, STE a, ASHLAND, OR 97520 641.645.1465 m a ye ~O Ga T t 1 1 Q x P2R SOTAE F d / ! Dad o ~Io, h REG.a 943 N 0 4 v U K-y Ken,aan F _ J / 1 ! 17 FENCE CONTINUOUSLY 2T 11112199 r AROUNDTREEAS 'APE ARG SHOWN ON PLAN I, 11 1 30 - 28 6'TALL CONTINUOUS CHAINLINK 12 _ 29 i m NOTE: FENCING ON CONCRETE PIERS Drawn By: 1 m 1 0 ,1. TREE PROTECTION FENCING SHALL BE INSTALLEDPRIORTOSTARTOF STAFF CONSTRUCTION AND SHALL REMAIN IN PLACE THROUGH COMPLETION OF 5 PROJECT. X 2. FENCING SHALL ONLY BE REMOVED TEMPORARILY FOR WORK TO BE DONE SCALEV 30'-0" 6 X WITHIN DRIPLINEAND REPLACED AT THE END OF EACH WORK DAY. - 3. ALL EXCAVATION WITHIN ORIPLINEOF TREES SHALL BE DONE BY HAND. IF ROOTS _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ OVER2 IN DIAMETERARE ENCOUNTERED, CONTRACTOR SHALL CONSULT WITH * u LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT ORARSORIST BEFORE PROCEEDING. EXISTING I6 %IUIIDttEASEMENi 4. TREE ROOTS ENCOUNTERED DURING CONSTRUCTION, SHALL BE CUT CLEANLY AT A 90 DEGREE ANGLE AND PACKED WITH DAMP SOIL IMMEDIATELY. S00'3033E - - 801.3.3 - S. DURING CONSTRUCTION ALL TREES TO REMAIN SHALL BE IRRIGATED ONA WEEKLY BASIS OR AS NECESSARY WITH LEAKY PIPE ENCIRCLING THE TREE FROM / TRUNK OUT TO DRIP LINE. G LDRIVEWAY A¢DAA ,AV' AVµEAMG ly1V90 15 1 TREE PROTECTION 14 13 TREE LEGEND TREE PROTECTION AND REMOVAL NOTES # Species DBH Heightin Crown Radius Tree Protection Tolerance to Condition Notes 1. BEFORE BEGINNING WORK, THE CONTRACTOR IS REQUIRED TO MEET WITH THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT ATTHE SITE TO REVIEW ALL WORK PROCEDURES, ACCESS ROUTES, STORAGE AREAS, AND (Inches) Feet in Feet Zone Radius In Feel Construction TREE PROTECTION MEASURES. 1 Quemus kellogge 7 25 8 8.75 Fair 2 Quemus kelloggil 13,17,18,21 35 25 25 Excellent MuHlSlem 2• FENCES MUST BE ERECTED TO PROTECT TREES TO BE PRESERVED AS SHOWN IN DIAGRAM. FENCING SHALL BE 6'TALL TEMPORARY CHAIN LINK PANELS INSTALLED WITH METAL CONNECTIONS TO ALL PANELS AREA INTEGRATED, THESE FENCES SHALL BE INSTALLED SO THAT IT DOES NOT ALLOW PASSAGE OF PEDESTRIANS AND/ OR VEHICLES THROUGH R. FENCES DEFINEA SPECIFIC PROTECTION W CD 3 Ouetws kalloggli 10 23 9 12.5. Fair Barbed Wire In trunk ZONE FOR EACH TREE ORGROUPOFTREES. FENCES ARE TO REMAIN UNTIL ALL SITE WORK HAS BEEN COMPLETED. FENCES MAY NOT BE RELOCATED OR REMOVED WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF THE 4 Quemuskelloggii 0 30 8 10 Poor Some Dead, Leaning LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. V LO 6 Quemus kelloggii 9 28 7 11.5 Felt REMOVE 3. CONSTRUCTION TRAILERS AND TRAFFIC AND STORAGE AREAS MUST REMAIN OUTS] DE FENCED AREAS AT ALL TIMES. Z 6 Quemus kellogg6 9 25 8.5 11.5 Good REMOVE 4. ALL PROPOSED UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AND DRAIN OR IRRIGATION LINES SHALL BE ROUTED OUTSIDE THE TREE PROTECTION ZONE. IF LINES MUST TRANSVERSE THE PROTECTION AREA, THEY 7 Quemus garryene B 16 30 13 20 Good SHALL BE TUNNELED, BORED UNDER THE TREE ROOTS, OR DUG BY HAND. ~ Z Quemus kellog8ii 6.9 30 10 11.5 Good Multi-stem ® 0 9 Quemus kelloggii 10 33 12 12.5 Fair REMOVE 5. NO MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, SPOIL, OR WASTE OR WASHOUT WATER MAY BE DEPOSITED, STORED, OR PARKED WITHIN THE TREE PROTECTION ZONE (FENCED AREA). W W V 10 Quemus kelloggii 10 30 11 12S Good 8. ADOITIONALTREE PRUNING REQUIRED FOR THE CLEARANCE DURING CONSTRUCTION MUST BE PERFORMED BY A QUALIFIED ARBORISTAND NOT BY CONSTRUCTION PERSONNEL. V+ 1O~~ W 11 Quemus Aerryana 7,7 28 10 8.75 Fair Multi-slam, REMOVE 7. ANY HERBICIDES PLACED UNDER PAVING MATERIALS MUST BE SAFE FOR USE AROUND TREES AND LABELED FOR THAT USE. 12 Quemus garryana 9,10,11 35 14 12,5 Good Multi-stern, REMOVE v/ 0 13 Quercus ena 5,8,6,7,8 25 14 10 Good IAuN-slam B IF INJURY SHOULD OCCUR TO ANY TREE DURING CONSTRUCTION, THE TREE CONSULTANT SHOULD EVALUATE IT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE SO THAT APPORPRIATE TREATMENTS CAN BE APPLIED. ALL A&0' DAMAGE CAUSED BY CONSTRUCTION 70 EXISTING TREES SHALL BE COMPENSATED FOR, BEFORE THE PROJECT WILL BE CONSIDERED COMPLETE. 14 Quemus keibggif 7 30 9 8.75 Fair REMOVE - - - Uj W 15 Quemus kellogg6 10 20 10 12,5 Poor Some dead, REMOVE 9. THE PROJECT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT MUST MONITOR ANY GRADING, CONSTRUCTION, DEMOLITION, OR OTHER WORK THAT IS EXPECTED TO ENCOUNTER TREE ROOTS. - V/ 16 Quemus ganyane 8 30 7 10 poor Sparse, Fence in trunk 10. ALL TREES REMAINING SHALL BE IRRIGATED ONAWEEKLY BASIS WHEN WORK OCCURS BETWEEN JUNE isI THROUGH OCTOBER 1st. IRRIGATION SHALL WET THE SOIL WITHIN THE TREE PROTECTION. z 17 Quemus garryena 6.5 25 8 8.125 Fair Fence in trunk, Multl-stem ZONE TO A DEPTH OF 30 INCHES. 0 5 18 O-rcua keiloggii 9 32 10 11.5 Good REMOVE 11. EROSION CONTROL DEVICES SUCH AS SILT FENCING, DEBRIS BASINS, AND WATER DIVERSION STRUCTURES SHALL BE INSTALLED TO PREVENT SILTATION AND/ OR EROSION WITHIN THE TREE N 19 Quamus kelloggii 10 30 10 12.5 Fair PROTECTION ZONE. 20 Quemus kelloggii 6,6 23 7 7.5 Goad Multi-stem, REMOVE 12. BEFORE GRADING, PAD PREPARATION, OR EXCAVATION FOR THE FOUNDATIONS, FOOTINGS, WALLS, OR TRENCHING, ANY TREES WITHIN THE SPECIFIC CONSTRUCTION ZONE SHALL BE ROOT PRUNED I d' Q 21 Quemus kelbggil 9 30 11 11.5 Good Fence In trunk FOOT OUTSIDE THE TREE PROTECTION ZONE BY CUTTING ALL ROOTS CLEANLY AT A90 DEGREE ANGLE TO A DEPTH OF 24 INCHES. ROOTS SHALL BE CUT BY MANUALLY DIGGING ATRENCH AND CUTTING EXPOSED ROOTS WITH A SAW, VIBRATING KNIFE, ROCK SAW, NARROW TRENCHER WITH SHARP BLADES, OR OTHER APPROVED ROOT-PRUNING EQUIPMENT. 22 Quemus gerryana a 30 0 10 Fair Fence In trunk 23 Quemus garryana 9 30 12 itb Fair Lower dead, REMOVE 13. ANY ROOTS DAMAGED DURING GRADING OR CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE EXPOSED TO SOUND TISSUE AND CUT CLEANLY ATA 90 DEGREE ANGLE TO THE ROOT WITH ASAW. PLACE DAMP SOIL AROUND ALL CUTROOTS TOA DEPTH EQUALING THE EXISTING FINISH GRADE WITHIN 4 HOURS OF CUTS BEING MADE. REVISION DATE 24 Quemus kelloggn 9 33 13 11.5 Fair Lower dead, fence In trunk, REMOVE 25 Quemus kallggli 0 25 12 10 Good REMOVE 14. SPOIL FROM TRENCHES, BASEMENTS, OR OTHER EXCAVATIONS SHALL NOT BE PLACED WITHIN THE TREE PROTECTION ZONE, EITHER TEMPORARILY OR PERMANENTLY. 26 Quemus kelloggil 9 30 11 11.5 Fair Fence In trunk 15. NO BURN PILES OR DEBRIS PILES SHALL BE PLACED WITHIN THE TREE PROTECTION ZONE. NO ASHES, DEBRIS, OR GARBAGE MAY BE DUMPED OR BURIED WITHIN THE TREE PROTECTION ZONE. 27 Quemus ganyona 6 25 10 7.5 Good REMOVE 16. MAINTAIN FIRE-SAFE AREAS AROUND FENCED AREA. ALSO, NO HEAT SOURCES, FLAMES, IGNITION SOURCES, OR SMOKING IS ALLOWED NEAR MULCH OR TREES. 28 Quemus kelloggli 8,10,10,10 40 16 12.5 Good Muld-stem, REMOVE TREE 29 Quemus kellogge 12,13 40 20 16.25 Excellent Muldslem 17. DO NOT RAISE THE SOIL LEVEL WITHIN THE DRIP LINES TO ACHIEVE POSITIVE DRAINAGE, EXCEPT TO MATCH GRADES WITH SIDEWALKS AND CURBS, AND IN THOSE AREAS, FEATHER THE ADDED TOPSOIL BACK TO EXISTING GRADE AT APPROXIMATELY 3:1 SLOPE. INVENTORY/ 30 Quemus kellaggd 12 40 20 15 Excellent Laming 31 Quercusganyaoa 8,9,12 40 18 15 Fair Fence in trunk, Mdti-stem 18. REMOVE THE ROOT WAD FOR EACH TREE THAT IS INDICATED ON THE PLAN AS BEING REMOVED, o PROTECTION 32 Quercuskelloggii 10 35 15 125 Fair Fence in trunk 19. EXCEPTIONS TO THE TREE PROTECTION SPECIFICATIONS MAY ONLY BE GRANTED IN EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES WITH WRITTEN APPROVAL FROM THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. PLAN Canopy of trees SHEET KEY ISSUE DATE; Trees e to remain removeobe 0 Tree OCTOBER22,2015 moved protection PL 1.0 TREE PROTECTION PLAN - PL 2.0 SLOPE ANALYSIS 0 ,151 I6( 3d PL 3.0 GRADING PLAN scale: 1"=30'-0" 1. PL 3.1 CUT/FILL ANALYSIS AbM3At8a Db KenCairn ® CONCRETE DRIVEWAY Landscape Architecture S00°30'33"E 3% `J 00 MW 35% -T ~X x \ X X X\\ \V~~~~ 1 X ,61o 250/( 3no/ 30 /0 35 /o~ 141.A465 \ \ nSTA v °0 30 /0 25/ ° o qqq~ ° n~. - jQV 300- 35°/ y Drawn By: b~ b STAFF i SCALE 1 16'-D" "''CANT LEVER ` u°oi DECK OVER 35%+ 00 z i -M V- Z "'Z 25%-30% --25°/a 30% - E 6TING 10' PU - TILITY EASE T. 35 o 30% w N ~r V Lo Z CY) W C EL DRIVE A DR/V W Q WAY SAY Wry W IY LLJ U)o SLOPE ANALYSIS LEGEND Co Q 03-' C14 M Less than 25% V Q I REVISION DATE 25% TO 30% SLOPE 30% T o ANALYSIS 035% SHEET KEY ISSUE DATE: OCTOBER 22, 2015 PL 1.0 TREE PROTECTION PLAN n Greater than 35% yI,, (Ur PL 2,0 SLOPE ANALYSIS 0 PL 3,0 GRADING PLAN scale: 1"=16'-0" L ~ PL 3.1. CUT/FILL ANALYSIS KenCairn Landscape Architecture 23 0 0 CONCRETE DRIVEWAY ® AVM3AR1a OV ® S00a30'33"E - - - - - - - - x - ~ ~x 6459 ST, STE eB, . ASHLAND. 0•"97520 X 547.645.1485 ivS T~RC d V~ - STATE OF < OREGON r .m.d REG. #493 ; p Kerry KenCairn U i. 11/12,99 i ADO \ I 4 Drawn By: I STAFF 4, i \ 2 SCALE V=15'4" L,\ 00 Z x, LJ i1 v~ A \ +3 II T~ - A 1 ` : FXISTIPaG 10' {UPf:IC UTILITY BASEMENT' 1 5 poG `Q,\ X, y . LLJ Q Z 0 0°30'33"E - 90ui (D Ix C/) o O EL DRIVEWAY RlVEwAY' TW O Is z r _ ~ J ®cv= . =CV) CO SITE KEY AVERAGE LOT SLOPE REVISION DATE 2410 EXISTING CONTOUR TOTAL LOT AREA 25,276 SQUARE FEET 1 PROPOSED CUT (FEET) TOTAL AREA OF DISTURBANCE INCLUDING BUILDINGS: 7,308 SQUARE FEET PROPOSED FILL (FEET) PERCENT OF LOT DISTURBANCE INCLUDING BUILDINGS: 28.9% CUT/FILL oar ANALYSIS UNDISTURBED 17,968 S.F. = 71,1% (25% + 36% = 61 % REQUIRED) • MAXIMUM CUT OUTSIDE FOOTPRINT OF BUILDINGS: 6 FEET SHEET KEY ISSUE DATE; • MAXIMUM FILL OUTSIDE FOOTPRINT OF BUILDINGS: 6 FEET PL 1.0 TREE PROTECTION PLAN OCTOBER 22,2015 PL 2.0 SLOPE ANALYSIS I I-I • ALL CUTS AND FILLS AS SHOWN ON PLAN PL 3.0 GRADING PLAN 0 yt ~r I~ PL 3.1 CUT/FILL ANALYSIS scale: 1"=16'-0" 3.1 ASHLAND TREE COMMISSION PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENT SHEET November 5, 2015 PLANNING ACTION: PA-2015-01892 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 432 Wimer Street APPLICANT: Advantage Building and Design OWNER: Steven and Wendy Clouse DESCRIPTION: A request for Physical and Environmental Constraints Review and Exceptions to Hillside Design Standards and Street Standards in order to construct a single family residence. The proposal includes a request to remove 11 trees. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single Family Residential; ZONING: R-1-10; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 lE 05CD; TAX LOTS: 502. The Tree Commission recommends approval of the application as submitted, with the following recommendations: i 1) That an on-site arborist to oversee excavation near tree labeled as #2 on the tree inventory. If any roots are located near an excavation cut, they shall be cut cleanly by a qualified arborist. 2) That mitigation, or payment in lieu, is required for removals of trees listed as being in Fair, Good, or Excellent condition in the tree inventory plan. E f Department of Community Development Tel: 541.488-5350 CITY OF 51 Winbum Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 «,xixv.ashland.or.us ti. CITY F Planning Department, 51 Winburli Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520 541-488-5305 Fax: 541-552-2050 www.ashland,or,us TTY: 1-800-735-2900 A~ -AND NOTICE OF APPLICATION PLANNING ACTION: PA-2015-01892 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 432 Wimer Street APPLICANT: Advantage Building and Design OWNER: Steven and Wendy Clouse DESCRIPTION: A request for Physical and Environmental Constraints Review and Exceptions to Hillside Design Standards and Street Standards in order to construct a single family residence. The proposal includes a request to remove 11 trees. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single Family Residential; ZONING: R-1- 10; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 1 E 05CD; TAX LOTS: 502. 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. i' NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: November 20, 2015 DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION OF WRITTEN COMMENTS: December 4, 2015 l., W a a WIMER ST SUBJECT PROPERTY gs 432 Winner Street PA2015-01892 a o Y w' w' U (0 IT I-T 1:500 erne oe n -'`55a -AN' 1 inch = 50 feet u.>c4w b,<n,m,w unq.rM e„n no wnrnny of u,rty. y'~W A®R,Nrt.,,trvcNn,, hetlltl,,, e,.eemMOrrwOw,Y KK,lbnt ,noon N uaepene,My fi,W vertlbG loflabbrc„Mtor butlon. 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. GAcomm-dev\planning\Planning Actions\Noticing FolderWailed Notices & Signs\2015\PA-2015-01892.docx PHYSICAL & ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS 18.3.10.050 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. EXCEPTION TO THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR HILLSIDE LANDS 18.3.10.090.H An exception under this section is not subject to the variance requirements of chapter 18.5.5 Variances. An application for an exception is subject to the Type I procedure in section 18.5.1.050 and may be granted with respect to the development standards for Hillside Lands if the proposal meets all of the following criteria. 1. 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. 2. The exception will result in equal or greater protection of the resources protected under this chapter. 3. The exception is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty. 4. The exception is consistent with the stated Purpose and Intent of chapter 18.3.16 Physical and Environmental Constraints Overlay chapter and section 18.3.10.090 Development Standards for Hillside Lands. EXCEPTION TO STREET STANDARDS 18.4.6.020.B.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. G:\comm-dev\planning\Planning Actions\Noticing Folder\Mailed Notices & Signs\2015\PA-2015-01892.docs 04 803 6013 1100 704, 700 150++!~ g Fa '43 g r i 401 rr' 502 ii I 401 1 102 106 40 i 1 i 105 405 1 [ 411 40d 170 11~ iia 1 40 119 1~ 11 z g I 403 I 01 407 105 j 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, i. Oregon 97520, in the Community Development Department. G 2. On November 20, 2015 1 caused to be mailed, by regular mail, in a sealed k` 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 #2015-01892, 432 Wimer. Signature of Employee DocumenW 11/20/2015 PA-2015-01892 391 E05CD 408 PA-2015-01892 391 E05CA 1101 PA-2015-01892 391 E05CD 501 BREAZEALE JOSEPH H/MAREN B BREWER RICHARD L CHIGNELL KIMBERLY A 1759 WESTWOOD DR 425 WIMER ST 507 GRANDVIEW DR CONCORD, CA 94521 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2015-01892 391 E05CD 502 PA-2015-01892 391 E05CD 402 PA-2015-01892 391 E05CA 702 CLOUSE STEVEN/WENDY GETZOFF HOWARD/LYNN W GIBB C PETER PO BOX 343 779 WRIGHTS CREEK DR 435 THORNTON WAY CARY, NC 27512 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2015-01892 391 E05CA 706 PA-2015-01892 391 E05CD 409 PA-2015-01892 391 E05CD 406 HANSON BRUCE B TRUSTEE ET AL HULSE JAMES L/LINDA RAE JONES RICHARD J/LEIGH E 419 WIMER ST 416 WIMER ST 705 WRIGHTS CREEK RD ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2015-01892 391 E05CD 405 PA-2015-01892 391 E05CD 500 PA-2015-01892 391 E05CA 701 KITZMAN DAVID M MCDONALD WILLIAM J TRUSTEE JR MILLS FAMILY TRUST ET AL 1780 NE BEULAH 720 GRANDVIEW DR 451 THORNTON WAY ROSEBURG, OR 97470 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 1 fPA-2015-01892 391 E05CD 411 PA-2015-01892 391 E05CD 412 PA-2015-01892 391 E05CD 410 ROBBINS EUGENE ET AL ROBBINS EUGENE K/BRODERSEN SPRAGUE ANN ET AL 635 WRIGHTS CREEK DR BONNIE 827 ST ANDREWS WAY ASHLAND, OR 97520 635 WRIGHTS CREEK RD EAGLE POINT, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2015-01892 391 E05CA 705 PA-2015-01892 391 E05CD 401 PA-2015-01892 STEINSIEK BILL/JILL T VAN VLECK JON TRUSTEE ET AL ADVANTAGE BUILDING DESIGN 430 THORNTON WAY 869 WRIGHTS CREEK DR PO BOX 964 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2015-01892 PA-2015-01892 432 Wimer KENCAIRN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING NOC 11/20/15 545 A STREET, STE 3 1314-B CENTER DR, #452 18 % ASHLAND, OR 97520 MEDFORD, OR 97501 Photo - Google Photos https://photos.google.com/search/ tra /photo/AF1QipP2RtB4Utl6_... t A zffia I' r r ' . v ~ t f_ ~Yis3r,^ L v; z 9 I Item moved to trash UNDO 1 of 1 12/3/2015 4:10 PM Photo - Google Photos https://photos,google.com/search/-tra-/Photo/AFIQipMR.nFh3G.. i 201° i item moved to trash UNDO 1 of 1 12/3/2015 4:08 PM Photo ® Google Photos https://pliotos.google.coin/searcb/ tra /photo/AFIQipNV?kn4GZA... jl~ z {s a tt ~ 'I I i 4 I I: I7 1 of 1 12/3/2015 4:11 PM FINDINGS F FACT PHYSICAL AND ENVIONRMENTAL CONSTRAINTS REVIEW PERMIT FOR DEVELOPMENT OF HILLSIDE LANDS *EARTH ADVANTAGE CONSTUCTION* SUBJECT PROPERTY 432 Wimer Street 391E 05CD #502 PROPERTY OWNER Steven and Wendy Clouse APPLICANT Melanie Smith Advantage Building and Design 0 2 . 9 1 432 WIMER STREET Subject Property Address: 432 Wimer Street Map Tax Lots: 391E 05CD #502 Property Owner: Steven and Wendy Clouse PO BOXT'C,3 )q Cary, NC 27512 Applicant: Advantage Building and Design Melanie Smith 535 W Nevada Street Ashland, OR 97520 Landscape Architect: KenCairn Landscape Architecture Kerry KenCairn 545 A Street, Suite 3 Ashland, OR 97520 Geotechnical Expert: Applied Geotechnical Engineering Robin Warren 1314-8 Center Drive #452 Medford, OR 97501 Comprehensive Plan Designation: Single Family Residential Uri' 02 A115 Zoning: R-1-10 Lot Area: 25,260.8 /.58 ac. Re guest: 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 Tree Removal Permit to remove eleven trees. Property Background: The subject property is located on the south side of Wimer Street beyond the intersection of Thornton Way. Wimer Street is a 20-foot wide, unimproved gravel road along the frontage of the parcel. The lot was created in 1980 by a minor land partition which divided the property to the west at 507 Grandview into three parcels. The subject property and the property to the south at 720 Grandview were divided off and are within the city limits. The parent parcel is outside of the city limits. The subject property is zoned single family residential (R-1-10). The property to the north, across Wimer is zoned R-1-7.5, the properties to the east and south are zoned R-1-10. All of the adjacent properties are occupied by single family homes and associated accessory structures. 2 432 WIMER STREET The property is 25,276 square feet in area and is vacant of structures. The lot slopes downhill away from the street to the southwest. The west half of the property has slopes of more than 25 percent with some areas between 30 to 35 percent and a few small areas where the slope is more than 35 percent. The average slope of the property from north to south is approximately 13 percent. There is a steep cross slope that is most pronounced along the frontage of the property and along the east property line. The rear half of the property has the least amount of slope but is more than 150 feet from the Wimer Street right-of-way. There are 50 trees in the vicinity of the new construction. The majority of the site trees are along the east property line. All of the trees are Oaks, either California black or white oak (Quercus kelloggi and Quercus garryana). Project Proposal: The request is to construct a new single family residential home on a vacant lot. The site is unique in that there are relatively few parcels of land on south facing slopes in the city. The parcel is oversized for the zoning but because of the lack of street improvements on Wimer and topographical constraints that prevent the street from widening, the parcel cannot be further partitioned. The proposed residence is a 2541 square foot single story structure with a 531 square foot attached garage. A 15-foot wide driveway at the northwest corner of the property is proposed to access the garage, the guest parking and vehicle maneuvering areas. The residence is setback from the front property line 40 feet to preserve the five trees along Wimer Street and more specifically, the large, beautiful Oak tree located at the front of the property. The residence is placed against the hillside along the east property line below the line of smaller oak trees. At the rear of the residence another group of large, well established oak trees are present. Below are the criteria addressing the standards for Hillside Development. Two design exceptions are requested. One is for the downhill wall height on the southwest corner of the residence which will be 22- feet to natural grade but less than 20-feet to finished grade. The area where this is occurring is on lands of less than 25 percent. The other is an exception to the design standards for more than a 36-foot horizontal plan without offsets. This applies to the east wall of the residence and garage. 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. The proposed residence is sited in a sensitive manner to protect as many of the native oak trees on the property while not disturbing the areas with more than 35 percent slope. The residence is below the grade of the other residences in the vicinity and through the application of the requirements of the geotechnical expert, the structural engineer and implementation of the erosion controlplans 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. Approximately 50 percent of the footprint of the proposed residence is placed into the portions of the property that are considered hillside slopes. The east wall of the residence will shore up the hie rl 3 432 WIMER STREET the proposed landscape block retaining walls on the downhill side will protect downhill properties. The structures foundation will be engineered and the geotechnical expert will provide periodic inspects of the site to verb their development requirements are being complied with. Erosion control will be installed on site and maintained throughout the duration of the construction. 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 proposed residence is located on the property in a manner thatpreserves the majority of the sites trees and does not encroach into the areas with the steepest slopes. The residence is relatively small by comparison to the structures that exist in the impact area. The average size of the residences within 200- feet of the subject property is 2,824. The proposed residence at 2541 square feet is significantly less than the existing development of the surrounding area. Very little excavation and filling of the site, especially in the vicinity of the native oak trees is proposed. This is to reduce the impacts of development on those trees. Additionally, the majority of the property including the areas near the oak trees is proposed to not have modifications through the planting of vegetation or installation of irrigation. 16.3.10.090 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. There is a small portion of 35 percent land that is proposed to have the structure cantilevered over the slope but the structure will be on land that is less than 35 percent. The geo-technical report was performed by Robin Warren in September 2015. The report finds that site has relatively uniform topography with silty sand soil above a granite bedrock. No groundwater springs or seepage were observed. i The geotech recommends period inspections and states that inspection reports will be provided to the City of Ashland at the completion of the project. 6. 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. Robin Warren has reviewed and approves the grading, erosion control, drainage and retaining wall plans that have been designed by others with demonstrable expertise in the development of Hillside Lands. See geotechnical report from Robin Warren dated September 26, 2015. The plans provided demonstrate compliance with the standards from the code. 02 2015 2. Timing of Improvements. This proposal is exempt from this section of the code. 4 432 WIMER STREET 3. Retention in natural state. Based on the average slope of the property at 12.9 percent, 38 percent of the site is to remain in a natural state. The proposed site disturbance of 19,813 square feet is less than 22 percent of the site leaving 77 percent of the site undisturbed. (25% + 12.9% = 37.9%) 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. All cut slopes will be retained with retaining walls and stacked block landscape retaining walls. b. Exposed cut slopes, such as those for streets, driveway accesses, or yard areas, greater than seven feet in height shall be terraced. Cut faces on a terraced section shall not exceed a maximum height of five feet. Terrace widths shall be a 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 tallest retaining wall on the site is parallel to the front property line to the south of the beautiful Oak tree. The wall is seven feet tall. In order to terrace the wall more disturbance into the tree protection zone would be necessary. The code allows for walls up to seven feet to not be terraced 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 east wall of the structure is cut into the slope and the west wall (downhill) will have fill to bring the driveway up to the garage grade. The fill on the downhill side is retained with two stacked block retaining walls of one to five foot tall retaining walls. 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. All terraced areas will be revegetated with low growing, native ground cover plants. The areas directly adjacent to the residence are proposed to be hydro-seeded with native plant mixture. 5. 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 exceeding 20 feet are proposed. All fill areas are proposed to be retained. 02 MIS 5 432 WIMER STREET 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 northeast corner of the structure out to the north east corner of the lot to the Wimer Street right-of-way where the stub-outs for water and sewer 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 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. 6 432 WIMER STREET Two short terraces constructed of dry stacked landscaping blocks are proposed on the downhill side (west) of the driveway, vehicle maneuvering area and residence. b. & c. Avoid hazardous or unstable portions of the site. Based on the Geological Report there are no 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. More than 77 percent of the lot is 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. C. Surface and Groundwater Drainage. Due to the distance of the existing storm drain line (Wimer Street near Thornton Way) being so far from the site, alternate methods for stormwater facilities are being explored. Ideally, a dry well with a detention pond and adequate leach field are proposed. The project engineer and geotechnical expert are currently working on a design that complies with the Residential Structural Specialty Code. If difficulties arise in engineering this system, the stormwater will be piped from the site into a new line that would be extended from the site to the existing line at Wimer and Thornton. If the on-site dry well and detention pond are a viable option, they will be the fzrstfacilities constructed on site. 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 /Protection Plan (PL 1.0) completed by Kerry KenCairn, Landscape Architect. Details regarding the protection are attached. 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. See the attached Tree Inventory / Protection Plan (PL 1.0) completed by Kerry KenCairn, Landscape Architect. The majority of the sites trees are proposed for conservation. The eleven trees proposed for removal are ten-inches in DBH and less. 3. Tree Conservation in Project Design. All deciduous trees that are more than 12-inches DBH are proposed for preservation. The site layout including utility installation are in the areas of least disturbance and will not have rzcgotive impacts on the preserved trees. The minimum number of trees are proposed for removal. The trees pr Or"I oposed f¢og(~r~ `C a R9 02, 7 432 WIMER STREET E removal are smaller in stature and a number are unhealthy with decay, dead limbs, and fences within the trees trunk and l or are multi-stemmed. 4. Tree Protection. See the attached Tree Inventory /Protection Plan 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. 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 access, driveway and vehicle maneuvering area and the placement of the resident are all in response to the site topography and the locations of the trees. The trees are within the building envelope, the driveway, parking areas or will be negatively impacted by proposed cuts to a degree that they will not survive. All of the site trees are Oak which are adverse to construction impacts, the majority of trees, including the biggest, most beautiful trees on the site are all being preserved. 6. Tree Replacement. Eleven trees are proposed for removal that are subject to the requirements of this chapter. Due to the sites numerous native oaks, the location of the property within the wildfire hazard zone and being located on a south facing slope it is proposed that none of the trees removed be mitigated for on-site. This is because irrigation is notproposed outside of the areas directly adjacent to the residence and in the two terraces below the residence as it would have an adverse impact on the native oak trees. 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. Not applicable, the property was created in 1980. 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 is proposed that is less than 35 feet in height. b. Cut buildings into hillsides to reduce effective visual bulk. The north wall of the residence is cut into the hillside, the structure `hugs' the hillside to reduce the effective visual bulk. T 02 N15 8 432 WIMER STREET I. Split pad or stepped footings shall be incorporated into building design to allow the structure to more closely follow the slope. The residence is cut into the uphill slope on the property. The remaining area of the structure, approximately 50 percent is on land with less than 25 percent slope. Due to the limited slope, the driveway access and the garage, a stepped pad is not feasible and would increase the amount of excavation occurring onsite. ii. Reduce building mass by utilizing below grade rooms cut into the natural slope. Since below grade construction is not proposed, no below grade rooms are proposed. 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. One building wall on the east corner of the structure is 22 feet above natural grade. This end of the structure is proposed to have fill to allow the small rear yard area to be at the grade of the adjacent terrace level. The exposed wall height following regrading will be 20 feet. This portion of the structure is not on land of more than 25 percent pre or post construction. Regardless, the criteria addressing the exception to the hillside design standards have been included. 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. The east wall of the residence is proposed to have more than 36 feet of horizontal plane. See exception findings below. 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 a hipped roof with a series of intersecting ridges and valley. The ridges are of varying heights. No large gable ends are proposed on the downhill elevations. 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. There are no lower floor levels to provide deck space. There is one deck at the rear of the residence proposed which will have vertical supports that are less than 12 feet tall. 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. 9 432 WIMER STREET Natural colors selected from the predominant colors of the surrounding landscape will be used for the exterior paint color. 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. C. 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 1980. H. Exception to the Development Standards for Hillside Lands. 1. 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. There are two exceptions to the Hillside Development Standards. One if for a downhill wall height to exceed 20 feet on the south end of the residence and the other is to exceed the 36 foot of horizontal plan on the east side of the residence. The site is unique in that it is on a south facing exposure with a large number of trees in the steep right- of-way abutting the front property line and within the hillside areas that are along the east property line. The east half of the parcel is more than 25 percent grade for the first approximately 150 feet of the property. The westproperty line This wall of the structure is up against the hillside forming a retained area of slope behind the wall. The need for slope retention is evidenced by the damage to the driveway for the property to the east and the erosion created by the un-retained hillside. The structure is also below the adjacent neighbor to the east. Wimer Street along the frontage of the parcel is steep and the road is loose gravel In front of the property it is difficult to maneuver a vehicle without 4WD. Due to the narrow road and the loose road surface the applicant have elected to provide all of the necessary back-up, turn-around, guestparking and emergency vehicle maneuvering on the private property. The wall that is on the downhill side which will have a height of 22 feet from natural grade and 19 - 20 feet in height from finished grade is on the portions of the parcel that are less than 25 percent slope. Additionally, the exposed downhill wall height does meet the intent of the code since the post site work wall height will be less than 20 feet. 2. The exception will result in equal or greater protection of the resources protected under this chapter. The wall of more than 36 feet provides retention for the area of the property that has the hillside lands. The wall that is greater than 36 feet also allows for thepreservation of the majority of the sites Oak trees. The structure is placed more than 30 feet away from the property line yet is still into the hillside. The design also allows for the retention of the largest, healthiest oak trees on the property is 0 2 1,5.E 10 432 WIMER STREET encouraged not only through the hillside design standards but also the tree protection /preservation ordinance. 3. The exception is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty. The exceptions are the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty in meeting the code. Both of the design standards are for aesthetic purposes. There are no properties in the City that will be negatively affected by the proposed walls lengths and height as this is the last lot in the City limits, the structure is below the grade of the adjacent residences that are in the city. 4. The exception is consistent with the stated Purpose and intent of chapter 18.3.10 Physical and Environmental Constraints Overlay chapter and section 18.3.10.090 Development Standards for Hillside Lands. The exception is consistent with the Purpose and Intent of the Physical and Environmental Constraints Overlay and the Development Standards for Hillside Lands. The proposed residence and site layout limit alteration of topography and reduce encroachment upon, or alteration of the natural environment and; to provide for sensitive development in areas that are constrained by various natural features, such as the steep slopes in the front yard and the large oak trees at the front and rear of the proposed residence. 18.3.10.100 Development Standards for Wildfire Lands B. 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. Class B or better shingles will be used on the roof. Tree Removal Permit 18.5.7.040 Approval Criteria B. Tree Removal Permit. a. 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 18.3.10. There are 50 trees greater than six-inches in diameter at breast height (DBM on the property. Of these 18 trees proposed for removal, seven of which are not subject to the Tree Removal Permit and Physical and Environmental Constraints chapters. These trees are less than 18-inches in diameter at breast height. On vacant R-1 zoned properties in areas that are less than 25 percent slope, trees 18-inches and greater in DBH are not subject to regulation. There are I1 trees proposed for removal that are on lands greater than 25 percent slope and therefore they are subject to the tree removal criteria and the Physical and Environmental Constraints chapter. The trees are primarily clustered in the area that is designated as the buildable area and the removal of the trees is necessitated by the proximity of the trees to the proposed construction and because of the Oak trees sensitivity to development. b. 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. OC Orr) 11 432 WIMER STREET The removal of the trees will not have significant negative impact on erosion or soil stability. There are no surface waters present on the site. The removal will benefit the remaining oaks as competition for light, air and groundwater will be lessened. The trees proposed for removal are not part of a windbreak. c. 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. The removal of the trees will not have a significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes, canopies and species diversity. The site has only Oak trees, the largest, healthiest, and majority of the sites trees removal following removal of eleven trees. The entire hillside in the vicinity is forested with Oak trees. d. 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. The residential density of the site is 2.61 units. The site cannot be built out to that density because of other site constraints not particularly the trees. More than 75 percent of the sites trees will remain post development. e. 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. Due to the sites large number of remaining trees, that the remaining trees should not have irrigation introduced and designation as wildfire lands, the applicant is requesting to not mitigate the 11 trees proposed for removal. . Exception to Street Standards: 18.4.6.020 Applicability 0. Exceptions 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. The site is located beyond the "improved" section of Wimer Street. The street frontage is narrow, at only 20 feet wide and is gravel. There are slopes in excess of 30 percent along the frontage of the parcel excepting the northwest corner of the property and the Wimer Street right-of-way. The slope at the NW corner of the property, is less than 25 percent allowing for a reasonable access point to the property. This is also the location where the driveway for the adjacent property is located due to topographical constraints to the west of their driveway access. The topography necessitates that the driveways be closer than 24 feet. b The exception will result in equal or superior transportation facilities and connectivity considering the following factors where applicable. L 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 bicyclib 4{op'th roadway), and frequency of conflicts with vehicle cross traffic. 12 432 WIMER STREET ill. 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. The topography along the frontage of the property limits the available transportation facilities. Due to the property location there are no impacts to transit, bicycle facilities or pedestrian facilities. c. The exception is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty. The driveway will connect to Wimer Street just behind the `flare " of the existing gravel driveway to the west. No additional width will be necessary at the connection with the road than is already existing. d. The exception is consistent with the Purpose and Intent of the Street Standards in subsection 18.4.6.040.A. The request for the exception is consistent with the Purpose and Intent of the Street Standards which speak largely to improved roads with curb, gutter, parkrow and sidewalk Wimer Street in the vicinity lacks all of these features and a "curb-cut" is not proposed due to the gravel street. This portion of Wimer Street has very low traffic volumes due to it only accessing a few properties and the impacts of the driveways being closer than 24 feet with have little to no impact on adjacent properties. Conclusion: In conclusion, the applicant's find that the proposed moderately sized, single family residence will be a welcome addition in the neighborhood. The geotechnical report has indicated that the areas selected for development are suitable and has recommended erosion control, foundation type and retaining wall design. The sites south facing slope, the steep, gravel street adjacent to the parcel, the native oak trees and steep slopes in the areas that are reasonable for development due to the proximity to City services created development constraints. 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. ~r 02 01 13 432 WIMER STREET ti m & Geologic Consulting September 26, 2015 Advantage Building and Design P.O. Box 1014 Medford, OR 97501 SUBJE : Geotechnical Investigation 432 Wiener Street Ashland, Oregon At your request, Applied Geotechnieal Engineering and Geologic Consulting LLC (AGEGC) has completed a geotechnical investigation for the proposed single-family home to be built at 432 Wimer Street in Ashland, Oregon. The intent of our work is to provide design recommendations for design and construction of the new home. Our work included a review of available geotechnical and geologic information for the property and vicinity, a ground-level reconnaissance of the property and vicinity, a test pit exploration, and engineering analyses. This report describes the work accomplished and provides our recommendations for development of the property. We understand the new home will consist of single-family, wood-frame structure. Due to the existing slopes, the new home will require concrete cantilevered retaining walls as part of the structure. In addition, due to the moderate slopes along the driveway location, retaining walls will be required to retain cut on the uphill side of the driveway and fill along the downhill side of the driveway. SITE DESCRIPTION A licensed geotechnical engineer and geologist provided by AGEGC completed site visits to the property in June and September 2015. The site is undeveloped, slopes down to the southwest, and is wooded with oaks. The slope is relatively uniform (hummocky topography was not observed). The site is bound on the north by Wimer Street and on the east and west by residential driveways. During our reconnaissance in September 2015, significant damage was observed to the asphaltic concrete driveway on the east (uphill) side of the property. The cause of the damage could not be determined during our site visit. Indications of groundwater springs or seepage were not observed on the lot. Indications of deep- seated slope instability was not observed on the lot. A shallow test pit was completed on the lot during our June site visit, Surficial soils consist of silty sand soils (decomposed granite). Geologic maps of the area indicate the site is underlain by granite. Native slopes in the vicinity of the proposed home site are relatively uniform and no indications of deep-seated slope failures were observed. We anticipate that groundwater typically occurs at depths of greater than 10 ft; however, perched groundwater likely occurs at the top of the weathered granite during periods of heavy and/or extended rainfall. i~ ~6 411615 432 wimer In our opinion, the property is suitable for development with the single-family residence. If our geotechnical recommendations for development of the lot are followed, in our opinion, there is no significant risk of slope instability on the lot. Recommendations for development and erosion control of the lot are provided below. Lot Development 1) Final graded slopes on the lot should be no steeper than 21-1;1. V. Temporary cut slopes up to 12 ft high completed during dry weather may be excavated at a slope of 1/214:1V. All fill slopes should be overbuilt a minimum of 2 ft beyond final grades then trimmed back to design elevations using a trackhoe equipped with a smooth-lip bucket. The disturbed silty sand soils are highly susceptible to erosion and should be revegetated as soon as practical. Prior to placement of any fill, the ground surface in the fill area should be stripped of organics and loose surf vial soils. The strippings are not suitable for use as compacted fill and should be removed from the site or used in landscaped areas. Slopes that will receive fill should be benched with relatively flat areas during fill placement. The benches should be a minimum of 12 ft wide. 2) Fill placed within 2 IT of driveway areas, the house footprint, retaining walls, and concrete flatwork should consist of compacted, structural fill. The on-site soil (without deleterious material) may be used as structural fill if properly moisture conditioned and compacted; however, it is typically not practical to use the on-site materials as structural fill during periods of wet weather. Structural fill may also be constructed of imported granular fill, such as and 4-in.-minus crushed rock. Structural fill must be compacted to at least 95% of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 698, at a moisture content within 3% of optimum. Landscaping fill should be compacted to at least 90% of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 698. The ground surface within all areas to receive fill should be stripped of surficial organics prior to placement of the fill. 3) Structural loads may be supported on continuous spread footing foundations founded on stiff native, undisturbed silty sand soils or on structural fill over undisturbed stiff native soils. We recommend that pad foundations not be used for support of the residence. Foundation excavations should be completed using a backhoe or traekhoe equipped with a smooth-lip bucket. Spread footing foundations may be designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of up to 2,000 psf. This allowable soil bearing pressure assumes all footings will be founded as recommended in this report. The minimum width of any footing should not be less than 12 in., and footings should be established a minimum of 18 in. below the lowest adjacent exterior grade. 4) The site should be graded to provide positive drainage away from footings and exterior walls. Subsurface drains (foundation drains) should be provided adjacent to all exterior foundations. 5) Concrete slab-on-grade floors should be underlain by a minimum of 9 in. of 3/d-in.e minus imported crushed rock. We recommend installation of a moisture retarding membrane under the concrete slab to minimize wicking of moisture up through the 2 4116-15 432 wimer slab. The garage floor slab will be located below adjacent exterior grades. To reduce the risk of hydrostatic pressure on the underside of the slab, we recommend drain pipes be installed in the aggregate base for the slab on about 10 ft center to center spacing. The drain pipes should be hard-piped to drain into the storm water system. 6) We understand that retaining walls will be constructed as part of the site grading for the home and driveway. The following embedded wall design recommendations assume that the wall backfill consists of clean granular material (sand or crushed rock) within at least 2 ft of the wall, the backfill is compacted to 90 to 95% of ASTM D 698, the backfill is level within 10 ft of the wall, and the embedded wall is fully drained, i.e., hydrostatic pressure cannot act on the wall. Walls that are allowed to yield by tilting about their base (cantilevered retaining walls are typically considered yielding) should be designed using a lateral earth pressure based on an equivalent fluid having a unit weight of 35 pef. We further recommend that horizontal earth pressures due to surcharge loads be taken as an additional uniform horizontal pressure (rectangular pressure diagram) of 0.5 times the intensity of the surcharge load acting over the entire height of the wall. Horizontal shear forces can be resisted partially or completely by frictional forces developed between the base of spread footings and the underlying soil and by passive soil resistance. The total frictional resistance between the footing and the soil is the normal force times the coefficient of friction between the soil and the base of the footing. We recommend an ultimate value of 0.4 for the coefficient of friction; the normal force is the sum of the vertical forces (dead load plus real live load). 7) We estimate that relatively hard granite occurs at a depth of greater than 40 ft at the site. In our opinion, seismic design for the new home can be completed based on a Site i Class C material. 8) The project geotechnical engineer should complete site visits on an intermittent basis to observe and evaluate site stripping, benching for fills, fill placement and compaction, and foundation excavations and subgrade prior to placement of concrete for the foundations. The owner and/or project earthwork contractor should advise the geotechnical engineer when this work will be started and as it is ongoing. 3 OCT 02 2015 4116-15 432 wiener Erosion Control The intent of the erosion control plan is to decrease erosion and off-site migration of soils. This can be accomplished by decreasing surface water runoff by means of vegetation, bay bales and rock coverings or checkdams; holding the soil in place by establishing a vegetation cover as soon as practical; and by directing surface water flow away from areas disturbed by construction activities. Gutters and downspouts should be installed as soon as practical during construction, 1) We anticipate that a portion of the property will be disturbed during construction of the proposed structures, driveway, and site grading including the backyard U. Landscape areas on the lot where the vegetation is disturbed or removed should be revegetated as soon as practical. The silty sand (decomposed granitic soils) is easily eroded when disturbed by construction activities. Mulch consisting of either straw, wood cellulose fiber or other similar materials can be placed in areas where landscaping will not be established prior to September 15. If required, the mulch should be applied at a rate of approximately 2,000 pounds per acre. Downspouts and other drains should be connected (hard-piped) to the storm water system as soon as practical. 2) We recommend all exposed soil areas (all graded areas) be graded such that surface water upslope of the disturbed area is directed away from the exposed soil. Any surface water flow on the exposed soil should move as sheet flow rather than concentrated flow. 3) Runoff from the disturbed portion of the site may contain some soil material, To further reduce the risk of sediment leaving the site during periods of wet weather (typically winter and spring months), small settling basins can be installed at the start of the wet season below the site at the discharge end of graded areas, ditches and swale areas. Straw bales should be staked along the downhill edge of the settling basin. Water can be discharged from the settling basin using 4-in.-diameter flex pipe. The settling basins should be installed no later than September 30, 4) Straw bales or silt fencing should be installed along the downhill edge of the proposed construction. The silt fence should be embedded at least 4 in. into the ground and should be staked in place. The straw bales should be placed end-to-end and staked in place to prevent separation between the bales. The silt fence and straw bales should be placed to direct surface water runoff from the site towards the settlement basins. 5) During construction and prior to establishment of the site landscaping, the erosion control measures must be monitored and will require periodic maintenance. Maintenance may include removal of sediment from upslope of the straw bales or silt fence, removal of sediment from the settlement basins, and the placement of additional straw bales or sediment fence. The amount of required maintenance of the erosion control measures will decrease significantly as the landscaping becomes established. 6) The project geotecbnical engineer (or person the owner designates as responsible for the erosion control measures) should evaluate the erosion control measures periodically during construction, including on about September 30 and after storm events. 4 f~pY02 1 4116-15 432 winter LI ITTINS This report has been prepared to aid the owner's design team in the design and construction of the proposed home on the referenced building lot, The scope is limited to the specific project and location described herein, and our description of the project represents our understanding of the significant aspects of the project relevant to the design and construction of the proposed structure. The conclusions and recommendations submitted in this report are based on the information described above. It should be understood that variations in subsurface conditions may be present away from the test pit location. If subsurface conditions different than those described in this report are encountered during construction, AGEGC should be notified to evaluate and change our recommendations as needed. We have performed these services in accordance with generally accepted geoteehnical engineering practices in southern Oregon at the time the study was accomplished. No other warranties, either expressed or implied, are provided. i Please contact AGEGC if you have any questions or require additional information. Sincerely, Applied Geotechnical Engineering and Geologic Consulting LLC r i. Robin L. Warren, G.E., R.G. ~p 0 PRO FFS Principal 1 9 Si0, 45PE rr i R N L. \N Renewal: June 2016 L 5° n > Community Development Department r i Residential 51 Winburn Way, Ashland, OR 97520 Energy Checklist Code 541-488-0305 Fax 541-552-2050 Job Address SLI ( tq:6e_ -S-1, LX~ Permit # BD - Contractor or Contact Name ADOWTA(=Ae tl ~r ~Ca 4- DESi(I Phone 6` Heating System Type: Electric Gas Other Heated Floor Area: Sq. Ft Energy Star/Earth Advantage Home? Yes X No- (See handout for Energy Star minimum required values) BUIDING COMPONENTSA REQUIRED EQUIVALANT VALUEb BUILDER VALUES PERFORMANCE Wall insulation-above grade U-0.060 R-21C -2 t Wall insulation-below grade F-0,565 R-15' 6'1 Flat ceilin sf U-0.031 R-38 y 1-1 of Vaulted ceilin sg U-0,042 R-38g - :3 r Underfloors U-0.028 R-30 K -36) Slab edge perimeter F-0.520 R-15 Y i Heated slab interiors n/a R-10 t t Windowsl U-0.35 U-0.35 " 00,30 Window area limitationj.k n/a n/a Skylights' U-0.60 U-0.60 U - 69, ~ o Exterior doorsm U-0.20 U-0.20 Exterior doors w/>2.5 ft2 lazin n U-040 U-040 Forced air duct insulation n/a R-8 Two additional measures from table on back of this form 1,2,3,4,5,or 6 and A,B C,D,E,F or G -P a. As allowed in Section N1104.1, thermal performance of a component may be adjusted provided that overall heat loss does not exceed the total resulting from conformance to the required U-value standards. Calculations to document equivalent heat loss shall be performed using the procedure and approved U-values contained in Table N1104.1(1). b. R-Values used in this table are nominal for the insulation only in standard wood framed construction and not for the entire assembly. C. Wall insulation requirements apply to all exterior wood framed, concrete or masonry walls that are above grade. This includes cripple walls and rim joist areas. R-19 Advanced Frame or 2 x 4 wall with rigid insulation maybe substituted if total nominal insulation R-value is 18.5 or greater. d. The wall component shall be a minimum solid log or timer wall thickness of 3.5 inches (90 mm). e. Below-grade wood, concrete, or masonry walls include all walls that are below grade and do not include those portions of such wall that extend more than 24 inches (60916 mm) above grade. f. Insulation levels for ceilings that have limited attictrafter depth such as dormers, bay windows or similar architectural features totaling not more than 150 square feet (13.9 m2) in area may be reduced to not less than R-21. When reduced, the cavity shall be filled (except for required ventilation spaces). g. The maximum vaulted ceiling surface area shall not be greater than 50 percent of the total heated space floor area unless area has a 1.1-factor no greater than U-0.031. The U- factor of 0.042 is representative of a vaulted scissor truss. A 10-inch (254mm) deep rafter vaulted ceiling with R-30 insulation is U-0.033 and complies with this requirement, not to exceed 50 percent of the total heated space floor area. h. A=Advanced frame construction, which shall provide full required insulating value to the outside of exterior walls. i. Heated slab interior applies to concrete slab floors (both on and below grade) that incorporate a radiant heating system within the slab. Insulation shall be installed underneath the entire slab. j. Sliding glass doors shall comply with window performance requirements. Windows exempt from testing in accordance with Section NF1111.2, Item 3 shall comply with window performance requirements if constructed with thermal freak aluminum or wood, or vinyl, or fiberglass frames and double-pane glazing with low-emissivity coatings of 0.10 or less. Buildings designed to incorporate passive solar elements may include glazing with a U-factor greater than 0.35 by using Table N1104.1(1) to demonstrate equivalence to building envelope requirements. k. Reduced window area may not be used as a trade-off criterion for thermal performance of any component. 1. Skylight area installed a 2 percent or less of total heated space floor area shall be deemed to satisfy this requirement with vinyl, wood or thermally broken aluminum frames and double-pane glazing with low-emissivity coatings. Skylight U-factor is tested in the 20 degree (0.35 red) overhead plane in accordance NFRC standards. m. A maximum of 28 square feet (2.6 m2) of exterior door area per dwelling unit can have a U-factor of 0.54 or less, n. Glazing that is either double pane with low-e coating on one surface, or triple pane shall be deemed to comply with this U-0.40 requirement. i 1 certify that 1 will comply w' _ all applicable requirements of the energy code prior to the final inspection and/or Certificate of Occupancy being approved. Applicant or Owner Signature Date (over) CADoomerte end SottingsWoosokDesktoplNew FoldedEnerg/ Code Chooklist_Revised 31312yg1.doo Revised 3.13.12 I14 , { (i ENERGY EFFICIENCY TABLE N1101.1(2) ADDITIONAL MEASURES High efficiency walls & windows: 1 Exterior walls-U-0.047/1119+5 (insulation sheathing)MIPS, and one of the following options: Windows-Max 15 percent of conditioned area, or Windows-U-0.30 Hi efficiency envelope: q Exterior walls-U-0.058/11-21 Intermediate framing, and 0 Vaulted ceilings-U-0.033/11-30Ade, and Flat ceilings-U-0.025/R-49, and ' 2 Framed floors-U-0.025/R-38, and Windows-U-0,30; and Doors-All doors U-0.20, or Additional 15 percent of permanently installed li tin fixtures as high-efficacy lamps or Conservation Measure D and E Hl effieienc ceilin do s & duct s Cannot be used with Conservation Measure 3 Vaulted ceilings-U-0,033/1- 30Ad-e, and p Flat ceilings-U-0.025/11 49, and u Windo s-U-0,30 and Performance tested duct s stems`' 4 Hi eiPtcienc thermal envelope UA: Pm osed UA is 15% lower than the Code U when calculated in Table N1104.10) Buildin • ti htness testing, ventilation & duct sealin : A mechanical exhaust, supply, or combination system providing whole-building ventilation rates specified in Table N110 1. 1(3), or ASHRAE 62.2, and S The dwelling shall be tested with a blower door and found to exhibit no more than 1. 6.0 air changes per hour, or 2.5.0 air changes per hour! when used with Conservation Measnre E, and Performance tested duct avatemst' Ducted HVAC stems within conditioned ace: Cannot be used with Conservation Measure B or 6 All ducts and air handler ate contained within buildin envelo e< Hi efficiency EIVAC tem: A Gas-feed furnace or boiler with minimum AFUE of 90% a, or Air-source heat pump with minimum HSPF of 8.5 or Closed-loo and source heat um with minimum COP of 10 Ducted EIVAC system within conditioned ace: All ducts and air handler are contained within building envelopd 19 Ductless heat um : Replace electric resistance heating In at least the primary zone of dwelling with at least one ductless mini-split heat pump having a minimum C IISPF of 8.5. Unit shall not have integrated backup resistance beat, and the unit (or units, if more than one is installed in the dwelling) shall be sized to have capacity to meet the entire dwelling design beat loss rate at outdoor design temperature condition. Conventional electric resistance m heating may be provided for any secondary zones in the dwelling. A packaged terminal heatpump (PTHP) with comparable efficiency ratings * may be used when no supplemental zonal heaters am installed in the building and irate ted backup resistant heat is allowed in a P`TM Hl effidan water heating & lighting: , t D Natural gas/propane, on-demand water heating with min EF of 0.80, and o A minimum 75 percent of permanently installed lighting fixtures as CPL or linear fluorescent or a min efficacy of 40 lumens per watt as specified in Section N110 .2e Lrner management device & duct scaling: o Whole building energy management device that is capable of monitoring or controlling energy consumption, and U Performance tested duct systemsb, and A minimum 75 percent of permanently installed lighting fixtures as high-efficacy lamps Solar hotovoltale: Minimum 1 watts R conditioned floors aces G Solar water heatin : Minimum of 40 PP of gross collector areah For SI: I square foot= 0.093 m', i watt per square foot= 10.8 Whr2. a: Furnaces located within the building envelope shall have sealed combustion air installed. Combustion air shall be ducted directly from the outdoors. b. Documentation of Performance TestedDudworkshall be submitted to the building official upon completion ofwork. Uds work shall beperfomteibyacontractor certifiedbyamOregon DepartmentofEnergy's(ODOE)ResidendalEnergyTaxCmditproW manddocumentaiimshallbeprovidedthatwodxdemonstratesconformanceto0D0EductperfomNo=standards. c, SectionN1107.2requires50percentofpermanently installed lighting fixtures tocontain high efficacy lamps,Eachofthese additionalmeasuresadds annddidonalpetcenttotheSection N1107.2 requirement d. A= advanced frame construction, which shall provide full required ceiling insulation value to the outside of exterior walls, e, The maximum vaulted ceiling surface area shall not be greater than 50 percent of the total heated space floor area unless vaulted area has a U-factor no greater than U-0.026, f. Build'mgtightness test shall beconducted with a blowardoDrdepressudzing the dwallhig50 Pascal's fromamblent comiltions, Documeatatton of blower door test shall be submitted to the Building Official upon completion of work. g. Solar electric system size shall include documentation indicating that Total Solar Resource Fraction is not less than 75 percent h. Solar waterheatingpanels shall be Solar Rating andCrrdfieationCorporation (SRCC)Standard 00-300 certified and labeled, with documentation indicating thatTotal SolarResource Fraction Is not less than 75 percent I. A total of 5 percent of an HVAC systems ductwork shall be permitted to be located outside of the conditioned space. Ducts located outside the condition de s1~a~l h~ve}'p¢ 4on installed as required in ibis code. 00 if ti+ i,) 2011 OREGON RESIDENTIAL SPECIALTY CODE 11-3 P I + 90L t!Q 00 OM N83-4 IQ P 89L 94S I SBS % m ' r 8ZZE9091 9-SZ } LZZESOSl r i; ~'s{, g-OS ac A ; ZTTT ZEOT19- f sf ' 6LL 964 n , ZZ£S09H r 08L E99 .4 i 609 OZ8 I ' g 698 . I 4 ZE4 e p®~ SOZbSOs Dos Oeb7d-0 >yZ' 9ZZ£SoSS 9 ~ i co OE4 664 y 984 R I SZ4 6Z4E.., ' a •`5 f ~ ~"022nis I - I i t I L, t I j r - f f m o ! 413- _ vI _ m J j N T-O.N 12' p RIGHTS EEC DR J 0 , m E 'Id o. "(DIP) _ I j 6 #tt 57' 0 R - (C ~ o (5(17~ ~ a - 1 m 0) , 6"(CIP) ff TEEL y ox: tiNK) A NUT I 1 t ' I I ~ i v t _ ~ PIPE-STS i ~ v ,ICY . I' A - - E1 " p TO r O RI SITS EEK DR N I ° , i ` DIP U I o0 • S2~ I i i i rn N' o A R l I _se - - 6, ( > ' - I 6 DIP) ~ 0 • e i o' ~ ,c row ~ 3 Win' i i : a - a J t .F I- o -ch 1- -1 _(STE~L 0 21 8° (DIP) I cl P. J` } 6" (CIP) b { ~C 1 6"' STEEL ' d% tiNK) A NUT S T I CITY OF ASHLAND Water Flow Request The following water flow information is being requested by a fire sprinkler contractor to identify the fire flow for the fire hydrant location specified. R is the responsibility of the contractor to verify the hydrant elevation and hydrant pressure. Completed form must be submitted t0 the Ashland Building east with fire, sprinkler plans. Report request date ~ Company requesting flow information J IQr l~E V! t.~cNL, j company address City State Company phone number M1) t °44RV U fax number ( ) tq ! E SheLlT( Contact persons e-mail V. l lu tr y4 IT QV~Nda 1•GO 1~t Company contact person Project location •'i 5a 11111 „ 5-r4.) i# 44w--3, x Sr. ''Ct jV ro►j Address where water service will be obtained to l Nt t2 N E IAc~ 00-.7 Do 11ot wi *e below this line - To he co d by &A and Fire chi Rescue Location of tested hydrant (boy- r\ I W J YYN-e'r Date hydrant flowed? I ' Hydrant elevation Elevation info obtained from: o GPS On-Site Reading 0 GIS Records © Other sutie42r-PSI Residual l G' PSI Picot #1 no PSI Pitat #z PSI FIowGPM( Comments: Information sent by: ❑ Fax OPhone ❑ Man By Date s Revised: 9106 ASHLAND FIRE & RESCUE Tel: 641482-2770 455 Sistd w Be"w l Fax 541.488.5318 ~AL F7 ' 0 Aghlet►d, oregat 97520 Tnr: 8732 wwwahW oc+n CiTY OF ASHLAND Water Flow Request The following water flow information is being requested by afire sprinkler contractor to identify the Ere flow for the fire hydrant location specified. It is the responsibility of the contractor to verify the hydrant elevation and hydrant pressure. Com leted form must be submitted to the Ashland Building PS)aft ant with fire s plans. Report request date Company requesting flow information (A66 0 lL.V1&& { Company address D~ City State Company phone member (fill ) wt' 1 1:747 fax number ( ) N 4 vK lT~ Q 1ti1 ttCompany contact person F1,J§JJ16 St!gffl F Contact persons e-mail Project location 3eL 11111 Mom„ 5?~ ,~~S,EIt.MtND X 5'i[' "['tt02NT0~ Address where water service will be obtained tAT• t,M,_~ 1 -tt•~o~ATtMN Do not wm ° below this An-e- To be co feted by AI-otd Fire & Rescue Location of tested hydrant Date hydrant flowed l I Hydrant elevation Elevation info obtained from: ❑ OPS On-Situ Reading ❑ GIS Records D Other Statle PSI R esidaal U PSI Pltot #1 PSI PIMt #Z PSI Flow_a, ,(GPM Comments: Information sent by: ❑ Fax ❑Phone ❑ Mail 13y 1 1 l`Vl, Date - RaWsed: V06 ASHLAND FIRE 4 RESCUE Tel., 541482-7770 465 Sisk w Bo" W Face 64b48&5318 Ashland, Oregon 97520 Tly: 80738-28Q0 U712 ' J www.asWW.Onx ' KenCaim Landscape Architecture 20 16 17 22 23. 16 23 1 a 9 19 24 31 h 20 25 a 3SV3 Al V unrin 01-111 ® AbALTAIyO Ctl ~r 21 2fi CONCRETE"'VVIAY 1 ~~-3p 301.33 f t 80 MS" 7`. \j X ELEVATION PLAN 0 d 00 OD ASrsAST, a Ann wm, OR97520 s1s1awas 0STE 4 C d PZR D R' tz ~STE OF d '1OR 4 REO.a FENCE CONTINUOUSLY 1V 2 AROUND TREE ASOPE 28 SHOWN ON PLAN 0MINUOUS CHAINLINK 6'ALL C 12 T Y_29 NOTE? FENCING ON CONCRETE PIER6 m DrawnBY: 1. TREE PROTECTIONFENCIN09HALL BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO SIARTOF STAFF CONSTRUCTION AND SHALL REMAIN IN PLACE THROUGH COMPLETION OF PROJECT. 6 2 FENCING SHALL ONLY BE REMOVED TEMPORARILY FOR WORK TO BE DONE SCALEI 300 WITHIN DRIPLINEAND REPLACED AT THE END OF EACH WORK DAY, 3. ALL EXCAVATION WITHIN DRIPLIIIE OF TREES SHALL BE DONE BY HAND. IFROOTS OVER 2' IN DIAMETER ARE ENCOUNTERED CONTRACTOR SHALL CONSULT WITH 3ra35r3.ununonan o LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT ORARBORIST BEFORE PROCEEDING, 3N 4. TREE ROOTS ENCOUNTERED DURING CONSTRUCTION, SHALL BE CUT CLEANLY i AT A W DEGREE ANGLE AND PACKED WITH DAMP SOIL IMMEDIATELY. I ,3 "'30_133 ~ 5. DURING CONSTRUCTION ALL TREES TO REMAIN SHALL BE IRRIGATED ONA 1 WEEKLY BASIS OR AS NECESSARY WITH LEAKY PIPE ENCIRCLING THE TREE FROM i TRUNK OUT TO DRIP LINE. AVltSNy00b ; Atlht3ATyB 15 r 1 TREE PROTECTION W ! 13 TREE LEGEND TREE PROTECTION AND REMOVAL NOTES # Species DBH Height In C- Radius Tree Protection Tolerance to (Inches) Feat In Feel Zane Radius Radius In In Feet Construction GondllbR Notes 1, BEFORE BEGINNING WORK, THE CONTRACTOR IS REQUIRED TO MEET WITH THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AT THE SITE TO REVIEW ALL WORK PROCEDURES, ACCESS ROUTES, STORAGE AREAS, AND TREE PROTECTION MEASURES. 1 Quercus Negoggil 7 25 B 8.75 Fair 2 Quercus keflaggi 13,17,18,21 35 25 25 Excellent M.10-St.. 2, FENCES MUST BE ERECTED TO PROTECT TREES TO BE PRESERVED AS SHOWN IN DIAGRAM. FENCING SHALL BE 6'TALLTEMPORARY CHAIN LINK PANELS INSTALLEDVVITH METAL CONNECTIONS TO ALL PANELS AREA INTEGRATED, THESE FENCES SHALL BE INSTALLED SO THAT IT DOES NOT ALLOW PASSAGE OF PEDESTRIANS AND/ OR VEHICLES THROUGH IT. FENCES DEFINE A SPECIFIC PROTECTION Q 3 Quercus kelloggil 10 23 9 12.5 Fair Barbed Was M trunk ZONE FOR EACH TREE OR GROUP OF TREES. FENCES ARE TO REMAIN UNTIL ALL SITE WORK HAS BEEN COMPLETED. FENCES MAY NOT BE RELOCATED OR REMOVED WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF THE N 4 Quercuskelloggi 8 30 8 10 Poor SwnaDead,LeanMg LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. LO 5 Over-keflagg6 9 28 7 11.5 Fair REMOVE 3. CONSTRUCTION TRAILERS AND TRAFFIC AND STORAGE AREAS MUST REMAIN OUTSIDE FENCED AREAS AT ALL TIMES. I- 6 Quercus Nelloggil 9 25 8.5 11.5 Good REMOVE U 7 Quecus ganyana 16 30 13 20 Good 4. SHALL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AND GRAIN, OR DUG BE ROUTED OUTSIDE THE TREE PROTECTION ZONE. IF LINES AIUSTTRANSVERSE THE PROTECTION AREA, THEY SHALL ENNNELED, BORED ED UNDER UNDERTHE TREE ROOTS, OR D DUG BY BY HAND. 'Z W Z 8 Quercus ke0og~ 6,9 30 10 115 Goad MulOstem 9 Ouemus keYoggl 10 33 12 12,5 Fall REMOVE 5. NO MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT. SPOIL, OR WASTE OR WASHOUT WATER MAY BE DEPOSITED, STORED, OR PARKED WITHIN THE TREE PROTECTION ZONE (FENCED AREA). W II' O Goo Q Lu 10 Quecus kelagg0 10 30 it 12,5 Good 6, ADDITIONAL TREE PRUNING REOIIIREOFOR THE CLEARANCE DARING CONSTRUCTION MUST BE PERFORATED BYAQUALIFIED ARBORISTAFID NOT BY CONSTRUCTION PERSONNEL. n/ W I t Quemusgarryana LJ 7,7 20 10 0.75 Fair . KNRI-stem, REMOVE 7. ANY HERBICIDES PLACED UNDER PAVING MATERIALS MUST BE SAFE FOR USE AROUND TREES AND LABELED FOR THAT USE. L. jj~ 12 Quercus ganyana 9,10,11 35 14 12.5 Good Mult4elem, REMOVE 13 Quercus garryana 5,6,6,7,8 25 14 10 Good M1uWstem 0. IF SHOULD OCCUR TOANY TREE DURING STREE CONSULTAGT BEFORE THE AS SOON AS ONSIDE POSS113LE SO THAT APPOflPRIATETREATMENTS CAN BE APPLIED. ALL W O DAMAGE hAGE CAUSED BY CONSTRUCTION TO EXISTING TREES TREES SHALL BE COMPENSATED FOR, , BEFORERE THE THE PROJECT WILL WILL BE BECON510ERED ED COMPLETE. lL 14 Quercus keiaggi 7 30 9 8,75 Fair REMOVE Y W- W 0 15 Ouercus kefl0996 10 20 10 12.5 Pow Same dead, REMOVE 9. THE PROJECT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT MUST MONITOR ANY GRADING, CONSTRUCTION, DEMOLITION, OR OTHER WORK THAT IS EXPECTED TO ENCOUNTER TREE ROOTS. Z 16 Quercus garryana 8 30 7 10 poor Sparse, Fence In trunk 10. ALL TREES REMAINING SHALL BE IRRIGATED ON A WEEKLY BASIS WHEN WORK OCCURS BETWEEN JUNE 1st THROUGH OCTOBER 1sL IRRIGATION SHALL WET THE SOIL WITHIN THE TREE PROTECTION 17 Quemoy garryana 65 25 8 6.125 Fair Fence in trunk, Multi-stem ZONE TO A DEPTH OF 30 INCHES. (Y 18 Quenue keiaggil 9 32 10 11.5 Good REMOVE 11. EROSION CONTROL DEVICES SUCH AS SILT FENCING, DEBRIS BASINS, AND WATER DIVERSION STRUCTURES SHALL BE INSTALLED TO PREVENT SILTATION ANDI OR EROSION WITHIN THE TREE 1,1 N 19 Quercus keflo99i 70 30 10 12.5 Fair PROTECTION ZONE. ('Q 20 Ouemus keloggi 6,6 23 7 7.5 Good MuOFslem, REMOVE 12. BEFORE GRADING, PAD PREPARATION, OR EXCAVATION FOR THE FOUNDATIONS, FOOTINGS ,WALLS, OR TRENCHING, ANY TREES WITHIN THE SPECIFIC CONSTRUCTION ZONE SHALL BE ROOT PRUNED I Q 21 Quercus kaiagg6 9 30 11 11.6 Good Ferree In trunk FOOT OUTSIDE THE TREE PROTECTION ZONE BY CUTTING ALL ROOTS CLEANLY ATA 90 DEGREE ANGLE TOADEPTH OF 24 INCHES. ROOTS SHALL 13E CUT BY MANUALLY DIGGING ATRENCH AND CURING EXPOSED ROOTS WITH A SAW, VIBRATING KNIFE, ROCK SAW, NARROW TRENCHER WITH SHARP BLADES, OR OTHER APPROVED ROOT-PRUNING EQUIPMENT. 22 Quercus garryana B 30 8 10 Fair Fence In trunk 23 Quercus garryana 9 30 12 115 Fall Lower dead, REMOVE 13. ANY ROOTS DAMAGED DURING GRADING OR CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE EXPOSED TO SOUND TISSUE AND CUT CLEANLY ATA 90 DEGREE ANGLE TO THE ROOT WITH ASAW. PLACE DAMP SOIL AROUND ALL CUT ROOTS TO A DEPTH EQUALING THE EXISTING FINISH GRADE WITHIN 4 HOURS OF CUTS BEING MADE. REVISION DATE 24 Quercus ke9agBli 9 33 13 11S Fair Lowerdead.lence ln4unN,ftEM1fOVE 25 Quercus kallgg11 8 25 12 10 Good REMOVE 14. SPOIL FRONT TRENCHES, BASEMENTS, OR OTHER EXCAVATIONS SHALL NOT BE PLACED WITHIN THE TREE PROTECTION ZONE, EITHER TEMPORARILY OR PERMANENTLY, 26 Quereskefloggi 9 30 11 11.5 Fair Fence In trunk 15. NO BURN PILES OR DEBRIS PILES SHALL BE PLACED WITHIN THE TREE PROTECTION ZONE. NO ASHES, DEBRIS, OR GARBAGE MAY BE DUMPED OR BURIED WITHIN THE TREE PROTECTION ZONE. 27 Quemrs garryana 6 25 10 7,5 Good REMOVE 16. MAINTAIN FIRESAFE AREAS AROUND FENCED AREA ALSO, NO HEAT SOURCES. FLAMES, IGNITION SOURCES, OR SMOKING IS ALLOWED NEAR MULCH OR TREES. 28 Quercuskeffoggi 8,10,10,10 40 16 12.5 Good Mofflstsm,REMOVE TREE 29 Quercus keflagill 12,13 40 20 16.25 E-11rt Mul6stem 17. DO NOT RAISE THE SOIL LEVEL WITHIN THE DRIP LINES TO ACHIEVE POSITIVE DRAINAGE, EXCEPT TO MATCH GRADES WITH SIDEWALKS AND CURBS, AND IN THOSE AREAS, FEATHER THE ADDED 30 Go-kafloggi 12 40 20 15 Excellent Leaning TOPSOIL BACK TO EXISTING GRADE AT APPROXIMATELY 3:I SLOPE. INVENTORYI 31 Onwcusgarryana 8,9,12 40 16 15 Fair Fence In trunk,Multietem 18. REMOVE THE ROOT WAD FOR EACH TREE THAT IS INDICATED ON THE PUN AS BEING REMOVED. r PROTECTION Alk 0 32 Quercuskelaggii \ 10 35 15 12.5 Fat Fence In trunk 19. EXCEPTIONS TO THE TREE PROTECTION SPECIFICATIONS MAY ONLY BE GRANTED IN EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES WITH WRITTEN APPROVAL FROM THE LANDSCAPE A4CHVTECL PLAN 1. Canopy of Trees Trees to be 0 Tree ISSUE DATE: to remain removed protection SEPTEMBER 3,2015 fencing OCT 02 0' o Irsr l5r 301 PL 10 scale; 1"=30'-0" r 0 AVM3AI2i00y KenCairn ® CONCRETE DRIVEWAY Landscape Architecture ® 35%~ S00 3033 .y: V/ 576A 9T, 8iE719NWp, gl8t621 /30% -350/( ,25 GiSTER STATE Of-'O 25%-30% Ar 30% 35%,,. oxe°ox V xe°.aav N 25% - 30~~ A ~ A ~ ~ I Q KertY IQmCatm 1 I -35% \ qPE AEG \ / f Drawn By: STAFF SCALE 1"=18'•0" 00 Y) ~CANT LEVER ? ~ DECK OVER 35%+ Z / II i -`256/6- 30% ! 3 -225% - 30% 0 o' 1N3W3SV3Aiiiiin01l0nd,01, ON11 3 j ` 3 35% W SOOe3 ..E ~,>t C14 U 0) 1VM3AWo OV W W 0 AVM3AIa0 /-TAVao ®W w y U) 1 W 0 2i Z SLOPE ANALYSIS LEGEND Q C14Cf) U) Less than 25% 1 Q REVISION DATE 25% TO 30% ? . SLOPE 30% ANALYSIS TO 35% ° ISSUE DATE: SEPTEMBER 3, 2016 Greater than 35% 0 11~I scale:'' Ia IOr L 2.0 i KenCalrn Landscape Architecture 23, o CONCRETE DRIVEWA ® AbA43AI2jo w ® 0°30'33"E SO -x= - _ x x- - O.. _ V--._--'X! SiA5T.5iE 3, ASXUJY1Ln roa 641 ce) i i. ISTE ~BTATRO ~d OREGON f" REG. NJ93 U rry H KrnCui- ~r ~3~~ 9PE AEG Drawn By; J -4 ~4 r , STAFF -2 / SCALE 1"=16'-S" r . i I 2 = - ool, l CF) 00 r r% f N " 1N3tN35V3 hill11f13172t1d O ISIX3 r ' ✓ ~g i ✓ SOOo3 "E W UJI W 0 AVAA,3Ataa ob AVAA3Aaa i Avaq W 0 ~z ~ Q SITE KEY AVERAGE LOT SLOPE REVISION DATE 2410 EXISTING CONTOUR TOTAL LOT AREA 25,276 SQUARE FEET =1 I PROPOSED CUT (FEET) TOTAL AREA OF DISTURBANCE INCLUDING BUILDINGS: 5,730 SQUARE FEET PROPOSED FILL (FEET) PERCENT OF LOT DISTURBANCE INCLUDING BUILDINGS: 23% CUT/FILL 0 7- 0l ANALYSIS UNDISTURBED 19,813 S.F. = 77% o MAXIMUM CUT OUTSIDE FOOTPRINT OF BUILDINGS; 8 FEET (25% + 36% = 61% REQUIRED) ISSUE DATE; • MAXIMUM FILL OUTSIDE FOOTPRINT OF BUILDINGS: 5 FEET SEPTEMBER 3,20`15 ` T I 1 A • ALL CUTS AND FILLS AS SHOWN ON PLAN 0 S' 16 32°a A~1 scale: 1 -16'-0" 3 Y4 I ~ 6 to zo ~ f~ , xat F n7lAAL5LG _F . Q zj t ! t.. I 16:, > z t l a i zs e O 9 z 1A, ~ a fee r` r ms's ii p rTL I k W Fw z> ' 0> 1 I S"3 j m 1 1 W q W 81 I Ln ul n ~ j, S: ' {z N ]7W ' Z0 I '57 I PIL PIL PIL P/L PIL PIL P/L PIL-,GG'1OG'PIL PIL -P /L PIL -P IL x~ w1w - 5 5 J J C o _ _ _ _ - - - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ J W (L \ / 9 1 m i / \ I HOME OWNER: 6 - STEVEN ANDWENOYCLOUBE co ° I I \ \ P PO BOX 343 w l I al m 164'-8 3/8" m GARY, NO 27512 - .I c 6 APPLICANT: J J V---- / \ M " J ADVANTAGE BUILDING AND DESIGN m N _ 0i MELANIESMITH i p 535W NEVADASTREET N V E ~~9 T I / ~ \ 3 O O ~ ASHLAND, OR 97520 0~ m- I/ - ( \I 9r ry I ce 3 " 432 PROJECT. 432 L WIMER STREET UH > ASHLAND, OR 97520 Q J I II ~ N ADDRESS: d 432 M STREET i~ - - - - - - 10 ASHLAND, OR 87620 _ D 7 W vATA DATA T~ i LEGALADDRESS: EIL EIL- N 0 432 WIMER STREET ASHLAND, OR 97520 ~I /L P/L- P/L P/L IL P/L PIL-I--PIL-,66'~OE1L P/L PIL PIL P1L 391E05CD 502 w C)l W FIRE DISTRICT: L Z ASHLAND, OR _ X WATER DISTRICT: ASHLAND, OR ry -L. STORM WATERW: w ('O ~I Q ~1 /~-Y AS PER PLAN 9 All 5G, (~UII~L 1011 I bV 1 1 C~ T~6✓ BLDG PERMITS: 02 Allj-1-3 11 5/ I -p r) I y BUILDINGAREA: p M PLOT PLAN ( 1 K FLOOR 1: 2,280 SO, FT. } z~ HOUSE FOUNDATION: a 1 q 2243 SO. FT Z Z K =I GARAGE: 44050. FL Q O ~ F 01 a ~ ca DECKS: 189 SO. FT " N W o p - z z COVERED FRONT PORCH: m F x v 80 S0, FT. U ZzOa <~mm TOTAL STRUCTURE WI DECKS: 2,975 SO, FT. q WqO~ PAVINGANDWALKS: 1,581 S0. FT. SATE: TOTAL IMPERVIOUS SURFACE', 4556 SO. FT. %IMPERVIOUS SURFACE: 1~~2~2~15 0.18% SCALE: C 02 2615 SHEET: A# Detail l w zap aim 0 U s Jm m FW zN 84 N 22' 8'-6" 11' 1'-11" 4'3" 11'-4" 19' w 2' 6" 62'•10" a a 4'-1mn 3'-10" 4'-5" tt w m rv ~i 42" f/f 12" o f FIF . 42" f6 Y N o I- m f-a+m ~,ra 'ei"~ 4 t m~ pia a s iv z in W; gar :~„a ~~J a 1-o N3„ ~ i Nm ?Q x / m o P 0 0 ~ 4 m _ o "v O X I in ! - - 0 m5" i u rv w io r 3 K o naa F x 3 fY x a m s Qm v Q: ira a Q° o u 2 Z o x W rv rv Ill m: V? x 9 v W iv s a g-'-I T w n z, m N'" p- a h ic. O -I p 5 A S3u0:. g g wa F" X 8 - a in ~ 4'-0 118" :o s Ory - s 0 Zo - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - a J~wa m ~ F x I4 ma 0 m 9 a, ~4 ; J Iv a j o v 1 a s4° 2" em > = o- m g O x ;o o zn •p~i 1~ ~ry "T v d Q Ni U Ihl , 0 E V W v R m y 6'4"% 10 o it d in ~ ~ m Wm d x c cQ r 3---- - 9 V x N li W 'a c 's d° °3 a - m o W b m (21 r ! m 9 I in Aaa o _dld ~ 41~ / ~ ra.a B',Ss%9-d in (K L U Q did ..9E i A dhl a n z n 2--l" x5.•8. ~ - o ls) _ I ~ e ~ m m in u m~ LU J) m 'o a m~ \ u N z WiO ~ qa ra m ~o m \i s ~ WN I did "zz Q \\E z 1'-9112' \ 4'-0112" 15' 5' 6' 5 o i ° i 2' 18' o~ 15'-6" 5'-9112" 4'-5112° 6'-5" 24' ~ y m a N NW~o ZZ =N XP 26' 30 W1Q-Xp'i 54' ~o z<mm 0 500 DATE: 02 10/2/2015 SCALE: L) 1/4"=1'011 CAU ( SC A- L-0 OAJ SHEET: 1 i X ~ 9 V,I AjT5 W o Za Q~a 0 F IL K U O w} mm FW zN OW K 82' a 22'-0 1f4" 13'-113/4" 10'-2° 12' w m I I i i-------- , l I' - - - - - i - z - - - I I:I I;~I II I I I I Is,l I I I`.I Ifjl I'`I I I I I I.=I I I I I I; I I I I I I I I, I I I I I I~.I I':I I I~`~I I I I Z I 4 l I I I';r; in I<'I I I I I~ I I'I I'.I I;I I I I I ICI I I 1=1 ~ I'I lu 19 l l I:I 1 1=I I>I Oo I'1 I I I I I`,I I I I'I Q n I I ~"x I`:I I I I I I~~I I I I?I z I I d I I I I I I I• I I I J `t l ~ I~'I Oo I'I I I I I IsI I I f, `.I O LL- I?I I;%I I I I I I I I I L____~ l I ,'I 1= 2 '~~I I I I I I~~I I I I;I - lI i I i I I''I w I~::i I~:I I I I I I~''I I I ICI rl I I;I I I I I ICI I I I•,.I Q 1 L_ _ _ I I I I I I ze;! • I I I I,;I I I I;I ON - - - - n~_ : I I I I I I I I I ~C I ~ d o I:;I I I I I I•~I I I I'I p~ 26' I I I I I I, I I I I ' I I I I I I I I I I ~ I Detail 6 I'I I I I I 1(I I I It.l u. O I'I I Itil lil I l I I li=~I I I I~~}I r a I^;I I I I I I'I I l I:I m I};I I I I I I'I 11 I-;I II I I I I I`.~I I I I,;I N~ I;I I I I I I~~I I I I~;,I ~ Q IsI I I I I I;' I I I I,';I I I I IiI I I I(I IKLUL, 1,21 LL z - - - - I - ~`I K ryT- I I I LU m to I I I I' I [ I;I I I 1=1 z I I I I mR I, I I I nt l lu I' I I I o~ I, -1 m Qo - ° ZQ o m zz ;o 05 O F F='= Q 4'-l 3!4" 10' 10'-6" 9'-b" 12'-8" 11'-4" a I m v 54' z7- mQ~Y 3U zz:x dQmm id R ~ E DATE: ~Q op 10/2/2015 SCALE: Dv U T SHEET: 0 1,,3 I l K 1-7 ~Rc~i~ m o za ~1 > Q° z EL k u w p Jm m f' W ON FME 11 flE ❑o❑o~oCO❑o~n r oo❑o C ❑ Q ~~~cc cct~a~ ~ Loc a E F u, Dice--o ° 6j, 11 en~c~ o~ ~o- .tea; - ccUc'w- ❑CiOC7C1LCCJ❑OG~ uLC7❑NC7~C7 C D❑O ~ [I C❑Clf ~0❑ m z Y4F-5T 51DE ❑ ❑ - EXTERIOR FIN15HE5: CEMENT BOARD LAP 510ING LIFETIME LIMITED WARRANTY ~ COMP SHINGLE ROOF WINDOWS U-0.50 VALUE 02 ~P N Ln t- PEN t- a- N~ ~wQ EA5T51DE L L~z wmN P o z _ry m QO _ °w o z zg 0 a a fmQ m ZKZ mW~o ° - J(I tis~ 3o WFX~ u zzoo o❑o❑oGO L o ~ - ~ QQmm oo~,o❑oooC N ?r~7~~'GC'~C~'IL"~.:J Cli s000cL -i ~t ~~i rpG~p -Dju Wq0 a~lo,'1i 'n~~~ 17on]on~]ow ~d n, 0=0E IC, o ❑ DATE; 10/2/2015 SCALE: i NORTH 51DE Li LI o~OJ L -7 FR,IN SHEET; 5OUTH 51DE W ~ a Z a a F LUm m d I i zD) zD) Ntu i z V ~ ' d ba 6ar NORTH WEST VIE 0 N ul wQ A1 Z 02 5 I N~ I` w 4m~n / Nry o ~Q w zz <i / aV fmQ NWVO zZ Z'uw X'T zioo \ DATE; \ 10/2/2015 - ~ SCALE; i SHEET: 50UTH WEST VIEW r , _ 1'lar'lzaiarg Division C IT x o F 51 Winbum Way, ,A.s,'., rd OR 97520 -AS H LAN D 541®4885305 Fax 541-488.6006 FILL i, DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT x ®ESCRIPTtON OF PROPERTY Pursuing LEEDS Certification? 0 YES 13 NO Street Address 432 Winter St Ashland OR 97520 Assessors Map No. 391 E 05CD Tax lot(s) 502 Zoning R®1410 Comp Plan Designation Single Family Residential APPLICAN Name -Advantaa BMildin9 and BsW Phone _541-3014970 E-Mail minismithCa~pmail com Address ~PO Rax 964 City Ashland Zip -0 PROPERTY OWNER Name Steven and W®ndv Clouse Phone a7 XjU n2aa E_Maii stlnttsa nnstt prat Address PO Box4" 343 Ciiy Cary Zip 27512 SURVEYOR ENGINEER ARCHITECT .LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OTHER Title Landscape Arch Name KenCairn Lands- ArchitectuRhone ,94 .4B& 31Q4E-Mail Address _-545 A St, Suite 3 City Ashland ZiA97520 Title ntechni a F iilOme ,~,nnliPd L~,_.,._ ehone 541-226-6658 E-Mail ~ r,~ant~rhn~ira !;'nnina®ryn Address _1314_R CPnf r ®r #t4fi9 City -Medford Zip 97501 1 hereby ce0y that the statements and informaffon contained in this applcation, Including the enclosed drawings and the true and correct, t understand that all property pins must be shown on the drawings and visible upon the sitelnspecticn. In event the pinf ware norol all t shown orb (r location found to be Incorrect, the owner assumes full responsib#* 1 further understand that if this request is subsequently contested, the burden will be on me to establish; 1) that I Produced suNicient factual evidence of the hearing to support this request; 2) that the findings offact fumished)usfifies Me granting of the request, 3) that the findings of fact furnished by me are adequate, and further 4) that ell sbuotures orimprovements are pmpedylocated on the ground, Failure in this regard wr7l 1 most likely in not only the request being set aside, but also possibly In my sbuctures being built in reliance thereon being required to be remove at my a have any doubts,/ am advised to seek oompetent professional advice and assistance, /tom 10/2/15 Applica s ' u~ ~t ~s>L~ i Date As ownerof the property involved in this request,! have read and understood the complete application and its consequences to me as a properly owner, 10/2/15 Property Owner's Signature (required) _ Date trob®m VetedtrrCdyStd Date Received Zoning Permit Type Filing Fee OVER M a:bom-&VWa n T- m,s & Hando s7*,68 PaWtAppUmdmdoc OT 02 2015 Job Address: 432 WIMER ST Contractor: ASHLAND OR 97520 Address: C A Owner's Name: STEVE/WENDY CLOUSE O Phone: R Customer 07690 N State Lic No: ~ T City Lic No: R ADVANTAGE BUILDING & DESIGN Applicant: PO BOX 964 R I Address: ASHLAND OR 97520 A C C Sub-Contractor: A Phone: (541) 301-4970 T Address: N Applied: 10/02/2015 0 T Issued: R Expires: 03/30/2016 Phone: State Lic No: Maplot: 391 E05CD502 City Lic No: DESCRIPTION: Type 1 site review for a single family residence VALUATION Occupancy Type Construction Units Rate Amt Actual Amt Constuction Description Total for Valuation: MECHANICAL ELECTRICAL STRUCTURAL PERMIT FEE DETAIL Fee Description Amount Fee Description Amount Residential Site Review 1,012.00 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tel: 541-488-5305 20 East Main St. Fax: 541-488-5311 Ashland, OR 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us Inspection Request Line: 541-552-2080 CITY ASHLAND