Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutGreat Oaks_574_PA-2016-00143 CITY March 9, 2016 I: Notice of Final Decision F i.; On March 7, 2016, the Community Development Director approved the request for the following: i Planning Action: PA-2016-00143 Subject Property: 574 Great Oaks Drive Applicant: Temple Ashbrook Description: A Variance request to reduce, by less than 50 percent, the standard setback for a rear property line on the subject property. The development proposal would allow the expansion of an existing elevated deck approximately four foot and seven inches into the standard 10-foot rear yard setback at 574 Great Oaks Drive. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: North Mountain Single-Family Residential; ZONING: NM-R-1-5; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 lE 04DA; TAX LOTS: 2200. The Community Development Director's decision becomes final and is effective on the 12" day after the Notice of Final Decision is mailed. Approval is valid for a period of 18 months and all conditions of approval identified on the attached Findings are required to be met prior to project completion. The application, all associated documents and evidence submitted, and the applicable criteria are available for review at the Ashland Community Development Department, located at 51 Winburn Way. Copies of file documents can be requested and are charged based on the City of Ashland copy fee schedule. Prior to the final decision date, anyone who was mailed this Notice of Final Decision may request a reconsideration of the action as set forth in the Ashland Land Use Ordinance (ALUO) 18.5.1.050(F) and/or file an appeal to the Ashland 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 i` COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel: 541-488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 ( \ 1 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 \ 1 wv b nus i 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 i 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 `f' decision for purposes of reconsideration. The Staff Advisor shall decide within ten days to affirm, modify, or reverse f 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 18.5.1.050,13. 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 ofNotice of Appeal. The notice of appeal shall be accompanied by the required filing fee and shall contain. i. An identification of the decision being appealed, including the date of the decision. ii. A statement demonstrating the person filing the notice of appeal has standing to appeal. iii. A statement explaining the specific issues being raised on appeal. iv. A statement demonstrating that the appeal issues were raised during the public comment period. d. The appeal requirements of this section must be fully met or the appeal will be considered by the City as a jurisdictional defect and will not be heard or considered. 3. Scope of Appeal. Appeal hearings on Type I decisions made by the Staff Advisor shall be de novo hearings before the Planning Commission. The appeal shall not be limited to the application materials, evidence and other documentation, and specific issues raised in the review leading up to the Type I decision, but may include other relevant evidence and arguments. The Commission may allow additional evidence, testimony, or argument concerning any relevant ordinance provision. 4. Appeal Hearing Procedure. Hearings on appeals of Type I decisions follow the Type II public hearing procedures, pursuant to section 18.5.1.060, subsections A - E, except that the decision of the Planning Commission is the final decision of the City on an appeal of a Type I decision. A decision on an appeal is final the date the City mails the adopted and signed decision. Appeals of Commission decisions must be filed with the State Land Use Board of Appeals, pursuant to ORS 197.805 - 197.860. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel: 541-488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 ` f ASHLAND PLANNING DIVISION, j i G FINDINGS & ORDERS PLANNING ACTION: PA-2016-00143 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 574 Great Oaks Drive OWNER/APPLICANT: Temple Ashbrook DESCRIPTION: A Variance request to reduce, by less than 50 percent, the standard setback for a rear property line on the subject property. The development proposal would allow the expansion of an existing elevated deck approximately four foot and seven inches into the standard 10-foot rear yard setback at 574 Great Oaks Drive. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: North Mountain Single-Family Residential;, ZONING: NM-R-1-5; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 lE 04DA; TAX LOTS: 2200. SUBMITTAL DATE: January 22, 2016 DEEMED COMPLETE DATE: February 2, 2016 STAFF APPROVAL DATE: March 9, 2016 FINAL DECISION DATE: March 21, 2016 APPROVAL EXPIRATION DATE: September 21, 2017 DECISION The subject property is approximately 4,792 square feet, oriented north/south and fronts the south side of Great Oaks Drive. There is one structure on site, a 1,791 square feet main residence. The residence was constructed circa 1999. The subject lot is zoned NM-R-1-5 and is consistent with the surrounding zoning district. Off-street parking is provided in the garage. The application is for a Variance to standard rear yard setback. The property owner proposes to build an addition to an existing deck of approximately 88 square feet 4' x 22'). The proposed deck addition would encroach approximately four feet and seven-inches into a 10-foot rear yard setback. Due to circumstances on the property, the owner feels they cannot meet the rear-yard setback requirement of 10 feet. The subject property is part of the Mountain Meadows Subdivision development. The Mountain Meadows Homeowners Association owns the adjacent property to the rear of 574 Great Oaks, which is designated as open space. Directly behind the existing dwelling the rear yard begins a down sloping bank toward Kitchen Creek, which is approximately 45 feet beyond the rear property line. The bank drops off steeply behind the residence at a 43 percent slope making the rear yard unusable for the most part. The two residential properties abutting the subject property to the east and west are already encroaching into the 10-foot standards rear yard setback. No trees are proposed for removal as part of the application: The aforementioned circumstances lead Staff to believe that the application satisfies the first two approval criterion in Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) section 18.5.5.050. The applicant will benefit from having the use of an expanded deck area located in the rear yard of the property situated above an area of the yard that would otherwise receive minimal use. In addition, it is evident from aerial photography that several other properties adjacent to 574 Great Oaks have rear yard setbacks that are less than the standard requirement, which could mitigate negative impacts in regards to screening the deck addition from neighboring properties. Therefore, Staff has determined that, "the proposal's benefits will be greater than any negative impacts", and thus satisfies approval criterion number three AMC section 18.5.5.050. PA #2016-00143 574 Great Oaks Drive/MMS Page 1 The property owner is trying to accommodate small deck addition in order to have a more useable space in the rear yard of a lot with unique circumstances. These include the location of the property adjacent to the top of the bank along Kitchen Creek and a lack of usable rear yard area located under the proposed deck addition. The applicant's have not requested a property line adjustment or partition, which affect the proposed non-conforming setback. For no apparent reason does Staff believe that the requested Variance is self-imposed. Therefore, the application satisfies approval criterion number four in AMC section 18.5.5.050. Overall, Staff feels that the applicant has addressed any potential negative impacts associated with the proposed Variance. Due to the unique circumstances of the property, the proposal does not have any apparent adverse affects on the livability of the impact area. After review of the application submittals, Staff has decided that all applicable criteria have been satisfied. The approval criteria for a Variance are described in AMC Chapter 18.5.5.050.A, as follows: 1. The variance is necessary because the subject code provision does not account for special or unique physical circumstances of the subject site, such as topography, natural features, adjacent development, or similar circumstances. A legal lot determination may be sufficient evidence of a hardship for purposes of approving a variance. 2. The variance is the minimum necessary to address the special or unique physical circumstances related to the subject site. 3. The proposal's benefits will be greater than any negative impacts on the development of the adjacent uses and will further the purpose and intent of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan of the city. 4. The need for the variance is not self-imposed by the applicant or property owner. For example, the variance request does not arise as result of a property line adjustment or land division approval previously granted to the applicant. Planning Action #2016-00143 complies with all applicable City ordinances with the imposition of the conditions attached below. Therefore, Planning Action #2016-00143 is approved. If any one or more of the following conditions are found to be invalid, for any reason whatsoever, then Planning Action #2016-00143 is denied. The following are the conditions and they are attached to the approval: 1. That all proposals of the applicant shall be conditions of approval unless otherwise specifically modified herein. 2. That the plans submitted for the building permit shall be in substantial conformance with those approved as part of this application. If the plans submitted for the building permit are not in substantial conformance with those approved as part of this application, an application to modify the Variance approval shall be submitted and approved prior to issuance of a building permit. 3. That all exterior lighting shall be directed on the property and shall not directly illuminate adjacent proprieties. F, f, i f /(c 7 12, CJ 7 Bill Moln Planning Director Daft / Department f Community Development PA #2016-00143 574 Great Oaks Drive/MMS Page 2 i i PA-2016-00143 391 E04AD 7900 eA-2016-00143 391 E04AD 8000 ! rA-2016-00143 391 E04AD 8200 WOOD DOUGLAS L TRUSTEE ET AL SKLENSKY ALDEN F TRUSTEE ET AL LENTFER JACK W TRUSTEE ET AL 539 MOUNTAIN MEADOWS DR 549 MOUNTAIN MEADOWS DR 813 PLUM RIDGE DR ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-GRUOL2016-00143 VICTOR ET AL 391E04DA 1000 j WPA-2016-00143 391 E04DA 1100 YNN-OWEN LISBETH TRUSTEE ET AL MILLER 391 E04DA 1200 i MILLER EDWARD R TRUSTEE 3707 SE COOPER ST 803 PLUM RIDGE DR 161 BROWNS RD PORTLAND, OR 97202 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ! WILLIAMS, OR 97544 PA-2016-00143 391 E04DA 1300 PA-2016-00143 391 E04DA 1400 PA-2016-00143 391 E04DA 1500 TAYLOR JOEL S TRUSTEE. ET AL GOOZEE SHERWOOD TRUSTEE ET AL PEJSA ANTHONY W TRUSTEE ET AL 590 MOUNTAIN MEADOWS DR 595 GREAT OAKS DR 5353 BASELINE AVE ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, CA 97520 SANTA YNEZ, CA 93460 j PA-2016-00143 391 E04DA 1600 PA-2016-00143 391 E04DA 1700 PA-2016-00143 391 E04DA 1900 PHILLIPS PAULA L TRUSTEE ET AL ASHBEY WILLIAM N TRUSTEE ET AL GOTTESMANN ELLINOR 785 N MOUNTAIN AVE 777 N MOUNTAIN AVE 769 N MOUNTAIN AVE ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2016-00143 391 E04DA 2000 PA-2016-00143 391 E04DA 2100 PA-2016-00143 391 E04DA 2200 TAYLOR TAMSIN C INTER VIVOS TRUST HALL BETHANY H TRUSTEE ET AL j ASHBROOK TEMPLE II AND LORETTA 594 GREAT OAKS DR 584 GREAT OAKS DR HYA ET AL ASHLAND, OR 97520 I ASHLAND, OR 97520 1574 GREAT OAKS DR ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2016-00143 391E04DA 2300 ! PA-2016-00143 391E04DA 2400 'PA-2016-00143 391E04DA 2500 HAYES HAROLD E& DONNA L REV I BOWMAN LEE ELLSWORTH TRUSTEE LUCAS WILLIAM E TRUSTEE ET AL TRUST ET AL 554 MOUNTAIN MEADOWS DR 544 MOUNTAIN MEADOWS DR 814 MOUNTAIN MEADOWS j ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2016-00143 391 E04DA 2700 PA-2016-00143 391 E04DA 2800 PA-2016-00143 TAYLOR TAMSIN SPARTAN ASHLAND STELLA REAL j 574 GREAT OAKS 594 GREAT OAKS DR ESTATE LLC 3/q/2016 NOD ASHLAND, OR 97520 j 66 WATER ST 200 20 ASHLAND, OR 97520 !,II ~ I I i I I l i j I i i - I AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING E C STATE OF OREGON ) County of Jackson ) I` The undersigned being first duly sworn states that: 1. 1 am employed by the City of Ashland, 20 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon 97520, in the Community Development Department. 2. On March 9, 2016 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 #2016-00143, 574 Great Oaks. Si ture of Employee DocumenQ 31812016 Planning Department, 51 Winb m Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520 C I T IF 1 541-488-5305 Fax:541-552-2050 www.ashland.or.us TTY:1-800-735-2900 ASHLAND NOTICE OF APPLICATION PLANNING ACTION: 2016-00143 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 574 Great Oaks Drive OWNER/APPLICANT: Temple Ashbrook I DESCRIPTION: A Variance request to reduce by less than 50 percent the standard setback for a rear property line on the subject property. The development proposal would allow the expansion of an existing elevated deck approximately four foot and seven inches into the standard 10 foot rear yard setback at 574 Great Oaks Drive. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: North Mountain Single-Family Residential; ZONING: NM-R-1-5; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 1 E 04DA; TAX LOTS: 2200. L NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: February 2, 2016 DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION OF WRITTEN COMMENTS: February 16, 2016 MOUNTAIN MEADOWS DR } 1 - > Q z q,~s ) o SUBJECT PROPER 574 Great Oaks Drive PA-2016-00143 1:600 y~ cry orI 1Inch =50 feet rq y~E ASHLAND 'Y 6lappinp s adrenal I. only m,d bears na v< -ty or eccurxy. All1=,i a, eUUnur®, /xilidn, wfe- or toedway lo[eii," 0 15 SD FUr lhoeld be inde pmdcmy told voraod ro. ealaloeco eevor t-doe. The Ashland Planning Division Staff has received a complete application for the property noted above. Any affected property owner or resident has a right to submit written comments to the City of Ashland Planning Division, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520 prior to 4:30 p.m. on the deadline date shown above. Ashland Planning Division Staff determine if a Land Use application is complete within 30 days of submittal. Upon determination of completeness, a notice is sent to surrounding properties within 200 feet of the property submitting application which allows for a 14 day comment period. After the comment period and not more than 45 days from the application being deemed complete, the Planning Division Staff shall make a final decision on the application. A notice of decision is mailed to the same properties within 5 days of decision. An appeal to the Planning Commission of the Planning Division Staffs decision must be made in writing to the Ashland Planning Division within 12 days from the date of the mailing of final decision. (AMC 18.108.040) The ordinance criteria applicable to this application are attached to this notice. Oregon law states that failure to raise an objection concerning this application, by letter, or failure to provide sufficient specificity to afford the decision maker an opportunity to respond to the issue, precludes your right of appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) on that issue. Failure to specify which ordinance criterion the objection is based on also precludes your right of appeal to LUBA on that criterion. Failure of the applicant to raise constitutional or other issues relating to proposed conditions of approval with sufficient specificity to allow this Department to respond to the issue precludes an action for damages in circuit court. A copy of the application, all documents and evidence relied upon by the applicant and applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost and will be provided at reasonable cost, if requested. All materials are available at the Ashland Planning Division, Community Development & Engineering Services Building, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520. If you have questions or comments concerning this request, please feel free to contact the Ashland Planning Division at 541-488-5305. comm- ev p ammng ammng ctrons otlcmg o er ale Notices igns -2 - 3. ocs VARIANCE 1 8.5.5.050 1. The variance is necessary because the subject code provision does not account for special or unique physical circumstances of the subject site, such as topography, natural features, adjacent development, or similar circumstances. A legal lot determination may be sufficient evidence of a hardship for purposes of approving a variance. 2. The variance is the minimum necessary to address the special or unique physical circumstances related to the subject site. 3. The proposal's benefits will be greater than any negative impacts on the development of the adjacent uses and will further the purpose and intent of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan of the City. 4. The need for the variance is not self-imposed by the applicant or property owner. For example, the variance request does not arise as result of a property line adjustment or land division approval previously granted to the applicant. t; E:- Y% G:\comm-dev\planning0anning Actions\Noticing FolderWlailed Notices & Signs\2016\PA-2016-00143.docx G AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING f STATE OF OREGON ) County of Jackson ) I' The undersigned being first duly sworn states that: 1. 1 am employed by the City of Ashland, 20 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon 97520, in the Community Development Department. 2. On February 2, 2016 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 #2016-00143, 574 Great Oaks Drive. Signature of Employee Document3 2/112016 i PA-2016-00143 391 E04AD 7900 r'A-2016-00143 391 E04AD 8000 2016-00143 391 E04AD 8200 WOOD DOUGLAS L TRUSTEE ET AL SKLENSKY ALDEN F TRUSTEE ET AL LENTFER JACK W TRUSTEE ET AL 539 MOUNTAIN MEADOWS DR 549 MOUNTAIN MEADOWS DR 813 PLUM RIDGE DR ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ET A 4DA 1000 PA-2016-00143 391 E04DA 1100 ' PA-2016-00143 391 E04DA 1200 GRUO PA-2016-00143 391 VICTOR WYNN-OWEN LISBETH TRUSTEE ET AL MILLER EDWARD R TRUSTEE 3707 SE COOPER ST 803 PLUM RIDGE DR ( 161 BROWNS RD PORTLAND, OR 97202 ASHLAND, OR 97520 1 WILLIAMS, OR 97544 j I PA-2016-00143 391 E04DA 1300 PA-2016-00143 391 E04DA 1400 1 'PA-2016-00143 391 E04DA 1500 TAYLOR JOEL S TRUSTEE ET AL GOOZEE SHERWOOD TRUSTEE ET AL PEJSA ANTHONY W TRUSTEE ET AL 590 MOUNTAIN MEADOWS DR 595 GREAT OAKS DR 5353 BASELINE AVE ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, CA 97520 SANTA YNEZ, CA 93460 PA4016-00143 391 E04DA 1600 PA-2016-00143 391 E04DA 1700 PA-2016-00143 391 E04DA 1900 PHILLIPS PAULA L TRUSTEE ET AL ASHBEY WILLIAM N TRUSTEE ET AL GOTTESMANN ELLINOR 785 N MOUNTAIN AVE 777 N MOUNTAIN AVE 769 N MOUNTAIN AVE ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 I I PA-2016-00143 391 E04DA 2000 PA-2016-00143 391 E04DA 2100 PA-2016-00143 391 E04DA 2200 TAYLOR TAMSIN C INTER VIVOS TRUST HALL BETHANY H TRUSTEE ET AL ASHBROOK TEMPLE II AND LORETTA ET AL 1 584 GREAT OAKS DR 1 HYA ET AL 594 GREAT OAKS DR 1 ASHLAND, OR 97520 1 574 GREAT OAKS DR ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2016-00143 391 E64DA 2300 1 PA-2016-00143 391 E04DA 2400- 1 'PA-2016-00143 391 E04DA 2500 HAYES HAROLD E& DONNA L REV BOWMAN LEE ELLSWORTH TRUSTEE LUCAS WILLIAM E TRUSTEE ET AL TRUST ET AL ET AL 544 MOUNTAIN MEADOWS DR 814 MOUNTAIN MEADOWS 554 MOUNTAIN MEADOWS DR ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2016-00143 391 E04DA 2700 ' PA-2016-00143 391 E04DA 2800 1 ' PA-2016-00143 TAYLOR TAMSIN SPARTAN ASHLAND STELLA REAL 574 GREAT OAKS 594 GREAT OAKS DR ESTATE LLC 2/2/2016 NOC ASHLAND, OR 97520 66 WATER ST 200 20 ASHLAND, OR 97520 j I l I I ii 1, IICI 1 I I j I I Il~ ~Il d L L E-LU L , 'i MoD HOUM FEUD 51000 5M p t, + uu B'D 0 TrJl 'H-0 J s matip u 3"A ~ Mud dal U-1 Mod BNO 1~,~ ' 0OLj 12DO 7409 IWO, 1 C!1 2700 19" J I T 1 F ~ I 20 1,2 TOW ;0, 121 2865 E r 4 f 2U w i n 523 o J ' I ~I 320D 3Rnn soul NARRATIVE 7 ret as r. Ashland 97520 Revised Jan 22, 2016 I request a variance to the rear setback line of the existing single family residence at 574 Great Oaks Dr. in Mountain Meadows to allow expanding the 6'4" by 22'5" elevated deck at the rear to make it 10'4" by 22'5". This deck is supported on posts approximately ft. tall, with a bank that slopes down beyond the deck. The existing 6'4" deck has a net clearance of only 5'10" out from the house wall to the inside of the railing. This does not allow enough room for a 3'6"patio table with four chairs around it. The roof eave edge is aligned with the deck railing below. I request a variance to reduce the rear setback to 5'3" (less than a 50% reduction in the setback) since the proposed deck expansion into the setback is 4' 7" including the footings for added supporting posts, and it will be wise to assume 4'9" in case a footing has to be adjusted due to a conflict with boulders. (Please see Exh. 4). Attached are the following exhibits: 1. Vicinity map shows existing deck area and extension and fact that neighboring deck at the rear corner of 584 Great Oaks does not allow seeing the proposed deck extension at 574, so no screening is needed. 2. Copy of aerial photo. NOTE: I suggest sending Exh 1 and 2 and possibly Exh 5 to neighbors. 3. Site plan shows topography contours and large trees. 4. Partial site plan shows boulders and proposed footings. 5. Rear elevation and side elevation/section. 6. Framing pages 1,2,3. I respond to the requirements of Chapter 18.5.5 as follows: 1. The variance is necessary because the code provision does not allow for special physical circumstances of TOPOGRAPHY, NATURAL FEATURES AND ADJACENT DEVELOPMENT. The two residences immediately adjacent to 574 Great Oaks Dr. (564 and 584) both have rear walls that are closer to the rear lot line than the standard 10' rear setbacks, as do other parts of the North Mountain development. (Please see attached copy of aerial photo Exh. 2). This is not a problem for me since it means no screening is needed because of favorable sightlines. (See comments above for Exhibit 1, vicinity map). E At the rear of these three residences is a downsloping bank with the toe of the slope about 45' beyond the rear property line of 574, and about 20 `below the top of the slope, making the slope about 43 degrees. The bank has many attractive moss covered boulders, and the oaks and cottonwood trees beyond are very attractive, but the existing deck is too small to truly enjoy them. (Please see Exh. 3 and 4). The area on the bank below the proposed deck extension has drip irrigation and kinnick-kinnick ground cover and iris. No removal of trees is planned in association with this variance request. Existing trees will be safeguarded during construction. 574 Great Oaks is in compliance with Ashland's Firewise program, with no conifers or pyrophytes closer than 75 feet (see Exh. 3 showing the 30 inch pine southwest of the closest house corner). Also, about 3 or 4 years ago the City of Ashland's Firewise consultant (Alli?) recommended placing 1/8inch by 1/8 inch galvanized wire mesh over the lattice enclosing the area under the deck to prevent leaves accumulating under the deck, and in case of fire, to prevent large embers from causing problems. I installed the mesh, and it has been very successful. (See Exh. rear elevation) Beyond the rear property line is open space owned by Mountain Meadows and marked OPEN SPACE on the attached map. This map also shows the sewer access easement beyond the bottom of the rear down slope. It seems reasonable to me to allow the deck expansion and reduce the rear setback to 5 feet 3 inches considering these special physical circumstances. 2. The requested variance of reducing the rear setback to 5'3" is the minimum reasonably required to allow the proposed deck expansion. 3. The requested variance will benefit me and any future buyer of 574 Great Oaks with a deck of adequate size to be useful in enjoying the awesome outdoors. The existing deck is too small. I can not imagine any negative impacts from expanding an elevated deck over a sloping bank which is designated as open space. This request's benefits will further the intent of the ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Ashland. 4. The requested variance is not self imposed and is not made to resolve any possible prior problem. V)tov) \ `ity O U~ I ul ~ \ 05'1!1 H1nOS j~S'Og o a a tL b CJ o O ~ fy Lr) ~n co, G'1~ v jl / - - OS 16 H1nO3 v ~ LL LLI c.A O- moo}--~~GL i \~'4c. ~~r ~ c y m SOUTH 42.76 LL. be j 1 C35 ol Lo C \c IJ J ® ` V v r7 k-~ ~n £ t, 48 ; LLJ i r~ LLI 01 VA 0 , ;IJ.,TOS' r1CIJ i !t? `i Al h1_ ft`. "U, 1S) L ! _ c a, r. i i h o to r' SHLAND ARf~mc~W ~uhamalk Dory and hears no warranty otaccuncy, e a"uld nl d~~• fac@tllea. msemeM or rmdavy 1-m;o P~~n<A'fm ld verYlad for eiietsnca andlorlocl 12 LLJ f o/ Q/H ' LO -VI ---WZ > La o cn El c~ / ~ a z / zo Z W~ / ~~z0o 0 ozz 0m=o o~Q a a~ LL, o~ w~~Oa.¢ / ID --w Q~ 0 = 19 2 13 k oN f5~os-r5 (r-t~7i r ~ t _ 5(rpC LL- 1~ i~or ~~~~tat _ tog r? L"f- E ~ r ~ ~LI iJInJG~ t A- ~K ~r f 1 Y'(j t 1 ? Vt r_a ~XI t~J~ CL -A 6i-CVA-T 00 57Lt GR e~ r u5 o j-`~HONC- X141 - Z6, 11 ZZ Ll x T __p4 III - 7-61 17\ 2`Lq CAVC- oWoYe t, S EYT PL /lm k 1 Ll s t~' < d W ~v n IA 'J~ ip R ' v4 Lu I } =W YF' 02 I A 1x~ 'T'f 17-01 C3 ~I o wv ii QL V1 l~ I Oc' Oda d1 ~A may U a r d_ r tl i I r ~A Ej Y y'' Rr ~j[ Eye I w., . W \j rJ ff r'' Ap~~, S 1f• j_ r~ ~"r izr ;jam' 40 b )e ( f l 'yy U)~ {ip ll~ I! ~ W + T (Z 3 4 S i I~ ~ Planning Division ZONING IT APPLICATION CITY 51 Winburn Way, Ashland OR 97520 FILE '1 ASHLAND Of 541-4EE-5305 Fax 541-4EE-6006 - DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT a'i/NCr 7Z,27/& DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Pursuing LEEDO Certification? ❑ YES ❑ NO Street Address 57ZI Assessor's Map NAAo.~~ 391 E Tax Lot(s) '?_ao(D Zoning Comp Plan Designation APPLICANT, Name 44, 7Z-_64 Pe ~ .~r? I!;eZe%?e Phone E-Mail `O-'17/e Address :57-Y G a *4- ~2 City 4.5,ql .N~ Zip ~ ~ PROPERTY OWNER Name Phone E-Mail Address City Zip SURVEYOR ENGINEER ARCHITECT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OTHER Title Name Phone E-Mail Address City Zip Title Name Phone E-Mail Address City Zip i I hereby certify that the statements and information contained in this application, including the enclosed drawings and the required findings of fact, are in all respects, true and correct. I understand that all property pins must be shown on the drawings and visible upon the site inspection. In the event the pins are not shown or their location found to be incorrect, the owner assumes full responsibility. 1 further understand that if this request is subsequently contested, the burden will be on me to establish: 1) that 1 produced sufficient factual evidence at the hearing to support this request; 2) that the findings of fact furnished justifies the granting of the request; 3) that the findings of fact furnished by me are adequate; and further 4) that all structures or improvements are properly located on the ground. Failure in this regard will result most likely in not only the request being set aside, but also possibly in my structures being built in reliance thereon being required to be removed at xpense. If have any doubts, l am advised to seek competent professional advic and assistance. Applicant's Sig a re Date As owner of the property involved in this request, l have read and understood the complete application and its consequences to me as a property owner. Property per's Signature (required) Date [To be completed by City StaflJ r`" ~ rr (~j Date Received Zoning Permit Types Filing Fee $ t, OVER N GAcomm-deOplanningTPonns & Handouts\Zoning Permit Application.doc ff~7, i Job Address: 574 GREAT OAKS DR Contractor: ASHLAND OR 97520 Address: C A Owner's Name: ASHBROOK TEMPLE II TRUSTEE 0 Phone: P Customer 06733 N State Lic No: P ASHBROOK TEMPLE II TRUSTEE T City Lic No: L Applicant: 574 GREAT OAKS DR R Address: ASHLAND OR 97520 A C C Sub-Contractor: A Phone: T Address: N Applied: 01/22/2016 0 T Issued: Expires: 07/20/2016 R Phone: State Lid No: Maplot: 391E04DB117 City Lic No: i DESCRIPTION: Type 1 variance i!I j; 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 Variance (Type 1) 1,012.00 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tel: 541-488-5305 20 East Main St. Fax: 541-488-5311 Ashland, OR 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us Inspection Request Line: 541-552-2080 CITY OF