HomeMy WebLinkAboutAllison_574_PA-2016-00275
CITY OF
Planning Department,I
51 Winburn Way Ili! K l
Ashland, OR 97520
541-488-5305
Ashland Historic Commission
Design Review Form
Applicant MAfZ l NCIS Date IZi Cr I 2C°j l
Address S A_ L%L (SON ST
Proposed Action ccN U 02-0,( el, (,J
O Commercial ® Residential
O New Construction ® Changes to Existing Structure
Historic Review Board Comments:
t: (S 70 2 C COL4 1/0 ~ s sf0 /Q ~ Z In the spirit of protecting the historic design and compatibility of your project, if you wish to amend your
building plan in order to apply any recommendations of the Historic Review Board, we encourage you to
prepare an addendum and resubmit it to the BuildingDe(partment'
Applicant Signature Historic "eview Board Signature
G:Icomm-devlplanninglComrrissions & CommitteeMistodc CommissionWisc Admin-FORMNesign Review Form.doc
12/13/2007
t
elYL
rxl~
-e-
6dW
L _5
hz~
4 G
14
41/
~u~ car`
k/t
r
r
k'
SIM PLAN: 5-7,q ALLISaI~ 3i~
Pip GT; ~RNr~SG~~~ P~A-N LEC~~ND KcY:
-rP,X L;_ O 1 e J I L O 1 9 Q a ~fin~IPX tYv~ QOX
--~sP
CMS 1f~rsJ~.~a(/h~
-o- R ,nbird PC -U Sp~ ;AkItrNads
~1' Do,4,-'er FY:
$ 50-0" 12'-4 1 /2" (E) 24'-0" (E) 21'-0" (E)
20'-0" (E)
{ I I I 0 1~ `
I
I I I 0
I I I m ~
I 9
I 11
i PP
I
i ..r 1
~bOib•bebc®ble ~Ileb b• ee be PI®Ob
6uanymu5 8h~''. s• { _ b. I cJQr1AK~,~°t , ~ ~kv !1 rod
bark CWps I e~ M OVow
Gescu~
ho ph {jni I I a I ~roi~ (~sa
A. R~is~J 26 ~I b I au sP~4o~ 0 R Sib' s~
A i ~CUie
iqu(D
q ash f >0 C2~(~ Lily
{ ~J2~ fed I On. a1N 3. AM'6ER,
I «s~ ° 2h°a~ SwEic~4M
f: SM(~ e \ ~TN Lek aQtu 600 4cirk ~r,
C1~~ i aAX gLEC Rhady..,l '®ooov
19
i (~eQ 04 p ocicro3
2~4
L4(~iIN ~4
l ie Rcused i` i odor i ~cabiosa
S { Wrlla~l ~2G~. ~ ~,af
C I ~arfc
~ ~ TAI
I CkiPs
II T e N din0'-
Or I o OA avraw
I I Li r~V ru G'la Enylisk QieciS
If rl
sr be ee ee I u bb e• a ee e• ve •e eb bt • I
142 FT, i I
I I I I ~
~ ~CeriSO
I ~ I I C 2c2a1
51TE PLAN
5CALE; 115" - 1'-0"
f
YTS or
ASHLAND
I
April 12, 2016
i
Notice of Final Decision
On April 12, 2016, the Community Development Director approved the request for the following:
Planning Action: 2016-00275
Subject Property: 574 Allison Street
Applicant: Susan DeMarinis
Description: A request for a Site Design Review to allow for the conversion of an
existing single-car garage to an Accessory Residential Unit (ARU) at 574 Allison Street. The
proposed Accessory Residential Unit is to remain in the existing location on the property and will
have a small addition to the existing structure. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION:
Low Density Multiple Family Residential; ZONING: R-2; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 lE 09DB;
TAX LOTS: 5900
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 fmal 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: 541488-5305
51 Winbum Way Fax: 541-552-2050 )
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900
wwu. ashland. orms
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 I
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 ofAppeal. 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 11 public hearing procedures,
pursuant to section 18.5.1.060, subsections A - E, except that the decision of the Planning Commission is the final
decision of the City on an appeal of a Type I decision. A decision on an appeal is final the date the City mails the
adopted and signed decision. Appeals of Commission decisions must be filed with the State Land Use Board of
Appeals, pursuant to ORS 197.805 - 197.860.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel: 541488-5305
51 Winbum Way Fax: 541-552-2050
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900
www.ashland.or.us - '
K,
ASHLAND PLANNING DIVISION
i
i
FINDINGS & ORDERS
PLANNING ACTION: PA-2016-00275
SUBJECT PROPERTY: 574 Allison Street
APPLICANT/OWNER: Susan DeMarinis
DESCRIPTION: A request for Site Design Review to allow for the conversion of an
existing single-car garage to an Accessory Residential Unit (ARU) at 574 Allison Street. The
proposed Accessory Residential Unit is to remain in the existing location on the property and
will have a small addition to the existing structure.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low Density Multiple Family Residential;
ZONING: R-2; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 lE 09 DB; TAX LOT: 5900.
SUBMITTAL DATE: February 12, 2016
DEEMED COMPLETE DATE: February 23, 2016
STAFF APPROVAL DATE: April 12, 2016
FINAL DECISION DATE: April 25, 2016
APPROVAL EXPIRATION DATE: October 25, 2017
DECISION
The application involves a request for Site Design Review approval to convert an existing 280
square foot detached garage structure to an Accessory Residential Unit (ARU) behind the
existing home at 574 Allison Street. The subject parcel is located on the south side of Allison
Street, with vehicle access taken off the rear alley. The property is rectangular in shape, with an
area of approximately 7,100 square feet. The parcel and immediate surrounding uses are zoned
R-2, Multiple-Family Residential. Allison Street is identified as a Neighborhood Street and is
improved with paving, curb and gutters in place. Sidewalks exist in front of the subject property
and throughout the rest of the street.
According to Jackson County tax records, the property currently has a 726 square foot single-
family dwelling constructed in 1938. The application materials indicate an existing single-car
garage of approximately 280 square feet also exists on the property. The applicant is requesting
approval to allow for the conversion of this structure to an Accessory Residential Unit in
compliance with the Ashland Municipal Code section 18.2.3.040.
Sizes of ARU's are limited to 50 percent of the Gross Habitable Floor Area (GHFA) of the
primary residence, and, no greater than 1,000 square feet. In this case, the existing 280 square
foot structure would comply with the size limitation to be considered an ARU. A small addition
to the existing structure of approximately 105 square feet will make the structure 385 square feet
in total. The total of 385 square feet is 22 square feet more than the maximum 50 percent GHFA;
however, the lot is zoned R-2 and greater than 7,000 square feet, which allows for a full second
unit. A full second unit on this property is not limited to 50 percent of the GHFA of the primary E
residence. Therefore, based on these findings and the applicants desire to retain the diminutive
character of the existing structure the new ARU complies with the GHFA requirement under
PA #2016-00275
574 Allison Street/MMS
Page 1
AMC section 18.2.3.040. The new addition to the structure will comply with all current land use
ordinance requirements including a three foot side yard setback in accordance with section
18.2.5.060 of the AMC. In addition, the applicant has proposed to create two 9' x 18' off-street
parking spaces located off the rear alley and the Staff Advisor will grant one on-street vehicle
parking credit to meet the necessary three (3) required parking spaces to serve the existing home
and new ARU. The parking spaces will be constructed using porous parking pavers and will have
the required 5 foot landscaped buffer screening the parking from the neighboring property to the
west.
A zoning permit has already been issued for the construction of a storage shed of approximately
120 square feet to accommodate the three required bicycle parking spaces. Trash and recycling
containers shall be located inside of the proposed rear fence and screened from view from
adjacent properties and public right-of-ways. A condition of approval has been added to address
this requirement under section 18.4.4.030.G of the AMC. j
I
The existing garage (now the proposed ARIL) has a right side yard setback of approximately
three feet and the proposed addition will also meet the required side yard setback of three feet
from the west property line. All other setbacks for the structures conform to current land use
code requirements. The application materials state the proposed lot coverage will be
approximately 27.5 percent (1,953 square feet) impervious surfaces including the primary
dwelling, ARU, shed, porches, walkways, and parking area, which is consistent with the
submitted site plan map. Thus, the proposed ARU meets the code requirements for setbacks and
lot coverage.
Finally, the applicant does not propose any tree removals and has submitted a tree protection
plan meeting the requirements of AMC section 18.4.5. The proposed addition to the ARU is to
the south side and is within three feet of a large silver maple tree. The applicant states that the
existing garage already has a large opening and header construction for the automatic door to
open facing the alleyway. For the applicant, utilizing this opening for the addition make most
sense for construction and financial reasons. In order to mitigate damage to the existing tree the
applicant obtained an arborist report from Beaver Tree Service. The arborist recommends 4
fencing around the tree and cutting roots cleanly by hand and covering with wet burlap sacks
until they can be covered with backfill. A condition has been added requiring six foot chain link
fencing be placed around the drip line of the subject tree to the greatest extent possible. A
landscape and irrigation plan has been submitted including a new street tree located in the park
row off of Allison Street.
Site Review Approval Criteria
Where accessory residential units are allowed, they are subject to Site Design Review under
chapter 18.5.2. Accordingly, applicants are required to demonstrate compliance with the criteria
for Site Review approval. The following text addresses the applicant's proposal and the
applicable criteria.
The first criterion for Site Review approval is that, "The proposal complies with all of the
applicable provisions of the underlying zone (part 18.2), including but not limited to: building
i
PA #2016-00275
574 Allison StreeVWS '
Page 2
and yard setbacks, lot area and dimensions, density and floor area, lot coverage, building
height, building orientation, architecture, and other applicable standards. " The existing
structure and proposed addition conforms to the underlying zone's density and floor area
requirements, maximum building height, lot coverage, area and dimensions, setbacks, building
orientation, and architecture.
The second approval criterion is that, "The proposal complies with applicable overlay zone
requirements (part 18.3). " The proposal is complies with all standards for the Historic District
Overlay.
The third approval criterion is that, "The proposal complies with the applicable Site
Development and Design Standards of part 18.4, except as provided by subsection E. " The
application notes the existing structure will have a small addition of 105 square feet. The
proposed addition will have a gabled roof in line with the existing gable roof on the single-car
garage. Siding and trim will match the existing primary dwelling with 7 1/4 inch lap siding
having a 6 inch reveal, and trim will be 4 inch. Two parking spaces are required for the existing
residence, and a third is needed for the proposed ARU. The application notes that there will be
two off-street parking spaces off the rear alley and approximate 50 feet of street frontage is
available for parking, which would allow for one on-street credit to satisfy the parking
requirements.
The fourth criterion is that, "The proposal complies with the applicable standards in section
18.4.6 Public Facilities and that adequate capacity of City facilities for water, server, electricity,
urban storm drainage, paved access to and throughout the property and adequate transportation
can and will be provided to the subject property. " The application materials explain the
proposed ARU will be connected to the services for the existing single family dwelling. A
separate gas and electrical meter will be installed for the new unit in conjunction with a new
address. The applicants have contacted the Water, Sewer and Street Departments and they have
all indicated they see no need for additional improvements to accommodate the proposed unit.
Allison Street is paved, with curbs, gutters, park-row, and a sidewalk in place along the
property's full frontage.
CONCLUSIONS
Two public comments were received with regard to the proposal. Kathleen Mackris and Kristen
Beers submitted written comments in regards to the existing parking situation and multi-family
uses of the neighborhood. Many of the properties located on Allison Street are zoned for multiple
family residential uses although historically the neighborhood may have had mostly single
family dwellings. On-street vehicle parking may have been impacted by more recent multiple
family dwelling construction in the neighborhood as well. However, the applicant's proposal for
a small ARU is in compliance with the current land use ordinance. Planning Action 2016-00275
was reviewed by the Ashland Historic Commission at the regular meeting on March 2, 2016. The
commission recommended that the siding for the proposed ARU be six inch lap siding and that
the proposed addition have a gabled roof. A condition has been added to make the requested
design changes. Therefore, with the conditions below, staff finds that the proposed unit would be
PA #2016-00275
574 Allison StreeVMMS
Page 3
in conformance with the standards of the R-2 zone, the minimum requirements of the Accessory
Residential Unit and Site Design Review chapters of the Ashland Municipal Code.
The criteria for an Accessory Residential Unit are described in AMC Chapter 18.2.3.040, as
follows:
A. R-1 Zone. Accessory residential units in the R-1 zone shall meet the following requirements.
1. One accessory residential unit is allowed per lot, and the maximum number of dwelling
units shall not exceed two per lot.
2. Accessory residential units are not subject to the density or minimum lot area requirements
of the zone, except that accessory residential units shall be counted in the density of
developments created under the Performance Standards Option in chapter 18.3.9.
3. The maximum gross habitable floor area (GHFA) of the accessory residential unit shall not
exceed 50 percent of the GHFA of the primary residence on the lot, and shall not exceed
1, 000 square feet GHFA.
4. The proposal shall conform to the overall maximum lot coverage and setback requirements
of the underlying zone.
5. Additional parking shall be provided in conformance with the off-street parking provisions
for single-family dwellings in section 18.4.3.040, except that parking spaces, turn-arounds,
and driveways are exempt from the paving requirements in subsection 18.4.3.080.E.1.
C. R-2 and R-3 Zones. Accessory residential units in the R-2 and R-3 zones shall meet the standards
in subsection 18.2.3.040.A, except that the maximum gross habitable floor area (GHFA) of the
accessory residential structure shall not exceed 50 percent of the GHFA of the primary residence
on the lot, and shall not exceed 500 square feet GHFA.
The criteria for Site Review approval are described in AMC Chapter 18.5.2.050 as follows:
A. Underlying Zone: The proposal complies with all of the applicable provisions of the underlying
zone (part 18.2), including but not limited to: building and yard setbacks, lot area and dimensions,
density and floor area, lot coverage, building height, building orientation, architecture, and other
applicable standards.
B. Overlay Zones: The proposal complies with applicable overlay zone requirements (part 18.3).
C. Site Development and Design Standards: The proposal complies with the applicable Site
Development and Design Standards of part 18.4, except as provided by subsection E, below.
D. City Facilities: The proposal complies with the applicable standards in section 18.4.6 Public
Facilities and that adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, electricity, urban storm
drainage, paved access to and throughout the property and adequate transportation can and will
be provided to the subject property.
E. Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards. The approval authority may approve
exceptions to the Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4 if the circumstances in
either subsection 1 or 2, below, are found to exist.
PA #2016-00275
574 Allison Street/MMS
Page 4
I
}
1. There is a demonstrable difficulty meeting the specific requirements of the Site
Development and Design Standards due to a unique or unusual aspect of an existing
structure or the proposed use of a site; and approval of the exception will not substantially
negatively impact adjacent properties, and approval of the exception is consistent with the
stated purpose of the Site Development and Design; and the exception requested is the
minimum which would alleviate the difficulty.; or
2. There is no demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements, but granting the
exception will result in a design that equally or better achieves the stated purpose of the
Site Development and Design Standards.
In staff's assessment, with conditions, the application complies with applicable ordinances and
meets all required criteria for approval of the conversion of the existing garage to an Accessory
Residential Unit.
Planning Action 92016-00275 is approved with the following conditions. Further, if any one or
more of the following conditions are found to be invalid for any reason whatsoever, then
Planning Action #2016-00275 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 Site Design Review approval shall be submitted and approved
prior to issuance of a building permit.
3) That all recommendations of the Ashland Historic Commission, where consistent with
the applicable ordinances and standards and with final approval of the Staff Advisor,
shall be conditions of approval unless otherwise modified herein.
4) That all necessary building permits and associated fees and charges, including permits
and/or inspection fees for the kitchen and fire separation installation, permits and service
connection fees for the new electrical service to the accessory residential unit, and any
applicable system development charges for water, sewer, storm water, parks, and
transportation shall be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit. The building
permit submittals shall include:
a) That the plans submitted for the building permit shall be in 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 this Site Review approval shall be submitted
and approved prior to issuance of a building permit.
b) Lot coverage calculations including all building footprints, driveways, parking,
PA #2016-00275
574 Allison StreeVAWS
Page 5
and circulation areas.
e) That a revised Tree Protection Plan consistent with the standards described in
18.4.5 be submitted for review and approval by the Staff Advisor prior to the
issuance of a building permit. The plan shall identify the location and placement
of fencing around the drip lines of trees identified for preservation. The amount of
fill and grading within the drip line shall be minimized. Cuts within the drip line
shall be noted on the tree protection plan, and shall be executed by handsaw and
kept to a minimum. No fill shall be placed around the trunk/crown root.
f) That a Verification Permit shall be applied for and approved by the Ashland
Planning Division prior to site work, building demolition, and/or storage of
materials. The Verification Permit is to inspect the identification of the tree to be
protected and the installation of tree protection fencing for the silver maple tree
on the site. The tree protection shall be chain link fencing six feet tall and
installed in accordance with 18.61.200.B.
g) That a landscaping and irrigation plan to include irrigation details satisfying the
requirements of the Site Design and Use Standards Water Conserving
Landscaping Guidelines and Policies and showing park row improvements shall
be provided prior to issuance of a building permit.
5) That prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy:
a) That a separate electric service and meter for the accessory residential unit shall
be installed in accordance with Ashland Electric Department requirements.
b) That a separate address for the accessory residential unit shall be applied for !
approved by the City of Ashland Engineering Division. Addressing shall meet the E
requirements of the Ashland Fire Department and be visible from the Public E
Right-of-Way.
f
{
C) That the applicant shall screen recycle and refuse containers from adjacent
properties and public right-of-ways.
I
d) That street trees, 1 per 30 feet of street frontage, shall be installed on the Allison
Street frontage prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the proposed
ARU. All street trees shall be chosen from the adopted Street Tree List and shall
be installed in accordance with the specifications noted in Section E of the Site
Design and Use Standards. The street trees shall be irrigated.
f
e) That all landscaping in the new landscaped areas shall be installed according to
the approved plan, and tied into the existing irrigation system, prior to the E
issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
E
PA #2016-00275
574 Allison Street/MMS
Page 6
l ~z L7~
ill Molnar, Di+tor D to
Department of mmunity Development
i
I
i
G
PA #2016-00275
574 Allison Street/MMS
Page 7
't
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING
i•
STATE OF OREGON )
County of Jackson )
f
{
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 April 12, 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 #2016-00275, 574 Allison St.. /fOL
6 Z,:,
Signat of Employee
Document3 4/1212016
PA-2016-00275 391E09DB 7000 PA-2016-00275 391E09DB 6100 PA-2016-00275 391E09DB 6200
ANDERSON ERLAND/SUSAN R ANDERSON IVAR R JR TRUSTEE ET BEERS MATTHEW Q TRUSTEE ET AL
23131 VILLAGE 23 1737 VERSAILLES AVE 550 ALLISON ST
CAMARILLO, CA 93012 ALAMEDA, CA 94501 ASHLAND, OR 97520
' I
PA-2016-00275 391E09DB 5700 PA-2016-00275 391E09DB 5200 PA-2016-00275 391E09DB 6000
BLAZEJ LUCIAN R TRUSTEE ET AL CAVANAUGH RAGAN PATRICIA COX JAMES E TRUSTEE ET AL
50 LAIDLEY STREET PO BOX 247 508-350 STONE RD
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94131 ASHLAND, OR 97520 SUSANVILLE, CA 96130
i
PA-2016-00275 391E09CA 14200 PA-2016-00275 391E09DB 5900 PA-2016-00275 391E09DB 5300
DELSMAN JOSEPH W/ELAINE M DEMARINIS SUSAN K TRUSTEE ET AL HARDWICK JOHN ET AL
555 FAIRVIEW ST 145 NORMAL AVE 2552 EDGEWATER DR
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 EUGENE, OR 97401
1
PA-2016-00275 391E09CA 13800 PA-2016-00275 391E09DB 5000 PA-2016-00275 391E09CA 13700
HOWE GREGG TRUSTEE ET AL LAURSEN ERIC TRUSTEE ET AL LEE MARY BETH
PO BOX 336 46 UNION ST 542 ALLISON ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-2016-00275 391E09DB 5100 PA-2016-00275 391E09DB 5500 PA-2016-00275 391E09DB 7100
MACKRIS KATHLEEN MARY TRUSTEE MC KEE DAVID C/CYNTHIA S MIKALIS NIKOS TRUSTEE FBO f
549 ALLISON ST 145 SHERMAN ST 386 HELMAN ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-2016-00275 391E09DB 7200 PA-2016-00275 391E09DB 7400 PA-2016-00275 391E09DB 5400
MILES KATHLEEN M/ALLAN ! NEWMAN MARGARET R PANNETON ROGER F/SANDRA N '
593 FAIRVIEW ST 199 SHERMAN 125-121 SHERMAN ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-2016-00275 391E09DB 5600 PA-2016-00275 391E09DB 7500 PA-2016-00275 391E09CA 14000
SALLEE MICHAEL S/JENNIFER R SUNDELL CARLIN/MIRANDA THOMAS JOHN E/LORI D
433 CLINTON ST 181 SHERMAN ST 541 FAIRVIEW ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-2016-00275 391E09DB 5800 PA-2016-00275 391E09DB 7101 PA-2016-00275 391E09DB 4900
THOMPSON BRENT TRUSTEE ET AL WAAS NATHAN WHITE GLENN/TREADWAY MONA
P O BOX 201 567 FAIRVIEW ST 2 160 MEADE ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-2016-00275 391E09CA 14100
WILLIAMS JAMES
160 CHURCH ST /
ASHLAND, OR 97520
I
1
4
~Ia l ism
D01(&
t3
1I Property Owner Name:
3?
I~
Project Address: Y= s Account# l s:
Lawn to be Removed: _ ft2 Estimated Rebate: $ 1 `trf r=
The applicant has met all pre-conversion requirements for the Lawn Replacement Program and
is authorized to proceed with steps two and three of program conditions.
Water Conservation Staff Signature: °V i,,,__ Date:
q
Comments:
LP I ~ f-
Lis I''-eJ
Project Address: Lawn Removed: ftz
❑ W-9 Submitted Rebate Amount Approved: $
❑ Copy of Invoices Approximate Conversion Cost: $
Applicant has met all requirements of the Lawn Replacement Program and the
landscape conversion has been completed.
Water Conservation Staff Signature: Date:
Comments:
GREEW CUSTOMER COPY YELLOW. COA COPY PIW FINANCE COPY
CITY E
ASHLAND WA'T'ER CONSERVATION DIVISION
I
Water Consumption For : 2-3 ppl: 1300ft2 Lawn/500ft2 Shrubs Meter #
Account: Meter read:
CUBIC-FEET
10%
2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 Average Below
(Cubic Feet) (Cubic Feet) (Cubic Feet) (Cubic Feet) (Cubic Feet) (Cubic Feet) 2011-2014 Average
January 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 360
Februa 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 360
March 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 360
April 400 400 400 400 400 400 360
May 915 915 915 915 915 915 824
June 1,133 1,133 1,133 1,133 1,133 1,133 1,020
July 1 1,261 1,261 1,261 1,261 1,261 1,261 1,135
August 1,133 1,133 1,133 1,133 1,133 1,133 1,020
September 915 915 915 915 915 915 824
October 915 915 915 915 915 915 824
November 400 400 400 400 400 400 360
December 400 400 400 400 400 400 360
Total 1,200 8,672 8,672 8,672 8,672 8,672 7,072 6,365
GALLONS
10 ~io
2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 Average Below
(Gallons) (Gallons) (Gallons) (Gallons) (Gallons) (Gallons) 2011-2014 Average
January 2,992 2,992 2,992 2,992 2,992 2,992 2,992 2,693
February 2,992 2,992 2,992 2,992 2,992 2,992 2,992 2,693
March 2,992 2,992 2,992 2,992 2,992 2,992 2,992 2,693
April 0 2,992 2,992 2,992 2,992 2,992 2,992 2,693
May 0 6,844 6,844 6,844 6,844 6,844 6,844 6,160
June 0 8,475 8,475 8,475 8,475 8,475 8,475 7,627
Jul 0 9,432 9,432 9,432 9,432 9,432 9,432 8,489
August 0 8,475 8,475 8,475 8,475 8,475 8,475 7,627
September 0 6,844 6,844 6,844 6,844 6,844 6,844 6,160
October 0 6,844 6,844 6,844 6,844 6,844 6,844 6,160
November 0 2,992 2,992 2,992 2,992 2,992 2,992 2,693
December 0 2,992 2,992 2,992 2,992 2,992 2,992 2,693
Total 8,976 64,867 64,867 64,867 64,867 64,867 52,899 47,609
Notes: 1 cubic foot = 7.48 gallons PSI:
Phone: 541-522-2062 Email: Julie.Smitherman@ashland.or.us Website: www.ashland.or.us/conserve
Water-Wise Landscaping: www.ashiandsaveswater.org
I
Lai Plan'
9
C~ !
-PV
I d
d-,L~
a
aV ~ o
4
o
y
'J j
-VI
sided for your convenience. The landscape plan can be submitted on a separate sheet.
and irrigation to be installed. Include the estimated project area dimensions.
J
t
I
I ~ 1
c5G
~ tD
112
r
i
II
N'
r~
&nip
41,
f
5 12 r-r
FRh 'Ca Ile,
Q0 11C- H Rhf
I C t w
Co
6h
I
70 ~t;~
Pr
~ ~ ~ ~ dr tit V~`t
o /
P`^k 1 Ca t~'~ Pr~rc 1D
C& ~ rocKraS~ 1~pG~CYOt ~5~ N
iosa.
9
t
Addendum to Site (Design Weview forARU - I
Applicant/Owner: Susan DeMarinis, 145 Normal Ave., Ashland, OR 97520
541-292-1916, email: suedem@charter.net
Date submitted: March 10, 2016
Project Name: Garage - ARU conversion
Subject Property: 574 Allison Street, Ashland, OR 97520
Assessor's Map 39 1E 09DB Tax Lot 5900
Zoning: R-2
Site Design Modifications:
This proposal was reviewed and unanimously approved by the Ashland Historic Commission on March 2, 2016. They did,
however, have a few recommendations for this project to have better compatibility within the Historic District. I have
made these changes and attached the modified Site Plan with this addendum. In summary, the 82 sq. ft. addition will
have a gable style roof to match the south facing gable end on the existing garage. All siding and trim will match the
primary residence with 7 lap siding having a 6" reveal, and the trim to be 4". Also, their final recommendation was to
set the proposed storage shed 4' off the alleyway using the Rear Yard Exception Setback for properties on alleyways. This
modification is shown on the updated Site Plan Map.
Landscaping concerns were addressed by assuring the audience that after construction, yard maintenance and watering
of landscaping will be included in any rental fees and therefore be under the care and attention of the owner. Staff has
recommended that one street tree be added to the park row on Allison St. As indicated on the Site Plan, a Liquid Amber
Sweet Gum will be planted in the NE section (with most sun) of the park row. A detailed Landscape Plan is also attached
for post construction and the next appropriate planting season. This Landscape Plan has been submitted as well, to the
City of Ashland Lawn Replacement Program on March 9, 2016. In regards to the health effects and hazards to the Silver
Maple tree south of the Garage/ARU that might occur during construction, a report from a certified arborist, Clarence
Wangle, at Beaver Tree Service is enclosed. His recommendations for clean cuts to any roots, wet burlap bagging any
exposed roots for as short a time as possible during construction, and surrounding the tree with orange plastic fencing in
a 3' radius from the trunk, will be closely followed-to protect this tree.
The two Off-Street parking spaces off the alleyway will have their places identified/defined by concrete parking bumpers
at the head of each space, as indicated on the attached modified Site Plan.
The corrected property lines have been identified and marked on the updated Site Plan. After reviewing City of Ashland's
Plat and Google Earth maps, as well as shooting a laser measure line from the existing east fence line, the west property
line is now correctly located 4' from the existing garage wall. These measurements now correspond to the 50' width of
the property as recorded with Jackson County. As a result, now being greater than 3' from the property line, no firewall
or window elimination is required for the west wall of the garage. A slight modification to the garage addition (making it
14'x7.5') will also comply with the 3' side yard setback allowable for ARU's under 15' and more than 50' from the street.
This modification makes the total addition 105 sq.ft., just 23 sq.ft. larger than the originally planned 82 sq.ft., and is shown
on the attached Site Plan update.
Site Design Justifications:
Clarification of reasoning for ARU addition bumping out toward the alleyway is as follows. The existing garage already has
a large opening and header construction for the automatic garage door to open facing the alleyway. The access to park
in the garage has been from the alleyway and therefore this large opening already faces the south side of the property.
Utilizing this opening for the addition makes most sense construction-wise and financially. In addition, when completed,
the ARU will have a large yard area in front of the south facing entry, which doesn't face the primary residence. This
design will afford privacy for each unit, even though they will essentially share the overall huge fenced backyard.
t;
3110/2016 Image (2) jpg (2544x3504)
yy`t y _i' Zl F7~ 1l
T SERVICE
REL vorer U Ta¢e 6A®E
March 10 2016
Client: Sue Demarinis
574 Allison St.
Ashland, OR. 97520
City of Ashland
20 E. Main St.
Ashland, OR. 97520
To Whom it may concern:
Re: Tree protection plan for 574 Allison St. Ashland, Oregon
Tree: Silver Maple (Ater Saccharinum)
Evafuotion: The tree has two main trunks, one has a 12"dbh and the other has a 16" dbh. The crown has
approximately a 35 foot span. The tree is approximately 50 feet tall.
The property owner wants to extend the garage. She will put a plastic fence 3 feet from the trunk all the
way around the tree, any roots that may be dug up will be cut properly and covered with wet burlap
until it is covered with back fill.
Sincerely,
t
Clarence V. Wangle
ISA PN 0518A
Beaver Tree Service Inc.
Beaver Tree Service Inc. Portland Metro Office: Corporate Office:
CCB 9173614 7085 SW 175^ Ave 270 Wilson Rd.
Tax ID R 20-5639553 Beaverton, OR 97007 Central Point, OR 97502
(503) 224-1338 (541)`779-7072
Landscape Plan'
Page 2 of 4
1 ,
3 7
I s~~ c I r V~3
n L.1
r~ t \n
lz~
In -!Z s
-410
'y 1
r ) t _
F~ 1 J
7 L \P -J
J~ hf 4 !r`
1
- A-
Key ( = c r
cat \L
s; \
Use this grid to prepare a landscape plan. This grid is provided for your convenience. The landscape plan can be submitted on a separate sheet,
2 List and locate all plant material, pervious surfaces, mulch, and irrigation to be installed. Include the estimated project area dimensions.
CnM~a5l~ion
157+ ,LLI~ON ST ASHLAND
I Msh,ngle,:. 5hltgle o _
- \ G~sc _ .yam. : ' ' Wtlokrrlm3ur~Q P RrOJECT o -AR-u Corgv P.-5!ON
Wood k
~m _ - _ . _
Y t l~i rlm
ooi~T
v~ run ~ifl'
L+ght yard? pouf I m
~ ~is
~4IJ n w5 LaP ~ln~ 1. ; e Su ~
1 ~ ®~1~
'
30%xo+ I~`/I
(o E I 1
ZONE D*:
i 3
~ L ®'T 39 fE 09 D~ TAXLaT 59 ®
SoU1'N WC-ST EIEVRTanI' Not - Ast E~,EykTiar~ .
aF C~.ekkGc :Au
of kRryyc kP~u M MM
FT X 50FT. =7100'
ENSION
z~~a, 2n'~t 20t= ~2~-a Maplef~e lA M CL'(.
~o'II a-7Y
hlleCoM~OSI iD~l
I I ~ ~ ! I I ahf~gles 111 ~
s --k~ nyw to
1 a Gowns ut t _
'Jv
-1400
~ sit pang : pp Wood7~m
sl~l , Ya)(3 t
~y - P C
T,
Y ~ru~zTN CAT ~LEVFTfi~A J MR H WESY• EL~UkTroJ^ ~If I
it
OFP~YGE AP of GARAGE AP~UFnncre~el~fry
.~a,~,d r-1✓icIP1L~. Y ~0.~> l3~'fwr~) -
~I II a SI}o P.T P IGKE 17 F~! I~
5 LA ~ ~ExtStng Fe,,1Cea. ~~m1t1 _
8 U ~F~fa trd' en ~e _ ' ~ P r a Sin qle sforµ-iIIedroom. q'Ft. - ~ ly% ~ I'~'VP~ ~ ~ ~ 3 3 1
o~dlC Sf Z K fr i T y
( shing e, eroo'~~ x Po 1, 1,
Kl . 6rt, Bf6 ~j6~ j
btj
N ~ I 3 m 3$F t
xVie--
~ a
e O AY
.".'T{EC.T se IFS' i ..,V aV,ef Ar2¢.~6ECOYnES.~RWf;~~.,'
=0. i
` P: I Ft; ~2 i I dtQition, ~ ( f Rhby L>4 U1 x{2
9 1 a /g~r (5 FT~r . ~~"x3 I 7 h 1:4
9ha : JFo I l a e e~~03Q:F p}
.-L Relocae~' P hhghy.: 8z.o - aO~F- - I' l' _--r
a Ft' - i
I I _ i. , , GnrE'I Gne tJorfih . ° 4 Fr
I urrfyrzcn
{ „ I r ~xrstrny ra nce +b l~ r tctuTedatpro~w~y ~W
Xr.,1iFl3
~
• I I i ~ ~s Jf~--Y i~--* ,Q~-~o% ~E
+ :I t Pro. BaJ{ WE
mC 0"
eRL elan °j.~
j ® ca yR
f t v I `r'"hte py~w - ?Ft ~ de'')< 4 Ff ~9~~11~?~f~)__~~% ! ~a(n ~Y I p ~FId~•5~ ~ ~ I
7 ~ Et
ck ra=r%ed'w, - yy 0 ®7 V bunwm IQ SOFT
5~ ~ c ~ ~EUt i gr°t'e C oi~nq'a..t,kC~,r+r~osf~',9~n~1C~ I ! 1.'.~cwalk ~ 5~t, r
rt .M .SATE ' ^>ca9'_ ~ J p®~camill~m
-brass
r
,
w'~~~MM Medan
a2~`f
- - --30-An MEN _ 22.12 ~ . od-=- u G . ~ vJ i~ zso
IeA.
J o /VI a ~Fe,-S~ ,
StoRAC7 I; : I oRe~on 6edrroor
~ I A ~di~an SP
t _ t , I So`fall
h ~•Fr.~ a~~~ ~ ~ ti~9~~1
su6mi$ed ; .~ptJU>3Ry. 201(0
566 1/
041
574
i / 566 2 ~ -
582
i
f i
/ 582112
i
i
584
CITY OF
1:185 N LA
1 inch =15 feet W E Mapping is schematic only and bears no warranty of accuracy.
All features, structures, facilities, easement or roadway locations
S should be independently field verified for existence and/or location.
Our In
CC A~
~a
c3
~a'o x 3'0
NO 19
J ~1 ~ S E1~lr~S
1~~ ~ ~ r ~ LG I+T
t9~ e' NfK f A Q 1 3~ r
o \1
---3 C O Pr r
ovop-
~ - ~ r`r,.. ~ '~T'• - - ° -t ~ ~ 3da.Xlg~+;(IZ~ ,T,~ 3 [~5h+ !
D
Co
I_ f of Y~' Q-0-1- Y i
BL ! J P~NTRy C, 0--Se1` - X "v
To Whom It May Concern:
I am writing in response to the Notice of Application on Planning Action: PA-2016-00275;
conversion of an existing single car garage to an Accessory Rental Unit.
I have lived on Allison Street since 1991 and in the past several years have seen some unwelcome
changes in our Historically Designated neighborhood, primarily around non-owner occupied and
multi-unit dwellings. I understand that this neighborhood is zoned R-2 and has mixed use properties.
In the past this created a nice diversity. However, with the recent change in ownership of the 6-plex
at 565 Allison, the street parking has become untenable. It is my fear that the addition of another
dwelling unit at 574 Allison will only contribute to the congestion. I am not in favor of this
conversion due to the impact of parking and the concern about maintenance of the property as it will
not be owner occupied.
It is my understanding that the Historic Commission has approved the garage conversion, so I am
assuming that it is a foregone conclusion that it will be approved by the Planning Commission. Be
that as it may, I would like the commission members to know my opinion.
It is also my understanding that the property owner, Susan DeMarinis will not be occupying the
single family dwelling, which will also be rented, as it has unfortunately been for many years. It is
my hope that off-street parking will be mandatory for the ADU and that the front unit will also use
off- street parking. I am also hoping that Ms. DeMarinis will see fit to upgrade the existing single
family dwelling and keep it maintained. Last summer I was compelled to call Weed Abatement and
request that they contact the owner to mow the grass as it was a fire hazard. In short, the property is
one of several properties which are blight on the neighborhood.
While I understand the concept of in-fill, I find it distressing that this comes at the price of eroding
the integrity and livability of long established neighborhoods and would like the City to take a closer
look at how infill impacts established, historic neighborhoods and what can be done to mitigate the
effects of increased street parking and the effects of non-owner occupied dwellings on these
neighborhoods. I was a real estate appraiser for many years and know firsthand how poorly
maintained non-owner occupied units and lack of parking affect housing values.
I must say that I find it highly ironic that Ms. DeMarinis lives on Normal Avenue which is in a battle
over in-fill. If it is true that she is an opponent of that project, and yet feels perfectly comfortable
using the concept of in-fill to her advantage in our neighborhood, well that just smacks of NIMBY.
I trust that you will take my comments under consideration during the review process.
Sincerely,
d
Kathleen Mackris
549 Allison Street
Kristin Beers
550 Allison St.
Ashland, OR
97520
Bill Molnar, Community Development Director
City of Ashland Planning Division
51 Windburn Way
Ashland, OR
97520 NAR 07 016
RE: Planning Action: PA-2016-00275
To Whom It May Concern:
It is with a sense of sad resignation that I sit to write this letter. I feel there is so
much I want to express and yet, I know that I have little to no recourse for my
concerns. For some of these concerns I just want to feel that I am heard and for
some of them I wish I had a path to action. Regardless, I am taking the time to write
in response to the Notice of Application on Planning Action: PA-2016-00275;
Conversion of an existing single-car garage to an Accessory Rental Unit.
Susan DeMarinis is possibly a very lovely woman with the best intentions for her
newly purchased. property in our neighborhood. However, her request to add an
additional rental unit to her recently purchased lot is indicative of a trend that I
believe is eroding the fabric and character of our very historic neighborhood.
This neighborhood, Prachts Addition, is full of contributing buildings to the
Siskiyou-Hargidine Historic District. Most of these houses were small, for single
families and were built at the turning of the 20th century. Since then, many of these
beautiful examples of historic architecture have either been chopped up into
multiple residences (four beautiful old houses just on our block of Allison have four
or more residences) or have been crowded out with additional dwelling units. The
resulting hodge-podge of structures may be delightful for infill, but has lead to some
jarring visual results. The visuals are one thing, but the infill brings many other
issues I'd like to speak about.
I am an urban planner by schooling and training, so I understand the desire for infill
and a strong urban growth boundary. I am also a mother, raising young children, in
what I was hoping to be my forever home. I believe that with infill should also be
some ordinances to address the preservation of the historic character and scope of a
neighborhood. These ordinances are lacking and as such, with the infill, are coming
numerous issues that are leading to the deterioration of our neighborhood and
making my neighbors and me frustrated and saddened. We do not expect or wish for
a stagnant neighborhood, but we wish for a maintained and stable neighborhood.
My primary issues I'd like to raise in this letter are: 1) parking; 2) property
maintenance; 3) historic preservation; 4) concern for a big beautiful maple tree.
Parking:
This is the major issue and concern I'd like to address. With additional residents will
inevitably come more cars. Parking has become such an issue on Allison Street that
the gutter in front of my home has not been able to be swept for a year. I can no
longer rely on getting to park and unload my car in front of my house, and after a
haul to Costco to feed two growing boys, parking as close as possible is pretty
important. Many of the rentals on our block are now catering to SOU students. As
such, there are multiple students in a bedroom, and multiple cars on the street.
Large pick-up trucks from Nevada park for extended periods of time in front of my
home instead of in the lot behind the apartments, perhaps because the lot is not as
close and generally full of long-term parked boats, ATVs, and storage units. Again,
because of the constant on-street-parking, the gutters are filled with rotting leaves
and debris because the sweepers have to go around the cars.
Property Maintenance:
Some of the rentals on our block are meticulously maintained. Their landscaping is
kept up and they are wonderful neighbors. Many units, however, are not maintained
well and are degrading the character of our neighborhood. These units are overrun
with weeds, overgrown shrubs, have boats or horse trailers parked on the lawn, and
are a substantial blight. My neighbors and I call the landowners to at least mow the
lawns to reduce the fire hazard but our pleas fall on deaf ears. The residence in this
planning action is one such rental property that left the lawn un-mown to the extent
that the renters posted a sign on their door calling the property a "deer park". I
would like to see the new owner attempt to re-habilitate the "landscaping" on the
current dwelling, and show some commitment to her new neighbors, before
building more units.
Historic Preservation:
Additional units will further destroy the historic "family residence" (house with
yard or garden space) feel of our neighborhood. We already have lost so many great
homes to multiple unit complexes, that I am chagrined to see yet another lot go.
Small "granny-flats" might have been common on larger lots, but when unit upon
unit is stacked on the same lot, there is no longer an authentic historic contribution
to the neighborhood. I also have concerns about the styling and feel of the proposed
building. On Fairview, just behind this lot, an additional dwelling unit above a
garage was put in that is completely out of character with the surrounding
dwellings. The new unit, while a lovely small, modern, place, looks jarring next to
the "cottage" homes on the street. I don't understand the purpose of the historic
district designation, when such a modern looking structure can be put up without
regard for the overall character of the neighborhood. I am concerned that the new
unit proposed will have a similar disregard for character.
Tree Preservation:
This is a very minor point, but I am concerned about the possible impacts the
construction will have on the beautiful old maple tree right next to the garage
proposed for expansion.
I know I live in an R-2 zoned neighborhood. I know the desire for infill. I am calling
for a closer and better look at how that infill takes place. How many residences per
block are appropriate? Do we want ALL single-family residences in this area to go to
multi-family? Where is the conversation about recourses for parking and
landscaping maintenance, especially in a historic district?
Thank you,
Kristin Beers
550 Allison Street
Ashland, OR
Historic Preservation:
-14
I
566 Fairview - Two rentals, one lot. Vastly differing styles.
00
c R,
_ ly Off'
Y
ti.
1 Z+t~ ~-T ~1 F K~ y+
566 Fairview - Two rentals, one lot. Vastly differing styles.
Property Maintenance:
i
41
1
574 Allison Yard - Overgrown lawn
a
I i
5
Sherman Rental Yard
s
P71 1
1
I
1
a
j
"The Sherman House" - Unresponsive Landlords
Tree:
O-Z
s:
I - ~
574 Allison - Large maple next to garage to be expanded
i j.
ASHLAND HISTORIC COMMISSION
Planning Application Review
March 2, 2016
PLANNING ACTION: PA-2016-00073
SUBJECT PROPERTY: 574 Allison Street
APPLICANT: Susan DeMarinis
OWNER: Susan DeMarinis
DESCRIPTION: A request for Site Design Review allow for the conversion of an existing
single-car garage to an Accessory Residential Unit (ARU) on the subject property. The
proposed Accessory Residential Unit is to remain in the existing location on the property and
will have a small addition to the existing non-conforming structure.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low Density Multiple Family Residential;
ZONING: R-2; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 1 E 09DB; TAX LOTS: 5900.
Recommendation:
The Historic Commission recommends approving the application as submitted subject to the
specific recommendations below:
Include the following revisions in the building permit submittals:
1. The proposed siding for the ARU should be six inch lap siding.
2. The proposed ARU addition should have a gabled roof.
Department of Community Development Tel: 541488-5305 -
20 East Main St. Fax: 541-552-2050
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900
www.ashland.or.us
\ Planning Department, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520 CITY F
541-488-5305 Fax; 541-552-2050 www.ashland,or.us TTY: 1-800-735-2900 ASHLAND
NOTICE OF APPLICATION
PLANNING ACTION: PA-2016-00275
SUBJECT PROPERTY: 574 Allison Street
OWN ERIAPP LI CANT: Susan DeMarinis
DESCRIPTION: A request for a Site Design Review to allow for the conversion of an existing single-car garage to an
Accessory Residential Unit (ARU) on the subject property. The proposed Accessory Residential Unit is to remain in the
existing location on the property and will have a small addition to the existing structure.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low Density Multiple Family Residential; ZONING: R-2; ASSESSOR'S MAP:
391 E 09DB; TAX LOTS: 5900.
NOTE: The Ashland Historic Commission will also review this Planning Action on Wednesday March 2, 2016 at 6:00 PM in the
Community Development and Engineering Services building (Siskiyou Room), located at 51 Winburn Way.
NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: February 23, 2016
DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION OF WRITTEN COMMENTS: March 8, 2016
i
l
A,<<
so
J`~\o i ~ST N -
R
L `
SUBJECT PROPERTY _J
57 tree
PA-2016-00276 1}:500 iSFI LAN D
finch =50 feet Wapplod K+cM1anxiconly anJ LOer. no..vr~lya=~+rsr•
1•a1nUn, wremvnt er roedxxy locaUOC+
+w'
hou1dld b. 6+ icd +d-dd
+ (told v+rilbd lw c:lW+nc+endloritteJOn.
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.
Wcomm-dev\planning\Planning Actions\Noticing FolderWailed Notices & Signs\2016\PA-2016-00275.docx
SITE DESIGN AND USE STANDARDS
18.5.2.050
The following criteria shall be used to approve or deny an application:
A. Underlying Zone: The proposal complies with all of the applicable provisions of the underlying zone (part 18.2), including but not limited to:
building and yard setbacks, lot area and dimensions, density and floor area, lot coverage, building height, building orientation, architecture,
and other applicable standards.
B. Overlay Zones: The proposal complies with applicable overlay zone requirements (part 18.3).
C. Site Development and Design Standards: The proposal complies with the applicable Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4,
except as provided by subsection E, below.
D. City Facilities: The proposal complies with the applicable standards in section 18.4.6 Public Facilities and that adequate capacity of City
facilities for water, sewer, electricity, urban storm drainage, paved access to and throughout the property and adequate transportation can
and will be provided to the subject property.
E. Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards. The approval authority may approve exceptions to the Site Development and
Design Standards of part 18.4 if the circumstances in either subsection 1 or 2, below, are found to exist.
1. There is a demonstrable difficulty meeting the specific requirements of the Site Development and Design Standards due to a unique or
unusual aspect of an existing structure or the proposed use of a site; and approval of the exception will not substantially negatively
impact adjacent properties; and approval of the exception is consistent with the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design;
and the exception requested is the minimum which would alleviate the difficulty.; or
2. There is no demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements, but granting the exception will result in a design that equally or
better achieves the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design Standards.
GAcomm-dev\planning\Planning Actions\Noticing Folder\Mailed Notices & Signs\2016\PA-2016-00275.docx
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING
STATE OF OREGON )
County of Jackson )
The undersigned being first duly sworn states that:
1. 1 am employed by the City of Ashland, 20 East Main Street, Ashland,
Oregon 97520, in the Community Development Department.
i
2. On February 23, 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 i
E
under each person's name for Planning Action #2015-00275, 574 Allison Street.
Signa ure of Employee
l
F
Documen@ 212 312 01 6
I
PA-2016-00275 391E09CA 13700 PA-2016-00275 391E09CA 13800 rA-2016-00275 391E09CA 14000
LEE MARY BETH HOWE GREGG TRUSTEE ET AL ! THOMAS JOHN E/LORI D
542 ALLISON ST j PO BOX 336 541 FAIRVIEW ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-2016-00275 391E09CA 14100 PA-2016-00275 391E09CA 14200 PA-2016-00275 391E09DB 4900
WILLIAMS JAMES DELSMAN JOSEPH W/ELAINE M ! WHITE GLENN/TREADWAY
160 CHURCH ST 555 FAIRVIEW ST MONA
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 160 MEADE ST
j ASHLAND, OR 97520
CKRIS KATHLEEN MARY PA-2016-00275 391E09DB 5200
PA-2016-00275 391E09DB 5000 I MA
L CAVANAUGH RAGAN
SEN ERIC TRUSTEE ET A .
LAUR
46 UNION ST TRUSTEE ET AL PATRICIA
ASHLAND, OR 97520 549 ALLISON ST PO BOX 247.
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-2016-00275 391E09DB 5300 PA-2016-00275 391E09DB 5400 i PA-2016-00275 391E09DB 5500
HARDWICK JOHN ET AL PANNETON ROGER F/SANDRA ! 14MC Is'-EE DAVID 5 SHERMAN ST/CYNTHIA S
2552 EDGEWATER DR N
EUGENE, OR 97401 125421 SHERMAN ST ASHLAND, OR 97520
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-2016-00275 391E09DB 5600 j PA-2016-00275 391E09DB 5700 'PA-2016-00275 391E09DB 5800
SALLEE MICHAEL S/JENNIFER I BLAZEJ LUCIAN R TRUSTEE ET ! THOMPSON BRENT TRUSTEE
433 CLINTON ST AL P O BOX 201
ASHLAND, OR 97520 50 LAIDLEY STREET ASHLAND, OR 97520
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94131
PA-2016-00275 391E09DB 5900 PA-2016-00275 391E09DB 6000 PA-2016-00275 391E09DB 610
DEMARINIS SUSAN K TRUSTEE COX JAMES E TRUSTEE ET AL ANDERSON IVAR R JR
ET AL 508-350 STONE RD TRUSTEE ET AL
145 NORMAL AVE SUSANVILLE, CA 96130 ALA VERSAILLES
94501 E
ASHLAND, OR 97520 - - -
PA-2016-00275 391E09DB 6200 'PA-2016-00275 391E09DB 7000 PA-2016-00275 391E09DB 7100
BEERS MATTHEW Q TRUSTEE ANDERSON ERLAND/SUSAN R MIKALIS NIKOS TRUSTEE FBO
ET AL ! 23131 VILLAGE 23 386 HELMAN ST
550 ALLISON ST CAMARILLO, CA 93012 ASHLAND, OR 97520
- - - - -
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ~ - -
PA -20t6-00275 NI75 3 tEO9DB 7102 PA-2016-00275 391E09DB 7200
WARS -2016-00275 391E09DB 7101 I ( I MILES KATHLEEN M/ALLAN
1
NATHAN
567 FAIRVIEW ST 2 386 HELMAN ST 593 FAIRVIEW ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-2016-00275 391E09DB 7400 PA-2016-00275 391E09DB 7500 PA-2016-00275 391E09DB 7501
NEWMAN MARGARET R SUNDELL CARLIN/MIRANDA NEWMAN MARGARET R
j 199 SHERMAN 181 SHERMAN ST 199 SHERMAN
1 ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520
_ -i
~Ll
% ZIZ311G, NDv
I
-
i
I
n
IJ!f7L
DOW i
F!D +~Lc i
GO UJ
0194)
DOLL
2011
0ow 00"
i
oatn
006% I
L1 LI 1 L
000
polC 1
H 22h
oGn
rims
02VS G
Celt,
oes
zp+
r7l ~ L - 71 GCI~: DO
iJ~
Site VgAyn Review forARU - _TMe I
Applicant: Susan DeMarinis
145 Normal Ave.
Ashland, OR 97520
541-292-1916, email:...
Project Name: Garage -ARU conversion
Anticipated Date: April 2016
Subject Property: 574 Allison Street, Ashland, OR 97520
Assessor's Map 39 1E 09DB Tax Lot 5900
Zoning: R-2
Property Owner: Susan DeMarinis
Site Design Proposal:
This application is for a conversion of an existing single story single-car garage, built in 1938 on the subject
property, into an additional residential unit in the same location on the property, with an extension bumped
out adding 82 square feet to the existing footprint. A proposal for a new storage shed of approximately 120
square feet to accommodate bicycle and outdoor gear is also included.
The total square footage of the tax lot is 7,100 square feet, or 0.16 acre. The primary residence, approximately
726 square feet, is a two-bedroom, one bath single story house. The detached garage to be converted is 280
sq.ft. With the.proposed addition to the garage of 82 sq.ft, the total final square footage of the ARU will be 362
sq. ft. Since the subject property is zoned R-2, low density multi-family residential, and the gross habitable floor
area (GHFA) of the ARU is just under 50% of the primary residence, this conversion will comply with the size
requirements for an ARU to have no more than half the GHFA of the primary residence and will be less than the
maximum allowable 500 square feet for an ARU.
The project. proposal for the addition to the existing garage complies with side and rear yard setbacks under
AMC Chpt 18.2.5.13.1 forARU's. The pre-existing garage location and height will not be altered. All modifications
to convert the existing garage into a residential unit will comply with Ashland Building codes and recommended
criteria. Compatibility with the surrounding historic district will be enhanced by the replacement of the
decaying, peeling cedar shake siding with fiber-cement 7" lap siding and flat 4"trim around windows and gable
ends. The new double paned vinyl windows will be single hung and match the trim color. Roofing type will not
change. The small proposed.garage addition roof will match the existing composite shingles and have a sloping
shed style off of the gable end. The siding and trim colors will match the primary residence when project is
completed. Conversion of this garage into a residence will be compatible with the majority of the surrounding
homes in this neighborhood which already have additional dwelling units on their alleyway access.
This project proposes to provide two off-street parking spaces, approximately each 9ft. x 18 ft., off the rear
alleyway. These porous paver parking spaces will have a 5' landscaped setback from the West property line and
a 27 setback from the East property line. This property easily complies with the required parking necessary for
the primary and ARU resident vehicles. The existing rear fence line shall be moved further North by
approximately 4 feet to accommodate the new proposed storage shed along the alleyway. It will then meet
current setback standards of 6' from side yards and 10' from rear alleyways. This proposed storage shed,
approximately 10ft. x12 ft. or 120 sq. ft., will provide ample secure enclosed storage for bicycles, ski gear, snow
tires, lawn furniture, garden tools, etc. It will not be a heated or guaranteed watertight space. Trash and
recycling bins will be located along the rear alleyway, as indicated on Site Map.
Subject Property: '574 Allison Street, Ashland, OR page 2
Project Name: Garage -ARU Conversion
All trees will be preserved and protected on the subject property during and after any site disturbance. An
arborist's recommendations will be followed during this project for protective fencing around significant trees
and their root care, if needed. Inside the proposed fence lines, the existing mature landscaping will be enriched
with new native, drought tolerant plantings, as well as sectioning off an area for a garden space. All existing
landscaping, shrubs and trees will remain, especially the mature maple in the rear and the huge cedar in the
front. A drip irrigation system is already installed for all the landscaped areas around the primary residence, as
indicated on the Site Map. Expansion of this irrigation system will be installed to all new plantings. A proposed
garden area is slated for the expansive backyard open space. With relocation of the West fence to the western
property line, a new recreational area of approximately 546 sq. ft, will be added inside the fenced backyard.
Within the backyard fenced area, there will be porous pathways of compacted decomposed granite allowing for
drainage and storm water run-off. The alleyway access from the off-street parking area into the fenced property
will have motion sensor lights directed onto the pathways and gate entry for safety and security.
The percentage of lot coverage by structures will be:
726(primary)+362(ARU)+120(shed)+222(deck)+100(porch)+entrywalk(76) = 1606 sq. ft. / 7100 22%
The percentage of lot coverage by'recreational'areas,landscaping and lawns will be:
2212(rear yard) + 600 (garden) + 546 (behind ARU) + 1346 (front lawn) = 4704 sq. ft, / 7100 = 65%
The percentage of lot coverage by porous surfaces will be:
780(off alleyway) + 200(DG pathways) = 980 sq.ft. / 7100 = 13%
This project will not be pursuing LEED certification since the proposed conversion is to an already existing
building that would not qualify for such a program. Electric utilities will be upgraded to code for the ARU and a
separate electric meter service will be installed near the existing one for the primary residence, as indicated on
the Site Map. No gas utility will be provided to the RU since all heating and cooking needs will be serviced by
electricity. An extension of water and sewer lines tie primary residence will be installed during the project,
without installing a separate water meter for the ARU. All building permits and fees will be paid accordingly,
including any SDC's incurred. Along with these utility upgrades, a new address will be required for the converted
residential building. New address signage will be placed on the ARU, as well as on the new ARU mailbox
(indicating new building address in rear) affixed to the primary residence facing Allison Street. f
- i
Thank you for the opportunity to review my proposal for this Garage -ARU Conversion at 574 Allison Street.
i
Respectfully submitted, _
12
Susan DeMarinis
145 Normal Ave.
Ashland, OR 97520
suedem~char$er.net
Date: February 12, 2016
APPROX. CSP30
GEN. SE / ' 4900
0.23 Ac '~o~s < CS r
CS 12230
500029 P2 c / 4300
0.16 /C/ 28 ` A, 26 0.23 AC
a 5206 Ah1 j
N, `5100 0.26 Ac 25 0.14 AC ryp"' ~ , 7
A P, 5300 /
0.15 Ac t r)
b1b
0 _ 1,;, . y 5400 /
P2 0.16 Ac / 6 I
*0 CS 19062
6200 Pi 100 23 ''8os 6
0.16 AC 5500 22 ♦ -
6100 0.22 Ac/ j o 3700
0
°ry o0 0.16 Ac OO sOO° / 9 0.27 At
°N 6000
0.16 Ac S°o° m % nest
so o~ 5900 l) ?1 ~r? o
OO 56 ,°ry 0.16 AC K 'O 8
Q ~q, ~ry h 5800 C~4~30
57 6.24Ac 36C
0
56 5706 0.17
f /
pM 64 .00 59 0A A. 350
60 g1 / 62 51 0.17
Fw 7000 7101 5600 ° 1164
ry• 0 0
Ac 3400
O
.°ry~ ryQ 0.22 Ac d 0.29 Ac ~ 0.10 Act
°S
7102 1"
0.22 Ac o °jp a 0.8 0AOc
CS 4515
1 jy I `°o S8j 3O ° 4
107s0
~
r/1
7100 ~SNO
11s.a° Mn
5.00 „99IL
11
0.26Ac 7500 11>:
0.12 Ac 3200
` c
7501 118.00 0.23 Ac c
/ 4s' 0.04 A N89-M1-DOW
-0 C4
i o p~ -.7600 C
7400 0.14 Ac ~ 115
SWCOR. , 72(10 > 0.07 AC 118.00 Ir %1, 72-00500 0.17 Ac s 7700 99-5,-oaW 3100
~ g 8 S 0.21 Ac
0.12AC g
7300 "9 oD
C O10 AC V102 P193 SW CPR.
12 / ° TTl 1220 P580
31.58 60.00 80b0 11
8000 7800 0
9 a 1
10
.0909 A Ac 0.17 Ac 0.11 Ac m 3000
TOWNSHIP RANGE SECTION .053 e ° w 0.29 Ac
THIS MAP IS FORLOCATION PURPOSES ONLY 8200 - o 7900 20.e' c". L
0.13Ac 45 LINKSN
it SE COR. 0.11 AC o SW COR
NO LIABILITY IS ASSUMED FOR VARIATIONS CS 4688 -15o.9 PLC 39
DISCLOSED BY SURVEY OR COUNTY RECORDS 49.00 609o 80.50 ns
FIRST AMERICAN TITLE
~ 1726 CNS. 0 1139.16' E
,sUUKSm29.ZN_ - - - IOTA S L
FROM SW COR OLC 39 -
inA-
IN"1 ~1 ~-t r 1
~ I 1 ~ ) / Er•- ' ~ q ~ ~a r + a c~ ~f ~V~'t~~jti t~ i
~ - t~ti i2 ~ J, H`'-r-° - ~,r~ ~ x ~'-Si ~~;r~✓~~~~ c,~~rs„~3
r K, j ! l,, i t ~r.
t p ca r a, f_~ ,~f a
26 _
i.
n ' t tit
~I
t
S 1 , i
.r r X12 ~ ~ ~ t 3
t 0 t F h 1: _ _ L C Z 3 q\k ~ t ~ l ~ ~ e•
l i
' _ =
r
r ,
1 ~ 1 1:
+
lo,
i
i ~
i
t
a o JO81fi1. ~M )OSIf"
5h',ngl~
rood ~ n 57+ALLISON 3T, AsHL PAD.
I ~ - _ - - - -
W04Trirn ra
1- _ ' ~luodTr~m ~AP-AgE -Ap-u CONvER-slom
PROJECT: o,65 L 1
l~ hT c~d, , f - - -
J
I~ OWNER Sue I)cMar►'nis
i
oaf
r /
1:6 xso ~ ~nSpo't' ~ 1 I
buoy f~
OF GAP: , y /ATtDrI ti L ® 39 E 09 11~ L®~5 9 ®~d
HrHf hl~~~!atd WRTNEASI EL
1
r AZu \ Ij r!!`%''~~~ 9G 14ZFT X .50FT 7100)d
ao'~all Maple Yrze
~,r]It; I -r he ,w i - 1n7PP°Illo}1' C
E.-,T - Tn~ns ut ~ _ - Sh ng~es _
r 004
TPid
r
F J ~ 3 r,~l t + i_
a
I l ~ - s161
i~ r 1 1~1+ final ~'v Joci,~/'rM - c4, rl n~,g 11a.Q4.
n:
l~' t 110 L-.o.oa.
or(jft GE-Akp,
ee r,try
I, J
~
m ~F° P f rx15f'rr)A f eMCe~
° n oy ~nn
rntro-a 5{ 6~,.,I~C'- q - - g
~d T Rd a~idS+9Kfarn@~$G~roem~{~~~ t d II.l jump
('~4'` ~ ~ ~ ~ Caom shin IerooP~ G ~ I Tree; C v l ~
er n
Irn; ~i+Nn enPeD, UuFFI~R=~ ~ P 9 1 "~~~i~~. ( ~ 6Ft
N1QRl = to }9 I Cris n4 ~J' PI Po roe/se j C~/j
ST~~ECT I~
sed~
~zaoF~srr-
P~ $ecovne,~Hw,N , raq U I a' Ft-o i
rea a E 9
1
`?21WEL.fl" r. J I a-.6~t.
/I/ Ft.
N+ 0 5 3Q FT~ 3 I Rhode L✓1h~ = F20 n f
sci.FT. 36
c~Il
~F t I
r - alFr. - A
F
_ ( q ~flny ~emcz-y_D~ L_re ~~e~ta~p~aNan~yLne~dtrih~ >~CV I I
Evs log
t 11( INf >~"-`4Yi ~JIILn ~ att~ ~~eartro I ng°"'~ - 2$ ~ "
dew g7ouble runkM m, alley ,.i.l, / se bm
~ J (`ft 1~138~ i
~ aroL W _I Ywar ~ Ft
-
~J~4 ~ Q 1 t c U ti a I ~ 4, s mss ~
Y 2e
~ryj° ckrai t d wig C L oil Y\ o ®7 v e
Eo 0 t) ~o 'c?I ~N f ° f jug I q
9rof,~ S ~ no~'Qti ~f eo,,, ~osrn ~Evn le
.1 eii` ~I6a Ft, (n FL
rt, vI RrC a'X a ' ! .nm deaalk 5u sr (roA
F-z LA
=2212 zs~
F vii I~? o s4~ r, j ~E~ q
'(1roPoSedl~-4 rKU~~ A16~ ~I~Ya j tad
u "ET arage
~Far0l;esSK S, eTcjl I. 1 t: f 9 P`
~r "may
J21 ! b 'U~2P~Don
i rCr/tS~Q,
l' i d 0 nt. C ®Tfe
evdnr
n-InFt 1
4 _ G ^ Ced?r
~JYY~~I~INPI 1 ~ i ~,h _~I ?reer ~
subm*6 IMoR'I ~I(o
E
-
Planning Division NI PERMIT APPLICATION
51 Winbum Way, Ashland OR 97520 FILE # C I T Y OF 541-488-5305 Fax 541-488-6006
ASHLAND
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT `~11~
DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY ry / a Pursuing LEED® Certification? ❑ YES NO
Street Address
Assessor's Map No. 39 1 E 0 Tax Lot(s) C
Zoning Comp Plan Designation
APPLICANT
Name UL C
20 r?r9hone,%1 ~J1 A/ Mail S(4
Address 467 k c) rrQ a- e ° City zip 0 /s? -17 ~n
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
1 hereby certify that the statements and information contained in this application, including the enclosed drawings and the required findings of fact, are in all respects,
true and correct. 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. I 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 t 'regard will result like Lnot ly the request being set aside, but also possibly in my structures being built in reliance thereon being required to
be remo d of my expense. X1 ve anam advise d to seek competent professional advice a 9d assist ce.
pplicant's Signature Date
As owne f the property invo ed,'n this request, l have read and understood the complete application and its consequences to me as a property
owner
/Property Owner's Signatur required) Date
[To be completed by City Stafq
Date Received Zoning Permit Type e~ Filing Fee $ (U
OVER
Wcomm-de0planningToms & Ilmdouts7oning Pemut Application.doc
F
I
Job Address: 574 ALLISON ST Contractor:
ASHLAND OR 97520 Address:
C
P Owner's Name: DEMARINIS SUSAN K Phone:
Customer 08666 N State Lic No:
DEMARINIS SUSAN K T City Lic No:
L
Applicant: 145 NORMALAVE R
Address: ASHLAND OR 97520 A
C Sub-Contractor:
A Phone: (541) 292-1916 T Address:
N Applied: 02/12/2016 O
T Issued: R
Expires: 08/10/2016 Phone:
State Lic No:
Maplot: 391 E09DB5900 City Lic No:
DESCRIPTION: For ARU
VALUATION
Occupancy Type Construction Units Rate Amt Actual Amt Constuction Description
Total for Valuation:
MECHANICAL
L
ELECTRICAL
STRUCTURAL
PERMIT FEE DETAIL
Fee Description Amount Fee Description Amount
CUP Accessory Residential 658.00
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.onus
Inspection Request Line: 541-552-2080 CITY F
ONCA