The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutGranite_263&267_PA-2015-01894 i -PROPOSED KenCaim PROPERTY LINE Landscape Architecture / c9 PROPOSED / aid _ _ ~F AqP ST PEDESTRIAN PATH / \ LP gigs EXISTING PEDESTRIAN PATH TO BE ABANDONED II W nsrareaASHLAND, oesrro'I SrFq - V LOT LINE DIMENSIONS ON / 54:.4883194 s v -EXISTING SHEET L 2.0 LOT LINE EXHIBIT I 1 PEDESTRIAN PATH t I / ~ I EASEMENT TO BE ABANDONED / 1 : y I _2070' ' ; _ II I ~ / ~U 1 PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN SAPS II PATH EASEMENT 1 I I / L~~ GAS MARKER\\ I / / / ' Drawn By: 06C AV 1 I / /q / / STAFF i \ \ III / / SCALE: 1"=30',0° PROPOSED PUBLIC PATH PROPOSED WALL (TYP) ~O'y, Ai sp //F i /71 ELECTRIC N 9Gt /I EM 1 ii ~ S ' ti yo ELE1&C TR 5ECR64 N V ? I / pSANIPgRV LOT COVERAGE o ( ' ~ ~ , - ~ FME TAX LOT 1.391 E0BDA 1902 PROPOSED LOT SIZE: 2.07 ACRES = 90,056 SQUARE FEET r' Il,v ou7,204 ` HOUSE FOOTPRINT: 3,186 SQUARE FEET LOT LINE DIMENSIONS ON PAVED DRIVEWAY: 3,536 SQUARE FEET SHEET L 2.0 LOT LINE EXHIBIT PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN PAVED WALKWAYS: 987 SQUARE FEET ' PATH EASEMENT RYSEyEk aNrrgRr~ iP . £kg TOTAL LOT COVERAGE: 7,709 SQUARE FEET PERCENT LOT COVERAGE: 8.6% iVA r ALLOWABLE LOT COVERAGE PER ZONE: 40% ' A b I LOT COVERAGE TAX LOT 2 - 391 E08DA 1900 W N - Nt,~ o L - N \ 1 - I PROPOSED LOT SIZE: 0.71 ACRES = 31,014 SQUARE FEET Q 0 PROJECT INFORMATION: o r o ` HOUSE FOOTPRINT: 0 SQUARE FEET PAVED DRIVEWAY: 7,593 SQUARE FEET (f~ N PAVED WALKWAYS: 744 SQUARE FEET Lu OWNERS: CAIN FAMILY TRUST O 6718 STREET EXISTING WALL ~~yy TOTAL LOT COVERAGE: 8,337 SQUARE FEET ASHLAND, OR, 97520 TO REMAIN (TYP.) PHONE: (541) \ I PERCENT LOT COVERAGE: 26.9% + MIT ALLOWABLE LOT COVERAGE PER ZONE: 40% Q BUILDING DESIGN: SMALL 66 WATER ER STRETREET, SUIT , SUITE 101 y 1 PROPOSED WALL(fYP.) V (o ASHLAND, OR, 97520 \ I PHONE: (541) 488,8200 i LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: KERRY KENCAIRN - AL I ' REVISION DATE KENCAIRN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE 1, I ELECTRIC, WATER 545 A STREET AND STORM EASEMENT ASHLAND, OR, 97520 i PHONE: (541) 488.3194 ~QPr ; 0 1 e LOCATION: 267 GRANITE STREET COVER TAX LOT 1: 391E08DA 1902 LOT EXISTING LOT SIZE: 1.69 ACRES (73,473 ft~ ~oP~ae e/~~ oa PROPOSED LOT SIZE: 2.07 ACRES (90,056 ft~ ISSUE DATE: TAX LOT 2: 391E08DA 1900 EXISTING LOT SIZE: 1,09 ACRES (47,597 ft~ 1 L~ PROPOSED MAY 3,2016 PROPERTY n PROPOSED LOT SIZE: 0.71 ACRES (31,014 ft~ LINE 0 15' 30' 6 0' ZONING: R-1.10 , Scale: 1"=30' ADDENDA PROJECT SITE SCALE 1" = 30'-0" I T Y December 15, 2015 Notice of Final Decision On December 15, 2015, the Community Development Director approved the request for the following: Planning Action: 2015-01894 Subject Property: 263 & 267 Granite Applicant: Robert & Susan Cain Description: A request to modify a previous subdivision approval and a Physical and Environmental Constraints Permit in order to build a single family residence with an accessory residential unit. Included in the application is a proposal to relocate a public path and pedestrian easement. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single Family Residential and Woodland; ZONING: R- 1-10 and WR; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 lE 08DA; TAX LOTS: 1902; 1900. The Community Development Director's decision becomes final and is effective on the 12'h day after the Notice of Final Decision is mailed. Approval is valid for a period of 18 months and all conditions of approval identified on the attached Findings are required to be met prior to project completion. The application, all associated documents and evidence submitted, and the applicable criteria are available for review at the Ashland Community Development Department, located at 51 Winburn Way. Copies of file documents can be requested and are charged based on the City of Ashland copy fee schedule. Prior to the final decision date, anyone who was mailed this Notice of Final Decision may request a reconsideration of the action as set forth in the Ashland Land Use Ordinance (ALUO) 18.5.1.050(F) and/or file an appeal to the Ashland Planning Commission as provided in ALUO 18.5.1.050(G). The ALUO sections covering reconsideration and appeal procedures are attached. The appeal may not be made directly to the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals. If you have any questions regarding this decision, please contact Zechariah Heck in the Community Development Department at (541) 488-5305. cc: Parties of record and property owners within 200 ft COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel: 541488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 4" SECTION 18.5.1.050 Type I Procedure (Administrative Decision with Notice) E. Effective Date of Decision. Unless the conditions of approval specify otherwise or the decision is appealed pursuant to subsection 18.5.1.050.G, a Type I decision becomes effective 12 days after the City mails the notice of decision. F. Reconsideration. The Staff Advisor may reconsider a Type I decision as set forth below. 1. Any party entitled to notice of the planning action, or any City department may request reconsideration of the action after the decision has been made by providing evidence to the Staff Advisor that a factual error occurred through no fault of the party asking for reconsideration, which in the opinion of the Staff Advisor, might affect the decision. Reconsideration requests are limited to factual errors and not the failure of an issue to be raised by letter or evidence during the opportunity to provide public input on the application sufficient to afford the Staff Advisor an opportunity to respond to the issue prior to malting a decision. 2. Reconsideration requests shall be received within five days of mailing the notice of decision. The Staff Advisor shall decide within three days whether to reconsider the matter. 3. If the Staff Advisor is satisfied that an error occurred crucial to the decision, the Staff Advisor shall withdraw the decision for purposes of reconsideration. The Staff Advisor shall decide within ten days to affirm, modify, or reverse the original decision. The City shall send notice of the reconsideration decision to affirm, modify, or reverse to any party entitled to notice of the planning action. 4. If the Staff Advisor is not satisfied that an error occurred crucial to the decision, the Staff Advisor shall deny the reconsideration request. Notice of denial shall be sent to those parties that requested reconsideration. G. Appeal of Type I Decision. A Type I decision may be appealed to the Planning Commission, pursuant to the following: 1. Who May Appeal. The following persons have standing to appeal a Type I decision. a. The applicant or owner of the subject property. b. Any person who is entitled to written notice of the Type I decision pursuant to subsection 18.5.1.050.B. c. Any other person who participated in the proceeding by submitting written comments on the application to the City by the specified deadline. 2. Appeal Filing Procedure. a. Notice of Appeal. Any person with standing to appeal, as provided in subsection 18.5.1.050.G.1, above, may appeal a Type I decision by filing a notice of appeal and paying the appeal fee according to the procedures of this subsection. The fee required in this section shall not apply to appeals made by neighborhood or community organizations recognized by the City and whose boundaries include the site. If an appellant prevails at the hearing or upon subsequent appeal, the fee for the initial hearing shall be refunded. b. Time for Filing. A notice of appeal shall be filed with the Staff Advisor within 12 days of the date the notice of decision is mailed. c. Content of Notice of Appeal. The notice of appeal shall be accompanied by the required filing fee and shall contain. i. An identification of the decision being appealed, including the date of the decision, ii. A statement demonstrating the person filing the notice of appeal has standing to appeal. iii. A statement explaining the specific issues being raised on appeal. iv. A statement demonstrating that the appeal issues were raised during the public comment period. d. The appeal requirements of this section must be fully met or the appeal will be considered by the City as a jurisdictional defect and will not be heard or considered. 3. Scope of Appeal. Appeal hearings on Type I decisions made by the Staff Advisor shall be de novo hearings before the Planning Commission. The appeal shall not be limited to the application materials, evidence and other documentation, and specific issues raised in the review leading up to the Type I decision, but may include other relevant evidence and arguments. The Commission may allow additional evidence, testimony, or argument concerning any relevant ordinance provision. 4. Appeal Hearing Procedure. Hearings on appeals of Type I decisions follow the Type II public hearing procedures, pursuant to section 18.5.1.060, subsections A - E, except that the decision of the Planning Commission is the final decision of the City on an appeal of a Type I decision. A decision on an appeal is final the date the City mails the adopted and signed decision. Appeals of Commission decisions must be filed with the State Land Use Board of Appeals, pursuant to ORS 197.805 - 197.860. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel: 541-488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 6 . _ [ _ / I _J ; t t ASHLAND PLANNING DIVISION FINDINGS & ORDERS PLANNING ACTION: PA-2015-01894 SUBJECT PROPERTIES: 263 and 267 Granite Street OWNER: Robert and Susan Cain APPLICANT: Kerry Kencairn DESCRIPTION: A request to modify a previous subdivision approval and a Physical and Environmental Constraints Permit in order to build a single family residence with an accessory residential unit. Included in the application is a proposal to relocate a public path and pedestrian easement. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single Family Residential and Woodland; ZONING: R-1-10 and WR; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 lE 08DA; TAX LOTS: 1902; 1900. SUBMITTAL DATE: October 2, 2015 DEEMED COMPLETE DATE: October 29, 2015 STAFF APPROVAL DATE: December 15, 2015 APPEAL DEADLINE (4:30 P.M.) December 28 2015 FINAL DECISION DATE: December 28, 2015 APPROVAL EXPIRATION DATE: June 28, 2017 DECISION This application pertains to tax lots 1902 and 1900 in the 39 lE 08DA Assessor's Map, which are part of the Granite Estates Subdivision. The subject properties are located on the west side of Granite Street, north of the intersection with Winburn Way. The original performance standard subdivision contained five parcels. Currently, tax lot 1902 is 73,473 square feet or approximately 1.7 acres, tax lot 1900 property is 47,597 square feet or approximately 1.1_ acres. As proposed tax lot 1902 will be 90,056 square feet or 2.07 acres and tax lot 1900 will be 31,014 square feet or 0.71 acres. A majority of the land within the subdivision is R-1-10. There is a portion of land to the west within the subdivision that is zoned Woodland Residential (WR). A granite quarry existed on the land before, which means a significant portion of the land has been altered. Both properties have slopes almost entirely in excess of 35 percent. The western edge of the subject tax lots is forested. The properties become barer and altered moving east, which includes significant terracing and the existing driveway. Both of the subject parcels have access to Granite Street via a steep 400-foot driveway, which was approved in the original PSO approval and installed when the first three parcels in the subdivision were developed. A component of the applicant's proposal concerns a relocation of a public pedestrian easement. The relocation of the easement will not affect the subdivision Modification and Physical and Environmental Constraints permit. However, the public easement relocation requires coordination with the Parks Commission and final approval by the City Council. The application involves a request for the following permits/reviews: 1) Final Plan Modification of the original Performance Standard Subdivision approval in order to modify the property lines and building PA #2015-01894 263/267 Granite Street/zgh Page 1 envelopes of lot 1 and lot 2 of original subdivision; 2) a Physical & Environmental Constraints Review to construct two buildings on tan lot 1902; and 3) Site Design Review to develop an Accessory Residential Unit. The applicant's proposal is found to be in substantial conformance with the original Final Outline Plan of the Performance Standards Subdivision and Physical and Environmental Constraints Review. Currently, there are two undeveloped lots remaining in the subdivision. The applicant's proposal does not change the number of lots. One of the lots, tax lot 1902, will be developed as part of this application. Though the applicant's proposal does include an Accessory Residential Unit, it does not exceed the number of units permitted in the outline plan for the Performance Standard Subdivision. Because of the large lots and their configuration, the proposal does not change the yard depths, distances between buildings, and building size by more than ten percent. The proposal does not change the amount of open space for the subdivision. As presented, the building elevations and exterior materials are in conformance with the Land Use Ordinance and approved outline plan. Street standards are complied with and are not affected with the current proposal. f The intent of the Physical and Environmental Constraints Overlay (18.3.10) is for appropriate development on hillside lands that will protect the aesthetic and natural qualities of the land while protecting adjacent properties from erosion, sedimentation and slope failure. In Staff's review, the applicant's proposal has addressed potential negative outcomes on the impact area and has appropriately minimized the adverse impact. j" The materials provided in the application note all grading, retaining wall design, drainage and erosion control plans have been reviewed and approved by a geotechnical expert. A stamped geotechnical report is accompanied in the application. The geotechnical report states that the properties are suitable for development of single family residences and the accessory units. The report concludes that if the recommendations for development are followed, it is the geotechnical expert's option there are no significant risks of slope instability on the subject lots. The applicants are proposing an Exception to the Development Standards for Hillside Lands due to the sites unique topographic features of the reclaimed granite quary. In Staff's review, an exception to the design standards for hillside lands is appropriate because of the sites unusual aspects and limited visibility from adjacent properties. The exceptions do not have a negative affect on the protection of natural resources and the exception is arguably the minimum necessary to allelviate the difficulty of developing on the subject properties. Furthermore, the design exceptions are consistent with the purpose and intent of the Physical and Environmental Constraints Overlay. The elevations show the proposed buildings have been cut into the hillside to reduce visual bulk and more closely follow the hillside slope. The building design utilizes low profile roofs that also reduce visual bulk. The applicant's assert the building locations are in excavation cuts of the former granite quarry and, therefore, fit well into the hillside. The applicant's assert all areas where the proposed buildings do not meet hillside design standards are actually located behind terrace walls that will _---__obstruct views-from _adjacent properties.-Moreover, _ a_ condition-has been added below to include a landscape plan with the building permit submittal that shall obscure the areas where the proposed buildings do not comply with hillside design standards. PA #2015-01894 263/267 Granite Street/zgh Page 2 ti The application materials provided include a tree inventory, which includes an assessment of the existing trees. There are approximately 20 trees on site, mainly conifers that were apparently planted as part of the original subdivision approval. Five trees are slated for removal, two Calocedrus decurrens and three Pinus ponderosas. The application asserts the proposed driveway and building envelopes will preserve most of them. However, the trees to be removed are located in areas where retaining walls will be retained or where an excavation cut will prove to be detrimental to health of the tree(s). Mitigation trees to replace those removed are detailed in the erosion control plan. There are five mitigation trees for the five proposed removals. The mitigation trees selected, mainly Pin-us densiflora, have been chosen because they are well suited for the site according to the applicant. The applicantion also contains a fire prevention and control plan that expresses that wildfire hazards have been reduced to a reasonable degree and balances the preservation of trees and plants for erosion prevention, wildlife habitat and aesthetics. i The Tree Commission reviewed the application during the November 5, 2015 regular meeting. The commission approved the plans as submitted but wanted an updated tree inventory plan identifying several Zelkova serratas that were not on the original tree inventory. A condition has been added below to this affect. Part of the application is to construct an Accessory Residential Unit (ARU) on tax lot 1902. Within the R-1 zoning district ARUs are permitted, as long as there is only one per lot and that no more than two dwelling units exist on any given lot. ARUs are counted toward density developments under the Performance Standards Option (PSO) in chapter 18.3.9, which is applicable to this application. The original Performance Standard Subdivision was over 7.6 acres. Under AMC 18.3.9.050, PSO base densities for R-1-10 lots are allowed 2.4 units per acre; this equals 18 units for the original PSO. The application's proposal to construct an ARU on tax lot 1902 is within the density limitations of the Land Use Ordinance. In addition, the proposed ARU is less 50% of the proposed main residence and does not exceed 1,00 square feet. The R-1-10 zoning district allows 40% of the lot to be covered with impervious surfaces. As presented, the total lot coverage of tax lot 1902 is 8.6%. Two parking spaces- - are provided for the ARU on the lowest level of the ARU. All standard setbacks, in addition to the solar setback, are complied with as presented. Furthermore, where ARUs 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 existing unit 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 proposed residences are in the Wildfire Zone, which requires additional development standards. The application asserts their plan incorporates all required standards. A condition of approval of the original subdivision is that residences on lot 1 and 2 (the subject lots in this application) are to have residential sprinklers in accordance with requirements of Ashland Fire Department. A condition below has been added to ensure sprinklers are included in the building design, if necessary, before building permits are issued. Site Review design standards generally-seek buildings to have a strong orientation to the street. However, in this instance the structures are located approximately 200 feet from the nearest street. Staff does not feel it necessary to require building to be oriented toward the street in this situation given the distance and grade change from the nearest street. The application asserts the building materials and paint colors are compatible with the surrounding area. When the original Performance PA #2015-01894 263/267 Granite Street/zgh Page 3 F Standard Subdivision was approved, it was understood that five lots would be created, with a minimum of five residences. The front three lots with frontage on Granite Street have direct access to the public street. The two subject lots pertaining to this application have access via a private drive. As presented, the driveway meets the 20 foot minimum dedicated width for a drive serving two lots. Granite Street is an improved city street with asphalt pavement, curb and gutter and storm drains. Sidewalks have already been installed along Granite Street when the first three homes were developed in the j subdivision. For no foreseeable reason are there deficiencies in public facilities vis-a-vis the application. Staff has determined that all necessary public facilities are available to serve the applicant's proposal. There were no public comments received during the notice period. The approval criteria for a Performance Standards Option subdivision Final Plan are detailed in AMC 18.3.9.040.B.5 as follows: a. The number of dwelling units vary no more than ten percent of those shown on the approved outline plan, but in no case shall the number of units exceed those permitted in the outline plan. b. The yard depths and distances between main buildings vary no more than ten percent of those shown on the approved outline plan, but in no case shall these distances be reduced below the minimum established within this Ordinance. c. The open spaces vary no more than ten percent of that provided on the outline plan. d. The building size does not exceed the building size shown on the outline plan by more than ten percent. e. The building elevations and exterior materials are in conformance with the purpose and intent of this ordinance and the approved outline plan. f. That the additional standards which resulted in the awarding of bonus points in the outline plan approval have been included in the final plan with substantial detail to ensure that the performance level committed to in the outline plan will be achieved. g. The development complies with the Street Standards. h. Nothing in this section shall limit reduction in the number of dwelling units or increased open space provided- that, if this- is done for one phase, the number of dwelling units shall not be transferred to another phase, nor the open space reduced below that permitted in the outline plan. The approval criteria for a Minor Modification are detailed in AMC 18.5.6.040.C as follows: 1. Minor Modification applications are subject to the same approval criteria used for the initial project approval, except that the scope of review is limited to the modification request. For example, a request to modify a commercial development's parking lot shall require Site Design Review only for the proposed parking lot and any changes to associated access, circulation, etc. Notice shall be provided in accordance with chapter 18.5.1. 2. A modification adding or altering a conditional use, or requiring a variance, administrative variance, or exception may be deemed a Major Modification and/or may be subject to other ordinance requirements. 3. The approval authority shall approve, deny, or approve with conditions the application, based on written findings; except that conditions of approval do not apply, and findings are not required, where the original approval was approved through a Ministerial review. The approval criteria for a Physical & Environmental Constraints Review Permit are detailed in AMC 18.3.10.050 as follows: PA #2015-01894 263/267 Granite Street/zgh Page 4 A. Through the application of the development standards of this chapter, the potential impacts to the property and nearby areas have been considered, and adverse impacts have been minimized. B. That the applicant has considered the potential hazards that the development may create and implemented measures to mitigate the potential hazards caused by the development. C. That the applicant has taken all reasonable steps to reduce the adverse impact on the environment. Irreversible actions shall be considered more. seriously than reversible actions. The Staff Advisor or Planning Commission shall consider the existing development of the surrounding area, and the maximum development permitted by this ordinance. i The approval criteria for an Exception to the Development Standards for Hillside Lands are detailed in AMC 18.3.10.090.H as follows: 1. There is demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements of this chapter due to a unique or unusual aspect of the site or proposed use of the site. 2. The exception will result in equal or greater protection of the resources protected under this chapter. 3. The exception is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty. 4. The exception is consistent with the stated Purpose and Intent of chapter 18.3.10 Physical and Environmental Constraints Overlay chapter and section 18.3.10.090 Development Standards for Hillside Lands. In staff's assessment, the proposal has been carefully thought out to minimize the disturbance of the hillside lands, while recognizing the site was a former granite quarry. Based on the material submitted, the application with the attached conditions complies with all applicable City ordinances. Therefore, Planning Action #2015-01894 is approved with the following conditions. If any one or more of the following conditions are found to be invalid for any reason whatsoever, then Planning Action #2015- 01894 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 all conditions of Planning Action 97-087 and 98-041 remain valid unless modified herein. 3) That the plans submitted for the building permit shall-be-in substantial conformance with those - approved as part of this application. If the plans submitted for the building permit are not in substantial conformance with those approved as part of this application, an application to modify the PSO Modification and Physical and Environmental Constraints Permit approval shall be submitted and approved prior to issuance of a building permit. 4) That a preconstruction conference to review the requirements of the Hillside Development Permit shall be held prior to site work or the issuance of a building or excavation permit, whichever action occurs first. The conference shall include the Ashland Planning, Building, Engineering and Fire Departments; the project engineer; project geotechnical experts (Applied Geotechnical Engineering); landscape professional (KenCairn Landscape Architecture; arborist; and general contractor. The applicant or applicants' representative shall contact the Ashland Planning Department to schedule the preconstruction conference. 5) That temporary erosion control measures be maintained on-site during site preparation. Such methodologies to include, but no be limited to, hay bales, silt fencing or functional equivalent. 6)- ---That a Verification Permit shall be-applied-for and approved by the Ashland-Planning-Division - prior to tree removal, site work or storage of materials. Trees on site shall be identified by number, those to be removed marked with flagging tape, and access to the site provided. The Verification Permit is to inspect the identification of the trees to be removed and the installation PA #2015-01894 263/267 Granite Streettzgh Page 5 of tree protection fencing for the trees on and adjacent to the site. The tree protection shall be chain link fencing six feet tall and installed in accordance with the Tree Ordinance. Replacement trees to mitigate the trees removed shall be planted, inspected and approved by the Staff Advisor within one year of the removal. 7) That the tree protection and temporary erosion control measures (i.e. silt fencing, bale barriers, etc.) shall be installed according to the approved plan prior to any site work, storage of materials, issuance of an excavation permit and issuance of a building permit. The erosion control measures shall be installed as identified in the Applied Geotechnical Engineering report revised June 3, 2015. The tree protection and temporary erosion control measures shall be inspected and approved by the Ashland Planning Department prior to site work, storage of materials, the issuance of an excavation permit, and/or the issuance of a building permit. 8) That all new residences comply with the provisions of the City's Conservation bonus. Specific elements for meeting the bonus requirement to be indicated on the building plans at the time of building permit review. (Condition of Approval for original subdivision.) 9) That a landscape plan be submitted with building permit that identifies plantings which will obscure the areas of the proposed buildings that do not meet the hillside design standards. The plantings should comply with Wildfire Zone design standards. If there is a conflict in what is permissible, the Staff Advisor shall make final determination. This landscape plan shall also include all trees on the site, including the Zelkova serratas that the Tree Commission stated were not on the original tree inventory plan. 10) That building permit submittals shall include: a. Identification of all easements, including public and private utility easements, mutual access easements, public pedestrian access easements, and fire apparatus access easements. b. Solar setback calculations demonstrating that all new construction complies with the applicable Solar Setback Standard in the formula [(Height - 6 or 16)/(0.445 + Slope) _ - - - Required Solar Setback] and elevations or cross section drawings clearly identifying the highest shadow producing point(s) and the height(s) from natural grade. c. Lot coverage calculations including all building footprints, driveways, parking, and circulation areas. d. That storm water from all new impervious surfaces and runoff associated with peak rainfalls must be collected on site and channeled to the City storm water collection system (i.e., curb gutter at public street, public storm pipe or public drainage way) or through an approved alternative in accordance with Ashland Building Division policy BD-PP-0029. On-site collection systems shall be detailed on the building permit submittals. 11) Prior to the signature of Final Survey Plat: a. That a final survey plat shall be submitted within 12 months and approved by the City of Ashland within 18 months of this approval. b. All easements for public and private utilities, fire apparatus access, and reciprocal utility, maintenance, and access shall-be indicated on the final survey plat as-required-by the Ashland Engineering Division. c. That a final utility plan for the parcels shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning, Engineering, and Building Divisions prior to signature of the final survey PA #2015-01894 263/267 Granite Street/zgh Page 6 r: plat. The utility plan shall include the location of connections to all public facilities including the locations of water lines and meter sizes, fire hydrants, sanitary sewer lines, storm drain lines and electric services. d. That the location and final engineering for all storm drainage improvements associated with the project, shall be submitted for review and approval by the Departments of Public Works, Planning and Building Divisions prior to signature of the final survey plat. 12) That replacement trees to mitigate the trees removed shall be planted and irrigated according to the approved plan. 13) That a drainage plan for the project be constructed in accordance with the plans approved by the Engineering and Planning Division. 14) Prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy the applicant shall submit a written report from the project geo-technical engineer indicating required erosion control and slope stability measures have been installed per approved plans. 15) That a final storm drainage plan for the driveway shall be provided for the review and approval of the Ashland Building, Planning and Engineering Divisions prior to the issuance of an excavation permit or commencement of any site work. The storm drainage plan shall be designed, constructed and maintained in a manner that will avoid erosion on-site and to adjacent and downstream properties in accordance with 18.3.10.090.C 16) A final erosion control plan shall be provided for the review and approval of the Planning, Building and Engineering Divisions prior to the issuance of an excavation permit or commencement of any site work. Any temporary erosion control measures (i.e. silt fence or bale barriers) shall be installed according to the approved plan prior to any site work, storage of materials, or issuance of an excavation or building permit. Erosion control measures shall consistent with the recommendations of Applied Geotechnical Engineering, and shall be inspected and approved by the Staff Advisor prior to site work, storage of materials, the issuance of an excavation or building permit. The landscaping and irrigation for re-vegetation of cut/fill slopes and erosion control shall be installed in accordance with-the approved plan - prior to final sign-off on the driveaway. Vegetation shall be installed in such a manner as to be substantially established within one year of installation. 17) A written verification from the project geotechnical expert addressing the consistency of the permit submittals with the geotechnical report recommendations (e.g. grading plan, storm drainage plan, foundation plan, etc.) shall be submitted with the excavation or building permit and prior to any site work. 18) That the project's geotechnical expert shall inspect the site according to the inspection schedule of the engineering geology report by Applied Geotechnical Engineering. Prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy, the project's geotechnical expert shall provide a final report indicating that the approved grading, drainage and erosion control measures were installed as per the approved plans, and that all scheduled- inspections were conducted by the project geotechnical - expert periodically throughout the project. 19) That all measures installed for the purposes of long-term erosion control including but not limited to vegetative cover, rock walls, retaining walls and landscaping shall be maintained in perpetuity on all areas in accordance with AMC 18.3.10.090.B.7.a. PA #2015-01894 263/267 Granite Street/zgh Page 7 E 20) The requirements of the Ashland Fire Department, including: fire hydrant distance and clearance; fire flow; addressing; fire apparatus access and turn-around; firefighter access pathways; Fire Department work area; fuel break; and an approved Fire Prevention and Control Plan for Wildfire Lands shall be complied with prior to issuance of permits or the use of combustible materials, whichever applicable. Fire Department requirements shall be included j on the engineered construction documents. Note: If this project takes place during fire season restrictions and is on lands protected by the Oregon Department of Forestry or within 118 of a mile of ODF protected lands, applicant should check ODF restrictions at www.swofre.com or call (541) 664.3328). 21) That the location and modified design for the public path be approved by the City of Ashland Parks Department. The path shall be constructed in accordance with the approved plan and a new public easement recorded prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy. 1Z Z5 t~° Bill Mol ar, Director Date Comm uty Development Department PA #2015-01894 263/267 Granite Street/zgh Page 8 PA-2015-01894 391 E08DA 1902 PA-2015-01894 391 E08DA 1400 PA-2015-01894 391 E08DA 1903 CAIN N ROBERT ROBERT ROY TRUSTEE E COLLONGE JOSEPH L TRUSTEE CONNOLLY ERIK H CAIN FAMILY TRUST 111 BST 263 GRANITE ST 671 B ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2015-01894 391 E08DA 1905 PA-2015-01894 391 E08DA 1501 PA-2015-01894 391 E08DD 200 CONNOLLY ERIK/JAHNA HEYCKE JENS KURT ET AL ISEN HAROLD B TRUSTEE i 279 GRANITE ST 237 GRANITE ST 295 GRANITE ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 [ PA-2015-01894 391 E08DA 1300 PA-2015-01894 391 E08DD 100 PA-2015-01894 391 E08DA 1904 JACOBSON KRIS N/HEIDI L MAGIE STEPHEN KARL TRUSTEE NITZBERG MARK J 1917 E MAIN ST 1032 CEDAR GABLES DR 1166 ARCH ST MEDFORD, OR 97504 SAN JOSE, CA 95118 BERKELEY, CA 94708 PA-2015-01894 391 E08DD 400 PA-2015-01894 391 E08DA 1401 PA-2015-01894 TUTTLE TIMOTHY G TRUSTEE ET AL WEINER DANIEL M/ANDREA K KERRY KENCAIRN 309 GRANITE ST 241-243 GRANITE ST 545 A STREET ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2015-01894 PA-2015-01894 PA-2015-01894 APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING KISTLER SMALL & WHITE TERRASURVEY ROBIN WARREN JEROME WHITE STUART OSMUS 1314-B CENTER DRIVE #452 66 WATER STREET #100 274 FOURTH ST MEDFORD, OR 97501 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 267 & 263 Granite NOD 12115-2015 15 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF OREGON ) County of Jackson ) i i The undersigned being first duly sworn states that: 1. I am employed by the City of Ashland, 20 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon 97520, in the Community Development Department. 2. On December 15, 2015 1 caused to be mailed, by regular mail, in a sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid, a copy of the attached planning action notice to each person listed on the attached mailing list at such addresses as set forth on this list under each person's name for Planning Action #2015-01894, 267 Granite. 420~a j Sig re of Employee I Occumentl 12/15/2015 CITY F Planning Department, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520 i 541-488-5305 Fax:541-552-2050 www,ashland.or.us -ASHU-i OF APPLICATION PLANNING ACTION: PA-2015-01894 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 263 and 267 Granite Street OWNER: Robert and Susan Cain APPLICANT: Kerry Kencairn DESCRIPTION: A request to modify a previous subdivision approval and a Physical and Environmental Constraints Permit in order to build a single family residence with an accessory residential unit. Included in the application is a proposal to relocate a public path and pedestrian easement. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single Family Residential and Woodland; ZONING: R-1-10 and WR; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 391E 08DA; TAX LOTS: 1902; 1900. NOTE: The Ashland Tree Commission will also review this Planning Action on Thursday, November 5, 2015 at 6:00 PM in the Community Development and Engineering Services building (Siskiyou Room), located at 51 Winburn Way. NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: October 29, 2015 DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION OF WRITTEN COMMENTS: November 12, 2015 G) D ~ Z, SUBJECT PROPERTIES =-i II '263 and 267 Granite Street rn PA-2015-01894 V) G Z 1:600 CY'!Y 1 Inch 50 feet Ofpy w~ Tt -ASFi i..AND = Y u,ppiryaKntmtmony nw nttono..rrttyaktw,ry. m f-u A01ttNret, tWCNrtt, lx®itit4 fttemett or,aQrtY ~'tlbnt tMUtl b umt,tnmmy bid v,NNtl la f,b4rcf tnYOrbc,Lbn. 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 i application. A notice of decision is mailed to the same properties within 5 days of decision. An appeal to the Planning Commission of the Planning Division Staff's decision must be made in writing to the Ashland Planning Division within 12 days from the date of the mailing of final decision. (AMC 18.108.040) The ordinance criteria applicable to this application are attached to this notice. Oregon law states that failure to raise an objection concerning this application, by letter, or failure to provide sufficient specificity to afford the decision maker an opportunity to respond to the issue, precludes your right of appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) on that issue. Failure to specify which ordinance criterion the objection is based on also precludes your right of appeal to LUBA on that criterion. Failure of the applicant to raise constitutional or other issues relating to proposed conditions of approval with sufficient specificity to allow this Department to respond to the issue precludes an action for damages in circuit court. A copy of the application, all documents and evidence relied upon by the applicant and applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost and will be provided at reasonable cost, if requested. All materials are available at the Ashland Planning Division, Community Development & Engineering Services Building, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520. If you have questions or comments concerning this request, please feel free to contact the Ashland Planning Division at 541-488-5305. GAcomm-de0planning0anning Actions\Noticing Folder\Mailed Notices & Signs\2015\PA-2015-01894.docx i, MINOR MODIFICATIONS 18.5.6.040 C. Minor Modification Approval Criteria. A Minor Modification shall be approved only upon the approval authority finding that all of the following criteria are met. 1. Minor Modification applications are subject to the same approval criteria used for the initial project approval, except that the scope of review is limited to the modification request. For example, a request to modify a commercial development's parking lot shall require Site Design Review only for the proposed parking lot and any changes to associated access, circulation, etc. Notice shall be provided in accordance with chapter 18.5.1. 2. A modification adding or altering a conditional use, or requiring a variance, administrative variance, or exception may be deemed a Major Modification and/or may be subject to other ordinance requirements. 3. The approval authority shall approve, deny, or approve with conditions the application, based on written findings; except that conditions of approval do not apply, and findings are not required, where the original approval was approved through a Ministerial review. PHYSICAL & ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS 18.3.10.050 An application for a Physical Constraints Review Permit is subject to the Type I procedure in section 18.5.1.050 and shall be approved if the proposal meets all of the following criteria. A. Through the application of the development standards of this chapter, the potential impacts to the property and nearby areas have been considered, and adverse impacts have been minimized. B. That the applicant has considered the potential hazards that the development may create and implemented measures to mitigate the potential hazards caused by the development. C. That the applicant has taken all reasonable steps to reduce the adverse impact on the environment. Irreversible actions shall be considered more seriously than reversible actions. The Staff Advisor or Planning Commission shall consider the existing development of the surrounding area, and the maximum development permitted by this ordinance. 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 18A 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. c Wcomm-dcOplanning\Planning Actions\Noticing Folderwfailed Notices & Signs\2015\PA-2015-01894.docx t PA-2015-01894 391 E08DA 1902 PA-2015-01894 391 E08DA 1400 PA-2015-01894 391 E08DA 1903 CAIN ROBERT ROY TRUSTEE COLLONGE JOSEPH L TRUSTEE ET AL CONNOLLY ERIK H CAIN FAMILY TRUST 111 B ST 263 GRANITE ST 671 B ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2015-01894 391 E08DA 1905 PA-2015-01894 391 E08DA 1501 PA-2015-01894 391 E08DD 200 CONNOLLY ERIK/JAHNA HEYCKE JENS KURT ET AL ISEN HAROLD B TRUSTEE ET AL 279 GRANITE ST 237 GRANITE ST 295 GRANITE ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2015-01894 391 E08DA 1300 PA-2015-01894 391 E08DD 100 PA-2015-01894 391 E08DA 1904 JACOBSON KRIS N/HEIDI L MAGIE STEPHEN KARL TRUSTEE ET AL NITZBERG MARK J 1917 E MAIN ST 1032 CEDAR GABLES DR 1166 ARCH ST MEDFORD, OR 97504 SAN JOSE, CA 95118 BERKELEY, CA 94708 PA-2015-01894 391 E08DD 400 PA-2015-01894 391 E08DA 1401 PA-2015-01894 TUTTLE TIMOTHY G TRUSTEE ET AL WEINER DANIEL M/ANDREA K KERRY KENCAIRN 309 GRANITE ST 241-243 GRANITE ST 545 A STREET ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2015-01894 PA-2015-01894 PA-2015-01894 APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING KISTLER SMALL & WHITE TERRASURVEY ROBIN WARREN JEROME WHITE STUART OSMUS 1314-B CENTER DRIVE #452 66 WATER STREET #100 274 FOURTH ST MEDFORD, OR 97501 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 267 & 263 Granite NOC 10/29/15 15 c AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF OREGON ) County of Jackson ) i The undersigned being first duly sworn states that: I 1. 1 am employed by the City of Ashland, 20 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon 97520, in the Community Development Department. 2. On 10/29/15 1 caused to be mailed, by regular mail, in a sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid, a copy of the attached planning action notice to each person listed on the attached mailing list at such addresses as set forth on this list under each person's name for Planning Action #2015-01894, 267 & 263 Granite. Signature of Employee DocumenQ 10/29/2015 1100 • UDI 05~il0gg A=i5a 17 5'ilt~iJ'[lit jT U ~ti~~lll ~~~LI q i r r~'~' i t Sl l1' Lla ~1 i ANY -SM : of you ~.~ho ~tl2D ~zu HOD 2405 I ON 5'l t~ E fi?J~iF mv area law $ ~'tl amp q 539-D l 4uu_ Two - 10 mot 1901 1A Lp all a zoo ~oz IUD CID CIO ~'1tLN ~ 4C IP; 4u IT _ ~l tl at It Iol lillih I RUD I .11UO I 111 q ~ ' 1.24* 20 ~ q ADI a'll rl - q~, qtr MAN) 102 I'D f1 iJ lP 101 902 - I I~~ t i zoo F 400 300 i 1 A° % 705 703 r 1t' BUD ''i C'll' FI I toy 1i g `~Ik- q C~ I SON goo 046 U415 010 ri 230 itI (ONO IUD lei ze U1 lu{llJ'M 101 MB~;~~~~r ' r i 6G VYaiei St, Ste 101 kis tleism,- te.coin n Ashland, OR JI 97520 541 d88 8200 18.2.3 - Special Use Standards 18.2.3.040 Accessory Residential Unit 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. Complies - There is one accessory residential unit and two dwelling units proposed for this 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. Complies: Two dwelling units including one ARU are proposed for this modified lot that was created under the Performance Standards Option. 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 Complies - The main residence has a proposed gross area of 4,044 sq. ft. The ARU has a proposed gross area of 1,000 sq. ft. and is less than 50% of the main residence. 4. The proposal shall conform to the overall maximum lot coverage and setback requirements of the underlying zone. Complies -See Landscape Plans. 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. Two parking spaces are provided on the lowest level of the ARU in a carport style open arrangement beneath the main level deck and Living Room. This is in addition to the two parking spaces being provided in the garage of the main residence. Supplemental Findings for Cain Residence November 2, 2015 i I 103115 77 i o ® 2750 2160 Lo 2170 CAIN RESIDENCE SOLAR CALCULATIONS: ) 2 80 SW-NW SLOPE = -40.33% ( 21805- 2120.0'/ 150' SE-NE SLOPE = -,05% (2087.5'- 2087.0'/ 150') AVE. SLOPE = -20.19% ( -40.33 + -.0512) I 2 190 STANDARD A APPLIES (-20 SLOPE, N-S LOT DIMENSION IS > 122') 2200 SEE SOLAR SECTION CUTS ON SHTS. A17, A18 & A19 O I 1 ~ 1 s f i i i PREPARED BY KISTLER SMALL + WHITE ARCHITECTS SCALE 1 "=50' 18.3.9 ® Performance Standards Option and S Overlay 18.3.9.020 Applicability Developments exercising the Performance Standards option, including developments that are required to apply the option pursuant to this ordinance, shall meet the provisions of this chapter and all other applicable sections of this ordinance; except that developments subject to this chapter are not required to meet the minimum lot size, lot width, lot depth, and setback standards of part 18.2, and other standards as specifically provided by this chapter. The Performance Standards option may be used to divide residential and non-residential zoned land. This project was previously approved through the performance standard option process. This modification requires us to revise the findings for final plan approval through the performance' standard option. 18.3.9.030 PSO-Overlay This is a modification of a project that was originally developed under the Performance Standard Option, it is not within the overlay zone but was processed this way because it met criteria 18.2.9.030 D, the original property was over 6 acres and wider than 200 feet. 18.3.9.040 Review Procedures and Criteria A. Outline Plan. This application does not require an outline plan approval. B. Final Plan 1. Review Procedure. The Type I procedure in section 18.5.1.050 shall be used for approval of final plans, unless an outline plan has been filed concurrently, in which case Type II procedure shall be used, and the criteria for approval of an outline plan shall also be applied. 2. Phasing. The final plan may be filed in phases as approved on the outline plan. The original Outline and Final plans were a phased project with the upper lots that are now under a modification as phase two 3. Expiration. If the final plan or the first phase of the outline plan is not approved within 18 months from the date of the approval of the outline plan, then the approval of the plan is terminated and void and of no effect whatsoever. Not Applicable 4. Application Submission Requirements. The following information is required for a Performance Standards Subdivision Final Plan application submittal. For requirements 'a' through 'I' please see the graphic submittals associated with this project. m. Manner of financing. The project will be privately funded by the property owner. 0 1 1;. n. Development time schedule. The construction and site work will begin as soon as approval is granted. o. If individual lots are to be sold, a final plat is required, similar to that required for a subdivision, per chapter 18.5.3 Land Divisions and Property Line Adjustments. A preliminary, and then final plat will be submitted based on the graphic exhibits associated with this project. See sheet L 2.0. p. Final plans for location of water, sewer, drainage, electric and cable T.V. facilities, and plans for street improvements and grading or earth-moving improvements. Please see graphic submittals, sheets L 1.0 through L 5.0. q. The location of all trees over six inches diameter at breast height, which are to be removed by the developer. Such trees are to be tagged with flagging at the time of Final Plan approval. See also, chapter 18.4.5 Tree Preservation and Protection. Please see graphic submittals sheet L 1.1 Tree Protection Plan 5. Approval Criteria for Final Plan. Final Plan approval shall be granted upon finding of substantial conformance with the Outline Plan. This substantial conformance provision is intended solely to facilitate the minor modifications from one planning step to another. Substantial conformance shall exist when comparison of the outline plan with the final plan meets all of the following criteria. a. The number of dwelling units vary no more than ten percent of those shown on the approved outline plan, but in no case shall the number of units exceed those permitted in the outline plan. The proposed number of primary dwelling units remains the same, there are two dwelling units proposed where two dwellings units were previously approved in outline and final plans. The addition of an ARU does not constitute an additional dwelling unit. b. The yard depths and distances between main buildings vary no more than ten percent of those shown on the approved outline plan, but in no case shall these distances be reduced below the minimum established within this ordinance. The proposed distance between building envelopes is twenty feet. There were no approved houses in the previous outline and final plans. Please see graphic submittals sheet L 2.1. C. The open spaces vary no more than ten percent of that provided on the outline plan. There were/are no open spaces required for outline or final plan. d. The building size does not exceed the building size shown on the outline plan by more than ten percent. There were no previously approved houses in outline or final plan. The building envelopes on this modification are individually smaller than previous and overall there is less land associated with the proposed building envelopes than what was previously approved. Please see graphic201 submittals sheets L 2.0, L2.1 and L 2.2. e. The building elevations and exterior materials are in conformance with the purpose and intent of this ordinance and the approved outline plan. Please see architectural graphic submittal for elevations and material choices for home. f. That the additional standards which resulted in the awarding of bonus points in the outline plan approval have been included in the final plan with substantial detail to ensure that the performance level committed to in the outline plan will be achieved. Not applicable, there were not any bonus points awarded at outline plan. g. The development complies with the Street Standards. Not applicable - The project is served off a private drive. h. Nothing in this section shall limit reduction in the number of dwelling units or increased open space provided that, if this is done for one phase, the number of dwelling units shall not be transferred to another phase, nor the open space reduced below that permitted in the outline plan. Not applicable, nothing has changed since the outline plan as far as number of dwelling units 1. nor open space. 6. Any substantial amendment to an approved Final Plan shall follow a Type I procedure in section 18.5.1.050 and be reviewed in accordance with the above criteria. 18.3.9.050 Performance Standards for Residential Developments A. Base Densities. The density of the development shall not exceed the density established by this section. The density shall be computed by dividing the total number of dwelling units by the acreage of the project, including land dedicated to the public. Fractional portions of the final answer, after bonus point calculations, shall not apply towards the total density. The base density for this zone (R-1-10) is 2.4 dwelling units per acre. Including the three lots along granite street (that were developed in phase 1) , the total acreage of the original approval is 3.53 acres. Base density for this site is 3.53 times 2.4 equals 8.4 acres. Due to the steepness of the site and associated access difficulty the five dwelling units was approved and is the maximum practicle. 2. Open Space Required. All developments with a base density of ten units or greater shall be required to provide a minimum of five percent of the total lot area in Open Space; that area is not subject to bonus point calculations, however, density bonuses shall be awarded to open space areas in excess of the five percent required by this subsection. The original outline plan included five units, no open space was required. B. Density Bonus Point Calculations. The permitted base density shall be increased by the percentage gained through bonus points. In no case shall the density exceed that allowed under the Comprehensive Plan. The maximum density bonus permitted shall be 60 percent (base density x 1.6), pursuant to the following criteria. OT 2 Not Applicable 2. Provision of Common Open Space. A maximum ten percent bonus is allowed, pursuant to the following. Not applicable 3. Provision of Major Recreational Facilities. A maximum ten percent bonus is allowed, pursuant to the following. Not applicable 4. Affordable Housing. A maximum bonus of 35 percent is allowed. Developments shall receive a density bonus of two units for each affordable housing unit provided. Affordable housing bonus shall be for residential units that are guaranteed affordable in accordance with the standards of section 18.2.5.050 Affordable Housing Standards. Not applicable 18.3.9.060 Parking Standards All development under this chapter shall conform to the following parking standards, which are in addition to the requirements of chapter 18.4.3 Parking, Access, and Circulation. A. On-Street Parking Required. At least one on-street parking space per dwelling unit shall be provided, in addition to the off-street parking requirements for all developments in an R-1 zone and for all developments in R-2 and R-3 zones that create or improve public streets. The number of dwelling units has not changed from the previously approved outline and final plans. There are 160 linear feet of uninterrupted curb with 6.6 spaces possible adjacent to the private driveway. There are additional uninterrupted curbs after the driveway cut but are not necessary to meet this requirement and can be assigned to the other two homes that they are adjacent to. B. On-Street Parking Standards. On-street parking spaces shall be immediately adjacent to the public right-of-way on publicly or association-owned land and be directly accessible from public right-of-way streets. On-street parking spaces shall be located within 200 feet of the dwelling that it is intended to serve. In addition, on-street public parking may be provided pursuant to minimum criteria established under subsection 18.4.3.060.A. There are a total of 8 on street parking spaces associated with the five homes that are part of the original outline and final plan approval. The criteria is met, although, the two upper dwelling units are more than 200 feet up the hillside. C. Signing of Streets. The installation of "No Parking" signs regulating parking in the public right- of- way and any other signs related to the regulation of on-street parking shall be consistent with the Street Standards in 18.4.6.030, and shall be consistent with the respective City planning approval. Not Applicable, There is not a public street associated with this development i ~T 62 4 18.3.9.070 Setbacks t k All development under this chapter shall conform to the following setback standards, which are in addition to the requirements of the applicable zone. A. Front Yard Setback. Front yard setbacks shall follow the requirements of the underlying district. Front yard setback requirements for R-1-10 are 15 feet and are easily met with these two building E envelope revisions. See sheets L 2.0 through L 2.2. I B. Building Separation. The minimum separation between two buildings must be half of the height of the tallest building, where building height is measured at the two closest exterior walls, and the maximum required separation is 12 feet. See Figure 18.3.9.070.B. See also, definitions of height of building or structure, and grade or ground level in part 18.6. This standard does not apply to non- residential zoning districts including C-1, C-1-D, E-1, CM, and M-1. This criteria has been met, the separation between building envelopes (potential building walls) is twenty feet B. Solar Setback. Solar setbacks shall meet the requirements of 18.4.8. Solar setback A is being met and addressed in other portions of the findings. D. Perimeter Setback. Setbacks along the perimeter of the development shall have the same setbacks as required in the parent zone. The setbacks used for design purposes are those of the R-1-10 zone E. Building Envelope for Single-Family Structure. Any single-family structure not shown on the plan must meet the setback requirements established in the building envelope on the Outline Plan. This application alters the building envelopes from the original outline plan. The setbacks used for design purposes are those associated with the 114-10 zone. G0 VVaj_er Ste 101 I<1stIP~Sine ~ite,cuin u u Ashland, OR e lalkokist,_ ,mallviliite.com 97520 5d1 d88 8200 Supplemental Findings for Cain Residence Prepared by Jerome White, KSW Architects on 10-27-15. Chapter 18.3.10 - Physical and Environmental Constraints Overlay 18.3.10.090 Development Standards for Hillside Lands E. Building Location and Design Standards, 2. Building Design. a. The height of all structures shall be measured vertically from the natural grade to the uppermost point of the roof edge or peak, wall, parapet, mansard, or other feature perpendicular to that grade. Maximum hillside building heath shall be 35 feet. Complies - Both the main residence and the accessory residential unit are less than the maximum 35' height above natural grade. The exterior elevations and building sections shown on Shts. A10-A15 indicate the existing 'natural' grade and 35 foot vertical offsets clearly indicating that both structures are below the maximum height. The main residence is approximately 30'-6" on the downhill east end and approximately 17'-6" on the uphill west end (see East Elevation 2/A11). The A.R.U. is approximately 23'-6" above natural grade (see South Elevation 2/A12). 2. Building Design. c. A building step back shall be required on all downhill building walls greater than 20 feet in height, as measured above natural grade. Step-backs shall be a minimum of six feet. Main Residence: Although we believe that with a performance standards subdivision option this requirement can be modified, we are asking for an exception to this requirement due to extreme site difficulty with regard to the unique topographic features of this difficult 'reclaimed' former rock quarry. The south east corner of the building is 27'-6" above 'natural' grade at the lowest point of both the east and south walls (see South Elevation 1/A10 and East Elevation 2/A11). The south elevation is partially mitigated by the deck and partial solid guardrail, and the east elevation will be partly mitigated by a new planter, thereby reducing the visual impact of the south and east walls. The existing grade at the upper flat area to the west of the main residence is at a 2097 foot elevation while the lower grade where the proposed garage is to be located is at a 2080 foot elevation; a difference of 16 feet. With a two floor configuration, this would amount to a 17 foot floor to floor height from the lower level to the upper level. This is not an acceptable Supplemental Findings for Cain Residence October 28, 2015 floor to floor height for practical reasons, so we have raised the driveway elevation and lowered the upper level slightly to provide for a more manageable 13'-6" floor to floor height. If we maintained the garage elevation at 2080 feet and the floor to floor height at 13'-6", we would have to sink the upper level in to the grade 3'-6 This would only reduce the downhill wall to 24 feet; still necessitating an exception request and requiring seven steps up to the rear yard to the west. This is not acceptable from a design stand point. The addition of the planter and retaining wall on the east elevation reduces the perceived wall height to approximately 22'-8". A.R.U. a Complies with this requirement. 2. Building Design, d. Continuous horizontal building planes shall not exceed a maxim um length of 36 feet. Planes longer than 36 feet shall include a minimum offset of six feet. Main Residence: Although we believe the intent of this section was similar to 2c. and was intended for downhill facing walls, we are asking for an exception to this for the Main Residence. The uphill north elevation building length is 74 foot long with one 8 foot long offset resulting in a continuous wall length of 66 feet. The exposed wall height for this wall is 9 feet resulting in a 594 sq. ft. flat wall. This is less area than a maximum permitted 20 foot high by 36 foot long wall at 720 sq. ft. and therefore would have a similar if not lesser affect as is permitted. Given that the wall is also not visible from the pedestrian pathway above: and to the north of the building, there is virtually no negative impact from this 66 foot long wall on the public. (See'APPROX. LINE OF (E) GRADE AT CENTERLINE OF (E) PEDESTRIAN PATHWAY IN FOREGROUND' shown in North Elevation 1/A11). Virtually the entire 66 feet is well below this line. A.R.U.: Complies with standard. H. Exception to the Development Standards for Hillside Lands. Main Residence: We are asking for an exception to 18.3.10.090 E. 2. c. & d. as indicated in the preceding narrative. 1. There is demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements of this chapter due to a unique or unusual aspect of the site or proposed use of the site. The site is a former rock quarry that was reclaimed and subdivided in the 1990's. It goes without saying that this is an obviously difficult site, perhaps the most difficult in the City of Ashland (see Sht. A16 and topographic survey). Given the existing grade changes Supplemental Findings for Cain Residence October 28, 2015 between the upper and lower levels, it would be difficult to meet the 20 foot wall requirement without severely compromising the livability of the residence as both floors would need to be buried in to the hillside. The design neatly `slips' in to a'notch in the hillside (See Site Plan 1/A3, First Floor Plan 2/A6, and West Elevation 2/A10). Moving the house further to the north, while possibly, alleviating the height of the east wall, would compromise more of the existing retaining walls on the hillside and might begin to affect the solar shadow cast at the North Property Line. To offset the north 66 foot long wall with a 6 foot minimum setback would require moving the offset to the north in to the hillside, thus providing the same difficulty outlined in the previous paragraph. 2. The exception will result in equal or greater protection of the resources protected under this chapter. The area of wall that exceeds the 20 foot minimum (East Elevation 2/A11) is only 392 sq. ft. in area. The Ordinance permits a flat downhill facing wall to be 720 sq. ft. (20' x 36'). The wall considered in this exception is 54% of the permitted are, therefore we believe the exception offers greater protection the resources. The 66 foot long wall, as stated before, has an area that is less than the Ordinance allows, is on the uphill side of the building, is not visible from the pedestrian pathway, and therefore results in greater protection of the hillside view from below. 3. The exception is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty. The house 'slips' in to an existing notch in the hillside (as stated earlier) and will cause the least disturbance to the hillside making it difficult to rneet these two requirements. As both the north and east walls considered in these exceptions are less in area than what is allowed by ordinance, we believe this exception is the minimum necessary to alleviate this very difficult design challenge. 4. The exception is consistent with the stated Purpose and intent of chapter 18.3.10 Physical and Environmental Constraints Overlay chapter and section 18.3.10.090 Development standards for Hillside Lands. This project is the near culmination (one lot remaining) of an ambitious twenty plus project taken on by the Owner of the property to reclaim a 'scarred' landscape that defined exactly the opposite intent of the Hillside Lands portion of the ordinance. We believe that this project not only meets, but is a great example of meeting the intent of the ordinance. Supplemental Findings for Cain Residence October 28, 2015 Chapter 18.4.8 -Solar Access 18.4.8.020 A. Lot Classifications 1. We are asking that this lot be classified as Standard A, the most stringent solar standard. Formulas for average slope are not being provided as this lot has an extremely unique topographical complexity (see Sht. A16) that would not allow for an accurate representation of the solar shadow on the property. The Solar Setback formulas are generalized formulas, provide only an approximate determination of grade, and would not accurately depict the grade and resulting solar setback. As Standard A is the most restrictive standard in the ordinance, we are requesting that this be used for this project without providing calculations. By observation, the extreme south facing slope makes it obvious that Standard A will apply. 18.4.8.020 B. Exemptions 4. a. Actual Shadow Height. If the applicant demonstrates that the actual shadow that would be cast by the proposed structure at noon on December 21 is no higher than that allowed for that lot by the provisions of this section, the structure shall be approved. Main Residence: At no point does the solar shadow cast on December 21 at noon reach the property line, but rather hits the upward slope of the ridge line to the north of the main residence. (See Shts. A3, A17, A18, and A19) Five sections were cut through the property/building in a true north- south direction (house is approx. 25 degrees off from north-south direction) showing the actual shadow cast from the eaves of the roof onto the existing natural grade. The closest the actual shadow cast comes to reaching the property line is approximately 9'-4" (Section B on Sht. 18) and therefore does not cast any shadow on the north property line. The cast shadow is now shown on the Enlarged Site Plan on Sht. A3. A.R.U.: By observation, given that the accessory unit is to quite a distance to the south of the main residence, and that is has a lower roof than the main residence, it too complies with the solar access requirement. Supplemental Findings for Cain Residence October 28, 2015 - - \ 66 WATER STREET E7- SUITE 101 nC ASHLAND 7520 ry _ - TE L.: 541.488.8200 NOTFOR CONSTRUCTION THESE DRAWINGS SHALL NOTBE USED FOR: CONSTRUCTION - BIDOING CONVEYANE ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT PLANNING REVIEW 10-28-15 i - a _ ,I EWE= \ II LL ~ a 9 _ ~ I f- _ - - - j - - - W N o e N w coo 0 NZ 0 m REVISIONS S EI U DRIVEWAY VIEW a ° PROJECT: 15-024 _ ISSUE DATE: 10-2815 N SHEET: E 3 VIEW FROM DRIVEWAY APPROACH AO N U z b""' 7 Uo"N FR` 'Am NITE STREET + NEW RESIDENCE AND ACCESSORY RESIDENTIAL UNIT 4 66 WATER STREET SUITE 101 ASHLAND, OR 9752D TEL.: 541.488.8200 CIVIL ENGINEER LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT STRUCTURAL ENGINEER MECHANICAL ENGINEER ELECTRICAL ENGINEER GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER NOT FOR OWNER ARCHITECT CONSTRUCTION THESE DRAWINGS SHALL T BE USED NSTRUCTIO R ROB AND SUSAN CAIN kistler small + white architects TBD KENCAIRN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE TBD TBD TBD APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING NCO BIDDING o CONTACT: CONTACT: JEROME WHITE CONTACT: KERRY KENCAIRN CONTACT: ROBIN WARREN RECO RDATION 7 B STREET 66 WATER STREET SUITE 101 545 A STREET SUITE 3 1314-B CENTER DRIVE #452 Issu CONVEYANCE OpYANCE apERMIr ti ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OREGON 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 MEDFORD, OR 97501 (541)XXX-XXXX(P) (541) 486-8200 (P) Q (541)541-4883194(P) (541)226-6658(P) PLANNING REVIEW a robrcain@yahoo.com (541)552-9512(F) kerry@kencaimlandscape.com (541)956-8762(F) SUBMITTAL o Jerome@kistlersmallwhite.com (E) robin.wanen@agege.com 10-28-15 W r V I C I N I T Y M A P LEGENDS AND SYMBOLS ABBREVIATIONS DRAWING INDEX a DETAIL DOOR IDENTIFICATION NOTE: ABBREVIATIONS BELOW MAY NOT INCLUDE ALL FOUND IN THE DRAWINGS GENERAL: a A DETAIL IDENTIFICATION 100A_-N0 ROOM NUMBER OF DOOR AO 0ERALLVIEW X9.1 DWG, NO. WHERE DETAIL IS DRAWN LETTER' DOOR IDENTIFICATION ABV ABOVE Al GENERAL IrNFORAUHON KEYNOTE AC ASHPHALTIC CONCRETE KS KNEE SPACE KEY NOTENUMBER ACT ACOUSTIC CEILING TILE LAV LAVATORY SURVEY: AFF ABOVE FINISHED FLOOR LPG LIQUID PROPANE GAS TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY WALLCROSSSECTION WINDOW IDENTIFICATION ALT ALTERNATE M MIRROR LANDSCAPE: A SECTION IDENTIFICATION \V/ WNDOW NUMBER ASW AREA SEPARATION WALL MAX MAXIMUM 1_1 IRRIGATION PUN X9.1 DWG NO. WHERE SECTION IS DRAWN vvj GLAZINGTYPE BD BOARD MACH MACHINE tt IRRIGATION PL BLDG BUILDING MB MACHINE BOLT a R-1 RELITE IDENTIFICATION B.O. BOTTOM OF MB MARKER BOARD ARCHITECTURAL RELITE TYPE BM BEAM MDL MODEL A2 SITE PUN a ZONING SUMMARY IS BUILDING CROSS SECTION AS BACKSPLASH MECH MECHANICAL aT ExuRCeO RESOencE RAx A SECTION IDENTIFICATION PARTITION IDENTIFICATION CAB CABINET MED MEDIUM A4 EaURCED ARU PUN X9.1 OWG NO. WHERE SECTION IS DRAWN 28 PARTITION TYPE CFCI CONTRACTOR FURNISHIED MFR MANUFACTURER AS RESIDENCE BASEMENT FLOOR RAN CONTRACTOR INSTALLED MIW MAKE IT WORK AS RESIDEMEMAINFLOORPLAN r O.F.C.I. ITEM CH COAT HOOK MIN MINIMUM A7 RESIDENCE ROOF PUN }r ITEM NUMBER CJ CONTROL JOINT MISC MISCELLANEOUS AS ARU BOOR PLANS m 4 AS NCE EXTERIOR ELEVATION CLG CEILING MPH MILES PER HOUR Ato RE RESIDE ]PENCE ExreaREtevnnorNs 3 t X75 ELEVATION IDENTIFICATION CABINET DIMENSION CLR CLEAR MET METAL AtI RESIDENCE EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS r• DWG. NO. WHERE SECTION IS DRAWN ~ 155~- W.I.C. CABINET TYPE NUMBER CMU CONCRETE MASONRY UNIT MTL METAL A12 AR.U. EXTERIOR ELEVATIV48 401 CABINET LENGTH (FIELD VERIFY) COL COLUMN MW MICROWAVE Ats SITE AND eutolxosECnoxs - \ CONC CONCRETE (N) NEW X74 BUILDING SECTIONS _ CABINET DEPTH CONF CONFERENCE NIC NOT IN CONTRACT A1s BUILDING SECTIONS +-4 CONT CONTINUOUS 0l OVER A17 RE LAR E AXOUSMDOWSECTINCNEW LEVEL ELEVATIONTAG ar SOAR SNaoowswnoxe 1 SOLARSHADOWSECTIONS Y 4 T0. LEVELLWE&SURFACE CO FIR CORRIDOR OCC OCCUPANCY ALB W `o \ INTERIOR ELEVATION ® CPT CARPET OPNG OPENING A19 SOUR SHADOwSECTIONS ELEVATION IDENTIFICATION EL. O'-0' ELEVATION CR CLASSROOM OC ON CENTER 0 1 11'1 DWG. NO. WHERE SECTION IS DRAWN CTB COMPUTER TERMINAL BOARD OD OUTSIDE DIAMETER - CL CENTER LINE CTSK COUNTERSINK OFCI OWNER FURNISHED L N a DBL DOUBLE CONTRACTOR INSTALLED I- LNL r LOUVER IDENTIFICATION DIA DIAMETER OFOI OWNER FURNISHED OWNER INSTALLED m L-0 LOUVER NUMBER DIMS DIMENSIONS P PAINT co (0 f DF DRINKING FOUNTAIN PLAM PLASTIC LAMINATE co Y DS DOWNSPOUT PLWD PLYWOOD O HVAC EXHAUST H GRIDLINE DW DISMNASHER PSF POUNDS PER 50. FOOT - (A F-+- TOP TO BOTTOM: LETTERS DP DISABLED PERSON PwC PLASTIC WALL COVERING N \J LEFT TO RIGHT: NUMBERS HVAC RETURN E EXISTING PWP PLASTIC WALL PANEL W O _ EA EACH PT PRESSURE TREATED m EL ELEVATION RD ROOFDRAIN V C O ELE ELECTRICAL REF REFRIGERATOR U _ HVAC SUPPLY Q co Cu Cu a OFFIGE~ ROOMNAMEIFGATIGN ELEV7 EELECTRICAL RM ROOM - LEVATOR RD ROUGH OPENING Ut 1 208 ROOM NUMBER I~I LIGHTING SYMBOL EM ENTRANCE MATTING SD SOAP DISPENSER - -0 C: N 7 E EMT ELECTRICAL METALLIC TUBING SEP SEPARATION L : Cu Q " " - EQ EQUAL SF SQUARE FEET PROJECT SITE1 N O LIGHTING SYMBOL EX EXISTING SQ FT SQUAREFEET O N (E) EXISTING SHTG SHEATHING Q a) u) N N NORTHARROW 0 LIGHTING SYMBOL EJ EXPANSION JOINT BHT SHEET U 'p U) EXT EXTERIOR SIM SIMILAR 5 ARROW INDICATES PLAN NORTH FD PLOORDRAIN SM SHEET METAL C m m` W FE FIRE EXTINGUISHER SMS SHEET METAL SCREVJS FEC FIREEXBINGUISHER&CABINET SPECS SPECIFICATIONS (n ,O FF FINISHED FLOOR STB SINGAL TERMINAL BACKBOARD vv O r SEE INDIVIDUAL SHEETS FOR FFE FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION STL STEEL fy_ (O FG FINISH GRADE STRUCT STRUCTURAL ADDITIONAL LEGENDS AND SYMBOLS FHSMS FLAT HEAD SHEET METAL SCREWS SS STAINLESS STEEL FHMB FLAT HEAD MACHINE BOLT SST STAINLESS STEEL FND FEMININE NAPKIN DISPENSER TRSFR TRANSF RANSFORMEFNTRMERrtRPNSFER LOCATION MAP GOVERNING CODES MATERIALS LEGEND FIN FD) TPO TOILET SPENSER Z F.O. FACE OF TS TUBE STEEL a F.O.C. FACE OF CONCRETE i FACE OF COLUMN TTB TELEPHONE TERMINAL BACKBOARD F, O. FIN. FACE OF FINISH TVB DATATERMINAL BACKBOARD NZ 0 W THE DESIGN OF THIS PROJECT IS BASED ON THE F,OV FACE OF MASONRY TYP TYPICAL v_ FOLLOWING CODES: EARTH Y~Y BATT INSU ATION F.O.S. FACE OF STUD/ STRUCTURE TH THRESHOLD m FP FIREPLACE TO TOP OF REVISIONS FR FIRE RESISTANT TC TOP OF CONCRETEI CURB OREGON STRUCTURAL SPECIALTY CODE, 2014 ed. cRAVeueocK R1.0 INSU anoN FRMG FRAMING TW TOP OF WALL FRZR FREEZER UL UNDERWRITER'S LABORATORY OREGON MECHANICAL SPECIALTY CODE, 2014 ed. CEILNG/A000STIC Frc FOOTING uTn UTILITY - SANDIGROUT GA GUAGE UNO UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE LIL J TILE]/PANEL GA GYPSUM ASSOCIATION UON UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED O GI (t $ OREGON PLUMBING SPECIALTY CODE, 2014 ad. GAV GALVANIZED vcT VINYL coMPOSInoNrnE OGI 28 0 CONCRETE METAL GYPBO GYPSUM BOARD VERT VERTICAL GWB GYPSUM WALLBOARD VEST VESTIBULE OREGON ELECTRICAL SPECIALTY CODE, 2014 ed. GB GRABBAR V-A TYPE 5, RATED CMU DIMEN.IONALLUM.ER GI GALVANIZED IRON V-B TYPE 5, NON-RATED OREGON ENERGY EFFICIENCY SPECIALTY CODE, 2014 ad. GS GALVANIZED STEEL VWC VINYL WALL COVERING HALL WALL BUPER HS H GH STATION (ELEVATOR) WC WATER CMOSET GUARD OREGON FIRE CODE, 2014 ed. (E)CONCRETE BLOCKING rSHIM HDBD HARDBOARD WTI WOOD GENERAL HDR HEADER WOW WINDOW INFORMATION NFPA 72: NATIONAL FIRE ALARM CODE, 2013 ed. / (E)CMU FINISH WOOD HG HOT HEIGHT HAEIGHT D WT WT WATER HEATER m r ~ P WATER TREATMENT PLANT z HR HOUR WF WIDE FLANGE PROJECT: 15024 3 HVAC HFATINGNENTILATION/AIR CONDITIONING WS WOOD SCREW NFPA 13: AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEMS, 2013 ed. l BRICK PLwooO Hw HorwAER W.I.C. WOODWORK INSTITUTE ssueDATE: 10-28-15 N HC HANDICAP W/ WITH y INSUL INSULATION SHEET: PROJECT SITE " FRAMEDWALL-NEW IR INSIDE RADIUS { JST JOIST "--L/) NOTE: ALL MATERIAL SYMBOLS ABOVE MAY NOT NECESSARILY BE USED IN THIS Al PROJECT. SEE INDIVIDUAL SHEETS FOR ADDITIONAL LEGENDS AND SYMBOLS N ONERR5 /'s \ ADJACENT OCT 8 201 ADJACENT .2 ZONE R1-10 66 WATER STREET SUITE - - \ ASHLAN1,OR NORTH PROPERTY LINE 97520 TEL.: 5414888200 rv 230.81' / A 21333' / NOT FOR I / 8 v J I CONSTRUCTION 3 / / / `T CC11 II l\ THESE DRAWINGS SHALL I / ' R J III 1 I 1 NOT USED FR: CONSTRUCTION) m ~ / % 0 1111 `I{~ _ ' PROPOSED BUILDING ~ BIDDING ENVELOPE 3 - RECORDATION ONVACE CONVEYANCE ISSUANCE ~ OFA PERMIT ~I II IIiIII~ = \ z s BACK W W PLANNING REVIEW SUBMITTAL 10-28-15 I51'SxSEtBALK 7 as 6 °a m \ 20 050 / 1 1 A SLP.,CE a Al 4~ ( I j f ADJACENT \N\~ PROPO8E0 q,0446 ZONE RI-10 V~ MAIN RESIDENCE \ L PROPOSED BUILDIN ROPERTY LINE ENVELOPEI C I TO BE ABANDONED ,4 ~ r J \ A LIJ J~ - a ADJACENT oi. J - - N ZONE WR L \ cOHPOSED~ P L A N N I N G SUMMARY W N tY y I A I ~ DRIVEWAY N O 2082.00 I E) CONC. \ ZONE: R1-10 I- U c 6 DRIVEWAY N N PHYSICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS C) N E I a 1 soal6o OVERLAY: Z Q \ I ` HILLSIDE LANDS 18.3.10.090 B (13 In v\~ ~'5~0 \ I i \ WILDFIRE LANDS 18.3.10.100 Q (%0 N c \ \ m' \ SEVERE CONSTRAINT LANDS 18.3.10.110 U p 8 I/ M; cfn I PROPOSED 1,000s ADJACENTZONE SOLAR STANDARD A - COMPLIES N ED p o r` I \ ACCESSORY RESIDENTIAL UNIT R1-10 ' e \ u ° PROPOSED BUILDING AREAS D_(0 PROPOSED BUILDIN ENVELOPE2 p \ aca r RESIDENCE: W oaar BASEMENT UNCONDITIONED 1,606sf z a I V~ i BASEMENT CONDITIONED 169sf 1ST FLOOR 2,269s f N Z O \ ZONE R1-10 TOTAL AREA 4,044 sf A.R.U.: REVISIONS BASEMENT 76sf E) PROPERTY LINE I V ' 1ST FLOOR 576 sf E I \ UPPER FLOOR 350 sf TOTAL AREA 1,000 sf i r ROPOSED PROPERTY LINE TOTAL BUILDING AREA 5,044sf 1 I \ ° I N ° SITE PLAN & r i ZONING a ADJACENT SUMMARY PROJECT: 15-024 ZONE RR-.5 ADJACENT ISSUE DATE: 102815 a ZONE R1-10 SITE PLAN SHEET: 3 1 1i x 17: 1-20' 24x36: 1°=40 2 ' N iV ~ r P Y ~ . P 66 WATER STREET A~ SUITE 101 AND,OR 97520 Rr P TEL.: 541,488,8200 y p~j NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION \ N Q @' O~j~ THESEDRAWINGSSHALL NOT BE USED EOR: r GRA I /EL I Pl yap T coeloaNG \I I'1 W 4RECORDATION / ) M . Y _ _ _ _ CONVEYANCE ISSUANCE OFA PERMIT ~ ! / ~ ~ ~ ~ ---------1 PLANNING REVIEW D B SUBMITTAL 10.28.15 Alp- / L_ A I I I I ! I 1 v j I 1 1 1 1! 1 1 1 I! ar G) ~ ~~~I1 II ~ 11 11 I II 1 II I I 1 Ij111 l ~ I ~ - - _ _ - ~ 73 ~1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 111 . a n • l~~ X1,),11 1N)I I I1,, 8o 11111 11 111 II 1 j,' . 11 , ® - 11 111 II 11 11 111 ° 111 111 p ~1~N e 2096.50 ~pATH F, n 1'1'1 1 11 1 11 ' II I` II II ~a~ • _ - - -1 (0 r i',1, 1 II I II '1 Iv 'v A v F c '~v 111 v v v v 207 W N 1V v~~~ \ v ~z~ - - a 1 1 1711 Al Fil At IIA /Al 11 U) k t p2? \ \ _ \ \ i-_-- n 20 v 20\ W - 2080.00 - - - - - 2 a C N 7~ < co a) - ~IIII111111111I~I1\VAi U) III 11111 II 1 i 11 1 <I i ` e A 11 1 1 1 1 1 III V I I I II I I II' 1 1 1 1 V I 1 1 ~ 1 l 1 I~1 ~ ~ ~ C ~U) co 8 _ X111" 1 IM , - ~1 1 l I IIIIh1I1II111I' 11111\ I I ~ ~ I ~ ~ O~ T I 1 111111 X111111111 1 I ~I 1 11 1 / ' i O f 060 - 1 ` D C4 $ I I i ~/I111011 11 III II I III I % / I ~I V I / I~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ _ I I h I i I IIII 1111111111 1 1 101 1 1 I I I I I v / I ! I O I / 1 I ~ ~ ~ ~ / I I I 1/71 01 II W ~I 1 ////~1111111111II II111j1 ~I - (0 v I I I! l i/// i~ 1111~1~111 1 1 1 1 (IIII O i l ~ ~ ~ i ~ I I r; l ~ I~ ~-LJ! ~ ~z , N Z 0 rl ~/i / /l1111n 1 1 l i I I' I.I ~ R t l/ 1/! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 l 1 1 I I r, II REVISIONS 6 v~ II/,~////il/~ 1 111111!llllri11111 1 I n I I fI ~~f ~ m -_-`~~'1i11r1////i11/11/ 1 1! 1 1111II~I Ir11r1j11 ~ 1 1 1 I II i" ~ ~ i ~ 11 11 y,~ 1lull//11/ti!! 1 1 ~ !Il111u1111111 1 11 1 1 1 1 ~.ul~~ I 11 Id ~ ~ Ilfll/ /11111~~ I I 1 1 1111111111111 V 1 I I 1 1 1 _ I 1~,1I,. 1 / 1 ~ 1llllll 1l l lCll1 1 ~ 1 ! 111 II11I II IM 1d1 1 I I I 1 I -T-~~~ , v 111111%/',~ !!l l l I I 1 l l 111~ 1 1 j j 1 1 \\I~/1 1 I j ~ I I~ ~I ~~I. \ I l l/ll l i l I l! I 1 1 1 V V 1 A\ 1 I!~ 11 1 l 1 I I 1 y E i.. / I \ l/// l// / l l ~ 1 A A V V A Ili I l I 1 1 L' I I ~~Y / d 1~ v j N t q v~I ; gal I 0 Cl 28 2015 t plXl I I / 111 RESIDENCE ~I l SITE PLAN /i / / / ~l l 1 1 P ~I 5 --1 1 2~5 E PROJECT: 15024 / ISSUEDATE: 10.2845 I MAIN IDENCE = ENLARGED SITE PSAN SHEET: Y I i1 xJ a1i6•-i'.6• A3 N N ~ 36: 118"=T~P I ~ ;'r I i I I I u✓Q I~ I i ~II I~'~ ~I % I. I Illy, E i ~ 1 ~ 1 1 I I ' l( J I 1~ L qJ1 I I I I ~ ~ ~ II m ~ v ` I ~ ~I 1 I I I ~ I R Ili I III ~ ~ ~ I ' I~I ~I I i / aJ ( l 11 1 f I /l~! 1 1 l i 1 11 t`L 66 WATER STREET (I ( 111 / / 1 ! I 11 I I l i / l r,1~o'.f III II i~ SUITE 101 1 , j I L ! I I l J 1 1" I!/ 111 1~( ~I I~ ASHLAND, OR 97520 1 I I I 1 1/ J 1! l i 1 I l ~1 ~I~ ~~II~ TEL.: 541.488.8200 ~ I I I ~ 1 I 1 1 1 I I 'I 1 ' l / 1 ! 1 r I l! l l j 1 1 J l/ I p , I I ' 1 1 11 'If--~ ~~,,I a NOTFOR / I c ~ 1 dl ! I I I I i~ I G! 111 h I ~I i i CONSTRUCTION r ! I I / 1 I J J III \I .,1 / .O THESE BDRAWINGS E USED FOR: F LL N 3 I I I I l 1 l~ I I° ~ I~ 41 / CONSTRUCTION t MMM / I I I 'lI I: I I noN 1 i L J I I I~, 111 ~ PROPOSED 11'{ I I I coeaTRUCOR', BIDDING o 11 i'1 1 I I LC '1 c f.i la l i l I ~11 ~ , 1 1 1 I IN1 CONC. RECORDATION 'I l I /1 a( A l J 1 x J I J 1 III I I DRIVEWAY CONVEYANCE 11 111 ( I 1J < ~l!'l l III ~ 1 4, IS6UANCEOFAPERMIT a PLANNING REVIEW SUBMITTAL a v1 C~n~~ry 1/ V~ I ~l jA \ 10-28-15 Q -I jl~ III ~~Ij U` 1 II 11 I r qpr IV 1 I J 1 I l! 2092.00 I ~II I - I ~ \ \\1V1~~ ~1. l I I j I / ~ ~:J 208~b - ~ lil I If,I I III ~I I I I I A ~ V / _ I ~1 A 1 1 1 11 V 1 1 1 (I I i I .~'~.pl. I I I I ~ _ 1 1;~1 I ~a1 I j IIti I I' I / ~ 1VIA IA I,A 111 X01' ~`G IIV 71 \ 1 x I 1 1 11 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 i~ ~WC II I I I I f f~ A A 11 111 1111 t \ 11111111 1 1 k POINTA a A :n.i 2071.11' Y~\ I 1 1 1 1 11 1\ 11 A A 11 A I~ I I ;i 5~.~ I I I I III I ~ 1 I ~AI 11 11111 A A \ V A\11 A l x.11 I~ B I' I ~I ~I \ l ~ I i i Ik, ! 1 / 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i~ ~ I I ~Y ~}I I I I III I J / ~ II 1 11'1 A A , 1 I `I 11 111 11 ~ , II f l~ (E) CONC. I II N ~ III f I rI ~ ~ \ 1\ 1 _ DRIVEWAY O u 1 1 Al 1, 1 I I I I 1 1 1 1` 1 I l l 1'11111 i' AI 'I A ~ l I I l I I 1 111d1~ ~ - O I I ~ C I 1 IV 1 1 1 1 1 11 11 I I I I 1 11111 111 208 50 071.00 II 111 A II lit \111 .1111 111.. ® t ,vvv` 11'1,11 1'1~111n'I i I I ICI I ' ~ E v V A V 1 1 1 1 11 I 11 1" / Y n ~ 1 v 1UI VIII; IiI ~ I ICI - 5~ - Lu ~ Iv' v II I I I v~`v Ip11 I I I II 1 \V 1\V A~ A , ' 11111 ~1111,~~ ~'x// I I I 1i4~ / w C I. I I X1111 IAA ~ 208h50 19'-9"± SETBACK o~Y~ V A A 1\\\ \ V A A 111111 11\1~~.,w j~ I ! lid t~~~ LL p ~C) / A V 1, V, , 1 y \ A 1 1 1 i 1 U A12~ T~ `1 A A11 1 1` 11A I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I L~ III !l 1 I I U) ' ~AV 1~111A111I1j11J1~ 1111 II I a~,I p~ I I I II I U) ,1 7 ~',1 A 11111 1V`,AI.I III III I I NI r^,. 1 1 I W O v~ 1 1 v11 1 1 11 , A 1 l 1 y 1 1 1 1 1 II 'I y I I I I OI'll I c"I i '1 ~I 1 0 1 1 11 ~ I 1 1 1 l~` 111 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I ~ JII I 'I I I I I I I 11 I J I Il~ 1 1. 1 1, E 1 1 1 1 1 . i I I 1 ~ f" G C SV~! 1VA1\11A1111A1\tO.y~VA1 I1 11111111 ~i - I _Q N N NV' V10VA11111 11 Ivl 11111 l 1 .I~ ®Il 1 J I ,I U 0 N 1 1 11 C ~ ~i~ V111U 11~~~A\ ,111,IV',1I 10 1 1 II I 1 1 1 f 1! I' Z C NQ v11Q11vvuvvl~vl,111CP11111~1 I I I I v~ ~0~5.. Q 1 v 10111 1, 1v ~,11' 1~ 1 11 1 1 1 I I I I I I U 111,'111111111111111'11,11111II1IIIi,1 ~11~~~ I II I I i 111 n ~C i yl1v 1v111111111 1 ! ; ; i 1111 1111,1, I 1 I II I I i 1y 11 111 II v ~a m co (r~ a n 1- 1- e ~~I 1111ii1i/iII! III'l P 1 I i N 0(D o ~~1, 11 11111111111A11111,11 111 1 l~d lal I r~ 11 1 1 1 1 1 1, 1 1 1 1) 11 1 1 1,11 11 1~ l I'I 1~ i w 1 1 1 1 1 I I 11 1 l / A I / 1111111111111lI IIII II~~ I 1 1® / i z 111111111 b 111111111111 1,111 I11111~ I Il I ~1 J1 ~ ~ I I1;f v ~ 1t11110 llil11111'111n11tIII11I NZ 0 011 i l l l1 I' III . ' 1 1.I ' I `V I 1 I 111 l l 1 1 10 1 1 I REVISIONS m \ 11~,11111~111I,1 I I 1` 11 _ I / I l IJ ~I'l ~ 1 11111'n ; \1AA1111 I 1;~ l l 1 ~ ~ _ a v 11 1vvt1 vv 1~ 1111 11 1 1 I 1 O V~ 111, \ V1'~ ` 1~ ~~1~ ,1111 1~ 1 1 11 A i J 11'v O 1. 1 1A1 VA A 1A111111 1 11 I A \~1 \\,AAVAA1A11~111j1~V A 1 ll . ~1/0 1 1 v A A A VA 1 11 1 11111 1 V 1 V xx 111 :A1,,~1V1111111~„111~ 1 I 11 1 ~ 1~ 1 V 1A1/A11111I11111~1111 1 1 1,1 \ 11 f7 \ 1 ,tAA;A1111111ti111 11 i. 1\\\1'1 X11, 111,11 1111\1\'\11\~`\~~\ 1\ Y/ I Al V A.R.U. SITE u 2 2015 e PLAN a n~,1 A PROJECT: 75-624 ISSUE DATE: 10-28-15 N SHEET: A.R.U. ENLARGED SITE PLAN „x,7;,,6 ;:a° A 24 x 36: 118 '-D° N U` 74'-0° a m 49'A' 16A" 34~0' 4 fib WATER STREET SUITE 101 ASHLAND, OR 97520 TEL.; 541.488.8208 o c1 D nls A14 / NOT FOR R CONSTRUCTION THESE DRAWINGS SHALL 3 NOT BE USED FOR: CONSTRUCTION 5 BIDDING RECORDATION CONVEYANCE U ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT PLANNING REVIEW ~a SUBMITTAL c _ - 10-28-15 [TO W Iflf. 3 c U" A S o li ~ L { Ut~l~ty g 3 - m - E Gear m m ce 4 A J~` `jtorage I E E W f0 e~cv S W Q) ~ I a f ~ N i Garage4 p i 6 - 00 Ar~) Trask/ rjtorage Recyc e U :E E I2'-B" x 15'-8° N Q m Y N Q U a ~ m n = NCO ~I m li V d 0 C4 ~ct~ W m co a N N Z 0 REVISIONS v J m s-0° 5'-4' 24 0 RESIDENCE BASEMENT PLAN u ~ 23'-0' 27-0' 470" PROJECT: 18024 67~ @ ISSUE DATE: 1028-15 E w SHEET: N 1,775 Jtotal (169 Jconditioned) BASEMENT PLAN A5 °n 11x17:1!8•=1'.0° U. 24 x 38:114°=1'.0° 74'-0^ z 66'll" 1TA' z-10^ 8'-8' 8'-2° ITT" 6'8' TA" 4'E" E `m 4 68 WATER STREET o SUITE 101 ASHLAND, OR 97520 N TEL.: 541.488.8200 P C g A15 A15 A14 NOTFOR m CONSTRUCTION I THESE DRAWINGS SHALL 3 NOT BE USED FOR', m CONSTRUCTION BIDDING RECORDATION CONVEYANCE m I ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT PLANNING REVIEW EL SUBMITTAL o - 10-28-15 " z a T - 7 ~1 II II I I m m I II II ( h,:rr L - II 431 n y a - 3tl1 , ----I--- ii 3 5 nth 'lin Guest - iein,, - Bid%m 1 ~1 i i pall' - ~ ~ I 4 / office . Cloeet-1'I F)edroom m r th_ li o'rl3' =P*II's"Y-9' 15' - C r 1. f 3 E Lu ' r c t9 I _ f P 1 I L I' ~ _ i rli a) a .0 - - - - i - - - - - ining Kitcken poll ~ 8' J" x l I'_4° 13 ° x I4' f m m gnb h I '1 ~ /1 U Eul' L I Z"o pccL c Q y y (cr. jilt rv Q~ 7 2 a) u) H cu co m LL o m of (oo _ I I- ~ a) C Z o m REVISIONS I i E ~ I I I I v I I I I 3p-0" y RESIDENCE e'o s4° c.e° FIRST FLOOR gg ~~gg f PLAN Q U73A~ f " ```19t~ 8-g 23'-0° 3 32'-0" 42'-0" PROJECT: 15024 ISSUE DATE: 102845 E SHEET: N 2,249 Sf FIRST FLOOR PLAN N 2 A6 „X,7:,18'=,'-0' a m E N m 66 WATER STREET w SUITE 101 ASHLAND,OR 0 a 97520 c - D C B TEL.: 541,488.8200 A15 -A15 A14 NOT FOR GUTTE R AL L --1 CONSTRUCTION x AROUND THESE DRAWINGS SHALL NOT BE USED FOR: CONSTRUCTION BIDDING RECORDATION co CONVEYANCE ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT 'PLANNING REVIEW SUBMITTAL ALUM (RANI[ D,901 10-28-15 ' ( 44`i~Ah41NATLDG~A55 a I m I i I 'I c I I m I n° I 1 m G 111 a A C m A13 I Lu Q) e C A55 A ASPHALT N KOOLSHINGLES F- s U) Z' O N W N N O m U 0 . < c U 0 Z C N Q Q~ W in cu Do a~ m a NZ O m m REVISIONS m - E j N RESIDENCE a ~ ROOF PLAN o _ PROJECT: 15024 28 ISSUE DATE: 1048-15 m E SHEET: N ROOF PLAN N Y 11x17:1/8" 3 A7 °n 24 x 36:114"=1'-0" O 32-0° 37-0° 24'-0" 24'-0° 12' 0" E N `m p 66 WATER STREET SUITE 101 c ASHLAND,OR 97520 TEL.: 541.488.8200 NOT FOR m CONSTRUCTION THESE DRAWINGS SHALL 3 NOT BE USED FOR: m CONSTRUCTION BIDDING RECORDATION CONVEYANCE U ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT a PLANNING REVIEW m SUBMITTAL 0 10-28-15 Y IIII D - oo Deek v m~ - q Cer. I Ile a a _ q up E' E-ntr do Kitchen i L. P W N ( 1 Q 1 to Bath " a v / m 2:1 2 4 `C. W (1) m O B U e Living I- U ~ D _ Q N N /I Dinin 4 Concrete Z C N Q iv 4 Parking H Q 7 N N 2071.00 CU Co m N tl a ~ ~ Z a [leek q N Z O Tilc n m m ~J REVISIONS n Y J m 0 U 9 m N Al A.R.U. e FLOOR PLANS g PROJECT: 15-024 ISSUE DATE: 10-28-15 E y SHEET: 516 5q ft FIRST FLOOR PLAN 2 16 59 ft BASEMENT PLAN A8 ,1',0° rv 11 %17:178° 11.17: 118°=1'-0° 24x36'. 114° =1'-0" 24 M 36:1!4'=1'-0" m - - 3TL" Q 20'-0^ z-l6^ E N 66 WATER STREET SUITE 101 ASHLAND, OR 91520 TEL.: 54 1.488.8200 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION THESE DRAWINGS SHALL NOTRE USED FOR. c ALL r CONSTRUCTION AROUND BIDDING RECORDATION _ CONVEYANCE I it ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT Ir PLANNING REVIEW a SUBMITTAL e 10-28-15 CLASS A Asl-HALT F)c room ROOF SDHINGLL5 r i JEI Pjath ~i 4 m / I 1 T:) D, c IL linen c II - - C-cr q closet 3 - w/d :D LIJ 1 T m y U) O -GUTTER - ALL W N i AROUND c° 4 ~Q V(0 ca .L 'O C N E Z I Q C ro ~V a Qa) u) )f'HALT CLASS A A,' R00FS111NGLLS N ca CO ~r" ~ v W Z m _ - m3: = I NZ 0 - REVISIONS A.R.U. N N FLOOR PLANS m 3 PROJECT: 15024 ISSUE DATE: 1428-15 SHEET: N Y ROOF PLAN 3 0.59 ft SECOND FLOOR PLAN 2 A9 „x17. Ire°=1'-0° 11x11:1/8 11'0" 24 x 36:114° =1'-0° 24 x 36:114°=1''-0' m MAX HEIGHT PERMITTED ABOVE (E) a 'NATURAL' GRE T.O. ROOF RIDGE \ AT SOUTH WALLLLS@SECTIONCUT N @HIGHEST POINT ®EL 2114,00' 3 \ 66 WATER STREET 12 12 . SUITE 101 m AVE ROOF HEIGHT 5~. ~6 ASHLAND, OR 0 97520 t-~HIGHEST POIM - - TEL.: 541.488.6200 ®EL 21CO.6T CLASS AASHPHALT ROOF SHINGLES NOT FOR m CONSTRUCTION THESE DRAWINGS SHALL 3 ALUM GUTTERS & DOWNSPOUTS NOT BE USED FOR: CONSTRUCTION BIDDING CEM.FIBER SOFFIT TYP •PAINT RECORDATION ONV Y NCE I_ HORIZ.CEM.FIBER LAPSIDING- ISSUANCE FARPERMIT m O PAINT Q PLANNING REVIEW i CEM.FIBERTRIMTYP.- PAINT 3 ALUM. CLAD WOOD VflN00WSTYP. SUBMITTAL j m o „ - ALUM. CLAD WOOD DOORS TYP. W 10-26-15 - WOOD AND CABLE GUARDRAIL dU o m T... ~l`- r= _ im r _ QW n t? 1STf OR_~ o ® EL ° DING J C~ p I, H BIZ. EM.FIBER LAP - ~ - - - \ _ PAINT O < \ \ - - - - - _ _ CEM. FIBER BOARD -PANT a ~ Q c - _ _ Z F 'Rj I J_ LU LL m ~ $ J m E. FIN. GRADE _ _ f I 0 = m .AV O Q EL 2089.42 - - - - - k' - - - - Q 0- F = 21, UJI - - - - - - - TRASH ENCLOSURE x - - WOOD GARAGE DOORS 6m q 5 BASEMENT r + EL 2083.00' - - - - - - - - co E - POINTA m EL. 2083.00' W 00 W N a APPROX. LINE OF (E)'NATURAL' GRADE AT $ FACE OF SOUTH WALLS-GRADE TO BE - RECONFIGUREDW((N)LANDSCAPEWALLS z AND STEPS TO MAIN ENTRY ON UPPER LEVEL O °n (n " LINE OF PROPOSED FINISH GRADE LiJ ~ O F- U U E C SOUTH ELEVATION z a x 36:118°=1'-0" 24 % (6 2436:114°=a) a T.O. ROOF RIDGE _ mm m @HIGHEST POINT E ® mo EL 2114.00' - - -1~._-_. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - N (o 12 w AVE. ROOF HEIGHT' a" @HIGHEST POINT a EL 210aT Z Q W N REVISIONS m I - m I-F - I RESIDENCE 1STFLOOR EXTERIOR - ELZ9sssn POINTS - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ELEVATIONS ~m EL 2096.59 5 PROJECT: 15024 ISSUE DATE; 10.28-15 E m SHEET: N kG WEST ELEVATION 11%17:1/8°=1'-0' 2 A10 U 24 %36: 114' =1'-0° APPROX. LINE OF (E)'NATURAL' GRADE A1UM.SKYLIGHTSWIGNSS AT CENTERLINE OF (E) PEDESTRIAN m TYP.; NO ACRYLIC ALLOWED PATHWAY IN FOREGROUND IN WILDFIRE LANDS i T.O. ROOF m E ®EL 2114' PIP: 12 5 12 _ WATER AVE. ROOF HEIGHT _ 65 STREET SUITE 101 o / Q5 ASHLAND, OR c° @HIGHEST POINT 97620 - ® EL 2109.6T TEL.: 541.488.8200 NOT FOR / CONSTRUCTION THESE DRAWINGS SHALL c / NOT BE USED FOR: 3 CONSTRUCTION / BIDDING r _ - 1 CONVEYANCE o / i / v - - I- ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT 1- a PLANNING REVIEW - - SUBMITTAL i 10-28-15 g 1ST FLOOR a ®EL. 20qj / -POINT C LINE OF PROPOSED FINISH GRADE m EL 2095.83' 3 N NORTH ELEVATION I 24 X 35.114' =1'-W Tai (E) PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT m T.O. ROOF RIDGE - - - / ® @HIGHESTPOINT t EL. 2114.00' - - - - - - - / _ E 5~ r~ AVE ROOF HEIGHT @HIGHESTPOINT W EL. 2109.6T MAX HEIGHT PERMITTED ABOVE (E) / j co g NATURAL' GRADE @ SECTION CUT N 0 AT EAST ELEVATION WALL to i - W 0 APPROX. HEIGHT ABOVE (E) g ~ NATURAL' GRADE @ SECTION CUT C c Q AT EAST ELEVATION WALL o. - I - Q L c N r r ro - in ® 1STFLOOR _ m a o EL.2096.50' _ _ _ _ Q a) U) c: U) r Z @ J W T - 1 - _ - _ _ ~ AVE FIN. GRADE O w - r 111j J LL m EL.208942 - - - _L- - - - - - z N a ~ LU J i ~ lL 7i -fi c 4 40'b11t SETBACKTO NORTH PROP. LINE @ EAST WALL 0 2 - - - REVISIONS Z m BASEMEN 0. _ 268 OV 1 r E ® PO:NTD o = m EL 2092.37 t0 RESIDENCE m ff EXTERIOR UNEOFPROPOSEDFINISHGRADE EL VA IO S APPROX. LINE OF(E)'NATURAL'GRADE AT PROJECT: 16.024 SECTION CUT AT EAST ELEVATION WALL GRADE ISSUEDATE: 10-28-15 E TO BE RECONFIGURED W1 (N) LANDSCAPE WALLS N SHEET: EAST ELEVATION n All Y - L N 11X,7118'=1'-0° rv 24. 36: U4" =1'-0' fQ a \ ~ TO. ROOF T. 0. ROOF- EL2105' 12 \ EL. 2105' E 2 E Q4 A - 66 WATER STREET SUITE 101 ASHLAND, R m LI I 97620 a° \ TEL. 541.488.3200 - NOTFOR N - - - - - CONSTRUCTION m - ESE DRAWINGS SHALL - - - THESE NOT BE USED FOR: - CONSTRUCTION BIDDING 12 RECORDATION MIDPOINTOF R) 4 CONVEYANCE MIDPOINT OF ROOF HEIGHT - - - - - - - 2ND FLOOR ® ISSUANCE OFAPERMR 5 - _ 2NDFLOOR - - EL.zo9z ® EL209X PLANNING REVIEW a - - - SUBMITTAL t - - _ 10-28-16 m W m - Q - - - II~ ISTFL00R LL W iSTFL00R EL2081.5 O EL 208t5' y co m 03 C S Q -Nk c C'4 04 m m N N N :H t Q~ N td < j _ (E)'NATURAUGRADE@SECTION - C (E)NATURAL'GRADE@ m - CUT 6'EAST OF DECK SECTIONCUT6'SOUTH - _ - _ OF DECK - E LGI L BASEMENT BASEMENT W AVG. GRADE {.x V1 2771' INTA EL. 2071' 2071' POINTB - EL 2071' EL. 2071' EL 2071.00' W Q EAST ELEVATION SOUTH ELEVATION 2 N o „X,7:,73.=1tp^ / 11x,7:1/8"=1'-0" 17 2 24X36:174'=1'-0' 24x36:114'=1'-0' T.O,ROOF O. ROOF U) _ _ o i 12 EL. 2106' Q4 EL 2106' N MIDPOINT OF ROOF HEIGHT a4 MAXHEIGHTPERMITTEDABOVEEE)- o - - - - - - - - - NATURAL' G ADE @ SECTION CUT _L i W F- U _ r- - _ro m _ = APPROX. HE GHT ABOVE (E) LU NATURAL' G ADE @ SECTION CUT NQ E _ LU (6 N a+ = N c J 1 m = o _ m •U (V _ 1122 Q - _ 2 cu C) FLOOR (4 _ _2ND FLOOR - - _ ® N @ o mvr EL.209T ® _ EL 2097 = INTO m P ' ca _ - W ELZ W (.Z g (E)'NATURAL'GRADE @SECTION - - J i CUT VVVEST OF DECK - REVISIONS m I ¢ Z - 4 h, W N A p POINTD EL2083.35' E 1ST FLOOR Q - ,STFLOOR u 2081.5' - - - - - - - - - - - - _ EL FLOOR ® < EL 0 .L Zo N - (QNATURAl GRADE@ ARU NORTH WALFACE EXTERIOR m ELEVATIONS I PROJECT: 15024 ISSUE DATE: 10-28-15 BASEMENT ® BASEMENT EL. 207V SHEET: uEi EL.2071' WEST ELEVATION NORTH ELEVATION A12 3 4 N N x17: 4S"=1'-0" 11 x 17:1/8" =1'-0' 24 x 36:174"=1'-0" 24 x 36:1/4" =,'L' MAX HEIGHT PERMITTED ABOVE (E) NATURAL'GRADE@SECTION CUT A15 A15 ® ® ® A14 T.O. ROOF RIDGE +White HIGHEST P01NT EL 211400' N m APPROX. HEIGHT ABOVE (E) 66 WATER STREET 12 NATURAU GRADE @ SECTION CUT SUITE 101 AVE. ROOF HEIGHT 5 ® ASHLAND, OR ® @HIGHESTPOINT _ ® 97520 EL 2109.67' TEL.: 541.488.8200 12- =0 "I _ _ c NOT FOR Q5 CONSTRUCTION THESE DRAWINGS SHALL NOT BE USED FOR: m CONSTRUCTION BIDDING RECORDATION w O CONVEYANCE V Q ISSUANCE OFA PERMIT 9 PLANNING REVIEW Living St it Laundry Half Bath Office Closet Bedroom SUBMITTAL r~ (E) 'NATURAI'GRADE 10-28-15 F~- w z LU 8 a 19T FLDOR > ` EL. 209650' ,II Ili-.I. m F O Z w - - w _ O ~ III I~III - Garage Gear Storage Q a - j` Q AVE. FIN. GRADE H EL. 2089.4Z co CUT CUT a [ 0 -~1 SEES BASEMEN ®EL2083.00' II. III E' Uj ~I- W N N I- (E) 1990's GRADE (PRIOR TO ORIGINAL SUBDIVISION) (n 0 W 0 BUILDING SECTION Q Q 11x17:,18"=1'-0' N E 24x381Z C 10 Q r ~U) ___--_------------J (n of (0 0 (D - - - - r 3 z eo~ N Z 0 a~ - a~a0 REVISIONS W m 0 9 a~~., .12 LINE OF (N) GRADE aRn 0 LINE OF(E)'NATURAL'GRADE 4 9 LINE OF 1990's GRADE SITE AND BUILDING SECTIONS - - - - - - B_ - - - - - PROJECT: 15024 3 _ - ISSUE DATE: 10-28-15 E SHEET: N SITE SECTION A13 a 0 N U' a ® A19 (E) PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT I, m MAX HEIGHT PERMITTED ABOVE (E) 3 T.O. ROOF RIDGE 'NATURAL' GRADE @ SECTION CUT 0 HIGHEST POINT y EL 2114.00' 66 WATER STREET 3 `o ® SUITE 101 AVE, ROOF HEIGHT I I ASHLAND, OR a HIGHEST POINT 5~ TEL.: 1.488.8200 EL 2109.6T APPROX. HEIGHT ABOVE (E) O ® I (E) NATURAL' GRADE 'NATURAL' GRADE @ SECTION CUT / NOT FOR ✓ ® / I CONSTRUCTION ® I THESE DRAWINGS SHALL ® ® NOT BE USED FOR: CONSTRUCTION a BIDDING RECORDATION CONVEYANCE 3: W I I ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT PLANNING REVIEW Deck Gallery Office Guest SUBMITTAL 10-28-15 F 0 z 1STFLOOR W L) EL 2096.57 D a - m J F I . m z = 45'-5"i SETBACK TO NORTH PROP. LINE @ SECTION CUT n LU AVE. FIN GRADE - 0 Garage Q p EL 208947 H m (N) CONC. DRIVEWAY SLAB q (N) COMPACTED FILL CA (E) NATURAL' GRADE j CUT (N) CONC. RETAINING WALL WI C EASEMENT DRAIN ROCK AND PERFDRAIN -~1 ® EL 2083.07 - - - O. - - - - - - - - - - J -III III - =1 III - N N -1 l =11 =11 i, -III _ W - I I i III-III III III i i ~ III III , I I -III III III- ' I I' III-III III III ~ ul II_ 1 ~h~~l(I III II ill III !11=11 - III s H I=!Il III 11 III II III IIHII IIMIIL_III III W ~p 1 n r~ _ Fff III11111~ '~~ihT,~ ~y v / Co BUILDING SECTION z 11 x 171181'-0" B W N O ,E 24x36: /4"=1'-0' (E)1990'sGRADE (PRIOR TO I"' U a ORIGINAL SUBDIVISION) Q LO CU V) E -0 e C N Q 2 Q(U (n - W ~ rn ~ IY - ~ mm a~ r` w m LEGEND j N F-77-7 UNDISTURBED SOIL OR (E) > ' COMPACTED FILL N Z a REVISIONS m "III I- COMPACTED FILL E AREA OF CUT GRADE U J J 7 BUILDING SECTIONS m PROJECT: 15-024 ISSUE DATE: 10-28-15 c- SHEET: m1 1 A14 N APPROX. HEIGHT ABOVE (E) q m NATURAL'GRADE @SECTION CUT A13 (E)PEDESTRIANEASEMENT T.O. ROOF RIDGE \ HIGHEST POINT ..EL 2114.00' 4 I I 66 WATER STREET SUITE 101 ° AVE. ROOF HEIGHT 0 12 I I ASHLAND, OR @ HIGHEST POINT Q 5 97520 EL. 2109.6T (E)NATURAL'GRADE I " I TEL.: 541.488.8200 5 I I NOTFOR CONSTRUCTION F - I THESE DRAWINGS SHALL 3 Z / NOT BE USED FOR: CONSTRUCTION $ 1 1 I i BIDDING REC m ORDATION CONVEYANCE I , ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT 4 I ( / PLANNING REVIEW o ~II C4 SUBMITTAL 10-28-15 5 _ - i ' II I I III _ - - - ICI 1STFLOOR EL.2096,50 °o n AVE.FIN GRADE 651-10"t SETBACK TO NORTH PROP. LINE @ SECTION CUT . / - - - - - - - - - - - - MAX HEIGHT PERMITTED ABOVE (E) - 'NANRAL'GRADE@SECTION CUT - - - - - - - - < C BASEMENT ~ EL. 2063.0F E _ _ ~ o , _ - - - - - - - - _ , _ - - - - - - - - - - BUILDING SECTION w ro N ` 11X17:116'=1'-0' C 24x36:114°=1'-0' W 0 N APPROX. HEIGHT ABOVE (E) A73 / I (E) PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT 'NATURAL' GRADE @ SECTION CUT 0 m T.O. ROOF RIDGE ,1' o ® EL. 17400' POINT W N 0 a ~ e r 1~ C ° AVE. ROOF HEIGHT p s - I I - U L u @HIGHEST POINT \ _ ® I I z C (n EL.2109.13T e r c: N Q c J 12 I I N Q ) U) co co 0r- (o a ~ N IST FLOOR W m ® REVISIONS - - - - > - - - - - - - - - - - EL 2096.5(Y 5 O - W a :H b E (E) NATURAL' GRADE N 57'-6"± SETBACK TO NORTH PROP. LINE @ SECTION CUT BUILDING - SECTIONS a m r - i- PROJECT: 15-024 BASEMENT ISSUEDATE: 10-28-15 - ® E1.208000 BUILDING SECTION C SHEET: Y 11 x 17: 1/6"-1'-0' A15 N 24 x 38:114°-1'-0' N U _n kistler - 1 C 86 WATER STREET SUITE 101 - ASHLAND, OR 97520 TEL.: 541.4ee.e200 NOTFOR u CONSTRUCTION THESE DRAWINGS SHALL NOT BE USED TOR CONSTRUCTION \ BIDDING $ \ _ _ RECORDATION CONVEYANCE ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT 3 o \ PLANNING REVIEW 10-28-15 - Y F ice. ~ _ r W 0 U) W U) D 76 E _ f --%\V A. Z C m - \ i C U) (7 o h w w \ ~vv~\~~ / ~yT1 / (.3 zz A,, \ \ 1- j n N Z 0 REVISIONS k. I 1 r RESIDENCE AXONOMETRIC - VIEW PROJECT: 15-024 ISSUEDATE: 10-28-15 SHEET: RESIDENCE AXONOMETRIC VIEW FROM SOUTHEAST 4 NO SCALE I A16 N N U e \ \ m \ \ -----1, I (E) PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT r T.O.ROOFRIDGE \ S @HIGHEST POINT \ E EL 2714.00' ~\su 66 SUWE ER STREET IT 101 AVE. ROOF HEIGHT \qh ASHLAND, OR @HIGHESTPOIM A~~DD % 97520 - NT 541 488 8406 ®EL 2109.8T / A N - .1 \F~?J \ w NOTFOR / V / \ m CONSTRUCTION OR A/ THESE DRAWNGS SHALL ED FOR: NOT : / r \ I = CONSTRUCTION c CONSTRUCTION C r r - BIDDING o A Z RECORDATION \ CONVEYANCE \ I ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT \ \ \ ( PLANNING REVIEW SUBMITTAL \ \ \ 10-28.15 r it 1STFLOOR ELZass.Ba m \ \ A AVE. FIN. GRADE EL 2089.42' I L~ - (E) NATURAL GRADE @ SECTION CUT BUILDING ELEVATION BEYOND @ C BASEMENT I SECTION CUT L ® EL 2083.00' _ _ _ _ _ f E W r 4 W m L~ ~ $ r TRUE NORTH-SOUTH SOLAR SHADOW SECTION 11xv:1re"=1,_0" A 0 24x38:1/4'=P-0" ui N LLI a) 0 U 5 Q co 'm c ~ N Z C co Q Q a) U~ a a) co m 0 cn co a~ NZ 0 m REVISIONS a E 0 0 U J J SOLAR SHADOW (c7" ZO 15 SECTIONS a ~cm 5 PROJECT: 15024 ISSUE DATE: 10-2845 E m SHEET: `m s A17 N P e tl ~ \ < \ \ I (E) PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT T.O. ROOF RIDGE \ E' @ HIGHEST POINT -EL 21-14OF / i i 66 WATER STREET i F SUITE 101 AVE. ROOF HEIGHT , i~ _ AST j2 ASHLAND, OR $ HIGHEST POINT 97620 TEL.: 641.488.8200 - \0 r+ EL 2109.6r Q~l w NOTFOR o CONSTRUCTION z c THESE DRAWINGS SHALL NOT BE USED FOR: TRUCTION BIDDING \ z RECORDATION CONVEYANCE \ ~L ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT S I I` \ \ PLANNING REVIEW \ \ G` SUBMITTAL \ 10-28-15 1STFLOOR o EL2096.64' (E) NATURAL GRADE @ SECTION CUT BUILDING OUTLINE @ SECTION CUT ® AVE. FIN. GRADE EL 2089.42 a 3 5 BASEMENT EL 2063.07 _ _ - - _ - N TRUE NORTH-SOUTH SOLAR SHADOW SECTION w .m m` x17:1!8"=,_0.~/ C 24x36:11w NN is LL 0 F`~, \ \ (E) PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT co Z, .Z T.O. ROOF RIDGE \ \ \ ® @HIGHEST POINT w EL 2114.00' - - - S Q I U \L\r' I Q N N o AVE. ROOF HEIGHT i \ \q c) z W s z G fp E ®HIGHE3TPOIM ✓ \ \NQQ ® EL 2109.6T ✓ A. V~\N p 7i V~) -.ZZC,, Q c B L) co ~~v vv om e T \ N W to m w m 3: z B N Z 0 w 1ST FLOOR ( \ T REVISIONS $ ®EL 2096.57 a i E c (E) NATURAL GRADE @ SECTION CUT BUILDING OUTLINE @ SECTION CUT AVE. FIN, GRADE 0 EL 2089.4Z J n SOLAR SHADOW SECTIONS 6m 5 ®BASEMENT PROJECT: 16024 EL 2083.00' ISSUE DATE: 10-2&16 TRUE NORTH-SOUTH SOLAR SHADOW SECTION S"EET 11x17:1/6"=1'-0" B 1R N 24x36:1/4"= 1'-0" e V N U m \ m \ \ I (E) PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT T.O. ROOF RIDGE E @HIGHEST POINT EL 2714.00' - s ; . 0-- 66 1 SUITE OR STREET E AVE. ROOF HEIGHT \T7 ASHLAND, OR @HIGHEST POINT %VO I Z 07 P 520 EL 2109.er TEL.: 541.488.8200 NOT FOR m \ \ E I I o CONSTRUCTION rv ! THESE DRAWINGS SHALL v I NOT BE USED FOR' F CONSTRUCTION ~ BIDDING - \ \ E I I Z CRECORDATION ONVEYANCE \ \ ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT PLANNING REVIEW E SUBMITTAL 92 1 (E) NATURAL GRADE @ SECTION CUT I 0-28-15 o BUILDING ELEVATION IN FOREGROUND ST FLOOR @ SECTION CUT EL 2096.50' - 3 AVE. FlN. GRADE EL 2089,42 0 n ~i 9 C B BASEMENT LL r + - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ EL 2083.07 N TRUE NORTH-SOUTH SOLAR SHADOW SECTION n w m 11 x 17:118•= T-0" [ C 24 x 36:114"=1'-0" w Q~ 3 to ~ "N ! \ (E) PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT m T.O. ROOF RIDGE \ \ O @HIGHEST POINT _ \ I w EL 2114.07 - - - - - \-Z\as - - - - - - - - - - a -I- - ~ % ~ v~aRgNc I ~ ~ AVE. ROOF HEIGHT c) 7 @ HIGHEST POINT ~ %0 I z C ® EL 2109.6T / / !NO I L C N Q / D a U Un / ~ ~ AV I s ~ NCO \ I o' /n O a \I ~ \ D z I NZ 0 1STFLOOR -EL 2096.5y - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - REVISIONS E o (E) NATURAL GRADE @ SECTION CUT BUILDING OUTLINE @ SECTION CUT AVE. FIN. GRADE J EL 2089.42 i " 77 SOLAR SHADOW SECTIONS a t I BASEMENT PROJECT: 15-024 ISSUE DATE: 10-28-15 - EL 2083.00' _ _ _ N TRUE NORTH-SOUTH SOLAR SHADOW SECTION D SHEET: p 4 24 11 x 36: 11 11 -1-0' Al 9 m 14° -1 '-0° °n IU LOCA't 101N NOTES BASIS OF BEARINGS 2G7 GRA1 11'L S I "1 or,1 L TourlD FRO%J FSiNO 18653 12 ASHLAND, 0R.L-G N, 7 0 BB WATER STREET Y SUITE 101 ASHLAND, OR I,,,.l 1 97520 °w TEL.: 541.488.8200 R(>BERI CAIN ~ NOTPOR 79 t i A N I I I S I R L~ I CONSTRUCTION THESE DRAWINGS SHALL ASI II IN D. OftIIN 97520 I NOT BE USED FOR: CONSTRUCTION BIDDING RECORDATION CONVEYANCE ISSUANCE OFA PERMIT PLANNING REVIEW / onR J., SUBMITTAL 10-28-15 / /z ! 41- I I I I Zoe I A 1 l 1 I I I A l l I l i l! L / 1/ ~ I I T / \ s.tx4cn '~r~, ~ -N- p1. 1 vvII I1 11v,lrT! l,,T, ~ I t1 I 11v1"' Gam, ~ 7I 1 1 ~ ~E J ~„~;~Vv1vv1111111 ,rv"v~ III vT1i 1 11 I! 11L1I1;u1 ~ C 1 vv v v l tl t l v 1 11 ,v l I L11 1 1 T lYl i 1~ 1'11111 ~11~v~vv1vv vvIv.11vu1rL11 F,o11(II v r SCALE: r'=2o' m VAA~V A I V1\IT',A V1VI° s i' ..t~TC \ \ , \~1 I \ \ \ \ 9r t \ \ \ 7 l / / f DATE OF SUR EY. APRIL 10, 2015 VA A I v \V 1 A A T 1 ' m~ ~vv "l A CONTOUR INTLRVAL 2' J AA l !lll i A ~'r ~y V V v~ A VA \ e ~eA~w2~r v c' ' V / I I I C 2, C~ - - ~u.. i iT-~ r`vNV~11IIIIIII~ ~I~~ tlll L. A'~ 1 v.+~_ A lol 11 11111 0 1 eK, T v GL ~i V I II,d1111 1 \1~1~ o ~o.~~~ 1111111 III Ij111111111~A~~ 111 ' s"A ✓ I ewe' l illlJjlj7j111111AIAllIVV~I \ III I I llll~ ' A o~' A~r ErFa 5 rllfi 1,111111 V va' \f11 I-~.'IF \ \ r.~ I.a,,w~'~)Te 1wER " ~Ihl~lilliul l ll ll 11111 . 1 IA hlll z ♦I LEGEND Lhl L'111ffllllln'~"v'vII~~7_ vy~x~ 44, - m 11`~1~I'I' IIIfIIIII11f1111114 VIAIII 11 1 ~ 7~I(a~o 0 Ilrll 11i111j11 lilllj\ }I~ I I ?w I ~V1 ~ y v ~ ~ SU9.ECTPRweT L w ~~>I 17 !111111 1 I~h1' 1 .I 0 (n I NIl I!i I IlIk.AIIr1111 i~ I 9elA v V', "..A v 1 a s•SR~ Q {~3{ Ill 111/!1 fll 1111 \ VIII I ~ I 1 ' A 5"'~ ~ 0er~ p OTHER PROPERTY OR RIGHT OF VIAY f'NcS x/111 'MY! E~!f \ \ I \ \ 1 - w.. I SE,F \ a 7p ~J ~ I~ / 1r III I I I \ \ \ \ \ ` U / \R V ~ ~ u i!1I1l //f~L.TI11 \ t\ II, I1 II'~~ \ \ ° - - - - EASEUCrn M. '4111/ tll ~I 111E Itg11'IAA E //~~jllllJ~/ 1 I I A1111111 V v~V~,AI L` 1 \ V r,v _ Z C N r (o Q z olruu. AFjvpI1 11 1111 v'V111j11 X N . 7TT/° mvilllll 1111 1 II III~IIJ \An\ 1 09 7 N 4VYN~ ~1 IIL1 . A ISn.a < c V i _ N a) U) coy. STACKED RCCK PET I'ANG IvAU 7 P I I I I I 0 111 A 1111IIAI~I ' T K. r- V 1 V Y 'l_• V1,11111 I `I Il Il 11111 X111 11 11111,1 r { V 'p U) SrACUEO BLOCK a TAi NG eau '1' 1 l lv 11 I I I Il I I"' ~T 1 , \ 11 I I NCO 1 1 A lI Al _ 11 I 0 P_ OTO CATCH BASIN T \t F~V ` I P_ A' AREA UGH7 \ ~~AA A.q A ~ 11 ~ sons vvvvvvi r v t .a~,A1~1~ C W VERTICAL DATUM l( I1~t , Z TP 5 TEST PIT ~ A VAAAv) ~ ~ AT ~ sa V'D V 1 'FA. ~ ELEVATIONS ARE FRO,II JAOKSG'1 COUNTY G.LS. NAPS a) 3: m DEN ELECTICaJETEP, N Z 0 olcv IRRIGATION CONTROL VAL I A~ ATvlK~ TV ` CD 1 REVISIONS ~ 7E7.iP0RT4Y BENCHMARK, 4i 5 d£, VYIRi ELEVATION HOiED 7" Cl)~iCRETS' LIFE - !IE .1111 5°ECIES Al 1111E0 \ 'gcIE r \ , 'I TERRASURVFY, INC. N PROFESSIONAL LAND SUR VE YORS W 21!4 FOURTH STRETT TOPOGRAPHIC ASHLAND, OREG0IN ,97520 109117S'>wul",re( PROJECT: 18024 + telltlu;'hrp _ ISSUE DATE: 10.28-15 0 I JOB NO. 1004-I1 SHEET: P TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY 4 - N JJ Public Path and Pedestrian Easement Modification Findings 267 and 263 Granite Streets Owners Robert and Susan Cain Landscape Architect and Planning 671 B Street Kerry KenCairn ®J Ashland, OR 97520 KenCairn Landscape Architecture 541944-4039 545 A Street Suite 3 Ashland, OR 97520 541488-3194 This development proposal includes application to relocate the public pedestrian path and easement that travel through the site connecting to the Ashland trail system above. The proposed new trail location keeps pedestrian on the driveway for about 40 additional feet, before connecting them to a series of stairs and paths that traverse the terraced hillside. Walkers are deposited on the trail where the original steps hit terra firma, this allows us to totally replace the wood portion of this trail system. The new location of the path creates a much more obvious entry to the stair system. It traverses the existing terraces by cutting through the walls and grading into the terrace. The material choice for these stairs is a segmental retaining wall system (SRWS) where the stair treads and the walls are built of one material, designed to be used for both applications. Segmental retaining wall systems are engineered to withstand weather damage and aging. The systems have an added benefit of direct connection to the ground, where as the current steps have noticeable give to the foot, these concrete SRWS steps will feel solid and planted. Segmental retaining wall system stairways have the correct rise and run relationship to make walking feel natural and easy. The current wood steps are too shallow and are awkward to walk on. The original stair case was designed to traverse a ridge thought the site to an upper ridgeline and then to the existing trail system off the property. The proposed steps are integrated into a more solid and protected location. Visibility The new location is as visible as the current location but is improved from a 'statement' standpoint, the walker will walk up the driveway and come to a 'Y' where they will then be faced with a inset step entry sequence with a sign announcing the path connection. Access There is no change in access to the path other than the location of the steps. The path is accessible by walking up the subdivision driveway to a connection to the wood step sequence, then along a ridge to the trail system beyond. Ease of Use Concrete steps and steps on grade are superior in feel and stability to wood steps. The proposed steps will have a better rise and run which will increase the' joy' of use, the current steps are too shallow and are very unpleasant to walk on for those of average height and taller. Long Term Maintenance Segmental Retaining Wall Systems stairs on grade are basically maintenance free. This is a huge improvement over the current wooden step system. The relocation of the path and easement takes the path through the development instead of the current location that has the path traversing a steep ridge. This area, once decommissioned, wood benefit from an erosion control treatment and to be put back to a more natural state. The new steps will fit the site better from an overall erosion control and maintenance standpoint as they will be built into the hillside and ground, rather than sitting above it, where transition form path to step create erosive opportunities. The newly proposed easement is twenty feet wide where it passes between the two proposed building envelopes, it straddles the newly proposed property line. Drawings for this proposal are described in the overall drawing package as part of the physical and environmental constraints application. C , l p KenCaim GRANITE STREET Landscape Architecture z W ZW w 2 to _ 71 I o U) w uj ui 3: 5.WAST, STE .1 3,ASHWV0.~975A W I W ,(D 54141.1465 & C) OCT 06 2015 LLJ _ ~~1STER~ Z) STATE OF I ('J F Z OREGON W W Q 9 REG. 4493 U W (!1 ds c~PE AgG 0 W Lu (D M Drawn By: ) Z 0 STAFF f- ■ u k' o r w 5 - r / / I W N W • , U) W u (D r I z o 2p , D~ 0 t U 0 w co .C A 1 I V N Q Q , (0 N Z > i off, I 2010 ■ 1 fr~~ ' - _,20ap , Z ■ _ ' REVISION DATE t 08~ J 20135 P W o W 2oso-- I o a■ o ' - PATH + a I I EASEMENT seoz ` z ■ .2095 EXHIBIT i - ' X " ISSUE DATE: OCTOBER 6, 2015 W 2105 - kph:; ' ■ V '0602.` , v i E 1.0 ■ I 4 KenCairn GRANITE STREET Landscape Architecture z °w z U) _ p ~ < a w ~E w ' r ¢ i - ~I/^ aD iq 0 V/ VI 545 A ST, STE 3, ASHLAND, OR 9752D 0 ~hl9J W 0- w w w ~ 541-145.1465 I , 0 a isTER~ d w ~ STATE OF 4 _j / rv--r-c-ter r- - z OREGON REG, fk493 9~9 v vvvvv~~J l~ I > L 1\ \ \ \ \ I I KeM, Ken mm w I v v I t~ uiz~ ~W PEA ~ W I I I W \ \ I I 0. Drawn By, Q I \ \ ® STAFF SCALED-30'•0° I fCl/ ' J/, 0 spiels SJ/b Q5 V~~ ~ <L Y ~y \ Q ,fie C z "D spiels 0} ~ROQOS~~~ f CL ''Z I-w I- Z X Z H I D s / ,~7 t W W U) cc) w w yF- W N a o z > ~o w L 1- ZQ U) W' W C UJ z' QP t' w o'i o a W W r' 0 0 C~ z U) W U w ~~z C V' W Z W 0 ~ Co L) C14 < a _ REVISION DATE PATH + EMENT EA 7~ -99od _ , ,-2095 EXHIBIT W I _ , 2+ao ISSUE DATE; OCTDBER6 2015 ----2105 I 2 , _-06 1.1 Application Submittal 267 and 263 Granite Streets 391E 08DA Tax Lots 1900 and 1902 Granite Estates Sub-division Owners Robert and Susan Cain Geotechnica) Engineer 671 B Street Robin Warren Ashland, OR 97520 Applied Geotechnical Engineering 541944-4039 1314-B Center Drive #452 Medford, Oregon 97501 Landscape Architect and Planning 541226-6658 Kerry KenCairn KenCairn Landscape Architecture Structural Engineer 545 A Street Suite 3 Jason Prins Ashland, OR 97520 Structural Solutions Inc 541488-3194 Medford, OR 97504 Phone: (541) 608-8117 Architect Jerome White Surveyor Kistler Small and White Architects Stuart Osmus 66 Water Street #100 Terrasurvey Ashland, OR 97520 274 4th Street 541488-8200 Ashland, Oregon 97520 Project Description This project seeks to reconfigure the lot lines and building envelopes for the two remaining, undeveloped lots that are part of the original Granite Estates sub-division. This property is unique in that the original grades were not natural as it had been a functioning granite quarry before being redeveloped into a small housing project. The original approval was for a performance standards option development through the physical and environmental constraints ordinance. As part of the initially approved project, 5.38 acres of land was deeded to the City of Ashland as open space, and the remaining acreage was divided into 5 home site lots; the first three of the five lots to be developed front onto Granite Street. The remaining two lots are non-conforming as far as lot configuration and slope requirements are concerned. The proposed reconfiguration creates smaller building envelopes and turns the lots on a 90 degree axis to their original layout. The remaining two lots are hillside lots with severe constraints in the Physical and Environmental Constraints category; they also fall into the wildfire lands classification. This project is a proposal to create a primary home and an ARU on Lot 1, and leave lot 2 available for future development. This proposal also seeks to redefine the public access easement that travels through the property connecting to the Ashland trails system. The goal is to run the easement between the two newly configured building envelopes, and put the path I 0 2 Alt, stair sections and flat section on ground and stairs on grade rather than the current wooden step system that is part of the original project design and approval. The drawing package includes the proposed site reconfigurations, proposed grading and drainage, required exhibits responding to the Hillside requirements of the Physical and Environmental Constraints ordinance and designs for the primary residence and the associated ARU. This project will require compliance with the following code sections: 18.2.5 Standards for Residential Zones 18.3.10 Physical and Environmental Constraints in the Severe Constraints category 18.4.5 Tree Preservation and Protection 18.4.8 Solar Access 18.5.3.120 Property Line Adjustment 18.5.6 Modifications to Approved Planning Applications 18.5.7 Tree Removal Permits and a request for the relocation of a constructed public pedestrian path with its associated easement. 18.2.5 Standards for Residential Zones Main Residence: Exceeds all setback requirements. (See Site Plan on drawing A2 for setback dimensions.) ARU: Exceeds all setback requirements. (See Site Plan on drawing A2 for setback dimensions.) Any setback dimensions not labeled are over 100 feet and exceed the requirement by so much it was deemed unnecessary to label them. 18.3.10.090 Development Standards for Hillside Lands A. General Requirements The original development of this property involved creating access and flat sites as part of the reclamation of an existing granite quarry. Previously approved buildable areas included building on slopes greater than 35%. The property does not provide adequate buildable areas under 35%. This application, with re-orientation of the lots, and reconfiguration of the building envelopes, decreases the amount of land over 35% proposed for development. Please see sheet L 2.2 Lot Exhibit The extended driveway does not cross any slopes over 35% An extensive geotechnical study and geotechnical review of the appropriate submittals has been provided as part of this application. B. Hillside Grading and Erosion Control All grading, retaining wall design, drainage and erosion control plans have been reviewed edited and approved by a geotechnical expert and conform to the International Building Code. An erosion control plan has been submitted with this application. This proposal is for single family residence on a single lot and is not required to comply with calendar requirements. For the record, the underlying development was done throughout the OCT 02 winter months with no stability or erosion issues. The site is inherently stable solid and decomposed granite. Retention in natural state with the proposed primary home, ARU, drive extension and revised public path is at 86.6% the required natural state percentage for both lots is 61% (see sheet L 3.1 Cut Fill calculations) this allows for maximum flexibility when the second primary home is designed and constructed while still staying under the maximum lots disturbance allowance. B 4. Grading - Cuts a. The bedrock material throughout this development is decomposed and hard rock granite. The cuts have designed to respond to the native material, and all cut slopes will be retained with segmental retaining wall rockeries. b. There are no new exposed cut slopes proposed. c. Main Residence: The building design of the main residence reduces its effective visual bulk by utilizing stepped foundations that are cut into the existing hillside and "re-buried". (See Site and Building Sections on A13-A15 for a view of these stepped foundations.) ARU: The building design of the ARU reduces its effective visual bulk by utilizing stepped foundations that are cut into the existing hillside and "re-buried". (See Site and Building Sections on A13-A15 for a view of these stepped foundations.) d. At this time this proposal includes erosion control planting for all terraces and disturbed sites in general. An ornamental planting plan with irrigation as required will be submitted as part of the building permit package. Much of the erosion control planting is intended to be the final landscape treatment for the site. B S. Grading - Fill a. All the proposed fill slopes in this project are either paved or terraced and relate to the building and driveway development. Revegetation of the fill slopes shall be part of the overall erosion control plan and ultimate ornamental landscape plan. There are no fill slopes left unattended to and they have avoided wherever possible. B 8. Site Grading All grading of this site has been proposed to allow for circulation and construction. The site is stable, where there is potential hazard, where the existing retaining walls interact with the future home, we have proposed to take down and rebuild the walls to avoid potential undermining of the existing walls. This solution, to rebuild came about through discourse with both structural and geotechnical engineering team members. C. Surface and Groundwater Drainage There is an existing stormwater trunk line that runs down the main existing drive of the site. All stormwater facilities have been design to take advantage of this line as was the intention when it was installed as part of the initial site development. All cut and fill terraces are designed to I 2 f h5 collect water behind the walls and directed to the new system of hard pipe storm drains. There is not a natural drainage system associated with this project. Due to the severity of slope, it is not feasible to create detention facilities on this site. D. Tree Conservation, Protection and Removal A complete tree inventory that provides the specifics identified in this section has been provided see sheet L 1.1. The tree proposed for removal are adjacent to the most practical approach to the proposed primary residence, and adjacent to grading that is required as part of that residence. The grades of this site determine home and circulation placement, all of the trees were planted by the applicant as part of the previous development and they will replant at this time to exceed the previous project plantings. A tree protection plan has been submitted, see sheet L 1.1. This is a very sparse site; it will be easy to avoid damaging existing trees to remain. Replacement trees have been requested, see sheet L 3.3 Erosion Control. E. Building Location and Design Standards 1. Building Envelopes a. The proposed building envelopes contain slopes over 35%, but in general are less steep than the previously approved envelopes. This project takes advantage of grades with milder slopes to the greatest extent possible. b. The building envelopes honor retention in natural state by being located along already disturbed and improved circulation routes and/or grades. c. There is only one tree proposed for removal within a building envelope, the other trees proposed for removal are within the area needed for vehicular access and grading. d. Main Residence: The main residence is located well below the adjacent ridgelines so that the building envelope avoids ridgeline exposure. The proposed roofline does not project above the ridgeline. (See East Elevation on All and Building Section D on A15). ARU: The ARU is located well below the adjacent ridgelines so that the building envelope avoids ridgeline exposure. The proposed roofline does not project above the ridgeline. (See East Elevation on A12). 2. Building Design Main Residence: The building design of the main residence utilizes the following slope responsive design techniques. ARU: The building design of the ARU utilizes the following slope responsive design techniques. a. Main Residence: The main residence's building height is well under the 35' permitted hillside building height at all points when measured from the natural grade to the uppermost point of the roof peaks. (See Site Section on drawing A13 for a visual of this line.) ARU: The ARU's building height is well under the 35' permitted hillside building height at all points when measured from the natural grade to the uppermost point of the roof peaks. (See Site Section on drawing A13 for a visual of this line.) b. Main Residence: The main residence is built into an existing pocket in the hillside to reduce its effective visual bulk (see contour lines on the Residence Enlarged Site Plan drawing on A3). Stepped footings allow the building to closely follow the existing slopes (see sections on A13- A15 for a view of these stepped foundations). The building's mass utilizes below-grade rooms that are closely aligned with a pre-existing cut in the natural slope. The main residence is nestled into an existing east-west slot in the hillside, with access to the basement level from the south, and access to the main living level from the west and north sides. Therefore from the west and north, only one story of the building's two-story mass is exposed above ground. See Building Elevations (drawings A10-A12) for a visual of this stepped building form. ARU: The ARU is built into an existing pocket in the hillside to reduce its effective visual bulk (see contour lines on the A.R.U. Enlarged Site Plan drawing on A4). Stepped footings allow the building to closely follow the existing slopes (see sections on A13-A15 for a view of these stepped foundations). The building's mass utilizes below-grade rooms that are closely aligned with a pre-existing cut in the natural slope. The ARU utilizes a split-level floor plan that steps up the existing hillside. Its basement half-level (a covered carport and entry stair) is aligned with an existing cut out in the hill, and its upper stories terrace back from there following the natural slope. The ARU's roof is also broken into two levels that step with the hillside, further reducing the visual height impact. See Building Elevations (drawings A10-A12) for a visual of these stepped building forms. c. Main Residence: On the main residence, we are applying for an exception to this height limitation due to the southeastern most corner of its exterior walls, which has a total height of 22'-7" above natural grade. Due to the steep topography of the existing site, it was extremely difficult to site the building. The applicants have thoroughly studied all possible building locations on this lot, and feel the building is sited in the best location on the existing topography that satisfies several difficult constraints. The building is nestled in a slot on three sides, and, due to the steep topography of the site, moving it even a few feet would disrupt vehicular access to the garage and the ability to get a working vehicular turn around. We have employed a floor-to-floor height of 13'-6" in order to get the main living area level with an existing flat area and to prevent half of that level from being buried as a basement. We have sited the building so that we don't exceed the downhill wall height requirement by much (only 2'-7"), and we have incorporated several design steps to mitigate the wall's appearance. We have designed a change of materials through the use of horizontal banding that breaks up the wall into a stucco base with a horizontal siding portion above to reduce the visual height. A low retaining wall with plantings behind it further reduces the height of the wall at its base. The building style is in the Prairie style, which emphasizes horizontality through horizontal building elements that carry across the fagade and a moderate roof pitch with deep overhangs. All of this allows the building to appear low and modest in its spot nestled against the dramatic hillside. ARU: The ARU meets the step back requirement by stepping back at least 6 feet so that no downhill building wall is over 20 feet in height, d. Main Residence: The main residence is designed with stepping corners to reduce th(j,I 15 of all horizontal building planes. No horizontal building planes (including continuous indoor floor areas and outdoor terraces) are longer than 36 feet. ARU: The ARU is designed with stepping corners to reduce the length of all horizontal building planes. No horizontal building planes (including continuous indoor floor areas and outdoor terraces) are longer than 36 feet. e. Main Residence: The roofline on the main residence is broken up into smaller forms. The building has a hip roof so that all sides slope downward toward the walls with gentle slopes. The roof steps back in a series of simple intersecting rectilinear forms. The longest continuous roof line is kept to the rear of the house, where it is tucked against the hillside and not highly visible. ARU: The roofline on the ARU is broken up into smaller forms. The building has a hip roof so that all sides slope downward toward the walls with gentle slopes. The roof is broken into two completely separate levels, greatly reducing its visual impact. f. Main Residence: The main residence takes advantage of a lower level roof above the garage entry area to provide an outdoor deck space. The deck has no vertical supports above 12 feet in height. ARU: The ARU takes advantage of two lower level roofs to provide outdoor deck spaces. The main level of the ARU has two small decks above the carport and entry area. Neither of these decks has vertical supports above 12 feet in height. g. Main Residence and ARU: Both buildings will share the same material and color palette. Color selection for the buildings is still in progress, but will be of a neutral palette to minimize contrast between the structure and the natural environment. Exposed stone or CMU will remain its natural color to blend with the existing rock outcroppings. Neutral ceramic tile decking and exposed concrete stairs will also blend well with the terrain. The stucco and horizontal siding areas will be of neutral grey or beige shades. The roof will be class A asphalt roof shingles of a mid grey or brown tone. All exterior tones will be well coordinated with each other and the predominant colors of the surrounding landscape. F. Foundations Main Residence and ARU: The foundations on both buildings will be designed by a structural engineer with demonstrable geotechnical design experience and will work from the recommendations of the project's licensed geotechnical engineers report. The working drawings will not be completed until the engineer has designed the foundations. G. Newly created lots The original development of this property involved creating access and flat sites as part of the reclamation of an existing granite quarry. Previously approved buildable areas included building on slopes greater than 35%. The property does not provide adequate buildable areas under 35%. This application, with re-orientation of the lots, and reconfiguration of the building envelopes, decreases the amount of land over 35% proposed for development. Please see sheet L 2.2 Lot Exhibit. It should be noted that this proposal to reconfigure the lots and create new building envelopes decreases the potential development of the steeper slopes on the site. H. Exception to the Development Standards for Hillside Lands Main Residence: We are applying for an exception to the Standard 18.3.10.090 E.2.c which requires a step back on downhill building walls greater than 20 feet in height, due to one corner of the main residence that is 22'-7" tall. See text above in Section 18.3.10.090 E.2.c for a description. The exception meets all of the following criteria: 1. There is demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements of this chapter due to a unique or unusual aspect of the site or proposed use of the site. It was very difficult to meet all of the requirements of this chapter due to the fact that the site's topography is unusually steep. This made siting the residence in a way that met its functional requirements as a house, as well as the requirements of this chapter, very difficult. The site is a reclaimed granite quarry, and previous cuts in the hillside further limited the options of where the main residence could be located. The chosen location was the best one for balancing all of these factors, and the one exception requested only exceeds the requirement by a small amount. 2. The exception will result in equal or greater protection of the resources protected under this chapter. The chosen location of the residence and the layout of the entire development will both result in equal or greater protection of the natural resources of the site. We are stabilizing the hillside and preventing future erosion by putting the house in its chosen location. The development does not cause any soil erosion or flooding problems, or result in severe scarring or cutting of trees. 3. The exception is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty. We have exceeded the downhill wall height limitation by the minimum amount necessary to make the building work. 4. The exception is consistent with the stated Purpose and Intent of chapter 18.3.10 Physical and Environmental Constraints Overlay chapter and section 18.3.10.090 Development Standards for Hillside Lands. The requested exception is consistent with the stated Purpose and Intent of chapter 18.3.10 as well as section 18.3.10.090. The proposed reclamation of the old granite quarry as residential land allows the safe, orderly, and beneficial development of a district characterized by severe land slope. Furthermore, the proposed buildings work with the existing topography and hillside cuts, and limit the alteration of the existing topography to the minimum necessary. The development is done in a sensitive manner that protects the natural and topographic character of the site and does not create soil erosion or flooding problems or result in scarring or cutting. The modest residence and accessory residential unit both complement the site, as well as the natural and visual character of the City beyond. ARU: The ARU does not need any exceptions to the Development Standards for Hillside Lands. 18.3.10.100 Development Standards for Wildfire Lands ( C,'I ® 2 201.5 A. Requirements for Subdivisions, Performance Standards Developments, or Partitions A graphic fire prevention and control plan has been submitted as part of this package. The landscape for this site is proposed to be a matrix of short erosion control grasses, well spaced trees not adjacent to the homes and firewise plantings in general. The primary and secondary fuel breaks are predominantly clear which is the natural state of the site. See sheet L 4.0 B. Requirements for Construction of All Structures 5. Roofing Main Residence: All roofs will be constructed of Class A Asphalt roof shingles (see roof plan on drawing A7). Additionally, all exterior decks will be of non-combustible ceramic tile. ARU: All roofs will be constructed of Class A Asphalt roof shingles (see roof plans on drawing A9). Additionally, all exterior decks will be of non-combustible ceramic tile. 18.3.10.110 Development Standards for Severe Constraint Lands D. Engineering Geologic study approved by the Public Works Director and Planning Director A detailed geotechnical study accompanies this submittal. Chapter 18.4.5 -Tree Preservation and Protection 18.4.5.30 Tree Protection A. Tree Protection Plan. A Tree Protection Plan (see Sheet L1.1) that meets all of the code requirements has been provided in this submittal package. B. Tree Protection Plan Submission Requirements. A Tree Protection Plan (see Sheet L1.1) that meets all of the code requirements has been provided in this submittal package. C. Tree Protection Measures Require. A Tree Protection Plan (see Sheet L1.1) that meets all of the code requirements has been provided in this submittal package. 18.4.5.050 Verification Permit All trees will be tagged per the requirements in this section. Any work will await a verification permit prior to proceeding with any tree removals on the site. 18.4.8.030 Solar Setbacks A. Setback Standard A Main Residence: All proposed development meets the required solar setback for a standard A lot at the north property line. The shadow that would be cast by the main residence at 12 pm noon on December 21 (assuming a 24 degree solar angle) is labeled on Building Section B on drawing A14, along with the location of the north property line. This section was chosen because it is the worst case (where the property line comes in closest proximity to the building). Due to the fact that the building is nestled into the south facing slope, the shadow does not reach the north property line. ARU: All proposed development meets the required solar setback for a standard A lot at the north property line. The ARU is so far from the north property line (roughly 175 feet, on a south facing slope) there is no way it could possibly cast a shadow on that line at noon on December 21. See Site Plan on drawing A2. 18.5.3.120 Property Line Adjustments A Property Line Adjustment is the modification of lot boundary when no lot is created. The Staff Advisor reviews applications for Property Line Adjustments through the Ministerial procedure, per section 18.5.1.040. The application submission and approval process for Property Line Adjustments is as follows. A. Submission Requirements. Please see sheets L 2.0 through L 2.2 for a graphic explanation of this request. The lots are changed by how they are split, instead of a vertical split through the site the properties are split horizontally, more in relationship to following the topography of the site. The building envelopes create a smaller overall building area on both lots and provide for a better use of area in that the envelopes themselves include a smaller proportion of steep grades. The modification of the Lots allows for a modification of the building envelopes and the location, relationship of private parcels. This will allow for more efficient access through the site as well as more efficient staging during construction, the overall affect being less disturbance to the site and the creation of less intense paving requirements. B. Approval Criteria. The Staff Advisor shall approve or deny a request for a property line adjustment in writing based on all of the following criteria. 1. Parcel Creation. There are no addition parcels being created as part of this application. 2. Lot Standards. This proposal is for lots within the Performance Standard Option Overlay Zone. As such, the proposed non-conforming lots replace the previous non- conforming lots as far as the relationship of depth to witch and standard lot sizes per zone. The modification of the Lots allows for a modification of the building envelopes and the location, relationship of private parcels. This will allow for more efficient access through the site as well as more efficient staging during construction, the overall affect being less disturbance to the site and the creation of less intense paving requirements. 3. Access Standards. The access to and through these lots has been improved as part of the proposal. C. Final Property Line Adjustment Plat. The final plat for Property Line Adjustments shall be prepared as a partition plat, and meet the requirements of sections 18.5.3.090. D. Recording Property Line Adjustments. 1. Recording. Within 60 days of the City approval of the final plat (or the approval of the preliminary property line adjustment map expires), the applicant shall submit the final plat to Jackson County for signatures of County officials as required by ORS chapter 92. id 2. Time Limit. The applicant shall submit a copy of the recorded property line adjustment survey map to the City within 15 days of recording and prior to any application being filed for building permits on the re-configured lots. Chapter 18.5.6 - Modifications to Approved Planning Applications C. Minor Modification Approval Criteria. A Minor Modification shall be approved only upon the approval authority finding that all of the following criteria are met. 1. Minor Modification applications are subject to the same approval criteria used for the initial project approval, except that the scope of review is limited to the modification request. For example, a request to modify a commercial development's parking lot shall require Site Design Review only for the proposed parking lot and any changes to associated access, circulation, etc. Notice shall be provided in accordance with chapter 18.5.1. This proposal is for a modification of lots line and building envelopes. The overall affect of the application is to minimize buildable area in steep sites, make staging and building more efficient for both lots, and to increase the efficiency and safety of vehicle access on the site. f Chapter 18.5.7 -Tree Removal Permits 18.5.7.020 Applicability and Review Procedure All tree removal and topping activities shall be carried out in accordance with the requirements of this chapter. A Tree Protection Plan (see Sheet L1.1) that indicates any trees marked for removal has been provided in this submittal package. There are 5 trees proposed for removal. In all cases the removal is being requested to allow for site development that is either required for the home or the driveway access to the primary home. A. Other Requirements. Flood Plain, Hillsides, and Wildfire. Tree removal in the Physical and Environmental Constraints Overlay (i.e., areas identified as Flood Plain Corridor Land, Hillside Lands, Wildfire Lands and Severe Constraint Lands) must also comply with the provisions of chapter 18.3.10 Physical and Environmental Constrains Overlay. The trees that are pending removal are part of a Physical and Environmental Constraints Permit application. The property is categorized as Hillside Lands, Wildfire Lands and fall under the Severe Constraints classification. The trees proposed for removal are adjacent to the proposed building envelope, or the proposed driveway development, the trees are within the extents of the grading required to create these improvements. 18.5.7.40 Approval Criteria A. A Tree that is Not a Hazard. k~ I E The trees that are pending removal are part of a Physical and Environmental Constraints Permit application. The property is categorized as Hillside Lands, Wildfire Lands and fall under the Severe Constraints classification. The trees proposed for removal are adjacent to the proposed building envelope, or the proposed driveway development, the trees are within the extents of the grading required to create these improvements. The trees proposed for removal are in locations that will receive erosion control measures, and/or, hardscape and walls. There will not be any disturbance to the flow of surface waters, adjacent trees or windbreaks. The trees proposed for removal are part of the sparse existing native hillside forest; the removal of these trees will not greatly affect densities, species distribution or diversity. The removals are proposed to allow for the development of the primary home and vehicular access, both domestic and emergency. This site is a reclaimed granite quarry; all of the trees proposed for removal were planted as part of the initial development work and will be replaced with more appropriate trees as well as better and permanent locations. 18.5.7.050 Mitigation Required A. Replanting On-Site. This lot is part of a sparsely forested native landscape set within a former granite quarry. Planting of additional trees on site has been identified along the driveway where grades have been ameliorated as part of the driveway design and deeper soil opportunities have r been created. There are five trees proposed for removal, mitigation trees are shown on Erosion Control Plan, Sheet L 3.3. i pplied t eon ch ica 1 ri October 1, 2015 & Geologic Consulting KenCairn Landscaping Architecture LLC 545 A Street, Suite 3 Ashland, OR 97520 SUBJECT: Geotechnical Investigation and Erosion Control New Single-amily residence 267 Granite Street Ashland, Oregon At your request, Applied Geotechnical Engineering and Geologic Consulting LLC (AGEGC) has completed a geotechnical investigation and erosion control recommendations for the new home and guest house to be constructed at 267 Granite Street in Ashland, Oregon. The intent of our work is to provide geotechnical recommendations for design and construction of the new structures. Our geotechnical investigation included a review of available geotechnical and geologic information for the property and vicinity, a ground-level reconnaissance of the property and vicinity, subsurface explorations, and engineering analyses. This report describes the work accomplished and provides I` our recommendations for development of the property, including erosion control. We understand the new buildings will consist of single-family, woad-frame structures. Given the change in grades at both locations, concrete and MSE retaining walls will be required for site grading. C` IT DESCRIPTION A licensed geotechnical engineer/geologist provided by AGEGC completed several site visits to evaluate site conditions and meet with the design team. The property has previously been graded with an access drive and with landscaping retaining walls. Geologic maps of the area and our observations at the site indicate the site is underlain by hard granite. We understand the site used to be a granite quarry. The hard granite is underlain by a relatively thin layer of sandy silt soils (decomposed granite). As part of our work, five test pits were completed in the vicinity of the proposed home sites. The test pits encountered between 6 and 36 in. of sandy silt soil over hard granite. The mini excavator used for the test pits encountered practical refusal in all 5 test pits at shallow depths. Indications of deep-seated slope failures were not observed on the property. Landscaping walls installed several years ago had no indications of significant post-construction movement. In general, granite is highly stable and has a very low risk of large-scale slope movements, even on relatively steep slopes. Local wet areas were observed during our site work; however, we understand these are most likely due to irrigation of existing landscaping on the site, We anticipate that groundwater under the property typically occurs at depths of greater than 30 ft; however, perched groundwater likely occurs at the top of the hard granite during periods of heavy and/or extended rainfall. 1 02 Zal3,) x,314-B Center rive 11-152 - Mec/Jrwd, OR 97,501 - Phone: (541) 22' .',56,,3 399$15 267 Grwilte street CONCLUSIONS RECOMMENDATIONS In our opinion, the property is suitable for development with the proposed two single-family residences. The main geotechnical considerations for development of the property are the shallow hard rack and seasonal perched groundwater. If the geotechnical recommendations for development of the property are followed, in our opinion, there is no significant risk of slope instability on the property. Recommendations for development and erosion control of the property are provided below. Lot Development 1) Final graded slopes in the surficial soils on the property should be no steeper than 214:1 V. Final graded slopes in the granite may be at '/2H:1V. Landscaping fill should be compacted to at least 90% of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 698. Structural fill under buildings and concrete flatwork should be compacted to at least 95% of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 698. All fills should be overbuilt a minimum of 2 ft beyond final grades then trimmed back to design elevations using a trackhoe equipped with a smooth-lip bucket. The disturbed silty sand soils are highly susceptible to erosion and should be revegetated as soon as practical. Prior to placement of any fill, the ground surface in the fill are should be stripped of organics, existing fill, and loose/soft soils. The strippings are not suitable for use as compacted fill and should be removed from the site or used in landscaped areas. Slopes steeper than 5H:1 V to receive fill should be benched with relatively flat areas during fill placement. The benches should be a minimum of 12 ft wide. 2) All five test pits encountered practical refusal at relatively shallow depths on weathered granite. Where encountered in cuts, hard granite will require use of a hoe-ram or other rock excavation techniques. We anticipate that any significant cut will encounter hard granite. 3) Fill placed within 2 ft of driveway areas, the house footprint, retaining walls, and concrete flatwork should consist of compacted, structural fill. The on-site soil (without deleterious material including organics) may be used as structural fill if properly moisture conditioned and compacted; however, it is typically not practical to use the on- site materials as structural fill during periods of wet weather. Structural fill may also be constructed of imported granular fill, such as'/-in.-minus crushed rock. Structural fill must be compacted to at least 95% of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 698, at a moisture content within 3% of optimum. The ground surface within all areas to receive fill should be stripped of surficial organics prior to placement of the fill. 4) Structural loads may be supported on continuous spread footing foundations founded on stiff native, undisturbed silty sand soils or on structural fill over undisturbed native soils. We recommend that pad foundations not be used for support of the residence. Foundations located within 10 ft of the top of a cut slope should be founded on the hard granite. The downhill edge of any foundation must be setback an equivalent horizontal distance of at least 10 ft from the face of any fill slope. This setback may be obtained by embedding the foundation below grades. Spread footing foundations may be designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of up to 2,500 psf. This allowable soil bearing pressure assumes all footings will be founded as recommended in this report. The minimum width of any footing should not be less than 12 in., and footings should be established a minimum of 18 in. below the lowest adjacent exterior grade. , I, J 2 1 2 S 3998-15 267 Granite Street 5) The site should be graded to provide positive drainage away from footings, top of retaining walls, and exterior walls. Subsurface drains (foundation drains) should be provided adjacent to all exterior foundations. 6) Concrete slab-on-grade floors should be underlain by a minimum of 9 in. of/4-in.-minus imported crushed rock. We recommend installation of a moisture retarding membrane under all concrete slabs to minimize wicking of moisture up through the slab. Where floor slabs will be located below adjacent exterior grades, we recommend drain pipes be installed in the aggregate base for the slab on about 10 ft center to center spacing to reduce the risk of hydrostatic pressure on the underside of the slab. The drain pipes should be hard-piped to drain into the storm water system. 7) We understand that retaining walls will likely be constructed as part of the home and landscaping. Rigid (such as concrete cantilevered walls) retaining wall foundations should have the same slope setback requirements as the house foundations, MSE walls (which are relatively flexible) can have a minimum embedment below grades as required by the design for the wall's stability if settlement is not a significant concern. The following embedded wall design recommendations assume that the wall backfill consists of clean granular material (sand or crushed rock) within at least 2 ft of the wall, the backfill is compacted to 90 to 95% of ASTM D 698, the backfill is level within 10 ft of the wall, and the embedded wall is fully drained, i.e., hydrostatic pressure cannot act on the wall. Walls that are allowed to yield by tilting about their base (cantilevered retaining and MSE walls are typically considered yielding) should be designed using a lateral earth pressure based on an equivalent fluid having a unit weight of 35 pc£ We further recommend that horizontal earth pressures due to surcharge loads be taken as an additional uniform horizontal pressure (rectangular pressure diagram) of 0,5 times the intensity of the surcharge load acting over the entire height of the wall. Horizontal shear forces can be resisted partially or completely by frictional forces developed between the base of spread footings and the underlying soil and by passive soil resistance. The total frictional resistance between the footing and the soil is the normal force times the coefficient of friction between the soil and the base of the footing. We recommend an ultimate value of 0.5 for the coefficient of friction; the normal force is the sum of the vertical forces (dead load plus real live load). g) Relatively hard rock occurs at a depth of less than 10 ft at the site. In our opinion, seismic design for the new home can be completed based on a Site Class A material. 9) A qualified geotechnical engineer should evaluate structural fill placement and compaction, and examine the foundation excavations and evaluate the subgrade prior to construction of the foundations. 02 3 3998-15 267 Granite Street Erosion Control The intent of the erosion control plan is to decrease erosion and off-site migration of soils. This can be accomplished by decreasing surface water runoff by means of vegetation, hay bales and rock coverings or checkdams; holding the soil in place by establishing a vegetation cover as soon as practical; and by directing surface water flow away from areas disturbed by construction activities, l ) We anticipate that a portion of the property will be disturbed during construction of the proposed home, driveway, and site grading, Landscape areas on the property where the vegetation is disturbed or removed should be revegetated as soon as practical. The silty sand (decomposed granitic soils) is easily eroded when disturbed by construction activities. Mulch consisting of either straw, wood cellulose fiber or other similar materials can be placed in areas where landscaping will not be established prior to September 15. If required, the mulch should be applied at a rate of approximately 2,000 pounds per acre. Downspouts and other drains should be connected (hard-piped) to the storm water system as soon as practical. 2) We recommend all exposed soil areas (all graded areas) be graded such that surface water upslope of the disturbed area is directed away from the exposed soil. Any surface water flow on the exposed soil should move as sheet flow rather than concentrated flow, 3) Runoff from the disturbed portion of the site may contain some soil material. To further reduce the risk of sediment leaving the site during periods of wet weather (typically winter and spring months), small settling basins can be installed at the start of the wet season below the site at the discharge end of graded areas, ditches and swale areas. Straw bales should be staked along the downhill edge of the settling basin. Water can be discharged from the settling basin using 4-in,-diameter flex pipe. The settling basins should be installed no later than September 30. 4) Straw bales or silt fencing should be installed along the downhill edge of the proposed construction. The silt fence should be embedded at least 4 in. into the ground and should be staked in place. The straw bales should be placed end-to-end and staked in place to prevent separation between the bales. The silt fence and straw bales should be placed to direct surface water runoff from the site towards the settlement basins, 5) During construction and prior to establishment of the site landscaping, the erosion control measures must be monitored and will require periodic maintenance. Maintenance may include removal of sediment from upslope of the straw bales or silt fence, removal of sediment from the settlement basins, and the placement of additional straw bales or sediment fence, The amount of required maintenance of the erosion control measures will decrease significantly as the landscaping becomes established. 6) The project geotechnical engineer (or person of record responsible for the erosion control measures) should evaluate the erosion control measures periodically during construction, including on about September 30 and after storm events. r 2 ?911`1 4 3998-15 267 Granite Street LIMITATIONS This report has been prepared to aid the owner's design team in the design and construction of the proposed homes and retaining walls on the referenced building property. The scope is limited to the specific project and location described herein, and our description of the project represents our understanding of the significant aspects of the project relevant to the design and construction of the proposed structures, The conclusions and recommendations submitted in this report are based on the data obtained from the test pits made at the locations discussed in this report and from other sources of information discussed in this report. In the performance of subsurface investigations, specific information is obtained at specific locations at specific times. However, it is acknowledged that variations in soil and groundwater conditions may exist between exploration locations. This report does not reflect any variations which may occur between these explorations. The nature and extent of variation may not become evident until construction. If, during construction, subsurface conditions different from those encountered in the explorations are observed or encountered, we should be advised at once so that we can observe and review these conditions and reconsider our recommendations where necessary. We have performed these services in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices in southern Oregon at the time the study was accomplished. No other warranties, either expressed or implied, are provided. Please contact AGEGC if you have any questions or require additional information. Sincerely, Applied Geo echnical Engineering and Geologic Consulting LLC PRO 49 mac, ~yGINE/0 045f'E ter' Robin L. Warren, G.E., R.G. Principal v OREGON d 1'25 L. W Renewal: June 2016 02 V t S :~A\ 3998-15 267 Granite Street pplied ` eotechnical ngineering ;r_ i & Geologic Consulting October 2, 2015 KenCaim Landscaping Architecture LLC 545 A Street, Suite 3 Ashland, OR 97520 SUBJECT: Geotechnical Review of Drainage Plan 267 Granite Street Ashland, Oregon At your request, Applied Geotechnical Engineering and Geologic Consulting LLC (AGEGC) has reviewed your site drainage plans for this project for conformance with our geotechnical recommendations. General geotechnical recommendations for development of the property are contained in our October 17 2015, letter to you entitled "Geotechnical Investigation and Erosion Control, New Single-Family Residence, 267 Granite Street, Ashland, Oregon." As part of this work, we reviewed your October 2, 2015, Drainage Plan. The plan includes recommended locations for retaining wall drains, foundation drains, solid pipe collection of drainage, catch basins and area drains. In our opinion, the drainage plan is in substantial conformance with the recommendations contained in our geotechnical report. The drainage measures should be evaluated by a qualified person during construction to determine if additional measures are required or if any modifications are required based on conditions encountered during construction. Please contact AGEGC if you have any questions or require additional information. Sincerely, Applied Geotechnical Engineering and Geologic Consulting LLC ~--lJf ~pED PRDFfis Robin L. Warren, P.E., G.E., R.G. G,iN~`c~ Principal 045PE 'yam OREGON pO~~C Y251 199~ tl~' e~N L. W Renewal: June 2016 t~ts~ d: :r2.2 43 Di 0,v #4;~~ lb4~ztny&r4, 9759.1 Phtqze., ~54)) -226-665'A' k pplled 3998-15 267 Granite Street f e4r~ W~ r~ eotechnlcal ngineering Geologic Consulting October 2, 2015 KenCairn Landscaping Architecture LLC 545 A Street, Suite 3 Ashland, OR 97520 SUBJECT: Geotechnical Review of Grading Plan 267 Granite Street Ashland, Oregon At your request, Applied Geotechnical Engineering and Geologic Consulting LLC (AGEGC) has reviewed your grading plans for this project for conformance with our geotechnical recommendations. General geotechnical recommendations for development of the property are contained in our October 1, 2015, letter to you entitled "Geotechnical Investigation and Erosion Control, New Single-Family Residence, 267 Granite Street, Ashland, Oregon." As part of this work, we reviewed your October 2, 2015, Grading Plan. The plan includes locations of new cuts and fills, and new MSE retaining walls. The plans also show the design section and construction criteria for the new retaining walls. The MSE wall design assumes the walls are constructed against weathered (soft) granite rock, acting as a facade to protect the rock. The walls also are assumed to be supported on competent granite. In our opinion, the grading plan is in substantial conformance with the recommendations contained in our geotechnical report. The geoteehnical engineer should observe construction of the new walls on an intermittent basis and should evaluate final grading of the site. Please contact AGEGC if you have any questions or require additional information. Sincerely, Applied Geotechnical Engineering and Geologic Consulting LLC L/'d~' t t/ ~~D PROFF ~ ~ti ss F~ Robin L. Warren, P.E., G.E., R.G. NGIN - Principal 5045PE 9 VV 1OREGON o '1'25, 1gg !G~ L. W PAP Renewal: Tune 2016 1)C T 0, 2 tb'nf'y 452, l i { T ? ti. OR 97501 Pkeiz , . (541) '126-6058 ti ~ 1 pplied 3998-J 5 267 Granite Street eotechnic al j~ ngineering & Geologic Consulting October 2, 2015 KenCairn Landscaping Architecture LLC 545 A Street, Suite 3 Ashland, OR 97520 E; SUBJECT: Geotechnical Review of Erosion Control Plan 267 Granite Street Ashland, Oregon At your request, Applied Geotechnical Engineering and Geologic Consulting LLC (AGEGC) has reviewed your erosion control plans for this project for conformance with our geotechnical recommendations. General geotechnical recommendations for development of the property are contained in our October 1, 2015, letter to you entitled "Geotechnical Investigation and Erosion Control, New Single-Family Residence, 267 Granite Street, Ashland, Oregon." As part of this work, we reviewed your October 2, 2015, Erosion Control Plan. The plan includes recommended locations and design criteria for ground cover on disturbed soils, silt fence, and temporary sediment catchments. In our opinion, the erosion control plan is in substantial conformance with the recommendations contained in. our geotechnical report. The erosion control measures should be evaluated by a qualified person during construction to determine if additional measures are required and to fine-tune erosion control measure locations. In addition, the erosion control measures should be periodically evaluated by a qualified person after installation of the measures are completed and also after significant precipitation events until vegetation has been re-established. Please contact AGEGC if you have any questions or require additional information. Sincerely,; Applied Geotechnical Engineering and Geologic Consulting LLC 0 PROFFs NOtNE~ sf~ Robin L. Warren, P.E., G.E., R.G. 9 Principal /5045PE 7 4//~~ V OREGON Y25. L. W Renewal: June 2016 1 43, fY {gs Drive ? L` ' c- ' 7E2t 97501 ~77 9's 226-6658 r >~<I J £ , fZf al$: i,. r kIrI k' NHId lOl EJNDIFPdd *1? Nbld 311S e e os`s~ O ° .e ~ I- S _ ~w»a~romer M u06aJ0yu10d1uAUa0'PE08)P11WuH o LL, siunoo gous 1f 1NI0d lbalN30 ` wP+mw~ a.aro®n w 8mw ¢~s ~ & 11 U~ 5 id3€ g~o¢¢ $Q1 g1G8 ~~w g 9q c e sq' '°z_?o min 2= ~oE~3 `~6° ;j 268 RHO 01 gg$ ~ ~ ps [ ~~E a i is ion! in a jw G ~aq inn: im g'n"Is 3~ La ~d9 ul 8~~ga zv~ e§_~ - e1 A J 1 gw~SAS Q m~ ~ G T7_ Jr~ €m _ 4 - . .y p~el E oo ~rJ ~w3 i >g I t,~: § I 9 o s e d 3 Q6 r 1 `~'flmg lOT I o°I @ i gag x h ' w s~ l ~,c II ` :1j~ll// Y~~y I 8 I a~ y1 . L II I C SCI II wadi n L / E'uiill ~ ~ g i a ra - d - I o . t . IIII u s ' S n I ¢ 3"75 dG# R ; j o d f z aE 14 o tl i.t~ °I~w F --y?y 43 °4~ }jJ°fil G = F ~aK A'R O I 9 ELI! I p oo ''Tr i,.~i a sQ' ¢ - i 5 ~ qq rg 23:' x:14 ) 5 s9 5 ~f ty S~y$ n r' C ° ..:4 B z E 'CC~< u O u N t.°( #f1=E (1 i~~i~n a UN ~°9tl aa j w nq 4s3 f ' k 1 € g Q HIL o a _ 0 2015 - PROPOSED KenCalrn PROPERTY LINE Landscape Architecture L I I I A ® LANE PARK lPROPOSED j PEDESTRIAN PATH 9` F EXISTING PEDESTRIAN (n ST PATH TO BE ABANDONED 646AST EiTE3.ASHLANO, OR 97520 LOT LINE DIMENSIONS ON 641546.140 V, - SHEET L 2.0 LOT LINE EXHIBIT / L n EXISTING PEDESTRIAN PATH 1S TER -EASEMENT TO BE ABANDONED / ~9TATEOF~d ..k y LL- -2070 OREGON REG. #493 PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN 5T~P5 y ° W LLJ " Kerry Ken aim PATH EASEMENT ( d , jr~~ n+ GAS MARKERS Drawn By: 0 STAFF It SCALE: 1" = 30'.0„ N0- 3 J + PROPOSED PUBLIC PATH PROPOSED WALL (TYP) h /I VICINITY MAP SCALE 1" = 500'-0" ~ ~VIA + ELECTRIC Al" l~6T OEM 02 I ; 1 I I , \ 1 1 h~ ELEfRIC rR ~FCRM LOT COVERAGE 1. , , S NT TAX LOT I .391 E08DA 1902 / PROPOSED LOT SIZE: 2.07 ACRES = 90,056 SQUARE FEET h HOUSE FOOTPRINT: I JV OU 111,04 / 3,186 SQUARE FEET LOT LINE DIMENSIONS ON s PAVED DRIVEWAY: 3,536 SQUARE FEET j / e^ PAVED WALKWAYS: 987 SQUARE FEET SHEET L 2.0 LOT LINE EXHIBIT PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN I PATH EASEMENT s TOTAL LOT COVERAGE: 7,709 SQUARE FEET PERCENT LOT COVERAGE: 8.6% ALLOWABLE LOT COVERAGE PER ZONE: 40% N ~i i ~ i4 No i b o Lo LOT COVERAGE + a 1 TAX LOT 2.391 EOBDA 1900 W 4 i i o t, I,74" A5 ,an#R i PROPOSED LOT SIZE: 0.71 ACRES = 31,014 SQUARE FEET Q ~ 0 _ p3 PROJECT INFORMATION: + o HOUSE FOOTPRINT: 0SQUARE FEET I y a " PAVED DRIVEWAY: 7,593 SQUARE FEET V) 0) PAVED WALKWAYS: 744 SQUARE FEET OWNERS: CAIN FAMILY TRUST EXISTING WALL W N 671 B STREET TO REMAIN (TYP.) Li. C ASHLAND, OR, 97520 TOTAL LOT COVERAGE: 8,337° SQUARE FEET N 'D x, PERCENT LOT COVERAGE: 26.9% Z G PHONE: (541) N 1' ALLOWABLE LOT COVERAGE PER ZONE: 40% Q :E BUILDING DESIGN: KISTLER + SMALL+WHI 1-2055- -4PROPOSED WALL (TYP.) N 66 WATER STREET, SUITE 101 N Q ASHLAND, OR 97520 PHONE: (541) 488.8200 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: KERRY KENCAIRN REVISION DATE KENCAIRN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE AL / ELECTRIC, WATER \ 4 \ : , AND STORM EASEMENT 545 A STREET ASHLAND, OR, 97520 CONTENTS: PHONE: (541) 468.3194 °+rq \ so9o ``use i 6° COVER SITE PLAN + VICINITY MAP ~~OR 20 9s, s , INVCOUT=20502 ' L1.0 EXISTING SITE SURVEY LOCATION: 267 GRANITE STREET °ryr ? Co AL L 1.1 TREE PROTECTION PLAN SITE PLAN [ ` TAX LOT 1: 391E08DA 1902 k~77 s L 1.2 SLOPE ANALYSIS + EXISTING LOT SIZE: 1.69 ACRES (73,473 W) , \ I L2.0 LOT LINE EXHIBIT oRT VICINITY MAP PROPOSED LOT SIZE: 2.07 ACRES (90,056 fly) o> L 2.1 BUILDING ENVELOPE EXHIBIT L 2.2 LOT EXHIBIT TAX LOT 2: 391E08DA 1900 L 3.0 GRADING PLAN ISSUE DATE: EXISTING LOT SIZE: 1.09 ACRES (47,597 W) PROPOSED L 3.1 CUT/FILL ANALYSIS PLAN OCTOBER 2, 2015 PROPOSED LOT SIZE: 0.71 ACRES (31,014 fl:) 1L~- PROPERTY L 32 DRAINAGE PLAN I T LINE L 3.3 EROSION CONTROL PLAN ZONING: R-1.10 L 4.0 FIRE PREVENTION AND CONTROL PLAN 0 15' 30' 60' COVER 1 ' L5.0 SITE DETAILS scale: 1"=30'-0" PROJECT SITE SCALE 1" = 30'-0" KenCairn Landscape Architecture / Sip --------------r--------T--j 1 / 6'C AR L 'A1t PpN ST, STE 3, nsmwo,oRa7sw \ 545 541.545 7465 65 IS E1~ STATE OE~d V I / / / ! I OREGON -,-ICV 4M I / / I r REG. N493 I Y / / Il \ r ! 0 t 0', l / b IP-7 2070//10~iNE 0 y I / / / / I U i r i I I i ! ! o TPp / G ,A.. PG Kerty KenCmm ~f ~ ~D R ! ~ I f ( ! N , l i ~ ~ / 51E I / / / / I 1111259 h!. 055 I / I AEARG~ r I n' / ! I rv t~ I I~ 7 J l~/ y _,.i ,.It r~ 7. / I I ~!l 7l Ill (1 11r1 ~ id°PtC. v R I / ! I _ 1 I m / ! lilt i - re ~Il r 1 l 7 I ll, I I i iil! I I7 t I k I ~ 1 I IP 11 ~ ! i t i f l l l. l~ i t l 1 1 I I iJ h / oASER\ ~ V-~- ilvv,v(!~ {i S' „ I I T,5 ! ! 1 u 111 f 1', o' \ d Drawn BY. as Il+I ;1C, b I / y ~,vv 1 o ,1 I v v1 , I,' II \ I / / / I STAFF \ n11 cYl li11IV, ~5\\\,111 1 s 1 f,l,l . li I , 41 1 1",1 \\V V ` Vi111111,VI f v A ~4 \ ~v vIv v,v v ~,Iv EXISTING \ u/ / SCALE V=40'•0" ~'f>s A v - ` eA N\ \\v~ A 1 I 1 vA V5V I , 1 1 8'artr~ i 1 ARIVEWAY. ~b ~ AVM' v.~ v°uV A v v \ vV A t 11 11 ~ w s s ~y / I 1 „ t \ \ \ \ \ GE L l _ ilv \ \ 11 1 111 \ \ r J / v~Ilf~`~~~~~5- vZ v L_ _ 1 \ I 1" ~l 1 1 1' 41 1~ t t\ _ \ ELECTRIC / T - I O5 1 1 1l 1~ \ \ \ Y I l I 1 1111 I\, I I5 \ \ i \ 1' B'PINE' \ \1 DEM / I v IIIIIIt11 15 1 X1111 ~~v 1, l fV 5 V o EIETRIC _ It 111 IIII~ vv A jlll .III~_,__, , tV A hd" 3FORM II I) if f ly,rl, VIII Ill~l l,ll ~ I Wq`V1'11111, 1~11~11 5 I vv I Ih ~ ,'il~l',i LEGEND Il 5 II I'I~ C ~I~~II (1111 'l~~{ \'ll 5 III 'lull' A„'~ ll I~V IX~Tc20} - - - SUBJECT PROPERTY LINES 11 i II j I I ,i,I l 11 ~I~ I LIIjS 9°RME 8 B~ Rqy ill III I v 11111 . E~ 1--~-- I !!I 111 Ali!!;!!! ! khv, ` II'I I'IiPa1i ;i 51 A 5v A ,\fV A I I~IT~~r I rs~t-R I OTHER PROPERTY OR RIGHT OF WAY LINES 'l ! 1 t'V f I V 111 111 A v \ v I I I h,i~ II lr II ~tl Ili ,ullfulV 1 1 v v , A ..l 1 .J.--~ t,v, !v I I I I t 1 I, i 1 V 5 v l~ II ~ _ ! l am i "l i, l 11 ' i 15 1 I l II I I S v v v Av - - - - EASEMENTS tr.: - 'j I I 1 I 1 t \I tI 111: l ~a IP. I 11 v A A - AI . 1 I ~ i ~Ip 1 1 1 1 ,11.15 \~lil t, r. ~ 5\ ~ 1 CONTOUR .moo ~1iIIf11I~I111.II111,~vvv, l III yv 1wA 1\ I 1, 1 .4~ IAARKER. 1 ooa. STACKED ROCK RETAINING WALL I 1 , It 11VA1 111111 IIII i N I A N. \ 1 ~ I l i it X11 IIr Ii I 5V 5 f I I__.. o ® STACKED BLOCK RETAINING WALL A\ 5 1 1 VA Al1I I I Il II 1 1 1 l 11--- I v `.l Vv5v Ib'rHAE', I t i t 11 1 v im I II Lu ~ 1 A \ V' I t EXISTING 1 1 _ I Y.1 Lo 0 CB CATCH BASIN 1 Av,~ 1 v qlA r DRIVEWAY 1 ~1 ~ 51 t~ - \ i\\ \ 1 I M ~ ` 4\ o V I I \ \\C II l \ I 1 I --2055 I AL )',S AREA LIGHT \ S, IQ v.-v~', AV 5~ V v _ hOq~ h~ ~V\1\ I~ ~ ~ ~ C p 1P 5 GEOTECHN)CAL TEST PIT O EM ELECTRIC METER AL 4 v A IA;~ \V v V v / _ v, ! j N L- 0 I olcv IRRIGATION CONTROL VALVE I v ` \ i\ Svi`~5 qk,v\V , r ~PS D IA L I I W 1 nvA 1 I ~~s ~ ~ U I Ice ,m _0 I ° \ \ \ \ \ I TREE -SIZE AND SPECIES AS NOTED \q~\\ w.v VNQ 'FIR REVISION DATE I I I EXISTING SITE ORT SURVEY ISSUE DATE; OCTOBER 2, 2015 I n I 0 20' 40' 80' scale: 1"=40'-0" L 1.0 acavaa®ava®av®..v®vov®eaaasa eo®®av®vaeea®e.aeee v® av ®®ea as e® ae s® a® av na ea ev ®aa®aa®.. a. as a. KenCairn TREE PROTECTION AND REMOVAL NOTES 15 Landscape Architecture 1. BEFORE BEGINNING WORK, THE CONTRACTOR IS REQUIRED TO MEET WITH THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AT Ftit THE SITE TO REVIEW ALL WORK PROCEDURES, ACCESS ROUTES, STORAGE AREAS, AND TREE PROTECTION T MEASURES. 2. FENCES MUST BE ERECTED TO PROTECT TREES TO BE PRESERVED AS SHOWN IN DIAGRAM. FENCINGSHALL ' - 91 BES'TALLTEMPORARYCHAINLINKPANELSINSTALLEDWIHMETALCONNECTIONSTOALLPANELSAREA 6 AVELPATH s' LAPP s~gip INTEGRATED, THESE FENCES SHALL BE INSTALLED SO THAT IT DOES NOT ALLOW PASSAGE OF PEDESTRIANS GR AND( OR VEHICLES THROUGH IT. FENCES DEFINE A SPECIFIC PROTECTION ZONE FOR EACH TREE OR GROUP OF TREES. FENCES ARE TO REMAIN UNTIL ALL SITE WORK HAS BEEN COMPLETED. FENCES MAY NOT BE RELOCATED OR REMOVED WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. n~..r Has \ _ 3. CONSTRUCTION TRAILERS AND TRAFFIC AND STORAGE AREAS MUST REMAIN OUTSIDE FENCED AREAS AT ALL TIMES. ° 5+5 nsT,sre3,asnvuNo,av975M 4. ALL PROPOSED UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AND DRAIN OR IRRIGATION LINES SHALL BE ROUTED OUTSIDE THE _ 015/ $y 16 51I545.t4~ TREE PROTECTION ZONE. IF LINES MUST TRANSVERSE THE PROTECTION AREA, THEY SHALL BE TUNNELED, 2 tie BORED UNDER THE TREE ROOTS, OR DUG BY HAND. 17 IS T-6 5. NO MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, SPOIL, OR WASTE OR WASHOUT WATER MAYBE DEPOSITED, STORED, OR PARKED ; / - 05 ¢4'STATE OF WITHIN THE TREE PROTECTION ZONE (FENCED AREA). \ - OREGON 2065- - _ REG.#493 6. ADDITIONAL TREE PRUNING REQUIRED FOR THE CLEARANCE DURING CONSTRUCTION MUST BE PERFORMED + ,r X \ j 0 > U BY A QUALIFIED ARBORIST AND NOT BY CONSTRUCTION PERSONNEL. o $ n wm ti fit)\~ \ 1 - _ ~Q '111 2,W k 7. ANY HERBICIDES PLACED UNDER PAVING MATERIALS MUST BE SAFE FOR USE AROUND TREES AND LABELED FORTHAT USE 09AE AEG 8. IF INJURY SHOULD OCCUR TOANYTREE DURING CONSTRUCTION, THE TREE CONSULTANT SHOULD EVALUATE \ i IT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE SO THAT APPORPRIATE TREATMENTS CAN BE APPLIED. ALL DAMAGE CAUSED BY l,\ I I I l I ' A a Drawn By: CONSTRUCTION TO EXISTING TREES SHALL BE COMPENSATED FOR, BEFORE THE PROJECT WILL BE CONSIDERED COMPLETE. +r A\\\ A I ~~Fq 1 STAFF o A N V ,I ij,> A; s e \ P9 \ \ + a 9. THE PROJECT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT MUST MONITOR ANY GRADING, CONSTRUCTION, DEMOLITION, OR 1 0 OTHER WORK THAT IS EXPECTED TO ENCOUNTER TREE ROOTS. 9CALE1'=30'•0" 0 10. ALL TREES REMAINING SHALL BE IRRIGATED ONAWEEIQYBASIS WHEN WORK OCCURS BETW'EEN JUNEial THROUGH OCTOBER let. IRRIGATION SHALL WET THE SOIL WITHIN THE TREE PROTECTION ZONE TOADEPTH ~i 0 0 OF 30 INCHES. ( O I \ o G 37\'I ~ s ~ ~ STEP H 11. EROSION CONTROL DEVICES SUCH AS SILT FENCING, DEBRIS BASINS, AND WATER DIVERSION STRUCTURES \ z ~o '7J~\~\ SHALL BE INSTALLED TO PREVENT SILTATION AND/ OR EROSION WITHIN THE TREE PROTECTION ZONE, \ r \ I r C 1 1` 12. BEFORE GRADING, PAD PREPARATION, OR EXCAVATION FOR THE FOUNDATIONS, FOOTINGS, WALLS, OR 1 A \ - VA l'~ A+\ v A o ----18 TRENCHING, ANY TREES WITHIN THE SPECIFIC CONSTRUCTION ZONE SHALL BE ROOT PRUNED IFOOT - \ I \ \ c- A N V 1 v A v. OUTSIDE THETREE PROTECTION ZONE BYCUTTING ALLROOTS CLEANLYATAWDEGREE ANGLE TOADEPTH ~ ` I ? \ i'\' \ ✓ ---79 OF24INCHES. ROOTS SHALL BE CUT BY MANUALLY DIGGING A TRENCH AND CUTTING EXPOSED ROOTS WITH A --2 4~ SAW, VIBRATING KNIFE, ROCK SAW, NARROW TRENCHER WITH SHARP BLADES, OR OTHER APPROVED 1~'A f~~ ,I ROOT-PRUNING EQUIPMENT. 13. ANY ROOTS DAMAGED DURING GRADING OR CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE EXPOSED TO SOUND TISSUE AND CUT + I \ a/ CLEANLYATA 90 DEGREE ANGLE TO THE ROOTWITH A SAW. PLACE DAMP SOIL AROUND ALL CUT ROOTS To A r DEPTH EQUALING THE EXISTING FINISH GRADE WITHIN 4 HOURS OF CUTS BEING MADE. ,~i,1 I + I I + ' p\ 14. SPOIL FROM TRENCHES, BASEMENTS, OR OTHER EXCAVATIONS SHALL NOT BE PLACED WITHIN THE TREE PROTECTION ZONE, EITHER TEMPORARILY OR PERMANENTLY. 15. NO BURN PILES OR DEBRIS PILES SHALL BE PLACED WITHIN THE TREE PROTECTION ZONE. NO ASHES, DEBRIS, OR GARBAGE MAY BE DUMPED OR BURIED WITHIN THE TREE PROTECTION ZONE. 99ssT 18. MAINTAIN FIRESAFEAREAS AROUND FENCED AREA. ALSO, NO HEAT SOURCES, FLAMES, IGNITION SOURCES, Q~T Q ~ ZD~J u tl OR SMOKING IS ALLOWED NEAR MULCH OR TREES. + \ I 1 4 0. V 17. DO NOT RAISE THE301LLEVELWITHINTHEDRIPLINESTOACHIEVEPOSITIVEDRAINAGE,EXCEPTTOMATCH ' , I an p GRADES W'ITHSIDEWALKS ANDCURBS, ANDINTHOSE AREAS, FEATHER THEADDED TOPSOIL BACK TO I ? ` 1{ ~q/ EXISTING GRADE AT APPROXIMATELY 3:1 SLOPE. W N 18, REMOVE THE ROOT WAD FOR EACH TREE THAT IS INDICATED ON THE PLAN AS BEING REMOVED. I I I \ \ \ ~_LO,,, a to I 19. EXCEPTIONS TO THE TREE PROTECTION SPECIFICATIONS MAY ONLY BE GRANTED IN EXTRAORDINARY ° I v \1 \ CIRCUMSTANCES WITH WRITTEN APPROVAL FROM THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. O \ d 2 ELEVATION PAN 3 W n P Dq / i \nQ1v'i~ 7 d IZ7 09 Cy0 0~ Q oil o Canopy of trees Treaa to be Tree I ~ yo / 1~ ~ l C ( A' ° X PmtedWn - o / \ r o 6 to remain removed ~d a , 0 0 lend i A mr _LOSS- 6 Qz~ ~c0 D v A~~AV~VAAV~ \ I~~ Q aO~ PZR < Gil TREELEGEND d o ep . g C~ N Q DBH feeProtection p Species (inches) Feet nrFOrm Radms TZone Radius in Fed CoMdbn Niles \ 1\ ~1D\~ \ \0 \ / 1' A 4 o e 1 Pius ponderosa 6 18 4 6 Poor M-W Dead 2 Piwepondemsa 10 27 5 5 Gaol + I REVISION DATE FENCE CONTINUOUSLY ~AROUNDTREEAS 3 Pseudo6vga termed a 36 7.50 4 Good SHOWN ON PLAN 4 Phus pond- 10 30 6 5 Goad Fps V ~ `'OyS + .0 6' TALL CONTINUOUS CHAJNUNK 5 CdacedM deaarens 6 45 4 6 Good REMOVE ~/r• NOTE: FENCING ON CONCRETE PIERS 6 Puxs ponderosa a 27 8.60 4 Pat REMOVE 'V(1 \ 1. TREE PROTECTION FENCING SHALL BE INSTALLED PRIORTO START OF 7 Cancedms dea mms 7 20 4 7 Fair REMOVE TREE c A' CONSTRUCTION AND SHALL REMAIN IN PLACE THROUGH COMPLETION OF 6 Pius Fend- 9 25 7 5 Goad REMOVE PROTECTION PROJECT. 0 Pius pondem;a 9 26 5 6 Good REMOVE V~ p 1{ R E 2. FENCING SHALL ONLY BE REMOVED TEMPORARILY FOR WORK TO BE DONE 0~~ 1 OR 1D Rodhla sap, s 26 It 6 Grad WITHIN DRIPLINE AND REPLACED AT THE ENDOF EACH WORKDAY. 3. ALL EXCAVATION WITHIN DWPLINE OF TREES SHALL BE DONE BY HAND. IF ROOTS 11 Pseudobga rr-iese 9 22 10 5 Goad o OVER TIN DIAMETER ARE ENCOUNTERED, CONTRACTOR SHALL CONSULT WITH 12 Pseudo6ugam iesi s 25 6 5 Goad \ 1 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OR ARBORIST BEFORE PROCEEDING. 4. TREE ROOTS ENCOUNTERED DURING CONSTRUCTION, SHALL BE CUT CLEANLY 13 Psautlo4wga msn8es9 10 30 s 5 Good ISSUE DATE; ATA 90 DEGREE ANGLE AND PACKED WITH DAMP SOIL IMMEDIATELY. 14 Robin Purple Robe' 10 25 14 5 Good Saga DeadBmken Uruba 12 OCTOBER 2,2015 5. DURING CONSTRUCTION ALL TREES TO REMAIN SHALL BE IRRIGATED ON A 15 Cal-d-d- m 6 10 3 6 Poor 13 ' I 9 u u WEEKLY BASIS OR AS NECESSARY MATH LEAKY PIPE ENGRCUNG THE TREE FROM 16 PHvs pordemsa ti 28 6 5 Gaud 14 TRUNK OUT TO DRIP LINE. e 17 Piuspondemsa 11 25 5 5 Good ~ 0 15 30 60 ~ ~ ~ 18 Pk,.pod-a 7 20 7 6 Poor MosW Dead scale: le_30n-0' 1 TREE PROTECTION 19 CUocedrus dea, e s 6 Ie 6 s Fair 20 Cge-drus deoarens 6 20 6 6 Geed KenCairn Landscape Architecture m y® m m ® m m v o® m m ® m v® v m m® m y® m m® m® 3J4.PS ® m m v® v m m v m v® m v® v v® v m ~ 645 A ST, STE 3, ASHLAND, OR 87525 9 I 541.545.1465 VEL PATH if PPS \~qR 15 TER A, ~ STATE OF~'O OREGON s REG. #493 ~ -'251.35 a u I ~ ~ _ A Q - u uW ~ ~ Kcrty 1CeoC"im PROPOSED BUILDING OUTLINE k ~ Drawn By: r 2e t._3__ - STAFF 4 T \ ~l ! 25 ml"u A A\ `s ~53AV55 Ii1 231oa /7~ SCALE: 1"=40'-O" 3 ~A 3~ 1 l 25 menus A2A V~ An _~~C nfl~,3 ~ Sha EXISTING PROPERTY LINE TO BE ABANDONED SLOPE ANALYSIS LEGEND - - - - - - - - m m Nr~ r I II' 4 Less than 25% ~ II I'r ii 25 minus 1 v I ~ 25% TO 35°/D Q1 I I ~y ~ 6 1 , -2555 I ~ X6103 ~ hN \ 35% TO 40% Lu O \ V Lo 25 ",11N6 I - EXISTING WALL (TYP.) Z o v -zos I W C I 5 \ ~ ~ o° 3 5 I~ I ~ O Greater than 40°/D N U ' ° r I PROPOSED BUILDING OUTLINE W 0 5 \ I E co ~o ILI REVISION DATE I I I I 1 I SLOPE I I GRT ANALYSIS - J ISSUE DATE: L---------------------------------------- I OCTOBER 2, 2015 I n I ^ 0 20' 40' 80' ~ ~~L scale: I"=40'-O" KenCalrn Landscape Architecture 239'-1 213'-4" _ _ S ® cps TAX LOT 2:_ 391EOSDA 1900 EXISTING LOT SIZE: 1.09 ACRES (47,597 W) -4 L 1 - 1 ~q PROPOSED LOT SIZE: 0,71 ACRES (31,014 W) 545AST, STE3, ASMAN°, OR 97520 P~TM / ! P~" Std GSAVrt 577.545.1465 f! ~ ~ , (r~ / i~ Rf -u STgR 1 / ~ ~ i S nV~ 1 f STATE OF~d OREGON i t i °0° ~h l REG. N 493 / 0 % ~1 tiQ I / or r / I 'i FNn ,2070 h 5 / Kerry KenCaim N I o N ~ i J O - s~P iP irnz~ ~ ~qAE 70 Nf r~ ' r r l Q ax rn Drawn By: I ~1 -T '50 °x'a'x STAFF MAINTAIN EXISTING a gl' z / LOT LINES SCALE V= 30'.0" m ti°°°,E 'ea PROPERTY LINE 9 EXISTING PROPERTY LINE VA 1 T0~ BE ABANDONED ro 1 TO BE ABANDONED Cl) I 1 t l ~ ~ r 1 ~ o u! a MAINTAIN EXISTING _2060 LOT LINES ~ 1 t I W 0 1 ~:t7 i`~ O 1 I N ~ -2055 C) 0) tw Al U N p \ Lu 0 21 ° I L C 1 e ' N 70 D MAINTAIN EXISTING Q cp N LOT LINES V N Q I REVISION DATE 1 1 1 l TAX LOT 1: 391E08DA 1902 1 LOT LINE EXISTING LOT SIZE: 1.69 ACRES (73,473 W) 1 EXHIBIT oeT POSED LOT SIZE: 2.07 ACRES (90,056 W) [Z-0 331'-6" 18'-8° ISSUE DATE; OCTOBER 2, 2015 ALL LOT MEASUREMENTS ARE TO 0 15' 30' 60' ^ ~0 THE PROPOSED PROPERTY LINE scale: 1"=30'-0" L EXISTING PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN PAIN KenCairn MODIFIED PUBLIC 1, PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT Landscape Architecture TO I E~snu°suauc rTnES snssuFrrt I I PUBLIC PATH 1 BE REMOVED Z 2- F I /1~~ a o2s_.C Iai,ra, LOT 1900 ' rt~~ rI~ ~S ods ,/jet ~1, I`l'~~\\\\;\\\\\\~ ~ I to )S i (,l 546AST. STE3, ASHLAND, OR 87610 L- 541.5451465 1 IIX11 I., I p SISTER }q _ 4 1 / A vyam _ ; S~~ S *ATE OF~d .l VI ~~1 FOG OREGON I a REG.#497 r LOT 1900 II ~ r 4 ~nKerty I{eaCalm (y I1/12,99 LOT 1902 PE AR~~ II i 11 '4\ ' 1s i I ' ' LOT 1902 Drawn By: STAFF I 4 f\` III 1 I t I ~i„ 1 ~j SCALE 1'= 60'•0" tt 11 IT - I SLOPE ANALYSIS LEGEND LE98 THAN 26% ' L I A I 1 1 ~ 11~ 11 I i El 1 SLOPE ANALYSIS LEGEND F-1 ~ I 25Y 70366 ~ 1 1 1 ~ , I ~ ~ l ~7 1 LESS THAN 25% ,4 s \ i\i1 1 I 36%7040% l I F 25%7035% 1 :I TOTAL LOT AREA k GREATER LOT 1802 80,0561P 'I THAN 4D% LOT 900 31,014 ft 35%7040% TOTAL LOT AREA LOT 1900 47,597 fl' / I 1 LOT 1902 73,473 R° TOTAL 121,070ft A GREATER TOTAL 121,070 A° i EASEMENTLEGEND ENVELOPE 1 1 I THAN 40% ENVELOPEI 4,064 fl' ' I 1 F// LOT 1902_[ENVELOPE ENVELOPE2 2,126 ft EASEMENTLEGEND ENVELOPE TOTAL 1902 6,190 fl'(6.9%) 7 ENVELOPE 11LOT 7900) 7,429 R'(16.6%) LOT1900-[ENVELOPE3 4,745&(15.3%) 1 I EXISTING ENVELOPE 21 LOT 1902) 5,475 ft'(75%) I \ 1 EASEMENT I Easeiment TOTAL 10,935 ft- (9.0%) TOTAL 12,904 fl°(10.7%) I t LOT 1900 ANALYSIS LOT 1902 ANALYSIS TOTAL LOT ANALYSIS PROPOSED LOT 1900 ANALYSIS PROPOSED LOT 1902 ANALYSIS TOTAL LOT ANALYSIS O W N TOTAL LOT 47,497 ft2 TOTAL LOT 73,472 ft2 TOTAL LOT 1A 47,597 ft2 TOTAL LOT 31,014 ftz TOTAL LOT 90,056 ftz TOTAL LOT 1902 90,056 ftz V Lo TOTAL ENVELOPE 7,429 ft' 15.6% TOTAL ENVELOPE 5,475 ft2 7.5% TOTAL LOT 1 B 73,473 ft2 TOTAL ENVELOPE 4,745 ft2 15.3% TOTAL ENVELOPE 6,190 ft2 6.9% TOTAL LOT 1900 31,014 ft' Z -1 m BUILDING ENVELOPE SLOPE 1 ANALYSIS BUILDING ENVELOPE 2 SLOPE ANALYSIS TOTAL LOTS 121,070 ft' PROPOSED ENVELOPE 3 SLOPE ANALYSIS PROPOSED ENVELOPE 1 SLOPE ANALYSIS TOTAL LOTS 121,070 ftz 1W®W pJ BUILDING ENVELOPES ANALYSIS Less than 25% 2,363 ft2 49.8% Less than 25% 1,527 ft2 37.6% 1 BUILDING ENVELOPES ANALYSIS N Less than 25% 2,434 ft2 32.8% Less than 25% 2,325 ft2 42.4% I..I Q C 25% TO 35% 2,792 ft2 37.6% 25% TO 35% 865 ft2 15.8% 2 25% TO 35% 902 ft2 19.0% 25% TO 35% 1,928 ft' 47.4% ENVELOPE 1 4,064ft2 O3 -0 ENVELOPE1 7,429ftsr C Z 0 35%7040% 1,157 ft2 15.6% 35%TO40% 140 ft2 2.6% ENVELOPE 2 5,475 ft2 35%TO40% 410 ft2 8.6% 35%TO40% 444 ft2 10.9% ENVELOPE2 2,126 ft2 Greater than 40% 1,046 ft2 14.0% Greater than 40% 2,145 ft2 39.2% TOTAL 12,904 ft2 10.7/° ° Greater than 40% 1,070 ft2 22.6% Greater than 40% 165 ft2 4.1% ENVELOPE 3 4,745 ft2 V N Q TOTAL 7,429 ft2 100% TOTAL 5,475 ft2 100% TOTAL 4,745 ft2 100% TOTAL 4,064 ft2 100% TOTAL 10,935 ft2 9,0% REVISION DATE PROPOSED ENVELOPE 2 SLOPE ANALYSIS Less than 25% 977 ft2 46.0% 25% TO 35% 335 ft 2 15,7% LOT 35%TO40% 0ft2 0% EXHIBIT Greater than 40% 814 ft2 38.3% ISSUE GATE: TOTAL 2,126 ft2 100% OCTOBER 2,2015 EXISTING CONDITIONS PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS DR DRT L . LOTS, BUILDING ENVELOPES, PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT LOTS, BUILDING ENVELOPES, PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT KenCairn Landscape Architecture SreaS ~ STPaS PUBLIC PATH TO BE REMOVED FATH s PAm F PPS sT GRAS ? 9~ GRA~2 , 0 ~TRs - - - - , N H e / ~ s F J, J rat' - .I' 545 A ST, STE 3, ASHWID, OR 975 N t?u~ W. ~ - STFA ) ` / / , ~ TepS 20 a .u STATE OF po~0 % F 9 2070 ' OREGON h 1 REG.n493 o EXISTING ENVELOPE 1 s o PROPOSED ENVELOPE , ~ Kerry KeoGim - - U) ~ I ~ PROPOSED ENVELOPE 1 41 Drawn By: 1 , 0 i ® 11 I II 1 ® STAFF No 'I I II it i ~ II II ~ o ~ I I ® I Qs ®~s 9 ® N I I I' F 1 ~ ' ® SCALE 1 30 *-0 I A ® 1 II I p I y ~ 1 I 1 , I , S I I JI 1 n4I Ii _ ~,I II I II ~ 1 I I o,l ~.I 6' Sca a ; ' ; I y5' Tfa o~ I At III., ,~p5 I 'ti 7-~ B I$T(NG PROPERTY LINE - - b, - - r o t ND IONED I 'I Q ` N' ; I I , 1 /O t' ~1 q II I I 0 ~i II ' 'I II ~F o I I. i I 1 1~ 7^ 1 t it 1 I S 1 II. i II I. 0 .l I I 0 h0 I I I I ` I I ~ , I~~ i ' II ~I a~ rVbh N 4 I I L. Q l i "o, S ii , 1 I I <<I li ~ I I~:. ~ i1 ~ V' t II I I I J.; I III I I I ;1 "o- 1~ 1 I k l l I I I Ipg I= I I -1'~., 1 j I 1\ y I I I 1 1 i I I 1.. ~~1 ~ 6 1 (Z k 11 II 1 )i~ ! `1 I -VIII ,41 1St ' -I I ~ I I i 1 I I 0 ] I ' 1 1 ~I p I '1 1 , r 1 f II. I II I 11, , II I t ~ .,I I I I. 1 1 ~~~I.~ i . I , I I ve ~ ~I , , f 1 7 v f I t I ' li li e it II I'1 1 - I 1 ~'I ' II I 1 , , I i= II II it II 1 ! II II N II. ,I A 6 I ~I 1 I II t' I, ® ' k_ 1 1 1 I II III = , 1 . 1 `1®.I1~ ° ;,:III I51; ' ~l~ ~I c ENVELOPE 2 I I I I I I, ii•I I 'EXISTING - Q I II II i I I ® II I 2050 2050 / I' , O 1 .I II \'O @III I I O lp _ = I 1 =1 Y \1 „ 1 I W G - I ul I II 1 =1 ~~S ~~ql R, 1 `I ~.o, i Il ® o y I Isl I a) N F ~ II III 1 PROPOSED - a'I 1 I (A m I~✓~ I I I I li I ~S III ~ W ~ 0 2 ENVELOPE ° Y - I I,o I I o s co _0 a ~I ® Z - 205 - I --205 - 5 .r ~ 5 r N ~ I To Npi ~..J-] I , I ~I REVISION DATE t ~ h 10. I 1~ I O I I" 2'a I N I N BUILDING I ENVELOPE EXHIBIT 1 I EXISTING BUILDING ENVELOPES PROPOSED BUILDING ENVELOPES i t ISSUE DATE; OCTOBER 2, 2015 I n I °R 0 15' 30' 60' ~ L^, scale; 1"=30'-0" ppliea KenCalrn eotechnleal Landscape Architecture - & Ou'loglc CDninlting TW2102.00~ 1t4 [-TW06.00 ~TW96. L PA LQP sTq GRA~ PUBLIC PATH TO BE REMOVED '-A TS 8350 L ID L. _ - .i r A? j BS 79.50 , STFAS Of J/ L. yk,"' 545A ST, STE 3, ASHLAND, OR 97520 TW 96.50 " 541.545.1465 i Rc~aM :lwTe2014 T9I9'00 7430 Q IS TEk,0, ~ PROPOSED WALL(ryP.) STATE OF / TS 74.09 2070 OREGON REG. #493 J 5 > U i ~ 2_065 _ Kerry KenCaim (y - y h -II nnxvn ti / Y 2 T -ES 69!159 TW 80,50 1 ~Q STABLE =111 ui l 11 r / IWO6D~` ~ NATIVE SOIL 4'meK. V 7 TN 6364 ~ .I height Drawn By: v v I ~v I \ ,~I, v v v . ` I , ~ v i ~Twfis.7c TW e270 STAFF V A A V A 1 ~ T V ~ TW 75.60 S 3' INN. SILTY SOIL OR TOPSOIL CAP ~ A \ ,v N v A~ v ~ Twe3oa?~` ~ ~ SCALEI 300~~ 4 18'THICK) ~j. A A V \ V A i u: ~,P o A BS 9645 1 \ C I L/. , _ 10% max. Y \ BS8362 TW 63.50 " LOCKS WITH PINS Tl~v \ V ~A TW 85.14 \ flinch TA 61 34. ~ >vQ deep key A BW 61.64 l 6 9 )~I I REE.DRAINING TS 985 0 1 L\\~ \ 0 1 TF'p, CRUSHED ROCKBACKFILL o4 \ `BS 9565 \l \ ' U 11 . -889564 Y\ ~TW 8224 L i \.7'~ ~5' T887.90 STAB~_4'max. i~ \\~o 85 SOIL ~1IIheight V i A A d.. ~TW00 TW 8755 H~ NATIVE IAV1 BW 81.65 -TW6505 v , v I TW18460 1I M 1 1 \ ` \ B r \1 .~.2 3310 _ S ®b -1 II I ICI ERFORATED PIPE 5 I 0 r, I \ c A ~BSSS60 T v 1t i. ( II WASHED ROCK \ _ ~ I ~ ~vvv ~ ~ T v v na0aos / TW77.34 \ 5~1 V1TW~Oa~a 1 I 1 1 \ _ \ NOTES &INCH DEEP KEY \ ~TW76.34 ( \ 1, WALLS ARE INTENDEDTO FACE A STABLE CUT OF NATIVE 6011.. ~COLIPACTED, CRUSHED \ ) S ~7Y 2 MAXIMUM TOTAL CUT HEIGHT OF 11 FEET AND NOT MORE THAN 3TIERS OF WALLS. ROCK FOUNDATION, 6'THICK MIN. R\ i0i II I II 1 ] II1, , ~TW 7530 WALL STEP54VITH STAI TW 20505 3. GRAVEL LEVELING PAD SHALL BE PLACED ON AT LEAST MEDIUM DENSE OR MEDIUM STIFF, NATIVE SOIL. GRAVEL SHALL BE COMPACTED TW 2055.09 UNTIL IT IS FIRM AND NON-YIELDING WITH A SMOOTH TOP SURFACE. S 50,1. ( I I L III \ II i glTW 74.34 1 -EX 2055.09 0 q, BLOCKS SHALL WEIGH AT LEAST 80 POUNDS EACH AND BECAPABLE OF BEING PINNED BETWEEN EACH COURSE OF BLOCKS, ( ( \ ( II 'P \ S. BLOCKS SHALL BESET BACK AT LEAST 4/a"PER COURSE. / II } II II ( TW 7334. \ \ A, BLOCKSSHALLBECONNECTEDWITHPLASTICORFIBERGLASSPINS SUPPLIED BYTHEMANUFACTURER, r~ ,'1 I N. 11'. t\\\ L\ \ 7. THE BASE COURSE OF BLOCK SHALL SERVE TO KEY THE WALL INTO THE SOIL. THE SPACE IN FRONT OF THE FIRST COURSE SHALL BE 11' C) '0i ) ( I t ; 0 ~TW7284 BACKFILLEDWITHCOLIPACTEDCRUSNEOROCK U 11. \ \ 8. PERFORATED DRAIN PIPE SHALL BE EMBEDDED IN ANGULAR CHAIN ROCK TO AT LEAST 4' OVER THE TOP OF THE PIPE. Z 0 /i \ \ \ \ ~-2GSC B. DRAINAGE GRAVEL BEHIND THE WALL SHALL BE ANGULAR AND NOT HAVE MORE THAN 6Y. SILT AND CLAY BY WEIGHT. GRAVEL SHALL y ( \\\\\L \ § COMPACTED WITH LIGHT TO MODERATE EFFORT WITH A VIBRATORY PLATE TYPE COMPACTOR 11' O \ ,P ( N \\`1 1i~ 101 \ ~1\ \ ` w 10. SOIL BACKFILL BEHIND THE PLACED BEHIND THE DRAINAGE GRAVEL SHOULD BE PLACED IN LIFTS NOT MORE THAN 6" THICK AND Q (3) ,T~ p6\o l ( r 0 \ \ Eg COMPACTED WITH A VIBRATORY PLATE TYPE COMPACTOR. _ r~r/^ \ p ` 1 \ EXISTING WALL TO REMAIN (TYP,) 11. STACK NO MORE THAN 3 BLOCKS HIGH BEFORE BACKFILUNO. V N / \ \ I \ \ 1 ` 12. VERTICAL JOINTS SHOULD BE OFFSET AT LEAST4'FROM PREVIOUS JOINT AND THE TWO PINS ARE ENGAGED IN SEPARATE BLOCKS W O BELOW. 13. DRAINAGE GRAVEL SHALL BE CAPPED WITH I2"T018"OF SILTY SOIL TO PREVENT SURFACE WATER FLOWING INTO THEDRAINAGE T,V A ` V ALAV0~ 8 BACKFILL. PROPOSED WALL(TYP.) / \ 1NO 14. PROTECT TOP OF DRAINAGE GRAVEL FROM RAIN AND SURFACE WATER FLOW DURING CONSTRUCTION. AT THE END OF EACH DAYS \ \ \1 1 1 WORK, TARP TOP OF WALL AND GRADE SURROUNDING AREA TO PREVENT FLOW INTO THE GRAVEL. o q\ Q 1 \ \ \ ` \ \ \ ' 1 ~I'--`- 15. CONNECT AN0DIRECT DRAINPIPES TO AN APPROPRIATE DISCHARGE POINT, ` C9 UI 16. USE50ZNONWOVENGEOTEXTILEOR3`4MINUS CRUSHED ROCK BETWEEN DRAIN ROCK ANDNATIVE SOILCONTACTS. N v v ` v , A v ` g SECTION: VERSALOK RETAINING WALL SYSTEM \ '0• V AV. A ~T V ' \ _ B Scale: NTS v TW 63.50 v W7200 ~~V v v REVISION DATE \ \ \ V i \ \ \ \ ~ \ c L \ `f~` -...TW 64.50 V V A.,.AI c7 \f 'r , TW65.50 ,g/ A A,~,' TW 710,-OCO~---~ dVV ~I G J i 9Pp~ \ v A 2p~~ da ,o ~ , 1 A\~ 1 ~ ~ ~~,G ~,v\ ~,Q ~ TW 710 R ~Rq, v~ s' v rn6,.0 `'F V V AV 70.0 I 67, GRADING v v ~ rn w63.50 \ TW 699-x -TW64.75 PLAN \ •~1 \\~L\ "~1 4 _ DRT 0 V y,t,\ ,A i TW67.50 \VA-TW69.50 a v ISSUE DATE: OCTOBER 2, 2015 0 15' 30' 60' scale; 1"=30'-0" L 3.0 e i ® KenCalrn Landscape Architecture . , m AvE ATN i c / L P yL% 8 ~~~5 PUBLIC PATH TO BE REMOVED cR - / EXISTING RETAINING WALL TO REMAIN w 545A5T, SiE3, A5HW10, OR Bi54n F~.i- I' ^ SGT D~ I ~Q a 541545.1465 y PROPOSED WALL (TYP.) `5 S.~1 Ep5 ISTBR G 15.5 STATE OF~d OREGON REG. N493 ~ <0 L Kerry KenCaim AEG -0 - -'r , I 1 6 ; v1v11vn~1 , i ~ 1 1 1 1 t 1 l w \ ~ _ app ivllvv -0. ( I I s Drawn By: 070 o 1617 STAFF 45 lk 4' b 5 ~ ~ /r ~f I h SCALE! 1.:3U'-0° \u V1 - 6 Ie 3 X05 .4 SEE ENLARGEMENT B/L3.1 vI 11i 111 1 v ` s/5 + j - ~ ~o,e 12 v I I I I ~ I II II (1111 11 11v ~ ~ , i~ `v v , v I 65 1 i~ I I I I 2 ~ - - - II II.If~il. III I X11/v~~~'. ( ~U I T/ A / ~b I, +7 / by v 1, 31 1 I + ~v + s 1 s ~Q~ SEE ENLARGEMENT A/1-3.1 X10, ~ i7~, r ~ _ _ ~ If~illll'I`" III il'~ "i vr111vf~,r~ 5 0 ~9/ 4 SITEKEY 1 11~ I l I I, I I I I I v If ~1vv v 4 yl 7 I CRS N 4 6 EXISTINGCONTOUR II fir 1 II : 1 1 1 1 1 1 i I P~ v V r I I F i 11 11 l 1~ \ G 1 I i I I I 1' \ l \ 1 ~ Ili PROPOSED CUT (FEET) ~l I A ~ ; III VIII i ,v ~ 1 I I I 1I { IA V A II PROPOSED FILL (FEET) I 1 6+ II / / U 3 \ n I Illllli i../ T111 li III 7 I v v 1 i ,,5/ -A i y "1 UNDISTURBED 104802SF.=86.6% /I 1j1, I / / I/ t` AIlil , I 12 8 5 A v 1 (25%+86%=61%REQUIRED) ;Q TOTAL LOT AREA TOTAL 11 .d \v IV ,`f \I ,1 1/17~rl IIl/'` I ! I I ~I, IIII ~111I~N 1g i1 ~ ' 'I "',tw s AREA OF DISTURBANCE INCLUDING BUILDINGS: 16268SQUARE FEET , t PERCENT OF LOT DISTURBANCE INCLUDING BUILDINGS: 13.4% I I i I \f 1 t X1 -2 1 Lu C) as / / l i ~Aa //y x-2050 / /~!.,~0 I I I I 1 1 ` 5A • MAXIMUM CUT OUTSIDE FOOTPRINT OF BUILDINGS: 665FEET . MAXIMUM FILL OUTSIDE FO 3+~, 1L~ 6 1 A I ~V ` I - • 1 If ,1 l a A L A A A- 0TPRINT OFBUILDINGS: 8FEET 1 I oa5 +5 - s5 I 1 1~ a I v1 111 / 1 i ALL OTHER CUTS AND FILLS AS SHOWN PLAID 011 1 '1 11 1 A 11 I ~f , Z / 16s ~ / , A o1 1 1 v s / ~ ~ 1 1 v W O C 3 Q~ v of A I 0 0 r .2 , ~ \11 t I ~~I a N ~ +5,5 s ~L11 _ 1 m - 51 / 1 i A , 1 / 41 F m _0 1i - 1 0 1 ~o~H~ - 5 / U 15 4- \ \ V o ~~AV ~d vT -L 10b - +3 V10 vv v v~ ~1 REVISION DATE +5' h ~Prq . d8 ~v 1 y .5 6 I 5~ ~i 1v~ 1V /Q 13.3 _ 12 1d 1 CFO'c\~.~ A\}\ V ' 110.5 X0 05 I 1 t ~ , I 1 ~ ~ ~1 +5 e, 1 ~ ~ I X116 ~ V CUT/FILL oz~ .,s< vvv v ANALYSIS +4 PLAN + ISSUE DATE: I 11 + }3 OCTOBER2,2016 + `a~ \ 1 t 1 1A A \ V 5 A 0 154 304 60 A PLAN: PEDESTRIAN PATHWAY B PLAN: HOUSE STAIR +WALL SEQUENCE Scale: 1 °=30'4' L 3.1 L 3.1 Scale: Y=16'-0' \-L3.1 Scale; 1'=16'-0' pplied KenCalrn .@ .....~~.n .......~~...b eotecl]1llca1 Landscape Architecture Il~(tleeflil~ ® Geaiogle ~<msnnilrg I GRA ps PUBLIC PATH TO BE REMOVED C \r, i 0 , y S 0 tY lt7' ~A L- W 645A 6T, STE H, ASHLAND. OR 87691 /i l i L, V•. 641,546.1465 ~ 1'~I~ y A4r4~,ul:h1~'101G F~ ~ 2G~5 e TE,`L . - PROPOSED WALL (TYP.)~~ 2070 1 STATE OF O CONNECT TO STORM D SA OREGON REG. a493 65 _ y/ U 1 ,r R14C 1 SERNCE v f` C y a Drawn By: INTITIALS SCALE V=30'4' r q i i \ 1 V`; ~ ~ l 1 r'rr \ o I I ; 14'1 V4 / ~ / ~1 vy 1 r / 1 111 N 1 1w ~ lit f"t• ~ a 1 I' 1 7 1,; V AAV 41, s _ ,o 11 it I l i : I; 1 1 1 1 ~ 1 . I l ~ ~ 1 111 1 I 66 S. i Il~ Ai CONNECTTO STORM DRAIN U 11 / \ I VII F''~ ~I \ Zap `y~ i I Ill @ \ \ ~~s ~A, /W~ N s~ / I ~1 A D V Lo / / II I \ \ \ Lo -Zv'S0 ¢ i AA I ~A 4 A 1 1 Z 0-) W n N, I i~ r y vv vv Q L 0 cf) \VAA~ \ ~~1 1 X11 Cl) LLI 1, 1 ) tl -0 0 v 1 c ~ A A ~ ~ 11 ~ 11 ~ ~l PROPOSED WALL (TYP.) W ~ vv r ~~~~~41~~vAa~, q v 1 1 VA` - L v ~11~~ \ A U) v _ 1\I~~ VA \ \ \ - 1 \ ! 0 V .A. AV - 1 V s Ai 6 ~4-~~~ Ids I~ 614/ ~lxs e REVISION DATE CONNECT TO STORM DRAIN DRAINAGE PLAN LEGEND vv ~s v J a F~RwF v\ \ \ \ \ CATCH BASIN AREA DRAIN DRAINAGE \ \ , PLAN >'v n, iivv FOOTING DRAIN-4" PERFORATED PIPE SURFACE DRAINAGE ISSUE DATE, TIGHT LINE TO CATCH BASIN -4" HARD PIPE I n I OCTOBER 2, 2015 0 15' 30' 60' WALL COLLECT AND scale: 1"=30'-0" 3.2 ~ DISPERSE- 4" PERFORATED PIPE ~ ppiied KenCalrn eotechnicai Landscape Architecture engineering .l Uonlogio C'on~nrhing ATH ~ 7~ ~ 1~ S AFL P ✓ / j ~PP rqi @9 PROF fR h" / r qp PUBLIC PATH TO BE REMOVED }ySEPa INFSeSSiO / grN L `N PP 5AS A ST, STE 3, ASHLAND, OR 97WD / AQ Renewal: June 2016 541.545.1465 i C 0 PROPOSED WALL (TYP.) -2070--- - EROSION CONTROL LEGEND ~CjTSTATF , ~ ` ~ / 51EP5 q~' TH OF d J i 2065^✓~- OREGON PERMANENT HYDROSEED AREAS STANDARD HYDROSEED MIX: REG. #d93 Y I .i Hard Fescue Micro Clover, Tal/Fesae U white Ya mw, w/ i nodfiee ub, ~q TC J feckifie4 slow-release fertilizer, &mycrvrhpalmnoaAaM Kerty KenCwm ,4 1m193 III I ~l aG / - ? 9p$~ V I ,A x:, \ ~oy0 SILTFENCE Drawn By: A 1P N~ ` \V ti+i \ ~Y ~r N 1 ~~S ♦ CATCH BASIN •SEEL32 DRAINAGE PLAN STAFF 0~' T ~ I ~ 0 TC TEMPORARY SEDIMENT CATCHMENT. SEE DTL #2 THIS SHEET f~ \ AV + 0 tiT qC~ \-N V. /i ~ / m ,y \ ~ \ 0 S uuuunuuuuu TEMPORARY SEDIMENT CATCHMENT PIPE ' ~V / AAA \ ~l 1 / A A V 11 p55 Z NOTES: ,A ♦ A r V~. 1. AREAS NOT SHOWN AS HYDROSEEDED WILL NOT BE DISTURBED 2. INSTALL TEMPORARY CATCHMENT AT LOW POINT IN SILT FENCE LAYOUT A,V A ~1 A V A ♦ IRRIGATION NOTES: / 1 1 2 \ ♦ 1. Trees and ornamental landscape with imgallonvnO bedesigned pdorto bildiig peimitapplicattom 2. Hydroseedspecles have been selected to flourish wRinotsupplemantalwater. 11 1 V v \ I I 1 l ' k P 1 1 I I ` , 1 1 ~vv~ "1 ' I ? l~' v 1` fah / 1 I' 0 , a.,cares~ I' AV 1l n . ' V ~ I 11 ,1. I I I V A Q: e j -10s 1 I I. \ I I° I I I 1' I\I 1A" Q90 ~~v • Filter fabric material I I 1 1 I. supported by wire mesh 1 1- } Hn sn if necessary I: Trnr r~ I / 1 I L saovcwsva l / ♦ ♦ Attach filter fabric3 places per post / / 1 I I Anchor trench h + li 1 11 I ~k C1 t ♦ + 1 a 11 I I 111 {1 ' J Iz. a/ I II I 1 1 1 i o~ \vII 1 -2050 N 1 Lo /ry I I : ° Bury bottom of fabric U 2"by 2"wood slake ~ to 1 ♦ 0 . in 9" to 1Z'deep trench or metal T stake 1A TC 0 U) ~~0 V 1 A 11\ vrtr T.NTr 1 11 \ e{I eaoambe Aaa 1 SCHEMATIC: SILT FENCE CONSTRUCTION LLI p ~ 11111 ~-PROPOSED WALL ITYP.) L3,3 Seale: NITS C 3855 0 vv v~ ~Iv ~~v ; - 6 \ on v v vvv o~ f6 vv v v v vvvr s '`v .v~ tii1 I~ L V'. A A\c-- \ TV A N ~HayBales secure vdthrebarwhere N Q placed on soil. Outlet pipe Raise \ pipe invert to 1.5' above bottom REVISION DATE 9Pp 1 o~ ~Q, \ \X : ~zpd q,P V 0\\ \V R00¢ ~`Y \ 1 L 1 ` . 1 I \ ° Temporary Settling Basin y v v y',v v v~I --4x6feet acrossx2feetdeep Y Discharge to catch basin or EROSION , ^t V A A \ „A AV A continue with flexible, corrugated OCT a 2 26 pipe to bottom of slope CONTROL \ \ ~ \ ♦ 1 ~ i rti oeTH PLAN ISSUE DATE: OCTOBER 2, 2015 I 2 SCHEMATIC: TEMPORARY SEDIMENT CATCHMENT 0 15' 30' 60' ♦ I L3.3 Scale: NTS scale: V=30'-On L 3.3 KenCairn Landscape Architecture SECONDARY FIREBREAK SECONDARY FIREBREAK CIO L ansBwlo,oaels2o 545 AST, STE ~y/ R~~1EL~ 5 m /fi. z0 ~2htA s \~"A,A 1.54x1465 54 ASTI? STATEOF~d OREGON REG. p493 16 I U sl hi'. , /A 1~ ^V 17 Kerry KenCaim C, PRIMARY FIREBREAK INCREASED ~'BEYON03PMIN.DUE TO EXISTING Q~PE ARG~ eI A 1, TOPOGRAPHY I y' V A~ I STAIRWAYIN PUBLIC o ~ Q I A 1 1 ,EASEMENT FOR ~Y y Drawn B \ ~ EMERGENCY ACCE33~ Y' STAFF ~ ✓yET.- ~ / ~ ~ ~ 1 N SCALE I"=40'-O" TREELEGEND I W~ ~ e m4 ay., r 1, 5 T% f~ \ s 4 c i Pinus pmderosa 2 Firms ponderosa I ~ ~ P~ ~ 16 Q 3 Pseudolsuga menzlesB Ii~ i fI r h 4 Firms ponderosa 20 5 Cabwdms dewnens X IN IGRAPHYFIATT( 6 Firms ponderosa V TOP ~\\7 Cabsednu dewrtens LENGTH OF NEW NEW DRIVEWAY Pbus ponderosa Y PRIMARY FIREBREAK INCREASED BEYOND C06CRETE 10 Fraxinus spp. 8 , 11 Pseudobauga menziesll L. 1- Y M1N. DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY I 4 12 Pseudo uga ma ie ll FIREBREAK LINE BEYOND KNOWN 13 PseudWSuga menziesll TOPOGRAPHY IS ASSUMED / / \ L \ s 14 Robinla Puryle Robe' J 16 Pinuepondemse u A~ l •~~/~~(0~ Y\ l s 17 Pinus ponderosa ~ •j1 V'A ~ 18 PXluapoMemsa ° it y A A: \ 19 Cabcedn~.s deeurtens ~V r ~1 ~Y 1 1~\ s 20 Calooedras dewrtens O 1 2' :A OP % 1 ' F W N~ 4 u N I U 00 ~3 o f~f / 1 V` ~~1 1 Canopy of trees Trees to be 1 ~ Y\2 > ~~~A '~1 ` 1 to remain X removed z 4 w c 0/~e~ N VI PRIMARY FUEL BREAK W Q i l s + \ / \ SECONDARY FUEL BREAK = V N / /PRIMARY /Y )N L FIREBREAK INCREASED BEYONOX 30'MIN. DUE TO EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY s k FIRE PREVENTION AND CONTROL NOTES: 1. ALL FIREBREAK AREAS MUST BE INSTALLED AND MAINTAINED IN ACCORDANCE TO THE CITY OF ASHLAND \ I DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR WILDFIRE LANDS 18.3.10.13 \ FIREBREAK LINE BEYOND KNOWN 2. SECONDARY FIREBREAK ISTO FOLLOW PROPERTY LINE UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN. REVISION DATE \ TOPOGRAPHY IS ASSUMED 12 a Y` 14 s1 I I 13 FIRE PREVENTION ~ ~ ORT + CONTROL SECONDARY FIREBREAK PLAN ISSUE DATE, OCTOBER 2, 2015 I n I 0 15' 30' 60' 4.0 scale: V=30'-0" L 1. KenCairn Landscape Architecture STAIRNOTES: • USE SAME LEVELING PAD MATERIAL FOR STAIR PEDESTAL AS RETAINING WALL • CONSTRUCT STAIR RISERS FIRST, INSTALL CAPS FOR TREADS SECOND, AND THEN INSTALL SIDEWALLS LAST TURN SPLIT HALF UNITS UPSIDE DO NOT PIN STAIR UNITS DOWN TO HIDE SPLITTING CONSTRUCT BASE PEDESTAL IN 4 TO 6 RISER INCREMENTS • STACK SIDEWALLS VERTICALLY, WITHOUT PINNING GROVE OWN ON CORNERS HIDE SPIT BULLETIN 2 FOR ADDITIONAL STAIR / SEE CONSTRUCTION DETAILS CAP UNITS NOT SHOWN FOR CLARITY CAP UNITS NOT SHOWN TREADS OVERHANG 314' 645 A ST STEa ASHWIO, M 915M FOR CLARITY CAP UNITS NOT SHOWN 541.545.1465 FOR CLARITY \ ; SIDEWALLS CONSTRUCTED SIDEWALLS STACKED VERTICALLY VERTICALLY F t \ / rIAT. TURN SPLIT HALF UNITS 314"OVERLAP UPIDE DOWN TO HIDE LITTING GROVE G`* ~F, ' ~ RETAINING WAL LS R / - ® ® CONSTRUCTED •s'"~ 1': ' / / \ VERTICALLY \ y.' ® USE SPLIT HALF UNIT TO / CONSTRUCT OUTSIDE 314' OVERLAP ( I II \ Drawn By: CONSTRUCT RETAINING 314"OVERLAP CORNER REMAINING UNITS NOT STAFF WALLS VERTICALLY SHOWN FOR CLARITY USE A SPLIT HALF UNIT \ III -III NOT TO SCALE CONSTRUCT EXPOSED TURNED UPSIDE DOWN TO VERTICALLY SIDES STAIRS CONSTRUCT OUTSIDE CORNER GRANULAR LING PAD 6"THICKM MIN. THIC IN. 1 EXPOSED MODULAR BLOCK STAIR 2 EXPOSED SIDE MODULAR BLOCK STAIR 3 TYPICAL STAIR 4 SECTION • MODULAR BLOCK STAIR L 5A Scale: 112'=1'-0° L 5.0 Scale: 12'=1'•0" L 5.0 Scale: 318"= P-0' L 5A Scale: 314'= P-0' . CENTER ON TIMBER #4 REBAR@18°LENGTH HORIZONTAL it THROUGH JUNIPER TIMBER T 6x6 JUNIPER LANDSCAPE 4 TIMBER-(TYP.) b 94 REBAR @ 18' LENGTH VERTICAL THROUGH TIMBER 6x6 JUNIPER LANDSCAPE TIMBER- ENDS ITYP.) I-— T W C) o a N Lo 314* MINUS r` COMP COMPACTED SUBGRADE C3 ~ ~ #4 REBAR@18'LENGTH ~ ® O o o HORIZONTAL THROUGH JUNIPERTIMBERS #4 REBAR @ 18' LENGTH VERTICAL d ~ U) Q~ THROUGH JUNIPER TIMBERS W Q m L- Z D3 5 SECTION - TIMBER STEPS s ISOMETRIC VIEW - TIMBER STEPS Q C L 5.0 Scala: 112'= P-0' L 5.0 Scale: 112'=1'-0' N REVISION DATE SITE DETAILS ISSUE DATE: OCTOBER 2, 2015 L 5.0 Q L CX: A' I I O 1,J NOTES BASIS OF BEARINGS A_`-~FIL,AJNU, OHE(01\i, 975- B6 WATER STREET 4 SUITE 101 ASHLAND, OR 97620 TEL.: 541.488.8200 f;UI3ER ('.:11iA' NOT FOR 27f1 1712A1~11 t I RL~1 I I CONSTRUCTION m THESE DRAWINGS SHALL ASIII AI`.I U1 i1- 0 ] NOT BE USED FOR'. 3 CONSTRUCTION BIDDING RECORDATION CONVEYANCE ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT I PLANNING REVIEW f SUBMITTAL 10-02-15 75 l l 0T 4 1 r~~~1r ~ 11 i.. f : - nw W /Cf- ~i I III/1' I r J- I1 1.~1 ~ c ~I Irlll~ 11i t I 1 w11 - 77 iII 1 i 1 ~ ~ r/ T I~ I I I I 11 I ~ s .C ~ ~e~ ~ ~ I ~ N o II . V 11 U / I I ~ ~ ~ 11~ ~ 11~ ;1 r ~ 1 1 t- lAA1~ 1 l I 1 - ~1 1 I'1 1+ d 1 1 1A 1 1 T 1\ r 11~. SC ALL 20+^ lev l I i F" S 0 IE Os 5 l APRIL 10. 2J75 C -0.dr017 INTERVAL= 2' 11 1 1 A L A > i ry ~s~ ~T ~ ~ ~ fA Oil _ 1 T Il I I IIII I I i11i111- '1 A\ ~A II~Jnfl II m g Lr~~Tl✓ LI'Ir111 I Ilia 111, _ iT~ A~ p I'1 li j 11!~1I1 I~ `1111 1~~1 1 I A ,Y~ N W to LY aser„F ~ _ ~ 111 11 114l1 ll~ Q G ~L oral raPO L) c: n 1 14 1 III ! h II 1 1 1 Ir, ' - - - EISP.I,NT3 f ~noca j 1' 1iT11~n _~'\I* i - Z C C N Q 1 } 1 1 1 1 1 1 11~ i1111j111,~ z"i,~,,zx~ 1 P- Q (D U) W .o P 1 r, lldu 1 I 11~ 1 111,, x, A~•'y 1 s V C fn c C~ B LOCI r ~ :r~' 110 I L s 1 I I~~ k O ' ~CH -Ar eV,'N C' C9 - ~T (A (Y (4 a t\ 1 1 C1 ; zr L o ~-5,° -7 VERTICAL DATUM z -5 T p; T nn`` Z v Ju W u,, ARE , ~ J,,.NGi, oC',. 1 C. S. 1.4.P5 I _L~c*?IC:.IerFe ~ °'r;: I NZ O i c I r,~ev PHlaan~ e r oT a v ~ ~ REVISIONS K a, s ~cc s w i v I! ° 9 L RRAS(J VLY, IN(-'. PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEVORS o TOPOGRAPHIC 21'4 FOURIH S1RF,E1 i ASHLAND, OEW\ 97520 suRVev r (591i492-6474 PROJECT: 16-024 Icrr.rin'bisp.ni9 ! ISSUE DATE: 10-0215 cg piJ.`Jz?-'' SHEET: TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY V E - 66 WATER STREET 4 - ~ , - - - SUITE 1 01 1 - - - s ASHLAND, , OR 7520 TEL.: TEL 541.488.8200 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION m _ _ -1 \ THESE DRAWINGS SHALL NOT BE USED FOR: J CONSTRUCTION BIDDING RECORDATION CONVEYANCE 3 ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT 1 a - ~ PLANNING REVIEW SUBMITTAL 10-02-15 m 7 -I a , 'o I 0 m j i F9 _I-._- - - - - W E y S~ W c --7 - to I- , ~I W to ~ ; - _ I p- -Q Us r i v r r CD ICI LLI Z N i > a _ N Z 0 1~ $ - - - - - REVISIONS y DRIVEWAY / - - / - - - - - - - 1 VIEW a / 1~• m - ' 1 PROJECT: 15024 ISSUE DATE: 1002-15 - / ; E SHEET: VIEW FROM DRIVEWAY APPROACH N AO N a 26""7 GRANITE STREET + NEW RESIDENCE AN ACCESSORY RESIDENTIAL UNIT fib WATER STREET Y SUITE 101 ASHLAND, OR 97520 TEL.: 541.488.8200 NOTFO OWNER ARCHITECT CIVIL ENGINEER LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT STRUCTURAL ENGINEER MECHANICAL ENGINEER ELECTRICAL ENGINEER GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER CONS RUCTION THESE DRAWINGS SHALL NCONDDI 1oN 3 ROB AND SUSAN CAIN kistler small + white architects TBD KENCAIRN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE TBD TBD TBD APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING BBE USED FOR IDDING CONTACT: CONTACT: JEROME WHITE CONTACT: KERRY KENCAIRN CONTACT: ROBIN WARREN RECORDNG 671 B STREET 66 WATER STREET SUITE 101 545 A STREET SUITE 3 1314-B CENTER DRIVE #452 CONVEYANCE ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OREGON 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 MEDFORD, OR 97501 ssuANCEOFAPERMR o (541)XXX-XXXX(P) (541)488-8200(P) (541)541-488-3194(P) (541)226-6658(P) SITE REVIEW robrcain@yahoo.com (541) 552-9512 (F) kerry@kencairnlandscape.com (541) 956-8762 (F) SUBMITTAL E jerome@kistlersmaliwhite.com (E) robin.warren@agege.com 10-02-15 m Y V I C I N I T Y M A P LEGENDS AND SYMBOLS ABBREVIATIONS DRAWING INDEX a g DETAIL DOOR IDENTIFICATION NOTE: ABBREVIATIONS BELOW MAY NOT INCLUDE ALL FOUND IN THE DRAWINGS GENERAL: m A DETAIL IDENTIFICATION 100A-- NO, ROOM NUMBER OF DOOR M OVERAUVIEW A9.1 DWG. NO. WHERE DETAIL IS DRAWN LETTER: DOOR IDENTIFICATION ABV ABOVE Al csuERAUxFOaaunou 3 AC ASHPHALTIC CONCRETE KS KNEE SPACE _ KEYNOTE ACT ACOUSTIC CEILING TILE LAV LAVATORY SURVEY: `KEY NOTE NUMBER AFF ABOVE FINISHED FLOOR LPG LIQUID PROPANE GAS TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY - WALL CROSS SECTION WINDOW IDENTIFICATION ALT ALTERNATE M MIRROR A -SECTION IDENTIFICATION (At-WINDOWNUMBER ASW AREA SEPARATION WALL MAX MAXIMUM LANDSCAPE: V GLAZING TYPE BO BOARD MACH MACHINE LT RUINATION PLAN A9.1 DWG. NO. WHERE SECTION IS DRAWN BLDG BUILDING MB MACHINE BOLT 12 PLANTING PLR/ R-1 RELITE IDENTIFICATION B.O. BOTTOM OF MB MARKER BOARD ARCHITECTURAL: _ RELITE TYPE BM BEAM MOL MODEL Az SITE PLAN & ZONING SUMMARY BUILDING CROSS SECTION BS BACKSPLASH MECH MECHANICAL p1 EewmsD RESmExcE PLAN ` A - SECTION IDENTIFICATION PARTITION IDENTIFICATION CAB CABINET MED MEDIUM A4 EIURGE0 ARU PUN > I- A9.1 DWG NO. WHERE SECTION IS DRAWN 28 PARTITION TYPE CFCI CONTRACTOR FURNISHIED MFR MANUFACTURER As RESIDENCESASEMENTH-CORPLAN CONTRACTOR INSTALLED MW MAKE IT WORK As RESIDENCEMNN FLOOR PUN wa O.F.C.I. ITEM CH COAT HOOK MIN MINIMUM A7 RESIDENCEROOFPUN ITEM NUMBER CJ CONTROL JOINT MISS MISCELLANEOUS AS ARU FIOCR PUNS Q A9 ARUDENCE C EXTERIOR ELEVATION CLG CEILING MPH MESS PER HOUR All RESIDENCE EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS ELEVATION IDENTIFICATION CABINET DIMENSION CUR CLEAR MET METAL All RESIDENCE EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS I- 3 _ 1 A7.5 DWG NO, WHERE SECTION IS DRAWN 155 W.LC. CABINET TYPE NUMBER CMU CONCRETE MASONRY UNIT MTL METAL A12 ARU EXTERIOR ELEVATIORS E - 4DILV _ CABINET LENGTH (FIELD VERIFY) COL COLUMN MIN MICROWAVE Ais SITE AND BUILDING SECTIONS N CONS CONCRETE (N) NEW A14 BUILDING SECTIONS W _ \CABINET DEPTH CONF CONFERENCE NIC NOT IN CONTRACT AS ESIDAXIONS i-1 `m CONT CONTINUOUS 01 OVER AtE R RESIDEENNCECE AXCHOI4ETRlC VIEW I LEVEL ELEVATION TAG CORR CORRIDOR OCC OCCUPANCY W a) w 4\ INTERIOR ELEVATION [PTO LEVEL LINER SURFACE CPT CARPET OPNG OPENING ELEVATION IDENTIFICATION v EL-0`-0" ELEVATION CR CLASSROOM OC ON CENTER N 1 11'1 DWG. NO. WHERESECTION IS DRAWN CTB COMPUTER TERMINAL BOARD OD OUTSIDE DIAMETER r. CENTERLINE CTSK COUNTERSINK OFCI OWNERFURNISHED L N DBL DOUBLE CONTRACTOR INSTALLED I-' L 1 LOUVER IDENTIFICATION DIA DIAMETER Of01 OWNER FURNISHED OWNER INSTALLED ` LOUVER NUMBER DIMS DIMENSIONS P PAINT m f 0 I OF DRINKING FOUNTAIN PLAM PLASTIC LAMINATE ~J HVAC EXHAUST m Y GRID LINE DW DSHWASHHER PSFD PO NDSSP PER SQ. FOOT O - I A)--+- TOPTOBOTTOM: LETTERS DP DISABLED PERSON PWC PLASTIC WALL COVERING ui N `J LEFT TO RIGHT: NUMBERS HVAC RETURN E EXISTING PWP PLASTIC WALL PANEL LLJ a) Q EA EACH PT PRESSURETREATED V - EL ELEVATION RD ROOF DRAIN LL~ a - HVAC SUPPLY ELE ELECTRICAL REF REFRIGERATOR r V C G OFFICES ROOM NAMEIFICATION ELECT ELEL CT CAL RM ROM VATOR RO ROUGH OPENING e Co N ROOM ° _ 20B U ROOM NUMBER LIGHTING SYMBOL EM ENTRANCE MATTING SO SOAP DISPENSER E EMT ELECTRICAL METALLIC TUBING SEP SEPARATION Z C co Q G D LIGHTING SYMBOL EQ EQUAL SF SQUARE FEET U) - PROJECT SITE N EX EXISTING SQ FT SQUAREFEET Q ((10 =3 D ~ (E) EXISTING SHTG SHEATHING EJ EXPANSIONJOINT BHT SHEET n N NORTHARROW O LIGHTING SYMBOL EXT EXTERIOR BIM SIMILAR U C c \ ARROW INDICATES PLAN NORTH FD FLOOR DRAIN SM SHEET METAL „ = O m c \ FE FIRE EXTINGUISHER SMS SHEET METAL SCREWS 1--`j FEC FIRE EXTINGUISHERS CABINET SPECS SPECIFICATIONS r- °m FF FINISHED FLOOR STB SINGAL TERMINAL BACKBOARD O r-- a / SEE INDIVIDUAL SHEETS FOR FEE FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION STL STEEL N CD N ADDITIONAL LEGENDS AND SYMBOLS FG FINISH GRADE STRUCT STRUCTURAL s FHSMS FLAT HEAD SHEET METAL SCREWS SS STAINLESS STEEL Nei _ FHMB FIAT HEAD MACHINE BOLT SST STAINLESS STEEL LL W E ED' TRSFA TRANSFO ANSFO TOILET RMRDIBPENBERERlTRANSFER (.0 z LOCATION MAP GOVERNING CODES MATERIALS LEGEND END EN FEMININE NAPKIN DISPENSER TED F.O. FACEOF TS TUBE STEEL F.O.C. FACEOF CONCRETE/ FACE OF COLUMN TTB TELEPHONE TERMINAL BACKBOARD F.O.FIN. FACE OF FINISH TVB DATA TERMINAL BACKBOARD N Z THE DESIGN OF THIS PROJECT IS BASED ON THE ~I P.O.M. FACE of MASONRY TYP TYPICAL FOLLOWING CODES:EARTH BATT INSULATION F.0 S. FACE OF STUD /STRUCTURE TH THRESHOLD FP FIREPLACE TO TOP OF REVISIONS FR FIRE RESISTANT TC TOP OF CONCRETE/CURB - OREGONSTRUCTURALSPECIALTYCODE, 2014 ed. cAAVEUROCK RIGID INSULATION RMC FRAMING TIN T0P OF WALL FRZR FREEZER UL UNDERWRITER'S LABORATORY OREGON MECHANICAL SPECIALTY CODE, 2014 ed. CEILING/ ACOUSTIC FTC FOOTING UTIL UTILITY ` 'ICJ SAND/GROUT 111 7911 TILE/PANEL GA GUAGE ONO UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE GA GYPSUM ASSOCIATION UON UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ° OREGON PLUMBING SPECIALTY CODE, 2014 ed. GA v GALVANIZED VOT VINYL COMPOSITION TILE CONCRETE METAL GYP BO GYPSUM BOARD VERT VERTICAL GWB GYPBUMWALLBOARD VEST VESTIBULE OREGON ELECTRICAL SPECIALTY CODE, 2014 ed. GB GRAB BAR V-A TYPES, RATED CMU DIMENSIONALLUMEIER GI GALVANIZED IRON V-B TYPES, NON-RATED GS GALVANIZED STEEL VWC VINri WALL COVERING OREGON ENERGY EFFICIENCY SPECIALTY CODE, 2014 ed. HS HALL STATION (ELEVATOR) MG WALL BUMPER GUARD 1 (E)CONCRETE BLOCKING/SHIM HH HIGH DBD HARDBOARD WD WATER CLOSET GENERAL OREGON FIRE CODE, 2014 ed. HDR HEADER wow WINDOW INFORMATION E HDWD HARDWOOD WH WATER HEATER a NFPA 72: NATIONAL FIRE ALARM CODE, 2013 ed. (E)cMUL~ FINISH wooD HGT HEIGHT wP WATER TREATMENT PLANT HR HOUR WE WIDE FLANGE PROJECT: 15-024 L HVAC HEATINGNENTILATIOWAIR CONDITIONING WS WOODSCREW NFPA 13: AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEMS, 2013 ed. BRICK PLYWOOD HW HOTWATER WAG. WOODWORK INSTITUTE ISSUE DATE: 1002-15 HC HANDICAP W E N NSUL INSULATION / WITH SHEET: PROJECT SITE - FRAMEDWALL-NEW IR INSIDE RADIUS JST JOIST Y N j N l NOTE: ALL MATERIAL SYMBOLS ABOVE MAY NOT NECESSARILY BE USED IN THIS PROJECT. SEE INDIVIDUAL SHEETS FOR ADDITIONAL LEGENDS AND SYMBOLS „ r ADJACENT ZONE / N RR-.5 ADJACENT ZONE o / R1-10 88 WATER STREET 4 / \ SUITE 101 a / I ASHLAND, OR o / \ 97520 ~ NOate - - . RTHPROPERTYLINE 213.39' TEL.: 541.488.8200 ! rv NOT FOR c ! i 8 y I I CONSTRUCTION USED FOR: / / . THESE DRAWINGS FOR; CONSTRUCTION N BIDDING c I ~ BIDDING RECORDATION W CONVEYANCE ISSUANCE CFA PERMIT W PLANNING REVIEW SUBMITTAL 'i L+- 10-02-15 m j ~ Cn 15356ET8Atl I k i p 1 Lij -A l 1 , r ILA / % J Q ADJACENT ZONE I n/ R1-10 Lt "a PROPOSED 4,0445 m I MAIN RESIDENCE 1 A ~ROPERTY LINE 3 Z) TO BEABANDONED E I / w 9, N c ADJACENT ZONE L N V --L_ z / ~p U) ROP06ED w U) d CO NC. gg O \ G 1 \ 1 E) CONC. \ U , DRIVEWAY _ V t 1 C N E ) 't~ I1I sG ~ ~ `I ~ Puromsfiuuu.wr t I l 6sE~ VA a+ C 1 CA ZONE R1-10 ~ ~ 1~3nn C 1 - \ I 1 PHYSICAL AM ENARWAENTAL CWSTRAYR60VEI Y vJ L MLLSICELA110516a 10,0906 c: c B ` PoEOFWE UIaslea.m.lo6 0 m I PROPOSED 1,0005 ADJACENTZONE UI p S R1-10 semeEwusTRUrrtuxosTea.l6.DO 0 \ ACCESSORY RESIDENTIAL UNIT 9y N LL SOUR S T A M A R 0 A UJ BULI)1W R AS 3 z ovnE o RESR£ACE a) CrR- / 1S RASEME TF ONT I,P66FI1696=CONOITONE6T N L 7 O a I6TLOR 9 9s~ V roTALAREA a.abs= ZONE R1-10 A,Ru / •m E` BASEMENT '78 SF REVISIONS 5 / E)PROPERTY LINE 1 ERCLo R msF 1 T,aoa sF TOTALAREA 110 E PROPOSED PROPERTY LINE ~ ) A / / 111'1 ~~II N SITE PLAN & ZONING 331.52'\ SUMMARY / PROJECT: 15024 3 ADJACENT ZONE / ADJACENT ZONE ISSUE DATE: 10-02-15 RR-.5 _ R1-10 E SHEET: SITE PLAN H N U` Q tl vv - 88 WATER STREET r SUITE 101 o 1 - - - ASHLAND, OR 6 t', 7 ! 97520 tv v- _ - - . e k r TEL.: 541.498.8200 -ij c A ^ _ NOT FOR I Fit CONSTRUCTION \ THESE DRAIMNGS SHALL ~ ~ NOTBE USED FO R: `W CONSTRUCTION BIDDING r- RECORDATION CONVEYANCE i - - - ! 1 G~ ISSUANCE OPA PERMIT - PLANNING REVIEW a y SUBMITTAL 10-0215 r ~ - a 1 r - 9 J n I I I I ~ i i i~ ll c I I I a FF _ i - -6 1 I ~10~OFS rQ~ I ~ ~ I I' I I r l / ~ SASFM a x,111 I I I ~ / r !J'~ ~ or s , 1l, l l ! C ry= ,i f 1 i.. 1 I I I r 1 'q1 - ~ 7-1~ l O I S• .,~.i _ 1 I E:l li 1111 ~ I , I ; w I ~ y 4 \f---- p C « 1 ` I II 1 I Yr I 2=50 r 1 m r- /1 1 1 1 r' a~~ 7; r LLJ m 111 ~ 1 I r~ - y C LLJ r: r• ; r ! 1 1 1 ` / ~u'{'• ryy I III r~ - - LLI f - l - (j) o ~ l h 105700 V -0 o r T 1 I i , r ,II _ V z c: N Q =3 a) cu M m A~ - - 1 1 1'1111 II 1 1 Al 1 I II I ! m - 1 I I 1 111 1 1 1 1 I 1 - ` r" I 1 III 11 I I I I I / f 1v o ` - 11 I `~l i! nI1111 1 II T1 l I 1 ' 11I~ 1l 1 li' L~Y'v / ~ II'fD S ~ ~ I I i I ~ 1111(~1I11 I! I ~s9~1 I III I ~ I I~~1 nl ,r~l I~I~ ~ ~ ~ Q' i `I 11 I I fV _ I I I l i i~ T~ I 7 ILL] - ~ I~ l I I J~ 1 `I l1 11 I~ I I 'I i I I O i i~ 1 ~I 111 I~ i Z /i 1 J I III II c~ I1 1}~ l r 11 i t ) ~ I II ! l ' ;~rll / /;Irll ' I II111 I III I ITff~~~P~, ~ Ir~l NZ 0 \1 yr REVISIONS 1 / / i i ~/r l 111 II fI1I1rl ~ I I I 1 - ~ I~I:r.. Irll/ a 11 / / ~ I I 1 1 ~ III t I~ ~ i / I ! ~ 11 1 I J I l 7 T i/ 1~ 1 I~ I ~ I I 1 1 1 1 ~ ~ I i I'll ~i I~r ~G t i l l T J t 1! I I I I/ 1! 1 1 ~9~~~ 1 ir~~l~ l 1 11 / I II I, ~r I I I I I l I Q r ~ 11 / / i ' I VIII 1 ui 1 i a~ ~i I ~ y~I~ r 1 1 } 1 II ~ 14{ I li! - - r RESIDENCE SITE PLAN i /1 i/ / 1 r -R~;I 1 I~ PROJECT: 15.024 F ISSUE DATE: 10.02-15 E SHEET: RESIDENCE ENLARGED SITE PLAN N A3 N (1 I 66 WATER STREET r 7 ~ 1 ~ IIII ~ a.~ SUITE 101 ASHLAND, Oft i I - 97520 a I ~n I I I i TEL.: 641.468.6200 i I NOT FOR I I ~I I I m 'I I-, IIi CONSTRUCTION I i THESE DRAWINGS SHALL I I I NOT BE USED FOR: O CONSTRUCTION PROPOSED BIDDING I a ° I CONC. RECORDATION o c DRIVEWAY {I . ISSUANCE OF APERMIT % PLANNING REVIEW SUBMITTAL 10-02-15 I ~ I ~r a' ~ i ~II ~ I I U U I z' I I lS~ ~ I o ~ ~ I 1 ~ j11i t` t I I t 209200 1081 E it o '0 1 1~I M / o I + L ~ i II I~~ ( 11~'J o2~1 ~ I I ~ I I! I I ~1 ~.1! ~ 1 ) J N n ® i I ~4 I I I~ ~ n a - 1- ~ 1 ' 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 +0 y (E) CONC. ,Ir DRIVEWAY ~ r~ I I I `'~I iP, ~I r Irl I iJ I 2 C Q 2071.00 m 1 I i 1 L I I l ~ I ij I I Ir~ I ii'il I~ E m I ~ ~ i~ ~ X41 I I 1 I ~_r ~ ~ 1 1a 1 I II I I II - T~ - - ~ J ~i i4 V ~ 11 I 7ML8 I I I` I a 19'-9" SETBACK m r 1 i m 1 1 1` l rl a~ m ~'I , 11 of 1 10 N 0 Ip ti mm a I ~ ~ 1 0 1 I i 1 I~ ~ I I I _Q Us ° ~ 01~ z c: E .A .,IJ , 1 Air A J, 1, I l~ I I r 11 11 r)I C N Q I IIJ 1 I I A tl~~2 fn ~C u I I 11' 1 I ~I A nm fIf co co 1 1 r I 1 ~ ~ d i III I~ 1 1 I I~111 ~(D I I / 1~ 11 I 11 ~ ~ I I I I I )~i~ i r !r ~ LL t 11TIIt 1 1 t1 r1 1 ~,1 l I I, I 1t 1 j 1 d W 1~~11 111 ` t1~,I1 ~11~ 1 i! ® I f (c) z ~ \ I , 1 1 l 1 I I i I I 1 I I \ ,~`G ~ ~ I I I 1 ,Y NZ 0 ~ ~ , ~IrII dill II ~ J 111 I 4 i ,I 11 REVISIONS ~ 1 I I i ! I ~ ~C, III xy' Fj / ~ I I I 11 'y i o 1 1 1 I ~ ~ i ~ I r u A.R.U. SITE PLAN N PROJECT: 15-024 3 s ISSUE DATE: 10-0245 E SHEET: A.R.U. ENLARGED SITE PLAN A4 i;: a E 49'4" 5 164" 34'-G' 5' b E N 66 WATER STREET 3 SUITE 101 ASHLAND,OR 97520 gp TEL.: 541,488.8200 C 5 A75 A15 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION THESE DRAWINGS SHALL NOT BE USED R 3 CONSTRUCTION BIDDING RECORDATION L CONVEYANCE ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT U PLANNING REVIEW a SUBMITTAL t 4 I - ' - 10-02.15 u ~'11inc WorL skop ~ath ear - - 0 r 3 6' X3, U _ utl~lty 0 3 ~ - Crawl Gear 2 4 A SF~ce 'Storage A13 E W 4- y W C Y r.~cv 4 a r LL Garage U/ a 0 I W F ntry - _ _ N 0 Trash/ Q N a a _ o Storage Recycle W U L E IZi_g~xl$i_g~ _ N Q Z ~ C C N 4 Q N (D j CO ` N mm ` (D :2 9 m (n a ~o Z N v NZ 0 REVISIONS E 0 J 1, 5'4° 64" 24'-0° RESIDENCE V BASEMENT PLAN e Q 234" 2T4" 14'-8' 32-0° 42-0" PROJECT: 15-024 3 ISSUE DATE: 10-02-15 SHEET: E N N 1,775 sf total (169 sf conditioned) BASEMENT PLAN n A5 V4-1`0' N U' Q 66'-0" 1TA" 2-10" 31-8' 84° 13'-0" 6'b" T-0' 4'b" E 5-8" N 3 66 WATER STREET SUITE 101 m ASHLAND, OR c - - 97520 TEL.: 541.488.8200 D B A15 A15 A14 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION THESE DRAlMN0.93NALL NOT BE USED FOR', CONSTRUCTION m BIDDING - RECORDATION c° CONVEYANCE I ISSUANCE OFA PERMIT tl PLANNING REVIEW a SUBMITTAL 10-02-15 I I III I m I 'v a i I u a I 3 17 <i ~ j- ~ I Lath lin m - - - Guest I ~edroom _ I ~ ` ~ 12x1 16 x6 o / 7 y ~ ~ I 1 L _ - a BE ~ ~ _ g'.rI➢' I r,~ ofrice -_I ~oset 1._ I 4 < v ~ A I ~ ~ ~ ~ath ~ lo'xIT ;I-Txu s T 139^xlf' ~ ~ F[l - W E _ _ _ _ 7 -1__ r 4 I Y 4 i ~ 1 1± LL _ _ _ m n tr s x a w~ I rr , ~ ~ d I B r a I~ _ca U -cl E o I Z C: N I M In o I I I t s jJ " - Y V U) y % N t ~l C- Tile ( 1= c ro co or-- N ~m a I I I l2 m s 0.1 m ; 3z a I m i i I I NZ o m I REVISIONS j I I I I E h I I u j 3a-0. ' RESIDENCE g 81-0' 16'-0" FIRST FLOOR e PLAN 3 32'-0" 42'-0" PROJECT: 15-024 ISSUE DATE: 10-02-15 N SHEET: 2,269 ,J FIRST FLOOR PLAN A6 114' =1-0" ry U a m + E N u H 66 WATER STREET SUITE 101 o ASHLAND, OR o 97520 m TEL.: 541.488.8200 c D C B ra° A15 A15 A14 NOT FOR GUTTLRALL- CONSTRUCTION AROUND THESE DRAWINGS SHALL NOT BE USED FOR. 3 CONSTRUCTION y BIODINO 5 ~ - RECORDATION CONVEYANCE ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT { PLANNING REVIEW SUBMITTAL ALU 1 LIUIMLDSKYLGr1T5 10-02-15 r \V LAMINATLD GLASS Y a 9 v A13 ! L Z) N w i~ W N Y m i ~ N ~IASSAA, Pr I i N S11 KOOFIn LLS N 0 v W rn V 2 c: s U' - Z C N Q to r+ Q 7a) a) u) U -ofq m m m o~ - W I! N Z 0 REVISIONS m E _ i N RESIDENCE ROOF PLAN a 3 PROJECT: 15-024 ISSUE DATE: 10-02-15 E SHEET: N ROOF PLAN n AT 114- l - N U 32'-0" 8T-0' a 24'-0° 24'-0" E N m 66 WATER STREET SUITE 101 ASHLAND, OR 97520 TEL.: 541.480.8200 $ NOTFOR m CONSTRUCTION THESE DRAWINGS SHALL NOT BE USED FOR: CONSTRUCTION m BIDDING S ' RECORDATION CONVEYANCE ISSUANCE OFA PERMIT b PLANNING REVIEW n SUBMITTAL 10-02-15 r e DccL o 0 Cer. File ° p n 4 >Bi ~ W 1 f6 E - T--7- T~ W }F ntr 3 C G T 4 W x - I Kitchen w m E a ~ t ~ ~jath (~7 w~ o o Living a 15 _N q .u -Q V r N E - z c: 0 p (~.on letc C Q DininJ N I C U) F,l:lil0 Q Q a u 207.00 U iA v fA 0~ N Cck - Z 0 N 4 C~~.1 Ile REVISIONS I - - - - - - - - - E U A.R.U. m /V FLOOR PLANS FLOOR PLANS ,r. e N PROJECT: 15024 + ISBUEDATE: 10-02-15 E SHEET: N 576 59 ft MAIN FLOOR PLAN 76 59 ft GROUND FLOOR PLAN n Y I 114" VD' A8 N U b 32-0° a 2a-0° z-1w E y m fiB WATER STREET q" SUITE 101 ASHLAND, OR 97520 TEL.: 541.400.8200 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION THESE DRAWINGS SHALL - I`~-GUTTER - NOT BE USED FOR: JI - - ALL CONSTRUCTION c r BIDDING g I AROUND CRE ORDATION ONVEYANCE . 1 _ ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT n PLANNING REVIEW a / SUBMITTAL m 10-02-15 o r jT~ I CLA55 A ASPf1ALT ~edroom KOOL.SrINGLES la gath~`- n° I i j ~~CC~ ~Inen LT - :v l i - Closet` 3 I T _ 4 W E' ~p N Lu m i 0 GUTTER N ALL W 0 AROUND U : U ~ n Z~ c: N E C NQ N 7 N -LA5sAA5P11A1-r a) U) a) U) ROorsiJINGLLS ~ mm 0 a O m ! REVISIONS S m 10 A.R.U. m N N FLOOR PLANS m 3 PROJECT: 15-024 ISSUE DATE: 10-02-15 SHEET: E y Y ROOF PLAN 350 59 ft UPPER FLOOR PLAN n A9 ,140,,,-0" 2 114"=iO" I N U Q E 1 T0. ROOF N LL EL 2114' 4 66 WATER STREET SUITE 101 ASHLAND, OR H MIDPOINT OF ROOF HEIGHT T97520 EL.: 541.488,8200 6 W ~ \ NOT FOR ^tASSA ASPHALT ROOF SHINGLES CONSTRUCTION THESE DRAWINGS SHALL NOT BE USED FOR: $ J _ _ -tea CONSTRUCTION BIDDING RECORDATION CONVEYANCE EM. PLASTER SOFFIT ISSUANCE OFAPERMIT v - _ f - n il= v LADWOODWNDOWS PLANNING REVIEW SUBMITTAL m I fi - - -1 I__, SONRYVEREER 10-02-15 o ~ r2 ( I OoO CLAD DOOR m 7 p Q ^EM.PLASTER 1STFLOOR -I1 e J EL 2098.5' m I ORIL GEM. FIBER LAP SIDING - ~ I 1 m 0 a y i ~ avc. GRADE I _ - - - - - I L - BASEMENT I- m 2083' POINT 20 3' EL 2083' EL ® W ui to m ~Q) I m co z 0 W N 0 ~v ~c Ur E SOUTH ELEVATION Z c m Q U) U a (n IMF _ C c M co TO, ROOF N EL 2114' 0~ (o W MIDPOINT OF ROOF HEIGHT m z REVISIONS °o w - 17 Z RESIDENCE AVG. GRADE sTFLOOR EXTERIOR ro 2096.5' - - - - - - ELEVATIONS Q POINTS EL 2096,5' 6 EL. 2096.5' 5 PROJECT: 15-024 ISSUE DATE: 10-02-05 N SHEET: Y WEST ELEVATION 2 A10 N F OVERALL BUILDING HEIGHT= 19'-10" a E + T.O, ROOF m `m 86 WATER STREET 4 SUITE 101 ASHLAND, OR 97520 TEL.: 5414668200 MIDPOINT OF ROOF HEIGHT " e - - - - NOTPOR CONSTRUCTION THESE DRAWINGS SHALL `m U NOT BE USED FOR' 3 F, CONSTRUCTION o = BIDDING 0 RECORDATION oo LU CONVEYANCE _ ISSUANCE OFAPERMIT (7 171 - 3 Z - - - PLANNING REVIEW a SUBMITTAL 10-02-15 o - - I 1 1. c T FLOOR AVG. GRADE, - 1S EL 2096.5' 2096.17' POINTC EL. 2096AT 3 NORTH ELEVATION L f _ - T.O. ROOF ® Z) 3 _ EL 2114' - E c: H ~ 3 ® MIDPOINT OF ROOF HEIGHT a t - - - - 42 N H ` - - U c a Q 'ro ro EL 0 `m C w - Z c U) N7 - - Q~ rn~ ~ ST FLGGR - m 2 EL 2096.5' ® U C a J N U) LL o NN o ~ LJ. N Ud NZ 0 REVISIONS a AVG. GRADE _ - - BASEMEN V - ~ I~ _ POINfD - EL 20ST 2063' EL. 2063' _ E A _ i i J RESIDENCE EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS a m PROJECT: 15-024 ISSUE DATE: 1 0-02-15 E SHEET: N EAST ELEVATION All N OVERALL BUILDING HEIGHT= 19'-10" U a m , 3 T. 0. ROOF T. 0, ROOF ' - EL. 2105' EL. 2105' E N - - 66 WATER STREET 4 SUITE 101 ASHLAND, OR 97520 TEL.: 641.486.8200 NOT FOR - CONSTRUCTION m - - THESE DRAWINGS SHALL NOT BE USED FOR: - - _Ji - e i CONSTRUCTION _ - - ~ BIDDING RECORDATION 'a MIDPOINT OF ROOF HEIGHT ' MIDPOMTOFR 0-HEIGHT -i" CONVEYANCE - - ISSUANCE OFA PERMIT .3 2NDFLOOR 2NDFLOOR /lk EL2002'® = EL 2092' PLANNING REVIEW SUBMITTAL 10-02-15 t Q - Z - - - --------7_ - -I Z Z ISTFLOOR ISTFLOOR ] EL 2081.5' j EL 208t5 01 _ (V G - - 2 - A G GRADE uINIA BASEMENT AVG. GRADE BASEMENT W 4-1 _ - _ - EL.2071' ® 2071' POINT9 _-_-EL. 2071' m - EL. 2071' EL. 2071' W EAST ELEVATION SOUTH ELEVATION N 1 4 m n rr^^ vJ a T.O. ROOF ® T. O. ROOF EL 2105 I O EL 2105 / N 1' MIDPOINT OF ROOF HEIGHT - MIDPOINT OFROOFHEIGHT W O _ c U p x x , .G C ca cu w Zc roa z - z - Q U a U) 5 Q \ O m 7 -p 0 AVG GRADE 2NDFLOOR ® ® AVG2GGRADE 2ND FLOOR ® (A 209Y p NTC EL2082' f ®PCIt7p EL 2091 N E 2092 JEL 092' Z a - - NZ 0 A REVISIONS E 1STFLOOR 1ST FLOOR F-L 2081.5 O ARU EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 3 PROJECT: 15024 _ ISSUE DATE: 10-02-15 BASEMENT BASEMENT E EL-2071 E. 2071'SHEET: WEST ELEVATION NORTH ELEVATION ~ 172 OVERALL BUILDING HEIGHT= 16'&x" 3 v4^=r-0^ D C B A15 A75 A16 T .O. ROOF 12 EL 2114' 66 WATER STREET 3 SUITE 101 ASHLAND, OR 97520 q TEL.: 541.488.8200 ° NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION THESE DRAWINGS SHALL z NOT BE USED FOR: CONSTRUCTION $ _ BIDDING RECORDATION CONVEYANCE ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT PLANNING REVIEW Half a Living S air Laundry Office Closet [~edroom SUBMITTAL E)at6 10-02-15 w C IST FLOOR n EL 209i" - - r - Gear _ Garage Storage LINE OF (E) GRADE w CUT m CUT E < s - E - BASEMENT ® F- ` EL 2083' w C: m F Q) (N) COMPACTED FILL o $ (E) FILL LINE OF GRADE IN 1990' O (N) COMPACTED FILL W (E) FILL D F' V U BUILDING SECTIONA - Q ~ co E Z c mQ ~ ( ~ 7 N Q (D U) Ir- q rom m h 0 a, 0 W ro REVISIONS s ' E - a e0 ° LINE OF GRADE IN 1990' 0 LINE OF (E) GRADE J F LINE OF (N) GRADE ~ SITE AND BUILDING - au;0 SECTIONS PROJECT: 15-024 ISSUE DATE: 10-02-15 SHEET: E N 0 SITE SECTION_( A13 nc=ro° L) N U W _ Z A m \ \ A13 3 \ LU \ a- p T0, ROOF N d EL 2114' ~\HR\HG'( z 88 WATER STREET 4 \FqT SUITE 101 V21jy ASHLAND. OR \O% 97520 0 G O \ ,y TEL.: 541.488.8200 $ \ cZ1 NOTFOR A \ CONSTRUCTION THESE DRAWINGS SHALL m NOT BE USED FOR: CONSTRUCTION BIDDING \ RECORDATION \ CONVEYANCE \ ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT a \ PLANNING REVIEW ~ja~~ery OFFice Guest SUBMITTAL r ~ 10-02-15 .ti 41ST FLOOR f EL 209E 20965' 3 6araee N) CONC. DRIVEWAY SLAB N) COMPACTED FILL PDRA EXISTING F ILL CUT ONC. RETAINING WALL Wl N ROCKAND PERF DRAIN BASEMENT Z) EL 2083' 77 7-- Lu s ~ 'O z N BUILDING SECTION B w o 114" V-a _ F"v ~Q U co o C N E Z C NQ Q N N W ~ Y U a~ - mm 'p 0 N ~m e r~ W LEGEND (p a COMPACTED FILL N Z REVISIONS $ --III UNDISTURBED SOIL o m E . ❑ CUT J LINE OF GRADE IN 1990's BUILDING t LINE OF EXISTING GRADE SECTIONS a ~co PROJECT: 15-024 5 ISSUEDATE: 10-02-15 E LINE OF PROPOSED GRADE SHEET: m 4 Al N U A A14 i q T0. N EL 2114' `m 66 WATER STREET SUITE 101 ASHLAND,OR 87820 TEL.: 541.486.8200 NOTFOR CONSTRUCTION THESE DRAWINGS SHALL NOT BE USED FOR: CONSTRUCTION m BIDDING RECORDATION CONVEYANCE '3: I I i i ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT i PLANNING REVIEW SUBMITTAL 10-02-15 i `m I i i 4 iSTM, EL. 203S5' - _ _ > _ _ - _ _ - - _ - _ - - - ♦ ~ i n ♦ ♦ ♦ I Q _BASEMENT EL 2083' ® r 03 BUILDING SECTION I1 Lu 174, = P-0' D m ~ " A v~ A74 ~ O L A T.O.ROOF UJ (A o EL 2114' ® L m r V : Q UL w Z c: E C co Q N r E f6 U aU) N N CD 0 5 ~ m r 3 9 Z NZ 0 sr FLOOR REVISIONS -EL. 2096.5'-® ' m i J BUILDING a = SECTIONS v PROJECT: 15-024 BASEMENT ® EL ISSUE DATE: 10-02-15 2083' SHEET: N ~ BUILDING SECTION C A15 N U ° a t ; t E -T i 1 BEET 66 UITE tOR ST S ASHLAND, o } - R 97520 °n i \ r TEL.: 541.488.8200 NOTPOR CONSTRUCTION THESE DRAWINGS SHALL NOT BE USED FOR: m I Ii CON ION IDDNG RECORDATION f~ I CONVEYANCE } I i - ISSUANCE OFA PERMIT E Jf _ PLANNING REVIEW a _ SUBMITTAL 10-02-15 Y i ° m H ~ I a ; ~c k(p E W N W (p ° U) a) m m v - J ,r 01 0~ (o l N W _ Z REVIS _ ~ - r'f IONS i " LI i RESIDENCE AXONOMETRIC r VIE a PROJECT: 15-024 ♦ _ ISSUE DATE: 10-02-05 N / ti - SHEET: RESIDENCE AXONOMETRIC VIEW FROM SOUTHEAST _n 114- N =,.-01 I A16 ZONING PERMIT APPLICATION Planning Division 51 Winburn Way, Ashland OR 97520 CITY Of FILE # - ASHLAND 541-488-5305 Fax 541-488-6006 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT I DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Pursuing LEEDO Certification? ❑ YES ❑ NO Street Address Assessor's Map No. 391 E a Tax Lot(s) Zoning Comp Plan Designation APPLICANT Name Phone, E-Mail Address City Zip PROPERTY OWNER0 I Name Phone E-Mail f-'C))--"f`C 6"_1 n 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 hereby certify that the statements and information contained in this application, including the enclosed drawings and the required findings of fact, are in all respects, true and correct. /understand that all property pins must be shown on the drawings and visible upon the site inspection. In the event the pins are not shown or their location found to be incorrect, the owner assumes full responsibility. 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 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 rmov at my expense If J have any doubts, l am advised to seek competent professional advice and assistance. Applicant's Signature Date As owner o,rlhe,prop y involved i this request, I have read and understood the complete application and its consequences to me as a property owner. lJ 0 /'A Property 0 ner's Signature (required) Date [To be oom0et9d by Cky Staff F Date Received Zoning Permit Type Filing Fee $ k OVER N G:\comm-dev\planning\Forms & Handouts\Zoning Permit Application.do f I Job Address: 267 GRANITE ST Contractor: ASHLAND OR 97520 Address: C A Owner's Name: CAIN ROBERT ROY TRUSTEE O Phone: P Customer 00332 N State Lic No: ~ T City Lic No: P KENCAIRN KERRY KAI Applicant: 545 A ST R I Address: ASHLAND OR 97520 A C C Sub-Contractor: A Phone: (541) 488-3194 T Address: N Applied: 10/02/2015 T Issued: Expires: 03/30/2016 R Phone: State Lic No: Maplot: 391 E08DA1902 City Lic No: DESCRIPTION: 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 Physical Constraints Permit 1,146.00 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL i 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