Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-043 Agrmt - IPCO - Independent Way RIGHT OF WAY PURCHASE AGREEMENT CONSIDERATION: Three Hundred Thirty-Nine Thousand Two Hundred Sixty-Nine and No/100 Dollars ($339.269.00) BETWEEN: IPCO DEVELOPMENT CORP (Owner) AND: The City of Ashland, Oregon (City) DATED: Z 2017 ("Effective Date") RECITALS A. Owner is in possession of a tract of land in Jackson County, Oregon, hereinafter, "The Property", identified as Assessor's parcels 391 E14BA tax lots 5001600 & 900 at 688 and located at 640 Tolman Road in the City of Ashland. Oregon B. The City of Ashland, hereinafter "The City", has planned the Independent Way street Project, hereinafter "The Project", to connect Washington Street to Tolman Creek Road. Plans for said street are attached hereto as Attachment #4. C. The City and Owner entered into a Letter of Intent for sale of property to the City of Ashland which was signed on December 13, 2012 and which is attached hereto as Attachment #1. D. Owner obtained approval for development of the property in Planning Action #2015-00422 which was approved on September 8, 2015. which is attached hereto as Attachment #3. E. The Project will require a 39,914 s.f. acquisition of The Property by the City for construction of the new street. F. The City and Owner desire to enter into this agreement for acquisition of right of way needed for The Project in compliance with the terms of the attached Letter of Intent and Planning Action # 2015-00422.. NOW THEREFORE, FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS AND IN CONSIDERATION OF THE MUTUAL COVENANTS Page 1 of 3 CONTAINED HEREIN, THE RECEIPT AND SUFFICIENCY OF WHICH IS HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGED, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. Seller will grant to City a Dedication Deed identical to the one attached to this Agreement as Attachment #2, incorporated herein by reference, in order to convey the property rights needed for The Project. 2. City will compensate Owner for the purchase of the land described in Attachment #2, in the amount of Three Hundred Thirty-Nine Thousand Two Hundred Sixty-Nine and No/100 Dollars ($339.269.00) 3. In accordance with item "B" of Attachment #1 (the Letter of Intent), the City will construct and maintain a stream crossing structure over Hamilton Creek to support the new roadway. 4. In accordance with Item C of Attachment #1, the City will relocate existing utilities within the street right of way. 5. In accordance with Item G of Attachment #1 the City will work cooperatively with Owner during the engineering phase of The Project 6. In accordance with item "H" of Attachment #1, City will permit storm water drainage from The Property into Hamilton Creek to the extent that state, federal, and local storm drain regulations are met. 7. The City will pay any reasonable costs of landscape irrigation and maintenance of the sidewalk in the public right of way of Independent Way, as constructed by The Project, in accordance with plans approved by the City, such approval will not be unreasonably withheld. 8. The City agrees to process and extension of the Land Use permitted in Planning Action #2015-00422 before March 27, 2017. By signing this agreement, the parties agree to implement the terms expeditiously, and in a commercially reasonable manner. Dated as of the Effective Date stated above. Ipco Development Corp t C N me a d Title Page 2 of 3 CITY OF ASHLAND Joh arns, Interim City Administrator State of Oregon ) ss. County of Jackson ) On this I ip day of T , 2017 before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said C my and State, personally a peared the within named who is the trustees of co Development Corp and on the basis of satisfactory evidence are known to be the persons whose names are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged that they have the authority to execute the same for the purposes therein contained. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and official seal the day and year last above written. Notary Public for Oregon OFFICIAL STAMP My Commission EMILY IRENE KILLAM Expires: 05 CS 2) I NOTARY PUBLIC - OREGON COMMISSION NO. 938603 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES MAY 03, 2019 State of Oregon ) )SS County of Jackson ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me, this day of e. Af , 2017, by John Karns as Interim City Administrator for the City of Ashland. OFFICIAL STAMP Notary b l l c for reg o n EMILY IRENE KILLAM NOTARY PUBLIC - OREGON My commission expires: Ip ZO►a1 COMMISSION NO. 938603 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES MAY 03, 2019 Page 3 of 3 Attachment No. 1 LETTER OF INTENT FOR SALE OF REAL PROPERTY December 13, 2012 IPCO Development 640 Tolman Creek Road Ashland, OR 97520 Re: Purchase of Property for Right of Way between Washington Street & Tolman Creek Road Dear Messrs: By this letter, City of Ashland ("Buyer"), presents the manner in which it and 1PCO Development ("Seller") agree Buyer may acquire certain real property from Seller as described herein. The parties recognize that the transaction will require further documentation and approvals,, including the preparation and approval of a formal agreement setting forth the terms and conditions of the proposed purchase (the "Purchase Agreement"); nevertheless, they execute this letter to evidence their intention to proceed in mutual good faith to complete work required to negotiate terms of a Purchase Agreement that are consistent with this letter. The proposed terms and conditions include, but are not limited to, the following: 1. Property. Buyer will purchase from Seller all interests and rights, owned or used by Seller in connection with an approximate 55 feet wide strip of private property between Washington Street & Tolman Creek Road as further described in Exhibit A, (the "Property"). The Seller acknowledges that the Buyer intends to establish-this property as a dedicated right-of-way ("ROW") through the current IPCO Development property. This new ROW would parallel and offset approximately 10 feet to the north of the centerline of the existing Washington Street ROW. 2. Consideration. The consideration (the "Purchase Price") will be established pursuant to appraisal by an appraiser selected and paid by the Buyer and subject to reasonable negotiations with Seller. Buyer will not assume any other liabilities or obligations of Seller over other property adjacent to or previously part of parcel or lot through which the Property, as a right-of- way, runs, and Seller will indemnify and hold harmless Buyer against all such other liabilities and obligations. 3. Purchase Agreement. The transaction will be subject to the negotiation and execution of a definitive Purchase Agreement with terms satisfactory to Seller and Buyer. The Purchase Agreement will contain representations, warranties and covenants, conditions that are reflected in the IPCO Development conceptual site plan scheme 914 (11-13-13) Exhibit A (attached) and will include without limitation the following: (a) The Buyer proposes, subject to planning approval, to build, own, and maintain this approximately 700 feet long, 28 feet wide paved road with curb, "park row", and 8 feet wide sidewalks on the north'side of street. Buyer agrees, subject. to Planning approval, to allow seller to credit park row landscape for sellers required landscape associated to any future Page 1 of 4 Attachment No. 1 Continued development on said property. In addition, buyer will install irrigation system and pay water bill in public park row. (b) The Buyer will construct and maintain. a stream crossing structure over Hamilton Creek, to support the new roadway and sidewalk. The crossing structure will be designed to meet or exceed the most current storm water quality mitigation requirements and standards. Riparian restoration of the creek bed and banks will be included to the maximum extent practicable. (c) The Buyer will relocate existing utilities as required, without diminishing utility services quality to the development, including water pressure, electric power, and sewer service line to property line at a location designated by the property owner with proper access to all locations. This shall not be charged back to seller. (d) The Buyer will assist the development to adjust the location of the existing conservation r easement across private property to the match the new FEMA flood map and Ashland Water Resources Protection Ordinance boundaries. If allowed by FEMA, the Buyer will allow building E as shown with parking at the southeast corner with utility and road access over that area. (e) The Buyer, subject to Planning approval, will allow the development to use any land recovered and to use the area over the existing pipe culvert, as deemed appropriate by FEMA, and allow the development to clean out and maintain blackberry and weed infested areas and use these areas for landscape credits. (f) Assist the development in preparing a master plan that will include parking and driveways in specified locations to be formally submitted for planning review through the City's planning process. The associated City planning costs will be paid by the Buyer. The Buyer anticipates that the process will include the following steps: a. Submit pre-application for Preliminary Site Layout. b. Draft conservation easement boundary adjustment & delineate "water protection zone." c. Draft right-of-way dedication survey documentation. d. Obtain property owner concurrence RE: ROW dedication & easements. C, Obtain Planning approval for variances. f. Obtain City Council approval RE: ROW dedication & easements. g. Engineering Design & Permitting. h. Planning Approval for Environmental Constraints. i. Site Plan approvals. (g) The Buyer agrees to work with the Seller during engineering phase of project to ensure final grades will accommodate ingress and egress on the Seller's driveways in order to minimize impacts of steep grades as much as possible. (h) The Seller can continue to drain storm water into Hamilton Creek as long as current state, federal and local storm drain regulations are met. Page 2 of 4 Attachment No. 1 Continued 4. Access. To permit Buyer to conduct its due diligence investigation, as long as this letter remains in effect, Seller will permit Buyer and its agents to have reasonable access to the Property for purposes of surveying and planning for the use and design of the Property. 5. Conditions to Closing. The closing of the transaction will be subject to certain conditions, including without limitation the following: (a) Funds for the purchase of said land are subject to the buyer successfully securing a grant to purchase the Property. (b) All required approvals, consents, and authorizations of state and federal regulatory authorities shall have been received. (c) All required consents of third parties shall have been received. (d) Buyer shall have completed a due diligence review of the property and its title of Seller satisfactory to Buyer in its sole discretion. The Buyer, as the City, may be required to make make land use and/or building code decisions affecting development of the subject Right-of-Way and related property according to local and state laws. The Parties therefore acknowledge that the Buyer cannot and does not promise or guarantee any particular planning or building code decision or result as part of or as a condition of achieving the purposes of this letter of intent. b. Negotiations with Others. Until January 1, 2018, the date on which the parties anticipate that a Purchase Agreement will be executed, Seller will not offer its stock or assets to, entertain offers for them from, negotiate for their sale to, or make information about them available (for purposes of sale) to, any third party. 7. Conduct of Business; Interim Operations. As long as this letter remains in effect, Seller will use its best efforts to conduct its business in a reasonable and prudent manner in accordance with past practices, to preserve its existing business organizations and relationships with its employees, customers, suppliers, and others with whom it has a business relationship, to preserve and protect its properties, avoid any and all liens, and to conduct its business in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations. 8. Closing Date. The closing date under the Purchase Agreement will be the date agreed upon by the parties. 9. Effect of This Letter. This letter sets forth the intent of the parties only, is not binding on the parties, and may not be relied on as the basis for a contract by estoppel or be the basis for a claim based on detrimental reliance or any other theory; provided that paragraphs 6 and 7, and this paragraph 9 will be enforceable in accordance with their terms. With the exceptions of paragraphs 4, 6, 7, and this paragraph 9, the parties understand that no party shall be bound until the Purchase Agreement has been negotiated, executed, delivered, and approved by the partners or shareholders of Buyer and Seller, as the case may be. Page 3 of 4 Attachment No. 1 Continued 10. Termination of Negotiations. This letter may be terminated at any time by either party giving written notice to the other. After notice is given, the parties shall be bound only by paragraphs 6, 7, and 9. If this letter sets forth your intent to proceed in good faith substantially in the manner outlined in this letter, please sign a copy of this letter and return it to Buyer. This letter of intent shall be of no further force and effect if it is not signed by Seller and returned to Buyer by the close of business on -s 12012. Ver yours, By: truly ou~-e Buyer Accepted and agreed to: ' By: Seller Page 4 of 4 Grantor's Name and Address: Ipco Development Corporation 640 Tolman Creek road Ashland, OR 97520 Grantee's Name: City of Ashland 20 E Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 After Recording Return To: City of Ashland 20 E Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 Unless a change is requested all taxes shall be sent to: Grantor DEDICATION DEED FOR ROAD OR STREET PURPOSES Ipco Development Corporation, Grantor, does hereby dedicate to the public a perpetual right-of-way for street, road, and utility purposes on, over, across, under, along, and within the following described real property in The City of Ashland, Oregon: See Attached Exhibits "A" and "B" incorporated into this document by reference as though fully incorporated herein. To have and to hold the above-described and dedicated rights unto the public forever for uses and purposes hereinabove stated. The Grantor hereby covenants that they are the owner in fee simple and the property is being granted subject to easements of record and that they have good and legal right to grant its right above-described. The true consideration for this conveyance is Three Hundred Thirty Nine Thousand Two Hundred Sixty Nine and No/100 Dollars ($339,269.00), the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged. DATED this day of i-el 6 - )2017. s 1 W. a -NuoW Gra'ntor,,aName Grantor Name Dedication Deed - Ipco Development Corporation Page 1 of 4 State of Oregon ) } ss County of Jackson ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on , 2017 a= by COL LA k C, V-- and m Who are the y -115-7 S- g and the of Ipco Development Corporation. OFFICIAL STAMP Notary P ucfo r Oregon EMILY IRENE KILLAM NOTARY PUBLIC -OREGON My Commission Expires:: 9 COMMISSION NO. 938603 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES MAY 03, 20'19 Accepted on behalf of the City of Ashland this day of _t-f-loryjart, )2017. x Signatufe , r124 Print Name and Title Dedication Deed - Ipco Development Corporation Page 2 of 4 EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION-RIGHT OF WAY CONVEYANCE INDEPENDENT WAY (IPCO PARCEL), ASHLAND, OREGON ASSESSOR'S MAP NO. 39 1E 14 BA, Tax Lots 500, 600, & 900 A right-of-way for street purposes over and across a portion of those tracts of land described within Instrument No's. 2000-19335, 2000-19339, & 2000-19340 of the Official Records in Jackson County, Oregon, lying situate within the Northwest Quarter of Section 14, Township 39 South, Range 1 East of the Willamette Meridian in the City of Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon, being more particularly described and bounded as follows, to wit; Commencing at a 5/8 inch iron pin at the northwest comer of that tract of land described within Instrument No. 2000-19335 of the Official Records in Jackson County, Oregon; thence South 00°02' 19" East, along the east line of Tolman Creek Road, a distance of 280.40 feet to the Point of Beginning; thence 23.54 feet along the are of a 15.00 foot radius curve to the left having a delta angle of 89'55'11" (Chord bearing South 44°59'55" East, 21.20 feet) to a point of tangency; thence South 89°57'30" East, 301.43 feet to the northwest corner of Parcel 4, Partition Plat No. P-70-1997, recorded on November 24, 1997 in the Plat Records in Jackson County, Oregon; thence continuing South 89°57'30" East along the north line of said parcel 4, a distance of 174.54 feet; thence North 00°02'30" East, leaving said north line, a distance of 24.87 feet; thence South 89°57'30" East, 54.00 feet to the east line of Parcel 3 of said described Partition Plat No. P-70-1997; thence South 05°36'47" East, along said east line, a distance of 24.98 feet to the north line of said Parcel 4; thence South 89°57'30" East along said north line, a distance of 99.00 feet to the northeast corner thereof; thence South 00°02'49" West, along the east line of said Parcel 4, a distance of 91.58 feet; thence North 89°57'30" West, leaving said east line, a distance of 55.93 feet; thence North 51 °47'02" West, 55.19 feet; thence North 89°57'30" West, parallel with and 55.00 southerly of said north line of said Parcel 4, a distance of 528.84 feet to a point of curvature; thence 23.58 feet along the are of a 15.00 foot radius curve to the left, having a delta angle of 90°04'49" (Chord bearing South 45°00'05" West, 21.23 feet) to the east line of Tolman Creek Road; thence North 00°02' 19" West, along said east line, a distance of 85.00 feet to the Point of Beginning. Containing 39,914e square feet or 0.92 acres, more or less. REGISIFERED Prepared by= PP,0 F E S.S t ©N A L Shawn Kampmann Professional Land Surveyor 51 Polaris Land Surveying LLC oR`Gold~ ID JULY :4, ,995 P.O. Box 459 SWI:ENN KA PMANN 02883LS Ashland, Oregon 97520 Renewal Date: 6/30/17 Date: November 17, 2016 S:\suroevs\846-14\Independent Way-IPCO RW Leoawocx P. 0. box 459, Ashland, Oregon 97520 Phone: (541) 452-5009 Fax: (541) 466-0797 Mobile: (541) 601-3000 www.polari.5survey.com +QO C9 t u wv z n0)~ q 0, a C) Qz, 03 -Z co < 14 . Q ~X~LIJ N w < ca U O b U °wo Cl o Ld Z > U aoz h Q aaz Li E o / J k xs s - - - M ,.st;zo.oo s °p Lu N a 4 Q) d td (10 m O a way vl ?o L/ ~ N ~~a V ~o W j ~tr) ouzo z ~ N N ~ N~~~ N N O o d Col t - ~I ~ a o 00 a ~ Q h tj~•, ~ ~ ~ ry N v coo ~00 I d Z o° °o I h o N ~ k 1 0 0 LL W o - , 6z--PZf - M 61,0-0.00 N _ - - o ~ - o aV0-9 ~ Sff2I0 Nvw-1O1 o ~ 0 .y / O Q Attachment No. 3 BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION September 8, 2015 IN THE MATTER OF PLANNING ACTION #2015-00422, A REQUEST FOR } SITE DESIGN REVIEW; EXCEPTION TO STREET STANDARDS; PROPERTY } LINE ADJUSTMENT; LIMITED USE PERMIT AND WATER RESOURCE ) PROTECTION ZONE REDUCTION FOR CONSTRUCTION IN THE WATER } RESOURCE PROTECTION ZONE; PHYSICAL & ENVIRONMENTAL ) CONSTRAINTS REVIEW PERMIT FOR FLOODPLAIN DEVELOPMENT; AND ) TREE REMOVAL PERMIT APPROVALS TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION } OF A NEW PUBLIC STREET TO BE CALLED INDEPENDENT WAY BETWEEN ) WASHINGTON STREET AND TOLMAN CREEK ROAD, AND ASSOCIATED ) CHANGES TO THE LANE CONFIGURATION AND ON-STREET PARKING ON ) FINDINGS, TOLMAN CREEK ROAD TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH ASHLAND STREET. ) CONCLUSIONS, THE PROPOSAL ALSO INCLUDES THE REVIEW OF DRIVEWAY LOCATIONS } AND ORDERS f AND ASSOCIATED CIRCULATION TO ALLOW COORDINATED INITIAL ) GRADING AND UTILITY INSTALLATION ON THE ADJACENT PRIVATE ) PROPERTY IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE NEW STREET INSTALLATION, ) HOWEVER THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES WILL BE ) .E SUBJECT TO FUTURE SITE DESIGN REVIEW AS INDIVIDUAL BUILDINGS ) AND THEIR SITE ASSOCIATED IMPROVEMENTS ARE PROPOSED, AND IS ) NEITHER PROPOSED NOR CONSIDERED HERE. ) APPLICANT: City of Ashland (CSA Planning, Ltd., agents), Independent ) Printing Company, Inc,, IPCO Development Corp. ) RECITALS: I) Tax lots 500, 600, 601, 700, 800, and 900 of Map 39 lE 14 BA are located at 600, 640, 688, 694 and 696 Tolman Creek Road, and 2316 Highway 66 and are zoned E-1, Employment.. 2) The applicants are requesting Site Design Review, Exception to Street Standards, Property Line Adjustment, Limited Use Permit and Water Resource Protection Zone Reduction for Construction in the I Water Resource Protection Zone, Physical & Environmental Constraints Review Permit for Floodplain Development, and Tree Removal Permit approvals to allow the construction of a new public street to be called "Independent Way" between Washington Street and Tolman Creek Road, and associated changes to the lane configuration and on-street parking on Tolman Creek Road to its intersection with Ashland Street. I' ,x The proposal also includes the review of driveway locations and associated circulation to allow the coordinated initial grading and utility installation on the adjacent private property in conjunction with 2 the new street installation, however the development of the adjacent private properties is neither proposed nor considered here and will be subject to future Site Design Review as individual buildings are proposed. PA #201500422 r September 8, 2015 Page I fi Attachment No. 3 Continued The proposal is outlined on plans on file at the Department of Community Development. 3) The criteria for Site Design Review approval are described AMC 18.5.2.050 as follows: A. Underlying Zone: The proposal complies with all of the applicable provisions of the underlying zone (part 18.2), including but not limited to: building and yard setbacks, lot area and dimensions, density and floor area, lot coverage, building height, building orientation, architecture, and other applicable standards. B. Overlay Zones: The proposal complies with applicable overlay zone requirements (part C. Site Development and Design Standards: The proposal complies with the applicable Site Development and Design Standards of part 38.4, 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. 4) The criteria for Exception to Street Standards are described AMC 18.4.6.020.B.I as follows: l a. There is demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements of this chapter due to a unique or unusual aspect of the site or proposed use of the site. b. The exception will result in equal or superior transportation facilities and connectivity considering the following factors where applicable. i. For transit facilities and related improvements, access, wart time, and ride experien ce. ii. For bicycle facilities, feeling of safety, quality of experience (i.e., comfort level of f bicycling along the roadway), and frequency of conflicts with vehicle cross traffic. iii. For pedestrian facilities, feeling of safety, quality of experience (i.e., comfort level of walking along roadway), and ability to safety and efficiency crossing roadway. i C. The exception is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty. j d. The exception is consistent with the Purpose and Intent of the Street Standards in subsection 18.4.6.040.A. 5) The criteria for Property Line Adjustments are described AMC 18.5.3.120.B as follows: 1 1. Parcel Creation. No additional parcel or lot is created by the lot line adjustment. a 2. Lot Standards. Except as allowed for nonconforming lots, pursuant to chapter 18.14, or as required by an overlay zone in part 18.3, all lots and parcels conform to the lot PA #2015-00422 t September 8, 2015 2 Page 2 f'. Y i Attachment No. 2 Continued standards of the applicable zoning district, including lot area, dimensions, setbacks, and coverage, per part 18.2. If a lot does not conform to the lots standards of the applicable zoning district, it shall not be made less conforming by the property line adjustment. As applicable, all lots and parcels shall identify a buildable area free of building restrictions for physical constraints (i.e., flood plain, greater than 35 percent slope, water resource protection zones). 3. Access Standards. All lots and parcels conform to the standards in section 18.4.3.080 Vehicle Area Design. Lots and parcels that do not conform to the access standards shall not be made less conforming by the property line adjustment. 6) The criteria for a Limited Activities and Use Permit are described AMC 18.3.11.060.D as follows: 1. All activities shall be located as for away from streams and wetlands as practicable, designed to minimize intrusion into the Water Resources Protection Zone and disturb as little of the surface area of the Water Resource Protection Zone as practicable. 2. The proposed activity shall be designed, located and constructed to minimize excavation, grading, area of impervious surfaces, loss of native vegetation, erosion, and other adverse impacts on Water Resources. 3. On stream beds or banks within the bank full stage, in wetlands, and on slopes of 25 percent or greater in a Water Resource Protection Zone, excavation, grading, installation of impervious surfaces and removal of native vegetation shall be avoided except where no practicable alternative exists, or where necessary to construct public facilities or to ensure slope stability. 4. Water, storm drain, and sewer systems shall be designed, located and constructed to avoid exposure to floodwaters, and to avoid accidental discharges to streams and we t1 ands. 5. Stream channel repair and enhancement, riparian habitat restoration and enhancement, L and wetland restoration and enhancement will be restored through the implementation of a mitigation plan prepared in accordance with the standards and requirements in section 18.3.11.110 !Mitigation Requirements. 6. Long term conservation, management and maintenance of the Water Resource Protection Zone shall be ensured through preparation and recordation of a management plan as described in subsection 18.3. 11. 110, C, except a management plan is not required for residentially zoned lots occupied only by a single-family dwelling and accessory structures. PA 9201500422; September 8, 2015 Page 3 Attachment No. 3 Continued 7) The criteria for Water Resource Protection Zone Reductions are described AMC 18.3.11,070 as follows; A. The proposed use or activity is designed to avoid intrusion into the Water Resource Protection Zone through the use of up to a 50 percent reduction of any dimensional standards (e.g., required front, side and rear yard setbacks, required distance between buildings) to permit development as far outside or upland of the Water Resource Protection Zone as possible. Such adjustment to any applicable dimensional standards shall be reviewed as part of the requested reduction, and shall not be subject to a separate Variance application under chapter 18.5.5 Variances. Reductions to dimensional standards may nat be used to reduce required Solar Access setbacks without evidence of agreement by the effected property owner(s) to the north through a concurrent Solar Access Variance application as described in chapter 18.4.8 Solar Access. B. The alteration of the Water Resource Protection Zone is the minimum necessary to efficiently perform the proposed activity and/or use. The proposed development shall minimize disturbance to the Water Resource Protection Zone by utilizing the following design options to minimize or reduce impacts of development. f; F: 1 1. Multi-story construction shall be considered. 2. Parking spaces shall be minimized to no more than that required as a minimum for the use. 3. Pavement shall be minimized, and all pavement used shall be installed and maintained in a porous solid surface paving material. 4. Engineering solutions shall be used to minimize additional grading and/or fill. C. The application demonstrates that equal or better protection for identified resources will be ensured through restoration, enhancement, and mitigation measures. The structures, functions, and values of the Water Resource will be restored through the implementation of a restoration and enhancement strategy set forth in a mitigation plan r r prepared in accordance with the standards and requirements described in section 18,3.11.110 Mitigation Requirements. D. Long term conservation, management, and maintenance of the Water Resource Protection Zone shall be ensured through preparation and recordation of a management plan as described in subsection 18.3.11.110.C, except a management plan is not required for residentially zoned lots occupied only by a single-family dwelling and accessory structures. PA #2015-00422 September 8, 2015 Page 4 Attachment No. 3 Continued 8) The criteria for a Physical & Environmental Constraints Review Permit are described AMC 18.3.10.050 as follows: A. Through the application of the development standards of this chapter, the potential impacts to the property and nearby areas have been considered, and adverse impacts have been minimized. B. That the applicant has considered the potential hazards that the development may create and implemented measures to mitigate the potential hazards caused by the development. C. That the applicant has taken all reasonable steps to reduce the adverse impact on the environment. Irreversible actions shall be considered more seriously than reversible actions. The Staff Advisor or Planning Commission shall consider the existing development of the surrounding area, and the maximum development permitted by this ordinance 9) The criteria for a Tree Removal Permit are described in AMC 18.5.7.040.B as follows: 1. Hazard Tree. A Hazard Tree Removal Permit shall be granted if the approval authority finds that the application meets all of the following criteria, or can be made to conform through the imposition of conditions. I a. The applicant must demonstrate that the condition or location of the tree presents a clear public safety hazard (i.e., likely to fall and injure persons or property) or a foreseeable danger of property damage to an existing structure or facility, and such hazard or danger cannot reasonably be alleviated by treatment, relocation, or pruning. See definition of hazard tree in part 18.6, b. The City may require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each hazard tree pursuant to section 18.5.7.050. Such mitigation requirements shall be a ! condition of approval of the permit. 2. Tree That is Not a Hazard. A Tree Removal Permit for a tree that is not a hazard shall be granted if the approval authority finds that the application meets all of the following criteria, or can be made to conform through the imposition of conditions. 1. The tree is proposed for removal in order to permit the application to be s consistent with other applicable Land Use Ordinance requirements and standards, including but not limited to applicable Site Development and Design Standards in part 18.4 and Physical and Environmental Constraints in part 18.10. 2. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks. ti PA #2015-00422 September 8, 2015 Page 5 z Attachment No. 3 Continued 3. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes, canopies, and species diversity within 200 feet of the subject property. The City shall grant an exception to this criterion when alternatives to the tree removal have been considered and no reasonable alternative exists to allow the property to be used as permitted in the zone. 4. Nothing in this section shall require that the residential density to be reduced below the permitted density allowed by the zone. In making this determination, the City may consider alternative site plans or placement of structures of alternate landscaping designs that would lessen the impact on trees, so long as the alternatives continue to comply with the other provisions of this ordinance. 5. The City shall require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each tree granted approval pursuant to section 38.5.7.050. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit. 10) The Planning Commission, following proper public notice, held a public hearing on July 14, 2015 at which time testimony was received and exhibits were presented. Following testimony, the Planning Commission noted that the submittal materials made it difficult to discern the specifics of the request, and asked that revised materials clarifying the proposal be brought to the next meeting. The hearing was r continued until the Planning Commission's next regular meeting on August 11, 2015 at which time testimony was again received and exhibits were again presented. Subsequent to the closing of the hearing, r the Planning Commission approved the application subject to conditions pertaining to the appropriate development of the site. Now, therefore, the Planning Commission of the City of Ashland finds, concludes and recommends as r follows: SECTION L EXHIBITS For the purposes of reference to these Findings, the attached index of exhibits, data, and testimony will be used. i Staff Exhibits lettered with an "S" n Proponent's Exhibits, lettered with a "P" Opponent's Exhibits, lettered with an "O" Hearing Minutes, Notices, Miscellaneous Exhibits lettered with an i SECTION 2. CONCLUSORY FINDINGS PA #2015-00422 September 8, 2015 Page 6 Attachment No. 3 Continued 2.1 The Planning Commission finds that it has received all information necessary to make a decision based on the Staff Report, public hearing testimony and the exhibits received. i 2.2 The Planning Commission finds that the proposal for Site Design Review, Exception to Street Standards, Property Line Adjustment, Limited Use Permit and Water Resource Protection Zone Reduction for Construction in the Water Resource Protection Zone, Physical & Environmental Constraints Review Permit for Floodplain Development, and Tree Removal Permit approvals meets all applicable criteria for Site Review approval described in Chapter 18.5.2.050, Exception to Street Standards as described in Chapter 18.4.6.020.B.1, Property Line Adjustment as described in Chapter 18.5.3.120.B, Limited Use Permit and Water Resource Protection Zone Reduction for Construction in the Water Resource Protection Zone as described in Chapters 18.3,11,060.D and 18.3.11.070, Physical & Environmental Constraints Review Permit for Floodplain Development as described in Chapter 18.3.10.050, and Tree Removal Pennits as described in Chapter 18.5.7.040.B.2. 2.3 The Planning Commission finds that the proposal is somewhat limited in teens of Site Design Review because it involves only the review of the street installation, driveway locations and associated circulation to allow public improvements associated with the new street and coordinated initial grading and util ty installation on the adjacent private property. The materials provided emphasize that it is logical to complete grading and the installation of the main underground utilities for the site in conjunction with the street construction, however the applicants recognize that the extent of the entitlements sought are limited to this rough grading and associated installation of utilities with site planning details including final building locations, building designs, parking, site circulation, plaza space, truck loading bays and similar elements to be evaluated when development is proposed. The Commission notes that despite this recognition, page two of the July 22, 2015 memorandum from the applicants' agents CSA Planning Ltd. contains the following statements: "In order to approve the grading and utility plan as proposed, the Planning Commission must conclude that the proposed building pads are located such that fitture buildings in these locations could be feasibly designed to comply yvith the Site Plan Review criteria that pertain to building locations" and s "At its essence, approval of the building pads means that the Planning Commission finds that the proposed locations of the building pads are appropriate to site fixture buildings under the City's code The Commission explicitly rejects these statements, and finds it important to emphasize that no development of the adjacent private properties is being proposed by the applicants or considered by the Commission with this request, and when individual buildings and their associated site improvements are -E proposed, they will be subject to future land use review under all applicable regulations in effect at the time. The Commission further finds that by approving the curb cuts, curbing, and retaining wall locations, the Commission is recognizing the establishment of what will be pre-existing conditions that will not be considered self-imposed when the applicant brings forth a development proposal in the future. f The Commission further finds that consideration of underlying zoning requirements, overlay zones, and the Site Development and Design Standards are largely deferred until the adjacent properties develop, and that this Site Design Review focuses largely on determining that the improvements proposed comply with applicable standards, that public facilities (water, sewer, eelectricity, urban storm drainage PA #12015-00422 5 September 8, 2015 Page 7 is Attachment No. 3 Continued and paved access) have adequate capacity to and throughout the property, and that adequate transportation can and will be provided. The application materials provided note that there is an existing water main in Tolman Creek Road that will be extended through the subject property within the proposed Independent Way right-of-way in a new eight-inch water main. Similarly, there is an existing sanitary sewer main in Tolman Creek Road. An existing sanitary sewer lateral extends to serve the existing IPCO development on site. The application notes that a portion of this line will be reconstructed as part of the road project and that this line will serve any future development on the south side of Independent Way. Future development on the north side of Independent Way will be served by a new sanitary sewer lateral somewhere near the north property boundary that will connect to the existing sanitary sewer service in Tolman Creek Road. The application further explains that storm drainage from the new Independent Way is designed to outflow into the Hamilton Creek drainage. The proposed street design includes two Filterra© bio-- retention systems to treat stormwater before it enters the stream; these systems improve water quality by removing various undesirable particulates in the water for typical storm water events. The Filterra® systems are proposed at each of the two storm drain inlets on the south side of Independent Way. Future private development on the south side of Independent Way will direct storm drainage to the new storm i' drainage system in Independent Way. Future development on the north side of Independent Way will E utilize a new storm drain installed at the north boundary of the project site and direct flows into Hamilton Creek. The application notes that future storm water treatment systems in this area are expected to be integrated into the site landscaping design and reviewed as part of future Site Design Review in conjunction with development. The Commission further finds that in considering the proposal in light of the requirements for adequate transportation, a Traffic Impact Analysis has been provided with the application. Items of note with regard to the proposal include: • No bike lanes are proposed on either side of the new street as vehicle trips are anticipated to be low enough that cyclists will be comfortable sharing the road, and the design is to include r "sharrows". The materials also suggest that the proposed pedestrian corridor is adequate to accommodate bicyclists. • The application explains that driveway widths are proposed as somewhat wider than usual to accommodate semi-truck circulation to serve the existing IPCO facility and that this is necessitated because the new road is proposed only approximately 25 feet from the existing 2 building. • The application notes that the nature of the existing land uses on the south side of Independent Way as currently developed results in minimal pedestrian demand, which when combined with the anticipated truck traffic serving these uses, has lead the applicants to propose not to install standard sidewalks on the full south side of the proposed Independent Way. The application recognizes that in future years, the existing IPCO building on the south side of Independent Way PA 92015-00422 September 8, 2015 Page 8 i` [4 ii Attachment No. 3 Continued may redevelop and that the right-of-way width proposed is adequate to accommodate City standard pedestrian improvements with future redevelopment of the site. The application proposes to place street trees within grated wells in a five-foot parkrow on the north side of the new street, noting that this design option is typical where on-street parking is to be provided. These grated tree wells provide a flat area for people to step onto when exiting parked cars. The application emphasizes that the ultimate plan for the street is that in the event that the IPCO Printing business were to redevelop, on-street parking would be added on the north side of the street. As such, the street width is proposed at a 28-foot curb-to-curb width consistent with a cross-section to allow for parking on one side of the street. The application emphasizes that for the time being, full 14-foot lanes are needed to accommodate the large number of heavy vehicles and associated turning movements associated with the existing industrial use of the site. • Based on the applicants' Traffic Impact Analysis, on-street parking on Tolman Creek Road from its intersection with Ashland Street (Highway 66) and the new Independent Way will be eliminated in conjunction with lane reconfiguration. The applicants' Traffic Engineer makes this recommendation to reduce northbound queuing along Tolman Creek Road, improve the signalized intersection operation of Tolman Creek Road and Ashland Street, and provide a left turn lane at Tolman Creek Road. The application emphasizes that parking between Ashland Street and the new Independent Way is seldom used, and the removal of this parking would be required with or without the proposed Independent Way construction to address operational deficiencies at the intersection due to background traffic growth. The application emphasizes that the fiinctionality of the intersection, one of the busiest in Ashland, will be operationally improved because of the project and that the project will result in less circuitous access to Washington and Jefferson Street businesses by pedestrians and cyclists. The Commission finds that the materials provided argue that most of the on-street parking which would to be removed is seldom used, and that the operation of the Ashland Street-Tolman Creek intersection is such that the on-street parking will need to be removed in this area regardless of the proposed project. The application further emphasizes that the construction of the proposed new Independent Way connection will improve intersection operations at this location. The applicants also t indicate that the on-street parking that is being most utilized is around the Goodwill, and the applicants have raised the potential for installing a nine-foot deep parking bay 48 feet long on the south side of the new Independent Way near its intersection with Tolman Creek Road, across from Goodwill. The Commission finds that whatever measure of on-street parking can be provided on Independent Way to off-set the removal of on-street parking on Tolman Creek Road is beneficial, and a condition has accordingly been required below to require the applicants' proposed 48-foot parking bay on the south { side of Independent Way near its intersection with Tolman Creek Road. 2.4 The Planning Commission finds that the proposed new Independent Way is identified in the recently adopted Transportation System Plan as a Commercial Neighborhood Collector Street, and will serve as a gateway to nearby areas likely to see significant local job and housing growth in the near fixture. The Jefferson/Washington employment area, much of which is outside current city limits but within the urban growth boundary, consists of approximately 45 acres, including the commercial/employment area along Ashland Street and Tolman Creek Road, the city's second largest employment center after the downtown. 45 acres developed to an approximate Floor Area Ratio of 0.35 PA #2015-00422 September 2015 Page 9 i Attachment No. 3 Continued and an employment density of 20 employees per acre equates to approximately 686,000 square feet of building floor area and 900 employees ultimately served in the vicinity. The typical cross-section required for a city standard "Commercial Neighborhood Collector Street" includes two ten-foot motor vehicle travel lanes, eight-foot parking bays on one or both sides, a five- to seven-foot planting strip with street trees down both sides, and eight- to ten-foot sidewalks on both sides, all within a i-ight-of way width of between 55 and 71 feet. Bike lanes are only required where anticipated average daily trips exceed 3,000. The applicants initially proposed a 55-foot right-of-way width to consist of a 12-foot pedestrian corridor on the north side and two 14-foot travel lanes, with the potential to add on-street parking on the north side when the 1PCO site redevelops. Exceptions to the Street Standards were requested to not install a city standard sidewalk on the south side of the street, to install six-foot curbside sidewalks on both sides of the street at the creek crossing, and to install a 12- foot pedestrian corridor on the north side of the street where a minimum of 13 feet is required. The Commission finds that Exceptions require a demonstration that the facilities and resultant connectivity will be equal or superior to those required under the standards; that the exceptions requested are the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty, and that the exceptions are consistent with the purpose j and intent of the Street Standards. The Commission finds that the city's street standards are based on an assumption that all city streets are to have parkrows and sidewalks on both sides, while recognizing that in certain situations where the physical features of the land create severe constraints, or natural features should be preserved, Exceptions may be made which could result in meandering sidewalks, sidewalks on only one side of the street, or curbside sidewalk segments instead of setback walks. However, the Commission finds that the Street Standards emphasize that Exceptions should only be allowed when physical conditions exist that preclude development of a public street, or components of the street, and notes that such conditions may include, but are not limited to, topography, wetlands, mature trees, creeks, drainages, rock outcroppings, and limited right--of way when improving streets through a local improvement district. The Street Standards for a Neighborhood Commercial Collector Street call for a 13-foot pedestrian corridor while the application initially requested an Exception to provide only a 12-foot corridor on the north side. The Commission finds that insuring that the new street constructed provides for safe and j functional use by users of all modes of transportation over the life of the street as the area develops fully is crucial, and given the street's anticipated role as a Neighborhood Commercial Collector likely to serve the Washington Street and Croman employment areas, its anticipated level of vehicle trips with build-out in the area, and the truck circulation associated with the anticipated development of the applicants' properties, it would be difficult to find that a substandard corridor is "equal or superior" or that the width reduction is necessary to alleviate any difficulty when the street is new and the right-of- way proposed is of a width intended to accommodate standard improvements. The Planning Commission finds that the revised submittals provided for the August 11th hearing reflect the city standard 13-foot width north side pedestrian corridor, not counting curbing, incorporating an eight-foot wide sidewalk and five-foot by five-foot tree planting wells, as recommended by planning staff, The Commission further finds that where on-street parking is not planned, the 13 foot pedestrian' corridor n?ay consist of a continuous, seven-foot wide planting strip with a six-foot sidewalk rather than PA #2015-00422 September 8, 2015 Page 10 i Attachment No. 3 Continued a five-foot hardscape planting strip and eight--foot sidewalk. Planning staff had initially recommended that, given that on-street parking is not initially to be provided, a continuous seven-foot park row planting strip would better accommodate street tree growth to enhance the corridor and provide a greater buffer for pedestrians particularly given anticipated truck traffic. Staff noted that this parka-ow configuration could be adapted to on-street parking installation with future redevelopment. The applicants however requested an eight-foot sidewalk and five-foot tree grate pedestrian corridor configuration, but proposed to utilize structural soil as a way to better accommodate street tree growth and thus address the concerns raised by planning staff. Structural soil is a soil mix made of some combination of crushed stone, clay loam or other soil and a hydro-gel stabilizer that can be compacted for pavement installation while still accommodating root growth. For street trees, its use means that instead of having root growth confined to what amounts to 4 a small planting area within a tree well it can instead continue beneath a much broader area of the sidewalk corridor providing for more robust tree growth, a fuller canopy and a longer tree life. The Commission finds that structural soil has previously been used on projects in Ashland along Lithia Way both at 150 Lithia Way and along the full frontage of the First Place development. The Commission finds that the use of structural soil in combination with the eight-foot sidewalk and five- 3 foot grated tree planting well is an acceptable solution which addresses the concerns raised by staff while also addressing the applicants' concerns over water usage, maintenance, and providing a wider functional corridor to better accommodate pedestrians and bicycles. u The initial application also included the installation of an approximately 80-foot long section of eight- foot wide curbside sidewalk along the south side of the new street, along the frontage of Tax Lot #600 that would have required an Exception because no park row planting strip was proposed. Planning staff had noted that while an Exception was merited to defer the installation of standard sidewalks on the south side of the corridor to avoid conflicts with existing large truck traffic, they did not believe a substandard corridor was merited and instead recommended that sidewalk improvements on the south side either be deferred until Site Review for future buildings or constructed to current standards if installed now. The revised submittals provided at the August 11h hearing reflect a city standard sidewalk/parkrow installation in this section, and provide a location to connect a crosswalk to the north side sidewalk. 2.5 The Planning Commission finds that the property line adjustments proposed are intended to create a logical relationship between the new street, the existing development and future development areas. The applicants emphasize that right-of-way acquisition by itself does not partition properties, and .4 the right-of-way acquisition by the city proposed here would result in portions of one parcel split across two sides of the new street without the proposed adjustments. As proposed, these adjustments would :f place property lines along the centerline of the proposed right-of-way acquisition area, allowing right-of- way to be acquired logically from each parcel and resulting in a logical lot configuration after the right- 't is of-way acquisition by the city. There are no minimum lot sizes or dimensional requirements within the i E-1 zone, and all resulting lots are physically configured to support either existing development of the property or its future development after the right-of-way acquisition occurs. PA #2015-00422 September 8, 2015 Page 1 1 s Attachment No. 3 Continued 2.6 The Planning Commission finds that the application proposes a new public street crossing of the Hamilton Creek Water Resource Protection Zone, a relocated private driveway crossing of the Hamilton 3 Creek Water Resource Protection Zone, and three reductions in the Water Resource Protection Zone. The Commission finds that the proposed new street crosses Hamilton Creek in a location where the corridor transitions from an open creek bed to a piped reach flowing within a five-foot corrugated metal pipe and where the stream type transitions from a Local Stream with a 40-foot Water Resource Protection Zone to an Intermittent/Ephemeral Stream with a 30-foot Water Resource Protection Zone. The construction of new public access and utilities within a Water Resource Protection Zone is considered a Limited Use where deemed necessary to maintain a functional system and upon a finding that no other reasonable alternate location exists. The Transportation System Plan (TSP) is noted as a guiding document in this determination, and the Commission finds that the proposed new street crossing in this location is identified in the recently adopted TSP. Private access and utilities are also a limited use where necessary to provide access to an otherwise inaccessible or landlocked parcel where no other reasonable, alternate access exists as is the case with the applicants' proposed relocated crossing at the southeastern portion of the property. The Commission finds that with the project, the applicants will mitigate the proposed protection zone disturbances by restoring a significant reach of Hamilton Creek resulting in 19,900 square feet of enhancements. This will include approximately 14,551 square feet of mitigation area immediately up and down stream of the proposed crossing. The Commission further finds that the proposed stream crossings will utilize open bottom designs, and goes on to explain that while there are currently barriers r to fish passage downstream and immediately upstream, these designs will allow for fish passage in the future. The Commission finds that the application discusses three reductions in the Water Resources Protection Zone. The first is at the proposed new Independent Way public street crossing of Hamilton Creek (applicants' Impact Area B) and involves a disturbance within the Water Resource Protection Zone of r 9,S73 square feet. The second area involves the relocation of an existing private driveway crossing (applicants' Impact Area E) at the southeast corner of the site. The application notes that there is i. already an existing private driveway crossing here, although it is relatively minimal due to the ephemeral nature of the stream. The proposal is to better align the crossing with the existing development on the site, and the application emphasizes that without the reduction to allow the crossing and minimal maneuvering, this corner of the site would be of limited practical utility. The Commission finds that public and private access as proposed here are permissible as Limited Uses, and do not need to be considered separately as protection zone reductions. is The Commission finds that the third reduction requested involves two small areas (applicants' Impact Areas C and D) totaling 124 square feet to allow straight curb lines for parking and maneuvering areas to serve the existing and future development. The Commission finds that these reductions are cue Fminimus and necessary for the functioning of existing and future uses of the property and that the impacts have been minimized and will be mitigated. PA #2015-00422 September 8, 2015 Page 12 ii Attachment No. 3 Continued 2.7 The Planning Commission finds that because the application involves disturbance constituting development on Floodplain Corridor Lands, a Physical & Environmental Constraints Review Permit is also necessary. The application notes that Thornton Engineering has created hydraulic modeling for the full length of the stream corridor for all subject properties in conjunction with a Letter of Map Revision in order to reduce the extent of the property considered to be flood plain con•idor lands by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Thornton Engineering has indicated that the proposed project can and will be designed in a manner that does not increase base flood elevations, and the applicants have recommended a condition of approval to require a new hydraulic analysis be provided based on the final design of the build-condition project that shows no rise in base flood elevations when ti compared to the existing conditions hydraulic modeling provided with the application. .t i 2.8 The Planning Commission finds that the application as initially submitted included a Tree Inventory and Tree Removal/Protection Plan which identified a total of 31 trees greater than six-inches in diameter to be removed as part of the request. Of the trees to be removed, ten were proposed for removal to accommodate the construction of the proposed Independent Way and its crossing of Hamilton Creek and 21 were proposed for removal to allow development of the private portion of the project. The application emphasized that these proposed removals were necessary to create a new city street identified as a necessary connection in the city's Transportation System Plan and to prepare the adjacent private property for future development consistent with the E-1 zone. The application materials 1 argued that the removal of these trees would not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks, and also asserted that the project would not have a significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes, canopies or species diversity within 200 feet of the subject property. A mitigation plan was provided, with 37 trees z proposed to be planted along Hamilton Creek to mitigate those proposed to be removed. After a Planning Commissioner site visit on July 13"' and the subsequent initial hearing on the project on July 141h, Commissioners found that Tree #22, a 30-inch diameter Ponderosa Pine behind the existing z residence on the property, and Trees #14 and #15, 25- and 20-inch Oaks near the crossing proposed to access the building pad at the southeast corner of the site merited preservation through the modification of the initial proposal. The applicants subsequently provided a revised grading plan and cross-section drawings clarifying the rough grading proposed, and supporting narrative submittals which noted that the applicants would accept conditions requiring revised plans to reflect the preservation and protection of these three trees (#14, 415 and #22) which the Commission finds merit preservation and protection. 2.9 The Planning Commission finds that Independent Way will be an important new gateway to those areas likely to see significant local job and housing growth in the future, and that this new street connection will provide for increased functionality of the street system. The Commission finds that first consideration with the proposal is in insuring that the street system ultimately develops not only to support a functionality for motor vehicle circulation, but also in providing for multiple transportation s options to create a safe, optimal environment for all users as envisioned in the Street Standards and PA 82015-00422 September 8, 2015 Page 13 ;F Attachment No. 3 Continued Transportation System Plan. The Commission finds that the modifications made by the applicants since the July 14t" meeting bring the proposal largely into line with the street standards with the exception of the frontage of the existing 1PCO Printing building on the south side, and the Commission is supportive of these changes, including the proposed use of structural soil to better accommodate the development of a healthy and robust street tree canopy. The Commission is also supportive of establishing driveway curb cuts, preliminary rough grading and extending utility connections to the adjacent private property in conjunction with the proposed new street construction with the recognition that further development of these sites will be subject to Site Design Review to consider both the building and site designs in light of standards in place when each building is proposed, and that specific building locations, sizes and broader associated site improvements have not yet been proposed and are not considered or approved with this application. The Commission finds that the establishment of a clear curb line delineating the boundary of the Hamilton Creels corridor, and a de minim-us reduction in the Water Resource Protection Zone to square off this curb line for the functionality and efficiency of existing and future circulation is appropriate. The Commission further finds that the creek crossing for the new public street, including the associated removal of ten trees, and the private creek crossing for a new private driveway access to the building pad at the southeast of the site, including the removal of Tree #13, is appropriate but the establishment of on-site parking and circulation on that portion of the property will be better considered with Site Review for development of that building pad. The Commission finds that the applicants have agreed to J' preserve and protect Trees #14 and 415 that were previously proposed to be removed to accommodate the new driveway here, and their preservation and protection have been incorporated into the conditions below. ' is SECTION 3. DECISION 3.1 Based on the record of the Public Hearing on this hatter, the Planning Commission concludes that the proposal for Site Design Review, Exception to Street Standards, Property Line Adjustment, Limited Use Permit and Water Resource Protection Zone Reduction for Construction in the Water Resource ' Protection Zone, Physical & Environmental Constraints Review Permit for Floodplain Development, r and Tree Removal Permit approvals to allow the construction of a new public street is supported by evidence contained within the whole record. Therefore, based on our overall conclusions, and upon the proposal being subject to each of the following conditions, we approve Planning Action #2015--00422. Further, if any one or more of the conditions below f are found to be invalid, for any reason whatsoever, then Planning Action #2015--00422 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 modified herein, including that the final plans shall be revised to include the preservation and protection of. Trees #14, #15 and #22. 2. That a final survey plat shall be submitted within 12 months and approved by the City of PA #2015-00422 September 8, 2015 Page H n :i Attachment No. 3 Continued Ashland within 18 months of this approval. 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. 3. That final engineered street improvement, storm drainage and utility plans for the new Independent Way shall be submitted for the review and approval of the Ashland Engineering and Planning Divisions prior to signature of the final survey plat. 4. That the final engineered construction drawings for the public sidewalks on Independent Way shall be submitted for review and approval of the Ashland Planning and Engineering Divisions prior to work in the street right-of-way and prior to installation of improvements in the pedestrian corridor. The sidewalk on the north side of Independent Way shall be a minimum of eight feet in width with a required five-foot hardscape parkrow planting strip with tree grates between the sidewalk and the curb. No hardscape parkrow shall be required in the area of the bridge crossing, but full improvements, including but not limited to the sidewalk, parkrows with irrigated street trees, and street lighting shall be required on the remainder of the north side. The final engineered construction drawings shall include details for the installation of structural soil, including tree planting cross-sections, soil mix details, and the extent of the structural soil installation. 5. That street trees, spaced at one tree per 30 feet of street frontage, shall be installed on the north side of Independent Way. All street trees shall be chosen from the adopted Street Tree List and shall be installed in accordance with the specifications noted in AMC 18.4.4.030.E. All street trees shall be irrigated. 6. The sidewalk on the south side shall be constructed to six-foot width with no parkrow planting strip within the bridge crossing as proposed by the applicants. Any additional pedestrian corridor improvements installed on the south side shall be to city street standards. The completion of any remaining sections of sidewalk on the south side of Independent Way shall be evaluated with future development applications. 7. That the final engineered plans for the new Independent Way shall include the applicants' proposed 48-foot on-street parking bay on the south side of Independent Way near its intersection with Tolman Creek Road. 8. That the applicants shall work with the Rogue Valley Transportation District (RVTD) and neighboring property owners to address relocation of the transit stop on the west side of Tolman (',reek Road, if necessitated by the proposed on-street parking removal and lane reconfiguration. 9. That, as proposed by the applicants, a new hydraulic analysis by the project engineers shall be provided based on the final design of the build-condition project that shows no rise in base flood elevations when compared to the existing conditions hydraulic modeling provided with the is r application. 10. That a Tree Verification Permit shall be applied for and approved by the Ashland Planning Division prior to site work including excavation, staging or storage of materials. The Tree Verification Permit is to inspect the identification of the trees to be removed and the installation of tree protection fencing for trees to be retained. The tree protection shall be chain link fencing six feet tall and installed in accordance with the requirements of AMC 18.4.5.030.B. No construction shall occur within the tree protection zone including dumping or storage of materials such as building supplies, soil, waste, equipment, or parked vehicles. 11. That silt fencing or other protective measures shall be installed along the Water Resource I 4 PA #2015-00422 September 8, 2015 Page 15 1 l Attachment No. 3 Continued Protection Zone boundary, inspected and approved by the Staff Advisor prior to issuance of excavation permits or any site work, staging or storage of materials on site. 12. That the applicants shall provide a management plan, and any necessary modification to existing conservation easements, providing for the long--term conservation, management and maintenance of the Water Resource Protection Zone as detailed in AMC 18.3.11.110.0 prior to the approval of final civil engineering plans. 13. That a final grading and erosion control plans shall be provided which include details addressing the "Vegetation Preservation and Construction Staging Requirements" found in AMC 18.3.110.A. i 14. That a final size- and species-specific mitigation plan including irrigation details and details of the landscape materials to be planted to buffer the visual impacts of the retaining wall as viewed from Washington Street shall be provided for the review and approval of the Staff Advisor. All 1 mitigation plantings shall be installed according to the approved plan, inspected, and approved by the Staff Advisor, and the management plan and any necessary easement modifications recorded prior to final approval. s; 15. That lots not actively being constructed or used for staging shall be treated with a low-water use wildflower seed mix and generally maintained in a weed-free condition. 16. That no new paving or curbing other than that associated with the street installation, establishing new driveway curb cut locations, and delineating the Water Resources Protection Zone boundary shall be permitted until approved through future Site Design Review applications. 17. That the applicants' "Overall Master Site Plan (Sheet A--101)" has not been reviewed for I compliance with applicable standards and is not approved here, as recognized by the applicants in the narrative submittals provided. Development of the site shall be subject to full review under the applicable standards at the time each building is proposed. 18. That any demolition of existing buildings shall be subject to the applicable demolition r requirements (currently found in AMC 15.04.210-.216) and may require that the applicants obtain Demolition/Relocation Review Permit approval prior to any demolition. n 1 September 8, 2015 Planning Commission Approval Date E: r t i~ I% ~i li l s~ PA #2015-00422 September 8, 2015 Page 16 j I f Attachment No. 4 d doe°`~M ~ Wh~+W g Y~~ U] I U~\~ = o W -II. w >zz ~ W / ~ o ~ ~ azo a z ooZ lap y Q r( z°~ O w ~aa o << 336 ~'n O CD - -1 tl~ ~a ~w I U T I I I 4 F --j m~ / I 2IIIJ E ~ ~ s ~ ~ I I I•p~ Q o w a > I ~ 0 y0 00 Seth ~I' .°41 yp~ ry~o~ fQr ~'La,V2LLS LLD IHSy L4 N I[- F Jul UA H rc a -$rc"i ~I n oo x2 x 04 co o ' / ~_-W ° q zm~~ W co Avd pip; H ~1/~ 3 5~\ f d 4 tea; ct w U Z 00 M~ \ 6. to I N~~' J~I~ W Q 2 1 \ o CYIM, 1 < ro - W° 61U I 'I' U . l E~ \ III~W 20~21 q J i q I ~ ~ > I- 'I~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W~ ail ' n W " w II \ III o I is i I a o I ao I J I ~~\I i n II e o~ O~ I I 1 ~i' ~ ° e X000 @ \ U UO EOM W~ f I I ~8 I I I r~ ~ ma ~ ~ ~o / \ \ I ~ 3 o II M/ a _ _ - _ \I I ,sez 1 sez o = I < ~ 1 I ~ el~ ~ ~ o I- J QVOH 'VJH j AIVN7 I Attachment No. 4 Continued WC\2 Y ~ v~ ,'I ao z 1 a ~W ~~oN ~Ysz W r T~4 pSya °c v v Q CC CID A vo _ - U 4iW.~- tltl vi az °R~ [xz]~Q III Z: lz cr- i WR aO 3: al 1,21 L4.i -J Zfa t^"~~nw w - ~ ° ~ ~ r NO.LOIIIHSVAI j i W s, i°~ a e m ~ ~ ~ 7a - a~ -al\ ~ T7 jj \ s i 2 m 3 C/I _ D Vim;- 1 D { m I, i L ~ g o I Cz. 4 W S I~ 4 ~ g 5 5 ~ N U I z~ ~ W N. 5 g ~gi Z aaDill t l_ ~s a I, t~ c~2 23~ V 1 via -m m HG WW ~`4 z ym [ _ 4~ p 4 tt yy yyJ Msg. i FaF 0 \il, ,.:lm n' n4i ~~n rC~t C4t`~ry~["^F!°~oS..,v~I4 ~J~ ~i ~ I m c 9 ¢ L 13 W$ g 3 L U 09 ~i W he w `sa ` ~ _ CC ~ ;>'w w aLL~ s 0o Gm n ~ ~ ~ ad ,f i >a3 ~ _ Q i z E 5; - Q a-v0?I XIVH?Il? IV VH70.L Attachment No. 4 - Continued ~Y -,E z `m a: a W LL Ea LU :E a~i~ ~aa a~yg~ § p a o H = O m~ Q n 6 W t 3 m g8 8 8 8 8 o a °o 3 Z , d N - o mm.~° U W N a 9 T s@@ $ g g p LL x ui -i W d+N fF" axo$s~x r°, s s s s s s 'a 's a g s ° W a u "oaw o $ o ° o vi W I ` ca Q t9 \ a ~ W ygN"`ar \ C N X ~r w N W LU W Z 'O 8 \ \ p F W J1144b \ a W o - 07 7,7 70 /j w / /°W z / Z QZ%w` W NC N No N i a w °/a~ N U) V7 -1 re ui 'u v C - L6 - f rA p 'n z o z o s W a LU V U. p O O' Z Z-Z co N 0 ® s U. Z C,4 - J r' a N = a t-M%. FW ,.ir =s X W Z k W e I~o W Z d M J ®J lip _ S - - w 3 ~ ~ ~a Hr , - °a " ~ 3 N - ---W W I t7 g c Q o Z--- Z F Z ON N ~N- s N Z H ~7 N ,ate J T,' m r W r lLJG o 1- W---- t~ y W W vF D OOH W W N ego ~ Yx ~i / 1 ~ ~ _ Z~Z N Fi F~NO W ~m I NN Iq 3x II W W V H il't I ' W D I 1 V I N y a WH 99 f f~OL SIOLiB?li'~`PLOI M50uvee~()LL'.OLO~d~snab~c MONeIe~,NCH\4"u.smpe~~ Attachment No. 4 Continued _ V ~ C"' ~ I ~ * ~ Cap Z 0 0-~ C - - - - - Q W )IHHLJ AFO L7HY6'H - - M UU), r OA " O F ° °zZ ==u ~o ~ W °-j W - - ~ 8 ~~~~e VJs 1 N N N h N N O n o $ Q des' I I i ~ a I a I AY'M ILATgaAIHdHQ!\II Y R I ' ~ z O N 1 I 4 ~L-ll CQ O - 'I - O ~ - II O jk o i ~ p ~ L I ~ Q~l g s g i R w I~ o~ N N I ~ I ! III II HA➢7 .[.LNBdONd RL7fON ° _ V~ 1._ N N R h N H I 3 i _ _ III V I I L1 I I i 1_. a ~ o ° ° m a a ° o N N N N N Attachment No. 4 Continued gg ~C t~~ V7 M z om 9~ ~ ~Q Q ~C y cv v 12 2 W2 ; QoW z z~ xf oc o ~w a \ 22m~ ~Z W Wn~x o~=o gwO W aF L4J v\ y°o W 5& W „ A in -W 2U ~,~q ~ W ~ W m 4 `061 a `~J f \ % cn Wa ~ ' o'l~ 5srr ' ~ \ \ \ \ o ~ , \ ap j i 17 "I 1 ~F V a I rg I O $ ~ I J 1 I ('l - 1, - # s ~ ` OOM6 ~1= I O+L m 001 W OO+F OO+Z 00+1 ~00 0 W W 2U/` O ~ W °j / h NCO L 2 4 3 ~ I 2 .i~ 0 I a I ~ ly n . ~ ~ svasa - ~ A~.casv I t ~ M `T I i I I 2 n 1 a ~ Attachment No. 4 Continued Q N y m a J 3 \ ~ L C rrhh °~~ag®~ t~~ ~~a LLJ \ \m a W ti 0o~~ W OF) w _ ~I~ m1~ 4 ao ~ ~ N wW~ - I u ~ I O ~ IBS ~ a yy YP, o 9 LS'a G a m U ' V { o I 15 13 wU W vk j U O O~~RW> wu j4x~j a>0>a~ Z y o2t Rzi 5~;I LlVYaATffJjaNi- I = I q i _ b a ~ v \ r. r o iW I ~i 5 Q OS 2 v331 S t~ 1~ \i W wll U ~ I ~1 ' 2 o N 2U I W2 / m v iI y to R ~a I