Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOverlook_948-998_PA-2014-02046 ITT . 1T January 27, 2015 Notice of Final Decision On January 23, 2015, the Community Development Director approved the request for the following: Planning Action: 2014-02046 Subject Property: 948-998 Overlook Drive Applicant: Meadowbrook Townhomes, LLC Description: A request for a Site Review approval to construct six residential units and one 499 square foot accessory residential unit, on the six lots located at 948-998 Overlook Drive. Also included is a request for a Modification of the Outline Plan Approval (PA #2002-151) which originally showed the units as attached or closely abutting those along Patton Lane and sharing driveways along Overlook Drive; they are now proposed to be constructed as detached residences with individual driveways. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: North Mountain Neighborhood Core Overlay; ZONING: NM-MF; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 lE 04AD; TAX LOT : 3400 - 3900 The Community Development Director's decision becomes final and is effective on the 13`h day after the Notice of Final Decision is mailed. Approval is valid for a period of one year 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) 18.108.070(B)(2)(b) and/or file an appeal to the Ashland Planning Commission as provided in ALUO 18.108.070(B)(2)(c). 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 Derek Severson in the Community Development Department at (541) 488-5305. cc: Parties of record and property owners within 200 ft COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel: 541-488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 r Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 I ' t www.ashland.or.us~.f SECTION 18.108.070(B)2 Effective Date of Decision and Appeals, B. Actions subject to appeal: 2. Type I Planning Actions. a. Effective Date of Decision. The final decision of the City for planning actions resulting from the Type I Planning Procedure shall be the Staff Advisor decision, effective on the 13 day after notice of the decision is mailed unless reconsideration of the action is approved by the Staff Advisor or appealed to the Commission as provided in section 18.108.070(B)(2)(c). b. Reconsideration. The Staff Advisor may reconsider Type I planning actions as set forth below. i. Any party entitled to notice of the planning action, or any City Agency may request reconsideration of the action after the decision has been made by providing evidence to the Staff Advisor that a factual error occurred through no fault of the party asking for reconsideration, which in the opinion of the staff advisor, might affect the decision. Reconsideration requests are limited to factual errors and not the failure of an issue to be raised by letter or evidence during the opportunity to provide public input on the application sufficient to afford the Staff Advisor an opportunity to respond to the issue prior to making a decision. ii. Reconsideration requests shall be received within five (5) days of mailing. The Staff Advisor shall decide within three (3) days whether to reconsider the matter. Ili. If the Planning 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 (10) days to affirm, modify, or reverse the original decision. The Staff Advisor shall send notice of the reconsideration decision to affirm, modify, or reverse to any party entitled to notice of the planning action. iv. 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. c. Appeal. i. Within twelve (12) days of the date of the mailing of the Staff Advisor's final decision, including any approved reconsideration request, the decision may be appealed to the Planning Commission by any party entitled to receive notice of the planning action. The appeal shall be submitted to the Planning Commission Secretary on a form approved by the City Administrator, be accompanied by a fee established pursuant to City Council action, and be received by the city no later than 4:30 p.m. on the 12'' day after the notice of decision is mailed. ii. If an appellant prevails at the hearing or upon subsequent appeal, the fee for the initial hearing shall be refunded. 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. iii. The appeal shall be considered at the next regular Planning Commission or Hearings Board meeting. The appeal shall be a de novo hearing and shall be considered the initial evidentiary hearing required under ALUO 18.108.050 and ORS 197.763 as the basis for an appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals. The Planning Commission or Hearings Board decision on appeal shall be effective 13 days after the findings adopted by the Commission or Board are signed by the Chair of the Commission or Board and mailed to the parties. iv. 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. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel: 541-488-5305 51 Winbum Way Fax: 541-552-2050 ti Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.onus t _ ' ~t~ i I ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION FINDINGS & ORDERS PLANNING ACTION: PA-2014-02046 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 948-998 Overlook Drive APPLICANT: Meadowbrook Townhomes, LLC OWNER: Lazaro Ayala Family Trust (Lazaro Ayala, trustee) DESCRIPTION: A request for a Site Review approval to construct six residential units and one 499 square foot accessory residential unit, on the six lots located at 948 through 998 Overlook Drive. Also included is a request for a Modification of the Outline Plan Approval (PA #2002-151) which original showed the units as attached or closely abutting those along Patton 'Lane and sharing driveways along Overlook Drive; they are now proposed to be constructed as detached residences with individual driveways. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: North Mountain Neighborhood Core Overlay; ZONING: NM-MF; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 lE 04AD; TAX LOT : 3400 - 3900 SUBMITTAL DATE: November 26, 2014 DEEMED COMPLETE DATE: December 19, 2014 STAFF APPROVAL DATE: January 23, 2015 APPEAL DEADLINE: February 10, 2015 FINAL DECISION DATE: February 11, 2015 APPROVAL EXPIRATION DATE: February 11, 2016 DECISION: The subject property consists of six contiguous lots under the applicant's ownership located on the east side of Overlook'Drive, between Fair Oaks Avenue and East Nevada Street, within the "Meadotivbrook Park IT' subdivision. All six parcels are vacant, and are zoned North Mountain Multi-Family (NM-MF). The lots are small, generally measuring only 50 feet by 50 feet, and slope downhill toward Overlook Drive with slopes ranging from between 14 and 23 percent. All of the adjoining streets are newly constructed and built to City standards, with curbs, gutters, and curbside sidewalks in place. Driveway curb cuts have yet to be installed, and street trees have yet to be planted. A vicinity map with the lots identified is included below for reference. PA 2014-02046 948-998 Overlook DrAds Page 1 E_NEVADAST 1 r r I ~ ~N - J L - iz)l 17 ICI / - FAIR OAKS AV - i Fff7l 1 - - T _ ~,,,-n 012.35 50 Feet aom m.h•..h.nc: mry..m.cw.me. In reviewing the history of past planning approvals in the vicinity, staff noted that in May of 1997, the City Council adopted the "North Mountain Neighborhood Plan," which included a Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map amendment and a new chapter "18.30 North Mountain Neighborhood (NM)" in the Ashland Land Use Ordinance which lays the framework and provides ,zoning regulations and design standards for development within the NM zoning district. In May of 2003, the Planning Commission granted Outline approval (PA #2002-151) and in January of 2004 Final Plan approval (PA #2003-158) for "Meadowbrook Park II," an 81-lot Performance Standards subdivision within the North Mountain Neighborhood Plan area west of the North Mountain Avenue, east of Bear Creek, and south of Nevada Street. The applicants here propose to construct six residential units and one 499 square foot accessory residential unit on the six lots located at 948 through 998 Overlook Drive within the NM-MF zone. The current application requests approval for Site Review and a Modification of the original Outline and Final Plan approvals (PA #2002-151 and PA #2003-158) which showed the proposed units as attached or closely abutting those along Patton Lane and sharing T-shaped driveways along Overlook Drive. The applicants now propose to construct the units as detached residences with six individual driveways, where only four driveways were previously shown. The applicants note that they hope to develop the lots without having to construct a massive and unattractive common retaining wall as was illustrated in the original designs that would increase housing construction costs as well as insurance premiums and require shared maintenance agreements. The applicants assert that the proposed designs of each unit are more fitting of the neighborhood context and remain compliant with, the intent of the North Mountain Neighborhood Design Standards. The North Mountain Neighborhood zoning district has specific design standards which apply to all development within the NM zone. These standards call for a variety of building materials, strong orientation to the street, and narrow driveways. Outline and Final Plan documents included conceptual illustrations for the subject parcels, showing compliance with the NM Design Standards by attaching the units in order to compensate for the steep slopes and shallow PA 2014-02046 948-998 Overlook Dr./dds Page 2 lot depths. By attaching the homes, the designs eliminated the need to comply with solar setback requirements. This resulted in semi-attached homes with shared driveways, an interior parking courtyard with garages that faced each other, and high retaining walls along the rear property lines. Each of these NM-MF zoned lots was required to apply for Site Review approval prior to building permit application to ensure that as the conceptual designs were finalized for construction they could demonstrate compliance with the applicable standards. The application materials provided note that under the approved configuration, vehicles would enter and exit a property by utilizing a portion of their neighbor's property for maneuvering and if for any reason one neighbor had something in the driveway, the other neighbor wouldn't be able to access their garage. The applicants assert that this was a conceptual design that was intended to change once detailed engineering and site geology were taken into account. They suggest that the plan as originally approved was impractical as it required massive, 25- to 30-foot high retaining walls which, while screened by the units themselves, would have been very visible from the driveways. They also emphasize that the previous configuration would've taken up too much of each lots small area with garage and maneuvering areas and as such were impractical, raised construction cost, didn't improve tenant livability and were aesthetically a mistake. Home Designs The North Mountain Neighborhood Design Standards (Section VII of the Site Design and Use Standards) include specific housing design standards stating: Repetitive Elevations Excessive repetition of identical floor plans and elevations are not interesting and lack imagination. The information age allows today's architects and design professionals to generate diverse, attractive, and functional house plans at a minimal expense. Excessive repetition of identical floor plans and elevations shall b~ discouraged within the North Mountain Neighborhood. As initially submitted, the application provided elevation drawings for homes on only two of the six lots which suggested that the lots would be developed based on repetitive floor plans and exterior elevations. After discussions of these standards with staff, the applicants have provided elevation drawings for all six lots and all proposed buildings which illustrate a varied treatment of the elevations in terms of roof forms, windows, doors and exterior materials. Staff has included conditions to ensure that these varied treatments are reflected in the building permit submittals to demonstrate compliance with the design standards The application materials note that the garages are to be setback 15 feet from the homes' facades, and from 25 to 35 feet back from the sidewalk in keeping with the NM-MF standards. In combination with the recessed garages, the designs include front porches as an outdoor living space in order to encourage opportunities for social interaction with neighbors and to enhance each fagade's architectural character and streetscape rhythm. All of the porches are to have a PA 2014-02046 948-998 Overlook Dr./dds Page 3 i minimum depth of six feet and a minimum width of eight feet in order to provide positive, usable space for the tenants. The application notes that the materials used will include a combination of cedar shingles, hardi-plank lap siding, stained rails, heavy eight-inch posts, window moldings with vinyl windows, rock columns, stone bases and a multi-colored palette to enrich the facades, and each front porch is to have a walkway connection to the sidewalk. Garages & Driveways The original Meadowbrook Park II subdivision identified a total of four driveways for the six subject lots. This was accomplished with shared `T-shaped' driveways with garages facing each other across the driveways. As noted above, the applicant asserts this design creates unneeded constraints for the home owners resulting from a poor design. The application proposes to increase the number of driveway curb cuts by two, to a total of six, or one for each lot. The North Mountain Neighborhood Design Standards (Section VII of the Site Design and Use Standards) include specific standards relative to driveways in the portion of the neighborhood dedicated to housing: Driveways A narrow driveway width has many advantages to the streetscape. A narrower driveway with less concrete is visually more attractive, creates a more accommodating pedestrian environment, increases the on-street parking, and increases the number of street trees." Single home driveways should be no greater than nine feet wide (measured at street). When no alley is present and two garages share a common wall, a common driveway 12 feet in width may be used but shall serve both garages. In staff's view, the previous consolidation of driveways and minimization of their width was in keeping with this standard and was intended to downplay the influence of cars on the streetscape and enhance the pedestrian environment by minimizing interruptions in a pedestrian's route which could result in conflicts with users of other modes (i.e. drivers). The proposal now involves six driveways where only four were previously proposed, and those illustrated are at widths of sixteen feet or more at the curb. For staff, while topographic constraints or site dimensions justify some flexibility in modifying the previous approvals, the alternatives must continue to address the underlying objectives of the standards in supporting an enhanced pedestrian environment. With this in mind, staff. has included a number of conditions below to require: ® That the width of driveways be minimized to remain in keeping with the North Mountain Neighborhood Design Standards, and not exceed the minimum apron width allowed under Public Works/Engineering standards. ® That alternative paving treatments such as grass pavers or Hollywood strips be used for the driveways to minimize their visual impacts to the streetscape. ® That the proposed front door and garage door designs be varied from unit to unit. PA 2014-02046 948-998 Overlook DrAds Page 4 i Accessory Residential Unit The application materials provided note that, as permitted in the original subdivision approval, an accessory residential unit is proposed for 948 Overlook Drive, at the corner of Overlook and Fair Oaks Drives. The unit is 499 square feet and sits at, the opposite side of the house from the main unit's entrance and driveway area. The application notes that the design is intended to give it a low-key appearance in distinguishing it from the main house, with an independent entrance. The application proposes to address the one required parking space with an on-street parking credit on Fair. Oaks Drive. Solar Access The project is also required to comply with the solar access provisions described within the conditions of approval for Outline Final Plan approval, which provided that "Where separation occurs between groups of attached units... Standard "A " shall be relaxed and the shadow may encroach four feet up (measured 4 -feet above the living area's finished floor elevation) upon the neighboring residence." The application indicates that the proposed homes are designed for compliance with this standard. Landscaping & Irrigation Plans A proposed landscape and irrigation plan has been provided for the subject property, however the application notes that with each new home's building permit, the applicants may include an independent landscaping plan and front yard irrigation plan for the individual lots, dependent on the homebuyer's preference, and if there is no preference they will follow the landscape plans provided here. The Tree Commission reviewed the application at its December 8, 2014 regular meeting and recommended approval as submitted. The Commissioners noted that the proposed landscape plan presented a great mix of plantings, and that the curbside sidewalk installation will ultimately benefit the trees in giving them a less constrained growth area within the front yards. The Commission did however recommend that the "Purple Robe" Locust proposed to be planted in front of 988 Overlook Drive. be replaced with an alternative selection, as in Commissioner's experience the "Purple Robe" locust trees have shown a tendency toward severe trunk cracking and subsequent fungal infections when grown in Southern Oregon and would likely prove unsatisfactory to a future homeowner. X K X - , The application with the attached conditions addresses with all applicable approval criteria and development standards relevant to the application set forth in chapters 18.30 (North Mountain Neighborhood), 18.72 (Site Design Review), 18.88 (Performance Standards Options), and 18.92 (Parking, Access and Circulation) and is hereby approved. PA 2014-02046 948-998 Overlook DrAds Page 5 SITE DESIGN AND USE STANDARDS Criteria for Approval - Section 18.72.070 The following criteria shall be used to approve or deny an application; A. All applicable City ordinances have been met or will be met by the proposed development. B. All requirements of the Site Review Chapter have been met or will be met C. The development complies with the Site Design Standards adopted by the City Council for implementation of this Chapter. D. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, paved access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property. All improvements in the street fight-of-way shall comply with the Street Standards in Chapter 18.88, Performance Standards Options. OUTLINE PLAN Criteria for Approval - Section 18.88.030.A.4 The Planning Commission shall approve the outline plan when it finds the following criteria have been met: a. That the development meets all applicable ordinance requirements of the City of Ashland, b. That adequate key City facilities can be provided including water, sewer, paved access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, police and fire protection and adequate transportation; and that the development will not cause a City facility to operate beyond capacity. C. That the existing and natural features of the land; such as wetlands, floodplain corridors, ponds, large trees, rock outcroppings, etc., have been identified in the plan of the development and significant features have been included in the open space, common areas, and unbuildable areas. d. That the development of the land will not prevent adjacent land from being developed for the uses shown in the Comprehensive Plan. e. That there are adequate provisions for the maintenance of open space and common areas, if required or provided, and that if developments are done in phases that the early phases have the same or higher ratio of amenities as proposed in the entire project. f. That the proposed density meets the base and bonus density standards established under this Chapter. g. The development complies with the Street Standards. NORTH MOUNTAIN NEIGHBORHOOD Supplemental Approval Criteria - Section 18.30.100,C In addition to the criteria for approval required by other sections of the land use ordinance, applications within the NM land use district shall also address the following criteria: 1. That a statement has been provided indicating how the proposed application conforms with the general design requirements of the North Mountain Neighborhood Plan, including density, transportation, building design, and building orientation. 2. That the proposed application complies with the specific design requirements as provided in the North Mountain Neighborhood Design Standards. PA 2014-02046 948-998 Overlook DrAds Page 6 Planning Action #2014-02046 is approved with the following conditions. Further, if any one or more of the following conditions are found to be invalid for any reason whatsoever, then Planning Action #2014-02046 is denied. The following are the conditions. and they are attached to the approval: 1. That all proposals of the applicants shall be conditions of approval unless otherwise specifically modified herein. 2. That all relevant conditions of Outline Plan and Final Plan approval (PA2002-151, PA2003-158) remain applicable unless otherwise specifically modified herein. 3. That all required landscaping including street trees, irrigation, public sidewalks and street lighting shall be installed as per the approved plans prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for each unit. 4. That any fencing shall be consistent with the provisions described in the NM Zone as well as under the General Regulations chapter 18.68. Stipulations with regards to fencing shall be described in the project's CC&R's. Fence heights within side and rear yard areas adjoining a public right-of-way or public multi-use pathway shall not exceed four feet. All construction boundary fencing shall be chain link with slats. 5. That City of Ashland approved street trees shall be installed every 30 feet along street frontages as part of the overall subdivision improvements or, when appropriate, prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Street trees shall be installed, inspected and approved prior to the certificate of occupancy. A tree planting detail and the irrigation system plan shall be submitted for review and approval with the building permit drawings. 6. That final landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted with building permit submittals for the final review and approval of the Staff Advisor. 7. That the project CC&R's include a statement informing property owners that an area of the subdivision is located within the Area of Inundation in the case of an Emigrant Lake dam failure, as depicted in the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) study. 8. That prior to issuance of individual building permits, the project shall demonstrate compliance with the NM-MF Overlay maximum lot coverage requirement of 75%. The information shall be provided on a large-scale site plan and include detailed coverage calculations for impervious areas (i.e. buildings, driveways, etc.) and pervious areas (i.e. landscaping) for each lot. 9. That the building permit submittals shall demonstrate compliance with the following to minimize the impacts of each unit how having an individual driveway: a) That the width of driveways be minimized to remain in keeping with the North Mountain. Neighborhood Design Standards. All driveway curb cuts shall be permitted by the Public Works/Engineering Department, and shall not exceed the minimum allowable driveway cut width of 12 feet at the street allowed under current Public Works/Engineering standards. PA 2014-02046 948-998 Overlook DrAds Page 7 b) That alternative paving treatments such as grass pavers or Hollywood strips shall be used for the driveways to minimize their visual impacts to the streetscape. c) That the proposed garage and front door designs shall be varied from unit to unit. Garages shall be required to remain clear and available for parking purposes. 10. That to demonstrate compliance with the North Mountain Neighborhood Design Standards, the building permit submittals shall be consistent with the exterior elevations drawings provided on the plans date stamped as received by the City on January 20, 2015 and shall reflect a varied treatment of the buildings' elevations in terms of roof forms, windows, doors and exterior materials. M Bi olnar, ommimity Development Director Date i i I I PA 2014-02046 948-998 Overlook DrAds Page 8 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF OREGON ) County of Jackson ) The undersigned being first duly sworn states that: 1. 1 am employed by the City of Ashland, 20 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon 97520, in the Community Development Department. 2. On January 27, 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 #2014-02046, 948-998 Overlook, NOD. iJ k- Signat e of Employee Documentl 1/27/2015 PA-2014-02046 391 E04A 1100 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AC 401 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AC 411 YOUNG DAVID F TRUSTEE LEIFUR JANET A TRUSTEE RINEFORT JUSTIN/SHANNON M 348 MODOC AVE S 994 STONERIDGE AVE 42 JENSEN LN MEDFORD, OR 97504 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AC 412 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AC 422 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AC 423 COOPER MARIANA D PRINCE NOREEN FRED COX COMPANY LLC 366 STONERIDGE AVE 365 FAIR OAKS AVE 213 EASTBROOK WAY ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 U_ . PA-2014-02046 391 E04AC 425 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AC 427 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AC 428 MOUNTAIN VIEW REALTY COX FRED COMPANY LLC CHENG GUGHONG INVESTMENTS LLC 213 EASTBROOK WAY 945 *OVERLOOK DR 132 W MAIN ST 202 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 MEDFORD, OR 97501 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AC 429 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AC 430 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AC 436 PETSCH WOLFGANG H/SHIRLEY ANN MANN DAMIAN HASSELMAN LYNNE PO BOX 1028 368 FAIR OAKS AVE 916 STONERIDGE AVE ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AC 441 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AC 489 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AC 492 MCGUIRE BRIAN I BUTLER JENNIFER M HUDSON MYRON K/SUSAN B 906 STONERIDGE AVE 986 STONERIDGE AVE 978 STONERIDGE AVE ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AC 493 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AC 494 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 1600 THIRKILL MICHAEL STROMER JACK/MONA T MEADOWBROOK TOWNHOMES LLC PO BOX 1313 969 OVERLOOK DR 132 W MAIN ST 202 TALENT, OR 97540 ASHLAND, OR 97520 MEDFORD, OR 97501 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 1700 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 2200 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 2300 MEADOWBROOK TOWNHOMES LLC BISHOP RONALD D/JEANINE R JOHNS LIVING TRUST 132 W MAIN ST 201A 975 CAMELOT DR 2466 SUN OAKS DR MEDFORD, OR 97501 ASHLAND, OR 97520 MEDFORD, OR 97504 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 2400 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 2500 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 2600 MACHADO WILLIAM A HAGERTY ANA MAIRE KUPIN CONSTANCE 985 CAMELOT DR 11700 W CHARLESTON BLVD 170-156 995 CAMELOT DR ASHLAND, OR 97520 LAS VEGAS, NV. 89135 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 2700 MOONTAAIN IN VIEW 6IEW 391EREAALTLT Y 2800 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 4000 WILCOXON JAMES R/NANCY J MOUN HASKELL STEPHEN C TRUSTEE 999 CAMELOT DR INVESTMENTS LLC 993 OVERLOOK DR ASHLAND, OR 97520 132 W MAIN ST 202 MEDFORD, OR 97501 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 4100 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 4200 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 4300 SHERBOW MARK A BRONK JAMES B MD TRUSTEE COX FRED COMPANY LLC 985 OVERLOOK DR 50 EL MONTE WAY 213 EASTBROOK WAY ASHLAND, OR 97520 NAPA, CA 94558 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 4400 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 4500 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 4600 NICHOLS RICHARD A TRUSTEE GILL WILLIAM L TRUSTEE QUINN KELLY G TRUSTEE 921 PATTON LN 911 PATTON LN 905 PATTON LN ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 5000 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 5100 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 5200 BANCROFT JOHN CARSON CAROL BRANDY TRUSTEE GOMEZ KRISTIN 912 PATTON LN 922 PATTON LN 502 FAIR OAKS AVE ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 5300 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 5400 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 5500 ROUDEBUSH SUSAN LANGLADE JEAN-PIERRE/JULIE C MITZEL STEVEN D/MICHELE A 512 FAIR OAKS AVE 522-FAIR OAKS AVE 532 FAIR OAKS AVE ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2014-02046 MEADOWBROOK TOWNHOMES PA-2014-02046 PA-2014-02046 URBAN DEVELOPMENT SERVICE MADRARA DESIGN, INC DESIGN RESIDENTIAL, INC 604 FAIR OAKS CT 2994 WELLS FARGO ROAD P.O. BOX 8062 ASHLAND, OR 97520 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 MEDFORD, OR 97501 NOD 1/27/2015 I i I r I ASHLAND COMMISSION PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENT SHEET December 8, 2014 PLANNING ACTION: PA-2014-02046 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 948-998 Overlook Drive APPLICANT: Meadowbrook Townhomes, LLC OWNER: Lazaro Ayala Family Trust (Lazaro Ayala, trustee) DESCRIPTION: A request for a Site Review approval to construct six residential units and one 499 square foot accessory residential unit, on the six lots located at 948-998 Overlook Drive. Also included is a request for a Modification of the Outline Plan Approval (PA #2002-151) which original showed the units as attached or closely abutting those along Patton Lane and sharing driveways along Overlook Drive; they are now proposed to be constructed as detached residences with individual driveways. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: North Mountain Neighborhood Core Overlay; ZONING: NM- MF; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 lE 04AD; TAX LOT : 3400 - 3900 The Tree Commission recommends approving the application as submitted, with the specific recommendations below: 1) The Commission believes that the landscape plan presented represents a great mix of plantings, and that the curbside sidewalk installation will benefit the trees in giving them a less constrained growth area within the front yards. The Commission did however recommend that the "Purple Robe" Locust proposed to be planted in front of 988 Overlook be replaced with an alternative selection, as these trees have shown a tendency toward severe trunk cracking and subsequent fungal infections and would likely not prove satisfactory to a future homeowner there. Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5350 CITY OF 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 Planning Department, 51 Winuuln Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520 CITY 0 541-488-5305 Fax: 541-552-2050 www,ashland.orms TTY; 1-800-735-2900 NOTICE OF APPLICATION PLANNING ACTION: 2014-02046 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 948-998 Overlook Drive OWNERIAPPLICANT: Meadowbrook Townhomes, LLC DESCRIPTION: A request for a Site Review approval to construct six residential units and one 499 square foot accessory residential unit, on the six lots located at 948-998 Overlook Drive. Also included is a request for a Modification of the Outline Plan Approval (PA #2002-151) which originally showed the units as attached or closely abutting those along Patton Lane and sharing driveways along Overlook Drive; they are now proposed to be constructed as detached residences with individual driveways. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: North Mountain Neighborhood Core Overlay; ZONING: NM-MF; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 391 E 04AD; TAX LOT : 3400 - 3900 NOTE: The Ashland Tree Commission will also review this Planning Action on Thursday, January 8, 2015 at 6:00 PM in the Community Development and Engineering Services building (Siskiyou Room) located at 51 Winburn Way. NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: December 19, 2014 DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION OF WRITTEN COMMENTS: January 2, 2015 j E NEVADA ST z . FAIR OAKS AV ae 0125 Feat t a~.yn..~~a.~f=..ax..... o~w. pox a~o_aar~ The Ashland Planning Division Staff has received a complete application for the property noted above. Any affected property owner or resident has a right to submit written comments to the City of Ashland Planning Division, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520 prior to 4:30 p.m. on the deadline date shown above. Ashland Planning Division Staff determine if a Land Use application is complete within 30 days of submittal. Upon determination of completeness, a notice is sent to surrounding properties within 200 feet of the property submitting application which allows for a 14 day comment period. After the comment period and not more than 45 days from the application being deemed complete, the Planning Division Staff shall make a final decision on the application. A notice of decision is mailed to the same properties within 5 days of decision. An appeal to the Planning Commission of the Planning Division Staff's decision must be made in writing to the Ashland Planning Division within 12 days from the date of the mailing of final decision. (AMC 18.108.040) The ordinance criteria applicable to this application are attached to this notice. Oregon law states that failure to raise an objection concerning this application, by letter, or failure to provide sufficient specificity to afford the decision maker an opportunity to respond to the issue, precludes your right of appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) on that issue. Failure to specify which ordinance criterion the objection is based on also precludes your right of appeal to LUBA on that criterion. Failure of the applicant to raise constitutional or other issues relating to proposed conditions of approval with sufficient specificity to allow this Department to respond to the issue precludes an action for damages in circuit court. A copy of the application, all documents and evidence relied upon by the applicant and applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost and will be provided at reasonable cost, if requested. All materials are available at the Ashland Planning Division, Community Development & Engineering Services Building, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520. If you have questions or comments concerning this request, please feel free to contact the Ashland Planning Division at 541-488-5305. ocx SITE DESIGN AND USE STANDARDS 18.72.070 Criteria for Approval The following criteria shall be used to approve or deny an application: A. All applicable City ordinances have been met or will be met by the proposed development. B. All requirements of the Site Review Chapter have been met or will be met. C. The development complies with the Site Design Standards adopted by the City Council for implementation of this Chapter. D. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, paved access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property. All improvements in the street right-of-way shall comply with the Street Standards in Chapter 18.88, Performance Standards Options. OUTLINE PLAN APPROVAL 18.88.030.A.4 Criteria for Approval The Planning Commission shall approve the outline plan when it finds the following criteria have been met: a. That the development meets all applicable ordinance requirements of the City of Ashland. b. That adequate key City facilities can be provided including water, sewer, paved access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, police and fire protection and adequate transportation; and that the development will not cause a City facility to operate beyond capacity. c. That the existing and natural features of the land; such as wetlands, floodplain corridors, ponds, large trees, rock outcroppings, etc., have been identified in the plan of the development and significant features have been included in the open space, common areas, and unbuildable areas. d. That the development of the land will not prevent adjacent land from being developed for the uses shown in the Comprehensive Plan. e. That there are adequate provisions for the maintenance of open space and common areas, if required or provided, and that if developments are done in phases that the early phases have the same or higher ratio of amenities as proposed in the entire project. f. That the proposed density meets the base and bonus density standards established under this Chapter. g. The development complies with the Street Standards. (ORD 2836, 1999) NORTH MOUNTAIN NEIGHBORHOOD SECTION 18,30,100.C Supplemental Approval Criteria In addition to the criteria for approval required by other sections of the land use ordinance, applications within the NM land use district shall also address the following criteria: 1. That a statement has been provided indicating how the proposed application conforms with the general design requirements of the North Mountain Neighborhood Plan, including density, transportation, building design, and building orientation. 2. That the proposed application complies with the specific design requirements as provided in the North Mountain Neighborhood Design Standards. GAcomm-dev\planning\Planning Actions\Noticing FolderWaited Notices & Signs\2014\PA-2014-02046.docx AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF OREGON ) County of Jackson ) The undersigned being first duly sworn states that: 1. I am employed by the City of Ashland, 20 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon 97520, in the Community Development Department. 2. On December 19, 2014 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 #2014-02046, 948-998 Overlook. Signat, r of Employee Documentt 1211912014 PA-2014-02046 391 E04A 1100 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AC 401 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AC 411 YOUNG DAVID F TRUSTEE LEIFUR JANET A TRUSTEE RINEFORT JUSTIN/SHANNON M 348 MODOC AVE S 994 STONERIDGE AVE 42 JENSEN LN MEDFORD, OR 97504 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AC 412 PA-2014-02046.391 E04AC 422 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AC 423 COOPER MARIANA D PRINCE NOREEN FRED COX COMPANY LLC 366 STONERIDGE AVE 365 FAIR OAKS AVE 213 EASTBROOK WAY ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AC 425 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AC 427 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AC 428 MOUNTAIN VIEW REALTY COX FRED COMPANY LLC CHENG GUGHONG INVESTMENTS LLC 213 EASTBROOK WAY 945 OVERLOOK DR 132 W MAIN ST 202 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 MEDFORD, OR 97501 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AC 429 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AC 430 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AC 436 PETSCH WOLFGANG H/SHIRLEY ANN MANN DAMIAN HASSELMAN LYNNE PO BOX 1028 368 FAIR OAKS AVE 916 STONERIDGE AVE ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AC 441 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AC 489 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AC 492 MCGUIRE BRIAN I BUTLER JENNIFER M HUDSON MYRON K/SUSAN B 906 STONERIDGE AVE 986 STONERIDGE AVE 978 STONERIDGE AVE ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AC 493 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AC 494 PA-20147 02046 391 E04AD 1600 THIRKILL MICHAEL STROMER JACK/MONA T MEADOWBROOK TOWNHOMES LLC PO BOX 1313 969 OVERLOOK DR 132 W MAIN ST 202 TALENT, OR 97540 ASHLAND, OR 97520 MEDFORD, OR 97501 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 1700 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 2200 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 2300 MEADOWBROOK TOWNHOMES LLC BISHOP RONALD D/JEANINE R JOHNS LIVING TRUST 132 W MAIN ST 201A 975 CAMELOT DR 2466 SUN OAKS DR MEDFORD, OR 97501 ASHLAND, OR 97520 MEDFORD, OR 97504 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 2400 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 2500 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 2600 MACHADO WILLIAM A HAGERTY ANA MAIRE KUPIN CONSTANCE 985 CAMELOT DR 11700 W CHARLESTON BLVD 170-156 995 CAMELOT DR ASHLAND, OR 97520 LAS VEGAS, NV 89135 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 2700 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 2800 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 4000 WILCOXON JAMES R/NANCY J MOUNTAIN VIEW REALTY HASKELL STEPHEN C TRUSTEE 999 CAMELOT DR INVESTMENTS LLC. 993 OVERLOOK DR ASHLAND, OR 97520 132 W MAIN ST 202 MEDFORD, OR 97501 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 4100 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 4200 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 4300 SHERBOW MARK A BRONK JAMES B MD TRUSTEE COX FRED COMPANY LLC 985 OVERLOOK DR 50 EL MONTE WAY 213 EASTBROOK WAY ASHLAND, OR 97520 NAPA, CA 94558 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 4400 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 4500 PA-2014-02046 39.1 E04AD 4600 NICHOLS RICHARD A TRUSTEE GILL WILLIAM L TRUSTEE QUINN KELLY G TRUSTEE 921 PATTON LN 911 PATTON LN 905 PATTON LN ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 5000 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 5100 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 5200 BANCROFT JOHN CARSON CAROL BRANDY TRUSTEE GOMEZ KRISTIN 912 PATTON LN 922 PATTON LN 502-.FAIR OAKS AVE ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 5300 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 5400 PA-2014-02046 391 E04AD 5500 ROUDEBUSH SUSAN LANGLADE JEAN-PIERRE/JULIE C MITZEL STEVEN D/MICHELE A 512 FAIR OAKS AVE 522 FAIR OAKS AVE 532 FAIR OAKS AVE ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ow-Q l ~ DVvl0- i ZONING PERMIT APPLICATION \"J Planning Division cirv OF 51 Winhurn Way, Ashland OR 97520 FILE # -ASHLAND 541-488-5305 Fax 541-488-6006 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Pursuing LEEDO Certification? ❑ YES ❑ NO Street Address. p~ '9 Assessor's Map No. 391E Tax Lot(s) Zoning t Comp Plan Designation -j . : APPLICANT Name -4 - - $ to Phone . I ; E-Mail t x Address4 City Zip PROPERTY OWNER Name Phone E-Mail Address City Zip SURVEYOR, ENGINEER, ARCHITECT, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, OTHER Title Name Phone E-Mail Address City Zip Title Name Phone E-Mail Address City Zip I 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 removed at my expense. If I have any doubts, I am advised to seek competent professional advice and assistance. Applicant's Signature Date As owner of the property involved in this request, l have read and understood the complete application and its consequences to me as a property own r. -Property Ov~ner's'Signature (required) Date rfo be completed by City Stott] Date Received Zoning Permit Type Filing Fee $ OVER 0 Wcomm-de0plenningWovms & Handouts\Zoning Permit Application.doc PROJECT DESCRIPTION AN FINDINGS OF FACT FOR A SITE VIE PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTIES AT 948 - 998 OVERLOOK DRIVE (SIX LOTS - SEVEN UNITS); iT r, + r ~r a I ;t 11111) f r i I,:~)+ p~ T~ -ea r I13 ~f rIft, 1' 6 lots yi I I 7Units 1 ~1 1 _ ~n r /f r II " ~r 1 f: j (off SUBMITTED TO CITY OF ASHLAND PLANNING DEPARTMENT ASHLAND, OREGON SUBMITTED BY URBAN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC 604 FAIR OAKS COURT ASHLAND, OR 97520 OV 2 6 ZL' NOVEMBER 26TH, 2014 Page 1 of 16 rA1~ 2 6 PROJECT INFORMATION: APPLICANT: LAND USE PLANNING: Meadowbrook Townhomes, LLC Urban Development Services, LLC 604 Fair Oaks Court 604 Fair Oaks Court Ashland, OR 97520 Ashland, OR 97520 Tel: 541-941-2978 Tel: 541-821-3752 DRAFTING LANDSCAPE DESIGN Design Residential, Inc Madara Design, Inc. PO Box 8062 2994 Wells Fargo Road Medford, OR 97501 Central Point, OR 97502 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: North Mountain ZONING DESIGNATION: NM -MF LOT COVERAGE: 75% permitted, < 75% proposed APPLICABLE ORDINANCES: Site Design & Use Standards, Chapter 18.72 Multi-Family Residential Development, Site Design & Use Standards, Section II-B Landscaping Guidelines & Policies, Site Design & Use Standards, Section III NM Neighborhood Design Standards, Site Design & Use Standards, Section VII PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: The six properties are between along Overlook Drive, directly east of Fair Oaks Avenue. The properties back-up to six lots fronting onto Patton Lane and there is roughly a 35' of grade change between Overlook Drive and Patton Streets. The lots are small and generally measure 50' X 50'. The lots also abut similar lots along Patton Lane. Other than the severe slopes and shallow lot depths, no unique natural features exist as the properties were roughly pre-graded with all of the utilities, curbs and sidewalks previously installed. However, curb cuts for driveways were not constructed. The properties were originally platted and improvements installed as part of the North Mountain Meadowbrookc Park 11 Subdivision application which included conceptual plans and elevations for the various proposed housing types. The Findings, Conclusions & Orders of PA-2003-158, Condition 24, requires the multi-family properties to apply for a Site Review Permit prior to issuance of a building permit. PLANNING ACTION PROPOSAL: The applicants desire to obtain a Site Review Permit for the eventual construction of six residential homes, one accessory residential unit and a modification to the previously approved plot plan included with the original Meadowbrook Park 11 development plan which showed the subject units attached or closely abutting to the Page 2 of 16 i I o vv 53.23 4000 2800 " 0.11 Ac. °'3900 MOM. X0.08 Ac. S19465 o cc? 70.14 40 41 41 OO 3800 54.43 Previous o ' 2900 Conceptual Plan 2 d.08 Ac. o X0.07 Ac. 25' -30' ,o 0.08 Ac. ( I retaining walls) o 9.4200 4 3 o.oBiAc. 43 I 3100 49.45 ss0.07 3000 9 0.09 Ac. „ 48' Lot Depth 3tw G 45 ~o 0.07 A,;. ,'3100 0.08 Ac. I q8B 46 47 18 ° f 3500 ~ /",0.07 Ac. X00 05 3200 o os A, 0.08AC?" rn I.P. : moo. 8247 L 148/49 3400 so` 510600 .11 Ac. 0.12 Ac. 3300 N CS 21393 F 3" a 0.09 Ac. " a it ~h 3 4A AB ri 54 ~ e . 38.69 ~ ° 0.0 ~nnn IRI s 23 ® m° $ 2G 4_ -O-c\'rI sP/ 4 l G` 1 rfo, Geis 63 O O 'L31-O ~ clo8 Gfoq O Z6oo ~ ~ zW~ 1 ~ 1 ON $ j 4 O r 41 i» \O \ \ W \ G { V !V p ' LI4~ } 49 i °0,0 So/ /e. 3S2q,~ 1 EP !00 o n 0. 52311 ` Ao O GIl4 co °\503°02'34"W 75.66' 1 Nom' 10' PUf ! \ 70.66' OS°0234"IV s; ~\S• /1 o % { ' PUf rv - I i 6- S O m' 208 G?51 L4 i~ 10 \ L26 40 42 ii~ -2012 " 47 0° ~6jas u~t C9 P1 \ ; f 3' P150 0' m O O~ \ O 0Alt. 34.3q' O G107 '-Gf06 ` - 44 °b Q6 , 7 49- ~9 \qs` ~ °1578"W Ch 46 Z P 4/7 -35'3 .0. N ®~~K S9T~~ I\ : o ~ry 3' P150 (J~13024.00 S?~ '`mss Jr,z~ \ 60 g W ®~/p0 \ ` 10' PUf i V Page 3 of 16 0V t z units along Patton Lane and a shared "T" shaped driveway configuration. However, it's the applicant's intention to create a more dynamic, affordable and independent living environment for the occupants of the seven residences without having to construct a massive and unattractive common retaining wall as illustrated with the original design that would not only force housing costs to unnecessarily increase, but also increase insurance premiums and require shared maintenance agreements. Equally important is the fact the designs for each unit are more fitting into the context of the neighborhood and remain compliant with the intent of the North Mountain Neighborhood Design Standards. r Site Review Permit: A Site Review Permit is required for developments with the North Mountain Multi-Family district in accordance with Planning Action PA-2003-158. In this case, a total of six single family homes, one with an accessory unit, are proposed on six lots. The goal of the applicant is to construct traditional homes that are compatible in context with I' not only the recently constructed homes within the area, but to also address the site's sensitive slopes while insuring each future homeowner has logical living spaces and useable outdoor yard areas. Site Plan & Driveway Modification: Due to a combination of factors relating to the lots shallow depths, steep slopes and garage/porch setback requirements, the applicants propose to modify the plans, but remain consistent with the North Mountain Design Standards with creative and distinctive residential housing facades. As previously noted, the adopted "conceptual" plans identified housing units that abutted the rear units along Patton Lane and shared "T" shape driveways where each unit's garage would face the other unit's. With this scheme, vehicles would enter and exit the property by utilizing a portion of their neighbor's property for maneuvering and if for any reason one neighbor had something in the driveway at the time (bicycle, parked car, etc.), the other neighbor wouldn't be able to ingress or egress their garage. That said, the original scheme was really a conceptual site plan showing typical footprints and driveway configurations. The scheme was developed prior to detailed engineering or geology background data. The plan was not practical as "massive" 25' to 30' high retaining wails would have been required to accomplish the plan and although a good portion of the retaining walls would have been screened from the public right-of-way by the units themselves, the retaining walls would have been very visible in the area of the driveways. Overall, the applicants, Engineer and Project Contractors feel there are just too many obstacles for the previous conceptual design to function realistically which included prohibiting on-site parking spaces within the driveway for both household resident's or guests which is impractical and not realistic with normal lifestyles. Also, when one takes into account the back-up distances between the garages and needed turning radius (roughly 28'+/- even if divided between properties, the typical 20' to 22' garage and side yard setback, the remaining buildable area is roughly 9' - 15' depending on the lot's width. As such, the previous design was not practical, unnecessarily raised construction costs, didn't improve tenant livability and would have been an aesthetic mistake. NOV 26 71 Page 4 of 16 I' r z In the applicant's opinion, this type of misunderstanding is most likely why a condition was placed on the original subdivision requiring independent Site Review Permits for each phase of the development so that such circumstances could be narrowly focused on and resolved based on a more comprehensive understanding of the lots physical characteristics. Proposed Site Plan: The attached Site Plan identifies each of the subject properties with their building envelopes, garage locations, driveway locations, yard setbacks, retaining walls and utilities. The plan identifies how each house will accommodate the NM-MF zone's 15' front fagade to garage setback requirement, the 6' x 8' front porch requirement and all other required side yard and solar setbacks. The rear setback is similar to the original plans adopted as part of PA-2003-158 (0' to 3'), but are now proposed with a greater setback and range from 3' to 5' at the closest points and 10' to 12' from its furthest points. The plan also includes 4' to 6 retaining walls topped with 6' fencing for privacy (similar to the wall and fence between Overlook Drive and Stoneridge Avenue). Finally, the plans show six driveways where four were originally proposed, but the change is necessary to accommodate the revised driveway configuration. Also, since the curb cuts have not been installed, an encroachment permit will eventually be obtained to install the driveways and replace sections of sidewalk. Building Designs: The building designs are intended to distinctive from each other in order to eliminate a streetscape of repetitiveness. As noted above, a principal design element addressed in the North Mountain MF zone is the standard for recessed garages where each have to be at least 15' from the front fagade and 20' from the adjacent sidewalk. In the applicant's proposal, the garage setback will be 15' from the home's front fagade and 25' to 35' from the back of sidewalk. In combination of the recessed garage, the designs include front porches as an outdoor living space in order to encourage opportunities for social interaction with neighbors and to enhance each fagade's architectural character and streetscape rhythm. All porches will have a minimum depth of 6' and width of 8' in order to provide positive useable space for the tenants. In addition to the garage offsets, all of the proposed homes will have multiple rooflines and distinctive horizontal and vertical volume offsets providing an attractive and interesting streetscape environment. The use of materials include a combination of cedar shingles within the pediment of the ridge lines, hardi-plank lap siding, stained railings, heavy 8" posts, window moldings, vinyl windows, rock columns, corbels, stone bases and use a multicolored palette to enrich the fagade. Finally, each home's front porch will have a sidewalk extending from the street sidewalk to the home's front door creating an inevitable entry. The side elevations adjacent to'streets are also enhanced in an attempt to respect neighboring views and generate a positive streetscape. Overall, the applicant feels the design is well thought out and the mass and scale proportions are consistent with what's found in the immediate neighborhood. Private Yards: The design attempts to provide private yard areas between the units not only within the open spaces around the front, side and rear of each unit, but also with inclusion of front and rear porches as well as useable patios whereas the previous application was obviously conceptual and didn't address these elements in the same detail nor considered the slopes, limited property dimensions, affordability of construction or long term maintenance Page 5 of 16 2 6 ~ constraints on the individual property owners. Overall, the applicants contend the proposed application is far superior and goes above and beyond the limited livability elements of the original concept plans. is Accessory Residential Unit: As permitted with the original subdivision's plans, an Accessory Residential Unit or second multi-family unit is planned for 948 Overlook Drive (corner of Fair Oaks and Overlook Drive). The unit is 499 square feet and sits at the opposite side of the house from the main unit's entrance and driveway area. In general, the design is intended to give it a low key appearance from the main house with an independent entrance with an independent on-street parking space. Parking: In accordance with Chapter 18.92, a minimum of two parking spaces have been allocated on each of the six lots within the garage and an additional two within the recessed driveway area. No 1l parking is available on the east side of Overlook Drive, but y~ -gym parking for the Accessory Unit (second unit) is available along - Fair Oaks Drive. i Utilities: All of the site's utilities are already installed to each parcel and capable of servicing t the lots. Where utilities are shared or access is necessary R> through another parcel, the utilities extend through easements that were provided at 'N" 41 the time of the original plat approval. Fire hydrants are located at the end of each block I along Fair Oaks and Nevada Street in accordance with the original Civil Engineering plans. Landscaping; As discussed with staff, each new home's building permit may include its own k independent landscaping plan and front yard irrigation system dependant on the home buyer's preference. If there is no preference, the landscape plans submitted with this application will be followed and are intended to illustrate how each home will be landscaped prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy Permit. The landscape plan identifies a variety of plants Page 6 of 16 i k designed to enhance the buildings architecture. The landscaping plan has been designed so that 50% coverage is accomplished within the first year and 90% within five years. Solar Access: Preliminary designs easily show how the proposed units comply with the City's Solar Access Standards, specifically the exception granted with the original approval which allows a shadow to be casted up to 4' from the home's finished floor level. At the time of a building permit, plans will identify the home's shadow line not exceeding the permitted 4' Solar Access provision on the adjoining neighbor. Side Yard Setbacks: All of the units comply with the building separation standards of Chapter 18.30.040 C.2. where the side yard setback is 5' for the first floor (excluding the 1/2 story ground floor) and an additional 5' side yard setback for the second floor. Rear Yard Setbacks: As noted, the previously approved conceptual plans showed rear setbacks from 0' to 3' where as the proposed setbacks range from 3' to 5' at the closest points and 10' to 12' from its furthest points. The primary driving force behind the rear setback is the required recessed garage setback noted in Chapter 18.3 0.040 C.1 where the garage is to be 15' back from the front fagade and 20' from the sidewalk. For lots that are only 48' deep with a 10' Public Utility Easement and a minimum garage depth of 20', this only leaves 3' between the garage and the back property line - which is consistent with the setback dimension shown with the original Conceptual plans of PA-2003-158. However, in this case, it should be clarified the garage is essentially burrowed into the ground and the only encroachment into the rear yard is a trellis which extends off the main floor. Lot Coverage: All lots comply with the maximum lot coverage of 75%, including 948 Overlook Drive which is accommodating a second unit. The lot coverage calculations are identified on the site plan and will be further clarified at the time of the building permit application. FINDINGS OF FACT The following information has been provided by the applicants to help the Planning Staff and neighbors better understand the proposal. In addition, the required findings of fact have been provided to ensure the proposed project meets the Site Design & Use Standards as outlined in the Ashland Municipal Code (AMC), Section 18.72.070, Site Design & Use Standards (Design Standards Booklet, adopted August 0', 1992), Multi-Family Residential Development, Site Design & Use Standards, Section 1I-13, Landscaping Guidelines & Policies, Site Design & Use Standards, Section III, Street Tree Standards, Site Design & Use Standards, Section II-E and NM Neighborhood Design Standards, Site Design & Use Standards, Section VII. For clarity reasons, the following documentation has been formatted in "outline" form with the City's approval criteria noted in BOLD font and the applicant's response in regular font. Also, there are a number of responses that are repeated in order to ensure that the findings of fact are complete. Page 7of16 26 ~ CHAPTER 18.30.100 C. NM - SUPPLEMENTAL APPROVAL CRITERIA: 1. That a statement has been provided indicating how the proposed application conforms with the general design requirements of the North Mountain Neighborhood Plan, including density, transportation, building design, and building orientation. The proposal conforms to the general design requirements of the North Mountain Neighborhood Plan, Section VII, including density, transportation, building design, and building orientation. The proposal is for the construction of six single family residences and one accessory residential unit on six lots previously created as part of the Meadowbrook Park II Master Plan which was adopted by the Ashland Planning Commission, recorded as legal lots of record, and all relating infrastructure installed. The building designs conform to the standards which include human-scale streetscape elements such as porches, articulated fiont entrances, recessed garages and various architectural elements to give the residential building's character. 2. That the proposed application complies with the specific design requirements as provided in the North Mountain Neighborhood Design Standards. As noted above, the application complies with the specific design requirements provided in the North Mountain Neighborhood Design Standards and include various design features beyond the two that are required, including porches, recessed entrances, gables, dormers, posts, eaves and multiple off-sets. All of the proposed homes have articulated entrances oriented towards the street separated by pedestrian paths that help enhance the entrances. Unlike some of the other homes found in the neighborhood, the proposal attempts to minimize repetitive elevations and encourage individual ownership. CHAPTER 18.72.070 SITE DESIGN REVIEW CRITERIA: A. All applicable City Ordinances have been met or will be met by the proposed development. To the best of the applicant's knowledge, all applicable City ordinances have been met and will be met. At the time of the building permit submittal, the application will be substantially consistent with the proposed application and will meet all conditions of approval imposed by the City of Ashland. B. All requirements of the Site Review Chapter have been met or will be met. All of the requirements listed in the Site Review Chapter, Section 18.72, have been met. The Site Review Chapter was designed to ensure that high quality development is maintained throughout the City of Ashland. The proposed application was designed and redesigned in order to best meet this purpose and produce a quality living environment consistent with the intent of the Site Review Chapter. Page 8 of 16 0 i i i c C. The development complies with the Site Design Standards adopted by the City Council for implementation of this Chapter. The development complies with the City of Ashland's Site Design Standards, adopted August 4cn, 1992 and specifically the North Mountain Neighborhood Design Standards. D. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, paved access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property. All improvements in the street right-of-way shall comply with the Street Standards in Chapter 18.88, Performance Standards Options. All utilities serving the project are within the adjacent Overlook Drive right-of-way installed with the original construction of the Meadowbrook Park II Subdivision, including the location and separation of fire hydrants, storm water detention, sidewalks and street lighting. None of the utilities are at capacity to service the development. SITE DESIGN APPROVAL STANDARDS: Multi-family residential development shall conform to the following design standards: Orientation: II-B-la) Residential buildings shall have their primary orientation toward the street when they are within 20 to 30 feet of the street. All of the units, including the accessory unit, have their primary orientation fronting Overlook Drive. The front facades have been designed to have an attractive and pedestrian friendly streetscape environment as each has a small front porch and a sidewalk extending from'the adjacent right-of-way to the porch. II-B-lb) Buildings shall be set back from the street according to ordinance requirements, which is usually 20 feet. The proposed application meets the Site Design Standards, Section 11-B-1b as well as the setback requirements of the Meadowbrook Park II building envelope plans. II-B-lc) Building shall be accessed from the street and the sidewalk. Parking areas shall not be located between buildings and the street. The proposed application meets the Site Design Standards, Section II-B-lc. Pedestrian access will occur from the adjacent public sidewalk along Overlook Drive to each unit's front door. Parking for each unit will be within the garages or along Overlook Drive and Fair Oaks Avenue as originally planned in the Meadowbrook Park II development submittals. The garages sit back from the street, approximately 25' plus. Page 9 of 16 a~ 2 6 6'1 i i l Streetscape: II-B-2a) One street tree for every 30 feet of frontage, chosen from the street tree list, shall be placed on that portion of the development paralleling the street. Where the size of the project dictates an interior circulation street pattern, a similar streetscape with street trees is required. i The proposed application meets the Site Design Standards, Section II-B-2a. New street trees, every 3 0' of frontage, will be planted in accordance with the City's adopted street tree standards prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy Permit. The new trees will be chosen from the City Street Tree List and consistent with the tree planting specifications of the Meadowbrook Park II development. II-B-2b) Front yard landscaping shall be similar to those found in residential neighborhoods, with appropriate changes to decrease water use. The proposed application meets the Site Design Standards, Section II-B-2b. The applicants' conceptual landscape plans have been designed to accommodate a typical residential design. The proposed planting species are similar to what would be found in other multi-family neighborhoods and specifically the North Mountain Neighborhood. At the time of a Certificate of Occupancy Permit, each lot's front yard landscaping will be reviewed for compliance. II-B-3) Landscaping II-B-3a) Landscaping shall be designed so that 50% coverage occurs within one year of installation and 90% landscaping coverage occurs within 5 years. The proposed application meets the Site Design Standards, Section II-13-3a. Each unit will have its front yard landscaped and designed to meet a 50% "spreading" coverage after the first year and 90% "spreading" coverage prior to the development's 5th year. II-B-3b) Landscaping design shall include a variety of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs and flowering plant species well adapted to the local climate. The proposed application meets the Site Design Standards, Section II-B-3b. The conceptual landscaping plan incorporates a variety of deciduous shrubs and flowering plant species for Southern Oregon. The plans were completed by a local designer who is also an Arborist. II-B-3c) As many existing healthy trees on the site shall be saved as is reasonably feasible. Page 10 of 16 ,V 2 6 b" i Not applicable as there are no trees on the subject properties. II-B-3d) Buildings adjacent to streets shall be buffered by landscaped areas of at least 10 feet in width. The proposed application meets the Site Design Standards, Section II-13-3d. The front and rear yards of each unit will be landscaped as described and buffered with a minimum of 10' area between the rights-of-way and the unit. II-B-3e) Parking areas shall be shaded by large canopied deciduous trees and shall be adequately screened and buffered from adjacent uses. Each home's parking area is located on the northwestern side ensuring summer shading and screening. Each property will have shade trees helping to reduce microclimatic heat gain. II-B-3f) Irrigation systems shall be installed to assure landscaping successes. Refer to Parking Lot Landscaping and Screening Standards for more detail. The proposed application will meet the Site Design Standards, Section II-B-3f as an irrigation system will be installed at the time the landscaping is installed. The landscaping and the irrigation system will be installed by a professional landscape company. All irrigation will be installed prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy Permit. Open Space: II-B-4a) An area equal to at least 8% of the lot area shall be dedicated to open space for recreation for use by the tenants of the development. The proposed application meets the Site Design Standards, Section 11-13-4a as the subject lots were part of the Meadowbrook Park II development proposal which previously had identified the required open space area along Kestrel Parkway. Nevertheless, each lot identifies private recreational space incorporated into the porch, balcony, front yard or rear yard areas. Each porch has a minimum dimension of 6' X 8' and each rear yard has a covered patio which provides for an outdoor extension of the interior space where tenants can obtain some privately screened recreational space from the elevated Patton Street units above. II-B-4b) Areas covered by shrubs, bark mulch and other ground covers which do not provide a suitable surface for human use may not be counted toward this requirement. I Page 11 of 16 The application meets the Site Design Standards, Section II-13-4b as there are no areas intended to remain uncovered. II-B-4c) Decks, patios, and similar areas are eligible for open space criteria. Play areas for children are required for projects of greater than 20 units that are designed to include families. The application meets the Site Design Standards, Section II-13-4c as the proposal is for less than 20 units. However, each unit includes balconies, porches, patios and small rear yards meeting the intent of this standard. II-B-S) Natural Climate Control: Utilize deciduous trees with early leaf drop and low bare branch densities on the south sides of buildings which are occupied and have glazing for summer shade and warmth. To the best of the applicant's knowledge, the application meets this standard as deciduous trees will be planted with the intent to address summer shading and winter solar access. II-B-6) Building Materials: Building materials and paint colors should be compatible with the surrounding area. Very bright primary or neon-type paint colors which attract attention to the building or use are unacceptable. As noted previously, each home will be multicolored, but all colors are to be "earth toned" so as to not be distractive or out-of-place in the neighborhood. SITE DESIGN APPROVAL STANDARDS: SECTION II - Street Tree Standards II-E-1 Location for Street Trees - Street trees shall be located behind the sidewalk except in cases where there is a designated planting strip in the right-of-way, or the sidewalk is greater than 8 feet wide. Street trees shall include irrigation, root barriers, and generally conform to the standards established by the Department of Community Development. II-E-2 Spacing, Placement, and Pruning of Street Trees - All tree spacing may be made subject to special site conditions which may, for reasons such as safety, affect the decision. Any such proposed special condition shall be subject to the Staff Advisor's review and approval. The placement, spacing, and pruning of street trees shall be as follow: 1. Street trees shall be placed at the rate of one tree for every 30 feet of street frontage. Trees shall be evenly spaced, with variations to the Page 12 of 16 I spacing permitted for specific site limitations, such as driveway approaches. 2. Trees shall not be planted closer than 25 feet from the curb line of intersections of streets or alleys, and not closer than 10 feet from private driveways (measured at the back edge of the sidewalk), fire hydrants, or utility poles. 3. Street trees shall not be planted closer than 20 feet to light standards. Except for public safety no new light standard location shall be positioned closer than 10 feet to any existing street tree, and preferably such locations will be at least 20 feet distant. 4. Trees shall not be planted closer than 2 V2 feet from the face of the curb except at intersections where it shall be 5 feet from the curb, in a curb return area. 5. Where there are overhead power lines, tree species are to be chosen that will not interfere with those lines. 6. Trees shall not be planted within 2 feet of any permanent hard surface paving or walkway. Sidewalk cuts in concrete for trees, or tree wells, shall be at least 25 square feet; however, larger cuts are encouraged because they allow additional air and water into the root system and add to the health of the tree. Tree wells shall be covered by tree grates in accordance with city specifications. 7. Trees, as they grow, shall be pruned to provide at least 8 feet of clearance above sidewalks and 12 feet above street roadway surfaces. 8. Existing trees may be used as street trees if there will be no damage from the development which will kill or weaken the tree. Sidewalks of variable width and elevation may be utilized to save existing street trees, subject to approval by the Staff Advisor. II-E-3 Replacement of Street Trees - Existing street trees removed by development projects shall be replaced by the developer with those from the approved street tree list. The replacement trees shall be of size and species similar to the trees that are approved by the Staff Advisor. II-E-4 Recommended Street Trees - Street trees shall conform to the street tree list approved by the Ashland Tree Commission. Street trees have already been planted along the development's primary streets - Fair Oaks Boulevard and Nevada Street leaving Overlook Drive to be planted with street trees at the time of each unit's occupancy permit. In the Page 13 of 16 i applicant's proposal, each lot will include one street tree between the driveway and at least one along the frontage at a rate of one tree per 30' of frontage and planted and irrigated to the standards noted in the Site Design and Use Standards, Section IL SITE DESIGN APPROVAL STANDARDS: SECTION III - Water Conserving Landscaping Guidelines and Policies General and Miscellaneous The combined turf or water areas (i.e. pools, ponds and fountains) shall be limited to 20% of the landscaped areas. Turf limitations do not apply to public parks, private common open space, required outdoor recreation areas, golf courses, cemeteries and school recreation areas. Not applicable as the subject spaces will be private areas maintained by each property as there are no common open space areas. All fountains shall be designed to recycle their water. Not applicable as no fountains are proposed. Turf is restricted to slopes less than 10% grade. Turf will be restricted to slopes less than 10% grade. Plants At least 90% of plants in the non-turf areas are to be listed as drought tolerant in the Sunset Western Garden book, or be similarly well-suited for this climate of region as determined by the Staff Advisor. Up to 10% of the plants may be of a non-drought tolerant variety or species as long as they are grouped together and can be irrigated separately from the drought tolerant plants. At least 90% of the project's plants, excluding turf areas, are to be drought tolerant. The applicants are consulting with a local merchant to identify not only drought tolerant plantings, but plantings that are thriving in this region. Screening hedges must be planted to attain 50% coverage after two years. No screening hedges are proposed. Irrigation Irrigation systems shall be designed so that overspray is minimized. For sprinkler irrigated areas, perimeter sprinklers must be included in the irrigation pattern. Page 14 of 16 6~( r~' E G Serviceable check valves (or pressure compensating emitters for drip systems) are required where an elevation difference greater than 20 feet exists on any circuit. C Sprin1der head spacing shall be designed for head-to-head coverage. The system shall be designed to minimize runoff and overspray to non-irrigated areas. All irrigation systems shall be equipped with a controller capable of dual or multiple programming. Controllers must have multiple cycle start capacity and a flexible calendar program. Controllers must allow seven day or greater timing cycles. Each unit is to have individual irrigation systems, including controllers, backflow devices and check valves. All irrigation systems will be installed by a professional landscaping firm with the intent to address the above standards. Inspections at the time of a Certificate of Occupancy will occur verifying this standard has been met. Topography No more than 5% of landscaped area of any lot or project may be berms or raised beds higher than one foot unless there is demonstrated need for sound or safety barrier. All plantings on berms one foot or greater in height must be drought tolerant. Only drip irrigation is allowed on berms more than 1 foot in height. If allowed, berms must be no taller than 1/6 of their width. The area irrigated (in square feet). Precipitation rates for each valve circuit. Monthly irrigation schedule for the plant establishment period (6-12 months) and for the first year thereafter. A watering schedule for each circuit from the plan must be posted inside the corresponding controller. A grading plan with sufficient contours so that slope may be measured. For lots with less than 5,000 square feet of landscaped area no grading plan is required. Final landscape plans will include an irrigation plan, including automatic irrigations systems with backflow devices. Note: the subject lots are all less than 5, 000 sq. ft. Page 15 of 16 i i Supplemental Criteria (18.30.100): 1. That a statement has been provided indicating how the proposed application conforms with the general design requirements of the Forth Mountain Neighborhood Plan, including density, transportation, building design, and building orientation. As expressed herein, the proposal conforms with the general design requirements of the North Mountain Neighborhood Plan, including density, transportation, building design, and building orientation. 2. That the proposed application complies with the specific design requirements as provided in the North Mountain Neighborhood Design Standards. The proposed application complies with the specific design requirements as provided in the North Mountain Neighborhood Design Standards, specifically the garage to front fagade setbacks, solar access, multiple roof lines and varying use of materials. Conclusion: If there are any questions or comments, please feel free to contact me or the parties noted above. The applicants desire an expedited review of the plans as construction of the Overlook Drive units can only logically occur at the same time construction of the Patton Lane units are being constructed. Overall, the applicants contend the resulting design is far superior and much more understood from both an interior and exterior perspective than the original conceptual plans. Attached Plans: Master Site Plan - Sheet 1 (948 - 968 Overlook Drive) Master Site Plan - Sheet 2 (978 - 998 Overlook Drive) Master Landscaping Plan (948 - 998 Overlook Drive) Typical Cross-Section (967 Patton Lane & 968 Overlook Drive) Elevation West & North (948 Overlook Drive) Elevation East & South (948 Overlook Drive) Elevation West & North (968 Overlook Drive) Elevation East & South (968 Overlook Drive) Page 16 of 16 i I I 1 `1 . / 1Q 1 % Jg. . u w \ 1 1 I '1 ! ^o I :1 1 of j .I i of I I • I 8 I 00 I 8 i _ 0 I I I I I I LLd ~e I a~ j a d$~ j I I : o~w,N wo~< o hew w I I 4 cj- d,£F w - loo z ~o I I ?1 i 1 rivoo I 8 ~ N I I co LO LLI E 9 ~I e .I I -st I LL j ~ I I . 1---------- Io r ~ I _ €I 1 ~ i e 3 ~ Y 7 i w I - I-o w ~g I IN i oz co i ~ LL= i i e c~ c 4'S 'A R i i ~ i i i ~ 00 ° w 10'•0" of cod 6 : ' - A" ~ c ~ F c i ALL. ~ ci o yn ! i U x} u N i p ~n lil s° I 1 c ~g~ I 1 sg 00 \ 00 d$a~ \ r tl N r ../•v~. a~3\ °~ro~ m3219 ~ 000 / 10•~ o OD ° \ yG- \ c\ e \ LL o i Ne i i- o g,, N >6ODU i . r O> 'V' ~.s ga s o o d =g a s goo E ='o °E nom - ~m° ~i dad>° ° og go2 d °a a~ 8 g i ° iouo ~r A.z CO 121 a~ °-°s c F? E°~ 2 m go > g om N - a ~ ~ ac a of oggd r 25 0. o o N E S m p •e m m '[S E 8 rc~`-~ anti m~s_ a c a?°a o R`°`°mwNN wm R J 9V0S".m 8pO can YS at Nam Leta I cS" -8O rn~~a 8 J_ 2 o >aa 8...o° 03 Q c19 !ISM ."s_+8.~ c Et E.E'~c If °'.'6 4 1211 $ ali INS so aVE •°Y.88`._ a~d o a-~ Noac g2_ $zo 1 1;g. X 1i is Uj m as N C, E c m "O2 SaE,ma mI E: EC~,2>~.7i m~ Qdc ' d ~~m ~ $mL LL ~8$ "=~ESid 1E Z ~,jj ~o1my l=a 11=x~ ~ c a $g w=11 221 1 m n oc08a _ IsOR coon fw90iz2 8z c~>o8d2fyar ° - 2 ~ cX N'n °E , - co ° O> m°_ ~y -805.21 N N N N >y N ~4~°no~'`°~ -2B v`8F91 °o o 2 N-.-c nc .d `m45 mm r_~ r RE M y8a~ma-~`~"088~ a Ea c,;og=~~o~doaisanamaood~~~ md~d~~ T° 'Eo In i a aotmgm cam 'a` ey5 g >g8g2GTaM8 °acm _-O m¢c a~5¢'-m c `o .tea i~ N..-, <<n <o ti 00 8 `D`' ~_~_~_-W ~N~ mmO1m01 o) O r S N cVNn~i t~i~NNCaNNt~i~ mean _ E,q~s g'9 c Noa mn dN odr M "Ellif go.w $ t 00 .Y o ~c~i'U=d 3 n~q 8o$~ c °8 u ='0 '8 o c c 8 8f6U E m o - ` `o .cmm'2.c F.c~ C7 aag¢ oCi¢ ¢mmm=c~c~w==-°i ac~dma5 moan z E °N'`'~ a ~ °°~~°'a~dc~d$s3og°~vo aESx~~ fL~Pc= :9 m U - z -8a dm~~°o' ~ Yz'z'o Ro =B>TC _ ~ EB~~ac d~ Q d n ~ ¢mmmo aK ~70 A56 Q. NCriMVN~m {/-$~I[~jNNm N~~ d Nth C tiY' f3 4 rc-0 oo E v '~R off' ery-a a2 oc ~Sa c 0 S x= xx [0 m N c ism A a = d - ° d u' ~&a0 ~ am! P E F 5c Ell 57 0 ° oo 01 E jj HHd 0') o cvgmio g oil a 288 14" rn ^>ga _ aIN dgo 62 BE. 4 ~ 0- ~ a°o «NSA 8.43 g~ p' tot WW > o ~ W _ • 0Q N Z LL Z O Q CO J W J ~ p Z Z dd ° Lu - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3NIl A12d3d02dd I TVM 3`JMN`J ilV3H O ~ I I I I ~ I ~ W 2 N Z C J 3'J sA03.V w /0 00 cc O to N Q tD W N O (D o , I I I 0 0 ,✓o- °o „ss „s ,e „os o° i x~ ¢z ~ LL YO O ~ d i r „os X -B g I I I f- UK O~ x0 U U x a v C7 Z = W y (JJW2'~ Z0~0 ~ N J o N Z U >O> > Z Z rt O O > > WZ w w oo_ J J a~ w W = Y ~ N w o Z o ELI W O J aaz W 25 C~ ¢a ELI xg i~ N p x ~O L J N ® x C) O X -a ® ® ® W N g O w O N U a0 O L m0 U W p O _ O U g CL U O 2 N ~T C N L N N cJ CQ, z ED O Q z w O w eo . 0 ~ O w cn F- w 0 J 0 U K J O w O w ZU W W Z O DO 2 QW U a.. a x w 09 vO UU cr 0 QZ a a }O _ W ~O OJ O iz)0 U' fn~ZU ~ C1U~ 1 Ell Z F1 Z Q O NO a O UO W _f X W VLL.. N N ~ r Xm?~ ~ N ~ Z ~o co oco C) y a. .0 o ~U N J JO W U N aZ $g ~ N O i i i Hill LLI LLI y ~ ICI ~~yl r ' ~ I`Ii PI I II II I~~I I I~ ~ ~ I I~ i i Job Address: 948 OVERLOOK DR Contractor: ASHLAND OR 97520 Address: A Owner's Name: AYALA PROPERTIES LLC O Phone: P Customer 07306 N State Lic No: L City Lic No: P MEADOWBROOK TOWNHOMES LLC Applicant: 2138 DUNCAN DR R i Address: MEDFORD OR 97504 A C C Sub-Contractor: A Phone: (541) 944-1921 T Address: N Applied: 11/26/2014 T Issued: R Expires: 05/25/2015 Phone: State Lic No: Maplot: 391 E04ac400 City Lic No: DESCRIPTION: Residential Site Review (6 lots, 7 Units) - addresses 948-998 Overlook VALUATION Occupancy Type Construction Units Rate Amt Actual Amt Constuction Description Total for Valuation: MECHANICAL ELECTRICAL STRUCTURAL PERMIT FEE DETAIL Fee Description Amount Fee Description Amount Residential Site Review 1,481.00 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tel: 541-488-5305 20 East Main St. Fax: 541-488-5311 Ashland, OR 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us Inspection Request Line: 541-552-2080 CITY OF -ASHLAND Job Address: 948 OVERLOOK DR Contractor: ASHLAND OR 97520 Address: C A A Owner's Name: AYALA PROPERTIES LLC O Phone: Customer 07306 N State Lic No: ~ T City Lic No: P MEADOWBROOK TOWNHOMES LLC Applicant: 2138 DUNCAN DR R i Address: MEDFORD OR 97504 A C C Sub-Contractor: A Phone: (541) 944-1921 T Address: N Applied: 11/26/2014 T Issued: R Expires: 05/25/2015 Phone: State Lic No: Maplot: 391 E04ac400 City Lic No: DESCRIPTION: Residential Site Review (6 lots, 7 Units) - addresses 948-998 Overlook VALUATION Occupancy Type Construction Units Rate Amt Actual Amt Constuction Description Total for Valuation: MECHANICAL ELECTRICAL STRUCTURAL PERMIT FEE DETAIL Fee Description Amount Fee Description Amount Residential Site Review 1,481.00 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tel: 541-488-5305 20 East Main St. Fax: 541-488-5311 Ashland, OR 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us Inspection Request Line: 541-552-2080 CITY OF V, y I% I