HomeMy WebLinkAboutAlta_250_PA-2017-00838
i
{
CITY OF
ASHLAND
I
June 15, 2017
Notice of Final Decision c!
On June 13, 2017, the Community Development Director approved the request for the following:
Planning Action: PA-2017-00838
Subject Property: 250 Alta Ave.
Applicant: Vadim Agakhanov
Description: A request for a Physical & Environmental Constraints Review Permit to
construct a new single-family dwelling on Severe Constraint Hillside Lands for the property
located at 250 Alta Ave. The proposal involves an Exception to the Development Standards for
Hillside Lands to allow for a 10' tall retaining wall to stabilize an existing nine-foot tall un-
retained cut slope, and an Exception to the Street Design Standards to retain Alta Ave. as an
unimproved street with the addition of a curb and gutter, but no paving or sidewalk installation.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single-Family Residential; ZONING: R-1-7.5;
ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 lE 05DC; TAX LOT: 1301.
The Community Development Director's decision becomes final and is effective on the 12th day
after the Notice of Final Decision is mailed. Approval is valid for a period of 18 months and all
conditions of approval identified on the attached Findings are required to be met prior to project
completion.
The application, all associated documents and evidence submitted, and the applicable criteria are
available for review at the Ashland Community Development Department, located at 51
Winburn Way. Copies of file documents can be requested and are charged based on the City of
Ashland copy fee schedule.
Prior to the final decision date, anyone who was mailed this Notice of Final Decision may
request a reconsideration of the action as set forth in the Ashland Land Use Ordinance (ALUO)
18.5.1.050(F) and/or file an appeal to the Ashland Planning Commission as provided in ALUO
18.5.1.050(G). The ALUO sections covering reconsideration and appeal procedures are attached.
The appeal may not be made directly to the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals.
If you have any questions regarding this decision, please contact Brandon Goldman in the
Community Development Department at (541) 488-5305.
cc Property owners within 200 ft
i
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel: 541488-5305
51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 I
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 I -
www.ashland.or.us fir`
I t
SECTION 18.5.1.050 Type I Procedure (Administrative Decision with Notice)
E. Effective Date of Decision. Unless the conditions of approval specify otherwise or the decision is appealed pursuant to
subsection 18.5.1.050.G, a Type I decision becomes effective 12 days after the City mails the notice of decision.
F. Reconsideration. The Staff Advisor may reconsider a Type I decision as set forth below.
1. Any party entitled to notice of the planning action, or any City department may request reconsideration of the action
after the decision has been made by providing evidence to the Staff Advisor that a factual error occurred through no
fault of the party asking for reconsideration, which in the opinion of the Staff Advisor, might affect the decision.
Reconsideration requests are limited to factual errors and not the failure of an issue to be raised by letter or evidence
during the opportunity to provide public input on the application sufficient to afford the Staff Advisor an opportunity
to respond to the issue prior to making a decision.
2. Reconsideration requests shall be received within five days of mailing the notice of decision. The Staff Advisor shall
decide within three days whether to reconsider the matter.
3. If the Staff Advisor is satisfied that an error occurred crucial to the decision, the Staff Advisor shall withdraw the
decision for purposes of reconsideration. The Staff Advisor shall decide within ten days to affirm, modify, or reverse
the original decision. The City shall send notice of the reconsideration decision to affirm, modify, or reverse to any
party entitled to notice of the planning action.
4. If the Staff Advisor is not satisfied that an error occurred crucial to the decision, the Staff Advisor shall deny the
reconsideration request. Notice of denial shall be sent to those parties that requested reconsideration.
G. Appeal of Type I Decision. A Type I decision may be appealed to the Planning Commission, pursuant to the following:
1. Who May Appeal. The following persons have standing to appeal a Type I decision.
a. The applicant or owner of the subject property.
b. Any person who is entitled to written notice of the Type I decision pursuant to subsection
18.5.1.050.B.
c. Any other person who participated in the proceeding by submitting written comments on the application to the
City by the specified deadline.
2. Appeal Filing Procedure.
a. Notice of Appeal. Any person with standing to appeal, as provided in subsection 18.5.1.050.G.1, above, may
appeal a Type I decision by filing a notice of appeal and paying the appeal fee according to the procedures of
this subsection. The fee required in this section shall not apply to appeals made by neighborhood or community
organizations recognized by the City and whose boundaries include the site. If an appellant prevails at the
hearing or upon subsequent appeal, the fee for the initial hearing shall be refunded.
b. Time for Filing. A notice of appeal shall be filed with the Staff Advisor within 12 days of the date the notice of
decision is mailed.
c. Content of Notice of Appeal. The notice of appeal shall be accompanied by the required filing fee and shall
contain.
i. An identification of the decision being appealed, including the date of the decision.
ii. A statement demonstrating the person filing the notice of appeal has standing to appeal.
iii. A statement explaining the specific issues being raised on appeal.
iv. A statement demonstrating that the appeal issues were raised during the public comment period.
d. The appeal requirements of this section must be fully met or the appeal will be considered by the City as a
jurisdictional defect and will not be heard or considered.
3. Scope of Appeal. Appeal hearings on Type I decisions made by the Staff Advisor shall be de novo hearings before
the Planning Commission. The appeal shall not be limited to the application materials, evidence and other
documentation, and specific issues raised in the review leading up to the Type I decision, but may include other
relevant evidence and arguments. The Commission may allow additional evidence, testimony, or argument
concerning any relevant ordinance provision.
4. Appeal Hearing Procedure. Hearings on appeals of Type I decisions follow the Type 11 public hearing procedures,
pursuant to section 18.5.1.060, subsections A - E, except that the decision of the Planning Commission is the final
decision of the City on an appeal of a Type I decision. A decision on an appeal is final the date the City mails the
adopted and signed decision. Appeals of Commission decisions must be filed with the State Land Use Board of
Appeals, pursuant to ORS 197.805 - 197.860.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel: 541-488-5305
51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 J
www.ashland,or.us
ASHLAND PLANNING DIVISION
FINDINGS & ORDERS
PLANNING ACTION: PA-2017-00838
SUBJECT PROPERTY: 250 Alta Ave.
APPLICANT/OWNER: Vadim Agakhanov
DESCRIPTION: A request for a Physical & Environmental Constraints Review Permit to construct a
new single-family dwelling on Severe Constraint Hillside Lands for the property located at 250 Alta
Ave. The proposal involves an Exception to the Development Standards for Hillside Lands to allow for
a 10' tall retaining wall to stabilize an existing nine-foot tall un-retained cut slope, and an Exception to
the Street Design Standards to retain Alta Ave. as an unimproved street with the addition of a curb and
gutter, but no paving or sidewalk installation.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single-Family Residential; ZONING: R-1-7.5;
ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 lE 05DC; TAX LOT: 1301.
SUBMITTAL DATE: May 9, 2017
DEEMED COMPLETE DATE: May 24, 2017
STAFF APPROVAL DATE: June 15, 2017
APPEAL DEADLINE (4:30 P.M.): June 27, 2017
FINAL DECISION DATE: June 27, 2017
APPROVAL EXPIRATION DATE: December 27, 2018
DECISION
The subject property is located at 250 Alta Street. The parcel is 12,287 sq. ft. The property is presently
vacant, but for an extensive system of retaining walls previously constructed. The property slopes to
the northeast with an approximate average 26% grade. The natural grade of the property had been
significantly altered by the prior property owner in accordance with an approved planning action
(PA#2004-013). Although a series of retaining walls were built, a single-family home was not
constructed. The retaining walls previously installed are in many cases in poor condition, and thus the
application included an engineer's evaluation of each existing wall and of new retaining walls
necessary to address un-stabilized cut slopes. Because the property is greater than 25%, the project is
subject to a Physical & Environmental Constraints Permit. Lands which have a slope of 25 percent and
greater are defined as Hillside Lands in the Ashland land use ordinance (AMC 18.3.10.060.B) and
lands which have a slope greater than 35 percent are defined as Severe Constraints Lands (AMC
18.3.10.060.D). Lastly, because the property is within a Historic District (Skidmore-Academy), the
typical design standards for hillside lands do not apply.
The applicants are proposing to construct a new one-story home with a daylight basement consisting of
a total of 3,291 square feet. The basement area included in the total square footage is 1,3 82 sq. ft which
includes the 531 sq. ft. garage. Since the basement is not exposed for more than 50% of its perimeter,
the basement's square footage is not counted under the Maximum Permitted Floor Area (MPFA)
calculation for homes within designated historic districts. The MPFA contributing square footage is
1,909 square feet which is less than the calculated MPFA allowed by ordinance which is be 2,894 square
feet for this parcel.
_ PA #2017-0380
250 Alta Ave./blg
Page 1
E
The application involves a request for a Physical & Environmental Constraints Review Permit to allow
for the proposed single family home, driveway, grading, filling, new retaining walls, the replacement
of existing retaining walls, and storm water drainage facilities on Hillside and Severe Constrains Lands
for the property located at 250 Alta Ave. The application includes a slope analysis which shows slopes
in excess of 25 percent to the front, rear, and east side of the residence. Earth-moving activities and
construction in Hillside and Severe Constraints Lands require a Physical and Environmental
Constraints Permit because these areas are subject to damage fiom erosion and slope failure. The
application includes grading in the areas surrounding the home in areas of slopes in excess of 25
percent. In addition, a series of retaining walls and drainage facilities will be constructed, or replaced,
in these areas.
The proposal identifies that storm drainage and sanitary sewer will be directed to Scenic Dr. To
achieve this the utility lines will need to cross the property to the east. Water service is available on
Alta Ave to serve the proposed dwelling.
The application includes a request for Exceptions to the Development Standards for Hillside Lands to
build a ten foot tall retaining wall to stabilize an existing nine-foot tall unrestrained cut slope adjacent
to Alta Ave. The application describes the purpose of the grading and proposed retaining walls
adjacent to top the proposed building as necessary to provide access to the home, stabilize the hillside,
and resolve storm drainage issues.
The development standards for Hillside Lands in AMC 18.3.10.090 require a geotechnical expert to
design grading, retaining walls, drainage, and erosion control. The application includes a geologic
investigation and hazard study dated November 6, 2016 which has recommendations for grading,
retaining walls, drainage, and erosion control. The geologic investigation and hazard study includes an
analysis of the condition of the existing retaining walls. This evaluation identified indications of
possible bearing capacity failures of a number of the walls, and as such in additions to
recommendations relating to newly proposed retaining walls, the report also indicates strategies to
address the existing retaining walls and structural fill as necessary to retain the hillside and support the
proposed home. The report further provides recommendations relating to storm drainage and erosion
control to be implemented with construction of the property.
i
The geotechnical investigation and hazard study submitted with the application notes that the property
is suitable for development with the proposed improvements, and remediation of the existing retaining
walls. The report concludes that if the geotechnical recommendations for development are followed, it
is the geotechnical engineer's opinion that there is no significant risk of slope instability on the lot.
Conditions are added to this approval requiring evidence from the project geotechnical expert that the
building permit submittals are consistent with the referenced report recommendations and a report on
the inspections throughout the project construction by the project geotechnical expert as recommended
in #11 on page 5, and #6 on page 6, of the Geologic Investigation and Erosion Control study submitted
with the application.
The application notes that the applicants are proposing an Exception to the Development Standards for
Hillside Lands to exceed the maximum allowable cut slope of seven feet in height. The Hillside
Standards require cuts over seven feet in height to be broken into five foot sections that are terraced and
separated by a minimum of three feet in a horizontal direction. The justification for the proposed
PA 42017-0380
250 Alta Ave./blg
Page 2
exception to to allow a continuous 10' vertical retaining wall is because an existing 9' tall un-retained
cut slope exists on the property. A series of cuts in an uphill direction to accommodate a 3' horizontal
terrace would further intrude toward the Alta Avenue road edge making this option unviable. Creating a
downhill 3' horizontal terrace would require the import of a considerable amount of unnecessary fill,
and would further limit the small footprint area for the proposed home. Neither of these alternatives to
meet the standard would be preferable to retaining the existing 9' cut slope with a singular wall as is
proposed.
Staff believes the exception to make one wall to retain the existing nine foot tall cut slope, rather than a j
series of smaller cuts, meets the approval for an Exception to the Development Standards for Hillside
Lands. The location of the Alta Ave. right of way above the home and the limited buildable area for the
proposed residence provide insufficient distance to allow stepped terracing in this situation. The cut
behind the home is intended to create a passage to the front of the home and direct storm drainage away
from the home. Given the conditions, the use of one cut providing a minimal amount of space in front
of the home is the minimum necessary to address the access and storm drainage issues. The exception
is consistent with the purpose of the Physical and Environmental Constraints Overlay chapter of the land
use ordinance by retaining a cut into a slope of greater than 35 percent, creating access to the front of the
home, and resolving potential drainage problems at the front of the residence.
The application requests an exception to Street Standards to not install sidewalks and a parkrow along
the Alta Ave. frontage. This section of Alta Ave. is 20' wide with a gravel surface, and does not presently
include curb, gutters, or sidewalks. The application proposes the installation of curb and gutter along the
property frontage to extend to the improved section of Alta Ave... The installation of the proposed curb
and gutter will assist in directing surface run-off from the street to an improved storm water system.
Given the steep slopes adjacent to the roadway along the fi•ontage of this and adjoining properties staff
recognizes that the installation of a continuous sidewalk is presently impractical without a
comprehensive design involving properties all along Alta Ave. Further, as there are no sidewalks on
Alta Avenue either to the north or south of the subject property, the construction of a sidewalk along the
property's frontage at this time would not improve pedestrian connectivity. Staff has included a
condition of approval to require the applicant to sign in favor of future improvements on Alta Ave. in
the event the City of Ashland ever forms a Local Improvement District for such street improvements
such as paving or sidewalk installation.
The neighboring property owner at 255 Scenic Dr. provided a letter to the City on June 7th which
outlined concerns relating storm water drainage, stability of the steep slopes, location of the sewer line,
and the proposed size of the proposed structure. The applicants have provided a recorded easement,
located on the property at 255 Scenic Drive that demonstrates the property at 250 Alta Ave. can
connect waste water and storm drain lines to the public systems on Scenic Drive. To address the
impact of runoff and drainage in relation to the development of the property, Staff has included a
condition of approval to require a geotechnical expert inspect the site throughout construction to
ensure the storm drainage system, retaining walls, and building foundation are appropriately
constructed. Furthermore a condition of approval is included to require all landscaping and irrigation
for re-vegetation of the cut slopes shall be installed before the house can be occupied.
The Historic Commission reviewed the proposal at their June 7th meeting and found the project to
comply with the Historic District design guidelines and have recommended approval of the
application.
PA 112017-0380
250 Alta Ave./blg
Page 3
The approval criteria for a Physical & Environmental Constraints Review Permit are detailed in 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.
The approval criteria for an Exception to the Development Standards for Hillside Lands are detailed in
AMC 18.3.10.090.H as follows:
1. There is demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements of this chapter due to a
unique or unusual aspect of the site or proposed use of the site.
2. The exception will result in equal or greater protection of the resources protected under this
chapter.
3. The exception is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty.
4. The exception is consistent with the stated Purpose and Intent of chapter 18.3. 10 Physical and
Environmental Constraints Overlay chapter and section 18.3.10.090 Development Standards
for Hillside Lands.
The approval criteria for an Exception to the Street Design Standards are detailed in AMC 18.4.6.0920.13
as follows:
1. Exception to the Street Design Standards. The approval authority may approve exceptions to
the standards section in 18.4.6.040 Street Design Standards if all of the following
circumstances are found to exist.
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, wait time, and ride
experience.
ii. For bicycle facilities, feeling of safety, quality of experience (i. e., comfort level of
bicycling along the roadway), and frequency of conflicts with vehicle cross traffic.
N. 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.
c. The exception is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty.
d. The exception is consistent with the Purpose and Intent of the Street Standards in
subsection 18.4.6.040.A.
Conclusion and Conditions
In staff's assessment, the proposal has been carefully thought out to minimize the disturbance of the site,
and remediate for past alterations to the property. Based on the application material submitted, the
PA #2017-0380
250 Alta Ave./blg
Page 4
application with the attached conditions complies with all applicable City ordinances. Therefore,
Planning Action #2017-00838 is approved with the following conditions. If any one or more of the
following conditions are found to be invalid for any reason whatsoever, then Planning Action #2017-
00838 is denied. The following are the conditions and they are attached to the approval:
1) That all proposals of the applicant shall be conditions of approval unless otherwise specifically
modified herein.
2) That an engineered street improvement and storm drainage plan for Alta Ave. shall be submitted
for review and approval of the Ashland Engineering Division prior to issuance of a building
permit, and shall be installed in accordance with the approved plans prior to issuance of a
Certificate of Occupancy.
3) Public Works permits and associated inspections shall be obtained for any work to occur within
the public right-of-way.
4) That the property owner shall sign in favor of local improvement districts for the future street
improvements, including but not limited to paving and sidewalks, for Alta Ave. prior to issuance
of a building permit.
5) That final determination of existing fire hydrant's distance from the furthest point on the structure,
fire flow, and fire apparatus access requirements will be based upon plans submitted for Building
Permit review.
6) That a "Fuel Break" as defined in Ashland Municipal Code, section 18.3.10.10013 shall be
completed and an inspection shall be conducted by Ashland Fire & Rescue prior to bringing
combustible materials onto the site.
7) That the tree protection fencing and temporary erosion control measures (i.e. silt fencing, bale
barriers, etc.) shall be installed according to the approved plans prior to issuance of the building
permit for the retaining walls in slopes of 25 percent and over, storage of materials, or
commencement of any site work. The tree protection and temporary erosion control measures
shall be inspected and approved by the Ashland Planning Department prior to site work, storage
of materials, the issuance of an excavation permit, and/or the issuance of a building permit.
8) That the project landscape architect shall inspect work within the tree protection zones, including
but not limited to the installation of retaining walls, excavation for utilities and trimming trees,
as detailed in the Tree Protection Plan L-1 submitted with the application. Prior to issuance of a
certificate of occupancy, the project landscape architect shall provide a final report indicating
that the approved tree protection measures were installed as per the approved plans, and that all
scheduled inspections were conducted by the project landscape architect periodically throughout
the project.
I
9) That the storm drainage plan shall be designed, constructed and maintained in a manner that will
avoid erosion on-site and to adjacent properties in accordance with 18.3.10.090.C. The storm
drainage plan shall be submitted for review and approval to the Ashland Engineering and
Building Divisions prior to application for a building permit.
PA #2017-0380
250 Alta Ave./blg
Page 5
r
y 1
I
10) The landscaping and irrigation for re-vegetation of cut/fill slopes and erosion control shall be
installed in accordance with the approved plan prior to a certificate of occupancy. Vegetation
shall be installed in such a manner as to be substantially established within one year of
installation. That all measures installed for the purposes of long-term erosion control, including
but not limited to vegetative cover, rock walls, retaining walls and landscaping shall be
maintained in perpetuity on all areas in accordance with AMC 18.3.10.090.B.7.a.
11) That the project geotechnical expert shall inspect the site according to the inspection schedule
geologic investigation and erosion control study submitted with the application and dated
November 6, 2016. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the project geotechnical expert
shall provide a final report indicating that the approved grading, drainage, and erosion control
measures were installed as per the approved plans, and that all scheduled inspections were
conducted by the project geotechnical expert periodically throughout the project.
June 13, 2017
ill Molnar, Director Date
Community Divelopment Department
I
PA #2017-0380
250 Alta Ave./blg
Page 6
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 6/15/171 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 #2017-00838, 250 Alta.
Signature of Employee
DocumeW 6/15/2017
t
PA-2017-00838 391 E05DC 1301 PA-2017-00838 391 E05DC 1400 PA-2017-00838 391 E05DC 1200
AGAKHANOV VADIM AMAROTICO ALEXANDER BRINKLEY JEREMY/WEST NICOLE
131 MEADE ST GEORGE/DANIELLE CLAI 264 ALTA AVE
ASHLAND, OR 97520 BOX 156096153 ASHLAND, OR 97520
SIOUX FALLS, SD 57186
PA-2017-00838 391 E08AB 202 PA-2017-00838 391 E05DC 1501 PA-2017-00838 391 E05DC 1300
BURNS E SHEILA TRUSTEE ET AL CHURCHILL CHARLES B/LISA R DELLER TOBY K TRUSTEE ET AL
275 GRANDVIEW DR 269 ALTA AVE 575 N OREGON ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 JACKSONVILLE, OR 97530
PA-2017-00838 391 E05DD 6701 PA-2017-00838 391 E05DC 1302 PA-2017-00838 391 E05DD 6700
ENNIS STEVE/LISA KAHN DAVID E KIGEL KENNETH W TRUSTEE ET AL
152 MANZANITA ST 235 SCENIC DR 270 SCENIC
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-2017-00838 391 E08AA 7900 PA-2017-00838 391 E05DC 1201 PA-2017-00838 391 E05DC 1303
r
KOSKELLA S R/L M CHESNEY MACHCINSKI KAREN LOUISE MCLAUGHLIN KENT B TRUSTEE ET AL
215 SCENIC AVE 275 SCENIC DR 255 SCENIC DR
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-2017-00838 391 E05DD 6601 PA-2017-00838 391 E05DC 1100 PA-2017-00838 391 E05DD 6600
NELSON SCOTT/MCGOLDRICK SOHL BRYAN D/PAULA S ANEMA THOMPSON JOHN W/DELORA G
MARGARET 283 SCENIC DR 220 SCENIC DR
240 SCENIC DR ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-2017-00838 391 E05DD 6602 PA-2017-00838 PA-2017-00838
ZELL RONALD ALBERT TRUSTEE ET AL COVEY PARDEE APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING,
250 SCENIC DR 295 E MAIN ST, #8 ROBBIN WARREN
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 1314-B CENTER DRIVE #452
MEDFORD, OR 97501
250 Alta
NOD 6/15/17
18
I
I
I
i
F
ASHLAND HISTORIC COMMISSION
Planning Application Review
June 7, 2017
PLANNING ACTION: PA-2017-00838
SUBJECT PROPERTY: 250 Alta Ave.
APPLICANT/OWNER: Vadim Agakhanov
DESCRIPTION: A request for a Physical & Environmental Constraints Review Permit to
construct a new single-family dwelling on Severe Constraint Hillside Lands for the property
located at 250 Alta Ave. The proposal involves an Exception to the Development Standards
for Hillside Lands to allow for a 10' tall retaining wall to stabilize an existing nine-foot tall un-
retained cut slope, and an Exception to the Street Design Standards to retain Alta Ave. as an
unimproved street with the addition of a curb and gutter, but no paving or sidewalk installation.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single-Family Residential; ZONING: R-1-7.5;
ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 1 E 05DC; TAX LOT: 1301
Recommendation:
The Historic Commission recommends approval. f'
Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305
20 East Main St. Fax: 541-552-2050
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 l
www.ashiand,or.US
I
t t I,
Brandon Goldman
I
From: Brandon Goldman
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2017 10:10 AM
To: 'Kent McLaughlin'
Subject: RE: RESPONSE to NOTICE OF APPLICATION re: 250 Alta Ave
Attachments: 20170601_250AIta_easement.pdf
Kent,
I wanted to let you know that we received your letter and it was included in the record as requested. I will be
completing the review and sending out the notice of decision this week and I will send you the staff report once
completed. One item we discussed when you came in, and is mentioned in your letter, was the extension of a sewer
line through your property. Following our conversation I requested a copy of the sewer and storm water easement from
the applicants. They were able to provide the attached recorded easement that would enable the property at 250 Alta
Ave to connect waste water and storm drain lines through the easement on 255 Scenic Drive.
To address the concerns you've raised regarding the impact of runoff and drainage in relation to the development of the
property we will condition the application to have a geotechnical expert inspect the site trough out construction to
ensure the storm drainage system and retaining walls are appropriately constructed. Furthermore we will require that
all landscaping and irrigation for re-vegetation of the cut slopes shall be installed before the house can be occupied. This
vegetation should assist with minimizing sheet flow of surface run-off.`
I may also be able address the confusion regarding house size as presented in the application. The full
building, including a daylight basement, is indeed proposed to be 3,291 square feet in size. This includes a 1382sq.ft.
daylight basement area, which is fully exposed story on the downhill side. Within this basement is also the garage
which is not considered habitable space. The primary floor is 1909 sq.ft. For the purposes of complying with the
Maximum Permitted Floor Area in historic districts a daylight basement does not count as contributing area. In review
of the Maximum Permitted Floor Area ordinance we determined that of the 2760 sq.ft. of habitable space proposed only
1909sq.ft is on the main floor and as such it complied with the maximum allowed by ordinance of 2,894 sq.ft. for a lot
this size. The Historic Commission reviewed the plans on June 7th and have recommended approval finding it complies
with the historic design and size standards.
As I mentioned I will follow up with you with the final decision of the City this week. As we'd discussed, you will have
twelve days to appeal this decision. Thank you again for taking the time to review the application materials and for your
the letter highlighting your primary concerns.
All the best, Brandon
Brandon Goldman, AICP
Senior Planner
City of Ashland, Planning Division
20 East Main Street, Ashland OR 97520
(541) 552-2076, TTY: 1-800-735-2900
FAX: (541) 552-2050 f,
brandon.cgoldman(aDashland.or.us
This email transmission is official business of the City of Ashland, and it is subject to Oregon Public Records law for disclosure and
retention. If you have received this message in error, please contact me at (5d 1)552-2076. Thank you.
1
City of Ashland, Oregon June 6, 2017
Community Development and Planning Dept.
51 Winburn Way
Ashland, Oregon 97520
255 Scenic Drive
Ashland, Oregon 97520
Re: We request that these comments be lodged in the file for TAX LOT
1301. This pertains to our concerns in response to the "Notice of Application"
for the 250 ALTA AVE. property.
We are the owners of record, Kent and Pamela McLaughlin, of the 255 Scenic
Drive residence directly below [east] of the property under review.
We have read the Geotechnical [ AGE ] report of November 6, 2016 and the
Physical and Environmental Constraints Review of Feb. 16, 2017. We will
briefly state our concerns at this time understanding that, if necessary, an
appeal of the Planning Division Staffs' decision may later be made to the
Planning Commission in a timely manner. Briefly, our concerns relate to the
following:
As our property is directly, and steeply, situated below the proposed
residence, of great concern is the impact of runoff, drainage and hydrologic
[hydrostatic?] events in the future. The Geotechnical study I read was done
within a period of prolonged drought and no "Field Explorations" were
conducted. {See page 7, LIMITATIONS, second paragraph} Given the changing
climate conditions, we would like to see further "field explorations". What will
happen to our property when underground hydrostatic pressures increase
due to the accumulation of water above us??
The property plans we have viewed, for our own residence, did not show any
Sewer Line coming down the hill from the proposed residence on Alta. I may
not be recalling that accurately but will check on it when back in town several
days from now. j'
There exists some type of storm drain system which the previous owner of the
subject property installed when he built the retaining walls that are now
i
failing. Our concern is about the adequacy and functioning of that storm drain
system given that his retaining walls are failing.
Finally, there are omissions and incomplete, confusing, conflicting
phrases/sentences in our copy of the "Physical and Environmental
Constraints Review" of Feb. 16, 2017.
For example, page 3, paragraph 2 under PROJECT PROPOSAL, "..proposed
residence is is a 3,291- square foot structure." Then on page 4 under section C,
it says, "The proposed residence at 2,541 square feet is less than the existing
development of the surrounding area." Are they trying to "downplay" the size
of the proposed residential structure?
And the final sentence of that same paragraph reads, "The primary objectives,
in addition to the construction of the single-family residence and---------
stabilize the site." We, want to know what was omitted. It maybe important.
There are other examples but I won't continue. The point is that some of this
is written in an ambiguous, confusing manner. Some statements read as both
mandatory and non-mandatory. Are these purposeful or just oversights?
So, those are our immediate concerns.
Respectfully,:
Kent and Pamela McLaughlin
I'
i
Jackson County Official Records 2004-011789
R•e 03/08/200412:47:05 PM
EASEMENT Cnt=t Stn=1 AVGERICN
515.00 $5.00 $11.00 Total:$31.00
February 27, 2004 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
PO Box I I I o1o12706200400117890030036
Ashland. OR 97520 .nieensIha se<Ren.Ceuotyaerkf*,Je<weencoanlv,oreoon
<•rtIy Ihet InelNment IdlnlHtsd hvaln wee recordfd In fhe CIerM
rmom: Kathleen S. Beckett - County Clerk
To Whom It May Concern:
We are owners of the property (39-1 E-05DC) at 255 Scenic Drive, Ashland, Oregon
97520,
At the request of the adjacent property owner, Habib M. Shahin, please be advised that
we are granting two easements to the adjacent property that is to the west at 250 Alta
Ave. Ashland, Oregon 97520. The first easement grants access to the underground sewer
line that runs through our property at 255 Scenic Drive 97520. Our understanding is that
the underground sewer line is already in place; that it nuns down the hill along the
northern boundary of our property and that it connects to the main sewer line on Scenic
Drive.
The second easement being granted is also underground and grants the placement of a
storm drain for carrying runoff water from the 250 Alta Ave. property to the main storm
drain on Scenic Drive and will thus protect our property from their runoff. Our
understanding is that the storm drain to be placed will be at least 4 inches in diameter;
will be placed at least one foot underground and will run along side the aforementioned
sewer line parallel to the northern boundary of our property.
Habib and Miriam, we trust that this letter, notarized, will suffice in this aspect of
building your new home. Our best to you.
SEE ATTACHED LEGALS 'A'
Sincerely,
Kent B. McLaugh
da d'aug Ito
me a cLaug Ito
Owners of Residence at 255 Scenic Drive, Ashland, Oregon 97520
//tt~~~~ j le.a ~pI1 o4N c l! o U 1A V\ 61 VA it
COUNTY OF Ytl.^.a.a..::.....
SUSSCkIBED P"~ °",^"'1 ~~q~ Su~OSCKt e~ ci.M~`$4~C~+h~o~t~ew2 ,
THIS=g a DAy0FAAAV +-11 V t.\v.~u~,.`Ntti~4tn~NDl7a ulrts~b'~
LAyC, t, v
ey 00~ .
17048 Holiday Drive • Morgan hill, CA • 95037 f7\(xkjn
NUTAfiY PUCLI c\v~~., ~1iMQ1~
js'- ~~.er;aaNNNrr.nNNeea1111oN1♦j 3..r.~~'
S - LNILMASMITH } CINDAI,tdLIS1t:R r,
i Commission/1299227 i Cornetts.<,;o.;#12707
g er Notary Public • Calllornla 8 ~ , d< ?;I Not2r'ra,:.l ; - c:•.Iro ,
Santa ClaraCaunty t ~l ' San',C:r.:ncc-
icily
er,n ' My Comm. Expir¢S, Apr02, 2005jj Lty (.7n:rvn. t::;i: t 11 :pit;
~e111111 1e 111111N11NINIee1NNIN/N• ~.`OlC J.'^.,.-m....;.._....._..
i
,
03 i4880 116694J.r
EXHIBIT A
Parcel Ho. One (1) of Partition Plat recorded February S, 1992, as Partition Plat No.
P-13-1992 of 'Record of Partition Plats-, in Jackson County, Oregon, and filed as survey
No. 12854 in the Office of the County Surveyor.
(Code 5-01, Account 41-017621-2, Hap 4391EOSOC, Tax Lot 41301)
SUBJECT TO:
1. Agreement with the City of Ashland, subject to the terms and provisions thereof,
recorded September 8, 1989 as No. 89-20059, Official Records.
2. Agreement with the City of Ashland, subject to the terms and Provisions thereof,
recorded February 4, 1992 as No. 92-03107, official Records.
1. Any rights, interests, o claims which may exist o arise by reason of the following
ma tter 10) disclosed by part i[ion plat recorded February 5, 1992 as Partition Plat No.
P-13-1992 in "Record of Partition Plata- in Jackson County, Oregon, and filed as Survey
No. 12054 in the Office 'f the Jackson County Surveyor: The fact that the fence along the
north, south and -at boundaries does not follow the property line.
4. Any rights, interests, or claims which may exist or arise by reason of the following
matter(s) disclosed by partition plat. r orded February 5, 1992 as Partition Plat No,
P-13-1992 in 'Record of Partition Plata' in Jackson County, Oregon, and filed as Survey
No. 12054 in the Office of the Jackson County Surveyor! The fact that a barn on the west
boundary encroaches on to Alta Ave.
5. Sewer service t, 15.0 feet in width, reserved in deed recorded July 16, 1992
ae No. 92-20967, Official Record.. (Not locatable of record)
Jefton Cou O
t . "on
OFFICIAL RECORDS
MAR 1 1 200
a►o
COUNTY CLERK
i
01 24710 9asseJa
EXHIBIT A
Parcel No. Two (2). Parcel No. Two "I of Partition Plat recorded Pebruary 5, 1992, as
Partition plat Nc,. P-13-1992 oC "Record of Partition Plate" in Jackson County, Oregon, and
filed as Survey No 128`54 1n the Office of the County Surveyor.
(Code 5-01, Accrn.nt 91=001009-4, Map s3916050e, Tax Lot 01303)
G:
Jackson County, Ore®an.
Recorded
OFFICIAL RFCORDS
MAY- 3 1200}
A I 1 b
COUN'ry CLERK
3 /
i
i
}
N°`g
- ~ ~ ~ F no xi f' v
t9 ~ °a E3~ v ~ E
U O Ize- ? - .95 GtCl ~ t 'M Z z rO N
r&G lit
t o uj S ~4
0
w LD
Sys
V 0 iJ
r Yea m1 I wxi°sa~w
d u
y\ d rr2 ;y~~ a ~ a k
C OA
C ? ~gg~ Wu } ~ h i N~
O V 6~ w m I LL; `rl n~ i C ~
t ~ $ ~ ~ II W u' ~ o rc `ag d W
au c a, ~mS ~R ~ ~m ~ ~ C5S 8 P
Q OO `1C 8~ rtW✓ {S ~ ~N_ m ~ p ~ ~ ~ A
A g 'a
o LLI ~ b ^ E tp
o ¢
® -r ~ - w `off ° IEI
.2 Z&
yo J \ o S tl i♦
Q ~ N - C h M 96'06i .C9.t2.0 N u iG
o°~ M ~ $ 'm a a ~ NO -71IN.?Av W7d $ € s $ pp3
J z m m m i o n e L
! w, to
y,~h ~fl~~~ h h n n
LJ.. Q
o e ~ ~ 6
® Z 3 p DN aC fl 8 ° H E 1.
2 N~ Z w4imt.4 39~o W °s s ' - ~ ~ ~qq dm
Lij Z a7 Lf
w • M 4 0
C Q " o o vii
G d J v
c N v;° v~ W e N
-<°3 ~Na e~gN°.. tUCm _c °d
Lo m
1g
t°o "~~=p=moo„ma t~
s
3 IT =rn sfog
~Ngv.E°pv~ w3 °LoEL& `m b f6
Sara c°sa wg N o~r$ggCC~~1 Y
gig.
. -og€NWO. f ru-.SLp
°S2 3cEQg}~$,.5p6°,QON ` ou Osg{ ~E
-JU
° °m2r'E $cVY3 EOp 3Yo TO f'$l0'gg~
£ ~ a tty~-,¢¢S
Z°, '~~eg p3 a~3 o$emp oyF ~Ea jp$°- a g£ ~
8 W a 3 V B o E c~ ago 9 o o ° g
°e~- WyeL~f ~ zf
aye co- ~y €c kPE 3 z e
e U o~m~9m km~~~o m'tla o°Ni
Q y g G d tgsga E~gl iF o €
N € g3 3' g` f
a; U Q METH ~'•Nmu€r.,s
Enm~NSx Cy-3 aa€€Psy O~ bfr
e5 °m-P U ea €E_~ Q~
m 6°N`e pp pp
N F=❑m~'^$~EOa°m8 oW Y~°L `62=5.~"z u~iU Q
/ y F
Planning Department, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520 I T'
541-488-5305 Fax: 541-552-2050 www.ashland.or.us TTY: 1-800-735-2900 ASHLAND
NOTICE OF APPLICATION
PLANNING ACTION: PA-2017-00838
SUBJECT PROPERTY: 250 Alta Avenue
OWNER/APPLICANT: Vadim Agakhanov
DESCRIPTION: A request for a Physical & Environmental Constraints Review Permit to construct a new
single-family dwelling on Severe Constraint Hillside Lands for the property located at 250 Alta Ave. The
proposal involves an Exception to the Development Standards for Hillside Lands to allow for a 10' tall retaining
wall to stabilize an existing nine-foot tall un-retained cut slope, and an Exception to the Street Design Standards
to retain Alta Ave. as an unimproved street with the addition of a curb and gutter, but no paving or sidewalk
installation. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single-Family Residential; ZONING: R-1-7.5;
ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 1E 05DC; TAX LOT: 1301.
NOTE: The Ashland Historic Commission will also review this Planning Action on Wednesday June 7, 2017 at 6:00 PM in the
Community Development and Engineering Services building (Siskiyou Room), located at 51 Winburn Way.
NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: May 24, 2017
DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION OF WRITTEN COMMENTS: June 7, 2017
A
l ~ Subject Property ,
250 Alta Ave_
t ~ I PA# 20'17-00838 l IL
{
a
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 18.5.1.050.G)
The ordinance criteria applicable to this application are attached to this notice. Oregon law states that failure to raise an objection concerning this application,
by letter, or failure to provide sufficient specificity to afford the decision maker an opportunity to respond to the issue, precludes your right of appeal to the
Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) on that issue. Failure to specify which ordinance criterion the objection is based on also precludes your right of appeal
to LUBA on that criterion. Failure of the applicant to raise constitutional or other issues relating to proposed conditions of approval with sufficient specificity
to allow this Department to respond to the issue precludes an action for damages in circuit court.
A copy of the application, all documents and evidence relied upon by the applicant and applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost and will be
provided at reasonable cost, if requested. All materials are available at the Ashland Planning Division, Community Development & Engineering Services
Building, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520.
If you have questions or comments concerning this request, please feel free to contact the Ashland Planning Division at 541-488-5305.
Wcomm-dev\planning\Planning ActionMoticing FolderWailed Notices & Signs\20171PA-2017-00838.docs
PHYSICAL & ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINT"
18.3.10.050
An application for a Physical Constraints Review Permit is subject to the Type I procedure in section 18.5.1.050 and shall be approved if the proposal meets all
of the following criteria,
A. Through the application of the development standards of this chapter, the potential impacts to the property and nearby areas have been considered, and
adverse impacts have been minimized.
B. That the applicant has considered the potential hazards that the development may create and implemented measures to mitigate the potential hazards
caused by the development.
C. That the applicant has taken all reasonable steps to reduce the adverse impact on the environment. Irreversible actions shall be considered more
seriously than reversible actions. The Staff Advisor or Planning Commission shall consider the existing development of the surrounding area, and the
maximum development permitted by this ordinance.
EXCEPTION TO THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR HILLSIDE LANDS
18.3.10,090.H
An exception under this section is not subject to the variance requirements of chapter 18.5.5 Variances. An application for an exception is
subject to the Type I procedure in section 18.5.1.050 and may be granted with respect to the development standards for Hillside Lands if
the proposal meets all of the following criteria.
1. There is demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements of this chapter due to a unique or unusual aspect of the site or proposed use of the
site.
2. The exception will result in equal or greater protection of the resources protected under this chapter.
3. The exception is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty.
4. The exception is consistent with the stated Purpose and Intent of chapter 18.3.10 Physical and Environmental Constraints Overlay chapter and section
18.3.10.090 Development Standards for Hillside Lands.
EXCEPTION TO STREET STANDARDS
18.4.6.0203.1
Exception to the Street Design Standards. The approval authority may approve exceptions to the standards section in 18,4.6.040 Street Design Standards if all
of the following circumstances are found to exist,
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, wait time, and ride experience.
ii. For bicycle facilities, feeling of safety, quality of experience (i.e., comfort level of 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.
c. The exception is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty.
d. The exception is consistent with the Purpose and Intent of the Street Standards in subsection 18.4.6.040.A.
C=
G:\comm-dev\planning\Planning ActionsUVoticing Folder\Mailed Notices & Signs\2017\PA-2017-00838.docs
t
f
l
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 May 24, 2017 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 #PA-2017-00838, 250 Alta Avenue.
M~ 0(W
Si a ure of Employee
C:IUsersltrapprlDesktoplTemplaleslAFFIDAVIT OF MAILIN6_Regan.dou 512412017
I 091S tiaAV jpegeE) of zas1mn I ,dn-dod pjogaj @IJajgAaa ap uqe amgoey e1 @ zallded
j s}I1ege6/e0AJ9AeeZ911V as /use assal a sa anbl I s7ualed/wooAane:;ed
®I d 3 p .P ~ 33 ii
PA-2017-00838 391E05DC 1301 PA-2017-00838 391E05DC 1400 P,,-2017-00838
AGAKHANOV VADIM AMAROTICO ALEXANDER APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING
131 MEADE ST GEORGE/DANIELLE CLAI 1314-B CENTER DR. #452
ASHLAND, OR 97520 BOX 156096153 MEDFORD, OR 97501
SIOUX FALLS, SD 57186
PA-2017-00838 391E05DC 1200 PA-2017-00838 391E08AB 202 PA-2017-00838 391E05DC 1501
BRINKLEYJEREMY/WEST NICOLE BURNS E SHEILA TRUSTEE ETAL CHURCHILL CHARLES B/LISA R
264 ALTA AVE 275 GRANDVIEW DR 269 ALTA AVE
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-2017-00838 PA-2017-00838 391E08AB 101 PA-2017-00838 391E05DD 6701
COVEY PARDEE LANDSCAPE DESIGN j DELLER TOBY K TRUSTEE ET AL ENNIS STEVE/LISA
295 E. MAIN #8 575 N OREGON ST 152 MANZANITA ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520 JACKSONVILLE, OR 97530 ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-2017-00838 391E05DC 1302 PA-2017-00838 391E05DD 6700 I PA-2017-00838 391E08AA 7900
KAHN DAVID E KIGEL KENNETH W TRUSTEE ETAL KOSKELLAS R/L M CHESNEY
Z35 SCENIC DR 270 SCENIC 215 SCENIC AVE
ASHLAND, OR 97520 j ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-2017-00838 391E05DC 1201 PA-2017-00838 391E05DC 1303 PA-2017-00838 391E05DD 6601
MACHCINSKI KAREN LOUISE MCLAUGHLIN KENT B TRUSTEE ET AL NELSON SCOTT/MCGOLDRICK
275 SCENIC DR 255 SCENIC DR MARGARET
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 240 SCENIC DR
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-2017-00838 391E05DC 1100 PA-2017-00838 391E05DD 6600 PA-2017-00838 391E05DD 6602
30HL BRYAN D/PAULA S ANEMA THOMPSON JOHN W/DELORA G ZELL RONALD ALBERT TRUSTEE ET AL
283 SCENIC DR 220 SCENIC DR 250 SCENIC DR
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-2017-00838
250 ALTA 5/24/2017
NOC 18
I
i
i
I
j
10919 ajeldwalkaAV esn I 186P3 do-dod asodxa of au!l 6uole puag I
s9;eldul9;/W0a (lane of oE) ; slags, ssa1PP`d®laad ~(se3 ®09 LS OAHMV
i
a
Ci
I
I
1200 1201
1400 670
i
1341 130-3
"Ol
1100 4302
1 ig Lp
101
202
8 r L) A 9jl
'
2
r
ZONING PERMIT APPLICATION
Planning Division
L Y"
C I T Y OF 51 Winbum Way, Ashland OR 97520
541-488-5305 Fax 541-488-6006 FILE
~5M-#I.,A~ID '
I
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT J/ G Q
DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Pursuing LEED® Certification? ❑ YES 0
Street Address A2e&1Wjr_
Assessor's Map No. 39 1 E q f Tax Lot(s)
Zoning 1 ~5 Comp Plan Designation / Af6 - /fit/
APPLICANT
Name Vfi_P11tj
AAA) 'V Phone ~~J 0D49 E-Mail ~6,, ~
Address City Zip
PROPERTY OWNER 00-d~v
Name 0&bw /1,57- 4 4d v Phore / E-Mail
Address City Zip
i
SURVEYOR ENGINEER ARCHITECT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OTHER
Title Name Phone -Mail
Address City Zip
Title Name Phone E-Mail
Addres City Zip
1 hereby certify that the statements and information contained in this application, including the enclosed drawings and the required findings of fact, are in all respects,
true and correct. /understand that all property pins must be shown on the drawings and visible upon the site inspection. In the event the pins are not shown or their
location found to be incorrect, the owner assumes full responsibility. 1 further understand that if this request is subsequently contested, the burden will be on me to
establish:
1) that 1 produced sufficient factual evidence at the hearing to support this request;
2) that the findings of fact furnished justifies the granting of the request;
3) that the findings of fact furnished by me are adequate; and further
4) that all structures or improvements are properly located on the ground.
Fail ur i his 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 r oved atvny e e se. 1 any doubts, l am advised to seek competent professional advice and assistance.
® 6 ` ze
A plicant's Signature Date
As owner of the property invo d i is request, I have read and understood the complete application and its consequences to me as a property
o ner.
Property Owner's S' ture required) Date
[To be completed by City Staft]
CJJ
Date Received u~ Zoning Permit Type I ' ` I Filing Fee $
OVER N
GAcomm-dev\planningtFo=s & HandoutstZoning Pemut Applicafion.doc
FINDINGS OF FACT
PHYSICAL AND ENVIONRIVIENTAL CONSTRAINTS REVIEW PERMIT
FOR
DEVELOPMENT OF HILLSIDE LANDS
i
SUBJECT PROPERTY
250 Alta Avenue
39 1E 05DC #1301
February 16, 2017
1
250 Alta Avenue
39 1E 05DC #1301
PHYSICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS REVIEW PERMIT FOR HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT
Subject Propert
y
Address: 250 Alta Avenue
Map & Tax Lots: 39 1E 05DC #1301
Applicant: Vadim Agakhanov
131 Meade Street
Ashland, OR 97520
Landscape Design: CoveyPardee
295 E Main Street, #8
Ashland, OR 97520
Geotechnical Expert: Applied Geotechnical Engineering
Robin Warren
1314-B Center Drive #452
Medford, OR 97501
Comprehensive Plan Designation: Single Family Residential
Zoning: R-1-7.5
Lot Area: 12,287 square feet
Request:
Request for Physical and Environmental Constraints Review Permit for the construction of a new
single family residential home on land that has more than 25 percent slopes. The request includes
a Tree Removal Permit to remove two six-inch DBH Pear trees.
Property Background:
The subject property is located on the east side of Alta Avenue to the north of the intersection of
Grandview Drive. The subject property is zoned single family residential (R-1-7.5). The
immediately adjacent properties are also zoned R-1-7.5. The nearby properties to the south of the
Grandview Dr. intersection, the lots are zoned R-1-10. The properties to the west across
Grandview Dr. are zoned RR-.5. All of the adjacent properties are occupied by single family
2
250 Alta Avenue
39 1E 05DC #1301
PHYSICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS REVIEW PERMIT FOR HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT
I
E
homes and associated accessory structures. The property is within the Skidmore-Academy
Historic District.
is
The property is 12,287 square feet in area. The lot was created via a minor land partition in 1992.
The property is currently vacant of structures. There are retaining walls that were constructed
following a 2004 approval for the construction of a new single family residence. The house was
never constructed.
The lot slopes steeply downhill away from the street to the northeast. The property has slopes of
more than 35 percent. The slope of the property has been altered by a previous property owner
by excavation for a building pad and the construction of retaining walls. The average slope of the
property along the west property line was identified as 25.82 percent as measured by Jason
Martin, Registered Professional Land Surveyor, and President of To The Point Land Surveying,
LLC.
There are 17 trees in the vicinity of the new construction. Of these, seven trees are on the subject
property.
I;
Project Proposal:
The request is to construct a new single family residential home on the vacant lot. The site is
unique in that prior to the current site conditions, with a flat pad area and retaining walls, there
were no areas of less than 35 percent. With the previous owners site work, retaining walls were
constructed on the east and north sides of the site and a nine-foot tall, exposed cut bank was left
on the southwest side of the site.
The proposed residence is a 3,291-square foot structure. This includes a 1,382-square foot
basement. Within the basement is a 531-square foot two vehicle garage is proposed. A driveway
at the northwest end of the property is proposed to access the garage. The residence is setback
from the front property line 10 feet to reduce the downhill impacts of the proposed construction.
The reduced setback is allowed in the code and the slope of the property along the front property
line within the setback area has slopes of more than 25 percent.
There are retaining walls on the site built by the previous owner, some of these have failed and
will be removed. The reconstruction of the retaining walls requires the removal of the two small
diameter pear trees to the east of the proposed structure. The retaining wall for the nine-foot cut
slope near the southwest property corner will be retained. The height of this wall requires an
exception to the design standards. Below are the criteria addressing the standards for Hillside
Development.
18.3.10.050 Approval Criteria
A. Through the application of the development standards of this chapter, the potential impacts
to the property and nearby areas have been considered, and adverse impacts have been
minimized.
3
250 Alta Avenue
39 1E 05DC ##1301
PHYSICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS REVIEW PERMIT FOR HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT
i
The proposed residence is sited within the pad area created by the previous property owner to
reduce additional site disturbance and to preserve the remaining trees on the property. The site
has retaining walls that were constructed improperly that are failing. The proposed construction
utilizing the recommendations of the Geotechnical Expert will stabilize the steep property and
the failing walls. The residence is below the grade ofAlta Street and through the application of
the requirements of the geotechnical expert, the structural engineer and implementation of
erosion control fencing, potential 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.
The site in its current state with failing retaining walls and a nine foot cutbank adjacent to Alta
Street are potentially hazardous. The amount of site work necessary to fix the problems created
by a previous property owner requires the review and approval of the Physical and
Environmental Constraints Review Permit. The proposed retaining walls and new construction
will stabilize the existing site conditions andprovide measures to alleviate potential hazards that
exist on the site. The foundation will be engineered and the geotechnical expert will provide
periodic inspects of the site to verb their development requirements are being complied with.
Erosion control will be installed on site and maintained throughout the duration of the
construction. Construction materials will be brought onto site on the day of needed materials
limiting the amount ofstorage on site. All dirt will be removed from the site and brought back
onto the site as needed.
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.
The proposed residence is located on the property in a manner that reduces does not encroach
into the areas with the steepest slopes. The residence is relatively small by comparison to the
structures that exist in the impact area. The average size of the residences within 200 feet of the
subject property is 2,824. The proposed residence at 2,541 square feet is less than the existing
development of the surrounding area. Very little excavation and filling of the site is proposed.
The primary objectives, in addition to the construction of the single-family residence and
stabilize the site.
18.3.10.090 Development Standards for Hillside Lands
A. General Requirements. The following general requirements shall apply in Hillside Lands.
1. Buildable Area. All development shall occur on lands defined as having buildable area.
The subject property does not have any natural areas with less than 35 percent slopes. Previous
site work created a relatively flat building pad area and stacked block retaining wall were
installed. It is upon this excavated pad that the proposed structure will be located
250 Alta Avenue 4
39 1E 05DC #1301
PHYSICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS REVIEW PERMIT FOR HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT
The geo-technical site evaluation was performed by Robin Warren in November 2016
Subsequently, a detailed report was created. The report finds that site has silty sand
(decomposed granite) soil above a granite bedrock. No groundwater springs or seepage was
observed. The report find that the site is suitable for development for the proposed single family
residential home.
The geo-tech recommends period inspections and states that inspection reports will be provided
to the City of Ashland at the completion of the project.
i
B. Hillside Grading and Erosion Control. All development on lands classified as Hillside shall
provide plans conforming to the following items. h
1. All grading, retaining wall design, drainage, and erosion control plans for development on
Hillside Lands shall be designed by a geotechnical expert. All cuts, grading or fills shall conform
to the International Building Code and be consistent with the provisions of this ordinance.
Erosion control measures on the development site shall be required to minimize the solids in
runoff from disturbed areas.
The Geotechnical expert, Robin Warren has reviewed and approves the grading, erosion control,
drainage and retaining wall plans that have been designed by others with demonstrable
expertise in the development of Hillside Lands. See geotechnical report from Robin Warren
dated November, 2016. The plans provided demonstrate compliance with the standards from the
code.
2. Timing of Improvements.
This proposal is exempt from this section of the code. Due to the topography of the site, the
construction will likely occur in the dryer months.
3. Retention in natural state.
Based on the lot size of less than % of an acre, it is not subject to the retention in natural state
standard.
4. Grading - Cuts. On all cut slopes on areas classified as Hillside Lands, the following standards
shall apply.
a. Cut slope angles shall be determined in relationship to the type of materials of which they
are composed. Where the soil permits, limit the total area exposed to precipitation and
erosion. Steep cut slopes shall be retained with stacked rock, retaining walls, or functional
equivalent to control erosion and provide slope stability when necessary. Where cut slopes are
required to be laid back (1:1 or less steep), the slope shall be protected with erosion control
getting or structural equivalent installed per manufacturers specifications, and revegetated.
5
250 Alta Avenue
39 1E 05DC #1301
PHYSICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS REVIEW PERMIT FOR HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT
All cut slopes will be retained with retaining walls and mechanically stabilized earth (MSE)
retaining walls. The existing nine foot exposed cut slope will pushed to the existing concrete
block wall at the southeast corner of the lot and be retained with a properly engineered and
constructed retaining wall. This retaining wall will be taller than seven feet and due to the
proximity of the cut to the property line and the desire to reduce the setback and limit the amount
of artificial fill brought onto the site. Exception findings are provided for the wall.
b. Exposed cut slopes, such as those for streets, driveway accesses, or yard areas, greater than
seven feet in height shall be terraced. Cut faces on a terraced section shall not exceed a
maximum height of five feet. Terrace widths shall be a minimum of three feet to allow for the
introduction of vegetation for erosion control. Total cut slopes shall not exceed a maximum
vertical height of 15 feet. The top of cut slopes not utilizing structural retaining walls shall be
located a minimum setback of one-half the height of the cut slope from the nearest property
line.
The other proposed and remaining retaining walls on the site are proposed to be less than five
feet tall and a minimum step-back of three feet wide.
c. Cut slopes for structure foundations which reduce the effective visual bulk, such as split pad
or stepped footings, shall be exempted from the height limitations of this section.
Due to previous site disturbance, and the steep slope of the site, the building cannot be cut into
the hillside. As proposed, the structure is on the existing pad that was cut onto the site. There are
extremely steep slopes on the east side of the property below the existing retaining walls and the
proposal is to not disturb these slopes more than already altered
d. Revegetation of cut slope terraces shall include the provision of a planting plan, introduction
of top soil where necessary, and the use of irrigation if necessary. The vegetation used for these
areas shall be native, or species similar in resource value to native plants, which will survive,
help reduce the visual impact of the cut slope, and assist in providing long term slope
stabilization. Trees, bush-type plantings, and cascading vine-type plantings may be appropriate.
All terraced areas will be revegetated with low growing, native ground cover plants. A
comprehensive landscape plan has been provided.
5. Grading - Fill. On all fill slopes on lands classified as Hillside Lands, the following standards
shall apply.
a. Fill slopes shall not exceed a total vertical height of 20 feet. The toe of the fill slope area not
utilizing structural retaining shall be a minimum of six feet from the nearest property line.
No fill slopes exceeding 20 feet are proposed. All fill areas are proposed to be retained.
b. Fill slopes shall be protected with an erosion control netting, blanket or functional
equivalent. Netting or blankets shall only be used in conjunction with an organic mulch such as
6
250 Alta Avenue
39 1E 05DC #1301
PHYSICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS REVIEW PERMIT FOR HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT
is;
straw or wood fiber. The blanket must be applied so that it is in complete contact with the soil
so that erosion does not occur beneath it. Erosion netting or blankets shall be securely
anchored to the slope in accordance with manufacturer's recommendations.
No un-retained fill slopes are proposed.
c. Whenever possible, utilities shall not be located or installed on or in fill slopes. When
determined that it necessary to install utilities on fill slopes, all plans shall be designed by a
geotechnical expert.
The sewer line to the site exists and traverses the property to the east. No additional utilities are
not being installed on fill slopes.
d. Revegetation of fill slopes shall utilize native vegetation or vegetation similar in resource
value and which will survive and stabilize the surface. Irrigation may be provided to ensure
growth if necessary. Evidence shall be required indicating long-term viability of the proposed
vegetation for the purposes of erosion control on disturbed areas.
No un-retained fill slopes are proposed.
6. Revegetation Requirements. Where required by this chapter, all required revegetation of cut
and fill slopes shall be installed prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, signature of a
required survey plat, or other time as determined by the hearing authority. Vegetation shall be
installed in such a manner as to be substantially established within one year of installation.
The landscaping proposed for the retained areas and areas of disturbance are proposed to be
installed prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy.
7. Maintenance, Security, and Penalties for Erosion Control Measures.
a. Maintenance. All measures installed for the purposes of long-term erosion control, including
but not limited to vegetative cover, rock walls, and landscaping, shall be maintained in
perpetuity on all areas which have been disturbed, including public rights-of-way. The applicant
shall provide evidence indicating the mechanisms in place to ensure maintenance of measures.
The landscaping will be maintained in perpetuity. A formal landscape plan and irrigation will be
installed on the property to ensure maintenance of the erosion control vegetation and
landscaping.
b. Security.
The subject lot is not subject to this section of code as the lot existed prior to January 1, 1998
and the security bond requirements applies strictly to lots created after Juntim 7, 1998.
7
250 Alta Avenue
39 1E 05DC #1301
PHYSICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS REVIEW PERMIT FOR HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT
i
i
8. Site Grading. The grading of a site on Hillside Lands shall be reviewed considering the
following factors.
a. No terracing shall be allowed except for the purposes of developing a level building pad and
for providing vehicular access to the pad.
The site has had significant alterations by a previous property owner and retaining walls were
improperly installed with some failure shown on the site. The proposal is to minimize the hazards
created by poorly constructed retaining walls through the installation and stabilization of the
walls. The lot area is compact and no additional terracing is proposed.
b. & c. Avoid hazardous or unstable portions of the site.
Based on the Geological Report the hazards is the exiting failing retaining wall. The proposal is
to reconstruct this wall with an engineered wall that will restore stability. The areas further to
the east of the existing site development that are the steepest portions of the property will not be
developed
d. Building pads should be of minimum size to accommodate the structure and a reasonable
amount of yard space. Pads for tennis courts, swimming pools and large lawns are discouraged.
As much of the remaining lot area as possible should be kept in the natural state of the original
slope.
A building pad was created by a previous property owner, it is upon this existing cut pad that the
structure is proposed. There is little yard area on the site due to its topography. No additional
terraces are proposed to create pads for tennis courts, swimming pools or lawn. The areas below
the existing areas of site disturbance are proposed to be left in their current "natural" state.
9. Inspections and Final Report. Prior to the acceptance of a subdivision by the City, signature of
the final survey plat on partitions, or issuance of a certificate of occupancy for individual
structures, the project geotechnical expert shall provide a final report indicating that the
approved grading, drainage, and erosion control measures were installed as per the approved
plans, and that all scheduled inspections, as per 18.3.10.090.A.4.j were conducted by the
project geotechnical expert periodically throughout the project.
The final inspection report completed by the geotechnical expert will be provided prior to the
issuance of the certificate of occupancy.
C. Surface and Groundwater Drainage.
The storm water is proposed to be piped into the storm drain facilities on Scenic. All storm water I,
from the driveways, parking areas and other impervious surfaces including the roof drains will
be designed to divert away from the steepest portions of the site. The replacement walls and all
s
250 Alta Avenue
39 1E OSDC t#1301
PHYSICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS REVIEW PERMIT FOR HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT
new walls will include properly installed drainage to improve site stability and avoid on-site
erosion and impacts to downhill neighbors.
D. Tree Conservation, Protection and Removal. All development on Hillside Lands shall
conform to the following requirements.
1. Inventory of Existing Trees.
i°
See the attached Tree Inventory /Protection Plan (PL 1.0) completed by Landscape Architect,
Greg Covey. Details regarding the protection are attached.
i
2. Evaluation of Suitability for Conservation.
The majority of the sites trees are proposed for conservation. The two trees proposed for
removal are six-inches in DBH.
3. Tree Conservation in Project Design.
All deciduous trees that are more than 12-inches DBH are proposed for preservation. The site
layout including utility installation are in the areas of least disturbance and will not have
negative impacts on the preserved trees. The minimum number of trees are proposed for
removal.
4. Tree Protection.
See the attached Tree Inventory /Protection Plan
S. Tree Removal. Development shall be designed to preserve the maximum number of trees on
a site. The development shall follow the standards for fuel reduction if the development is
located in Wildfire Lands. When justified by findings of fact, the hearing authority may approve
the removal of trees for one or more of the following conditions.
e. The tree is located within or adjacent to areas of cuts or fills that are deemed threatening to
the life of the tree, as determined by a landscape professional.
The two pear trees proposed for removal are adjacent to failing retaining walls that will require
reconstruction which will negatively impact the trees to a degree that they will not survive.
6. Tree Replacement.
The two smaller stature pear trees are proposed to be mitigated for with new deciduous trees.
1
1
E. Building Location and Design Standards. All buildings and buildable areas proposed for
Hillside Lands shall be designed and constructed in compliance with the following standards.
1. Building Envelopes.
9
250 Alta Avenue
39 1E 05DC #1301
PHYSICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS REVIEW PERMIT FOR HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT
Not applicable, the property was created prior to the adoption of the Hillside Lands overlay and
a building envelope was not during the partition that created the lot.
2. Building Design. To reduce hillside disturbance through the use of slope responsive design
techniques, buildings on Hillside Lands, excepting those lands within the designated Historic
District, shall incorporate the following into the building design and indicate features on
required building permits.
The proposed residence is within the Skidmore Academy Historic District and is not subject to
the building design standards.
F. All structures on Hillside Lands shall have foundations designed by an engineer or architect
with demonstrable geotechnical design experience. A designer, as defined, shall not complete
working drawings without having foundations designed by an engineer.
The foundation will be designed by an engineer. The engineered foundation will be provided
with the building permit set.
G. All newly created lots or lots modified by a lot line adjustment must include building
envelopes containing a buildable area less than 35 percent slope of sufficient size to
accommodate the uses permitted in the underlying zone, unless the division or lot line
adjustment is for open space or conservation purposes.
This section is not applicable. The subject lot was created prior to the adoption of this
ordinance.
H. Exception to the Development Standards for Hillside Lands.
1. There is demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements of this chapter due to a
unique or unusual aspect of the site or proposed use of the site.
There is one exception to the Hillside Development Standards for an retaining wall to be
constructed for an existing nine foot tall, unretained cut slope adjacent to Alta Street. The wall
will exceed ten feet in height to stabilize the hillside.
The site is unique in that it is has pre-existing grading (cut slopes) and retaining wall
construction that has not been either retained or due to improper construction have failed. The
proposal is to shore up the existing site in order to prevent potential slope failure.
This wall of the structure is up against the hillside forming a retained area of slope behind the
residence. The need for slope retention is evidenced by the damage to the driveway for the
property to the east and the erosion created by the un-retained hillside. There is a four foot
concrete block retaining wall that will be removed and the new cut for the wall will replace this
structure. This wall needs to be replaced due to the unknown structural condition. Based on the
other walls on the site, it has not been properly installed.
10
250 Alta Avenue
39 1E 05DC #1301
PHYSICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS REVIEW PERMIT FOR HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT
The proposed residence is also below the Alta Street grade along the frontage of the parcel and
the front yard area of the site is steep. This steep hillside with properly installed structural
support will protect the residence that is being constructed on the only buildable area of the site.
Due to the limited distance of the cut from the property line and the need to limit further
downhill impacts, the cut cannot be terraced in five foot sections.
2. The exception will result in equal or greater protection of the resources protected under this
chapter.
The retaining wall that is more than seven feet without terracing (likely ten foot tall) provides
retention for the area of the property that has steep, unretained cut slopes. The proposed
structure closer to Alta Street against the higher than allowed by code wall allows for the
preservation of the steepest portions of the property to the east of the existing building pad.
i
3. The exception is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty.
The exception is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty in meeting the code. There are
no properties in the City that will be negatively affected by the proposed wall height and the wall
proposed structural stability to the street above.
i
4. The exception is consistent with the stated Purpose and Intent of chapter 18.3.10 Physical
and Environmental Constraints Overlay chapter and section 18.3.10.090 Development
Standards for Hillside Lands.
The exception is consistent with the Purpose and Intent of the Physical and Environmental
Constraints Overlay and the Development Standards for Hillside Lands. The proposed residence
and site layout limit alteration of topography and reduced encroachment upon, or alteration of
the natural environment and; to provide for sensitive development in areas that are constrained
by various natural features, such as the steep slopes in the front yard and the steep slopes at the
rear of the property.
18.3.10.100 Development Standards for Wildfire Lands
B. Requirements for Construction of All Structures.
Compliance with the development standards for wildfire lands will be implemented on-site prior
to introduction of combustible construction materials. Class B or better shingles will be used on
the roof.
Tree Removal Permit
18.5.7.040 Approval Criteria
B. Tree Removal Permit.
11
250 Alta Avenue
39 1E 05DC #1301
PHYSICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS REVIEW PERMIT FOR HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT
I
a. The tree is proposed for removal in order to permit the application to be 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 18.3.10.
There are two trees proposed for removal that are on lands greater than 25 percent slope and
therefore they are subject to the tree removal criteria and the Physical and Environmental
Constraints chapter.
The trees are adjacent to the failing retaining wall and correction to the wall construction
necessitates the removal of the small pear trees.
b. 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.
The removal of the trees will not have significant negative impact on erosion or soil stability.
There are no surface waters present on the site. The removal will benefit the retaining wall
construction and with new deciduous trees proposed, the canopy will be eventually replaced
c. 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.
The removal of the trees will not have a significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes,
canopies and species diversity. There are numerous old fruit trees in the vicinity of the property.
The trees will be mitigated for with deciduous trees which will replace the lost canopy.
d. 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.
The residential density of the site is one unit.
e. The City shall require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each tree granted approval
pursuant to section 18.5.7.050. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of
the permit.
See the attached landscaping plan which mitigates the loss of the two trees.
I
Exception to Street Standards:
18.4.6.020 Applicability
12
250 Alta Avenue
39 1E 05DC #1301
PHYSICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS REVIEW PERMIT FOR HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT
I
B. Exceptions
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.
The site is located beyond the "improved" section ofAlta Street. The streetfrontage is narrow,
at only 20 feet wide and is gravel. There are slopes more than 25 percent along the frontage of
the parcel. The proposal includes the request to install curb and gutter along the frontage and to
connect to the existing improved section ofAlta Street, but no sidewalks.
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, wait time, and ride experience.
ii. For bicycle facilities, feeling of safety, quality of experience (i.e., comfort level of 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.
The topography along the frontage of the property limits the available transportation facilities.
Due to the property location, there are no impacts to transit, bicycle facilities or pedestrian
facilities.
c. The exception is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty.
The existing driveway connects to Alta Street. The exception is to allow for only curb and gutter
but no sidewalk. The width of the right-of-way, existing tree encroachments and the lack of
sidewalk on the entire street limit the area of improvement.
d. The exception is consistent with the Purpose and Intent of the Street Standards in subsection
18.4.6.040.A.
The request for the exception is consistent with the Purpose and Intent of the Street Standards
which speak largely to improved roads with curb, gutter, parkrow and sidewalk. Alta Street in
the vicinity lacks all of these features. This portion ofAlta has very low traffic volumes due to it
only accessing a few properties and due to the steepness, it functions much like a dead-end street
and all of the traffic is limited to local resident traffic. The pavement, curb and gutter will
improve the street in general conformance with the standards.
Conclusion:
In conclusion, the applicant's find that the proposed moderately sized, single family residence
will be a welcome addition in the neighborhood. The geotechnical report has indicated that the
areas selected for development are suitable and has recommended erosion control, foundation
type and retaining wall design.
i
13
250 Alta Avenue
39 1E 05DC #11301
PHYSICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS REVIEW PERMIT FOR HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT
i
The applicant finds that all of the applicable City of Ashland requirements have been met or can
be met through the imposition of conditions of approval.
F
i
14
250 Alta Avenue
39 1E 05DC #1301
PHYSICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS REVIEW PERMIT FOR HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT
i
pplie
eotechical
11 l eeri
& Geologic Consulting
November 6, 2016
Vadim Agakhanov
521 Schofield
Ashland, OR 97520
SUBJECT: Geotechnical Investigation and Erosion Control
New Single-Family Residence
250 Alta Avenue
Ashland, Oregon
At your request, Applied Geotechnical Engineering and Geologic Consulting LLC (AGEGC) has
E
completed a geotechnical investigation and erosion control plan for the proposed residential home to
be built at 250 Alta Avenue in Ashland, Oregon. The intent of our work is to provide design
recommendations for design and construction of the new home. The geotechnical evaluation
included a review of available geotechnical and geologic information for the property and vicinity,
ground-level reconnaissance of the property and vicinity, and engineering analyses. This report
describes the work accomplished and provides our recommendations for development of the lot,
including erosion control.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
We understand that the proposed new home will consist of a single-family, wood-frame structure
with attached garage. The home will be constructed on the uphill (west) side of the property, on the
level area adjacent to Alta Avenue. The home will require a concrete cantilevered retaining wall as
part of the structure. The retaining wall for the home may be up to about 10 ft high and located along
Alta Avenue, on the uphill (west) side of the home. Due to the relatively steep existing slopes along
the eastern side (back) of the lot and an existing, failing retaining wall along the north property line,
new MSE (mechanically stabilized earth) retaining walls will be required to retain the slopes along
the downhill and north sides of the lot. Extreme care must be taken during installation of the new
retaining walls to not undermine and destabilize the existing retaining walls. To decrease the risk of
the new home's foundations adding excessive loading to the existing retaining walls, the house will
require deep spread footing foundations. Downspouts and low-point drains from the home will be
hard-piped to the storm water system.
SITE DESCRIPTION
A senior licensed geotechnical engineer/geologist from AGEGC met you at the site on January 2,
2014 and on October 20, 2016. The lot is located on the east (downhill) side of Alta Road. The site
slopes down to the east, away from Alta Street. The lot has been graded with a cut along Alta Road
and with several MSE walls on the downhill side of the building pad. A retaining wall constructed
of railroad ties is located along the north property line.
F
E
`t
4359-16 250 Alta Avenuc
Properly constructed MSE retaining walls consist of the facing (typically proprietary concrete
blocks), a geogrid that extends back into the wall backfill from the face of the wall and reinforces the
soil, structural backfill (typically compacted crushed rock material such as 3/4-in.-minus crushed
rock), and drainage. A wall typically has several layers of the grid for reinforcement of the wall
backfill, often spaced on about 2 ft vertical spacings. In walls with multiple tiers, the grids from the
lower walls typically extend under the toe of the next wall up and support the upper walls. The lower
walls cannot be removed without undermining the support of the upper walls.
The existing southern wall section consists of two levels of MSE retaining wall, the northern wall
section consists of three levels of MSE retaining wall. The walls are up to about 7 ft high with
landscaping areas above each wall. A set of concrete stairs goes from the upper level to the area
above the lower wall with a concrete landing at the bottom of the stairs. The slope below the southern
wall section is relatively steep. The slope below the northern has been graded with significant fill.
Based on potholing below the lowest northern wall, the wall appears to have been constructed on
non-structural (uncontrolled) silt fill.
Indications of shallow groundwater seepage were not observed on the lot below the walls; however,
the area has had minimal precipitation prior to our site visit. In addition, the central portion of the
walls is located over a drainage swale. Perched groundwater is typically concentrated in this area.
The location and type of drainage behind the walls is unknown.
The concrete block facing for MSE retaining walls are normally installed level and with uniform
horizontal spacing between blocks. Post-construction differential movements can be evaluated
partially by irregularities in the levelness of the blocks and by the spacing between the blocks;
however, the total settlement can be difficult to ascertain. Sections of differential settlement of the
existing MSE retaining walls were observed during our site visit based on breaks in grade along the
top of the wall and irregular gaps in the wall facing blocks. In addition, the concrete landing at the
base of the stairs has a slight slope back away from the top of the lowest wall, indicating probable
rotation of the wall which is consistent with a bearing capacity failure of a wall. t
Surfrcial soils consist of silty sand soils (decomposed granite). Geologic maps of the area indicate
the site is underlain by granite. Native slopes in the vicinity of the proposed home site are relatively
uniform and no indications of deep-seated slope failures were observed. Soil creep was locally
observed on portions of the roadway fill slope.
We anticipate that groundwater typically occurs at depths of greater than 30 ft; however, perched
groundwater likely occurs at the top of the weathered granite during periods of heavy and/or extended
rainfall.
Significant changes in the movements (rotation and/or settlement) of the existing MSE retaining walls
were not observed between our two site visits to the lot.
2
4359-16 250 Alta Avenue
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
In our opinion, the property is suitable for development with the single-family residence. The main
geotechnical considerations for development of the lot include the remediation of the existing MSE
retaining walls, the location/depth of the new homes foundations, and the potential for seasonal
perched groundwater. If the geotechnical recommendations for development of the lot are followed,
in our opinion, there is no increase in the risk of slope instability on the lot or existing walls.
Recommendations for development and erosion control of the lot are provided below.
Lot Development
1) Final graded slopes on the lot should be no steeper than 211:1 V. Temporary cut slopes
up to 10 ft high completed during dry weather may be excavated at a slope of 1 H:1 V.
Landscaping fill should be compacted to at least 90% of the maximum dry density as
determined by ASTM D 698. Structural fill under buildings and concrete flatwork
should be compacted to at least 95% of the maximum dry density as determined by
ASTM D 698. All fills should be overbuilt a minimum of 2 ft beyond final grades then
trimmed back to design elevations using a trackhoe equipped with a smooth-lip bucket.
The disturbed silty sand soils are highly susceptible to erosion and should be revegetated
as soon as practical. Prior to placement of any fill, the ground surface in the fill are
should be stripped of organics and existing fill. The strippings are not suitable for use
as compacted fill and should be removed from the site or used in landscaped areas.
Slopes steeper than 5H: IV to receive fill should be benched with relatively flat areas
during fill placement. The benches should be a minimum of 12 ft wide,
2) Fill placed within 3 ft of driveway areas, the house footprint, retaining walls, and
concrete flatwork should consist of compacted, structural fill. The on-site soil (without
deleterious material) may be used as structural fill if properly moisture conditioned and
compacted; however, it is typically not practical to use the on-site materials as structural
fill during periods of wet weather. Structural fill may also be constricted of imported
granular fill, such as 3/4-in.-minus crushed rock. Structural fill must be compacted to at
least 95% of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 698, at a moisture
content within 3% of optimum. The ground surface within all areas to receive fill should
be stripped of surficial organics prior to placement of the fill.
3) Structural loads may be supported on continuous spread footing foundations founded on
stiff native, undisturbed silty sand soils or on structural fill over undisturbed native soils.
Pad foundations should not be used for support of the residence including deck support.
Foundations should be oriented perpendicular to the slope (east/west) where practical to
provide additional lateral support to the home.
4) The existing retaining wall backfill is not suitable for support of residential foundations
without significant risk of differential settlement. Foundations should be embedded such
that they extend to native, undisturbed soils. Care must be taken to not significantly
damage and/or disturb the geogrids for the existing walls.
5) Foundation excavations should be completed using a backhoe or trackhoe equipped with
a smooth-lip bucket. The downhill edge of any foundation must be setback an equivalent
horizontal distance of at least 10 ft fi-om the face of any slope. This setback may be
3
i
4359-16 250 Alta Avenue
I
obtained by embedding the foundation below grades. On a 2H:1 V slope, the downhill
edge of a foundation must be embedded 5 ft below grade to obtain the recommended
slope setback. Spread footing foundations may be designed for an allowable soil bearing
pressure of up to 1,500 psf. This allowable soil bearing pressure assumes all footings
will be founded as recommended in this report. The minimum width of any footing
should not be less than 15 in., and footings should be established a minimum of 18 in.
below the lowest adjacent exterior grade.
6) The site should be graded to provide positive drainage away from footings and exterior
walls. Subsurface drains (foundation drains) should be provided adjacent to all exterior
foundations.
7) Spread footing foundations should be underlain by a minimum of 4 in. of compacted'/-
in.-minus, compacted crushed rock on the foundation subgrade to protect the subgrade
from disturbance due to construction. The thickness of the crushed rock may need to be
increased during wet weather construction. The crushed rock should be compacted with
several passes with a smooth-plate vibratory compactor.
8) Concrete slab-on-grade floors should be underlain by a minimum of 9 in. of/-in.-mimes
imported crushed rock. If moisture sensitive flooring will be installed of moisture
sensitive materials will be stored on the floor, we recommend installation of a moisture
retarding membrane under the concrete slab to minimize wicking of moisture up through
the slab. The garage floor slab will be located below adjacent exterior grades. To reduce
the risk of hydrostatic pressure on the underside of the slab, we recommend drain pipes
be installed in the aggregate base for the slab on about 10 ft center to center spacing.
The drain pipes should be hard-piped to drain into the storm water system.
9) We understand that additional (new) retaining walls will be constructed as part of the
home construction, and that additional (new) MSE retaining walls will be constructed
across the north and east sides of the lot to retain existing soils and the existing MSE
retaining walls. Rigid (such as concrete cantilevered walls) retaining wall foundations
should have the same slope setback requirements as the house foundations. The
following embedded wall design recommendations assume that the wall backfill consists
of clean granular material (sand or crushed rock) within at least 2 ft of the wall, the
backfill is compacted to 90 to 95% of ASTM D 698, the backfill is level within 10 ft of
the wall, and the embedded wall is fully drained, i.e., hydrostatic pressure cannot act on
the wall. Walls that are allowed to yield by tilting about their base (cantilevered retaining
and MSE walls are typically considered yielding) should be designed using a lateral earth
pressure based on an equivalent fluid having a unit weight of 35 pcf. We further
recommend that horizontal earth pressures due to surcharge loads be taken as an
additional uniform horizontal pressure (rectangular pressure diagram) of 0.5 times the
intensity of the surcharge load acting over the entire height of the wall.
Horizontal shear forces can be resisted partially or completely by frictional forces
developed between the base of spread footings and the underlying soil and by passive
soil resistance. The total frictional resistance between the footing and the soil is the
normal force times the coefficient of friction between the soil and the base of the footing.
4
I
f
4359-16 250 Alta Avenue
We recommend an ultimate value of 0.3 for the coefficient of friction; the normal force
is the sum of the vertical forces (dead load plus real live load).
10) We estimate that relatively hard rock occurs at a depth of less than 20 ft at the site. In
our opinion, seismic design for the new home can be completed based on a Site Class B
material.
11) A qualified geotechnical engineer should evaluate structural fill placement and
compaction, and examine the foundation excavations and evaluate the subgrade prior to
construction of the foundations.
Mechanically Stabilized Earth (MSE) Retaining Walls
Mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) retaining walls up to about 10 ft high are planed downhill of the
existing MSE walls and along the northern property line. Because of the location of the existing
retaining walls, extreme care must be taken during installation of the new walls to not undermine
and/or destabilize the existing retaining walls. This may include installation of the new walls in short
sections (installation of the wall concurrently as excavation of the wall occurs) and/or temporary
removal of portions of the existing MSE retaining walls. The geotechnical engineer of record for the
new walls must work closely with you during construction of the new walls to reduce the risk of
failure of the existing walls.
MSE walls consist of geogrid reinforced soil, compacted (structural) fill, and a facing to retain the
fill. We anticipate that the structural fill for construction of the MSE walls will consist of sand soils
(decomposed granite) and imported crushed rock fill (3/4-in.-minus crushed rock) with a minimum
angle of internal friction of 35°, and a dry unit weight of between 120 and 140 pef Silty decomposed
granite soils should not be used for wall construction. The backfill should be compacted to at least
95% of the dry density as determined by ASTM D 698.
The geogrid should extend back from the face a distance equal to 75% of the total wall height. The
total wall height for design purposes should be measured from the toe of the wall to the top of the
wall. The MSE wall reinforcement should consist of Miragrid 5XT geogrid (or equivalent) installed
with the higher strength perpendicular to the face of the wall. For 8-in.-high block facing, the first
two layers of geogrid should be installed two and four blocks from the top. The remainder of the
grids should be installed every third block, starting at 7 blocks from the top.
The blocks should be underlain by a minimum of 12 in. of compacted '/4 -in.-minus crushed rock
placed as structural fill. Subgrade should consist of competent, native silt soil. The base of the wall
should be embedded to provide a minimum horizontal setback from the slope of 6 ft (2 ft of
embedment on a 3H:1 V slope). A minimum of 2 blocks should be embedded below final grades.
A 12-in.-wide drainage layer should be installed along the back of the MSE wall geogrids. Where
the drain rock is adjacent to the native silty sand soils, a non-woven geotextile (5 oz minimum weight)
must be placed to separate the soils from the drain rock to prevent erosion of the soil into the rock.
A 4-in.-diameter perforated drain should be placed at the bottom of the drain rock section and
connected to the storm water system.
5
4359-16 250 Alta Avenue
Erosion Control
The intent of the erosion control plan is to decrease erosion and off-site migration of soils. This can
be accomplished by decreasing surface water runoff by means of vegetation, hay bales and rock
coverings or cheekdams; holding the soil in place by establishing a vegetation cover as soon as
practical; and by directing surface water flow away from areas disturbed by construction activities.
i
1) We anticipate that a portion of the property will be disturbed during construction of the
proposed structures, driveway, and site grading including the backyard fill. Landscape areas
on the lot where the vegetation is disturbed or removed should be revegetated as soon as
practical. The silty sand (decomposed granitic soils) is easily eroded when disturbed by
construction activities. Mulch consisting of either straw, wood cellulose fiber or other similar
materials can be placed in areas where landscaping will not be established prior to September
15. If required, the mulch should be applied at a rate of approximately 2,000 pounds per
acre. Downspouts and other drains should be connected (hard-piped) to the storm water
system as soon as practical.
2) We recommend all exposed soil areas (all graded areas) be graded such that surface water
upslope of the disturbed area is directed away from the exposed soil. Any surface water flow
on the exposed soil should move as sheet flow rather than concentrated flow.
3) Runoff from the disturbed portion of the site may contain some soil material. To further
reduce the risk of sediment leaving the site during periods of wet weather (typically winter
and spring months), small settling basins can be installed at the start of the wet season below
the site at the discharge end of graded areas, ditches and swale areas. Straw bales should be
staked along the downhill edge of the settling basin. Water can be discharged from the
settling basin using 4-in.-diameter flex pipe. The settling basins should be installed no later
than September 30.
4) Straw bales or silt fencing should be installed along the downhill edge of the proposed
construction (along the east and north sides of the property). The silt fence should be
embedded at least 4 in. into the ground and should be staked in place. The straw bales should
be placed end-to-end and staked in place to prevent separation between the bales. The silt
fence and straw bales should be placed to direct surface water runoff from the site towards
the settlement basins.
5) During construction and prior to establishment of the site landscaping, the erosion control
measures must be monitored and will require periodic maintenance. Maintenance may
include removal of sediment from upslope of the straw bales or silt fence, removal of
sediment from the settlement basins, and the placement of additional straw bales or sediment
fence. The amount of required maintenance of the erosion control measures will decrease
significantly as the landscaping becomes established.
6) The project geotechnical engineer should evaluate the erosion control measures periodically
during construction, including on about September 30 and after storm events.
6
i
i
4359-16 250 Alta Avenue
LIMITATIONS
This report has been prepared to aid the owner's design team in the design and construction of the
proposed home, detached garage and retaining walls on the referenced building lot. The scope is
limited to the specific project and location described herein, and our description of the project
represents our understanding of the significant aspects of the project relevant to the design and
construction of the proposed home and retaining walls.
The conclusions and recommendations submitted in this report are based on the information
described above- It should be understood that there are limitations in a study of this type (without
field explorations). If the owner wishes to reduce these uncertainties beyond the level associated
with this report, we should be advised at once.
We have performed these services in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering
practices in southern Oregon at the time the study was accomplished. No other warranties, either
expressed or implied, are provided.
Please contact AGEGC if you have any questions or require additional information.
Sincerely,
Applied Geoteehnical g>j ineering an Geologic Consulting LLC
Robin L. Warren, G.E., R.G. p, R
Principal GIN
r
i 150,15P
0 '
EGO o-
25,
~N L. W PPP
Renewal: June 2018
7
fi.
E
June 15, 2015
Vadim Agakhanov
521 Schofield St.
Ashland, OR 97520
(541) 951-6727
Dear Mr. Agakhanov,
At your request "To The Point Land Surveying, LLC" measured the grade along the West
Property Line of 250 Alta Avenue in Ashland, Oregon. As of June 11, 2015, we find the
grade to be 25.82%. This measurement was made between the Northwest and Southwest
property corners. The horizontal distance measured was 131.20 feet with a vertical
difference of 33.87 feet.
Thank you,
✓~~~.t G1iv1. G'~~
Jason M. Martin, PLS
President
To The Point Land Surveying, LLC
REGISTERED
PROFESSIONAL
LAND SURVEYOR
OREGON
MAY 8, 2012
JASON M. MARTIN
54729
RENEWS: 1 - - 2
apt C5
AV V1 lV
x '
a
q
° J Y
1: ~ - B~j
WA,
W k I E
x
x.25_
~ ~ \ , ~ ~,',I' ~ U•- - 'tea
z
02
w4 CQ
J
4-9
060\;
- I -
12
oi-
vN,
N
w
z
s~
w
i
b~ I
11 _
fi ♦ 4
Z. ~n I
w ~ f 1,
i
1
I It
l I ,i
i
\ I v
1 I I i I ~ n ~
77
I
a 9 Z/
(Ti
LI \ 11
I 1 I I
T ~1 I. I II D
li
I'.I ~ :~~I~I 11 I
i
II ~ 'ill ,,jl 1 i l I ~
11 it I li+, ~ I! I!~1 ° ~ ~
II'' I rill
! I
I' (ll
1
N i I
l
L
n
LL- L[
_ art TI 7 I,
I I ' '1 MCI-I_ 1 L-
u
w N
,r
III 1
\ L
lid r
m,
i
~ IV
W
o GJS \ V
o r~~ II;r11`!I ~
-
o ~
d £ i0
m r
`T Rol R
0
o
i
v
i i
1 y ; I~
I-a
1 ^o
1 N 001
j
U O -
V\ &
o I ~
-
n
u
•r
v
^v x) L
1
o y ~i ~ N T
o _ =3 a
0
1
a W ~ s
= o
4
M
I
a
o
i
0
Z v e
1- ~ m
a Z
F w
w ~
■
■
a m ■
- m
K m o U d
op p m
_ ` 5 g U m
wit O O
d t S c ~ w w
v d Ego z F
W W ~w
f o ==a (7 z> z_z
A¢° W N°
a a$
w¢ w¢
zo ~
z F-
/
W
- - s _
V 1= 1= m n U~ u.~ \
Q tt1 G O /
a
_ BLS \ ` \ \ \I~----
00
co -2.9
m \ ♦ v a g \ I
to \
\ m %
15 E
J~ 3 1
=o El
F-I
vvv vvv vvv vvv Aj % ~
\ \ / ✓ E / / E
w e \ i 11 - _ w
zwsFti Nacnr ~nz via a v~d _ cna
dtioooo00~00o do0 -
mmm oo0000000000 od.
x 2 2 J J J J J J J J J J J
_ ¢¢a¢¢aa¢¢a¢a ¢aa
l.9 (9 c7 c7 U' C7 c7 c7 U' (70c7 000
y a z dw w
m w y l
J m IY ~ d m y w f --t
wm m¢ o zwoo< w
ymw Wwxw Q~wJa ozrmii
¢ Z C7 Z 2 m¢ K O K a w Z ¢ N T
~m aWQm$ w w wKV WIN b I-
rw/1 (w/J Y ZLLO UOm U' g>yrm . ~aF ¢ _
wwa omzz°oZNOO~O zWO z
0 m¢w- LL a
Z ZQ J J
a 2 z= z w o o o, 3 w 3 W
-,gym U 3§ m~do o w zwz
V a a O ¢ O m m
m i
w
w
~ J O
Li w ¢ z m o
C~7 w G w O z K w 2
d°• 2NOO W K 2 w
.U' O w r m V
m OJ 0~~~ w ? a LL
C)
UK g~ h20w ol U UU¢K 0 w 00 / OrK
0 O a 2 LL¢ a 7 Y > U
z o 2 Y
0, 1- x OwgQg z a¢ 0 ~OK xO U
% 0 W w
2 m w2 ~m~¢0o O Ugh wgw a
ZO W 2m wXj wU¢U j d
w m
w}W tea' m mS
¢¢ao ~2i-»~-xx O aJ v~ 0 'n
m VFW 2 ww¢00 aOO:xa¢q K r?w W o w w ¢
¢m d m m m Ow w~ aaK Vim F- C7 2>2 J z C7 ° m
Q O Q J Z J
OO ~
O
O
~p
m
a m
a
W
W `C \ \ W
'Z' 6
:61 -
\ \ /T, / / / /o / \ 0
\o m
00z z
o- Z,
B. ol
E o ooo
\ \ \ / / I w U w
o z
\ \ / z a / / Jo 0
Z o
(D 0 CD
LLI
z / m N w
0 of -0
g 0
10 . Of
\ / z h I \ Q omN
a w i~ \ Q~ a3<
\ //I W/ LLZV- Q L
(D m
jwmj of j
-E
\ \ \ m IT vv x ~/v/ice '
F-job Address: 250 ALTAAVE Contractor:
ASHLAND OR 97520 Address:
C
P Owner's Name: AGAKHANOV VADIM ETAL
P Phone:
Customer 08299 N State Lic No:
P
L AGAKHANOV VADIM ETAL T City Lic No:
Applicant: 131 MEADE ST R
Address: ASHLAND OR 97520 A
G G Sub-Contractor:
A Phone: T Address:
N Applied: 05/09/2017 0
T Issued:
Expires: 11/05/2017 Phone:
State Lic No:
Maplot: 391 E05DC1301 City Lic No:
DESCRIPTION: P & E
VALUATION
Occupancy Type Construction Units Rate Amt Actual Amt Constuction Description
Total for Valuation:
MECHANICAL
ELECTRICAL
STRUCTURAL
PERMIT FEE DETAIL
Fee Description Amount Fee Description Amount
Physical Constraints Permit 1,022.00
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 F
1-115" LAN "v
i
~I
i
reby certify the contents of this application to be correct to the
of my knowledge, and furthermore, that I have read, Fee Summary Paid Amounts
erstood and agreed to the following:
Building: $ 0.00 $ 0.00
Flh
is permit s
hall remain valid only in accordance with code State Surcharge: $ 0.00 $ 0.00 I`
or regulation provisions relating to time lapse and revocation
(180 days). Development Fees: $ 0.00 $ 0.00
2. Work shall not proceed past approved inspection stage. All Systems Development Charges: $ 0.00 $ 0.00
required inspections shall be called for 24 hours in advance.
3. Any modifications in plans or work shall be reported in Utility Connection Fees: $ 0.00 $ 0.00
advance to the department. Public Works Fees: $ 0.00 $ 0.00
4. Responsibility for complying with all applicable federal, state, Planning Fees: $ 1,022.00 $ 1,022.00
or local laws, ordinances, or regulations rests solely with the
applicant. Sub-Total: $ 1,022.00
Fees Paid: $ 1,022.00
Applicant Date Total Amount Due: $ 0
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 F
&-A 0 In