Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutGranite_114_PA-2017-00235 t Community Development - Planning Department 20 East Main Street Ashland, OR 97620 Phone 541-488-53oFax 541488-6006 SOLARACCESS WAIVER AGr,,rr_aWr_NT i i 1 Planning ACtiotl For County Use i i Address of Property Requesting Soler Waiver 114 GRANITE STREET, Tax Lot of Property Requesting Solar Waiver, 3401 Address of Property Agreeing to Solar Waiver 108 GRANITE STREET Legal Description of Property Agreeing to Solar Waiver (Mach, N necessary) see attached i The undersigned, for themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, consent to permit obstruction of their solar access' rights described in Chapter 18.4,8,020 of the Ashland Municipal Code on that portion of propertyin Township 39, Range 1 East, Section '04BC Tax Lot # 3400 ) further described by legal description In the attached Exhibit "K. The undersigned certify and agree to the following: 1. This agreement shall be binding upon their heirs, successors and assigns and shall run with the land, 2. The undersigned are the owners of the property described on Exhibit "A". 3. This waiver applies only to the specific building(s) noted in the attached Exhibit "B"; and to the shadow(s) cast by such building(s) as noted in Exhibit "B", 4. The solar access rights described In Chapter 18:4.8 of the Ashland Municipal Code are waived only for that buildable space shown on Exhibit "B" and the City of Ashland is'indemnified and shall be held harmless for any damages resulting to any person or property resulting from this waiver. 51 The consideration for this agreement is $1,00 and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is acknowledged by the undersigned. Property Owner(s) Agreeing to Solar Waiver c"00, SignatureL Date Signature, _ - - - - - Date a _ 001 DEANN NOTAR State of Oregon Gomm County oflackson ) My G008S On, this day of 20 before me personally appeared, whose identity was proven to me an the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is (are) subscribed to this instrument, and acknowledged that be (steel /ttiev~P~~~ ed the same. E BROOKE MICHELLE MCCREA 1 NOTARY PUBLIC - OREGON Notary Public for Oregon Commission Expiration Date I C,ommiS310N NO. 935074 my r`c~h,iL11~ ^i~")14 rXPIRES FES, $,2010 Approved; by City of Ashland Planning Staff Date STATE OF OREGON ) ss County of Jackson ) On the day of , 2017, before me personally appeared, Alan D. Miller, whose identity was proven to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person whose name is subscribed to the foregoing Solar Access Agreement and acknowledged that he executed the same. FFICIAL SEAL A MONIQUE COSTEN Y PUBLIC-OREGON SSION NO. 479733 ION EXPIRES AUGUST 28, 2017 Notary Public for the State of Oregon My Commission Expires: ,1r .f3. OFFICIAL SEAL NO ARY P®NBILIIC-OREGON 00 COMMISSION NO. 479733 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES AUGUST 28, 2017 I -I UY OF i, A L, Community Development - Planning Department 20 East Main Street, Ashland, OR 97520 541-488-5303 SOLAR 18.4.0.020.0. Solar Setback Exceptions I 1. Solar Setback Exception. The approval authority through a Type I review pursuant to section 18.5.1.050 may approve exceptions to the standards in 18.4.8.030 Solar Setbacks if the requirements in subsection a, below, are met and the circumstances in subsection b, below, are found to exist. a. That the owner or owners of all property to be shaded sign, and record with the County Clerk on the affected properties' deed, a release form supplied by the City containing all of the following information. i. The signatures of all owners or registered leaseholders holding an interest in the property in question. ii. A statement that the waiver applies only to the specific building or buildings to which the waiver is granted. iii. A statement that the solar access guaranteed by this section is waived for that particular structure and the City is held harmless for any damages resulting from the waiver. iv. A description and drawing of the shading which would occur b. The approval authority finds all of the following criteria are met. i. The exception does not preclude the reasonable use of solar energy (i.e., passive and active solar energy systems) on the site by future habitable buildings. ii. The exception does not diminish any substantial solar access which benefits a passive or active solar energy system used by a habitable structure on an adjacent lot. iii. There are unique or unusual circumstances that apply to this site which do not typically apply elsewhere. i I i j G: Comm-devlplanningTorms & HandouWSolar Waiver Handout REVISED 2015.doe 516/2015 CITY F ASHLAND Community Development - Planning Department 20 East Main Street, Ashland, OR 97520 Phone 541-488-5303 Fax 541-488-6006 SOLAR WAIVER AGREEMENT Planning Action # For County Use Address of Property Requesting Solar Waiver Tax Lot # of Property Requesting Solar Waiver Address of Property Agreeing to Solar Waiver Legal Description of Property Agreeing to Solar Waiver (Attach, if necessary) The undersigned, for themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, consent to permit obstruction of their solar access rights described in Chapter 18.4.8.020 of the Ashland Municipal Code on that portion of property in Township 39, Range 1 East, Section Tax Lot # further described by legal description in the attached Exhibit "A". The undersigned certify and agree to the following: 1. This agreement shall be binding upon their heirs, successors and assigns and shall run with the land. 2. The undersigned are the owners of the property described on Exhibit "A". 3. This waiver applies only to the specific building(s) noted in the attached Exhibit "B"; and to the shadow(s) cast by such building(s) as noted in Exhibit "B". 4. The solar access rights described in Chapter 18.4.8 of the Ashland Municipal Code are waived only for that buildable space shown on Exhibit "B" and the City of Ashland is indemnified and shall be held harmless for any damages resulting to any person or property resulting from this waiver. 5. The consideration for this agreement is $1.00 and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is acknowledged by the undersigned. Property Owner(s) Agreeing to Solar Waiver Signature Date Signature Date State of Oregon ) County of Jackson ) On this day of 20 , before me personally appeared, whose identity was proven to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is (are) subscribed to this instrument, and acknowledged that he (she) (they) executed the same. Notary Public for Oregon Commission Expiration Date i i Approved by City of Ashland Planning Staff Date T : The following exhibits must be attached to the Solar Access giver Agreement: (Make sure documents have at least a 1" margin on all sides for County recording purposes) i EXHIBIT A (Legal description of property agreeing to solar waiver) EXHIBIT B (Plot plan of both the property requesting solar waiver and the property agreeing to the waiver. The plot plan must show, on the requesting property, the specific building(s) and shadow(s) cast by such building(s) and, on the agreeing property, the buildable space affected. See attached sample.) i CI'T'Y F ASHLAND May 19, 2017 Notice of Final Decision On May 19, 2017, the Community Development Director approved the request for the following: Planning Action: PA-2017-00235 Subject Property: 114 Granite Applicant: Mardi Mastain Description: A request for a Site Design Review to allow for the onsite relocation of the existing historic dwelling unit and the addition of an accessory residential unit (ARU) to the subject property. The proposal is to relocate the existing dwelling unit to the rear of the property and convert it to a 998 square foot ARU. In addition, the applicant proposes to construct a new 2,462 square foot primary dwelling unit as part of the Site Design Review. A Physical & Environmental Constraints Review permit is also requested for Hillside Lands affected by the proposed primary dwelling unit. In addition, the applicant is requesting a Solar Setback Exception for a Standard B lot to allow a larger shadow to be cast on the property to the north by the new primary dwelling unit/garage. There are 12 trees located on or adjacent to the site and two of these trees are proposed to be removed as part of this application. A Variance to the maximum allowed lot coverage is requested, going from 45 percent to 48 percent, a three percent increase. An Exception to the Site Design and Standards is requested to allow for a reduced landscaping buffer for vehicle parking spaces from eight to six feet from the ARU and from five to three feet to the property line. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single-Family Residential; ZONING: R-1-7.5; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 lE 09 BC; TAX LOT: 3401. The Community Development Director's decision becomes final and is effective on the 12"' day after the Notice of Final Decision is mailed. Approval is valid for a period of 18 months and all conditions of approval identified on the attached Findings are required to be met prior to project completion. The application, all associated documents and evidence submitted, and the applicable criteria are available for review at the Ashland Community Development Department, located at 51 Winburn Way. Copies of file documents can be requested and are charged based on the City of Ashland copy fee schedule. Prior to the 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 Maria Harris in the Community Development Department at (541) 488-5305. cc: Parties of record and property owners within 200 ft COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel: 541488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 f Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 l \ www.ashland.or.us \f I 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. Titne for Filing. A notice of appeal shall be filed with the Staff Advisor within 12 days of the date the notice of decision is mailed. c. Content of Notice of Appeal. The notice of appeal shall be accompanied by the required filing fee and shall contain. i. An identification of the decision being appealed, including the date of the decision. ii. A statement demonstrating the person filing the notice of appeal has standing to appeal. iii. A statement explaining the specific issues being raised on appeal. iv. A statement demonstrating that the appeal issues were raised during the public comment period. d. The appeal requirements of this section must be fully met or the appeal will be considered by the City as a jurisdictional defect and will not be heard or considered. 3. Scope of Appeal. Appeal hearings on Type I decisions made by the Staff Advisor shall be de novo hearings before the Planning Commission. The appeal shall not be limited to the application materials, evidence and other documentation, and specific issues raised in the review leading up to the Type I decision, but may include other relevant evidence and arguments. The Commission may allow additional evidence, testimony, or argument concerning any relevant ordinance provision. 4. Appeal Hearing Procedure. Hearings on appeals of Type I decisions follow the Type II public hearing procedures, pursuant to section 18.5.1.060, subsections A - E, except that the decision of the Planning Commission is the final decision of the City on an appeal of a Type I decision. A decision on an appeal is final the date the City mails the adopted and signed decision. Appeals of Commission decisions must be filed with the State Land Use Board of Appeals, pursuant to ORS 197.805 - 197.860. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel: 541-488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us t ASHLAND PLANNING DIVISION FINDINGS & ORDERS PLANNING ACTION: PA-2017-00235 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 114 Granite St. APPLICANT/OWNER: Mardi Mastain DESCRIPTION: A request for Site Design Review to relocate the existing historic bungalow to the rear of the property to be used as an accessory residential unit and to construct a new single-family residence at the front of property facing Granite St. A Physical Constraints Review Permit is requested for development of lands at slopes of 25 percent and greater and a Variance to exceed the maximum allowed lot coverage of 45 percent by three percent. The application includes an Exception to the Solar Setback requirement to allow a larger shadow to be cast by the new single-family residence on the property to the north and an Exception to the Site Design Standards to reduce the landscape buffers for a newparking space located at the rear of the property. A Tree Removal Permit is requested to remove two trees over 18-inches diameter at breast height near the front of the property. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single-Family Residential; ZONING: R-1-7.5; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 lE 09 BC; TAX LOTS: 3401 SUBMITTAL DATE: February 10, 2017 DEEMED COMPLETE DATE: February 28, 2017 STAFF APPROVAL DATE: May 19, 2017 APPEAL DEADLINE (4:30 P.M.) May 31, 2017 FINAL DECISION DATE: June 1, 2017 APPROVAL EXPIRATION DATE: December 1, 2018 I DECISION The proposal is a request for Site Design Review to relocate the existing historic bungalow to the rear of the property to be used as an accessory residential unit and to construct a new single-family residence at the front of property facing Granite St. The proposal also includes the following requests: 1) an Exception to the Solar Setback requirement to allow a larger shadow to be cast by the new single-family residence on the property to the north, 2) a Physical Constraints Review Permit for development of lands at slopes of 25 percent and greater, 3) an Exception to the Site Design Standards to reduce the landscape buffers for a new parking space located at the rear of the property, 4) a Variance to exceed the maximum allowed lot coverage of 45 percent by three percent, and 5) a Tree Removal Permit to remove two trees over 18-inches diameter at breast height near the front of the property. The property is located in the Single-Family Residential Zone, Historic District Overlay and Hillside Lands Area. The subject property is located on the east side of Granite St. near the intersection of Granite and Nutley St. The surrounding neighborhood to the north and west is comprised primarily of single-family homes, many of which are designated as historic contributing structures. There is a city parking lot located to the east of, or downhill from, the property. The city parking lot parcel is part of Lithia Park and has a leg that extends PA #2017-00235 114 Granite St./mh Page 1 i uphill adjacent to the intersection of Nutley St. and Granite St. There is the equivalent of a small lot connected to the city parking lot parcel that fronts on Granite and is located between the subject property and Nutley St. The area south of the subject property is comprised of Lithia Park. The subject property and surrounding area are zoned Single-Family Residential (R-1-7.5). The property is in the shape of an irregular pentagon with the eastern third of the property roughly triangular. The property slopes downhill to the southeast. There is a historic bungalow located at the front of the property which is notable because John Gruelle, the author of the Raggedy Ann and Andy books, and his family spent a year living in the bungalow. The bungalow was originally built as a guest house to the property located to the north at 108 Granite St. According to the slope analysis submitted with the application, roughly the front 2/3 of the lot ranges from 25 to over 40 percent slopes. There is an area less than 25% slope at the rear of the property where the proposed accessory residential unit will be located. The tree inventory submitted with the application indicates 11 trees over six-inches diameter at breast height (dbh) located on the subject property or very near the property line. The tree protection plan indicates all but three of the eleven trees are classified as significant because the trees are 18-inches dbh. Most notably there are three large sequoias ranging from 60 to 105-feet in height and 22 to 49-inches dbh. A driveway apron on the Granite St. frontage provides vehicular access to the property. The existing driveway apron on Granite St. is not currently in use and will be replaced with a new driveway apron further to the north to access the garage of the single-family home. The application states that there is an access easement that runs across the city property and the east end of the subj ect property to connect 108 Granite St. to Nutley St. The existing driveway cut on Nutley St. will be used to access the driveway and parking space for the accessory residential unit. The accessory residential unit access requires crossing the City of Ashland tax lot between the subject property and Nutley St. This access requires an easement form the City of Ashland to cross the City-owned parcel. The application states that the access easement was granted by the Parks Department in August 2016 and the application includes evidence of the ingress/egress and utility easement. The application is required to meet the approval criteria for Site Design Review in AMC 18.5.2.050 for the relocation of the existing historic bungalow to the rear of the property as an accessory residential unit and to construct a new single-family residence at the front of property facing Granite St. The proposal is subj ect to the site development and design standards for multi-family residential development and the Historic District Design Standards in AMC 18.4.2.050.B. In addition, the development of the new single-family home at the front of the property requires an Exception to the Solar Setback and a Physical and Environmental Constraints permit for hillside development because a portion of the house is located on slopes that are 25 percent and greater. The proposed primary residence is a two-story structure approximately 3,900 square feet in size. However, from Granite St. the proposed home is a one-story volume that is similar in height, scale, massing and form as surrounding residential structures. The majority of the bottom floor is below finished grade and therefore considered a basement. The home contains traditional design elements such as a covered front entry, an unenclosed front porch, and window and door placement and sizes that are compatible with the surrounding PA #2017-00235 114 Granite St./mh Page 2 i i area. The proposed home meets the design standards for the historic district. The proposed primary residence meets the maximum permitted floor area for the historic district. According to the application, the lot is 8,378 square feet in size, which would allow 2,515 square feet of floor area according to AMC 18.2.5.070. According to the floor plan submitted with the planning application, the first floor is 2,509 square feet in size. The basement area is not included in the floor area in accordance with AMC 18.2.5.070.E. The proposal includes an exception to the solar setback requirement for the proposed primary residence. According to the application materials, the proposed home will cast a shadow greater than that allowed by the land use ordinance in the yard area to the east of the existing home located at 108 Granite St. The majority of the proposed home meets the required solar setback but a portion of the master bedroom exceeds the allowed shadow by a triangular area less than 300 square feet in size. The application includes a release form from the owners of 108 Granite that states that the solar access guaranteed by AMC 18.4.8 is waived for the proposed home in the area as shown on the shadow plan included in the application. The proposed shadow will not diminish substantial passive or active solar access of the existing home at 108 Granite St. because the shadow will not touch the existing home. The existing solar shadow permitted by the land use ordinance covers most of the area to the south of the home located at 108 Granite St. However, a future addition could be accommodated to the east or downhill of the existing home that would not be shadowed and could reasonable use passive and active solar energy. Additionally, according to the tree survey submitted with the application, there is a significantly sized Douglas Fir on the property located at 108 Granite in the location of the additional shadow. Unless the Douglas Fir is removed, the tree would likely shade future additions to 108 Granite St. The situation is unusual because of the steep drop off from Granite St. and the location of the significantly sized sequoia trees along the southern property edge of the subject property. c, The development of the primary residence will disturb slopes that range from 25 to over 40 percent. As a result, the areas of disturbance are identified as Hillside and Severe Constraints Lands. According to slope analysis provide in the application, the location of the accessory residential unit is located on slopes that are less than 25 percent and therefore does not require a Physical and Environmental Constraints Review permit. A geotechnical report is included in the application and identifies the site as suitable for construction. The report includes recommendations for the construction of the primary residence including earthwork, the building foundations, retaining walls and site drainage. The foundation and home itself will retain most of the sloped area. A retaining wall is proposed to the north and east of the proposed residence. According to the plans submitted with the application, the wall will be less than two feet in height to the side of the home and six to eight feet in height as viewed form the accessory residential unit location. The proposed accessory residential unit is required to meet the approval criteria in AMC 18.5.2.050 for Site Design Review and an Exception to the Site Design Standards to reduce the landscape buffers for a new parking space located at the rear of the property. The proposal is subject to the site development and design standards for multi-family residential development and the Historic District Design Standards in AMC 18.4.2.050.B. The proposed accessory residential unit meets the use standards for an accessory residential unit in AMC PA #2017-00235 114 Granite St./mh Page 3 z; i 18.2.3.040. There will be two dwelling units on the subject property including one accessory residential unit. The proposed accessory residential unit is 1,000 square feet in size and therefore meets the maximum allowed of 1,000 square feet. Additionally, the accessory residential unit does not exceed 50 percent of the gross habitable floor area (GHFA) of the primary residence, which is 3,907 GHFA. The accessory residential unit requires two off-street parking spaces with one space provided adjacent to the C lower driveway off of Nutley St. and one space provided by an on-street parking credit on Granite St. adjacent to the property frontage. The existing curb cut and driveway apron on Granite St. is required to be removed and replaced with a standard curb and sidewalk because the property is permitted one driveway access per street and the continuous curb line of 24 lineal feet is required for an on-street parking credit. The square footage of the accessory residential unit is exempt from the maximum permitted floor area calculation per AMC 18.2.5.070.E. because it is located more than six feet from the primary residence. At the closest point, the accessory residential unit is approximately 15 feet from the primary residence. The proposal involves relocating the existing historic bungalow to the rear of the property to be used as an accessory residential unit. The bungalow is a two-story structure and identified as a historic contributing resource in the Skidmore Academy Historic District. The City of Ashland Historic Resources Inventory describes the existing home as a traditional 20th century bungalow. The bottom story of the bungalow in the existing location is largely below grade and as a result appears to be a one-story structure from Granite St. When the bungalow is moved to the rear of the lot, the bottom floor will be reconstructed. The existing architectural features and materials of the original bungalow will be maintained including retaining the original siding. The front door that currently faces Granite St. will face Nutley St. and therefore the orientation of the structure to the street will be retained. The proposal meets the Historic District Design Standards. The site is served by city facilities including water in Granite St. and sanitary sewer and storm drainage in Nutley St. and Winburn Way. Granite and Nutley streets are existing paved streets that will provide vehicular access to the property. A curbside sidewalk in place along the Granite Street frontage and on Nutley St. A five-foot wide landscape buffer is required between the parking space for the accessory residential unit and the property line, and an eight-foot buffer is required between the parking space and the accessory residential unit. The proposal is to provide a three-foot wide buffer adjacent to the property line and a six- foot wide buffer to the accessory residential unit. The narrowing of the lot at the east, downhill end combined with the steep slopes limits the available area for the location of the accessory residential unit. The exception will allow the preservation of the historic bungalow and allow the bungalow to continue to be used as a residential dwelling. The final two components of the application are a Variance to exceed the maximum allowed lot coverage of 45 percent by three percent and a Tree Removal Permit to remove two trees over 18-inches diameter at breast height near the front of the property. The variance requested is to exceed the allowed lot coverage by three percent or approximately 250 square feet. The area covered by the driveway, which also provides access via an easement to the property located PA #2017-00235 114 Granite St./mh Page 4 i at108 Granite St., is 264 square feet in size. The situation is somewhat unusual because of the preexisting G easement to the neighboring property and the unusual lot configuration. The proposal takes advantage of the easement area by also using it as access for the accessory residential unit. The proposal's benefits are that the historic bungalow will be retained and used as a dwelling unit. E c: The application requests the removal of two trees over 18-inches diameter at breast height. According to the tree protection plan included in the application, the trees proposed for removal are a Siberian elm near the front of the property and an Oregon oak located in the northwest portion of the lot. There are two multi- trunked hazelnut trees in the area between the accessory residential unit location and the south property line that may be removed. However, removal of the hazelnut trees does not require a removal permit because the trees are less than 18-inches dbh. There are eight significant trees, l 8-inches dbh and greater, on or very near the property that will be retained including three Sequoias ranging from 22 to 44-inches dbh. According to the tree protection plan two of the Sequoias are located near or on the south property line. The site plan shows storm drain and sewer lines running through the drip lines and protection zones for two of the trees including the largest Sequoia (#1) and a Maple (#8) to connect with facilities in Nutley Street. Along with recommendations regarding the location of the tree protection fencing, removal of top soil in the critical root zone, digging in the critical root zone for foundations and drains and irrigating trees during construction, the arborist recommends to "bring all underground utilities in from Granite Street, to minimize damage to roots from the redwood trees." A condition has been added requiring the arborist report and site plan to be coordinated and revised for the building permit submittals. The Historic District Design Standards require front walls of new buildings to be in the same plane as facades of adjacent buildings. The trees proposed for removal are located near the front of the lot. Similar to the proposed primary residence, the four homes to the north of the subject property on the same side of Granite St. are within 15 feet of the front property line. The removal of the proposed trees allows the placement of the primary residence to meet the above mentioned setback standard for historic residential development. The subj ect property has numerous mature trees given and Lithia Park provides substantial tree densities and species diversity within relatively close proximity. The removal of two significant trees including a Siberian elm and Oregon oak near the front of the property meets the approval criteria for a Tree Removal Permit for trees that are not a hazard. The Historic Commission reviewed the application at the March 8, 2017 meeting and recommended approval of the application with revisions to the siding and windows. The Tree Commission reviewed the application at the March 9, 2017 meeting and recommended approval of the application with revisions to the length of the retaining wall and tree protection fencing. The approval criteria for Site Design Review and an Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards are in AMC 18.5.2.050 as follows: An application for Site Design Review shall be approved if the proposal meets the criteria in subsections A, B, C, and D below. The approval authority may, in approving the application, impose conditions of approval, consistent with the applicable criteria. A. Underlying Zone. The proposal complies with all of the applicable provisions of the underlying zone (part 18.2), including but not limited to: building and yard setbacks, lot area and dimensions, density and floor area, lot coverage, building height, building orientation, architecture, and other applicable PA #2017-00235 114 Granite St./ nh Page 5 { t 1 standards. l B. Overlay Zones. The proposal complies with applicable overlay zone requirements (part 18.3). C. Site Development and Design Standards. The proposal complies with the applicable Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4, except as provided by subsection E, below. D. City Facilities. The proposal complies with the applicable standards in section 18.4.6 Public Facilities and that adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, electricity, urban storm drainage, paved access to and throughout the property, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to the subject property. E. Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards. The approval authority may approve exceptions to the Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4 if the circumstances in either subsection 1 or 2, below, are found to exist. 1. There is a demonstrable difficulty meeting the specific requirements of the Site Development and Design Standards due to a unique or unusual aspect of an existing structure or the proposed use of a site; and approval of the exception will not substantially negatively impact adjacent properties; and approval of the exception is consistent with the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design; and the exception requested is the minimum which would alleviate the difficulty.; or 2. There is no demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements, but granting the exception will result in a design that equally or better achieves the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design Standards. The approval criteria for an Exception to the Solar Setback are in AMC 18.4.8.020.0.1 as follows: 1. Solar Setback Exception. The approval authority through a Type I review pursuant to section 18.5.1.050 may approve exceptions to the standards in 18.4.8.030 Solar Setbacks if the requirements in subsection a, below, are met and the circumstances in subsection b, below, are found to exist. a. That the owner or owners of all property to be shaded sign, and record with the County Clerk on the affected properties' deed, a release form supplied by the City containing all of the following information. i. The signatures of all owners or registered leaseholders holding an interest in the property in question. ii. A statement that the waiver applies only to the specific building or buildings to which the waiver is granted. iii. A statement that the solar access guaranteed by this section is waived for that particular structure and the City is held harmless for any damages resulting from the waiver. iv. A description and drawing of the shading which would occur. b. The approval authority finds all of the following criteria are met. i. The exception does not preclude the reasonable use of solar energy (i.e., passive and active solar energy systems) on the site by future habitable buildings. PA #2017-00235 114 Granite St./mh Page 6 ii. The exception does not diminish any substantial solar access which benefits a passive or active solar energy system used by a habitable structure on an adjacent lot. iii. There are unique or unusual circumstances that apply to this site which do not typically apply elsewhere. The approval criteria for a Physical and Environmental Constraints Review Permit are 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 a Variance are in AMC 18.5.5.050.A as follows: 1. The variance is necessary because the subject code provision does not account for special or unique physical circumstances of the subject site, such as topography, natural features, adjacent development, or similar circumstances. A legal lot determination may be sufficient evidence of a hardship for purposes of approving a variance. 2. The variance is the minimum necessary to address the special or unique physical circumstances related to the subject site. 3. The proposal's benefits will be greater than any negative impacts on the development of the adjacent uses and will further the purpose and intent of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan of the City. 4. The need for the variance is not self-imposed by the applicant or property owner. For example, the variance request does not arise as result of a property line adjustment or land division approval previously granted to the applicant. The approval criteria for a Tree Removal Permit are in AMC 18.5.7.040.6 as follows: 1. Hazard Tree. A Hazard Tree Removal Permit shall be granted if the approval authority finds that the application meets all of the following criteria, or can be made to conform through the imposition of conditions. a. The applicant must demonstrate that the condition or location of the tree presents a clear public safety hazard (i.e., likely to fall and injure persons or property) or a foreseeable danger of property damage to an existing structure or facility, and such hazard or danger cannot reasonably be alleviated by treatment, relocation, or pruning. See definition of hazard tree in part 18.6. b. The City may require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each hazard tree pursuant to section 18.5.7.050. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit. PA #2017-00235 114 Granite StAnh Page 7 f 2. Tree That is Not a Hazard. A Tree Removal Permit for a tree that is not a hazard shall be granted if the approval authority finds that the application meets all of the following criteria, or can be made to conform through the imposition of conditions. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. The application with the attached conditions complies with all applicable City ordinances. Planning Action 2017-00235 is approved with the following conditions. Further, if any one or more of the following conditions are found to be invalid for any reason whatsoever, then Planning Action 2017-0023 5 is denied. The following conditions are attached to the approval. 1) That all proposals of the applicant shall be conditions of approval unless otherwise modified herein. 2) That the following items shall be submitted for review and approval of the Ashland Planning Division prior to the issuance of the building permit. a) That the site plan, tree protection plan and arborist report shall be coordinated and revised regarding utility line location in relation to preserved trees. b) That the recommendations of the Tree Commission from March 9, 2017 with final approval by the Staff Advisory shall be incorporated into the building permit submittals including the following. 1. The length of the proposed retaining wall is reduced as identified in the applicant's testimony. 2. Merge the tree protection fencing for trees 1, 2, 3 and 8. PA #2017-00235 114 Granite St./rah Page 8 c) A landscape and irrigation plan in accordance with AMC 18.4.4.020.A and AMC 18.4.4.020.H and meeting the standards in AMC 18.4.4.030.A-C for residential site design review and AMC 18.3.10.090.13 for grading and erosion control. d) That the tree protection fencing shall be installed according to the approved plan prior to any site work, storage of materials or issuance of the building permit. The tree protection shall be inspected and approved by the Ashland Planning Division prior to site work, storage of materials or the issuance of a building permit. The tree protection shall be chain link fencing six feet tall and installed in accordance with AMC 18.4.5.030. C. e) That the required Exhibit A and B attachments to the Solar Waiver Agreement shall be submitted for review and approval by the Ashland Planning Division. Exhibit A is the legal description of the property agreeing to the solar waiver and Exhibit B is the plot plan of property requesting and granting solar waiver with the specific building shadow cast on the property located at 108 Granite St. by the proposed home at 114 Granite St. The Exhibits shall be no larger than 8.5 inches by 11 inches. 3) That the plans submitted for the building permit shall be in substantial conformance with those approved as part of this application. If the plans submitted for the building permit are not in substantial conformance with those approved as part of this application, an application to modify the Site Review approval shall be submitted and approved prior to issuance of a building permit. 4) That the building permit submittals shall include the following information and revisions. a) Lot coverage calculations including all building footprints, driveways, parking, patios and circulation areas. b) Solar setback calculations demonstrating that all new construction complies with Solar Setback Standard B in the formula [(Height -16)/(0.445 + Slope) = Required Solar Setback) and elevations or cross section drawings clearly identifying the highest shadow producing point(s) and the height(s) from natural grade. f) Height calculations per 18.2.5.030.A for buildings in the historic district g) Verification the primary residence meets the hillside building height requirements of E. 18.3.10.090.2.a. h) The exterior building materials and paint colors shall be identified on the building plans and shall not be very bright primary or neon paint colors in accordance with AMC 18.4.2.03 O.E. i) That the recommendations of the Historic Commission from the March 8, 2017 with final approval by the Staff Advisory shall be incorporated into the building permit submittals including the following. 1. The siding should be 9/16 with a four-inch exposure and smooth hardiplank. PA #2017-00235 114 Granite St./mh Page 9 2. The vinyl windows should be off-white in color and divided lights should be true or none used. j) The ingress/easement and utility easement connecting the property to Nutley St. shall be delineated on the site plan. k) That the recommendations of the Tree Commission from March 9, 2017 with final approval by the Staff Advisory shall be incorporated into the building permit submittals including the following. 1. The length of the proposed retaining wall is reduced as identified in the applicant's testimony. 2. Merge the tree protection fencing for trees 1, 2, 3 and 8. 1) That storm water from all new impervious surfaces and runoff associated with peak rainfalls must be collected on site and channeled to the City storm water collection system (i.e., curb gutter at public street, public storm pipe or public drainage way) or through an approved alternative in accordance with Ashland Building Division policy BD-PP-0029. On-site collection systems shall be detailed on the building permit submittals. 5) That prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy the following shall be completed. a) That the project geotechnical expert shall inspect the site according to the inspection schedule included in the geotechnical investigation report submitted with the application and dated September 24, 2015. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the project geotechnical expert shall provide a final report indicating that the final building plan review, earthwork, foundation, retaining wall and site drainage were installed as per said report, and that all scheduled inspections were conducted by the project geotechnical expert periodically throughout the project. b) The landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with the approved plans prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy. Vegetation shall be installed in such a manner as to be substantially established within one year of installation. c) That the existing driveway apron on the Granite St. frontage of the subject property shall be replaced with a City-standard curb and sidewalk. Public Works permits and associated inspections shall be obtained for any work to occur within the public right-of-way. d) That a City-standard driveway apron on the Nutley St. frontage of the subject property shall be installed. Public Works permits and associated inspections shall be obtained for any work to occur within the public right-of-way. e) That a separate electric service and meter for the accessory residential unit shall be installed in accordance with Ashland Electric Department requirements. PA #2017-00235 114 Granite St./mh Page 10 f) That a separate address for the accessory residential unit shall be applied for approved by the City of Ashland Engineering Division. Addressing shall meet the requirements of the Ashland Fire Department and be visible from the Public Right-of-Way. g) That recycle and refuse containers for the accessory residential unit shall be screened from adjacent properties and public right-of-ways. A~-~ tD a Harris, Planning Manager Date Department of Community Development I' L PA #2017-00235 114 Granite StAnh Page 11 i I 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 5/19/171 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 r listed on the attached mailing list at such addresses as set forth on this list under each person's name for Planning Action #2017-00235, 114 Granite. Signature of Employee DocumenQ 5/1912017 i PA-2017-00235 391 E08AD 1200 PA-2017-00235 391 E08AD 6400 PA-2017-00235 391 E09BC 3000 BANKERS TRUST COMPANY TRUSTEE BUSBY EDWARD G/ROCHELLE D DEBOER BRYAN/STEPHANIE NUSSBAUM-BELL MINDY 64 NUTLEY ST 1 EASTWOOD DR PO BOX 897 ASHLAND, OR 97520 MEDFORD, OR 97504 DES MOINES, IA 50304-0897 PA-2017-00235 391 E08AD 1700 PA-2017-00235 391 E08AD 800 PA-2017-00235 391 E09BC 3200 HULL JACQUELINE A/JERRY E HULTEEN NOREEN/RONALD E KENNEDY RUTH A TRUST ET AL 710 NW 2ND ST 87 GRANITE ST 94 GRANITE ST GRANTS PASS, OR 97526 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2017-00235 391 E08AD 1001 PA-2017-00235 391 E08AD 1600 PA-2017-00235 391 E08AD 1300 KUENZEL ROBERT V TRUSTEE ET AL LEMKE MARTHA M/RICHARD L LEWIS JANET 98 PINE ST 61 NUTLEY ST 112 PINE ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2017-00235 391 E09BC 3401 PA-2017-00235 391 E08AD 6500 PA-2017-00235 391 E09BC 2900 MASTAIN MARDI MARY MARDENE MC LEAN JOHN R TRUSTEE FBO MEESE JED D TRUSTEE ET AL JED D & 114 GRANITE ST 890 SHEILA CT CELIA MEESE ASHLAND, OR 97520 CAMPBELL, CA 95008 774 MAYS BLVD SUITE 10-366 INCLINE VILLAGE, NV 89451 PA-2017-00235 391 E09BC 3400 PA-2017-00235 391 E08AD 1000 PA-2017-00235 391 E08AD 1500 MILLER STEVEN L ET AL PHELPS ESTHER BRAD THOMPSON RIGOTTI GARY R TRUSTEE ET AL 1556 N 20TH ST 3300 UNIVERSITY BLVD 218 12 PEBBLE CREEK DR COOS BAY, OR 97420 WINTER PARK, FL 32792 EAGLE POINT, OR 97524 PA-2017-00235 391 E08AD 901 PA-2017-00235 391 E09BC 3301 PA-2017-00235 391 E09BC 3300 SCHREIBER HOWARD D/MICHELE SPILLMAN JOHN W/KARIN E SPILLMAN LYNN W TRUSTEE ET AL 93 GRANITE ST 102 GRANITE ST 98 GRANITE ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2017-00235 391 E08AD 1400 PA-2017-00235 391 E08AD 1100 PA-2017-00235 STEBBINS ROBERTA W TRUSTEE ET AL ZUNDEL MICHELLE ROGUE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT 111 GRANITE ST 107 GRANITE ST 1424 S IVY ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 MEDFORD, OR 97501 PA-2017-00235 PA-2017-00235 PA-2017-00235 PETER CIPES MARQUESS & ASSOCIATES KERRY KENCAIRN 317 N MAIN RIC SWANSON PO BOX 490 545 A STREET, STE 3 ASHLAND, OR 97520 MEDFOR 9 OR 97501 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2017-00235 WILLIE GINGG 114 Granite PO BOX 5140 NOD 5/19/17 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 25 c; C' -,;20 o 0 ;~,3 `i ( S',G~,v of v l~t; ~l~ 6't2 Ala f ct ivn c Uc~ as2..,~ 9 PA-2017-00235 #114 Granite St. -Derek Seve,,https:Houtlook.office",.com/owa/?viewmodel=ReadMessageltem&... PA-2017-00235 #114 Granite St. anne pollack <annepollack121@gmaH.com> Tue 3/7/2017 9:16 PM To:planning <planning@ashland.or.us>; t: F We have lived at #98 Pine Street since 1996 and love the beauty of our neighborhood with its historic homes and gracious old trees. We object to the Planning Commission making exceptions for solar setback and site design on this property and fail to see how they can be justified, particularly in light of the fact that #114 sits on the border of Lithia Park and as such is a neighborhood segue into that exquisite green space. Because of this, it seems especially important for the city to insure that this property not be overbuilt and unimportant exceptions not be granted. Thank you for your consideration. Anne Pollack and Bob Kuenzel C I r 1 of 1 3/31/2017 8:52 AM ASHLAND TREE COMMISSION PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENT SHEET" March 9, 2017 PLANNING ACTION: PA-2017-00235 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 114 Granite Street APPLICANT/OWNER: Mardi Mastain DESCRIPTION: A request for a Site Design Review to allow for the onsite relocation of the existing j historic dwelling unit and the addition of an accessory residential unit (ARU) to the subject property. The proposal is to relocate the existing dwelling unit to the rear of the property and convert it to a 998 square foot ARU. In addition, the applicant proposes to construct a new 2,462 r square foot primary dwelling unit as part of the Site Design Review. A Physical & Environmental Constraints Review permit is also requested for Hillside Lands affected by the proposed primary dwelling unit. In addition, the applicant is requesting a Solar Setback Exception for a Standard B lot to allow a larger shadow to be cast on the property to the north by the new primary dwelling unit/garage. There are 12 trees located on or adjacent to the site and two of these trees are proposed to be removed as part of this application. A Variance to the maximum allowed lot coverage is requested, going from 45 percent to 48 percent, a three percent increase. An Exception to the Site Design and Standards is requested to allow for a reduced landscaping buffer for vehicle parking spaces from eight to six feet from the ARU and from five to three feet to the property line. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single-Family Residential; ZONING: R-1-7.5; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 1E 09 BC; TAX LOT: 3401 The Tree Commission recommends approving the application as submitted along with specific recommendations below: 1. That, if the length of the proposed retaining wall is reduced as was identified as a likely possibility during the applicant's testimony, the applicant merge the following two sections of tree protection fencing. a. The section encompassing trees 1, 2, and 3. b. The section encompassing tree 8. Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5350 C I T Y OF 51 Winbum Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 w%Aryv.asWand.or.us i ASHLAND HISTORIC COMMISSION Planning Application Review March 8, 2017 PLANNING ACTION: PA-2017-00235 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 114 Granite Street APPLICANT/OWNER: Mardi Mastain DESCRIPTION: A request for a Site Design Review to allow for the onsite relocation of the existing historic dwelling unit and the addition of an accessory residential unit (ARU) to the subject property. The proposal is to relocate the existing dwelling unit to the rear of the property and convert it to a 998 square foot ARU. In addition, the applicant proposes to construct a new 2,462 square foot primary dwelling unit as part of the Site Design Review. A Physical & Environmental Constraints Review permit is also requested for Hillside Lands affected by the proposed primary dwelling unit. In addition, the applicant is requesting a Solar Setback Exception for a Standard B lot to allow for a larger shadow to be cast on the property to the north by the new primary dwelling unit/garage. There are 12 trees located on or adjacent to the site and two of these trees are proposed to be removed as part of this application. A Variance to the maximum allowed lot coverage is requested, going from 45 percent to 48 percent, a three percent increase. An Exception to the Site Design and Standards is requested to allow for a reduced landscaping buffer for vehicle parking spaces from eight to six feet from the ARU and from five to three feet to the property line. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single-Family Residential; ZONING: R-1-7.5; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 1 E 09 BC; TAX LOT: 3401. Recommendation: The Historic Commission recommends approving the application as submitted subject to the specific recommendations below: Include the following revisions in the building permit submittals: 1) Siding should be 9/16 with a 4 inch exposure (Smooth Hardiplank) 2) Vinyl windows should be off-white in color (divided lights should be true or none used). Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305 20 East Main St. Fax: 541-552-2050 r_ Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 ,i www.ashland.or.us i C NPS Form 10-900-A OMB Appro. . No. 1024-0018 (8-86) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register Historic Continuation Section Number: 7 Page: 184 Skidmore Academy Historic District, Ashland, OR 503.0 Survey #615 SATTERFIELD, JOSEPH & CATHERINE HOUSE 1886 108 GRANITE ST 391E09BC 3400 Other: Vernacular [L-House] Historic Contributing Joseph W. and Catherine Anne Satterfield purchased this property in 1885 and soon began construction of a dwelling for their own occupancy. (JCD 12:309, 29:165) At years' end the local paper noted a $600 improvement by the Satterfields. In 1888 Mr. Satterfield died at home, aged 75 years. His widow remained in the house, living her until her own death in 1922. Mrs. Satterfield was well known and beloved within the neighborhood and was affectionately known as "Grandma Satterfield." A one-story vernacular ell, the Satterfield House is a gable-roofed volume with a projecting front facing gable. A small arch-topped porch, not original, likely replaced an earlier porch within the ells. Although somewhat modified, the Satterfield House retains sufficient integrity to relate its period of construction. 504.0 Survey #616 BARNTHOUSE, VERL & CARMEL BUNGALOW 1928c 114 GRANITE ST 391E09BC 3401 20"' Century American: Bungalow Historic Contributing This small bungalow was built on a portion of the Satterfield property sometime between 1911 and 1928 according to Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps although its exact development history is uncertain. By 1948 Verl G. and Carmel Barnthouse are shown residing here in city directories and by 1950 the couple had purchased the property, along with what is now Tax Lot 3401 to the south. (JCD 344:390) Verl G. Barnthouse was a longtime employee of the Southern Pacific Railroad and he and his wife lived here for the many years. A small single story dwelling, the Barnthouse Bungalow is typical of a modest rental design. The building retains early appearing horizontal siding, paired double-hung windows and wide overhanging eaves. Essentially unaltered, the Barnthouse Bungalow retains substantial integrity and effectively relates the period of significance. SUMMARY More than one hundred forty years since its original development period, the residential resources of the "Skidmore Academy District" retain a high degree of integrity and continue to convey the area's unique history and development pattern within the City of Ashland. Over sixty percent of the District's resources retain sufficient integrity to the historic period of significance and effectively convey their history, accurately document the associations for which they are significant, and successfully relate the history of the Skidmore Academy neighborhood's development. t Mark chexnayder From: anne pollack <annepollack121 @gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2017 9:16 PM To: planning Subject: PA-2017-00235 #114 Granite St. We have lived at #98 Pine Street since 1996 and love the beauty of our neighborhood with its historic homes and gracious old trees. We object to the Planning Commission making exceptions for solar setback and site design on this property and fail to see how they can be justified, particularly in light of the fact that #114 sits on the border of Lithia Park and as such is a neighborhood segue into that exquisite green space. Because of this, it seems especially important for the city to insure that this property not be overbuilt and unimportant exceptions not be granted. i Thank you for your consideration. Anne Pollack and Bob Kuenzel i i ""Y 9v°++ o4+ v{ Nuvu- v} A4!ULI4Juuuu uc Je)jeu,l uuit:irwap dy; plo}f.e o; n;ioi}meas;uaiogns apino.la o; aanlie; .lo •je;;al nq 'uoi;eoildde sig; 6uwwaouoo uogoefgo ue asiej o; ajnpe;;eg; sa;e;s met uobaJo -eoi;ou siq; o; pagoe;;e aje uoi;eoildde sig; o; algeoildde eua;uo eoueuipio aql (J•090, vq,q L OWd) 'u01sloap leui;;o 6ugfew ay; ;o a;ep ag; wal; SAep ZL ulg;inn uofsini4 6uiuueld pueIgsy ay; o; 6ui;unn ui apew aq ;snw U01SI09p SL4e;g uoisinia 6uiuueld ay;;o uoissiwwoo 6uiuueld ay; o; leadde uy -uofsioap;o sAep S uig;fm sai}ladoad awes aq; o; paliew s[ uoisioap;o aoi;ou y uoiWoijdde aq; uo uoisioap Ieui; a @~ euu pegs ge;g uoiSnip 6uiuueld ay; 'a;a1dwoo paweap 6uiaq uoi;eoildde ay; wa; s Cep 917 ueq; aaow;ou pue pouad;uawwoo ay; ja4v -pouad;uawwoo !ep bL e .lo; sMope goiynn uoi;eogdde 6ui;;iwgns Cpadoid aq;;o;aa; OOZ uig;iM sai;ladoid 6uipunoaans o;;uas si aoi;ou a 'ssaua;aldwoo;o uoi;euiLw9;ap uodn -fie;;iwgns;o sAep Og uig;inn a;aldwoo si uogeoildde ash pue-1 e;i auiwIa;ap };e;S uoisfnia 6uiuueld puelgsy anoge umogs a;ep auilpeep ag; uo -w-d Og:q o; aoiad OZ9L6 u069ao 'puelgsy'AeM wnquiM LS 'uoisinIp 6uiuueld pueNsy;O A;lo ag; o; s;uawwoo ua;;lion;iwgns o4;g6ia e seg;uapfsaj jo jaumo Cpadoid pa;oage Cuy -anoge pa;ou A(jadoJd ag; ao; uoi;eoildde a;aidwoo e p9nia09a seg;;e;S uoisinip 6uiuueld puelgsy agl -uu11rn mlpuv rnuaielm -1 pMjl.. DIW Apoopuud:,DUI uq plvo4z u~lAmxpew io WVwusw'rm4(i!xl'aunP~ae•wnuw/ 11V ••e` 0 '4JOSniao N ADwlmm ou cmaV DuV Aluo olRItWVOa W BDIddaC9 3-~[ p~-T1. - VAAIII/// iaal 09 = Sou! L i a 0094 SEZ00-LGOZ-b'd / JU 113d02ld ioare IS ,I 1.3-i-t - _ _ - 1S C Z r J ` LTOZ `tI IlozeW :S1LNaIVN03 NallI2IAX 3® NOISSINCUIS HOA aI ll([Va(l LIOZ 18Z XnTugad :NolLVDIrlddV 2[larldIAl®D j aDlL N ~~A1 umquiAA, I S Tu paleool `(uroog no,Si)IsTS) puipllnq sooujog nuuaaui~ug pue ;uaurdolanaQ 1~41un=OD arl; u? Wd 00:9;u LIOZ `6 qa iujV `Reps ingjL uo uoi}oy ~iuruueld sirlT moinaz osle ItIm uoissiuzuzoD oojL puelgsy oigl :g.LON •X,em umquj Al I S Te pa;eool `(uzoog noXgSTS) `3urplinq sooiAZas 5upaaurpug pue ;uouZdolanaQ ,~jtunuzuroD auI ut Nd 00:9 Ili LIOZ `8 ga.tuN ,CupsaupaAA,uo uoi;oV'oLT!=ld sirlT marna.z osie Iilm uorsSrurruoD oiaoIsT puelrlsV oqj :dj ON •IOtI£ :JLOrl AV.L `Dg 60 gI 6£ :JVTV Sc2I®SSUSSV `S•L-I-U :DNIN Z `.IeRuapISOU -~I1u-m3-0PUTS :NOI,LVNDISa KVrld aAISN:lH dWOD alit; ~~Tadoxd au} ol laaj ooxgT 01 aAg Ulozj pUe 11-dV aq uzozj jooj xis ol jig2io uzoij sooeds Ouppud olonlaA zoj Tojjng ~?Mdeospuel poonpaz u zoj moll-e of palsanbaz sT SpxepUeIS pue UOTSaQ oTIS gill o} uoTldooxg uv •oseazouT luoozad ooigj P `luoozad 81, o} Iuoozad sl, LUoij Ouio~ `po sanbaz ST 02ezanoo 101 pamolle UMTUTXLUI aqT of aou-elzeA V •UOITeotldd-e slTjo lmd su panouaaz ag ol posodozd are soazl osalll jo omI pu-e alts aq of }uaoefpe TO uo paIeool saazl ZI am aloTgL •aj3jBO/Ilun i3UTIIamp ,i-MTUTZd mau oqj ,~g II1.Tou oiq of X:Podozd aqj uo Iseo ag ol mopeTls xaoxel L, moll-c of poi g pzmpueiS L zoj U01 dooxg ~IoegjaS T'eloS e Oullsanbaz si ju-nildde oiq `uoTTlppe uI •Ijun 2?uTllamp ,~xeuTUd posodozd ott Sg po oopu spueg apisllTH -IOJ poTsonbaz OSIe ST Iluuod mouo-d slul-ezlsuoD IquoumonAUg W IeoTs.Ild V •malAag UOISaQ aT1S olq jo 1jud se Itun futllomp ,~zeuzizd looj oxenbs Z9t`Z mau E }onzlauoo ol sosodozd Iueolldde o-qT `UOTTtppe UI •fl-dV JOOJ oxenbs 866B 01I1 }zanuoo pue fvodozd oily jo m;)j aTII of IIUn Ouillomp dui sixo oTq~ owoolaz of Si IeSodozd oTIZ •,~azadozd jooCgns aTII ol (n-IV) Itun Ietjuopisax ,Tossoooe ue jo uoilTppe aTll pue Ijun fuTllamp ouojsjTq OUIISixa aTIj jO UOIW3OIaz QJISUO OT41 z0J mOIIe OI maTAa-d UfTSaQ aIIS'P zoj ISanbaz V :Nolj,d aSa ure~seY~I ?p LEI :JLNV31rlJdVrdHNAkO alru I-TD t, I I :A1LH2[d 2Id JD ElIlS uolldoox0 aqI pup 'spzppuulS rill pun UaIsOQ oliS agi jo osodmd polmis aqi lllm lualslsuoo sT uolldaoxa agiJo Ipnozddp pun "saTlzadozd IUaopfpm Iouduu XIOnilunaU XItullumisgns IOU Ilim uoildoox0 Ogl jo lunozddu pun `.Oils m jo asn posodozd agl zo 0inlon.4s nUIISTxa Uu jo loodsu tunsnun.zo onbiun u of anp spnpuulS osrl pun unisaQ oliS agl jo sluotuazmbaz ogioods aqi nimlootu uT ~ilnoWjp Olgmzisuoulap u sl azOgZ -N :Isixa of punoj on sooupisumom nUTmolloj olgl jo llu `polilulgns aou0pln0 pun uoiinallsanUT `uolluoilddn oql jo sispg agi uo 3i 080-ZL"81 uoiloas .zapun poldopu spzupuplS UaisOQ oliS agl jo sluoLuo mbaz agl of loodsaz gllm poluuza ag Fnuz zaldpgo slgl jo sluotuounbaz agI of uol1doox0 u-v 060'ZL'81 SCIHV(I NVIS 2[SII (LKV NOIS21O MLIS HHJL 01 AIOI,I.ddoX~ quuoilddu agi of polunza Xgsnouo zd Iunozddp UOTSTn1p punt .TO luauTlsnfpu ouTl /Slladozd n jo llnsaz su Osizp IOU saop Isonbaz 001Mlzpn aqI `alduiuxo zo j uoumo X1zOdozd zo Iunoilddn aqi Xg posoduu jjos IOU ST 001MIJpn aqI zoj pOaU 014,L "t olio ag1 JO unld anTSUOgazduioo aqI pun aoupnTpzO silt Jo luolul pun osodmd agi zaglzrg Itlm pun sosn luonp pu agl jo Iuowdotanap agi uo slopduli anTipaOu rue ungl zalmaza ag Itim slgauag s jusodozd agZ f -ails loafgns agl of paiulaz soaunlsumon_o luoisXgd onbiun zo Inloads aqI ssazppe oI,ruess0oou UTnmTuim agi si 0ouuupn oqj •aoununn m 5UTnozddu jo sosodmd zoj dlgspznq u jo aouapina luoiolUns ag ,~uw uoiipuiuu0lap lol Ipaal y -saoupisumozm n[I mis zo `luauldojanap luaonfpn `samluad Inminu `Xgdn.Toodol su gons `ails loafgns Ogl jo s031Mlsum0110 juolsXgd anblUn .TO Iploods zoj lunooou IOU saop UOTSino.Td opoo Ioafgns aqi asnmooq l mssooou ST aoununn oql "1 OSO'S'S'81 ao A •lluuod aqj J0 lnnozddm jo uoilipuoo p ag Itpgs siuoulazlnbaz uoguniiiLu gonS 'OSO"L-9"8I uolloos of lunnsmd Imnozddu paluuza aazl louo jo feAOUTaz aqi.IOJ alnpiliUI of lueoilddu aqi omnbaz tlmgs Ilio oq L -o aoumu.pzo slgi jo suoisinozd zagio agl gilm /ildTuoo of onuTiuoo Sanlipuzailp aqi su nuol os `saazl uo iopduU agi uassat pinom Imgi suaisop nuiduospuml onmollu jo sOmionzls jo luouiaould zo suptd ails anllnUZOilp zaplsuoo k0U1 XITo agi `uoiluUTuuOlap slgi puI>Ieuz UI -ouoz aql Xg pomotln fiisuop poliluuod agI motoq poonpaz ag of XIisuop pulluopisaz agl ingl Ozmbaz tlugs uoiloas sigi ui nuiglox •p -0uoz agi ui poulmod su posn ag of f4zadozd aqi molip of SISixa OAlipUJOIJU algpuosuaz Ou pun pazapisuoo uaag annq lpnoulaz 004 agi oI sanllpUZallp uagm uouallzo slgl of uoildooxo um luuza tangs kilo agZ -Aizadozd loafgns agl jo looj OOZ Ulgiim ciiszanip smods pun `SaTdouuo `sozls `soilisuop a0zl aqI uo lomduu 3nllu50U lumogT ais n annq IOU Itlm 004 Oq1 JO IeAOUIQ d •o -s~,jeazgpulm DUllslxa .IO `sOazl luaopfPB JO uolloolozd `szalum 0omjms jo mog `,~ltttguls ltos `uoisoza uo louduzi anlinaau luuogluais e anpg IOU Itlm aazi aqI JO IunoulaX -g "0I "81 lied ui siuTp.4suoo lniuouluozlnug pun ipolSXgd pue t"8 t Ind ui spzupuplS uaisaQ pun 1uou1dol0n0Q OTIS olguoTlddu of polluzit IOU Ing nuTpnloUT `spzppuels pun SIU0ulazinbaz aounulpz0 os1 l punt olguoilddu zagio gllm lublslsuoo ag of uollnolddu Ogl lluuod of zapzo UT lunouiaz zoj posodozd sl aazl ag,l, •m suo.Ilpuoo jo uoilisoduzT aqi ganozgl uuojuoo of appal ag upo zo `nuaiiz0 nulmottOj 0jJ0 lip Slaaul UOllpoilddu agi Imgl spUg l~4lzoglnu lunozddu agl jl polupza ag tangs pzuzuq u IOU sT Ingl 0azl u JOJ iluu0d lunoulOX Oazl, y P.d'Vj:j 7? 10~T Sr fa)zff do-11 •Z -Iluuod agl jo Imnozddu jo uoilipuoo p ag Ilugs sluoTuounbaz uoTipaRi gonS "090"L'S'8I uoiloas of lunnsmd owl pzpz-eq gong jo lunouTaz agI zoJ OIL& luz of lunoilddu aqi azinbaz, nut FLITo aqj -q 9"8I lied ui Oazl pzpzuq jo uoilipuop ooS -2?uTunzd zo `uoiipootaz `iuoulimazl ,~g p0lmin0tlp ag ,~igpuosuaz lomeo zanump zo pzpzmq gons pup `FLIItIonj zO aznlonziS nUTISTX0 um of aapuTmp /fizadozd jo n_lwep algpaOsazOj u zo (Fi.Iadozd zo suoszad amfuT pue Itej of XIaTI pnzeq pious oitgnd znoto u sluosazd aazi aqi jo uoilpoot zo uoilipuoo aqI Ingl ainzlsuoulap IsnTU lupoilddu agI m -suoilipuoo do uoillsoduu aqI ganozgl uuojuoo of opum aq uno 1o ` ualuo nUTmolloj 0ql jo alp sloom uoilmoTldde agi lpgl spuTj /lizoginu IMozddu agi jl paluuza ag tlpgs liuuad tunouIOX OOJI pzpzpH V WO.rL p.rTlzvH 'I E'0ti0'L'S'81 JLlV Had'IVAOWa2I aaHl •0ouuuTp io sigl Xg pOlliuuad luouidolOnap umuuxpuz all pun `Hain luipuno. ms agldo 1uoLudol3nap nUTislxo agI zapisuoo Ilugs uolssTunuoo nuluapld zO zosinpyJjpiS aql -SUOTiop olgiSZanaz upgl ,~isnouas azoui pazaplsuoo ag tlugs suoilou apgiszanazzl •luauUTOZTnua aqI uo Iouduu oszanpu agI 0onpaz of sdols olgpuosmaz tln uc el smq IUnoTtddu agi IngZ -luauldopanap agi i~q posnuo spznznq lulluolod agi 0i-0lljtu oI somsuouT poluoTuolduU pun alnazo kew IuauTdotanap agl Imgi spznzug tuiluolod agi pazaplsuoo suq luuoTlddu all Iugs -S -poziuliulUT uaag annq slopduli OSZanpp purr `pazaplSUO0 uaag anng Snazu /~gzp0u pun F4zadozd aqi of sloudwT_ luiluolod agi `zaldmgo sull jo spnpuels luouidolanap agl jo UOTIpoilddu agl ganozgs - -v -uiz0luo nuimoptOj agi jo Itu sloom Ipsodozc agl ji pOnozddp ag Itmgs puu 0SO"t"S"8I uoiloas uT ampooozd I ocUL agl of loafgns si Iluuad mouoaj sluTuzlsuoo polskgd p .IOj uoliuoTlddu u-v OSO'OI'£'81 SINWHISNOO 'IV,1LKalVN0MANa W 'IVoISXHd •spznpunlS ualsaQ pun luouldolanaQ aIIS aql jo osodmd palms agi SQA0ig072zaliag zo XItpnbo lugl upI_sop u uT llnsaz Illm uo1_ldooxo aqi nuquuza Ing `slu0mimbaz ogio0ds agi Aulloom uT ,~llnogjip olguzisuomp ou si o.13T4 , "Z zo -A,llnogjlp aqi alpinailu pInom golgm ulnuiMuz agi s1 polsonbaz uolidooxa agI pup `UaTSaQ pup luauldotanaQ aIIS agl jo asodmd palms agi gilm iualslsuoo ST UOTldooxo aqj J0 Iunozddp pup 'soillodozd luoopfpm IomduzT Atanllufou XItullupisgns IOU Ilim UOTidooxo ag1 JO Ipnozddu pup `ails u jo asn posodozd aqI zo Oznlonzis nuTisixo uu jo loodsu Ipnsnun .To anblun p of anp spzppuBIS uaisaQ puu luouidolanaQ aliS aql jo sluouTazmbaz ogioods aqI nUTlaauT ,iilnogjip otgp.iisuoui0p u sT azaq L - I -Isixa of punoj on `molag `Z zo I uoiloasgns zagil0 uT soomisumozTo agi jI t,"81 lzud jo spnpunlS'ualsaQ PUB luoTudolanaQ OJIS aqI of sUOTldooxo anOddu XpuT fjlzoglnu lunozddm agZ sp mpunzS u2!sat7 pun luoutdolaaat7 ap1S, acfl ol uoijdaox~y -3 -,Slzadozd loafgns aql of papinozd ag IIl^m pup um uoiiplzodsupzi Olmnbopu pue ASlladozd agi Inoganozgi pup of swoop paned `aapurezp uuols upgm `,4Iloizlo0la `zamos `zalpm zoj soill1ibnj 1ql03o ,1Iiouduo olpnbape ipgl pup soilitloud oitgnd 9-j7-81 UOTIoas ui spznpuuis 0tguollddu aqi gllm salldwoo psodozd alL :sollltloej 1410 -C ^ •molag `g uolloosgns Sq papinozd sic idoox0 -a.Tagmasla ,~Idde ,~Ileotd/C4 lou op gotgm ails stgl of ,~ldde lugl soouelsuunox[o Iensnun xo onbiun o.Te axagL •111 -lol luaoe(pe ue uo oxmonxls aiqultq-eg P ,~q posn uuols,~s Fa.Touo .mlos antloe .zo anlssed u sirgauaq goigm ssaooe xelos l'etluelsgns ,Sue gstuluuip lou saop uoildaoxa agl, •Tt s TZtpltng atgpltgeq axnln-I Xq alts agl uo (suuals,~s f,'g.zaua xelos ant}on PUP antssnd `•a•i) Biouo relos jo osn algeuoseaz agl opnloaxd lou saop uotldooxo agZ •T jom axe eualtxo DuTmolloj agl jo IIP spin JClt.zoglne Ieno.zdde agI •q unooo plnom goigm puTpegs agl jo Iutm72.ip pine uotlduosop y -nt •.TanTem agl uuoxd putlinsax soO uuep Xue ioj ssoluuxLg plag st XlTD agl pup axnlonxls xelnotlzed legl zoj pantem si uoiloos sigl Xq paaluemTiO ssoooe xelos agl l-egl luouualels y -ITI -palue- 23 st xanTem agl gotgm of s5uipltnq jo OuTpltnq ozgtoods agl of /~Iuo satldde xantem agl 173gl luauualels y •Tt -uoTlsanb uT Xlzadoxd agl ut lsaxalul ue ~?uTplog sxaplogaseal paxalstfaz xo snumo Iln jo saxnleu is oqj -t -uoTleuuolut nutmolloj agl jo Ile Dututeluoo jr,ll3 agl Xq poilddns uuod aseala.T E `poop soillodwd poloo e agl uo ~ixal~ 4unoD agl glim pxooa.z pine `u2is popegs oq of j~4xadozd Ilu jo snumo xo numo agl juT41 -P t AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING i 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 February 28, 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-2017-00235, 114 Granite. AW M- 0(W I Sig ture of Employee C:1UsersltrapprlDesktop\TempfatestAFFIDAVIT OF MAILING_Regan.dou 2 /2 812 01 7 E'- C': Easy PeelO Labels i A Bend along line to Use Avery© Template 51600 ~d Paper expose Pop-up EdgeTM j ® AVERY@ 5160 1 PA-2017-00235 391 E08AD 1200 PA-2017-00235 391 E08AD 6400 PA-2017-00235 391 E09BC 3000 BANKERS TRUST COMPANY TRUSTEE BUSBY EDWARD G/ROCHELLE D DEBOER BRYAN/STEPHANIE PO BOX 897 64 NUTLEY ST 1 EASTWOOD DR DES MOINES, IA 50304-0897 ASHLAND, OR 97520 MEDFORD, OR 97504 I PA-2017-00235 391 E08AD 1700 PA-2017-00235 391 E08AD 800 I PA-2017-00235 391 E09BC 3200 HULL JACQUELINE A/JERRY E HULTEEN NOREEN/RONALD E KENNEDY RUTH A TRUST ET AL 710 NW 2ND ST j 87 GRANITE ST 94 GRANITE ST GRANTS PASS, OR 97526 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2017-00235 391 E08AD 1001 PA-2017-00235 391 E08AD 1600 PA-2017-00235 391 E08AD 1300 KUENZEL ROBERT V TRUSTEE ET AL LEMKE MARTHA M/RICHARD L LEWIS JANET 98 PINE ST 61 NUTLEY ST 112 PINE ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 j ~ j PA-2017-00235 391 E09BC 3401 PA-2017-00235 391 E08AD 6500 PA-2017-00235 391 E09BC 2900 MASTAIN MARDI MC LEAN JOHN R TRUSTEE FBO MEESE JED D TRUSTEE ET AL 114 GRANITE ST 890 SHEILA CT 774 MAYS BLVD SUITE 10-366 ASHLAND, OR 97520 CAMPBELL, CA 95008 INCLINE VILLAGE, NV 89451 1 PA-2017-00235 391 E09BC 3400 PA-2017-00235 PA-2017-00235 391 E08AD 1000 MILLER FAMILY TRUST ET AL PETER CIPES BUILDING DESIGN PHELPS ESTHER 1556 N 20TH ST 317 N. MAIN STREET 3300 UNIVERSITY BLVD 218 COOS BAY, OR 97420 ASHLAND, OR 97520 WINTER PARK, FL 32792 i PA-2017-00235 391 E08AD 1500 PA-2017-00235 PA-2017-00235 391 E08AD 901 RIGOTTI GARY R TRUSTEE ET AL ROGUE PLANNING AND DEV SCHREIBER HOWARD D/MICHELE j 12 PEBBLE CREEK DR 1424 S. IVY STREET 93 GRANITE ST EAGLE POINT, OR 97524 MEDFORD, OR 97501 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2017-00235 391 E09BC 3301 PA-2017-00235 391 E09BC 3300 PA-2017-00235 391 E08AD 1400 SPILLMAN JOHN W/KARIN E SPILLMAN LYNN W TRUSTEE ET AL STEBBINS ROBERTA W TRUSTEE ET AL 102 GRANITE ST 98 GRANITE ST 111 GRANITE ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 I I PA-2017-00235 391 E08AD 1100 ZUNDEL MICHELLE 114 Granite 107 GRANITE ST 2/28/2017 NOC ASHLAND, OR 97520 22 it i I i i I ~ I Etiquettes faciles a peler I; Repliez a la hachure afin de I, www.avery.com I Sensde Utilisez le gabarit AVERY@ 51600 j cha gement reveler le rebord Pop-upmc U 1-800-GO-AVERY m ll 1!!111'+ ' 4 Li a i'Llf1~~;b !r~~f;~f a t ilfll~5 I li=~ ~ If Ii I;I I E C l 00 1 t! Two 3200 t12, 1100 100 J, 1h 300 k -R A 1600 3400 t r_ _uo I .j 4 111 J 4 1 G ` 1.':117 u f ~!N~:I11 J i `-111th :IGi~~l~ 11J4 ?t[~~a r'.a~ lEl i,i 11 JI # - v J Ll 11 1111 `~'I~-111 d_ ~ ~h 4U::" J, 4tl r, Planning Division NI IT APPLICATION CITY OF 51 Winburn Way, Ashland OR 97520 FILE # (")()'2-3 ASHLAND 541-488-5305 Fax 541-488-6006 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT Site Design Review for ARU; P&E for hillside development, variance to lot coverage, solar waiver DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Pursuing LEED® Certification? ❑ YES 9NO Street Address 114 Granite Street Assessor's Map No. 391 E 39 1E 05 BD Tax Lot 2208 Zoning R-1-7.5 Comp Plan Designation Single Family Residential APPLICANT Name Mardi Mastain Phone 541-261-3000 E-Mail mardimastain@hotmail.com Address 114 Granite Street City Ashland Zip 97520 PROPERTY OWNER Name Mardi Mastain Phone 541-261-3000 E-Mail mardimastain@hotmaii.com Address 114 Granite Street City Ashland Zip 97501 SURVEYOR, ENGINEER, ARCHITECT, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, OTHER Title Land Use Planner Name Rogue Planning & Development Services Phone 541-951-4020 E-Mail amptgunter.planning&gmail.com Address 1424 S ivy Street City Medford Zip 97501 Title Building Designer Name Peter Cipes Building Deisgn Phone 541-488-1096 E-Mail homedesignso-mac.com Address 317 N Main Street City Ashland Zip 97520 SEE ADDITIONAL PROJECT PROFESSIONALS ON PAGE 1 OF FINDINGS I hereby certify that the statements and information contained in this application, including the enclosed drawings and the required findings of fact, are in all respects, true and correct. I understand that all property pins must be shown on the drawings and visible upon the site inspection. In the event the pins are not shown or their location found to be incorrect, the owner assumes full responsibility. I further understand that if this request is subsequently contested, the burden will be on me to establish: 1) that I produced sufficient factual evidence at the hearing to support this request; 2) that the findings of fact furnished justifies the granting of the request 3) that the findings of fact furnished by me are adequate; and further 4) that all structures or improvements are properly located on the ground. Failure in this regard will result most likely in not only the request being set aside, but also possibly in my structures being built in reliance thereon being required to be remo ed at my9expense. If I have any doubts, l am advised to seek competent professional advice and assilstanc"ems App icant's ignature Date As owner of the property involved in this request, I have read and understood the complete application and its consequences to me as a property owner. Pro arty ®wn is Signature (required) Date fro be completed by City Staff] Date Received Zoning Permit Type Filing Fee $ OVER 0 G:\comm-dev\planningWomis & Handoufs\Zoning remit Application.doc 114 Granite Street Site Review for Accessory Residential Unit, P&E for Hillside Development, Lot Coverage Variance and Solar Setback Waiver l r i ROGUE PLANNING R DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC February 10, 2017 Subject Property Property Address: 114 Granite Street Owner/Applicant: Mardi Mastain 114 Granite Street Ashland, OR 97520 Building Designer: Peter Cipes Peter Cipes Building Design 317 N Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 Engineering Services: Marquess & Associates Eric "Ric" Swanson, P.E. (Geotech) PO BOX 490 1120 East Jackson Medford, OR 97501 Landscape Architect: Kerry KenCairn KenCairn Landscape Architecture 545 A Street, Suite 3 Ashland, OR 97520 Arborist: Willie Gingg S.O. Tree Care P.O. Box 5140 Central Point, OR 97502 Planning Consultant: Rogue Planning & Development Services Amy Gunter 1424 S Ivy Street Medford, OR 97501 Page 1 of 20 PROJECT PROPOSAL: Physical and Environmental Constraints Review for the construction of a new single family residential home. The existing bungalow on the site will be relocated to an area on the lower portion of the parcel, to the east of its present location. The bungalow will become an accessory residential unit (ARU) to the new residence. The bungalow will be accessed via the curb cut off Nutley Street. The request includes a Site Design Review for the ARU to permit second dwelling in the single family residential zone. A Variance to lot coverage is requested and a solar setback waiver is requested to shade a portion of the property to the north more than allowed by the land use ordinance. I PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Request: Physical and Environmental Constraints Review Permit for hillside development including areas of severe constraints, a Site Review Permit for the use of the existing bungalow as an Accessory Residential Unit to allow for the construction of a new single family residential home. Site Description: The subject property is located on the southeast side of Granite Street near the intersection of~ Granite and Nutley Street. The lot was created in 1998 as the result of a partition from the property to the north at 108 Granite Street. moo The subject property and the surrounding properties are w > , r oi0t zoned Single Family Residential (R-1-7.5). The tax lot that contains the Ice Rink and a public parking lot is located to the N1J'rLrY S•r, east and south of the property, this property is part of the larger Lithia Park property to the south and east of the subject property. h For a small parcel, the subject property has unique physical characteristics that pose site development challenges. There are steep slopes, a large number of larger stature trees and a historic bungalow. There is a steep slope along the frontage of the property created by the construction of Granite Street, the property slopes nearly 50 percent from the right-of-way down to the west within the first 15 feet of the property. The lot then levels out for with a series of rock walls and railroad tie walls to create the yard area to the north of the bungalow. There is rock wall terracing shared with the property to the north that crosses between subject property and 108 Granite Street to the north. The property is sort of a "bowl" created by the topography up to Granite Street, the rock wall that curves to the northeast between the two properties, and the large Coast Redwood on the south side of the property. The property has average slopes between 19 to 21.2 percent slopes with portions of the property sloping more than 25 percent. Page 2 of 20 There are twelve trees six-inches in diameter at breast height (DBH) and larger on and adjacnet to the property. A tree inventory has been provided (See attachment L.1.1, additionally a detailed arborist report was completed by Arborist Willie Gingg of Southern Oregon Tree Care (see attachment). There a number of large stature trees including trees three coast redwoods (Sequioa Seimpervernes) a 28-inch diameter at breast height (DBH) Oak; a 27-inch Maple, a 12-inch DBH elm; and a 12-inch DBH cedar tree on the subject property. The proposed site layout strives to preserve the majority of the trees on the site with speciffic layout and foundation construction for the preservation of the large coast redwoods. The arborist reviewed the health of trees and their suitability to construction and provided recommendations for the site and measures necessary to ensure the best survival for the coast redwood trees. The property is occupied by a 1,020 square foot structure that consists of a 526 square foot main floor and a 496 basement. The bungalow structure was constructed sometime between 1911 and the 1920s. The bungalow was constructed on the south half of the property to the north at 108 Granite Street as a guest cottage. The exact year of construction is unknown but the structure appears on the Sandborn Fire Insurance Map from 1928. The basement was converted from a dirt floor cellar to habitable space in the late 1990s. The large coast redwoods and many of the trees on the site were planted on the site by the grandfather (Barnthouse) of the property owners of 108 Granite Street. The bungalow is a historic contributing resource in the City of Ashland Historic Resources Inventory for the Skidmore Academy Historic District and is known as the Barnthouse Bungalow (the Barnthouse's were the property owners at time of inventory). The structure is classified in the Inventory as a "traditional 20th century bungalow". The bungalow has even more historic significance beyond the architectural description provided in the Historic Resource Inventory. In 1925, Johnny Gruelle, the author of the Raggedy Ann and Andy books is known to have stayed on the property. While visiting the family that lived in the 108 Granite Street, the Gruelle's spent a year in the family's guest cottage that is now known as 114 Granite Street. During their time in Oregon, the Gruelle's stayed at Lake of the Woods. There was a stuffed camel toy in the window of the Lake of the Woods store with sagging stuffing. This toy provided the inspiration for the "Camel with the Wrinkly Knees" Raggedy Anne and Andy book (see attached letter and photo). Granite Street, along the frontage of the property is improved with curb, gutter and a curbside sidewalk. There is an un-used driveway curb cut on the south side of the bungalow. There is a second driveway curb cut approximately mid-block on the north side of Nutley Street. This driveway accesses the lower portion of the property located at 114 Granite Street by crossing the City of Ashland tax lot between the subject property and Nutley Street. Page 3 of 20 City facilities are available within Granite Street, Nutley Street and Winburn Way. The property is served by an 8-inch sanitary sewer main in Granite Street. There is a 16-inch water main in Granite Street that serves the existing structure with a water meter at Granite Street. No storm drain facilities exist on the site. The property is served by an overhead power on Granite Street. PROJECT PROPOSAL: The request is to relocate the existing Historic Contributing bungalow structure to its proposed location accessed via Nutley Street, and then to construct a new single family residence in the bungalow's former location accessed via Granite Street. The bungalow will become the accessory residential unit (ARU) to the new single family residence. There are portions of the property that are greater than 25 percent slope so a Physical and Environmental Constraints Review Permit for the new single family residence is necessary, the ARU is located on slopes of less than 25 percent. To facilitate the construction of the new single family residence, two of the trees on the site will need to be removed, the Maple tree is on slopes of more than 25 percent. In addition, the development of the site will require a variance to lot coverage and a solar setback waiver to shade the property to the north more than allowed outright by code. Accessory Residential Unit: The proposal to retain existing Historic Contributing bungalow as an ARU. The structure will be moved downhill towards Lithia Park and placed on a semi-level area of the lot near the rear property line. The proposed location will be similar to where it is currently on the site, with the entrance oriented towards Nutley Street. The existing front doorfaces the street and the orientation of the structure towards Nutley Street will be retained. The main level of the bungalow is 526 square feet in area. The topography of the site provides the opportunity to provide habitable space in a new lower level / basement similar to the current configuration. The existing bungalow has a very small bedroom and limited living area on the main level. Additionally, developed as a guest house / cabin, the front door enters the middle of the kitchen. As part of the proposal, the main level, the historic portion would have the living, dining, kitchen and bathroom in a reconfigured interior floorplan. Below, a bedroom and a living area including a second bathroom would be provided. After the remodel and addition, the accessory residential unit would be 1,000 square feet. Access to the accessory residential unit is proposed to be accessed from Nutley Street. The access required an easement from City of Ashland to cross the parcel owned by the City between the subject property and Nutley Street. That easement was grated in August 2016 and evidence of such is provided in the attachments. The lot to the north at 108 Granite has an access easement across the subject property to access the lower portion of their property. The accessory residential unit will require 1.5 (rounded to 2) parking spaces. One off-street parking space is proposed adjacent to the driveway. This parking space is less than eight feet from the accessory residential unit and less than five feet from the Page 4 of 20 I adjacent property line and requires exceptions to the screening standards required in the Site Review chapter. According to the pre-application conference comments, the Site Review applies to both the accessory residential unit and the new single family residence. Technically, single family residences are exempt from Site Design Review but staff found the proposed development as a transition to multi-family, thus requiring review of the single-family residence. The proposed single family residence is single story, 2,462 square foot (including attached garage). The topography of the site necessitates a basement for the residence to be at a similar grade as Granite Street and to not be located substantially below the street grade. The proposed residence is in conformance with the maximum permitted floor area in the historic district. The residence is oriented towards Granite Street with a covered front porch and a walkway from Granite i Street to the front porch. The home will have two off-street parking spaces provided in the front-loading garage. The garage is recessed behind the fagade of the residence. The proposed residence has two gables, including a Dutch gable facing Granite Street providing variations in the rooflines. The proposed windows and door styles, including the front-loading garage are historically compatible with double hung f style windows, carriage style garage doors and a craftsman style front door. The proposed residence has seven of the nine required design elements for single family residential units. i Physical and Environmental Constraints Review for Hillside Development: Due to proposed site disturbance of the areas of the property that have slopes exceeding 25 percent, the construction of the new single family residence requires a Physical and Environmental Constraints Review Permit. The area where the bungalow will be relocated is not on areas identified as hillside slopes. (See attached topographical survey). Rick Swanson, Physical Engineer and Geotech from Marquess and Associates has performed an initial site evaluation and geotechnical report. Based on the site assessment by the Geotech, the site is suitable for construction. The report speaks to the fill materials approximately four feet below the present grade. Below the fill material layer is a silty sand layer. Below the silty sand lay at about eight feet below grade, a boulder and cobble layer was encountered. In one test pit and assumed below the other, granite bedrock was encountered approximately 9.5 feet below grade. The report has earthwork considerations during construction and a recommended inspection schedule. Though a standard foundation is acceptable on the site, post and pier foundation is an acceptable means of construction to minimize disturbance to the critical root zone of the large pine trees. City of Ashland Parks and Recreation has provided a temporary encroachment area to the south of the subject property on to the triangular lot for material storage area, additional staging area is available adjacent to the ARU. Page 5 of 20 Solar Setback Exception: The existing lot has an average width of 59.65-feet-wide due to how the north/south lot dimensions are measured. The slope of the property is 4.8 percent up-hill to the north. Based on the code, the is subject to Solar Setback Standard B. The proposed single family residential structure generally complies with Solar Setback Standard B excepting the garage, where the topography of the site as it slopes downhill from Granite Street along the west property line towards the east. A portion of the master bedroom at the rear of the proposed residence requires a solar setback variance. The neighbor to the north at 108 Granite Street has agreed to allow for the additional shadowing. Tree Protection and Preservation: The proposed structure has been designed in a manner to have the least impact on the large redwoods on the property and located just to the south of the property on the City of Ashland lot to the south of the subject property. A combination of traditional foundation and cantilevered / post and pier foundation methods are proposed in order to limit the amount of excavation within the sensitive root zones of the large trees. On the following pages are the findings of fact addressing the criteria from the Ashland Municipal Code for Site Design Review, Physical and Environmental Constraints Review,, Variance to Lot Coverage, Solar Setback Waiver and Exception to Site Design Standards. The applicant's findings are in Calibri font and the City of Ashland criteria are in Times New Roman. I i Page 6 of 20 CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL: Ashland Unified Land Use Ordinance A. Underlying Zone. The proposal complies with all of the applicable provisions of the underlying zone (part 18.2), including but not limited to: building and yard setbacks, lot area and dimensions, density and floor area, lot coverage, building height, building orientation, architecture, and other applicable standards. The proposal complies with the required building and yard setbacks, the lot area and dimensions are pre- existing and will not change as part of this proposal. The allowed density in the zone is a single-family residence with the potential for an up to 1,000 square foot Accessory Residential Unit. The proposed building height complies with the maximum height of 30 feet in the historic district, both buildings are clearly oriented towards the nearest street. The proposed single family residence and the preservation of j the historic bungalow is consistent with the historic district design standards. A variance to lot coverage I is requested as part of this request. 18.2.3.040 Accessory Residential Unit A. R-1 Zone. Accessory residential units in the R-1 zone shall meet the following requirements. 1. One accessory residential unit is allowed per lot, and the maximum number of dwelling units shall not exceed two per lot. Only one accessory residential unit is proposed. No more than two dwelling units will be on the lot. 2. Accessory residential units are not subject to the density or minimum lot area requirements of the zone, except that accessory residential units shall be counted in the density of developments created under the Performance Standards Option in chapter 18.3.9. Property not part of a Performance Standards subdivision. 3. The maximum gross habitable floor area (GHFA) of the accessory residential unit shall not exceed 50 percent of the GHFA of the primary residence on the lot, and shall not exceed 1,000 square feet GHFA. The proposed accessory residential unit at 998 square feet is less than 50 percent of the GHFA of the primary and is less than 1,000 square feet. 4. The proposal shall conform to the overall maximum lot coverage and setback requirements of the underlying zone. The proposal complies with the setback requirements a variance to exceed the maximum lot coverage is requested as part of the proposal. 5. Additional parking shall be provided in conformance with the off-street parking provisions for single-family dwellings in section 18.4.3.040, except that parking spaces, turn-arounds, and driveways are exempt from the paving requirements in subsection 18.4.3.080. E.1. The accessory residential unit with one-bedroom and more than 500-square feet required 1.5 parking spaces in addition to the two required for the single-family residence. The ARU will have one parking space provided adjacent to the unit and one on-street parking credit is requested for Page 7 of 20 the additional space. The driveway and the parking area are proposed to be surfaced with crushed, decomposed granite. 18.2.3.120 Dwelling in Historic District Overlay Dwellings in the Historic District Overlay subject to all of the following requirements. A. Manufactured homes are prohibited. N/A B. Dwellings shall conform to the maximum permitted floor area standards of section 18.2.5.070, except that dwellings exceeding the maximum permitted floor area are allowed subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit under chapter 18.5.4. The proposed single family residence complies with the maximum permitted floor area in the historic district. The lot area allows for a SFR of 2,514 square feet in area. The proposed residence and garage is considered a single story due to the presence of a basement. The single level SFR is 2,462 square feet in area which is less than the maximum allowed. The Accessory Residential Unit is more than six feet from the primary residence and is exempt from the code. C. Notwithstanding the height standards of the R-1 zone, structures within the Historic Overlay shall not exceed a height of 30 feet. The average height of both structures is less than 30 feet. D. Retail commercial uses in a dwelling unit within the Railroad Historic Overlay are subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit under chapter 18.5.4 and shall conform to the standards of section 18.2.3.210. N/A B. Overlay Zones. The proposal complies with applicable overlay zone requirements (part 18.3). The subject property is within the Skidmore Academy Historic District, has slopes of more than 25% and is subject to the Physical and Environmental Constraints review for Hillside Development. 18.3.10.050 Physical and Environmental Constraints 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. Portions of the site where the existing residence that is proposed to be relocated and the location of the new residence are subject to the Physical Constraints Review permit for Hillside Development because areas of the site exceed 25 percent slopes. 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. Page 8 of 20 f The proposed residence and site work has been designed in accordance with the requirements and standards of the Hillside Development chapter of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance. The project team has considered the adverse impacts and the proposed development with the oversite of the geotechnical expert have been minimized. A site evaluation was performed by Rick Swanson from Marquess and Associates in September 2015. A report on the site findings is attached. The report finds that site has steep slopes to the east and a relatively uniform topography of 20 percent across the building pad area. The site has old fill materials to a depth of 4' below existing grade. The old fill consists of silty sand with occasional rock fragments and pervasive roots throughout the layer. Beneath the fill materials, the soil appears to be natural slope wash material from higher elevations but may be alluvial in origin. This soil consisted of loose to medium dense silty sand with occasional cobble to small boulder-sized rock fragments. Beneath this soil layer is a granitic bedrock layer. No groundwater springs or seepage were observed. From a soil and foundation engineering standpoint, it is the opinion of the Geotechnical Engineer that the proposed residence can be constructed as proposed provided the recommendations contained in their report are incorporated into the design and construction of the project. The Geotech recommends periodic inspections and states that inspection reports will be provided to the City of Ashland at the completion of the project. The grading, retaining wall design, drainage an erosion control plans for the site development have been reviewed and designed in accordance with the geotechnical expert's recommendations for the site. A letter from the project Geotech regarding his review and approval of the project plans has been submitted with the application. See attachments. No cut slopes will be created that are not filled or retained through the construction of the structure or the rear (east) retaining wall. No cut slopes will be left exposed. The cut for the basement will be retained with the structures basement foundation walls. No exposed cut slopes will remain that would require revegetation. No fill slopes exceeding 20 feet are proposed. All fill areas are proposed to be retained. The utilities are not being installed on fill slopes. The water and electricity service the property from Granite Street, this will be retained. The storm water drainage is proposed to be directed to Nutley Street and the sanitary sewer will be directed to Nutley Street and connect to the system on Winburn Way. None of these areas are fill slopes. 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. A performance bond will be provided for 120 percent of the cost of the erosion control plan and landscape plan installation. Page 9 of 20 The final inspection report completed by the geotechnical expert will be provided prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy. Storm drainage created from the new and relocated structures will collected on site and be piped to Nutley Street. TREES: See the attached Tree Inventory / Protection Plan (PL 1.0) completed by Kerry KenCairn, Landscape Architect in conjunction with the review of the trees detailed in the arborist report provided by Willie Gingg from Southern Oregon Tree Care. None of the trees proposed for removal are on slopes of more than 25 percent. i The site layout including utility installation are in the areas of least disturbance and will not have negative impacts on the preserved trees. The site design is specifically to allow for the retention of the large Coast Redwood trees on the subject property and just to the south of the site on the City of Ashland Parks Dept. property. No grading, stripping, storage of materials or construction debris are permitted within the tree protection zone. The location of the residence, the proposed foundation construction methods and the driveway location are in response to the site topography and the locations of the trees. The trees proposed for removal are within the proposed building footprint, or will be negatively impacted by proposed construction to a degree that they will not survive. Additionally, the oak tree near Granite Street is in a state of decline and the arborist recommends its removal. A building envelope has not been provided on the site. The lot was created in 1998. The subject property is within the Skidmore Academy Historic District and is not subject to the building design standards. The foundation will be designed by an engineer. The engineered foundation will be provided with the building permit set. The lot is pre-existing and is not proposed to be modified through lot line adjustment. 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 proposed site development has considered the potential hazards that the development may create and the proposed erosion control, the preservation of the large trees, the retention of all areas of fill and/or cut and the maintenance of the erosion control landscaping post development mitigate 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 Page 10 of 20 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 within the existing "hole" on the site that surrounds the existing residence on two and a half sides. In order to get a structure up and out of the hole and place the residence at the same grade as Granite Street, fill material will be necessary in some locations on the site and cut slopes on other portions of the site. As proposed, all cut and fill locations on the site will be retained. Additionally, the proposed site development preserves the largest of the sites trees. The trees provide an added measure of erosion control to protect the surrounding area from any adverse impacts. C. Site Development and Design Standards. The proposal complies with the applicable Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4, except as provided by subsection E, below. 18.4.2.030 Multi-Family Residential Development Careful design considerations have been made to assure that the development is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. For example, the use of earth tone colors and wood siding will blend a development into an area 1. Building Orientation to Street. Dwelling units shall have their primary orientation toward a street. Where residential buildings are located within 20 feet of a street, they shall have a primacy entrance opening toward the street and connected to the right-of-way via an approved walkway. The proposed single family residence has a recessed front door accessed from the front porch. The proposed single family residence is setback nine feet to the front porch. The front fagade of the residence is 15 feet from the front property line. A walkway is provided from the residence to Granite Street. The proposed accessory residential unit (ARU) is oriented towards Nutley Street. The front door of the ARU is parallel to Nutley Street. Due to a private tax lot, separating Nutley Street from the property, the ARU cannot have a direct walkway to the street but will share the driveway from Nutley where there is a five foot wide public sidewalk.` 2. Limitation on Parking Between Primary Entrance and Street. Automobile circulation or off- street parking is not allowed between the building and the street. Parking areas shall be located behind buildings, or on one or both sides. The proposed parking for the single-family residence is within the two-vehicle garage that is attached to the north side of the residence. The ARU is a 1,000-square foot, one-bedroom unit which requires (1.5 parking space) or two parking spaces. One space is provided accessed via the driveway from Nutley Street and is on the north side of the ARU, not between the building and the street. The other space is requested as an on-street parking credit. The site currently has no on-site parking and only has on-street parking. The proposal will provide for three of the required Page 11 of 20 three and one half parking spaces on site, which brings the site closer to compliance with the standards that what is occurring presently. 3. Build-to Line. Where a new building is proposed in a zone that requires a build-to line or maximum front setback yard, except as otherwise required for clear vision at intersections, the building shall comply with the build-to line standard. The proposed single family residence is setback from Granite Street in accordance with the minimum setbacks in the zone. The unenclosed front porch is setback nine feet, the front of the single-family residence is setback 15 feet and the garage is setback 20 feet. The ARU complies with the minimum rear and side yard setbacks in the zone. D. Garages. 1. Alleys and Shared Drives. Where a lot abuts a rear or side alley, or a shared driveway, including flag drives, the garage or carport opening(s) for that dwelling shall orient to the alley or shared drive, as applicable, and not a street. The garage for the single-family residence is accessible from the public street. There is a shared driveway at the rear of the property approximately 100 feet from the single-family residence and approximately 20 feet below Granite Street. The proposed garage is recessed behind the fagade of the residence. Though not common on this block of Granite Street, there are other examples of front loading garages on Granite Street. The proposed garage door will be "cottage style" to minimize the mass of a two-vehicle garage door. The ARU will utilize Nutley Street and the shared driveway access for the single vehicle parking space. 2. Setback for Garage Opening Facing Street. The minimum setback for a garage (or carport) opening facing a street is 20 feet. This provision does not apply to alleys. The proposed garage complies with the minimum setback for garages in the zone. E. Building Materials. Building materials and paint colors should be compatible with the surrounding area. Very bright primary or neon-type paint colors, which attract attention to the building or use, are unacceptable. Neutral, earth tone colors found in the surrounding area will be utilized as the color scheme. F. Streetscape. One street tree chosen from the street tree list shall be placed for each 30 feet of frontage for that portion of the development fronting the street pursuant to subsection 18.4.4.030.E. One street tree is proposed for the frontage of the property, the lot is 57 feet wide and to comply with spacing standards for proximity to hardscape, there is room for one street tree. Due to the presence of overhead powerlines, the street tree will be of smaller stature to stay below the lines. G. Landscaping and Recycle/Refuse Disposal Areas. Landscaping and recycle/refuse disposal Page 12 of 20 areas shall be provided pursuant to chapter 18.4.4. A trash/recycle enclosure area for the single-family residence is proposed adjacent to the garage. The ARU trash I recycle enclosure area will be adjacent to the structure. In both cases the trash / recycle area will be screened from the right-of-way. i H. Open Space. Residential developments that are subject to the provisions of this chapter shall conform to all of the following standards. There is 672 square feet of open space provided on the property. The open spaces consist of the deck, the front porch and a small outdoor area to the east of the proposed ARU. The area is more than the required eight percent of the lot area shall be dedicated to open space for recreational use by the property owner and tenant. 4. Play Areas. Play areas for children are required for projects of greater than 20 units that are designed to include families. Play areas are eligible for open space., No play area is proposed. r F 18.4.2.050 Historic District Development B. Historic District Design Standards. The property has been occupied by a very small bungalow that is proposed to be preserved as part of the proposal. The property is last residential lot on the west side of Granite Street and the lot to the east and south are part of Lithia Park and are vacant of structures for comparison purposes as directed in the municipal code. The properties to the north and east are developed with single family residences. This portion (properties within 200 feet of the property) of Granite Street has an eclectic development pattern and no identifiable style or development pattern. Though the lot should be considered transitional, the proposed residence and the preservation of the bungalow is compatible with the design esthetic found in the vicinity. Height: The Granite Street fagade of the residence is similar in height as the existing structures in the vicinity. The proposed front fagade height is 21 feet, 8-inches. The structures to the south are higher due to the site topography. Scale: The scale of the proposed ARU is an allowed size of ARU's in the single-family zone. The residence is a similar scale to the other eclectic architecture found in the immediate vicinity. Massing: Through the incorporation of various gables facing the street, the recessed garage, the recessed entrance, the porch columns, and the provision of cantilevering, the massing of the proposed residence is reduced and similar to the residences in the vicinity. Page 13 of 20 Setback: The proposed recessed garage at 20 feet from the front property line, the front facade at 15 feet and the front porch setback nine feet and compliance with side yard setbacks, the proposed setback is similar to residences in the vicinity. i Roof: The proposed structure and the bungalow both have lower pitch, gable roofs. These are the predominate roof form in the vicinity. Rhythm of Openings: The proposed single family residence and the bungalow both have a consistent rhythm of openings found on residential structures in the vicinity. The proposed garage facing the street is not a common feature on Granite Street but is not completely unfounded. Additionally, the carriage style door is proposed to minimize the presence of the garage. Base or Platform: The proposed residence has a partially exposed basement that is visible above the grade. The exposed base provides a strong anchor to the ground. Form: The form of both the single-family residence and the ARU are traditional residential forms. The form of the bungalow will not be altered with the relocation of the structure. The addition of the deck and the exterior stair will not have a negative impact on the form of the ARU. The form of the single-family residence is traditional with elements of craftsman, and American bungalow. Entrances: Both structures have entrances that face the public street. Both structures have covered entrances to enhance their presence. Imitation: The proposed single family home has elements of traditional American bungalow and craftsman styles. There are a variety of housing styles in the vicinity. The home intentionally, is not one specific architectural style to avoid looking like an imitation and is a melding of the various styles that is clearly construction from our time but not an overly contemporary or modern design. Garage Placement: Due to the site topography and the location of a city owned tax lot between the subject property and Nutley Street, the side street, the garage for the primary residence is accessed from Granite Street. The proposed garage is setback from the front property line by 20- feet. A large front porch is proposed to provide symmetry to the structure and de-emphasize the presence of the garage. C. Rehabilitation Standards for Existing Buildings and Additions. The bungalow is proposed to be relocated to the lower portion of the property. The bungalow will become the accessory residential unit to the proposed single family residence. a. Historic architectural styles and associated features shall not be replicated in new additions or associated buildings. Page 14 of 20 ~i Historic architectural styles and associated features are referenced with the proposed exposed foundation for the lower level, adds a contemporary element. b. Original architectural features shall be restored as much as possible, when those features can be documented. The bungalow is virtually the same as the photos shown when Johnny Gruelle stayed in the "guest cottage" of 108 Granite Street. c. Replacement finishes on exterior walls of historic buildings shall match the original finish. Exterior finishes on new additions to historic buildings shall be compatible with, but not replicate, the finish of the historic building. The finish of the "new" exterior walls will be concrete block. Similar to the existing exposed basement walls, the lower level is not a basement per the definition similar to the existing presence with a exposed base that is larger than a typical foundation. d. Diagonal and vertical siding shall be avoided on new additions or on historic buildings except in those instances where it was used as the original siding. New siding is not proposed. e. Exterior wall colors on new additions shall match those of the historic building. The new exposed foundation will be similar in color as the historic structure. The color may be a darker shade of the historic structure or a shade of grey, if the block is painted. f. Imitative materials including but not limited to asphalt siding, wood textured aluminum siding, and artificial stone shall be avoided. No imitative materials are proposed. g. Replacement windows in historic buildings shall match the original windows. Windows in new additions shall be compatible in proportion, shape and size, but not replicate original windows in the historic building. New windows are proposed in the lower level. Their size is required to meet egress codes. h. Reconstructed roofs on historic buildings shall match the pitch and form of the original roof. Roofs on new additions shall match the pitch and form of the historic building, and shall be attached at a different height so the addition can be clearly differentiated from the historic building. Shed roofs are acceptable for one-story rear additions. No new roofs are proposed. If the roof requires removal for structural relocation, it will be reconstructed matching the pitch and form of the original roof. i. Asphalt or composition shingle roofs are preferred. Asphalt shingles which match the original roof material in color and texture are acceptable. Wood shake, wood shingle, tile, and metal roofs shall be avoided. Page 15 of 20 i4 Composition roofing is proposed on the new residence. If the roofing material is modified on the bungalow, composition roofing will be used as the replacement. j. New porches or entries shall be compatible with, but not replicate, the historic character of the building. A small shed roof exists over the front door. This will be reconstructed in the same fashion as existing. k. New detached buildings shall be compatible with the associated historic building and shall conform to the above standards. No other detached buildings are proposed on the property. The findings for the new single family residence are provided on the previous pages. D. 00) Facilities. The proposal complies with the applicable standards in section 18.4.6Public Facilities, and that adequate capacity) of Cite facilities for mater, sewer, electricity; urban storm drainage, paved access to and throughout the property, and adequate transportation can and Neill be provided to the subject property. Adequate capacity of City facilities exists to serve the single-family residence and the ARU. The proposed residence and the relocated ARU will be served by existing and newly extended services. New sanitary sewer services are proposed to be extended from the property, towards Nutley Street through the easement crossing the Parks Dept. property and then down to Winburn Way. The storm sewer will be collected on site and directed toward the approved system on Nutley Street. The water for the exists in Granite Street and will continue to serve the property. Granite Street along the frontage of the property is improved with curb, gutter and a curbside sidewalk. Nutley Street is improved with curb, gutter and curbside sidewalk. E. Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards. The approval authority may approve exceptions to the Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4 if the circumstances in either subsection I or 2, below, are found to exist. 1. There is a demonstrable d f cult) meeting the specific requirements of the Site Development and Design Standards due to a unique or unusual aspect of an existing structure or the proposed use of a site; and approval of the exception will not substantially negatively impact adjacent properties; and approval of the exception is consistent With the stated pu7pose of the Site Development and Design; and the exception requested is the minimimn which would alleviate the d fculty.; or The proposal includes a request to reduce the eight foot buffer between the parking space and the ARU and a reduction in the five-foot buffer required between the parking space and the adjacent property. The parking space will be six feet away from the ARU and three feet from the adjacent property line. The requested buffer reductions are to allow for the preservation of the bungalow as an ARU, allows for a parking space with adequate back-up out on-to Nutley Street. The lot is narrow, has numerous trees proposed for preservation and topographical constraints that limit the areas of development. The exception request will not have any impacts on adjacent properties or adjacent property structures. The floor plan for the ARU shows a small entry area (bedroom egress) and a bathroom on the end of the ARU Page 16 of 20 nearest the parking space on the lower level and on the upper level, the kitchen is located on the parking space side of the ARU. This limits the impact to the ARU because the automobile noise, exhaust and headlight glare will be concentrated on portions of the residence that will be least noticeable to a tenant. Additionally, the automobile utilizing the parking space is for the tenant of the ARU and in most circumstances, the tenant will not be in the unit when they are in their vehicle entering, existing or parking on the site. I 18.4.8.040. Solar Setback Standard Exception: i. The exception does not preclude the reasonable use of solar energy (i.e., passive and active solar energy systems) on the site by future habitable buildings. The proposed residence will shade the side hillside of the adjacent property to the north that consists of side yard lawn and shrubbery. The existing residence as 108 Granite Street exists and the solar shadow does not shade the structure. ii. The exception does not diminish any substantial solar access which benefits a passive or active solar energy system used by a habitable structure on an adjacent lot. The proposed exception does not shadow the existing structure and does not diminish any access to passive or active solar energy systems used now or in the future on the adjacent lot. iii. There are unique or unusual circumstances that apply to this site which do not typically apply elsewhere. The property has significant areas of steep slope from east to west due to the embankment that is created by the fill used to build Granite Street that crosses the front of the property. The slope areas then cut back towards the west along the north property line forming a bowl on the property. The "bowl" is more than 20 feet deep from Granite Street down to the existing grade which even with fill to raise the grade eight- foot plate heights, a less than 5 Y21 12 pitch roof, the cross slope and the slope to the north create a unique site that is difficult to construct a structure that complies with historic district design standards and is compatible with the neighborhood. The preservation of the large redwoods that were planted by the owners of 108 Granite Street's grandfather pushes the proposed structure further to the north which into the area of the site that has a more substantial change in grade from Granite Street down than in the areas of the large trees. Additionally, the proposal reduces the amount of disturbance on the hillside slopes near the largest of the redwood. 18.5.5.080 Variance: A variance to exceed the maximum lot coverage in the zone of 45 percent is proposed to increase the lot coverage to 48 percent, a three -percent increase. 1. The variance is necessary because the subject code provision does not account for special or unique physical circumstances of the subject site, such as topography, natural features, adjacent development, or similar circumstances. A legal lot determination may be sufficient evidence of a hardship for purposes of approving a variance. The site is complex with the large, healthy, mature trees, the limited developable area, the existing shared gravel driveway access and the preservation of a historic contributing bungalow. The preservation of the Page 17 of 20 i bungalow and the necessary driveway access at the rear of the property triggers the need for the variance. The preservation of the small, yet culturally important structure is a special site feature that is also a unique physical characteristic of the site. 2. The variance is the minimum necessary to address the special or unique physical circumstances related to the subject site. The minimal request (48 percent) is the minimum necessary to allow for the preservation of the bungalow and to provide access and parking for the preserved structure. 3. The proposal's benefits will be greater than any negative impacts on the development of the adjacent uses and will further the purpose and intent of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan of the City. The proposal to retain a historic contributing structure, provide a parking space in order for the space to be used as an accessory residential unit providing historic preservation and provision of a small rental unit are greater that than the minimal impacts of the proposed excess lot coverage. 4. The need for the variance is not self-imposed by the applicant or property owner. For example, the variance request does not arise as result of a property line adjustment or land division approval previously granted to the applicant. The property owner has sought to purchase the triangle of property owned by the city of Ashland and has sought to purchase a 12 foot strip of land from the adjacent property owner at 108 Granite in order to increase the lot area to be similar as those in the vicinity. The majority of the lots in the area are much more than 7,500 square feet in area. The property owner also explored the idea of removal of the existing bungalow but found the structure too historically significant to remove from the property and from the historic inventory. B. In granting a variance, the approval authority may impose conditions similar to those provided for conditional uses to protect the best interests of the surrounding property and property owners, the neighborhood, or the City as a whole. In order to not increase site run-off, the areas that exceed the maximum lot coverage are in all respects permeable surfaces including decks, pavers, landscaping stone and gravel that allow for the natural percolation of rainwater into the soils. The types of surface treatments proposed will not require the piping of the run-off as there will not be any run-off from these surfaces and the surfaces will not increase storm sewer volumes. 18.5.7.040B. Tree Removal Permit. Though two trees are shown for removal, only one requires review because it is more than 18-inches in diameter at breast height. The Elm is shown as a removal and the two multi-stemmed hazelnut trees are shown as left as is but not have tree protection fencing installed. This is because the trees are filled with sucker growth, have been previous topped and are in poor condition. These trees provide a good screen of the proposed ARU to Nutley Street and the property owner seeks to retain them but Page 18 of 20 acknowledges they may be in the way of the development thus no fencing proposed. These trees are less than 18-inches DBH and do not require a tree removal permit. 2. Tree That is Not a Hazard. 1. 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 18.10. The tree proposed for removal allows for the construction of a new single family residence while preserving the most substantial and healthiest of the trees on the site. 2. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks. There is one oak tree proposed for removal. Per the arborist report the tree is in a state of decline and should be removed. The removal will not have significant impact on erosion, soil stability, protection of adjacent trees and is not part of a wind-break. 3. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes, canopies, and species diversity within 200 feet of the subject property. The City shall grant an exception to this criterion when alternatives to the tree removal have been considered and no reasonable alternative exists to allow the property to be used as permitted in the zone. The removal will not have significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes, canopies, or species diversity within 200 feet of the subject property. The proximity to Lithia Park and forested lands surround the park demonstrates that there are adequate tree densities, sizes, canopies and species diversity. 4. Nothing in this section shall require that the residential density to be reduced below the permitted density allowed by the zone. In making this determination, the City may consider alternative site plans or placement of structures of alternate landscaping designs that would lessen the impact on trees, so long as the alternatives continue to comply with the other provisions of this ordinance. The density of the property is one, single family residence with the option of a site design review for an ARU. The proposed tree removal allows for the construction of a single-family residence. 5. 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. One tree is proposed for removal that are subject to the requirements of this chapter. Due to the sites, numerous large stature trees, it is proposed that the tree removed will be mitigated for off-site. This is because the small property has many substantially sized trees and the site is very shady due to the presence of the large trees are to be preserved are distributed throughout the site. Page 19 of 20 t I Attachments: 1) ARBORIST REPORT 2) GEOTECHNICAL REPORT 3) TOPOGRAPHICAL SURVEY 4) DRIVEWAY EASEMENT 5) HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS 6) SITE PLAN ® VICINITY MAP 7) SHEET 2 MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN 8) SHEET 3 BASEMENT FLOOR PLAN 9) SHEET 4 WEST & SOUTH ELEVATIONS 10) SHEET 5 EAST & NORTH ELEVATIONS 11) SHEET 6 RELOCATED HISTORIC BUNGALOW 12) SHEET 7 SOLAR SETBACK SHADOW PLAN 13) SHEET L.0 COVER 14) SHEET 1-1.0 EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS 15) SHEET L1.1 TREE PROTECTION AND REMOVAL PLAN 16) SHEET L2.0 GRADING 17) SHEET L2.1 CUT/ FILL 18) SHEET L2.2 EROSION CONTROL i Page 20 of 20 I 541-772-0404 Sotreecare.com PO Box 5140 Central Point, OR 97502 114 GRANITE ST. REDWOOD PRESERVATION PLAN Prepared For Mardi Mastain By Willie Gingg ASCA Consulting Arborist ISA Board Certified Master Arborist #PN5564B October 5t" 2015 114 Granite Street Redwood ...;port 1 SUMMARY Ms. Mastain contacted me September 8th 2015 regarding some trees near her home. She was planning to build a new home and was concerned with the impact the construction would have on several large redwood trees. She requested a report that would be used as guidelines for the construction crews. INTRODUCTION Background I was contacted by Ms. Mastain on September 8th regarding several large trees on her property, the three most important were coast redwood (Sequoia sempervirens). Her existing home was built in 1920 and she is planning to build a new home that will be more than double the square footage. This home will be well inside the critical root zone (CRZ) of the tree so minimizing construction damage to these trees is very important. Assignment My assignment from Ms. Mastain was: • Review report from Marquess & Associates Inc. and address any tree concerns in the report. • Develop a tree preservation plan that should be followed during the construction process. Limits of Report The contents of this report are limited to the information provided to me as well as my observations on the date of my last site visit, October 2na 2015. OBSERVATIONS Tree Description These trees are large for the species and our area, east to west the trees are number one, 49 inches diameter breast height (DBH), number two 44 inches DBH and number three bifurcates just above the ground, each trunk being 22 and 25 inches DBH. The redwoods are located along the south side of the existing and proposed home sites. Trees two and three are within six and a half feet of the proposed structure. Tree number one is to have part of the new home on two sides, about nine feet to the north of the tree and about 14 feet to the west. This area is steep and the plans show a deck surrounding the tree. This tree is the largest both in diameter and in height and has a western screech owl living in a nesting box affixed about 20 feet off the ground. There is also a Siberian elm (Ulmus pumilato) be saved near Granite St. Willie Gingg, Consulting Arborist October 5th 2015 114 Granite street Redwood' --port Home Description It is my understanding that the old home will be moved to an area at the east end of the property. Once this has happened, a new home will be built with a pier foundation. This is a much more expensive type of building than a home with standard footings. The reason this method of building was chosen is because it will be significantly lesser impact. This type of construction, as explained to me, will require drilling holes in the ground every six to 8 feet around the exterior edge of the new home to support the home off of the ground. There is to be a basement area of the home that will be partially underground. This basement will incorporate the existing basement at the southwest corner and wrap around the entire north side of the home. Ms. Mastain mentioned that the northeast corner of the basement would have a crawl space under it. She mentioned as well they intended the basement would be under the deck area as well but this would require significant excavation in the CRZ. Geotechnical Report In reading the Geotechnical report it mentions the basement would only be along the west side of the home. It also emphasizes minimizing excavations due to the importance of the trees. On page four of the Marquess report dated September 24th 2015, the report states in the first lines that topsoil and vegetation should be stripped out of the building area. Line item two recommends then "excavated down to desired grades" and then after "recompaction of the subgrades, the excavations may be backfilled with structural fill". The piers to be drilled and poured are to be at least 18 inches diameter, likely the holes to be excavated will need to be at least two feet diameter to allow working room. The hole depths are estimated to be 7.5 feet to 10.5 feet deep, possibly deeper. Under the basement the recommendation is to have at least a foot of mechanically tamped rock over textile. Within this rock is to be installed a grid of drain pipes. DISCUSSION These trees have relatively good tolerance to construction damage (Matheny and Clark 1998). That said, the CRZ on these trees are as follows; tree number one 37 feet radius, tree number two 33 feet and tree number three 35 feet. This is calculated by multiplying the DBH by.75 based on the previously noted book, factors are size of tree, species and tree age (young, mature or overmature). The proximity of the proposed home to these trees is of great concern; these trees will be significantly impacted by the construction process. Minimizing the impact will be difficult due to the layout of the construction site but important to give the trees the best chance of survival. Typically we would recommend temporary fencing be installed all the way around these trees during the entire construction project, I don't believe this will be possible but fencing should be installed around the south side of these trees at the least extending about 30 feet to the south. Inside this fenced area should be off limits to all construction activities such as equipment, excavation, tool washing, storage etc. If equipment access becomes necessary, the project arborist should be consulted with enough advanced notice to examine the site, make recommendations and observe activity while fence is opened. Willie Gingg, Consulting Arborist October 5th 2015 114 Granite street Redwood ~..;Port The fenced area shall be irrigated weekly or twice weekly in hot weather, to maintain soil moisture of at least 50% unless sufficient rainfall occurs to maintain this moisture content. In the report by Marquess & Associates Inc, they recommend removing all topsoil and vegetation in the construction site. This will remove approximately half of the root systems from these three trees nearly guaranteeing their decline to the point of death. If this is to happen the project should just continue with conventional foundations as the damage will be essentially the same. Most trees have their entire root system in the top three feet of soil (Harris, Clark, Matheny 2004). Prior to the piers being drilled, and knowing the trees shouldn't have roots much deeper than the three foot mark but not knowing where the major structural roots are, the first three to four feet of each hole should be excavated with hand tools. It is my understanding that the spacing of the piers is somewhat negotiable in the six to eight feet apart range. Excavating with hand tools will allow the laborer to expose larger roots and move the hole accordingly or root prune correctly as directed below. I do have some concerns as to the drains installed under the basement. I feel this is acceptable under the existing basement as well as the portion below the proposed garage area. If the basement is indeed to extend further to the east, it would not be good for the trees to excavate and compact this area. In discussions with Ms. Mastain, the basement was to be under the deck; this would require significant excavation and hence, root loss. As well, she mentioned the basement would be under the northeast corner of the home as well and that that portion of the basement would have a crawl space beneath it. The report by Marquess suggests the basement will only be on the west side of the property. This would be the best for the trees but if the basement is to be larger and can be supported on the piers, I believe this to be acceptable. The Siberian elm is very tolerant of fill soils, root pruning and soil moisture variances (Matheny and Clark 1998). CONCLUSIONS In conclusion, I think this project, with help from each contractor involved, can be done in such a way as to save the trees. Ms. Mastain is very determined to save these trees and has taken steps to already ensure their survival with the least impact during this project. These trees appear to be in very good health. Even though they are not in an ideal climate regionally, the micro climate appears to suit them fairly well; this should help them deal with the damages to come. I could find no restrictions on the western screech owl but there may be some impacts on construction timing. RECCOMENDATIONS I have many recommendations for this project and they are as follows, ® Communicate clearly with all of your contractors, emphasizing up front the importance of these trees, especially to the general contractor. The general contractor should in turn communicate to all of their sub-contractors so they can bid accordingly. ® Install a temporary fence from tree number 3, west to within one foot of the sidewalk on Granite St., continuing south for 30 feet and turning east to the vegetation growing Willie Gingg, Consulting Arborist October 5th 2015 114 Granite street Redwoodk port along the hillside. It would be a good idea to extend 2 more fence panels closely along A the vegetation to hinder people's desire to skirt around the fencing into the CRZ. ® Bring all underground utilities in from Granite Street, to minimize damages to roots from the redwood trees. ® Consult with appropriate contractors regarding the request to remove topsoil and compact through the entire building area. ® Consult with the appropriate contractors regarding the request to excavate and compact under the north east portion of the basement. ® Discuss as well the impact to the structure of possibly irrigating this area monthly through the hot summer months for the next three years to help the trees recover and adapt to the new changes. ® Dig the first three to four feet of each pier hole with hand tools. Any roots over %2 inch diameter and up to two inches diameter should be cut back near the edge of the hole after making sure there are no roots larger than four inches diameter. If roots are encountered over four inches diameter and the hole cannot be moved, the project arborist should be notified to make the determination whether or not it can be cut and where to cut. No more than two roots over two inches diameter may be cut per hole without approval by the project arborist. ® Irrigate the fenced area weekly in normal weather to maintain at least 50% soil moisture. Twice weekly in temperatures over 95 degrees. ® Avoid contact with the Siberian elm, do not excavate within six feet of the trunk. If large roots are encountered outside of this area they should be cut cleanly with hand tools. Any roots over six inches diameter on this tree should have approval by project arborist prior to cutting. ® Any heavy trucks entering the construction zone should lay down pressure reducing mats to minimize soil compaction as much as possible. If it is possible to keep heavy trucks on the roadways that is to be preferred. ® An I.S.A. Certified Arborist will be available from our company to consult at standard rates with reasonable notification. Feel free to contact us with any questions regarding this project or for further clarification. Willie Gingg, Consulting Arborist October 5 t" 2015 114 Granite street Redwood,. )ort GLOSSARY Bifurcate- A point where many trees divide into two separate trunks. CRZ- A portion of the root system that is the minimum necessary to maintain vitality or stability of the tree. DBH- Diameter at breast height. The diameter of a tree measured at four and one-half (4.5) feet above the ground. BIBLIOGRAPHY • Trees and Development: A Technical Guide to Preservation of Trees During Land Development - Nelda Matheny & James R. Clark - c. by ISA 1998 • Arboriculture: Integrated Management of Landscape Trees, Shrubs, and Vines (Fourth Edition)- Richard W. Harris, James R. Clark & Nelda Matheny c. by Pearson Education Inc. 2004 I Willie Gingg, Consulting Arborist October 5t" 2015 114 Granite street Redwoo6 port Appendix +~p' ~s!yp~ IAC+ .,w I ~ I+ .y - / 1 s P.~3}mil wIaK r 40, 74. Showing existing home and the three redwoods trees. Numbered from right to left, 1-3. Willie Gingg, Consulting Arborist October 5th 2015 114 Granite street Redwood port Appendix _ 1 ,1 I t , 1 I~- ` 3 1 l~j 1 1 i , . r l~~~rq 4 ` ~ Y~ i I Showing owl nest in tree number one and northeast corner of building site. Willie Gingg, Consulting Arborist October 5th 2015 114 Granite street Redwood ort A I Appendix 4~ t Tz- NO- Showing tree number one (by red arrow) and approximate building location (green lines). Looking east from proposed garage area. Willie Gingg, Consulting Arborist October 5th 2015 114 Granite street Redwoo :port ASSUMPTIONS AN LIMITING CONDITIONS 1) Care has been taken to obtain all information from reliable sources. All data has been verified insofar as possible considering time constraints; however, the arborist can neither guarantee nor be responsible for the accuracy of the information provided by others. 2) Loss or alteration of any part of this report invalidates any the entire report 3) Possession of this report or a copy thereof does not imply right of publication or use for any purpose by anyone other than whom it is addressed, without the prior expressed written or verbal consent of the consulting arborist 4) The consulting arborist shall not be required to give testimony or to attend court by reason of this report unless subsequent contractual arrangements are made, including payment of an additional fee for such services to be agreed upon before that time. 5) The photos in this report are intended as visual aids only. I Willie Gingg, Consulting Arborist October 5th 2015 114 Granite street Redwood i ort i 1 I CERTIFICATION PERFORMANCE I, Willie Gingg, certify; ® That I have personally inspected the trees referred to in this report, and have stated my findings accurately. ® That I have no personal interest or bias in with respect to the parties involved. ® That the analysis, opinions and conclusions stated herein are my own and are based on current scientific procedures and facts. ® That my compensation is not contingent on upon reporting of a predetermined conclusion that favors the cause of the client or any other party, nor upon the results of the assessment, the attainment of stipulated results, or the occurrence of any subsequent events. ® That my analysis, opinions and conclusions were developed and this report has been prepared according to commonly accepted arboricultural practices. ® That no one provided significant professional assistance to the consultant, except as indicated within this report. ® 1 further certify that I am a member of the American Society of Arborists and I am an International Society of Arboriculture Board Certified Master Arborist. Signed Dated b I Willie Gingg, Consulting Arborist October 5th 2015 t_ _ d 6 October 19, 2015 1 was contacted in September of 2015 by Mardi Mastain regarding a big leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), a black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia) and an Oregon white oak (Quercus garryana) located at 114 Granite St. in Ashland Oregon. She requested that I write a report as part of her permit process to remove the trees for a building project she intends to do at this location. I visited the site on October 2nd 2015 and observed a mature oak tree that is showing signs of decline. This observation of decline was based off the canopy being very sparse for this species. The tree was 29 inches DBH (diameter at breast height). The tree is located inside the foot print of her proposed home. The home is the reason for this removal process. There is a big leaf maple in the front that is not inside the proposed home but will be impacted significantly in the construction process. This tree is 28 inches DBH. This species is intolerant of fill soils (Matheny & Clark 1998) and will likely have significant fill around it to provide for the driveway and garage that are to be next to the tree. The final tree is the locust; this tree is struggling as well. There are large, dead tops protruding out of its canopy suggesting it is dying or at least had significant root damage, possibly from when the sidewalk nearby was constructed. This property is located on a hillside limiting construction options and Ms. Mastain is planning to preserve many other large trees at great additional expense. I don't believe these removals will have a significant impact to tree canopy densities as the oak and locust are already declining significantly, the maple will not likely survive much change of grades around it and the fact that there are 3 large redwoods, a Siberian elm and many other smaller trees on her lot to be preserved. I prepared a tree preservation plan for Ms. Mastain earlier this month that I believe can be made available if necessary to see the steps she plans to take to preserve these remaining trees. Feel free to contact us with any questions regarding this project. Willie Gingg Date i i `r`OUY'l ~ _;"dk~~ II~~`kiIr 0'~~gtl~K(, fly, Awl ,SI,~k( t`7 ~l i & A ,S 5 U t_ I : k. 5~ Iii P 541772-7115 1541-779 40/9 1120 FAST IAC:1, SON I'U I C)x 06 N41 DI ORD, 01197501 EMAIL: ink, ' I)):' quess-con1 WEB: w~~w.marqu~ .ti.cinu i September 24, 2015 - Mardi Mastain 114 Granite Street Ashland, Oregon 97520 RE: GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT PROPOSED RESIDENCE 114 GRANITE STREET ASHLAND,OREGON MAI JOB NO. 15-1164 Dear Ms. Mastain: Introduction We are pleased to present our geotechnical investigation report for your proposed new residence at 114 Granite Street in Ashland, Oregon. The purpose of this investigation was to determine the prevailing subsurface conditions at the site and develop earthwork and foundation engineering recommendations for the development. The proposed residence is shown on the attached Site Plan, Drawing 1. The proposed residence will be a single-story structure with a partial, daylight basement. The basement level is expected to be established at about elevation 1945 and is expected to underlie only the western (Granite Street side) half of the residence. Excavations and construction of new foundations will be limited as much as possible around and adjacent to the existing large trees at the property. The existing residence at the site is also a single story structure over a basement established at about elevation 1945. The existing residence will be demolished as part of the proposed construction. There are numerous significant trees near the proposed new house and we understand that all but one will be saved as part of the construction activities This report has been prepared for the specific use of Mardi Mastain and her designers in accordance with generally accepted soil and foundation engineering principles and practices. No other warranty, either expressed or implied, is made. In the event that any substantial changes in the nature, design, or locations of the structures are planned, the conclusions and recommendations of this report shall not be considered valid unless such changes are reviewed and the conclusions of this report are modified or verified in writing, Mardi Mastain September 24, 2015 Page 2 of 8 It should be recognized that changes in the site conditions may occur with the passage of time due to environmental processes or man-made changes. Furthermore, building code or state of the practice changes may require modifications in the recommendations presented herein. Accordingly, the recommendations of this report should not be relied on beyond a period of three years without being reviewed by a geotechnical engineer. j Method of Investigation Two exploratory test pits were excavated on September 8, 2015, in the new home location with a rubber-tire backhoe. The locations of the test pits are approximately shown on the Site Plan and are based on interpolation of the existing features at the site. A key describing the soil classification system and soil consistency terms used in this report is presented on Drawing 2. Logs of the exploratory test pits are presented on Drawing 3. Site Conditions A. Surface The property is a trapezoidal-shaped lot that is located adjacent to the City-owned corner parcel at the northeast intersection of Granite Street on the west and Nutley Street on the south. The property is presently occupied by an older home (1940's to 1950's vintage) and numerous trees. The property is bounded on the north by a residential property. The ground surface slopes steeply to the east with an average gradient of 20 percent across the proposed building pad. As stated previously, the basement of the existing home lies at about elevation 1945. The curb grade of Granite Street lies at about elevation 1956. The ground surface within the new homesite area is a mix of gently sloping lawn areas, low rock armor walls, and thickly vegetated cutslopes and/or fillslopes. No significant signs of hillside instability were observed at the site. B. Subsurface Old Fill. Both test pits encountered old fill materials to a depth of 4' below existing grade. The old fill consisted of silty sand with occasional rock fragments and common roots. The roots were pervasive throughout the layer. Natural Silty Sand. This layer was encountered beneath the old fill materials in both test pits. This soil appears to be natural slopewash material from higher elevations but may be alluvial in origin. This soil was encountered to a depth of 8' below existing grade at Pit 1 and to a depth of 5.5' below existing grade at Pit 2. This soil consisted of loose to medium dense silty sand with occasional cobble to small boulder-sized rock fragments. Boulders. Boulders and cobbles were encountered in the test pits at depths of 8' in Pit 1 and 5.5' in Pit 2. The boulders and cobbles had a silty sand matrix and locally the silty sand also occurred Mardi Mastain September 24, 2015 Page 3 of 8 as scattered lenses. This deposit was difficult to excavate leading to practical excavation refusal at depths of 10.5' in Pit 1 and 7.5' in Pit 2. Granitic Bedrock. Decomposed granitic bedrock was encountered in Pit 1 at a depth of 9.5' below existing grade. Granitic bedrock was not encountered in Pit 2 even though we made a good effort to penetrate through the overlying boulder deposit (we believe granitic bedrock underlies the boulder deposit at Pit 2 as it did at Pit 1). C. Groundwater No free groundwater was observed in the test pits during excavation. Fluctuations in the groundwater level at the site may occur, however, because of variations in rainfall, temperature, runoff, irrigation, and other factors not evident at the time our observations were made and reported herein. Conclusions and Recommendations From a soil and foundation engineering standpoint, it is our opinion that the proposed residence can be constructed as proposed provided the recommendations contained in this report are incorporated into the design and construction of the project. Site Conditions. The test pits encountered 4' of old fill at the ground surface. It is reasonable to believe that all of the low areas within the proposed building pad are also comprised of old fill; however, this may not hold true to the higher areas within the proposed building pad. No groundwater was observed in the test pits during excavation. It is reasonable, however, to assume that groundwater would exist within the underlying boulder deposit at other times of the year. The foundation construction is severely constrained by the presence of many nearby large trees. Foundations. The proposed home construction and site conditions, notwithstanding the trees, are well suited for conventional footing foundations - the existing fill materials could be excavated from beneath footings and slabs, and the resulting excavations could be backfilled with structural fill to support new foundations. Instead, it appears that drilled pier foundations, or some other deep foundation method that minimizes excavations, are necessary for this project. We envision using drilled, straight-shaft, reinforced concrete piers designed to utilize both skin friction and end bearing to support the residence. Drilled pier foundations are substantially more difficult, time-consuming, and costly than footings and will require full-time field observation by our field representative during the drilling, cleaning, and concreting of the piers. The recommendations presented in the remainder of the report are contingent on our observation of the earthwork and subsurface conditions and building pad construction. Mardi Mastain September 24, 2015 Page 4 of 8 I A. Earthwork 1. Areas to be developed should be cleared of obstructions and vegetation and stripped of topsoil. Holes resulting from removing underground obstructions in areas to be improved should be cleared out and backfilled in accordance with the recommendations presented below. 2. After the building pad is cleared and stripped, the site should be excavated down to the desired grades. After the excavations are completed we should be called out to observe the subgrade conditions prior to placement of any structural fill or concrete forms. After observation and recompaction of the subgrades, the excavations may be backfilled with structural fill. 3. In general, subgrade soils should be recompacted prior to placing fill. If the soils are firm, excavated cleanly, and undisturbed by the excavation work, the soil engineer may waive the requirement for recompaction of subgrade. The recompaction should consist of moisture conditioning the soils to approximately three percent above optimum and compacting them to at least 95 percent relative compaction as determined by ASTM Test Method D698. Compaction should be performed using heavy equipment such as a self-propelled vibratory compactor. 4. In order to achieve satisfactory compaction in the subgrade and fill soils, it may be necessary to adjust the soil moisture content at the time of construction. Soils which are too dry will require the addition of water while scarification and aeration will be required for soils which are too wet. 5. High quality structural fill materials, such as 3/a"-0 or 4"-0 crushed rock, should be used beneath building footings and building slabs. On-site silty sand may be re- used as general fill except where special materials are required. 6. All fill should be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction as determined by ASTM Test Method D698. Fill material should be spread and compacted in lifts not exceeding eight inches in uncompacted thickness. The compaction of the fill, thickness of lifts, and control of the moisture content should be monitored and tested by our field representative. 7. Utility trenches should be backfilled with compacted fill placed in lifts not exceeding eight inches in uncompacted thickness, except thicker lifts may be used with the approval of the soil engineer provided satisfactory compaction is achieved. The trench backfill should be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction. Jetting of backfill to obtain compaction should not be permitted. 8. Grading and earthwork should be monitored and tested by our representative for conformance with the project plans/specifications and our recommendations. c Mardi Mastain September 24, 2015 Page 5 of 8 i This work includes site preparation, site excavation, selection of satisfactory fill j materials, and placement and compaction of the subgrades and fills. Sufficient notification prior to commencement of earthwork is essential to make certain that the work will be properly observed. B. Drilled Pier Foundations 1. The residence and any attached retaining walls should be supported on cast-in- place, straight shaft, drilled piers tied together with grade beams. The piers should have a minimum diameter of 18". 2. All piers should be drilled to refusal in the underlying boulder deposit, or better yet, into the underlying granitic bedrock. Where the boulders are fully penetrated, a minimum embedment of 2' into the granitic bedrock is acceptable. At the present time, drilling refusal is assumed to be at a depth of 10.5' at Pit 1 and 7.5' at Pit 2. Drilling refusal should be evaluated by our field representative at the time of drilling. Heavy duty pier drilling equipment and skilled operators should be used to drill the piers. The final actual lengths of the pier holes will depend on the subsurface conditions and the capabilities of the drilling rig. 3. Piers may be designed for an allowable end bearing capacity of 3000 psf for dead plus live loadings. Piers may also be designed for an allowable skin friction of 200 psf in the portion of the piers lying below the old fill materials (for practical purposes, the old fill materials should be assumed to be 4' thick everywhere). These allowable values may be increased by one-third for short term loading. All piers should be reinforced with at least four No. 4 bars, full length, tied in a cage. The grade beams should be wide enough to accommodate the pier cage bars. 4. Where piers must resist lateral loadings from retaining walls, or where grades fall away behind piers, lateral loads will develop on the piers. These lateral loads can be resisted by passive pressure equal to 100 pcf for a depth of 4' and 300 pcf below a depth of 4'. The piers should be considered non-constrained at the top unless they are locked in by a concrete slab or by an X-Y grid of grade beams. 5. The bottoms of the pier excavations should be relatively dry and absolutely free of loose material, such as loosened soil or fall-in, prior to pouring concrete. We envision that a vacuum truck will be required to clean the holes of loose material in order to create the best possible bearing surface on the boulders. (Truck access to the pier holes will be challenging and must be carefully planned.) Roots large enough to hinder rebar placement or concrete placement will need to be removed. With regards to the possible need for temporary casing of the holes, the sandy fill and natural soils will probably stand up well enough, unless there are thick and abundant roots or there is seeping groundwater. If substantial groundwater is encountered during drilling, it will need to be removed from the pier holes prior to concreting the holes. t Mardi Mastain September 24, 2015 Page 6 of 8 6. Foundation settlements are expected to be within tolerable limits for the proposed construction. Post-construction differential movements of the foundations are expected to be less than 3/4 inches over a horizontal distance of 50 feet. 7. The installation of the drilled pier foundations (drilling, cleaning, and concreting) should be performed under the full time observation of our field representative. C. Slabs-On-Grade 1. In general, all slabs should be underlain by at least 6" of compacted 3/a"-0 crushed rock. All weak soil encountered below the slab should be removed and replaced with structural fill such as well-compacted 3/a"-0 crushed rock or 4"-0 crushed rock. 2. The basement slab floor will be partially below grade, thus the basement slab should be underlain by an underlaab drainage system. This slab should be underlain by at least twelve inches of mechanically tamped, free-draining 3/a" crushed rock (no fines, no round rock) over non-woven, minimum 4 ounces per square yard, filter fabric over subgrade. Three-inch diameter perforated rigid PVC pipes should be placed within the free-draining crushed rock layer. The pipes should be placed flat on two inches of free-draining 3/a" crushed rock and form a grid system of interconnected underdrain pipes. The pipes should start 2' inside of the perimeter footings and be spaced no more than 10' apart in an X-Y pattern across the entire basement. The pipes should be plumbed to a solid pipe sloped at least 2 percent to drain downslope of the residence. The free-draining 3/a" crushed rock will act as a capillary moisture break to help decrease moisture through the slab. A waterproofing membrane should also be incorporated into the design to seal off the slab. 3. All slabs should be reinforced in accordance with the anticipated use and loading, but as a minimum, slabs should be reinforced with sufficient rebar or equal for temperature and shrinkage control. D. Retaining Walls 1. Retaining walls attached to the residence should be designed in accordance with our pier design recommendations. Retaining walls that are isolated from the residence may be supported on spread footings designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 1500 psf. All obviously weals or deleterious soils should be removed from beneath footing foundations. Unrestrained walls with level to gently sloping (less than 25 percent slopes) backfill surfaces should be designed to resist an equivalent fluid pressure of at least 40 pcf. Where restrained, walls with similar backslope conditions should be designed for an equivalent fluid pressure of 60 pcf with similar t t Mardi Mastain September 24, 2015 Page 7 of 8 backfill surfaces. These pressures do not account for any surcharge loadings or saturated backfills. Surcharge loadings and saturated backfills should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. 2. The preceding pressures assume that sufficient drainage is provided behind the walls to prevent the build-up of hydrostatic pressures from surface or subsurface water infiltration. Adequate drainage may be provided by means of 3/a" drain rock material enclosed in a filter fabric and a 4" diameter rigid perforated pipe placed at the base of the wall. The drainrock should extend up the walls to within one foot of the finished grade. The drain pipes should be tied into closed pipes that discharge downslope of the wall. 3. The backfill placed behind retaining walls should be fully granular and compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction using light compaction equipment. Interior walls should be thoroughly waterproofed and the waterproofing should be protected with protection boards or similar. E. Site Drainage 1. Positive surface gradients of at least five percent on porous surfaces and two percent on paved surfaces should be maintained away from the building so that surface water does not collect in the vicinity of the foundations. Water from roof downspouts should be collected into closed pipes that discharge the water in an approved manner downslope of the home. 2. A foundation drain should be placed adjacent to the perimeter building footings, where retaining wall backdrains are not required, to control moisture beneath the foundations. The perimeter drain should be set as low as practical to obtain maximum drainage control. F. Plan Review and Construction Observation 1. We recommend that we review the final development plans for the residence. We should also be retained to provide soil engineering monitoring and testing services during the grading, foundation installation, and subdrainage installation. This will provide us the opportunity for correlation of the soil conditions found in our investigation with those actually encountered in the field, and thus permit any necessary modifications in our recommendations resulting from changes in anticipated conditions. r S Mardi Mastain September 24, 2015 Page 8 of 8 Please contact this office if you have any questions regarding this report. PRVery truly yours, GIN 4,~ 16885 MARQUESS & ASSOCIATES, INC. OREGON SW @^~ Rick Swanson, P.E., G.E. Civil Engineer 16885 EXPIRES:630: ~ RS/ler Copies: Addressee (1), also by email Attachments: Site Plan, Drawing 1 Key to Boring and Pit Logs, Drawing 2 Logs of Pits 1-2, Drawing 3 I Sri i G i (II M1 ~ V Li ~t i ~ Q f G I i 1 5 'I I I I/ ~ (-T CC ~'7~ "tea' ~ I 1 gis C I i r ' 1 - z . V,t t-._ _ / J II I- t~el \ I 1~ Ili I ~ I - ' J of S Sd31S~ 30 'I O&M i W 4 PRIMARY DIVISIONS GROUP SECONDARY DIVISIONS SYMBOL J GRAVELS CLEAN Ow Well graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or GRAVELS no fines. MORE THAN HALF (LESS THAN Poorly graded grovels, or gravel-sand mixtures, little O ® ¢ N OF COARSE 5% FINES) GP or no fines. ® FRACTION IS GRAVEL CM Silty grovels, gravel-sand-silt mixtures, non- plastic fines. 0 v_ z U LARGER THAN WITH z o ¢z No. 4 SIEVE FINES Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures, Q J iE lastic fines. CD z w SANDS SACLEAN NDS SAN Well graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines. U ¢ MORE THAN HALF (LESS THAN U) 5% FINES) SP Poorly graded sands or gravelly sands, little or Q OF COARSE no fines. ® ix - FRACTION IS SANDS SM Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures, non-plastic fines U 00 SMALLER THAN WITH No. 4 SIEVE FINES SC Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines, J N SILTS AND CLAYS ML Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour, silty or U_ u~ cla a fine sands or clayey silts with slight plasticity. 5 U) ~3 LIQUID LIMIT IS CL Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly Lp = N LESS THAN 50% clays, sandy clays, silty clays, lean clays. z to ® OL Organic silts and organic silty clays of low plasticity. < J N SILTS AND CLAYS MH Inorganic silts, micaceous or did omaceous fine ¢ d sand or silt soils, elastic silts. U o H z LIQUID LIMIT I5 CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays. tZ GREATER THAN 50% Organic clays of medium to high plasticity, OH or anic silts. HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS Pt Peat and other highly organic soils. UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (ASTM D-2487) U.S. STANDARD SERIES SIEVE CLEAR SQUARE SIEVE OPENINGS 200 40 10 4 3/4" 3" 12" SILTS AND CLAYS SAND GRAVEL FINE MEDIUM COARSE FINE COARSE COBBLES BOULDERS GRAIN SIZES ANDS & GRAVELS BLOWS/FOOT SILTS & CLAYS STRENGTH BLOWS/FOOT VERY LOOSE 0 - 4 VERY SOFT 0 - 1/4 0 - 2 LOOSE 4 - 10 SOFT 1/4 - 1/2 2 - 4 MEDIUM DENSE 10 - 30 FIRM 1/2 - 1 4 - 8 STIFF 1 - 2 8 - 16 DENSE 30 - 50 VERY STIFF 2 - 4 16 - 32 VERY DENSE OVER 50 HARD OVER 4 OVER 32 RELATIVE DENSITY CONSISTENCY tNumber of blows of 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches to drive a 2 inch O.D. (1-3/8 inch I.D.) split spoon (ASTM 0-1586). #Unconfined compressive strength In tons/sq. ft. as determined by laboratory testing or approximated by the standard penetration test (ASTM D-1586 , pocket penetrometer, torvane, or visual observation. Fs41•nr7ns TO BORM AM Pff LOW DRAWING F s41-779.4079 1110 E1ST)ACKSON " e PO BOX 490 R i"DFORD, ORM01 I t r c wl aoe~ .ate u4 G aWte .Stmet Ashland Or on 7 ' I 1 At Jos tea ]5ll64 Dtuwrr gS 9z~' ~r~~ r I 1SSUC AATB Sept 2015 cmcm RS OP 3 DWGS TEST PIT 1 0 FILL. SILTY SAND (SM), dusky brown, loose, dry, thick roots In layers V- 20- 30. 4' 5' SILTY SAND (SM), gray-brown, loose to medium dense, dry to moist, 6' porous granular framework, occ'I cobbles/boulders 7' 8' 9' COBBLES and BOULDERS with matrix of silty sand, gray-brown, medium dense to dense, hard dig due to boulders, boulders up to 1.5' dic 10' GRANITIC bedrock, decomposed, orange-brown, very dense excavation Bottom of test pit = 10.5, practical excavation refusal at 10.5' deep due to boulders at 8' to 9.5' deep. TEST PIT 2 0 FILL. mixed SILTY SAND (SM), brown and dusky brown, loose to medium 1' dense, dry, scattered minor debris (glass and porcelain fragments, horseshoe) 2'- S. 4' 5, SILTY SAND (SM), gray-brown, medium dense, dry to moist 6' BOULDERS with matrix and lenses of silty sand, gray-brown, medium 7' dense to hard, boulders up to 2' dia Bottom of test pit = 7.5', practical excavation refusal at 7.5' deep due to boulders P 541-772-7115 i and 2 DrJ F 541.779.4079 L20 EkSr)/ICYMN PO B-490 i1fDFOBD,OR97501 111,4 ~-7 VCdilltrite Strea M 1<;r 5 PW. 17 Ashland Oregon MAT JOB M JSllfiQ DRAWN ' L5 M DAM SepC 2(115 CHEC~A RS OF 3 DWCS GRANITE STREET 1 1 r n r f k\,A`.> j~~ m y 9 may? ~i - - a\ %s y Gl x G n ~ z x tp" 7~ M b o m 0 L 0 z ~ o ~ Z 1,1 \ j`' ction 7J > 0 0 rn 1945 1 1 Ch 4 0 0 a p u 2 S A N1 D-WA / / ` 47 Zpa F ~m tog 080 ~NeZ C7 ~_p ~ - - 7 Z \ y -1940- 1 r ~ ~ r O N N 0) oN y 1 ,e wn1L _ A (WA o c~i~ rr*7 _ i _ J z o 0 o yz I I Ca ~ 1 O y 3~ / a xz z / u mao~ o 5` oarCy' m ~ I b 1 lu ITl A cy~~ y 8 PDF Created with deskPDF PDF Writer- Trial:: hltp:/A"vw,dmudesk.wm i EXHIBIT `A' INGRESS / EGRESS AND UTILITY EASEMENT An easement located in the Northwest Quarter of Section 9, Township 39 South, Range 1 East, Willamette Base and Meridian, Jackson County, Oregon, lying across a portion of the City of Ashland Lithia Park property and being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the most southerly corner of Parcel No. 2 of Partition Plat No. P- 57-1998, recorded August 31, 1998 in "Record of Partition Plats" in Jackson County, Oregon and filed as Survey No. 15863 in the office of the Jackson County Surveyor; thence along the southeasterly line of said Parcel No. 2, North 80° 29' 52" East, 66.48 feet to the Point of Beginning; thence continuing along said southeasterly line, North 80° 29' 52" East, 18.00 feet to the most southeasterly corner of said Parcel No. 2; thence South 15° 42'04" East, 15.46 feet to the northerly line of the north sidewalk along Nutley Street in said City of Ashland; thence along said northerly line, South 79° 09'06" West, 18.00 feet; thence, leaving said northerly line, North 15° 33' 15" West, 15.88 feet to the Point of Beginning, containing 281 square feet, more or less. March 14, 2016 L REGISTERED F I NAL LAN SURVEYOR OR 0FREGON .bUIY $8, 1 aw ART M. OSMUS NO. 2464 Iz -31116 I OREGON INVENTORY OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES HISTORIC RESOURCE SURVEY SHEET f j. Historic Name: Common Name: Address: F ti _ I f I I • Owner ~ Address: f: Lot ' Block Err a Addr ion /11'I ~t 1~~„t z t ~ Plat r Tax Lot Date of Construction s''tr<<°r~~~ :)1~ Present use/function I (-/,,r<~~'+<+ r' Original use/function Area of significance/study theme: A.rch./Bldr, if , known Architectural style: c , No, of stories: (1+ i_( Plan type/shape: ~ t r.t -f (y/n) : l1_ Foundat i on mater i al : f 'o- lr )r' Basement form & materials: r ? `~<<~i' - t / ,r r Wall construction. yt Structural frame: Primary window type: Primary exterior surfacing materials Outstanding decorative features: Condition: Excellent Good Fair Deteriorated !loved (date) Associated Structures: 1 Exterior alterations/addition= (dated): Known archeological features of site; Noteworthy landscape features: Recorded by: Date: Negative No... Slide No. State Inventory No. OREGON INVENTORY OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES HISTORIC RESOURCE SURVEY SHEET-TWO Describe geographic location & immediate setting . { p yl If, ( r i'1 - `,-7 r {"tn f' [ t ! ! Li' c ~C t r t 3 C ( _ r ~ I Statement of Significance (Historical and/or architectural importance, dates, events, persons, contexts): J ~ t'i,~ ` '•1 p~ f C Quadrangle name, 11~ Township Ranae 1 i Section #-u'x'w~ ~'~-~'x-->3-~~-~•at'~'~•}~'~'~'•?~~'.~.~'.a..~.as.~-:~~'~'~x'~•-~~'•~~'~-x•-x'x•~'~•'~~±'-g'•~-x'~-~-~i"~•a~'~•'~':~~'*~•~x;~'~-~•:>F~'-~~-~'-x-:~•~~-~~.~~. 7. :9- F'LEO E PLACE HERE: ~ F'LEASE F'LOC'E HERE: Site crap schematic dravii ng ~ Tov)n map vji tt-i c:rnss streets sh+>lvAng ].r-I",ent ror-led b1 d,.j. (a) fer- urban arr a'; DI' and inclutc_iinq at_ bLkildings, k: F) -f t_JSt'iS matp iar, rctr-a1 Fart=_,~. strL_tctt.tres, r-a.d•zi, and hits- tc.)ric land:,c:apj.ng, i.+ apprn- y priate. Indicate nt:)rtl-t by an ~ F '~"~'.:t.•~t"~{'•?t•-it"~..~'X.~"},"Y..~'.1d"}t•'~'.~{. -y{'-~' jt.'~"~"tt•'1t"1f"!.'it'-lf.yt.'~."#.~"yt'}F'~t"~{.'~"}f':N-')4".~"jt'}{'.~('.~.'~"y{.•}t"~.'#"11•.it"~••3F'`•'~'-#•'i:•Y'•K'#•~. '-}(•-?t-~•at-;~!•-1t..~f"~'~~~i•-p.:i. -1(. Sources: . 4 ~ ~ ~ . f ,I LAW Z Nk CM, ~ t 1.7!;/5(35 r I r i, ~ tj t Iti: ~ ~ - 1 I I 1 U_J b (t 4, s 1 r l ~ Id.~ Cf i; l.u1C~u I F..114 Guf~. `CIi, 0 4 LO f £ Ft 4 7r ~ ~ i ao I u44 Did. PALTU,~AV I l"~' 1+)tJ I r E CoF' Lf +PC~ 3wL.5~. i9~H rlac.k ~ - L(JT 14M") Il „ i n7 f sc X44 1 „ ! ~I L l pus M b y 4 I f ~I 1)t5 e AlJll _ is ~ i t CSC 4 p 1 I . , "'ti f 1' ~ aea r § p < :b` 7t. 07 a 3 0 G) _.---..4p 4p - F I IC~71) I(Aee.~ 1{71 N~ I G , s 1 1' v 5 i. (U C'tiA! 3 h v ra X00 I0ups, s AND cRn113 W. OF s.c~ cH^ i7 ea: = 1 4 E I,'~3 ar o, c1/a"ow c.6 w~Ft r4/r-ar,~, / OF 11)8/604 S,E.COW (tl"` ~..'I1 r r ,i f) J 0}'? 5~`7 ,oR pz")"'4G 76L'92 5. ANC 11 T Ic "a, V). or I or c.1/4c~R. I t~r_r, n }1 1J 1~ 'P. Li ill I,; 1 I. I FF f1 - - I ~ E ~q! i7' r I i ASI L.-AND CULTURAL, RESOURCE INVENTuRY I Significance: Compatible Legal Description: T39 RIE S9BC, Tax I,ot 3400 l Account No: 10067519 Present Owner: Barnhouse, Verl G./ Carmel 108 Granite Street Ashland, Oregon 97520 Address: 114 Granite Street f ` Shape: Rectangular Roof: Gable, single ridge; composition shingle Sheathing: Horizontal double drop openings: One-over-one double hung sash Foundation: Concrete block Siting: Southeast side of Granite Street and Nutley Condition: Good 616 f I !i i A' . " i ~ 1 ~ r _ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ :-t i i ~ _ _ ~ ~ - - - i '~i ~ 1, i i - ~ - - ` ' ~ - - r ~ , _ ~ , _ ~ - ~ - r r - ~ ~ I a _ _ _ ~ ' _ _ a _ _ 'i - _ r ~ ~ i' _ r - , i ~ _ _ - 4 - - ~ i - ' l 3 ~ i I ~ i i _ - o d, a i_ a ~ ~ i f _ i r S ~ i i I ? ~ ~ I ~ i ~ _ ,r I i. t - - i t . X-I 3 a _ et IV~ 4 a f f 34 1 I i j Amy Gunter <amygunter.planningg)gmail.coirn> 114 Granite Steve Walker <steve.walke r@as h land. or. us> Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 12:27 PM To: Amy Gunter <amygunter.plan ning@gmail. com>, Peter Cipes <homedesigns@mac.com> Ni Amy, The meter is ok for an ARU as we allow one meter to feed more than one address on one tax lot but, as far as how many fixtures it can feed you will have to get that information from the plumbing inspector. Currently it's a 5/8" x 3/4" meter fed from a 3/4" type K copper service off of a 16" ductile iron water main with approx.90 psi. I hope this helps Steve Steve Walker Water Quality and Distribution Supervisor City of Ashland, Water Department 541-438-5353 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(541)483®5353. Thank you. From: Amy Gunter [mailto: :F] Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 12:59 PM To: Steve Walker; Peter Cipes Subject: 114 Granite JOUCIed text hidden] I z~Om p K. 0 0 ~z f0 Q w J w w F 4 °C 4z u } zOxl-z_ v ,O Q0F pK04 N 4 oC F w? ? w Iw- E z z 'U w K O 0 u R v QOr mUa.. v ~w4~h UI uz Nd O d wI z d t O r- ll~l O w w F F w z 1- F d w ~KOJ U ®aFwt z adid ~da4 pvdJ4 Uq ,(_.n~ z 1- f~ OCw q Z 0 O J F l ~ mO VI m F V F4 l[ 4 F- z > j OC f X~1LZ V d>~ < - JQN KZ[L u D w w U U p~ryvmr ®pI100a p[Ou U -14a mmN Z F N w V <K w w o[~ O 1--1 zUl WU> Ck u d~ wwI-v~ r w ~ ~z KN w w w ro m O w 1 q d .~wr ~JOOJ~ 1p0 KI V Ord 111 QQwY tpl- a F w lu E} i w w m K K p F 4 w O d J 1 Kw K w K d>> O d w U fN,~ ml[ X01 J uU d➢L .E dal[ d m v[W w~~~ ~~~J4z OF Up ~xv xmNF OL= i w dm OF Q a 1- m w U U E 3 x z~pzuiz NzoOu~f oQ X~rm OC>jzm JN 3 w i mi z w w 0 W - IL `y ~~aaN ~ONwI'fnC ®ct u d~ <moi du_w0x ow N m ~r m m r m v _ / Z pdILdmN QUNp[UIIL Ja01 Jp ~N n Q. V'N^-10 UD m S 22°02''f5 W " ~ ,k~\ ~ ~ M ~ O O i / tl• m ` \ / Y r w ¢ o ~ m z x a z ¢ a a ao ~ O~ o ~ J O ~ y 0 Q~ 0 a ~ f° a w U rc i tO ~ ry\ , K~ O¢m z0 ~mz Z O KYY W (¢'J w Oz cYimcYi~ w 16 \ ~ \ ¢oo- zi-mc~rnz 'o > ~B3 r- ¢ m ~ z¢ w m m o o ~ LL w w - _ m a a m w a o u~ m a U ~ z O O c7 m O- \ O~ I \ tLi -j PL - \ 0 \ \ olp Zo p''N I - _a ~p i - --Sbs I~ ~ I I ~M O ~i - I I to e I I l I _ i - Z ~ _ - I v ci I I ~ w aa I I 'i I~ N ~ O W ~ 1- x O Jyi I V N N ~ l m a~ 1- N ED x I 110 I I I~ _ W I~ cv iz. WN O V X ~ IW 4 W ' 0 Im tL:- Q O I ® CL m O IW N ~ I I z I I I z I I i I _ I I I I O I Yi z ~ N I I' zl° ~ X WIN W .o in~ Ylm l Ur o X I - ~ X W -J - I I I„ I I I n ~ ~ WII~ .Ones II [f 0 ~ 0 ~ x Q O W N m Q N I I Ii , , a I MZ I I ~ I 0 ~ I „9-,5 Z W F I b W j ~ I z D I O I ~Y I r c0 I I _ I it> IL I ..:....-.is-- IW I~ j Im t- IW v ~ Iw IJ I W o 'J ~ x ~ I J OC O Q ~ I x N W N W x 10 0 i m ~ I I I I I I~ o I I tm- 4 t- N w z_ y ~ m 4 ~ 3 V J w J ~ ~ ro = w z z y 0 w w $ U F Q m Q Q Q Q < U- o z x 0 u > m a ..0 0 E 0 F-I R ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ / j -III I I I - I I I r- w li I I ~ I .p I i I U I m I, I L _ I a I ~I 1 I F L----------------- - LL / I I' J ~ I I I I j 97~ `ti I I I II I z JL= } m z Ir' f IIL i0 Im I - J _ I I m w 10 14 I- I I 10 i I - iw I I ~ I - _J - I I 7 , I I I I.I ~ 1 i ~ a I I I I I - II - I i II a.,W I 1 3 _J V I.., ~ I I f I I Ilr I I ~ I I I C F z_ loj m 3 Kj 0 z z - 0 I W I ( Nj ® f F- ( V f W j F OC YN F W I W X WW > D x 6) D D ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ I 1 1 I I I I _ - 1 I „OL-,l L I I I I \ I I t ~ ~ II I / 1 I \ I I ( I d ~ =7L-j, I - I II I IQ - - 1 I IJ 1 I ^1 i la 1 1 rc - I I - 1 1 z 1 1 W X11 I - I 1 I~ ~ 1 r~ I - I I I I ~ i 1 I - - I - = I 1 _ b 0 1 M-K - ri ~I m ~l m I~ z II _ 1 I 'v + d \i C ° I I - d ' ill _L Q ~ 1 ~v c\ )3 LO Jw _V c 1 j IL JW ❑ F-I F-I F-I El F n a F1 E] El n IJ Ll E E D1:1 E E E E L1:1 D171 Ll Ll E E E D D D D „Z/ l L -,8 l a LIq=-p=- IUUI lu pl j lu El O N W _ ~ \ v 4 X 4 I i` N ~ W N .,O Q W \ I Iii W W W W m im 3/~09H''T3/3'I NIV W d0 3NI~ I a i ~ I I I 0 _ I v X ~ I I j . lu i ~ ❑ {u I ` I ® tV T I = °X I H ~ N m ~ I (r 4 4 ! L l ! Ck to O w ww ~w ~ X OS s~ ILI D- w a q ~ w ~ z ~ q oo =a t } W ~o In G 0 ° w z 0 t z_ ~ x J=i1 ~iLI r 5 l ! ti Y, v ! R~ b,r f - `ept lu a f lu~~ r~ I d ! zwF- ! a ! pW ~ wm W 1- IL IS F s 1~L. 1- N W l9 Q = W W A ! N U- ®mm~ J LLB- a Ir~ 10 7 it " r ~rQ to y~ fr ~zQ > O z w N m10 r W ~ ~ / ! 13 m to n Z It* UWD a0 W It* O ONto tl1 , r}~ U1 W It XU1t0 W ~J ® Qoit Ir (o lu In W{- OW ® + a jm V\.' 111® N ® W \Fw m i- LW~ d N Z`tmQF=- S Oz~o0) M S6~ ,7S ~ kv I C o. - - LLJ w a v H r w W W U M W z I. Z H rn rn - ¢OK Q.< 0 O om v ww0 ZJ w v (L Z < O < zz Wz~o~ z ow g o Y < w o~g ~o<~Z c ~}z _ r ~I~_ mZ M0 rm ?wo ~o z0OW¢c - LL I V O w~w0HC 4 O N CO W F- (9 C.) u 1- w J of U O Fz W LLJ - ® z o a o F- z F- Z>oro~C, z Z U X~X ON 0 - - N N P ¢ ¢ O 0 J li O J I- W N UJJJJ_ • U % v li ~ QOM ~ Q- 5 n ~ I ~ P J I_ f•_ w ,I y ~ s NO Ll FWo, UZ Qo9 O Z KQ g m -6O-, LL o, - Z WJZ WWZVI-00 EL SZO ¢ F Z av WN ox x W3 li J Z tnwg~a 2FF 3- Om OF=- o OQ 2 a, hW-Up W JQN of FUQp7 °QUO gO W 'If z CL0 Wm ° ZO zed W ~2 oom p F Q O U a LLl co z w p w O O Ewm O J 0 3 a' 2 F I¢- Z O F 7 Z Q? O zU ¢ O w m . J 5,-,w w O J U W w Z a LLQ`N g J pa O F-~LLFx-' J p~-~ O W Q° ROLL Z W Qa =K O Um 1- aNQg¢Z V mmO° W F O pON O a' ~i~0 ¢ F~U a LUF W W pJ Z W aY W = W QQ~~ U° SU ~J <K'. W (n< O~OZ mQ W F W f4Z of azF~°m WZ ¢ ~ -F-Za Z°W'z SW OFQww w0 ¢~O waive Ww¢~O°O c°D0~< ¢a awo ~¢Qo >IO-zui O a~ = O w O 6 J 2 CL V1 K HQ ~ O Z m o 2 m V W< mJ , Q J E =w p w z a > w w a m U w p b= O° o w K p U w w rir ¢ W W o J g K O o w C=J K a(n W¢ W ~F U~ O F p p0 W W a' mO F W J a'a'F' D° O H O o JQ w W W <w d Q E m O ° o W Q-w u. `L O z_ ~ w o K W Q K W Y W o z o o w F U W F w z 0 ¢ O° x o ¢ F-° WW o o ❑ 2 a0T ~p °jm2a z,W K JHS a.0 WWO WQaQ JZUw 2w p K w0 OFFS "S WUw - ZJwoow.WF o ,iz W°w W ~a Q a OOZaJz p w ? W F OUF (jJ wZS o a= Q W= f7 61¢-dz ZFx- ~Z W QZ w d W~ 0 O Fa'2 ~ QwW w o a p~0 ~ O O ~zz wm ~~Uw°U gzx g w= ~~z zJZOZw° gpx xW0¢ w °Ow cnp tx-ww 00 °¢U L JZS'mx W O°U a JOO pw o FO W p 'g, w F ZFT O¢OIN-UW o W wcn }SKFO xz J wow w 1_ W X 6. j F?~ ¢ Wm W Q FF-7w po W W Zo= m fr wz.=, U1- a' wmz Oz3 V o LLZ~Z Fo ~w ~m W 2 O ~z dOS a' W ¢F W Zpa .F >2 WF d' F ¢ZF WUW W li W¢ S KW zwcUQxo~o O~° gm= w❑ ~tgC7w O~z wcnF zOZ WC~~VO~2w OzaC9 O0¢2 Wiz z~~ z (7<2 wW 0k~w D J° W m mt mz a x a H Q O Q ~ N y S j = m~ H (/-J d 0= X 7 3 ~ K0 K Z F W x U° d o m g O W J W¢ Z W z IQ- w O z_ W o > w Fr U S~=Z0°'=o~ <ml Oww o0o z~ ?owXO 20Z CVO K?K Oopoafwz<o z0~X ~'~.Ww agw o0'= Q2 zO~Zaa ww XWza Zi vlQw~~UO ¢mFK ZoQ aUU ~!-U F W U FU W QOn7 wow mw V a o ¢Z W aFa W -F ma' In a6. Zak 2 W o ❑ Fa a'm w?J M V In N r m of - r O- a ( C6 N \ ~ T \ N C d \ d \ a o a a ~ 1 ~ a a _ E ° -vs~ g3o rn Q 0 > s W _ m ° E E a _ MS ZS ~ m U m m ~ F a a ° U does r°z I~// "r" Y R L W (0 ~5 Z5 Z5 L f U ° x ° o i a° a° a° a° c 5 m lL co m M O M N O N O O O a N ~ ~ ~ u t0 - o v v v •0 0 o m v v 0 W o 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 o O C9 C7 C7 C9 a % o c O y ~ y J -co o Li L) i .2 ~O O O O O 0 0 O O O O ~ I m ~ O m cp t° In O V V' n') M ch \ Z W j \ V V N N N N O N W E E W o m C w F r.` 0 C C C C m 0 J Z Z Z c N T C T C C d d U 0 LiJ m h m E rn>>> • / I y m m m a m m v m o m m o E U E i 0961 d m d N t0 U \ .O W rn w U w¢ o o 0 c1 U¢ U U U F:l ui cb ~ \ -T- N M v .n m r m m o s o F F °F / a D oaoa4 00 z w Y o3 pp ~ ❑ ~d4~ pe q oa: J~ LL LLJ o zW wo d o o wz 'a w oo c) zz~ o e K x W F- <o W ~d w > U T A OE E ,r 1 C ~ A ..f j I 4ti6~ z u ~ - 8 I I ~ 24 \t I(,, \ ✓ west ® ueem1e911e,x edols? 1 ~ 1 13dVo SOMP v 1 I ~r i I ° yl , , O, - - I -ozst ~ / ~ 1g30 ~ -M Sl,ZOeLZS ~ ~ ' 6i C9 (m7 f ~ (r I ~ ♦ W N w F i \ Fem. LL_ LL o O ~ 2 - ? O ~ tS O J U ¢ ~ E X W O O r r _ I - Q I _ ~ 1 r w 1 cl: N f ~m r ~ n LL I , \ ~ I ,I u I LLI f LLI d - o and pc U \ ~ F Z a W - \ O ' W ie44 W t") i i z I y a Z T W _ L .c ----117 FFF--- ,A E co L O 1 W 2 W o- a EEC U ~ O N ~ N ~V/JJ z° Lu z y ~ - - .,seep Y N a ~ C 0 6. t m Q _E t 9 N 15 1.- LL v - O R E IIu~I I ° z I N N W - W LL I I I J I c v > w E a ~r z ❑ El Z c ~ I wa z° z W O - CD ~a i r- cc II ~ - I El Q Zw z w I ~ x ~ a o° y L II - ==ginm o W _ i _x r Job Address: 114 GRANITE ST Contractor: ASHLAND OR 97520 Address: C ~ A Owner's Name: MARDI MASTAIN 0 Phone: Customer 08141 N State Lic No:!! Cit Lic No: L MARDI MASTAIN y Applicant: 114 GRANITE ST R Address: ASHLAND OR 97520 A C C Sub-Contractor: A Phone: T Address: N Applied: 02/10/2017 0 T Issued: Expires: 08/09/2017 Phone: State Lic No: Maplot: 391 E09BC3401 City Lic No: DESCRIPTION: P & E Constraints, Site Review ARU, Variance, Solar setback 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 Solar Setback Variance 1,022.00 Physical Constraints Permit 1,022.00 CUP Accessory Residential 664.00 Variance (Type 1) 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 -ASH LAN D% I hereby certify the contents of this application to be correct to the best of my knowledge, and furthermore, that I have read, Fee Summary Paid Amounts understood and agreed to the following: Building: $ 0.00 $ 0.00 1. This permit shall remain valid only in accordance with code State Surcharge: $ 0.00 $ 0.00 or regulation provisions relating to time lapse and revocation Development Fees: $ 0.00 $ 0.00 (180 days). 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. Utility Connection Fees: $ 0.00 $ 0.00 3. Any modifications in plans or work shall be reported in advance to the department. Public Works Fees: $ 0.00 $ 0.00 4. Responsibility for complying with all applicable federal, state, Planning Fees: $ 3,730.00 $ 3,730.00 or local laws, ordinances, or regulations rests solely with the applicant. Sub-Total: $ 3,730.00 Fees Paid: $ 3,730.00 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 OF