HomeMy WebLinkAboutEMain_550_PA-2017-00707
IT F
a ►
July 10, 2017
Notice of Final Decision
On July 10, 2017, the Community Development Director approved the request for the following:
Planning Action: PA-2017-00707
Subject Property: 550 E. Main
Applicant: Geoff and Mary Ann Geness
c
Description: A request for Conditional Use Permit and Site Design Review approval to
expand an existing hotel from two to four units for the property located at 550 E. Main St. The
proposal includes building a two-story, 960-square foot addition to accommodate two additional
hotel units. The application includes a request for an Exception to the Site Development and
Design Standards to eliminate the required five-foot landscape buffer at the property line adjacent
to the City's Fire Station. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial;
ZONING: C-1; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 lE 09 AC; TAX LOTS: 14900
I
The Community Development Director's decision becomes final and is effective on the 12th day
after the Notice of Final Decision is mailed. Approval is valid for a period of 18 months and all
conditions of approval identified on the attached Findings are required to be met prior to project
completion.
The application, all associated documents and evidence submitted, and the applicable criteria are
available for review at the Ashland Community Development Department, located at 51
Winburn Way. Copies of file documents can be requested and are charged based on the City of
Ashland copy fee schedule.
Prior to the final decision date, anyone who was mailed this Notice of Final Decision may
request a reconsideration of the action as set forth in the Ashland Land Use Ordinance (ALUO)
18.5.1.050(F) and/or file an appeal to the Ashland Planning Commission as provided in ALUO
18.5.1.050(G). The ALUO sections covering reconsideration and appeal procedures are attached.
The appeal may not be made directly to the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals.
If you have any questions regarding this decision, please contact 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: 541-488-5305
51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900
)1%us
11
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 E
during the opportunity to provide public input on the application sufficient to afford the Staff Advisor an opportunity
to respond to the issue prior to making a decision.
2. Reconsideration requests shall be received within five days of mailing the notice of decision. The Staff Advisor shall
decide within three days whether to reconsider the matter.
3. If the Staff Advisor is satisfied that an error occurred crucial to the decision, the Staff Advisor shall withdraw the
decision for purposes of reconsideration. The Staff Advisor shall decide within ten days to affirm, modify, or reverse
the original decision. The City shall send notice of the reconsideration decision to affirm, modify, or reverse to any
party entitled to notice of the planning action.
4. If the Staff Advisor is not satisfied that an error occurred crucial to the decision, the Staff Advisor shall deny the
reconsideration request. Notice of denial shall be sent to those parties that requested reconsideration.
G. Appeal of Type I Decision. A Type I decision may be appealed to the Planning Commission, pursuant to the following:
1. Who May Appeal. The following persons have standing to appeal a Type I decision.
a. The applicant or owner of the subject property.
b. Any person who is entitled to written notice of the Type I decision pursuant to subsection
18.5.1.050.B.
c. Any other person who participated in the proceeding by submitting written comments on the application to the
City by the specified deadline.
2. Appeal Filing Procedure.
a. Notice of Appeal. Any person with standing to appeal, as provided in subsection 18.5.1.050.G.1, above, may
appeal a Type I decision by filing a notice of appeal and paying the appeal fee according to the procedures of this
subsection. The fee required in this section shall not apply to appeals made by neighborhood or community
organizations recognized by the City and whose boundaries include the site. If an appellant prevails at the hearing
or upon subsequent appeal, the fee for the initial hearing shall be refunded.
b. Time for Filing. A notice of appeal shall be filed with the Staff Advisor within 12 days of the date the notice of
decision is mailed.
c. Content of Notice ofAppeal. 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 1?
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900
ASHLAND PLANNING DIVISION ~
FINDINGS & ORDERS
i
i
PLANNING ACTION: PA-2017-00707
SUBJECT PROPERTY: 550 E. Main St.
APPLICANT/OWNER: Geoff and Mary Ann Geness
DESCRIPTION: A request for Conditional Use Permit and Site Design Review approval to
expand an existing hotel from two to four units for the property located at 550 E. Main St. The proposal
includes building a two-story, 960-square foot addition to accommodate two additional hotel units. The
application includes a request for an Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards to eliminate
the required five-foot landscape buffer at the property line adjacent to the City's Fire Station.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial; ZONING: C-1; ASSESSOR'S MAP:
39 lE 09 AC; TAX LOTS: 14900
SUBMITTAL DATE: April 24, 2017
DEEMED COMPLETE DATE: May 24, 2017
STAFF APPROVAL DATE: July 10, 2017
APPEAL DEADLINE (4:30 PM.) July 24, 2017
FINAL DECISION DATE: July 25, 2017
APPROVAL EXPIRATION DATE: January 25, 2019
DECISION
The proposal is a request for Conditional Use Permit and Site Design Review approval to expand the
existing hotel from two to four units for the property located at 550 E. Main St. The proposal includes
building a two-story, 960-square foot addition to accommodate two additional hotel units. The property is
located in the Detail Site Review and Historic District overlays.
The block has a mix of commercial uses and is situated between the more intensely developed commercial
downtown core and the residentially zoned neighborhoods to the north and east. The subject property is
located on the south side of E. Main St., between Lithia Way and Sherman St. The subj ect property is zoned
Commercial Retail (C-1), as is the area directly surrounding the site.
The subject property is rectangular, with a 62.5-foot frontage on E. Main St., a depth of 105 feet, and an area
of 6,562 square feet. The National Register of Historic Places documentation for the Ashland Railroad
Addition District identifies the primary residence as the Jesse A. McCall house from 1890 and as a historic
contributing structure. At the time of-writing, the primary residence was undergoing significant rehabilitation
and the front yard has been newly landscaped in-conjuiietion with the rehabilitation of the primary residence.
The site layout is residential incharacter because historic primary residence was originally built as a home
rather than a commercial structure. As a result, the lot has a large landscaped front yard area with
approximately 40 feet between the front property line and the primary residence. There is approximately nine
feet in elevation gain from the front of the property to the back. There is one tree over six inches diameter at
PA #2017-00707
550 E. Main St./mh
Page 1
i
t
i
t
E
G
breast height (dbh), a blue spruce, located in the front yard-and the application indicates the tree will be
preserved.
The property received Conditional Use Permit and Site Review approval for a two-unit hotel and beauty
shop in 1990 (PA 90-124). The hotel use was discontinued in 1997. In 2010, the property again received
Conditional Use Permit and Site Design Review approval for a two-unit hotel (PA 2010-00355).
The new structure meets the dimensional requirements of the C-1 zone. The building is a one-story structure
and well below the maximum allowed height of 40 feet. Since the property is surrounded by properties that
area also zoned C-1, there are no minimum yard requirements and the building is not required to meet the
solar setback. The proposed landscaping will cover 60% of the lot, which exceeds the minimum requirement
of 15% landscape area.
The property is served by city facilities which will be extended to serve the new building. A sidewalk and
planting strip is in place in front of the building in the E. Main St. right-of-way. The site is accessed by a
shared driveway that is mostly located on the property to the north. The driveway is paved.
Five off-street parking spaces are required for a four-unit-hotel. The parking area consists of two existing
parallel spaces adjacent to the primary residence which were approved with the original hotel in 1990. Three
additional spaces will be added at the rear of the property. The site plan does not include the required 22 feet
of back up space for the two of the three new head-in parking spaces (#3 and 4 on site plan) in the southeast
corner of the property. A condition is added requiring a revised site plan prior to the building permit
submittal that includes the required back up space in AMC 18.4.3.080.B.3.
The application includes a request to locate the parking adjacent to the south property line and thereby not
provide a five-foot landscape buffer between the subject property and the property to the south. As
mentioned before, the property is somewhat unusual because the original residence has a large front yard
area of approximately 40 feet between the front property line and the primary residence. This results in a
somewhat limited area behind the primary residence for additional development under today's commercial
zoning. The parking directly adjacent to the property line will not impact the property to the north which is
one of the City of Ashland fire stations. There is a landscaped area on the fire station property that is
approximately 40 feet in depth which provides a generous buffer between the proposed parking on the
subject property and the fire station property. In addition, the area south of the subject property is also
parking for the fire station.
The target use of the property is a 3,281 square-foot building used for general office uses. The total square
footage-of the primary residence and the new building is 2,358 square feet and are similar in architecture and
scale,-bulk and coverage to the surrounding_ area. Since the subject property as well as most of the
surrounding buildings originally served as homes, the buildings andsite layout are of a residential character.
The proposed new building is similar in that clearly secondary to the primary residence and- retains-the
generous front yard area. Noise, right and-glare-is a similar or lesser impact to the surrounding retail and
hotel uses. The traffic impact of the four unit hotel is comparable to the target use office building. The
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) estimates an office building of this size would generate 36
vehicle trips per day compared to 35 trips-per day by a four-unit hotel.
PA #2017-00707
550 E. Main St.lmh
Page 2
The proposal is subject to the site development and design standards for non-residential development,
including the Detailed Site Review Standards, in AMC 18.4.2.040. The property is also subject to the
Historic District Design Standards in AMC 18.4.2.050.B because the lot is located in the Historic District
overlay.
The new building is oriented to the north but located approximately 78 feet from East Main Street. The site
plan does not show pedestrian access to the new structure and a -condition has been added requiring a
pedestrian path connecting the new units to E. Main St.
The building is a relatively modest design reflective of the limited size and secondary nature to the primary'
residence. The building footprint is 24 feet by 24 feet, similar to a garage structure. Some of the
architectural details of the primary residence are used in the new structure including a set of bay windows on
the east side of the building. The new building is connected to the second story of the primary residence by
an elevated deck and walkway. The application says that the exterior materials will match those of the
primary residence including real wood horizontal siding and wood clad windows. The exterior building
colors will also match the primary residence with grey with blue and white trim for the exterior wall colors
and dark blue cladding on the exterior windows. Originally the application proposed standing seam metal
roofing. However, the application submitted a revision on June 6, 2017 stating that they metal roof request
was withdrawn and instead the new building would have composite shingle roofing.
The Historic Commission reviewed the application at the June 7, 2017 meeting and recommended approval
with modifications to the new structure to meet the Historic District Design Standards. The Historic
Commission commended the applicants' efforts in the rehabilitation of the primary residence as well as the
use of architectural elements and materials of the historic home in the new structure.
The Historic Commission recommend several changes to the proposed design of the new structure to meet
the Historic District Design Standards. Specifically, the Commission had a concern with the new structure at
the rear of the property exceeding the height of the original home and being clearly visible from E. Main St.
and Siskiyou Blvd. Here again, the change in elevation from the front of the property to the rear accentuates
the height of the new building. The Commission recommended using a hipped roof with false dormers and
vents to reduce the height of the new building to address the applicable Historic District Design Standards on
height, scale, massing and form (AMC 18.4.050.B.2,3,4 and 9). The Historic District Design Standards also
require the pattern of rhythm of wall to door/window openings to be consistent with the adjacent historic
buildings (AMC 18.4.050.B.7). The Commission recommended adjustments to the bay windows and-doors
-on the east elevation of the new building to make the pattern of the door/window openings consistent with
the primary residence. A condition is added requiring the Historic Commission's recommendations to be
incorporated into the building permit submittals.
The approval-criteria for a Conditional Use Permit are in AMC 18.5.4.050.A as follows:
That the use would be-in conformancewith all-standards within the zoning district in which the
use is proposed to be located, and in conformance with relevant Comprehensive-plan policies
that-are not implemented by any City, State; or Federal law or program.
2. That adequate capacity of City facilities for wafer, sewer, electricity, urban storm drainage, paved
access to and throughout the development, and adequate transportation can and will be
provided to the subject property.
PA 92017-00707
550 E. Main St./mh
Page 3
I
3. That the conditional use will have no greater adverse material effect on the livability of the
impact area when compared to the development of the subject lot with the target use of the
zone, pursuant with subsection 18.5.4.050.A.5, below. When evaluating the effect of the
proposed use on the impact area, the following factors of livability of the impact area shall be
considered in relation to the target use of the zone.
a. Similarity in scale, bulk, and coverage.
b. Generation of traffic and effects on surrounding streets. Increases in pedestrian, bicycle, and
mass transit use are considered beneficial regardless of capacity of facilities,
c. Architectural compatibility with the impact area.
d. Air quality, including the generation of dust, odors, or other environmental pollutants.
e. Generation of noise, light, and glare.
f. The development of adjacent properties as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan.
g. Other factors found to be relevant by the approval authority for review of the proposed use.
4. A conditional use permit shall not allow a use that is. prohibited or one that is not permitted
pursuant to this ordinance.
5. For the purposes of reviewing conditional use permit applications for conformity with the
approval criteria of this subsection, the target uses of each zone are as follows.
d. C-1. The general retail commercial uses listed in chapter 18.2.2 Base Zones and Allowed
Uses, developed at an intensity of 0.35 floor to area ratio, complying with all ordinance
requirements; and within the Detailed Site Review overlay, at an intensity of 0.50 floor to
area ratio, complying with all ordinance requirements.
The approval criteria for Site Design Review 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 provisio-ns of the underlying zone
(part 1-8.2), including but not limited to: building and yard setbacks, lot area and-dimensions, density
and floor area, lot coverage, building height, building orientation, architecture, and other applicable
standards.
B. Overlay Zones. The proposal complies with applicable overlay zone requirements (part 18.3).
C. Site Development and Design Standards. The proposal complies with the applicable Site
Development and Design Standards of part 18.4, except as provided by subsection 1=, below.
D. City Facilities. The proposal complies with the applicable standards in section 18.4.6 Public
=Facilities and that adeq-uate 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
PA #2017-00707
550 E. Main St./mh
Page 4
i
subsection 1 or 2, below, are found to exist.
i
1. There is a demonstrable difficulty meeting the specific requirements of the Site Development
and Design Standards due to a unique of 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.
i
The application with the attached conditions complies with all applicable City ordinances. Planning Action
#2017-00707 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 #2017-00707 is denied.
The following conditions are attached to the approval.
I'
1) That all proposals of the applicant shall be conditions of approval unless otherwise modified herein. E
2) 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.
3) 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 shall be revised to provide the required back-up dimension in AMC
18.4.3.080.B.3 for the parking spaces in the southeast corner of the lot.
b) That the site plan shall be revised to provide a pedestrian connection between the
sidewalk on E. Main St. and the units in the new structure in accordance with 18.4.3.090.
c) That bicycle parking including rack type and placement shall be indicated in the building
permit submittals. Two bicycle parking spaces are required and shall meet the design and
dimensional requirements of AMC 18.4.3_.070.
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.
4) That the building permit submittal shall- include-the following.
a) That a drainage plan for roof, footing and surface drainage shall be submitted for the review
and approval.
PA #2017-00707
550 E. Main St./mh
Page 5
b) That the recommendations of the Historic Commission from the June 7, 2017 meeting with
final approval by the Staff Advisor shall be incorporated into the building permit submittals.
i
C) That all outdoor lighting shall meet the requirements of AMC 18.4.4.050 including but not
limited to that that exterior lighting shall be appropriately shrouded so there is no direct
illumination of surrounding properties. Lighting fixture specifications and shrouding details
shall be provided with the building permit submittals.
d) That an irrigation plan shall be submitted with the building submittals and approved by the
Staff Advisor prior to issuance of the building permit. The street tree and plantings in the
planting strip shall be irrigated in accordance with AMC 18.4.4.030.E.1.
5) That all landscaping and irrigation shall be installed according to the approved plan, inspected and
approved prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit. The landscaping must meet the water
conserving landscaping standards in AMC 18.4.4.03.1 as is required for commercial developments.
6) That bicycle parking shall be installed in accordance with the approved plan and the design and rack
standards in AMC 18.4.3.070.1 prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy.
7) That the parking area shall be paved and solid waste/recycle area and screening shall be installed
prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy.
i
July 10, 2017
Bil Molnar, ~Ommunity Development Director Date
epar men f Community Development
PA #2017-00707
550 E. Main St./mh
Page 6
i
I
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 July 10, 20171 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-2017-00707, 550 E. Main.,
6E, PC ~
Signa re of Employee
C:IUsersltrapprlDesktoplTemplatesWFIDAVITOF MAILING_Regan.docx 7/10/2017
i 09Ls NanyiijegeE)aizas!mn 1 ®dn-dod paogaj alJaI?ngl ap uge einyoey el@ zagdaa i
qIJege6/ewttane a zall`d ' ®laad Ase3 assaape p sapanbl~3 slualed~woo•luane:ded
PA-2017-00707 391 E09AC 14701
PA-2017-00707 391 E09AC 6300 PA-2017-00707 391 E09AC 14300
BELL ROBERT BRISCOE JAMES CHRISTOPHER CONFLUENTIAL GROUP LLC
TRUSTEE ET AL
6556 PIONEER RD 18 HILLCREST ST
6625 CAMINITO BLYTHEFIELD
MEDFORD, OR 97501 1 ASHLAND, OR 97504
LA JOLLA, CA 92037
I I
PA-2017-00707 391 E09AC 6000 PA-2017-00707 391 E09AC 14700 PA-2017-00707 391 E09BD 7200
DAVIS JACK ET AL DELUCA RONALD L TRUSTEE ET AL DEWS GEORGINA R ET AL
515 E MAIN ST 228 MORNINGLIGHT DR 100 DOYLE ST STE A
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 SANTA CRUZ, CA 95062
PA-2017-00707 391 E09AC 14801 PA-2017-00707 391 E09AC 14900 PA-2017-00707 391 E09AC 6100
DHZ LLC ET AL DENNIS BAIN GENESS GEOFF/MARY ANN GOTSHALK MATTHEW L ET AL
8919 W 24TH ST P 0 BOX 1166 549 E MAIN ST
LOS ANGELES, CA 90034 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520
I
PA-2017-00707 391 E09BD 600 PA-2017-00707 391 E09AC 14803 PA-2017-00707 391 E09AC 5900
HALD CHRISTIAN P MD TRUSTEE ET AL MC MILLAN GLENN JR/CAROLE MCINTYRE MARTHA M TRUSTEE ET AL
PO BOX 127 ! 416 LIBERTY ST j 58 FOURTH ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520
I
PA-2017-00707 391 E09BD 7500 PA-2017-00707 391 E09BD 7400 PA-2017-00707 391 E09AC 6600
MICHAEL PHILIP F TRUSTEE ET AL MONTES MIGUEL A TRUSTEE ET AL RANDALL CHET C/O TED RANDALL
PO BOX 853 486 SISKIYOU BLVD 11261 SW 128 PLACE
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 MIAMI, FL 33186
i
PA-2017-00707 391 E09AC 14802 PA-2017-00707 391 E09AC 6200 PA-2017-00707 391 E09BD 7300
RUNKEL DAVID R/DONNAN B SPIERINGS J FRANK STEINLE PAUL/SARA M BROWN
586 E MAIN ST PO BOX 1315 478 SISKIYOU BLVD
ASHLAND, OR 97520 PHOENIX, OR 97535 ASHLAND, OR 97520
I
PA-2017-00707 391 E09AC 14400 PA-2017-00707 391 E09AC 6500 PA-2017-00707
TUMPANE LLC VANNICE VICKI RUTHANN RAY KISTLER
555 SISKIYOU BLVD 585 EAST MAIN ST 66 WATER ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520
i
550 E Main Street
NOD 7/10/2017
21
i
j I
I
i
i
E
i 0919 ajeldwalluawasn i 043 dn-dod asodxa of au!l buole puag
s9;eldW94/W0:)iG9ne of oE) ; slagel ssaippy®laad Ase3 ; ®09LS
ASHLAND HISTORIC COMMISSION
Planning Application Review
June 7, 2017
I
t:
PLANNING ACTION: PA-2017-00707
SUBJECT PROPERTY: 550 E. Main St.
APPLICANTIOWNER: Geoff and Mary Ann Geness
DESCRIPTION: A request for Site Design Review and Conditional Use Permit approval for the property located at 550
East Main Street. The proposal involves a two-story, 960-square foot detached addition to accommodate two additional
hotel units, bringing the total approved hotel units on the property to four. The application includes a request for an
Exception to the Site Development & Design Standards to not provide the typically required five-foot landscape buffer at the
property line adjacent to the city's Fire Station #1.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial; ZONING: C-1; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 391E
09AC; TAX LOT: 14900
Recommendation:
The Historic Commission greatly appreciates the retention and rehabilitation of the original home that is currently underway
including the use of historically compatible exterior materials such as the siding and windows. The additions and decks at
the back of the home cascade nicely down from the main form.
The Commission also appreciates that the proposed new structure includes architectural elements and materials of the I
historic home such as the bay windows and matching wood windows. The Commission believes the proposed structure
meets many of the Historic District Design Standards in 18.4.2.050.B. However, there are several standards that the
Commission determined were not meet by the proposed structure. The Commission recommends approval of the
application with a condition that the plans are revised to address the following standards.
Height, Scale, Massing, Form (AMC 18.4.2.050.B 2, 3, 4, 9)
The Historic Commission appreciates the change from the initial concept of a flat roof with a deck to a roof shape that is
consistent with the historic buildings in the immediate vicinity. The Commission's concern is that the proposed structure
exceeds the height of the original home and will be clearly visible from E. Main and Siskiyou Blvd. As a result, the height,
massing and form varies with historic buildings in the vicinity. Despite the small size of the proposed new building, the roof
will be prominent in part because of the topography of the site. The Commission recommends using a hipped roof (pyramid)
and also consider using false dormers with vents.
Rhythm of Openings (AMC 18.4.2.050.B.7)
The Historic Commission has a concern about the consistency of the pattern and rhythm of the wall to door/windows
openings on the west elevation (side view 2) with the historic home.
® Doors on first and second floor - the type and width of doors is not typically found in the historic district. The
Commission recommends using narrower French doors (e.g., four feet wide) or a series of double hung windows.
® Bay windows - the window and side panels appear slightly out of proportion. The Commission recommends using
a wider window and narrower side panels to reflect the bay window on the historic home.
1
r
\ Planning Department, 51 Winburn, Ashland, Oregon 97520 C I T Y F
541-488-5305 Fax: 541-552-2050 wwW.ashland.ocus TTY: 1-800-735-2900 ASHLAND
NOTICE OF APPLICATION
PLANNING ACTION: PA-2017-00707
SUBJECT PROPERTY: 550 East Main Street
OWNER: Geoff & Mary Ann Geness
APPLICANT: Kistler, Small and White, Architects
DESCRIPTION: A request for Site Design Review and Conditional Use Permit approval for the property located at
550 East Main Street. The proposal involves a two-story, 960-square foot detached addition to accommodate two
additional hotel units, bringing the total approved hotel units on the property to four. The application includes a
request for an Exception to the Site Development & Design Standards to not provide the typically required five-foot
landscape buffer at the property line adjacent to the city's Fire Station 1. COMPREHENSIVE'PLAN
DESIGNATION: Commercial; ZONING: C-1; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 391E 09AC; TAX LOT: #14900.
NOTE: The Ashland Historic Commission will also review this Planning Action on Wednesday June 7, 2017 at 6:00 PM in the Community
Development and Engineering Services building (Siskiyou Room), located at 51 Winburn Way.
NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: May 24, 2017
DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION OF WRITTEN COMMENTS: June 7, 2017
PA #2017-00707 a~ d -
550 E. MAIN ST. ;
A - _ - ; SUBJECT PROPERTY
- 666666 ~J}.,~J -
4
N I
Geoff and MaryAnn Geness
RedTail Inn, LLC
PO Box 1166
Ashland, OR 97520
Re: Property Address: 550 East Main St., Ashland, OR 97520
Planning Action -2017- 00707
June 6, 2017
To who it may concern:
We withdraw the request to use a metal roof on the proposed 960 sq. ft. detached
addition. We have found a historically accurate product in composite shingle and
will match the existing structure.
Sincerely,
L
G ene s and MaryAn ness
x
I
' i4 E rommmU X07..5. UU ~
SS C~~ O- Q U o
c c4a:)~ 0m mrn~> 3~ o
o aU
o:3a mm
co o O c > °mo mE (D
3: -a m n
_0 Mn
ca i Eames O a om J
N N ~ I o `oa~ca c3° n0 oC
V U , N O C O N O U C C m
0" 1 9 O a) > cc~55
> U N m ro Nw ~W
~ aao:E co
o L
C O Ea) E0 0 oc O ra
' I ro Y m 0 z
M a 0 0 ~Z O 1 m F Eo ro o m 0 c y mm o ac c
L O
a) CL
C:) co
0
V) C
O
n C E m S N
'O S N O -
N
d' v
m
O U ([S c
UW:k 0 °v~c°c f 000 o w
p (0 Q>I- h I Qro~a° ~~~o ~p o c
fn® r ro p~~mm m on m o
L
(>6 ~FWJ N - w o Q roa~o~ maroai0ma roE p
L
W m -
Q
N L D Q c VA - 0~ 4 0 0 E-°C) m~ 0
m U O 0 0-) Y* m50)aCL E
o yc~mc ~U c c
a6 O a~U y n U wocro a) umm ~O_ ro
Q !9 (6 F 0 c c d °J
E O~ Q~ D > w 3mcro a0mNm u" G
CD N~ 0 UO d~ P' N mcaa% Nacro Om ~O m ro
0
p Lij C ® CL O '0 3 t m M a
rn OOH .D~ N
Cl S N mccYm rom r
Z O O- qt c- m-0 ai c) m" .2 e- co
'd O a N v
® 4) 00~ NQ cammS c) mro r o
Q C N (O +a~-+ Lroa-O= 2NU~C
O °c o E3pu m~ m
0o U c a~COQ o`° `o Ec 3QO
J O O O (n C ) a) •U -0p C 0 0 m ° j, y ai 0 c c ctl O C7
Lo 14 } d an a O L f^ Q t!j o c N o E(1) a.? u a o c ro °
Q a
rf- U C6) 42 CLLR/! 0)~ F ? N oa) E'SEnp caNOiaN a.2 U)
rnN Q O O - m he o hZ U oroa) -0 aa) m
c LL = U 2' o u) > 0 - r UJ w Q a o T~sc S) IN a) O a) 7 a) y a)
3 a y y o m
m~ 0 (6^
as U~ a E CVO 0 0 _ c( a= am ro
pa U tnQ 0 p0q)$) W (n 0 ~o~a %r E o:p D ~ m°m n~
F- N D c O~ ~d o m ~ac~v mroLL cN o
co > m
O N C (6 N O Q aa)) f6 -Z ~ a ° m v° aj m
> > Z o .w E o a a~ a ro a a) 0 ro o_m cm a
(n E P4 Q 3 C~ (D Z c> (D p p N
a) U) o m 4jv L) 0 co o o. °-Q 'N ro U)
> 3 n c~ c o p N roU o ZF- a~~l me 0m~a m ma) 2~ 3
70 o ~~mm: mayy~ ro 0
m 3 Q ca .m> > t3, -
CD CK5
'o x(622 N.C~❑OO _o P 4 ? E coy~O o,,ooacm
(n (D V') CD m FD (n (D ~N Oi ~0 O CZ c~ QLl" JNa~m mmQ~~ PELO
ti U) O N 0 o N U O co
roc o ° m 3° m- rn m
c N r a'S O N w a) of r N c ~ N 3 a= :D Q c
5 CDW N~ O tea) .0 .2 ao m3roa0 c roov~a~c ~ 0 E
O O N E L 0. o o - N m N c roa m m
end QO N cn Q c ~,N E QU) J, ~L 'E~ rom :.5; 0E m~ 0
crop o
`o L1L.C) Y j N m0 O U oC) LLJ ~ Lo v~~Em a 2 `m
m O a m m U
E ti } 73 F' B O O E C) H~ c a s~ 0, a) a 0 Q y O o o-', o _0 n)n Z~ ` O
(n 0-
N O U) c d= > cr ~°o.~N ~Ea y o V) E
a,o O_W c U NU ='o) to 3 E m0 cro - -Q E
p~ I-a QU) X L o~j oc acEOE Qwm00 m0T o
0 k a- m (a
~00 O c 2 c ~0 c~ UO w Cp).~0E .2 a)0amimro o o
d a u O Rp Q U° OZh W c p` ao ; ~.N a]o C) 0
t F- c p c U vm J oro
EL u) Z U Q QQ L o 0 Z z d QO c O a c o o m c° aN'0 a
ZLuLLJ ~ ~ v0 ~ ° (Wj-J o o~ cc°Q ~amma° m~~ o
Z~ZJULU = N U) Lii o ❑ c m romm ro~ c ~aa
QCD O. C:) _0 ~pW ®W `~~1 X aoi~ aa a ONo E4om-e mn >
J❑~C Oa) a Mn = 11~ ~ c ° o w OC3 w
Ll(nOQ❑ LO LO -0 M O Zp z0 Q N T (u UEc)ca 0 0-aro°E) a~ c
Nooa•~co saarn~ 0O0
~-.F Q> Qcoap F mmcN Qam
E 4~- - az N m o m a o- o mro o m E
c N c v c U c a O N a°
O 3 m- °N N C N (6 L p ro (6 m L o
c m O 4)
o v c m `ro ° ° m 3 C E D (a o a m c o
(13 ~ 2 co
° q) a (`a a N C) 0 o c-0 a ° (1) CY) a) m m
o m E a m
C C p - ° CO 'O N N a) o
C N
a) E o ro o o> o Cc o 4 ri m U p c c ro .O ¢
-O ° ° a) "V N to O cn Q 'N -C N E2 W Q. N = ° C V
M c > W- m LO `o E o o N Q v a c o m c `o CD ft E OU 'O° O C C 7 (V a U) LO 0 N OU
ro 3 N O ro ro 42 N co a) "D J
N ~ O
.00 C N QO .00 N ~ m cc; Lo 0) E ,O N m m m NL 'T'. p' ro C) m 7 ~O
c o aa)i N -o ° m m ° 5 ° o a E° m w 3 E E o )°t ami
° 0 Do a) - U a oro of `o o c c o mEa) Ea 3
° oo mLO o 0 r oro o ro o> Y o
0 o s° oN a m u) ro a) 2
ro n c 0 a`i 0 to o c LO U o ~ N 0 ~ a m m aa)) a.) m a c Z3 6 U o O O CO >
> N C M m o 'N NO m ~ m m c.) p '=O m '0) -Ei a) -0 ~5 m E2 F;; m
C 'O
a U O 4-- "O 0) (D C a) C a) O .O m
Q L m a5 ° C C C` m N ro co
a ° m Q a v ro° Q- ro ro m o ro m c a o > Q c (n m
c_- ff
-0 =3
O E O 7 U) !E m N E U 'O O O C .C .C O C m ° Q ro 0 U) U m a 0- CL a° > c `0 3 m
o o N° a) Ca c c ro
a) a) nEm aa)ic m oo ° Y y °o c 0 cc; m m a L o mN _
a~ ° s o °N N m c c > c roo > ro ° a) - o ro a m~ a)
3 t5
!E (D 10 - ~ ~ E a ° a) a) m o ° o > z Q `o o m o- X a o a o (n E
N° m- a) m
0) cn t_-
O •a) Q a) N
v- E O m a) a) U)' v- O O 'N6 m (O m N N -06 N C C N Q
m ~ O >p ro O .o ° _C ° t0/ m O U U N M C C E 2 m ro-> a)
30 nom c mm ° o u~ L -0 cc;
o~ o -o o c3o X w i
a) m m N U) ro C> N •U a m 3 a) 'N a) N U C m C p U c
° y a) a > C a) o C N o > C N N a) m D a) m ro C1 N N
a) b
° rom E° ro ooa -o a) a > rom ° u c > LL a'Xa °
y a
E ro > oaro a) a a om Q -oc •o•~ 0 a) 4 >c "p U oa 7 65
-0 Fu
a) U) ro cU- O o~Y c m m a > 75 :F 75 > ° ° N U) M op c ° U) d " ~ EC) o
a° E 3 o c n Qo E E m S ° 0° m m
o =o a) a3 oo ~N
(D ° > a) ,Y a) y a) 3 c O N m N ro of y ill ° o vi
ro N m N c m n Q c N o ro m ` p U. r- 7 c C ro a o 0
m oU c > fl o 0 c c' aci o m o m N U = 6 09 a)'Q c o m (U
ro
m -t6 m E U Na> N Q a) E N N E a c 3 > Q ~No
m - L6 Q c ° n E > E _ co o c o a c ai 4 m o
m S ~ Q" c a) p 3: M c- _2 a) E U m °c 3 N U a ~ a ma 5 a) n o 2~ (D u C ) ~ m~
N . ao °
y cU T o c w E a.TM o c o M m m
m = N` o. -C a) Q m E CO
ON > tf C (O ' a) ° > U O' y o- m a) N
(V > N N C > Off,
O p 'O N E W N N N m a) N E M ro O` O
N c N
= 00
t) 0 d m > ° co c ro c~ ° o ME aU a o Ec i 06 a)
-o a) mUa
> 20Lo (D m a) c°) E coi oo p L N a? m- m U ~ 0 0 m N ig: ° m L o a) m ~ N
y C9 Q.~CO 'N~ O C G N C L a
N O EQ- N N ro O
N U- C N O ro m ~ (D t2. N (n N U (h - O M US V1 O
o o 6'N
LF- c :3 c ~ ~ m C6 Q m v n c U) E w e
a? m c
m.c c ° a~ m 3
s ) m a 3 m ° ~.o ayQ.m -2 m ° ac v m - a_ aro a) o (D U) - m ° c m C6 m ° N a) o m
-m m a) c a o o ro N'~ 2 U C13 > U ° Nw o a~ CL
N m. ° OroLa - a) - ~cNm ac (Li3 aro° O °c°a C~Ua AYONN
ro a) a) E
a) O co fl Co o° N' a) E
ro N Q N N u 0 m m U m 3 -o a) p ro p p m m
ro O Q Y a ° m N Q C C CO C ro C. y N ro o F N Q 7 L Q
> c E - CY' o > N' cc ° a) m N .c > c a o a N c
d N .0+ O O L ro '°o N a E -So :t:f :L
2 m N N N O- m U o a d. L U) O U >
a ro o ->o. E c m N a a ~y N ma.E o` o f c a~
ro 3°) m3ro o U) roro a)a)m 0NC N , a -O a)m a° a) (n CL Via)
o o m c o as 1,0 y~~ a m a) a) 0 3 ~ 7 m m N N> `o 3 m sly- (6 a) N'~ a° a) E~
ro a _ n E m c N E o E = T r.c aid
3 ~a~LQro~ .E°aia) _0 co CU E s E o~ Lm ° a roE a) o> 3a m m c0Ey~m>,ai
° U o m 7 o mom 0 C- 0 0 3 o m~ m e aai ro E m ~o• c N 3 o m x
U
N N .Q U) a) O C° U U 'p N Q a) Q 7 -v U U- U)- ro N E r a) C
C a) U. o a >0 m m m
- a E Y (0 .7 Y ' E = Q Q. L:) N E- N _ > 4-
c m•- m• c y ° 4 m -0 o c a) m o' ~ ` 3 a) c a) N c- ac d o m° o
ro ~w 3 aS~°m roc a) o c N > N E E_ c a) mcm moc ro ao E o
° n c ma) a) ❑ U E E o m
E- ro c o o c c c o a) o m
m o Q a ro o c m 3 m m E°° a E~ ° ro~ E o 0 m ~ o E ° m E ° U o E c Q i o U o~~ o
- CIO E 75- om ~ o~ ~mm~cEE(D Q❑ boa ~m~) M (D=2 ova
~~OcUCC z;, o ~~m~mm
U m ro (N °7 M O.C C U N 'o C a) 3 V C E L~ N d N N N .O > D N> O f0
T U) =3 - a) Z:3 0 CL
o
~ roa c Qo ° 3~ ~Q :m n aN- c N> a N v o m T E p ~ Fa o ro n.°)IC
co
c m4- ro ma N c-a)~cmo_ mn op
E ro a2 > ❑ Nc°c U m
N0~x'8.0 (n (D ago a8Eo"occ a) a)ro~ Qmc°)i m M~M~(Oil N ooc°° ~~0-ro~
a) -0 a) a) CL
LU C c o o N O o c o E N° o ~N c riN amE a) c m U" m m"o (D cn N~ m c m m a) U m- a) a)
m 3
(L a) 0 o OiNN a) a)3 Ua) a) 303 c• = vo I CNC~ oc E o m
O N n. O N U C C ro C O O N a) ~ a - m O m "6 C m -C C 'O m e m C Q) 1] t (6 ro o o w
aNm~w,o~~'>O-~(°aoN caNi c mm~° o~ol mm~I-o Z ANY roam ~a~io°NO.~.ENU)
N- U o N U I- a)
j Q~ E a~ o ro a'cm a~~4- c ° o m a)°~ m (1) amp EIL- CU EAU QO az ~z m a m co °c)y °-°.o H-2 3 ° E o aE E a>) ifj
Q ~EmU%° myoEmv`amaN'm~E~ aroio~~E~E~UE m_>o~~mN°O~sQOa~oc cl)
po 0 m ro 6yY oiACD oQQUI~-O~ U ~~~N~WU ° oU mw 3 EAU °U °U 3S0 FO° a) N % mp•o~ a° a-o~ M a-~ m
~f o 0 H N M IL- ° (1.o c) -o (a) an Q LL (d (d .o L) -o ai o c _ Y - W fV o > n O IF) a U 3 m W (q r ~i
Z v? U o E 4i a)
co 00 Q y (V ri 4 L6 u) - H Q m U O Ld
O -
t t
I
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING
I
I
STATE OF OREGON )
County of Jackson ) I
f
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 5/24/171 caused to be mailed, by regular mail, in a sealed envelope
with postage fully prepaid, a copy of the attached planning action notice to each person
listed on the attached mailing list at such addresses as set forth on this list under each
person's name for Planning Action #2017-00707, 550 East Main.
,j4uvo-
Signature of Employee
i
DacumeW 5/23/2017
II
r
t
PA-2017-00707 391 E09AC 6300 PA-2017-00707 391 E09AC 14701 PA-2017-00707 391 E09AC 14300
BELL ROBERT BRISCOE JAMES CHRISTOPHER CONFLUENTIAL GROUP LLC
6556 PIONEER RD TRUSTEE ET AL 18 HILLCREST ST
MEDFORD, OR 97501 LA 6625 JOLLALA C, CA TO 92037 BLYTHEFIELD ASHLAND, OR 97504
PA-2017-00707 391 E09AC 6000 PA-2017-00707 391 E09AC 14700 PA-2017-00707 391 E09BD 7200
DAVIS JACK ET AL DELUCA RONALD L TRUSTEE ET AL DEWS GEORGINA R ET AL
515 E MAIN ST 228 MORNINGLIGHT DR 100 DOYLE ST STE A
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 SANTA CRUZ, CA 95062
PA-2017-00707 391 E09AC 14801 PA-2017-00707 391 E09AC 14900 PA-2017-00707 391 E09AC 6100
DHZ LLC ET AL DENNIS BAIN GENESS GEOFF/MARY ANN GOTSHALK MATTHEW L ET AL
8919 W 24TH ST P 0 BOX 1166 549 E MAIN ST
LOS ANGELES, CA 90034 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-2017-00707 391 E09BD 600 PA-2017-00707 391 E09AC 14803 PA-2017-00707 391 E09AC 5900
HALD CHRISTIAN P MD TRUSTEE ET AL MC MILLAN GLENN JR/CAROLE MCINTYRE MARTHA M TRUSTEE ET AL
PO BOX 127 416 LIBERTY ST 58 FOURTH ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-2017-00707 391 E09BD 7500 PA-2017-00707 391 E09BD 7400 PA-2017-00707 391 E09AC 6600
MICHAEL PHILIP F TRUSTEE ET AL MONTES MIGUEL A TRUSTEE ET AL RANDALL CHET C/O TED RANDALL
PO BOX 853 486 SISKIYOU BLVD 11261 SW 128 PLACE
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 MIAMI, FL 33186
PA-2017-00707 391 E09AC 14802 PA-2017-00707 391 E09AC 6200 PA-2017-00707 391 E09BD 7300
RUNKEL DAVID R/DONNAN B SPIERINGS J FRANK STEINLE PAUL/SARA M BROWN
586 E MAIN ST PO BOX 1315 478 SISKIYOU BLVD
ASHLAND, OR 97520 PHOENIX, OR 97535 ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-2017-00707 391 E09AC 14400 PA-2017-00707 391 E09AC 6500 PA-2017-00707
TUMPANE LLC VANNICE VICKI RUTHANN RAY KISTLER
555 SISKIYOU BLVD 585 EAST MAIN ST 66 WATER ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520
550 E Main Street
NOC 5/24/17
21
A
B
d z
Idt Ilia d ~ d~a
o,
sl it " t-..,_m
dd i b Y' XI ~ e ~
d
- a.A'LF i b i1 u' ltd M fl U1J~ i' p!
s
~ y
a ,
a
ail
OfOD p
s
d4 E i
add al 9
1 ,
a
I tut
6100
"0 6EM
dl MDO
dia 61 ~
11 ' a
ada
~i
71
1d'il I i
+d, 14006 14901 q,
a~
.
lieu-
720 ,1
id
Fl.
UTUU..
Al
f 4
is x 1•,~ , ,
i
c'
-d I c ~r b
itl r + small white
architects
April 19, 2017
Site Review
w
1
I,
F ;
L _ .
_ Gf<?DF t1£l.t t1l ~s~jt ^l
ed Tail Inn
550 Main
Ashland,
Submitted to:
CITY OFASHLAND PLANNING DEPARTMENT
ASHLAND, OREGON
Submitted by:
KISTLER, SMALL &WHITE
ARCHITECTS
66 WATER STREET
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ""r''
istlr + small + white
architects
PROJICT INFORMATION
PLANNING ACTION:
ADDRESS & LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
550 E. Main
Map and Tax Lot: 391E09ac TL# 14900
OWNER: ARCHITECTS:
Geoff & MaryAnn Geness Kistler Small & White
P.O. Box 1166 66 Water Street
Ashland, OR 97520 Ashland, OR 97520
541.488.8200
LAND USE PLANNING: PROJECT LANDSCAPE:
Kistler, Small & White By Owner
66 Water Street
Ashland, OR 97520
541-499-7333
ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS:
City of Ashland Fire Station #1
Cucina Biazzi
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial
ZONING DESIGNATION: C-1
ADDRESS: 550 E Main
LOT AREA:
Tax Lot 6,562 sf (.15)ac.
Redtail Inn f
April A 2017 I ~ Page a wlir;
i tl r+sm small + white
architects
PARKING: 18.92
Required: (1) per unit + Manager space = 5; 5 Provided.
APPLICABLE ORDINANCES
Site Design & Use Standards, 18.4.2
Basic Site Review, 18.4.2.040
Historic District Design Standards, 18.4.2.050
Historic District Development/ Rehabilitation Standards, 18.4.2.050
ADJACENT ZONING/USE
WEST: C-1; Commercial
EAST: C-1; Commercial
SOUTH: C-1; Commercial
NORTH: C-1; Commercial (across street)
SUBJECT SITE: C-1; Commercial
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
INTRODUCTION:
The existing Jesse McCall House has become the ReclTail Inn, located at 550 E. Main St in the C-
1 commercial zone between Ashland Fire Station #1 and the Cucina Biazzi restaurant. The
property is considered a "Historic Contributing Resource" and is currently undergoing a
revitalization and historical rejuvenation.
Phase 1 upgrades of the historic Jesse McCall house, which has been used as a commercial
hotel for over 30 years are currently underway by Steve Asher Homes. The Building
Department recently cleared the way for this phase by granting an official change of occupancy
for the historic Inn after some much needed repair with the addition of fire sprinkling was
included in the remodel. The non-compatible asbestos shingles that were removed hid
structural problems that are being rectified now. At the end of this phase, the owners request
permission to operate 3 hotel units (4 parking spaces are currently provided, and 5 spaces are
proposed in Phase 2, please see below).
I
Redtail Inn
April 20, 2017 i 0; 1
Page 3
Y
kistler + small + white
architects
This Proposed Phase 2 is for a type 1 site review of a mostly-detached, 2-unit addition behind
the existing historic house/Inn at 550 E. Main, Ashland. Upon completion, there will be a total
of 4 hotel units; two located in the main house, and two in the addition (Units 1&2 in the main
house will combine at that time to create a 213/26 unit downstairs). In the Phase 2 addition,
there will be one at-grade accessible unit, and one unit above that will share an access stair and
deck with the second floor unit of the main house. The earlier proposed rooftop deck has been
deleted per Historic Commission request and a simple gable roof form of same roof pitch and
orientation has been substituted within this application.
The Owners are requesting an exception to the 5' parking lot buffer because on the other side
of the southerly property line is a large landscaped bio-swale owned by the city fire station.
Any additional landscape buffer strip would only buffer existing permanent landscape area.
It should also be noted that there is less asphalt parking area with this proposal because the
parking area is being reduced in size by 9'x14' = 126sf. Therefore no Civil Engineering was
needed to accommodate an increase in storm water.
Redtail Inn
April 20, 2017,h iPage /
I
Y
kistler + small + white
architects
18.3.9.040 REVIEW PROCEDURES AND CRITERIA
A. Outline Plan
1. Review Procedure: The applicant will comply with the required review procedures.
2. The development meets all applicable ordinance requirements of the City
To the applicant's knowledge all City regulations are or will be met by the proposed
development.
3. Adequate key City facilities can be provided including water, sewer, paved access
to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, police and fire
protection, and adequate transportation; and that the development will not cause
a City facility to operate beyond capacity.
All utilities associated with the development of this property will be directed
towards East Main St. Adequate public facilities are available within the adjacent
rights-of-way. The applicants have worked with the various utility companies to
ensure both existing and proposed utilities are available to provide the necessary
services. At no time has there been any indication by these service providers that
services will be unavailable or exceed capacity.
An Electric Utility Plan will be developed in consultation with the City's Electric
Department, Dave Tygerson, to ensure not only capacities can be accommodated,
but to also minimize aesthetic impact to the proposed building. All electrical
services will be provided from East Main Street where the service currently exists.
All electrical work will be completed under the direction of the Ashland Electric and
Building Departments. Further, all improvements within the adjacent rights-of-way,
including construction detouring, will be completed under the direction of the
Ashland Engineering Department and the Oregon Department of Transportation
(ODOT).
Applicants have addressed or will address at the time of the building permit all
code issues relating to the Ashland Fire Department, including an FDC valve along
the front of the building. A fire hydrant is within 150' of the property boundary
with adequate pressure to service the building. All work will be completed under
the direction of the Ashland Building and/or Fire Departments.
I
Redtail Inn
April 20, 20 17
Page (w,vFil:
I
itler + small + white
architects
4. The existing and natural features of the land: such as wetlands, floodplain
corridors, ponds, large trees, rock outcropping, etc., have been identified in the
plan of the development and significant features have been included in the open
space, common areas, and unbuildable areas.
Development will be done with the least possible removal of trees, which are the
only notable natural feature of the land. Large existing Spruce Tree is on the other
side of the property and should not be impacted
5. The development of the land will not prevent adjacent land form being developed
for the uses shown in the Comprehensive Plan.
The development will not prevent development of adjacent land.
6. There are adequate provisions for the maintenance of open space and common
areas, if required or provided.
A landscape plan is submitted with application. Irrigation systems shall be installed
to assure landscaping success. In addition the Owners will provide professional
grounds keeping.
7. The development complies with the Street Standards.
No exceptions to street or sidewalk standards are requested as they exist and
conform to planning codes.
Redtail Inn
April 20, 2017 ~ :li f
Page ~ (k
I
j
istl r + small + whit
architects
CHAP I F R 18A.2, SITF DI V{=F.OPIVIIEN T AND DESIGN STANDARDS.
HISTORIC DESIGN STANDARDS:
18.4.2.050.8 HISTORIC DISTRICT/HISTORIC DISTRICT DESIGN STANDARDS:
1. Transitional Areas: The location of the proposed building is behind the existing ReclTail
Inn (Jesse McCall House).
2. Height: The new building - addition will have a similar proportion in height, width, and
mass as other buildings found in the neighborhood. It does not violate the existing scale
of the area especially when considering the Ashland Fire Station next door.
3. Scale: The new construction is similar in height as the other two-story building found
on site and elsewhere on the block with a 24'x24' building footprint. Ceilings are only 8'
tall, roof pitch matches slope and orientation of existing Jesse McCall House.
4. Massing: The addition massing is very similar to the existing Jesse McCall House; albeit
a smaller footprint, but matching floor and eave elevations.
5. Setback: Setback is only 3' on the south and west elevations, however zero setback is
allowed. 3' setback allows for a small roof overhang and minimal windows (15% max
wall area per building code at 3').
6. Roof: Standing seam metal roof, color charcoal grey.
7. Rhythms of Openings: The front entrances are well articulated in form so that they
create a medium sense of entry from the shared driveway so as not to compete with the
front, historic, main Jesse McCall House. This structure is meant to be compatible but
also as a back drop building form.
8. Form: The applicants believe the proposed buildings are traditional in symmetry,
volume, rhythm and setting, but still subservient to the historic Jesse McCall House.
9. Entrances: The entrance to the addition is under cover (deck above) and at grade for
accessibility purposes and in order to not have to construct a ramp up to the highly
raised front porch of the Jesse McCall house.
h
Redtail Inn
April 20, 2017
Page 7
itl r + small + whit
architects
18.4.2.050.C HISTORIC DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT/REHABILITATION STANDARDS OR EXISTING
BUILDINGS AND ADDITIONS:
1. Restore vs Remodel: The historic house is currently being restored. This section will
address 550 E Main, Addition specifically unless otherwise mentioned. Every effort is
being made to restore the house to as original condition as possible.
2. Rehabilitation Standards:
a. Historic architectural styles: There will not be any additions to the original
structure other than the connected 2nd floor deck with connects the two
buildings.
b. Original architectural features: The features will be as original as possible,
c. Replacement finishes: The exterior finishes will be consistent with the historic
building with real wood horizontal siding and wood clad windows, which will be
oriented vertically.
d. Diagonal and vertical siding: Vertical siding will not be used.
e. Exterior wall colors: Exterior wall colors will be historic, same as Jesse McCall
House, grey with blue and white trim.
f. Imitative materials: N/A
g. Replacement windows: Windows will be the size and placement of the original
construction. Wood windows with dark blue cladding on exterior.
h. Reconstructed Roofs: The roof will be the same pitch and form of the original
structure.
i. Asphalt or composition shingle roofs: Architect urges the city not to require
asphalt composition shingles, arguably the worst sustainable building material
with the largest footprint in our landfills every 15 years. The architect and
applicant would prefer a metal roof, because of it superior durability, quality,
environmental sustainability and performance. The ReTtail Innis being touted
as an environmentally friendly location, and would like to live up to that
standard.
j. New porches: Entry door is under the deck.
k. New detached buildings: N/A
Redtail Inn ~~,:rflr
April 20, 201 yap tin
Page 8
it r + small + white
architects
CONDITIONAL USI I'FR[\ 11 T
AMC 18.104.050 Conditional Use Permit Criteria
18.104.050 Approval Criteria
A conditional use permit shall be granted if the approval authority finds that the
proposed use conforms, or can be made to conform through the imposition of conditions,
with the following approval criteria.
A. That the use would be in conformance with all standards within the zoning district in
which the use is proposed to be located, and in conformance with relevant Comprehensive
plan policies that are not implemented by any City, State, or Federal law or program.
The applicant requests an expansion of the Hotel-use from 2 units to 3 immediately and then
to 4 units upon completion of the accessory structure, as it is in a commercial zone which
conforms with the Comprehensive Plan, located on a main arterial street.
B. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, paved access to and through
the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, and adequate transportation can and
will be provided to and through the subject property.
All utilities associated with the development of this property will be directed towards East Main
St. Adequate public facilities are available within the adjacent rights-of-way. The applicants
have worked with the various utility companies to ensure both existing and proposed utilities
are available to provide the necessary services. At no time has there been any indication by
these service providers that services will be unavailable or exceed capacity.
An Electric Utility Plan will be developed in consultation with the City's Electric Department,
Dave Tygerson, to ensure not only capacities can be accommodated, but to also minimize
aesthetic impact to the proposed building. All electrical services will be provided from "B"
and/or Oak Street where the service currently exist. All electrical work will be completed
under the direction of the Ashland Electric and Building Departments. Further, all
improvements within the adjacent rights-of-way, including construction detouring, will be
completed under the direction of the Ashland Engineering Department.
Applicants have addressed or will address at the time of the building permit all code issues
RedtalInn
20,2017
April 19
Page
I
kitl r+ small + white
architects
relating to the Ashland Fire Department. A fire hydrant is within 1S0' of the property
boundary (on the property directly across the street) with adequate pressure to service the
building. All work will be completed under the direction of the Ashland Building and/or Fire
Departments.
C. That the conditional use will have no greater adverse material effect on the livability of
the impact area when compared to the development of the subject lot with the target use of
the zone.
N/A, Commercial Zoning.
When evaluating the effect of the proposed use on the impact area, the
following factors of livability of the impact area shall be considered in relation
to the target use of the zone:
1. Similarity in scale, bulk, and coverage.
The proposal is similar in bulk and coverage to surrounding historic properties from the public
streets / views.
2. Generation of traffic and effects on surrounding streets. Increases in pedestrian, bicycle,
and mass transit use are considered beneficial regardless of capacity of facilities.
In the applicant's opinion, the proposed in traffic from 2 additional units will have no adverse
material effect on traffic on the surrounding arterial East Main or Siskiyou Blvd. streets. The
property is only one lot away from the downtown core.
3. Architectural compatibility with the impact area.
All new construction on the site will be compatible with the Historic District Design Standards
and thus compatible with the impact area.
4. Air quality, including the generation of dust, odors, or other environmental pollutants.
The proposed conditional use permit will not have any discernible increases of environmental
impacts including those related to air quality, including the generation of dust, odors, or other
environmental pollutants.
Rechail Inn
April 70, 201
Page 10 I
isl r + small + whit
architects
5. Generation of noise, light, and glare.
The proposals will not have any discernible increases of noise, light and glare.
6. The development of adjacent properties as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan.
The proposed conditional use permit will not have any material effects on the adjoining
properties as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan.
8. Other factors found to be relevant by the Hearing Authority for review of the proposed
use.
The applicants are not aware of any other factors that may be found to be relevant by the
hearing authority, but if there are factors found to be relevant, the applicants would like the
opportunity to clarify and answer questions of the hearing authority prior to a final decision.
8. Other factors found to be relevant by the Hearing Authority for review of the proposed
use.
The applicants are not aware of any other factors that may be found to be relevant by the
hearing authority, but if there are factors found to be relevant, the applicants would like the
opportunity to clarify and answer questions of the hearing authority prior to a final decision.
Prepared and Respectfully Submitted by:
P
Raymond Kistler Date
Kistler Small + White, Architects
Redoil Inn
April 20, "2011 ~ tvt,x~iYi~
Page I [ t
Landscape Plan
RedTail Inn (Jesse McCall House)
550 E. Fain St.
Ashland, OR 97520
Owners:
Geoff and MaryAnn Geness
Architect:
Ray Kistler
Landscape Designer/Manager:
Daniel Perry
Note: There will be no lawn at all.
KEY:
4 =Native grass (tall)
=Native grass (short
N'tq(i =Trailing vine/ground cover (drought resistant)
V =Bulbs/ferns
Ll =Wax leaf laurel
.Z\ = Variegated small bush
X = lavender (French, Spanish, English)
= Hydrangea
= Climbing Rose
=Boulder border (stones from property)
aoo o = Flagstone path
= Dry "streambed"
ft T =Arbor
t =Picket fence (30" tall)
-r
gu ~ ~
v
jj
12' 3"
, 6,1
r m I
o~ wD
~ G' 006 j 1944
o~ zm _ j.
Xrn ~rn
El M G)
o C)
'I ZC)
r - I
_-I - - ; - - I Cl)
I ( El
1946
ieieiil I ( `
o~
! rZ
zl
c~
_ al 0 20,e0„
8
m o b.
m
~ j
- 6
3'-0"
PROJECT SUMMARY
O
h
THE EXISTING JESSE MCCALL HOUS , LOCATED IN THE COMMERCIAL C-7°I i.
ZONE BETWEEN ASHLAND FIRE ST ION NO. I AND CUCINA BIAZZI
RESTAURANT, IS CONSIDERED AN' HISTORIC CONTRIBUTING RESOURCE"
AND IS CURRENTLY APPROVED UN ER CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
(PLANNING ACTION 2010,00355) FOR A COMMERCIAL BUSINESS AND TWO-
UNIT HOTEL. 68 WATER STREET
SUITE 101
I THE PROPOSED PROJECT WILL INC UDE A TWO STORY BUILDING WITH A ASHLAND, OR
NEW EXTERIOR STAIR THAT WILLS RVE THE THE SECOND FLOOR AND 97520
THE EXISTING HOUSE SECOND FL RUNIT. TEL.: 541.488.8200
EXISTING BUILDING
GEOFF AND MARYANN GENESS
P,O.SOX 1166
(RESTAURANT)
i ASHLAND, OREGON 87520
I
j J 560EASTh STREET
H ASHLAND,O GON 97520
rJ I~
MAP: 391 EWAC
X 490o CONSTRUCTION
ZONE: C-1
DOCUMENTS
LL \ BUILDING AREA:
''r ,CP+/ SECONDFLOOR- 480SF
® FIRST FLOOR- 4805E ~CREU (~~C
_ LLd Z d`I C-1 ZONE EXISTING TOTAL 960 SF CUG frr
4> r N AC PAVING L R Yv%lf) J. MS1tfR 1A
SHARED ACCESS LOTCOIJERAG is
72
PL 105.0' EASEMENT as_I LOr•AREte 6,562 F 15ACR y
- E)
BUILDINGS 1,398 F a e
m 1 „AA A
"90 90'
TAf4OS APE AREA 3,944 F S
,Z_/ 18'-0" 18,-D" %LANDSCAPE AREA 60.1 ~j+ A~•
Q I - l I -'I PIAVEMEN~CAPEREQD: 1220 F O~~'~
1
~
Ill COMPACT CAR ONLY COMPACT OAR ONLY I RohO I 0
I I I I/O I THERE IS NO \ NIMUMAXIMUM COVE N CAPE IS ZONE,
i
I PROVIDED MINIMUM PERCENTAGE F LANDSCAPE IS PROVIDED.
{
_9 Ld 0 \ 2 SETBACKS:
OD I U W
r I ° a J Q NO MINIMUM FRONT,SIDE OR REAR YARD REQUIRED IN G} ZONE
Q I- EXCEPT WHERE SUBJECT SITE AB S AN RESIDENTIAL ZONE
¢ I T < 2
3 4 w J PROJECT SITE DOES NOT ABUTAR SIDENTIAL ZONE. !
SOLAR SETBACKS TANOAROS DON TAPPLY7057RUCNRES 114
m N a ~I C•1ZONE EXCEPTWHERESUBJEO SITE IS WITHIN 100 FT. OFA
Fn
- RESIDENTIAL ZONE
/ REFERENCE Q 0 \
ELEVATION Y - O PROJECT SITE IS NOT WITHIN 100 .OF A RESIDENTIAL ZONE.
Q ( EXISTING I3'DIA.
BLUE SPRUCE I 19JA00 / LL
(+0'-0') r PARS:
82 I
REQUIRED-1 SPACE PER GUEST ROOM, PLUS 1 SPACE FOR
/ 11 THE OWNER OR MANAGER = 5 SPACES REQUIRED
m I L~ PROVIDED-5 PARKING SPACES (3 ANDARDt 2COh9PACT) Z
\ Z
\8110 DING CONSTRUCTION:
.49 I W \
II / CONSTRUCTION TYPE V-N(SPRINRED) 1
y I I UP EXISTIN3 / ! I \
-R°" EXISTING2-STORY 0
"JESSE
SE McCALL"HOUSE z
~I W
pb wpy oNCRE E NOW: RED TAIL INN
He o LANDSCAPE
I ® I l Z ~0
z
m I
2 I
CF)
o / Aa.1 I I jf LL I
E I / I co n/LIJ O
2 I I / I / I \ `L A Z
m I J/r V/ I
EXISTING LANDSCAPE ,I - I Q
= TOREMAIN Q 0 W I
Lt.l L0 0
L0 (D Ln< I
e I / f REVISIONS 3
C-1 ZONE
I
m
l LINE OF DECK ABOVE
it
r
t
r it EXISTING 4' MULTIdRUNK
IAIN / - k
EXISTING 6 FT. NIGH
o I CX
CHAIN @
IJNK FENCE - DECIDUOUS TREE - -
I b I
I I I
PL 105.0- LANDSCAPE
m
--a-= ~°-°-~-=j °--a---=-~ i---~®°- -=--e = - ~=°-~---°e--°-- SITE PLAN &
6 ZONING
s SUMMARY
a
PROJECTNO.: 16016
t ISSUE DATE: 04/19117
C-1 ZONE ASHLAND FIRE STATION N0.1 UNITS 3 AND 4 SHEET:
SITE - PLAN 1 /Q®.1
3116" =1'-0"
(1 -
I
Street View
54~(= 9,r`7
l u
\r
5
U E
C
L
L El
000
ILI
i
a 7 C
1 ~
'ggip
I
Side View 2
i
550 EAST MAIN ® RED TAIL INN
Tal lark CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS
0411911' WITH UNITS 3AND4
i
ROOF
WORK-LEVEL2
i r
r
i
----LEVEL I
GRADE _n
S-s,
BASEMENT PLAN
7
6
a
ZONING PERMIT APPLICATION
Planning Division
- 51 Winburn Way, Ashland OR 97520
CITY o F 541-488-5305 Fax 541-488-6006 FILE #
,ASHLAND DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT t r
DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Pursuing LEEDO Certification? ❑ YES ❑ NO
Street Address- a( c
Assessor's Map No. 39 1 E Tax Lot(s) / 6
~ r
Zoning, Comp Plan Designation
f
APPLICANT
Name 00W& e4Phone 50a - 9 °14 Mail e S i`yAA,
Address City r zip
PROPERTY OWNER
Name ° r ~ t -AS Phones '2- + -°gf¢7.3 E-Mail 0\ N PV1 e-S
`
Address City. Zip S1°-
SURVEYOR ENGINEER ARCHITECT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OTHER
Title C % Name s .If Phone Aff _8 NE-Mail
Address City Zip
Title Name Phone E-Mail
Address City Zip'
I hereby certify that the statements and information contained in this application, including the enclosed drawings and the required findings of fact, are in all respects,
true and correct. 1 understand that all property pins must be shown on the drawings and visible upon the site inspection. In the event the pins are not shown or their
location found to be incorrect, the owner assumes full responsibility. I further understand that if this request is subsequently contested, the burden will be on me to
establish:
1) that 1 produced sufficient factual evidence at the hearing to support this request,-
2) that the findings of fact furnished justifies the granting of the request;
3) that the findings of fact furnished by me are adequate; and further
4) that all structures or improvements are properly located on the ground.
Failure in this regard will result most likely in not only the request being set aside, but also possibly in my structures being built in reliance thereon being required to
be remove at my e 1 ve any ubts, l a advised to seek competent professional advice and agsist nice. f
Applica s ignature Date
As owner of the propert ' 1v in this request,) have read and understood the complete application and its consequences to me as a property
owner c r
Property wn is Signature (required) Date
[To be completed by City Staft)
Date Received Zoning Permit Type Filing Fee $
OVER 00
Glcomm-dev~planningWomis & HandoutsVoning Permit Application.doc
,.l.V M1 .~i tai
Job Address: 550 E MAIN ST Contractor:
ASHLAND OR 97520 Address:
C
A Owner's Name: GEOFF/MARYANN GENESS Phone:
P Customer 09312 N State Lie No:
P GEOFF/MARYANN GENESS T City Lie No:
L Applicant: 665 E ASHLAND LN R
I Address: ASHLAND OR 97520 A
C C Sub-Contractor:
A Phone: (503) 998-9460 T Address:
N Applied: 04/24/2017 0
Y Issued:
Expires: 10/21/2017 R Phone:
State Lie No:
Maplot: 391 E09AC14900 City Lie No:
DESCRIPTION: Commercial Site Review and Conditional Use Permit to expand from two to four guest units
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
Conditional Use Permit Type 1 1,022.00 Commercial Site Review (type1) 1,397.00
r
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
i
I
I
it
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: $ 2,419.00 $ 2,419.00
or local laws, ordinances, or regulations rests solely with the
applicant. Sub-Total: $ 2,419.00
Fees Paid: $ 2,419.00
Applicant Date Total Amount Due: $ 0
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tel: 541-488-5305
20 East Main St. Fax: 541-488-5311
Ashland, OR 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900
www.ashland.or.us
Inspection Request Line: 541-552-2080 CITY F