Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMaple_330_PA-2017-01507 October 14, 2017 Dear Derek Severson, I see that the notice of final decision has arrived regarding the building project for 330 Maple Street. This email is to relay information to you regarding a meeting I had with Mark Reitinger on September the 27th to review the proposal at the site and talk about its impact on the residential neighborhood. Mr. Reitinger was cordial and very willing to talk through the elements of concern that I expressed in the letter I presented to the Development Commission. He was also willing to make certain adjustments to mitigate the new building's impact on the neighborhood. Specifically these were the following: 1) Remove a "street light" on the current proposal, from the western corner of the property facing Maple Street. It isn't necessary, and would have shined light into the neighborhood. 2) Move the "street light" currently placed on the sidewalk, center to the drop off on Maple Street closer to the building and reversing its direction to shine into the drop off area and building. In this new location it will illuminate the building and drop off rather than the neighborhood. The trees and landscaping in the bay adjacent to the drop off will also serve as a light shield. 3) Remove "sconce" lights from the westernmost section of the building (just beyond the drop off section) on the Maple Street side. These two lights would have been directly across from our house at 345 Maple Street. 4) We talked about a transformer that will be place on the Chestnut side and then wired to a panel located on the building on the Maple Street side near the westernmost corner of the building. Mr. Reitinger assured me that this panel was not noisy-would not hum. 5) He did say that a generator will be placed midway in the back of the building (facing the west neighborhood). This generator will run for an hour a month ("exercised") and can be timed to happen during the day and workweek. We also talked about timeline and the impact of construction. He said construction would take between 1.5 and 2 years: Lots of excavation and daytime noise. I certainly get this, and I told him I understood and would just want to establish a line of communication so that if I or another neighbor had a concern we would be able to be heard. This is a public letter, so please feel free to share this with any appropriate parties. Sincerely, Deltra Ferguson (345 Maple Street deltraferguson@gmail.com) I - LIJ October 11, 2017 Notice of Final Decision The Ashland Planning Commission has approved the request for the following: Planning Action: PA-2017-01507 Subject Property: 330 Maple Street t' Applicant: Maple LLC Description: A request for Site Design Review approval to construct a new 29,400 square foot mixed-use building consisting of basement parking, medical suites on the first floor and two residential units on the second floor for the property located at 330 Maple Street. The application includes: a request for Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards to allow automobile circulation between the building and the street to allow a patient drop-off area from Maple Street; a request for an Exception to Street Standards to allow a smaller than typically-required separation between driveways; and a Tree Removal Permit to remove two trees six-inches in diameter at breast height (d.b.h.) or greater. The Planning Commission's decision becomes final and effective ten days after this 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 docu vents 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. This decision may be appealed to the Ashland City Council if a Notice of Appeal is filed prior to the effective date of the decision and with the required fee ($325), in accordance with section 18.5.1.060.1 of the Ashland Municipal Code, which is also attached. The appeal may not be made directly to the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals. If you have any questions regarding this decision, please contact Derek Severson in the Community Development Department at (541) 488-5305. cc: Maple LLC Reitinger & Associates Sandow Engineering Deltra Ferguson COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel: 541A88-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 7 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 l wmv.ashland.or.us i i s SECTION 18.5.1.060.1 1. Appeal of Type H Decision. The City Council may call up a Type II decision pursuant to section 18.5.1.060.J. A Type H decision may also be appealed to the Council as follows. 1. Who May Appeal. Appeals may only be filed by parties to the plarming action. "Parties" shall be defined as the following. a. The applicant. b. Persons who participated in the public hearing, either orally or in writing. Failure to participate in the public hearing, either orally or in writing, precludes the right of appeal to the Council, c. Persons who were entitled to receive notice of the action but did not receive notice due to error. 2. Appeal Filing Procedure. a. Notice of Appeal. Any person with standing to appeal, as provided in subsection 18.5.1.060.1.1, above, may appeal a Type H decision by filing a notice of appeal and paying the appeal fee according to the procedures of this subsection. b. Thne for Filing. The notice of appeal shall be filed with the City Administrator within ten days of the date the notice of decision is mailed. c. Content of Notice of Appeal. The notice shall include the appellant's name, address, a reference to the decision sought to be reviewed, a statement as to how the appellant qualifies as a party, the date of the decision being appealed, and a clear and distinct identification of the specific grounds for which the decision should be reversed or modified, based on identified applicable criteria or procedural irregularity. 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. Mailed Notice. The City shall mail the notice of appeal together with a notice of the date, time, and place to consider the appeal by the City Council to the parties, as provided in subsection 18.5.1.060.H.1, at least 20 days prior to the meeting. 4. Scope of Appeal. a. Except upon the election to reopen the record as set forth in subsection 18.5.1.060.I.4.b, below, the review of a decision of the Planning Commission by the City Council shall be confined to the record of the proceeding before the Commission. The record shall consist of the application and all materials submitted with it; documentary evidence, exhibits, and materials submitted during the hearing or at other times when the record before the Commission was open; recorded testimony; (including DVDs when available), the executed decision of the Commission, including the findings and conclusions. In addition, for purposes of Council review, the notice of appeal and the written arguments submitted by the parties to the appeal, and the oral arguments, if any, shall become part of the record of the appeal proceeding. b. Reopening the Record. The City Council may reopen the record and consider new evidence on a limited basis, if such a request to reopen the record is made to the City Administrator` together with the filing of the notice of appeal and the City Administrator determines prior to the Council appeal hearing that the requesting party has demonstrated one or more of the following. i. That the Planning Commission committed a procedural error, through no fault of the 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 ~~__I requesting party, that prejudiced the requesting party's substantial rights and that reopening the record before the Council is the only means of correcting the error. ii. That a factual error occurred before the Commission through no fault of the requesting party which is relevant to an approval criterion and material to the decision. iii. That new evidence material to the decision on appeal exists which was unavailable, through no fault of the requesting party, when the record of the proceeding was open, and during the period when the requesting party could have requested reconsideration. A requesting party may only qualify for this exception if he or she demonstrates that the new evidence is relevant to an approval criterion and material to the decision. This exception shall be strictly construed by the Council in order to ensure that only relevant evidence and testimony is submitted to the hearing body. iv. Re-opening the record for purposes of this section means the submission of additional written testimony and evidence, not oral testimony or presentation of evidence before the Council. 5. Appeal Hearing Procedure. The decision of the City Council is the final decision of the City on an appeal of a Type II decision, unless the decision is remanded to the Planning Commission. a. Oral Arguanent. Oral argument on the appeal shall be permitted before the Council. Oral argument shall be limited to ten minutes for the applicant, ten for the appellant, if different, and three minutes for any other party who participated below. A party shall not be permitted oral argument if written arguments have not been timely submitted. Written arguments shall be submitted no less than ten days prior to the Council consideration of the appeal. Written and oral arguments on the appeal shall be limited to those issues clearly and distinctly set forth in the notice of appeal; similarly, oral argument shall be confined to the substance of the written argument. b. Scope of Appeal Deliberations. Upon review, and except when limited reopening of the record is allowed, the Council shall not re-examine issues of fact and shall limit its review to determining whether there is substantial evidence to support the findings of the Planning Commission, or to determining if errors in law were committed by the Commission. Review shall in any event be limited to those issues clearly and distinctly set forth in the notice of appeal. No issue may be raised on appeal to the Council that was not raised before the Commission with sufficient specificity to enable the Commission and the parties to respond. c. Council Decision. The Council may affirm, reverse, modify, or remand the decision and may approve or deny the request, or grant approval with conditions. The Council shall make findings and conclusions, and make a decision based on the record before it as justification for its action. The Council shall cause copies of a final order to be sent to all parties participating in the appeal. Upon recommendation of the Administrator, the Council may elect to summarily remand the matter to the Planning Commission. If the Council elects to remand a decision to the Commission, either summarily or otherwise, the Commission decision shall be the final decision of the City, unless the Council calls the matter up pursuant to subsection 18.5.1.060.J. 6. Record of the Public Hearing. For purposes of City Council review, the notice of appeal and the IF written arguments submitted by the parties to the appeal, and the oral arguments, if any, shall become part of the record of the appeal proceeding. The public hearing record shall include the following information. a. The notice of appeal and the written arguments submitted by the parties to the appeal. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel: 541A88-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.orms ` i b. Copies of all notices given as required by this chapter, and correspondence regarding the application that the City mailed or received. c. All materials considered by the hearings body including the application and all materials submitted with it. l d. Documentary evidence, exhibits and materials submitted during the hearing or at other times when the record before the Planning Commission was open. e. Recorded testimony (including DVDs when available). f. All materials submitted by the Staff Advisor to the hearings body regarding the application; g. The minutes of the hearing. g. The final written decision of the Commission including findings and conclusions. 7. Effective Date and Appeals to State Land Use Board of Appeals. City Council decisions on Type II applications are final the date the City mails the notice of decision. Appeals of Council decisions on Type 11 applications must be filed with the State Land Use Board of Appeals, pursuant to ORS 197.805 - 197.860. i COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel: 541488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 f Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 r=7° www.ashiand.or.us i( ~ J BEFORE THE' PLANNING COMMISSION October 10, 2017 IN THE MATTER OF PLANNING ACTION #2017-01507, A REQUEST FOR SITE ) DESIGN REVIEW APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A NEW 29,400 SQUARE FOOT ) MIXED-USE BUILDING CONSISTING OF BASEMENT PARING, MEDICAL ) SUITES ON THE FIRST FLOOR AND TWO RESIDENTIAL UNITS ON THE ) SECOND FLOOR FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 330 MAPLE STREET. THE) APPLICATION INCLUDES: A REQUEST FOR EXCEPTION TO THE SITE DEVEL-) F INDINGS, OPMENT AND DESIGN STANDARDS TO ALLOW AUTOMOBILE CIRCULA- ) CONCLUSIONS, TION BETWEEN THE BUILDING AND THE STREET TO ALLOW A PATIENT ) & ORDERS DROP-OFF AREA FROM MAPLE STREET; AND A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT ) TO REMOVE TWO TREES SIX-INCHES IN DIAMETER AT BREAST HEIGHT ) (D.B.H.) OR GREATER. ) j; O ER/APPLICANT: Maple LLC/Reitinger & Associates, Inc. ) __________________________________®___-_-_-__---__--___-_-_--____-_-_----_-_--_____-_-_---_---_m___-__________ RECITALS: 1) Tax lots #2000 of Map 39 lE 05DB is located at 330 Maple Street and is zoned HC, Health Care. 2) The applicants are requesting Site Design Review approval to construct a new 29,400 square foot mixed-use building consisting of basement parking,, medical suites on the first floor and two residential units on the second floor for the property located at 330 Maple Street. The application includes a request for Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards to allow automobile circulation between the building and the street to allow a patient drop-off area from Maple Street, and for a Tree Removal Permit to remove two trees six-inches in diameter at breast height (d.b.h.) or greater. The proposal is outlined in plans on file at the Department of Community Development. 3) The criteria for Site Design Review approval for a new subdivision are described in AMC 18.5.2.050 as follows: A. Underlying Zone: The proposal complies with all of the applicable provisions of the underlying zone (part 18.2), including but not limited to: building and yard setbacks, lot area and dimensions, density and floor area, lot coverage, building height, building orientation, architecture, and other applicable standards. B. Overlay Zones: The proposal complies with applicable overlay zone requirements (part 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. PA #2017-01507 October 10, 2017 Page 1 f 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 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 difficulo) 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. 4) The criteria for a Tree Removal Permit are described in AMC 18.5.7.040.13 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 ofproperty damage to an existing structure or facility, and such hazard or danger cannot reasonably be alleviated by treatment, relocation, or pruning. See definition of hazard tree in part 18.6 b. The City may require the applicant to mitigate for° the removal of each hazard tree pursuant to section 18.5.7.050. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit. 2. Tree That is Not a Hazard. A Tree Removal Permit for a tree that is not a hazard shall be granted if the approval authority finds that the application meets all of the following criteria, or can be made to conform through the imposition of conditions. 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 18.10. 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. PA #2017-01507 October 10, 2017 Page 2 i i i 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. 5) The Planning Commission, following proper public notice, held a public hearing on September 12, 2017 at which time testimony was received and exhibits were presented. Subsequent to the closing of the hearing, the Planning Commission approved the application subj ect to conditions pertaining to the appropriate development of the site. Now, therefore, the Planning Commission of the City of Ashland finds, concludes and recommends as follows: SECTION 1. EXHIBITS For the purposes of reference to these Findings, the attached index of exhibits, data, and testimony will be used. Staff Exhibits lettered with an "S" Proponent's Exhibits, lettered with a "P" Opponent's Exhibits, lettered with an "O" I' Hearing Minutes, Notices, Miscellaneous Exhibits lettered with an "M" SECTION 2. FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS 2.1 The Planning Commission finds that it has received all information necessary to make a decision based on the staff report, public hearing testimony and the exhibits received. 2.2 The Planning Commission finds that the proposal for Site Design Review, Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards and Tree Removal Permit approvals meets all applicable criteria for Site Design Review described in AMC 18.5.2.050; for an Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards described in AMC 18.4.5.2.050.E; and for a Tree Removal Permit as described in AMC PA #2017-01507 October 10, 2017 Page 3 18.5.7.040.B. i 2.3 The Planning Commission finds that within the HC zoning district, Site Review for new buildings or additions greater than 15,000 square feet is subject to a "Type II" application procedure which requires a decision by the Planning Commission through a public hearing. Site Design Review approval is considered in light of the approval criteria in AMC 18.5.2.050 as wells as the "Building Placement, Orientation and Design" standards for non-residential development in AMC 18.4.2.040. The first criterion for Site Design Review approval is that, "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 Planning Commission finds that the proposed development complies with applicable provisions for the underlying zone detailed in AMC 18.2 including setbacks, lot area, dimension, density, floor area, building height, building orientation,! architecture, and other applicable standards. With regard to lot coverage, the application indicates that a Variance is requested to allow a 66 percent lot coverage where the HC zone limits coverage to 65 percent. The Plamling Commission finds that the plans provided identify the project impervious surfaces as being limited to 64 percent. It appears that the 66 percent coverage described was based on an earlier iteration of the plan with a longer service corridor along the west property line, and that the expanded staff lawn area now shown in this location resolves any coverage issue and eliminates the need for a Variance. The second approval criterion is that, "The proposal complies with applicable overlay zone requirements (part 18.3). " The Planning Commission finds that the property is located within the Health Care Services District overlay zone. Within this overlay, both residential uses and clinics for doctors including but not limited to opticians are outright permitted uses. The proposal complies with the building height, setback and coverage requirements of the overlay. The third criterion for the Site Design Review approval is that, "The proposal complies with the applicable Site Development and Design Standards ofpart 18.4, except as provided by subsection E (which addresses Exceptions) below." In this instance, the applicable standards are those for Basic Site Review found in AMC 18.4.2.040.B. seeking: ® Primary orientation toward a street rather than parking, with automobile circulation and parking not allowed between the building and the street and parking instead located behind or to one side. ® A building fagade or multiple building facades occupying a large majority of the street frontage. ® Building entrances oriented to the street and accessed from a public sidewall<, which entrances designed to be clearly visible, functional, and open to the public during all business hours. ® Building entrances located within 20 feet of the street, and where located on a corner lot, entrances oriented to the higher order street or the corner and the building located as close to the intersection corner as practicable. PA #2017-01507 October 10, 2017 Page 4 i; k;.j Public sidewall<s. ® One street tree chosen from the street tree list shall be placed for each 30 feet of frontage. © Landscaped areas at least ten feet in width shall buffer buildings adjacent to streets. I Landscaping and recycle/refuse disposal areas provided. ® Noise and glare standards addressed. The Planning Commission finds that the proposed building is to be oriented to the corner, with the building facades occupying a large majority of the frontage. A patient drop-off drive with circulation between the building and the street is proposed from Maple Street, but parking is provided in the basement. Sidewalks with street trees are to be provided along Chestnut Street with pedestrian access directly to the corner s entry, and landscaping provided in required yard areas along both street frontages. Recycling and refuse disposal areas are screened from the service corridor provided uphill of the building. C The application includes parking calculations indicating that 38.57 parking spaces are required for medical office use, while 3.5 parking spaces are required for the two proposed residential units for a total off-street parking requirement of 42.07 spaces. The applicants propose a mixed-use parking credit of 3.5 parking spaces as the peals parking demand of the medical and residential office uses would be materially off-set, and a 1.0 parking space credit for providing five additional bicycle parking spaces beyond the nine spaces required for the proposed use. This would reduce the off-street parking demand to 37.57 (38) spaces, and the application illustrates 39 spaces proposed including 36 spaces in the basement parking garage, two parallel spaces off of the delivery driveway, and one space off of the patient drop-off drive. In addition, the application illustrates six available on-street spaces along the subject property's frontage although no off-street parking credit is requested. The fourth approval criterion for Site Design Review addresses city facilities and requires that, "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." With regard to the various public utilities, the Commission finds that: ® Electricity: The Electric Department has noted that while there is available capacity in the adjacent overhead lines, there are no facilities currently in place in the immediate vicinity to serve the subject property. The applicants will need to extend services to the site and provide a new transformer on the property, which is complicated by the proposed on-site stormwater detention, site grades, and the need for the service corridor at the rear to maintain access to the trash and recycling facilities. The applicants are working with the Electric Department to identify the facilities necessary to serve the proposed building and develop a final electric service plan for the site. ® Water: The Public Works Department has noted that the property is currently served by six-inch water mains in the adjacent rights-of-way for both Maple and Chestnut Streets. New connections and services will need to be extended by the applicants. PA #2017-01507 October 10, 2017 Page 5 ® Sewer: The Public Works Department has noted that the property is currently served by six-inch sanitary sewer mains in the adjacent rights-of-way for both Maple and Chestnut Streets. New connections and services will need to be extended by the applicants. ® Urban storm drainage: The Public Works Department has noted that the property is currently served by a 12-inch storm sewer main in Maple Street, and that there is currently a catch basin in place at the northeast corner of the lot. Public Works/Engineering staff have noted that the storm drain and catch basin are not currently functioning properly as grades are such that drainage misses the existing catch basin; this is not a capacity issue but rather a problem in the design of the existing infrastructure and staff and the project civil engineer are working to correct this issue with a revised stormwater drainage plan for the site. ® Paved Access & Adequate Transportation: o Chestnut Street - The property has approximately 180 linear feet of frontage on Chestnut Street. Chestnut is a Neighborhood Collector Street and city standard frontage improvements would typically require five- to eight-foot parkrow planting strips with irrigated street trees every 30 feet, and a six- to eight-foot sidewalk. Chestnut Street is currently improved with paving, curb, gutter, and an approximately four-foot wide curbside sidewalk in place along the property's full frontage, and there are no parkrow planting strips in place. The applicants propose a six-foot sidewalk with a five-foot hardscape parkrow, with street trees to be provided in standard five-foot tree wells with grates. While the application does not propose to rely on on-street parking credits to meet project parking requirements, this more commercial frontage treatment is intended to facilitate the use of on-street parking spaces along the subject property's street frontage. o Maple Street - The property has approximately 150 linear feet of frontage on Maple Street. Maple is a Neighborhood Street, and city standard frontage improvements would typically require seven- to eight-foot parkrow planting strips with irrigated street trees every 30 feet, and L five- to six-foot sidewalks. Maple Street is currently improved with paving, curb, gutter, and an approximately four-foot wide curbside sidewalk in place along the property's full frontage, and there are no parkrow planting strips in place. The applicants propose to continue the existing curbside sidewalk configuration on this frontage, with street trees to be provided in the landscaped area proposed directly behind the sidewalk and existing trees to be preserved where possible. The application also includes an assessment by Kelly Sandow of Sandow Engineering, who has determined that: the project will generate no more than 49 vehicle trips during the PM peak hour; is not installing any traffic control devices or geometric improvements; and is not expected to generate more than 20 additional heavy vehicle trips during the day. As such, the proposal does not exceed any of the threshold levels which would trigger a Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA). ® Trash and Recycling: The application identifies a service corridor coming off of Maple Street which would share a driveway entrance with the patient drop-off and provide truck access to a screened trash and recycling enclosure. In preliminary review by Recology Ashland, they have indicated that the enclosure may not be large enough, and may require individual rolling cans for the two residential units in addition PA 42017-01507 October 10, 2017 Page 6 f i to the commercial dumpsters proposed. The applicants have been made aware of this potential issue, 4! and advised to contact staff at Recology Ashland. i Conditions have been included below to require that final civil engineering plans including electric service and utility plans, street improvement plans, grading and drainage plans be provided for the review and approval of the Staff Advisor and city departments prior to the submittal of a building permit. 4 2.4 The Planning Commission finds that the application proposes a patient drop-off area to be accessed from a circular driveway from Maple Street, and requests an Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards (AMC 18.4.2.040.B.1.a) to allow the proposed automobile circulation between the building and the street. 4+ The approval criteria for an Exception are that, "])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 adjacentproperties; and approval of the exception is consistent with the stated pui pose 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 »neeting 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 application emphasizes that a patient drop-off which is safely off-street and a relatively short transport is essential to a medical practice of this specialty as many patients are too frail to manage more than getting out of their car, being assisted by a wheelchair or staff members, and transported a short distance into the clinic. The Planning Commission finds that the site has unique sloping conditions for a Health Care zone, and that the solution proposed not only meets the needs of the medical practice but also helps reduce drop- off traffic congestion that would otherwise block the street or adjacent residential driveways. 2.5 The Planning Commission finds that while the application discusses an Exception to Street Standards (AMC 18.4.3.080.C) to allow a smaller than typically-required separation between driveways, the separation between the subject property's existing Maple Street driveway and the driveway immediately uphill is an existing, non-conforming condition which the application is not exacerbating. Maple Street here is a neighborhood street and controlled access standards call for a minimum 24-foot separation between driveways for two units or fewer per lot, and a 50-foot separation for three or more units per lot. In this instance, the existing curb cut on Maple Street is 19 feet from the driveway uphill to the west, and the applicants propose to utilize this existing curb cut for access to serve both their service corridor and patient drop-off, noting that the drop-off is needed because roughly 31 percent of patients are dropped off for their appointments by a driver leaving to do other things during the appointment time, and that the drop-off avoids traffic that would otherwise block Maple Street with drivers trying to make drop- off's from the street. The applicants further note that the proposed configuration will keep larger vehicles off of the street while they are servicing the building for trash, recycling, delivery or other services, and patients using the one-way circulation of the drop-off will exit the property an additional 38 feet to the east. In addition, the applicants note that the existing driveway in this location serves 12 off-street parking spaces, and by shifting these spaces to basement parking they believe that there is an opportunity to PA #2017-01507 October 10, 2017 Page 7 i t 1 positively impact the residential neighbors while retaining the existing curb cut and addressing the need for a patient drop-off on this site. The Planning Commission finds that while the proposed driveway r separation does not meet the current standard, it is an existing condition which is not being impacted by the request and as such does not require an Exception. 2.6 The Planning Commission finds that the application materials identify 14 trees on and adjacent to the property which are six-inches or greater in diameter at breast height, and note that these are a mix of deciduous and coniferous trees. While the application suggests that some trees will be significantly c impacted by sidewalk replacements, and that those that will not be affected will be protected and preserved, the Landscaping Plan identifies only two of the trees for removal: one conifer near the northwest corner of the existing building which is not identified on the tree survey but which will be impacted both by the demolition of the existing building and by the placement of the new drop-off drive, and the other a ten-inch d.b.h. deciduous tree which will be located just south of the patient drop off drive and which will be impacted by the sidewalk replacement. The Planning Commission finds that the application materials are somewhat unclear with regard to trees L in that the narrative provided suggests that more trees are to be removed than are shown to be removed on the Landscaping Plan provided, and no report from an arborist has been provided either to assess the trees' present conditions or abilities to accommodate the redevelopment of the site or to identify specific measures for their protection. The Planning Commission further finds that the two tree removals detailed in the Landscaping Plan are necessary to accommodate the demolition of the existing building and redevelopment of the site as proposed, which is in keeping with the Health Care zoning. The Commission further finds that an arborist will need to fully assess all of the site's trees and that a Tree Protection Plan based on the arborist's report will need to be prepared for the review and approval of the Staff Advisor prior to the issuance of a building permit. Should the arborist determine that additional removals are necessary, a modification of the approval would be necessary, and would need to be considered by the Tree Commission. Conditions to this effect have been included below. 2.7 The Planning Commission finds that, as noted in the application materials, the proposed multi- level building will serve a low-mobility patient demographic; provide unique solutions to a challenging sloped site and existing parking impacts imposed by the neighboring Ashland Community Hospital; and thoughtfully address the transition between the Healthcare Services overlay and adjacent residential zones. Development of the property is challenged both by Maple Street's topography and by adjacent development. The presence of Asante Ashland Community Hospital (AACH) immediately across the street brings with it a considerable parking demand which frequently consumes all of the available on- street parking in the vicinity, including both of the subject property's full street frontages, and which makes it imperative that the subject property accommodate its full off-street parking demand on site rather than relying on on-street parking credits. The property's topography makes this a challenge in that it slopes from Chestnut up Maple by approximately 15 percent, and the applicants must not only accommodate parking on a sloped site but also do so in a way that will serve a clientele with physical and visual impairments. The applicants have responded by taking full advantage of the site's topography, excavating to place proposed parking in the basement beneath the first floor of medical suites while providing a patient drop-off directly to the first floor from Maple Street. Required off-street parking is accommodated entirely on the subject property while allowing for the full redevelopment of this long- PA #2017-01507 October 10, 2017 Page 8 f G dilapidated property in keeping with the underlying Healthcare Services overlay, and by using an existing curb cut on Maple Street to serve not only the drop-off but also a screened service corridor on the uphill side of the building, thereby providing a larger separation between the new building and the existing home above while site topography, associated retaining and proposed vegetative screening buffer the corridor. The Commission finds that the proposal complies with all applicable standards found in the Ashland Land Use Ordinance and merits approval. SECTION 3. DECISION E 3.1 Based on the record of the Public Hearing on this matter, the Planning Commission concludes that the proposal for Site Design Review, Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards, and a Tree Removal Permit is supported by evidence contained within the whole record. The proposal will re-develop a long-neglected property in an otherwise already developed neighborhood with eight new Earth Advantage® Platinum homes, and in so doing construct new sidewalks along the property's fall frontage while limiting the number of driveways to two to minimize conflict points in the streetscape opposite Helman Elementary School. Therefore, based on our overall conclusions, and upon the proposal being subject to each of the following conditions, we approve Planning Action #2017-01507. Further, if any one or more of the conditions below are found to be invalid, for any reason whatsoever, then Planning Action #2017-01507 is denied. The following are the conditions and they are attached to the approval: 1. That all proposals of the applicant shall be conditions of approval unless otherwise modified herein. 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 conformance with those approved as part of this application, an application to modify the current Site Design Review approval shall be submitted and approved prior to issuance of a building permit. 3. That permits shall be obtained from the Ashland Public Works/Engineering Division prior to any work in the public right of way. New driveway approaches shall be permitted through the Public Works/Engineering Division and driveway curb cuts shall be installed, inspected and approved prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 4. That the recommendation from the Tree Commission from its September 7, 2017 meeting that the street trees be selected from the Approved Street Tree Guide to be larger stature shade trees at maturity, and preferably three-inch caliper at planting, shall be a condition of approval where consistent with applicable criteria and standards and with final approval by the Staff Advisor. 5. That a Demolition Permit shall be obtained from the Building Division if deemed necessary by the Building Official prior to any demolition of existing buildings. 6. That a sign permit shall be obtained prior to installation of any new signage. Signage shall meet the requirements of Chapter 18.4.7 and shall meet the requirements of 18.2.4.040 if located in a vision clearance area. I PA #2017-01507 October 10, 2017 Page 9 f i 7. That the front entrance at the corner shall remain functional and open to the public during all business hours. 8. That, in light of the mixed use parking credit and the parking constraints in the neighborhood, no parking spaces shall be reserved for the exclusive use of the residential units. 9. That the building permit submittals shall include: a. Building permit plans shall include the identification of all easements, including but not limited to any public or private utility easements. b. Building permit plans shall include solar setback calculations demonstrating that all new construction complies with the applicable solar access standard. Permit submittals shall include elevation drawings or cross sections clearly identifying the highest shadow producing point(s) and their height(s) from natural grade and calculations in the form of [(Height - 6)/(0.445 + Slope) - - Required Solar Setback]. C. That a final utility plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning, Engineering, and Building Divisions prior to signature of the final survey plat. The utility plan shall include the location of connections to all public facilities including the locations is of water lines and meter sizes, fire hydrants, sanitary sewer lines, storm drain lines and electric services. d. That the location and final engineering for all storm drainage improvements associated with the project, shall be submitted for review and approval by the Departments of Public Works, Planning and Building Divisions prior to signature of the final survey plat. Storm water from all new impervious surfaces and run-off 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. e. That the applicant shall submit an electric design and distribution plan including load calculations and locations of all primary and secondary services including transformers, cabinets and all other necessary equipment. This plan must be reviewed and approved by the Electric Department prior to the signature of the final survey plat. Transformers and cabinets shall be located in areas least visible from streets and outside of vision clearance areas, while considering the access needs of the Electric Department. f. That the engineered construction drawings for the public sidewalk along Chestnut Street shall be submitted for review and approval of the Ashland Planning and Engineering Divisions prior to work in the street right-of-way and prior to installation of improvements in the pedestrian corridor. The sidewalk shall be a minimum of six-feet in width with five- foot width hardscape parkrows and street trees in city standard five-foot square tree grates between the sidewalk and the street. All frontage improvements, including but not limited to the sidewalk, street trees, and street lighting, shall be constructed across the entire frontage of the site, inspected and approved prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The sidewalk shall be constructed to City of Ashland Street Standards. If necessary to provide required frontage improvements, the area necessary for street improvements shall be dedicated as public street right-of-way or a public pedestrian access easement provide. Right-of-way dedications or easements shall be submitted for review and approval of the Planning and Engineering Divisions. PA #2017-01507 October 10, 2017 Page 10 i C E` I' g. That the engineered construction drawings for the public sidewalk along Maple Street shall be submitted for review and approval of the Ashland Planning and Engineering Divisions { prior to work in the street right-of-way and prior to installation of improvements in the pedestrian corridor. The sidewalk shall be a minimum of five-feet in width installed curbside. All frontage improvements, including but not limited to the sidewalk, street trees in the landscaped areas behind the sidewalk, and street lighting shall be constructed across the entire frontage of the site, inspected and approved prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The sidewalk shall be constructed to City of Ashland Street Standards. If ' necessary to provide required frontage improvements, the area necessary for street improvements shall be dedicated as public street right-of-way or a public pedestrian access easement provide. Right-of-way dedications or easements shall be submitted for review and approval of the Planning and Engineering Divisions. h. That a final Landscaping and Irrigation Plan shall be provided for review and approval. This plan shall include: 1) irrigation details satisfying the requirements of the Water Conserving Landscaping Guidelines and Policies found in AMC 18.4.4; 2) identification of the placement and screening of the required recycling/refuse area; 3) final proposed lot coverage calculations including all building footprints, driveways, parking, and circulation areas. Lot coverage shall be limited to no more than 65 percent as allowed in the HC zoning district; 4) identification of two required mitigation trees. i. An arborist report assessing the condition of existing trees and their abilities to accommodate the proposed construction and a Tree Protection Plan prepared by a certified arborist to address trees on the subject property and on adjacent properties within 15 feet of the property line shall be submitted for the review and approval of the Staff Advisor. j. Demonstration that exterior lighting shall be directed onto the property and shall not directly illuminate adjacent proprieties shall be provided for the review and approval of the Staff Advisor. Exterior lighting details including fixture specifications, placement details and shrouding details (if necessary) shall be provided on building permit submittals. k. That exterior building materials and paint colors shall be compatible with the surrounding area and consistent with those described in the application materials. Sample exterior building colors shall be provided with the building permit submittals for review and approval of the Staff Advisor. Very bright or neon paint colors shall not be used in accordance with the Site Design and Development Standards. 1. That the building permit submittals shall include verification that required parking spaces and back-up areas meet the dimensional requirements of the land use ordinance. in. That the building permit submittals shall identify the required sheltered bicycle parking spaces. The building permit submittals shall verify that the bicycle parking design, spacing and coverage requirements in AMC 18.4.3.070 are met, and all bicycle parking shall be installed in accordance with the approved plan prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy. n. That the building permit submittals shall identify all proposed mechanical equipment in the elevation drawings, as required in AMC 18.5.2.040.B.4.a., and that these drawings shall include screening meeting the requirements of AMC 18.4.4.03 0. G.4 to limit the view of all roof-mounted mechanical equipment from public rights-of-way and adjacent residentially- zoned properties through the placement of parapets, walls or other sight-blocking features PA #2017-01507 October 10, 2017 Page ll at least equal in height to the proposed mechanical equipment. Mechanical equipment installation and operation shall be consistent with the provisions of the Ashland Municipal Code, including but not limited to noise attenuation. 10. That prior to the issuance of a building permit: i a. That the tree protection fencing and other tree preservation measures shall be installed according to the approved plan, inspected and approved by the Staff Advisor prior to any site work, including demolition, staging or storage of materials, or issuance of the building permit. The tree protection shall be chain link fencing six feet tall and installed in accordance with 18.4.5.030.C. and no construction shall occur within the tree protection zone including dumping or storage of materials such as building supplies, soil, waste, equipment, or parked vehicles. b. That all necessary building permits fees and charges, including permits for new electric and water services, and system development charges for water,, sewer, storm water, parks, and transportation shall be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit. C. The requirements of the Ashland Fire Department, including approved addressing, fire apparatus access, firefighter access pathway, fire hydrant clearance, fire department connection (FDC), and provisions for a key box must be complied with prior to issuance of the building permit or the use of combustible materials. Fire Department requirements shall be included on the engineered construction documents. If a fire protection vault is required, the vault shall not be located in the sidewalk corridor. 11. That prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy: a. That the required bicycle parking shall be installed according to the approved plan, c inspected and approved by the Staff Advisor. b. That all landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with the approved plans, inspected and approved by the Staff Advisor. Replacement trees to mitigate the two trees removed shall be planted and irrigated according to the approved plan. C. That all public improvements including but not limited to the sidewalk, irrigated street I' trees, and street lighting along Maple and Chestnut Streets shall be installed under permit from the Public Works Department and in accordance with the approved plan prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. All street trees shall be chosen from the adopted Street Tree List and shall be planted in accordance with the specifications contained therein. The street trees shall be irrigated. d. That the screening for the trash and recycling containers shall be installed in accordance with the Site Design and Development Standards prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. An opportunity to recycle site of equal or greater size than the solid waste receptacle shall be included in the trash enclosure in accordance with 18.4.4.040. PA #2017-01507 October 10, 2017 Page 12 I i C. That all exterior lighting shall be directed on the property and shall not directly illuminate r adjacent proprieties. October 10, 2017 Planning Commission Approval Date PA #2017-01507 October 10, 2017 Page 13 I E i I F 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 October 11, 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-2017-01507, 330 Maple St. Signature of Employee h C:IUserslsmithda.AFNHBDesktoptAFFIDAVIT OF MAILINO_ds.docx 10111/2017 i PA-2017-01507 PA-2017-01507 PA-2017-01507 MAPLE LLC REITINGER & ASSOCIATES, INC DELTRA FERGUSON 246 CATALINA DRIVE 307 N. MAIN 345 MAPLE ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2017-01507 PA-2017-01507 SANDOW ENGINEERING 330 MAPLE STREET KELLY SANDOW 10-11-17 NOD 160 MADISON ST STE A 4 EUGENE, OR 97402 I l S' Planning Commission Speaker Request Form 1) Complete this form and return it to the Secretary prior to the discussion of the item you wish to speak about. 2) Speak to the Planning Commission from the table podium microphone. 3) State your name and address for the record. 4) Limit your comments to the amount of time given to you by the Chair, usually 5 minutes. 5) If you present written materials, please give a copy to the Secretary for the record. 6) You may give written comments to the Secretary for the record if you do not wish to speak. 7) Speakers are solely responsible for the content of their public statement. Name (please print) Address (no P.O. Boa) Phone 17, f° Email r°€ Tonight's Meeting Date ~ Regular Meeting Agenda item number OR Topic for public forum (non agenda item) Land Use Public Hearing For: Against: Challenge for Conflict of Interest or Bias If you are challenging a member (planning commissioner) with a conflict of interest or bias, please write your allegation complete with supporting facts on this form and deliver it to the clerk immediately. The Chair will address the written challenge with the member. Please be respectful of the proceeding and do not interrupt. You may also provide testimony about the challenge when you testify during the normal order of proceedings. Written Comments/Challenge: C' The Public Meeting Law requires that all city fneetings are open to the public. Oregon law does not always require that the public be permitted to speak. The Ashland Planning Commission generally invites the public to speak on agenda items and duringpublic forian on non-agenda items unless time consti-amts limitpublic testimony. No person has an absolute right to speak or participate in every phase of a proceeding. Please respect the order of proceedings for public hearings and strictly follow the directions of the presiding officer. Behavior or actions which are unreasonably loud or disruptive are disrespectful, and niay constitute disorderly conduct. Offenders will be requested to leave the room. Comments and staternents by speakers do not represent the opinion of the City Council, City Officers or employees or the City of Ashland. U g of Ashland ti f ±ariin Exhibit September 12, 2017 ? Regarding the proposal for 330 Maple Street To the Ashland Planning Commission, My name is, Deltra Ferguson. I live at 345 Maple Street, where we built our home in 2000. I have seen the property at 330 Maple through a number of uses and now into dilapidation. It is good news that there is a proposal to develop this property. I visited with Associate Planner, Derek Severson, who shared and reviewed the plans for 330 with me. Since our home at 345 Maple Street will be directly across from the proposed patient drop off and the service entrance in the back of the building, I will be watching these developments with great interest. I think that it is always tricky to interface business and residential use. That said, I remain generally positive about this proposal. As this project moves forward, I would like to remain informed about the following, before final plans are completed: 1) Lighting-- how lights are directed and shrouded to subdue (directed away from the Maple Street neighborhood). 2) Noise-- how transformers are positioned (on building sides away from Maple Street and residences). 3) Landscaping-how planting can be used to enhance privacy and subdue light (especially in the tree bay in front of the drop-off) 4) Business after 5pm-- I anticipate a fair up-tick in cars and I hope that since this business will abut a neighborhood that evening hours will be avoided. 5) I want to strongly recommend consideration of turning the intersection at Maple and Chestnut into a 4-way (it is currently a 3-way). It is confusing for drivers who come to hospital, and will only get worse with the new building, drop off and parking area. I wish Dr. Rodden and Reitinger and Associates success with this project, and feel grateful for their investment in our community. Respecjfuilly Submitted, Deltra Ferguson, PhD 541-621-0517 deltraferguson@gmail.com i 1 i 'EM W"I request for Site Design Review approval to construct a new 29,400 square foot mixed- use building consisting o basement parking, medical suites o the first floor and two residential units on the second floor for the property located a 330 Maple Street. The application also includes: request for Exception tote Site Development and Design Standards to allow automobile circulation between the building and the street to allow a patient drop-off area from ale Street. request for an Exception to Street Standards to allow a smaller than typically- required separation between driveways. L) A Tree Removal Permit to remove two trees six-inches i diameter at breast height ( . or greater. I ~ s PA t2017-01-507 -2-011 f,aT",FILE ST - SUBJECT PROPERTY i ? J LLJ ASHLAND COMMUNFry HOSPITAL 217 f 4j1~ r a I ;a w. MAPLE ST ' a ey r r f II ~~Z jqp ' .,r a I- n k. h ~`s# a ~ j - a I 7 _ i MAPLE ST 330 MAPLE City Zones ZONING f E_1 HC L U 1 R-1-10 1 1 fit- - - _ - R-1-5 R-°€-a 5 f R-2 R-3 RR --5 RR-9 so WFZ S WR-20 ~ n ~ ' 3~, , \ f 4`A X1,;2\ ~~'~a ~ ~ P 1 ~ - ~ f~ _ _ ~ ~ i. , • fir,, s-~ r ~ ~ y 4., M*, 3 - _ Ml - S. " Gk1 L.':~i_.. IF far Y' 5, r s s + 4:• 4, ~ a Fl~ {i Yc~4 11 i 4 r y a! y ~W V Y.. ~ 14 ,q S a~ ~ -r -777 i ~ , ti ~ r~ ~ ~ '~"'rafi' ~ a ~ - ~ F ~7 X~'! ~F y ~r ~ 5 i m,., f ~ ~ { I mj: w Lv r« vys L. ~ ~ s"~l~tie~E ~ Ifv ~l. - 'd;~bY- i1?.d.., _ _ . , 9 ~ rs~ a~ x ~ ~ ~ a~ _ ~ ~ _ , n ' ~ ~ h r.. a , - - - i _ _ _ ~k v t n F i rye - - _ 7Z9 FWD ~ ~ ~ . _ r su'b` - Jt Ar, stn d ,3 4 +~~3k~ tya 'i y _ d' 4 - T AT ! 117~~1JJ ^ ^ min r - ! ok" 9 ~ M a' _ 2S t - r { C• U 4g~;~Vyw ~r, ~ Y hCi~ ~ AF~~F,rrJ J~,r ftGat- g II.. Ts l` h 9 4 .r,•-.7 ~ ! t~ . ~ - ~,;-..mow ,f '1' d, j- ~ _ - - ~r III ~ - . f; r 075 HV e zOio~ u -iF M1a" - A • .i ~ f ~ y t ~ ~ - ~ J ~ ~ .r - i~~~4 i err ~ I ,rte - - - a ut +-e -yy~~ ° 5 ~ t /yt J I - a 7. 7 777 j f - - L i E i-- y e v } r Pf l rx "q r Jy ,L 1 77777- les Ito _ Tsar _ ::s ss 3m @ n ~c e = _ I - ~ I mmmmm PM=2 6^ r I - m - t CHES'?~LT ST. g4 o S505542S 2 t F - _ G P5055426 55404 _ /vfAPLE ST R , . r r ACS e t }q$ GGG Q ~ 50 G ' ' - - - , , ~P5055453,~, d;lr al Q ~ f 444 Q k` } ~ @ v - - e j K 5.20 - ( 01 52] { G - - - - 47 ~ ,t~vnw+ •:•:C.x.~ _ ~ 1~~~ i j ❑ Imo`' ~ r u _ 41 CHESTI\~LT" ST.- , - - - FRCPCSED LANDSCAPING PLAN n~ i I\ hay - = n ,•„~r ~ _ ~ i CHESTNUT,/ST. - - - e c 1. The street trees be selects from the Ashland Street Tree Guide to be larger stature shade trees at maturity, a preferably three- inch caliper at planting. 2. That the staff recommendations (that r oris 1 assess l o the site's trees, that a Tree Protection based on the ar oris's assessment be provided forte review approval the Staff Advisor prior tote issuance of a building permit, and that should the ar ris determine that additional removals are necessary a modification the approval would be necessary, and would need to be considered by the Tree Commission) be incorporated as conditions o approval. ~ I t . - - T"tt . -r -r m FRONT .2Q FEET 33Q 38@ w u uJ LL tO Q sso 0 O _ LU - o ui < ~ Ct < in 531 = s REAR-1Q FEET PER STOR`; STAFF EXHIBIT S-2 &EIMIEMIL MUM T011tltlliltlil L NORTH FFOFERIY LINE VF66TATICN PSAL / TREE PRESERVATION AND PROTECTIOJ 18ROPOPRDPOSEE) EXISTIG CURB CUT FOR TWO EXIBTN's TREES ON THE NORTH EAST a , AND FENCED TOP OF EXa BARK AT NEIGHDORYa CORNER TIg ADDITION AND MODFICATICN CF THE ETC RE AT BACWSP AT REIGMDORW. TAX. DRIVE MOARED PAI2KROL, SIDEWALK AND CIRCULAR DRIVE \ 6 ^TQR TRASH 1 LOT WILL REaBRE REMOVAL OF SOME EXISTING TREES. FECYCLE AREA END OF NEW NEW STREET TREES ARE PROPOSED UT14N THE NEW SCU:o eANN;'LIN. AND EXISTIG EVERGREEN SIDEWALK PARKROWi HEDGE PRIVACY SCREEN MOTE 4) PLANTING PLANTING 1 7• EAST PROIEERTY LINE VEGETATION PROPOSAL REITINGER hEWKEYSTONE AND SCREEN A. ALL NEW STREET CN THE EAST PROPERTY UELLB REiANNG WALL EXISTON.+CURB OJT LINE_ DE PLANTED N 6rREEi AT &ASSOCIATES INC, T C SITE vmui e - I - - i ,oue GUm ra®nnuo L-3 ~ 1 j 'N b. A~RAR08CAPE'Df Z PASSAGE KROW 16 PROPOSED FOR 1, r ~ B _ - - - - - _ _ - - EASIER D TO FROM SITE. - s _ - \r l j I _n I. -.r Z'IROV4 ~IIII I'tTH. 4. wIPRB RIY LINE VEGETATIUI PROPOSAL xwcrsruav, 915 - - ER LL u m nsw, 0110 PROVIDEEDB EEYc~EN CEDAR ON THE PROPERTY SO1MrI&wbu f ' 4•5H~ED~ R i _ - ~L 1. I / / 9. w.w..,m•~mm~°"d' . 9 01- e. A 5•FOOT CONTNUOU9 PLMl010N PROPCOAL, iP1G STRIP AND I' ~~-vE W - - 4 - - , } a / / FENCE SHALL PROVIDE BORE W. FROM { 6Tp--r-l •,SU~ VIII M~~v W D m ADJONPG W61DENTIAL LOTS TO THE WEST. PROJECT: ACE ❑ d~~~lptU m / ' ' ' ' ' ' . ANY UNHEALTHY SIB9/BS WITHIN THE CONRS)OU18 • 1 ! ...........I b CB. pn r~~ntnnnn``/A~y/ D r~ R T2t_ / PLANTRY STRIP, MID WITHIN iVE PROPERTY LINES, -D V LBWU/kf 11 / a / Mar BE REMOVED AND NEW PLANTIN36 SHALL BE -6 - W I / INTRODUCED TO PROVIDE CONTINUOUS 6cFzENP INTRODUCED p,W, . i't L.d `I t ,iJt PRal DELIVERY DRIVE AND REFUSE AREA i :I ,w MAPLE STREET IOU @@w1lm@[9 3 MEDICAL 1' 1 L 5~ 6S - / / I. TOTAL ACIDS TO BE DEVELOPED • 0,611 AC 7. I DT CM RdGE BY BfdAARE FOOT GE BUILDING 1961 _ 1 -3 .,av0e q~ - _ - 1~ IMPERVIOUS C DUILODK(GR089 AT GRADE) • Bp09 o fi' R 1~ I bIDENTIA4 WITS ~ S 9W 19 TRASH REFUSE 119 ; i CIRCULATION (DRIVES 1 UW KW4Y8) • 3"s EVFL2_-_ CLINIC ENTRY 1966 Iww LEVEL I 5' 7O"q ^bfa } IMPERVIOUS SUBTOTAL (SPJ • MASS L•6 CUREI ECllll[[ A,' / STAFF LAW 1,5iB Bo~*TCi'rOF SLOPE LANDECMWi • S)19 U 50v - - ~FOTi STORM WATER PERVIOUS, SUBTOTAL (SPJ • 0944 a ~IDD°M~~®NJ~dD~~ i + o ErEErtTO TOTAL (BN.ITAU 330 MAPLE STREET 1965 I y ASHLAND, OR 97520 JACKSON COUNTY PAPo(IY GARAGE (GRC(M FLR) • I3,500 Sa FT. - - I'~ MEDICAL (LEVEL I)• 5,500 Sa FT. I'•,r,A'1` / , 3. LOT OVERAGE BY .EERCENTAra RESIDENTIAL (LEVEL~ ~7) • 7A0~~0.$.a..F.T... TOTAL sAOO 6a PT. ; / BUI ROSS AT GRADE) 49% DRAIVINC INFORMATION: 1 ~S t Ti - / TRASH REFUSE 1.4 SE (DRIVES / WW.KWAY81 H% 66 t;: gg / IMPERVIOUS SUBTOTAL (6PJ 64% PERVIOUS STAFf Alm 6% F4 J '.n, e T LANDSCAPING . 30% NEW 81E -L POST 1 I~ " 'r 5 PERVIOUS SUBTOTAL (SP) 36% 10% SCHEMATICS REEFENCE STEEL SCREEN - I TOTAL. 198% DRAIN BY; A-K DAIS 01V6 SHEhT SIZE CIffX 0 BY. MR DAM b111A6 AgN D .4 " 'A• " NO. RTISION DATE BY ",rA l` - - _ 4. 811E KH A Fk15PERFPE•AY'CQ497N8 01/Mt dMC • B fE1:PER PIE-AFF CM9N18 7 O6/7A7 AN km Y, L-3 ' •1- I' ~I BIDE SETBACK ~ SETBACK SETS~ INTERIM LOT) m Fr e) I I I REAR (M1LTISTORY, I9' PER LEVEL) • 70 FT 4yl~~6 , 5+Y/1! ~ .i r--- ~ I~;P~°~'r rt 1 ~INIJ LhLS®L51N1~ MAN CIRCULATION TOTTER , 21:' Y%? • 4di TBACfQ ROOF DOWNSPOUT - EXIBTM TREE TO REMAIN U4010TURBED. 964 s t\v ",lam' `•t~+' GD FILE.- L-ODI LaM-pMg PI-4, TO BIODUN.E FOR PARDON WIRY l EXIT I GARAGE ENIRY ~ GROUND FLOOR _ • - PIDT DATE/ME 7/12/2017 - sts<m MANAGEMENT WATER I Goo aooR o e - 196100 196109 L-- _ I' A l 3 J + = o ) 1 EXISTING. TREE TO BE REMOVED OR SALVAGED. i ~~t 1'P 'at' I :E✓v. ~C _ _ -Alu 4 1 ' to I V !151 sT.. N, NEW TREE (SPECM8 TO BE SELECTED ('4' „6, (70'MIN) a t v ° 0° I FROM CITY OP ASHLAND'6 RECOMMENDED - f -DEF brREErTREEGUIDEJ LANDSCAPING PLAN 4J (NOTE 3) _ZZ O/ -r'f•r ~7.,`3, l~ q K PERENNIAL BHRIBS, iBD. rt' \ = ryp 1960 VIII Bd PROPOSED LANDSCAPING PLAN , N Y i'; ,.t • I 1 A\1VAL6.TBD. / - fA- v 1950 .7 \(lA ~o ~V \nA va 6 \ - : p \~.A N - p0 V. ' BFRINq.EPED LAUN Vv _ ':i,, 7 I L 5 5 n L .I 3 CANC. •2i•15' t. \ \ / / / BIO&LLU.E / VI&CN CLR AffA Au x bt's Ill,- 22' GRAPHIC SCAt& / (15' MOL BETWEEN DRIVEWAYS) DRIVEWAY MAT CURE / 4G3C [ 6~C~L~bD 0 S' 10' 20 EXISTWNi D1RB MANTAN LOCATION CF CUT AT / AND SIDEWALK STREW THE FABE'OF EkG. OPPOSITE OF DNERIGHBVELLWSY Alr TREE LLE668 SIDEWALK W/ STREET IF - - N ` CHESTNUT BL I' - IU-0' 195150 / f - - - -fit- - - - - - - --L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - h CHESTNUT,/ ST. L-1 EY 0 30.35' ~ DFIPUn-.b-IT, SHEET NUMBER: PI \OI 06E LA11 F, !,CAC IN`~f i L/4I ' ~ / ^ T/rT11 11 W~3 E E ~R EN DFPL 15.75' Q ^1,!1v„` I`\J/I L-d DECIDUOUS DRIP M. 15.10' NEW DECIDUOUS DRIP I. LBrn 10-15' L ( -001 OI.V I/l(vV^111/V111TJ~ u L•5 NEW I ~ r=1aa L-6 NEW DECIDUOUS DRIP LINE, 70.76' ASHLAND PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF PORT September 12, 2017 PLANNING ACTION PA #2017-01507 OWNER/APPLICANT: Maple LLC/Reitinger & Associates, Inc. LOCATION: 330 Maple Street ZONE DESIGNATION: HC COMP. PLAN DESIGNATION: Health Care ORDINANCE REFERENCES: (See also http://,ww,`N,.codepublishiny-.co /OR/Ashland/#!!Landl.se/index.ht --,_T) 18.2.4 General Regulations for Base Zones 18.2.5 Standards for Residential Zones 18.2.6 Standards for Non-Residential Zones 18.4.2 Building Placement, Orientation & Design 18.4.3 Parking, Access and Circulation 18.4.4 Landscaping, Lighting & Screening 18.4.5 Tree Preservation and Protection 18.4.6 Public Facilities 18.4.7 Signs 18.4.8 Solar Access 18.5 Application Review Procedures and Approval Criteria 18.5.2 Site Design Review 18.5.7 Tree Removal 18.6.1 Definitions APPLICATION DEEMED COMPLETE ON: September 2, 2017 REQUEST: A request for Site Design Review approval to construct a new 29,400 square foot mixed-use building consisting of basement parking, medical suites on the first floor and two residential units on the second floor for the property located at 330 Maple Street. The application includes: a request for Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards to allow automobile circulation between the building and the street to allow a patient drop-off area from Maple Street; a request for an Exception to Street Standards to allow a smaller than typically-required separation between driveways; and a Tree Removal Permit to remove two trees six-inches in diameter at breast height (d.b.h.) or greater. 1. Relevant Facts Planning Action 2017-01507 Ashland Planning Department - Staff Report / dds Applicant: Maple/Reitinger Page 1 of 14 i I) Background - History of Application There are no planning actions of record for the property. I 2) Detailed Description of the Site and Proposal Site Description The subject property is a rectangular lot located at the southwest corner of the intersection of Maple and Chestnut Streets, just uphill and across the street from Ashland Community Hospital. The property has an area of 0.63-acres (27,443 square feet) and is zoned HC, a healthcare services zoning district. The two properties immediately to the south, including the contiguous property to the south which is under the same ownership, and properties to the east on and around the Ashland Community Hospital campus are also zoned HC. The property immediately uphill to the west along Maple Street is zoned R-2 (Low Density Multi-Family Residential) while the properties across Maple Street to the north are zoned R-1-7.5 (Single Family Residential). The property currently contains a 7,056 square foot, one-story medical building near the center of the site which Jackson County tax records identify as the former Ashland View Manor, a 20-room nursing home. In addition, there is a small, single-story storage structure. The application notes that both structures are in poor condition and proposed to be demolished. Use of the existing buildings was discontinued some time ago, and the main building is now boarded up and parking lot access restricted. The existing medical building is setback approximately 55 feet from Chestnut Street, and the area between the sidewalk and the building has slopes of approximately 15-18 percent. The application includes a tree survey identifying approximately 14 trees greater than six-inches in diameter at breast height (d.b.h.) on and immediately adjacent to the property, and a landscape plan identifies 12 of these as being retained and incorporated in the landscape plan, with only two trees identified for removal on the landscape plan provided. The property has approximately 180 linear feet of frontage on Chestnut Street, a Neighborhood Collector Street. Chestnut Street is currently improved with paving, curb, gutter, and an approximately four-foot wide curbside sidewalk in place along the property's full frontage. There are currently no parkrow planting strips along Chestnut Street. The property has approximately 150 linear feet of frontage on Maple Street, a Neighborhood Street. Maple Street is currently improved with paving, curb, gutter, and an approximately four-foot wide curbside sidewalk in place along the property's full frontage. There are currently no parkrow planting strips along Maple Street. Current Proposal The current application requests Site Design Review approval to construct a new 29,400 square foot mixed-use building consisting of parking in the 13,500 square Planning Action #2017-00615 Ashland Planning Department - Staff Report / dds Applicant; Ashworth/Rogue Page 2 of 14 i I foot basement, medical suites on the 13,500 square foot first floor, and two 1,200 residential penthouse suites on the second floor. The application materials explain that the medical practice developing the project is The Retina and Vitreous Center of Southern Oregon, and that its physicians deal with the deep interior of the eye and diseases which are often blinding or sight- diminishing. 82 percent of patients are over 65 years of age, and 25 percent of patients are over 85 years old. Most patients are temporarily, if not permanently, at least partially disabled due to vision issues and are unable to drive themselves to appointments and instead rely on a combination of family, friends, taxis, medical transport vans and the bus. Approximately 31 percent of patients are dropped off for their appointments by a driver who does not park on site, and are picked up afterwards. Another two percent take the bus, walk or ride to an appointment. The application further explains that typical new patient appointments last from two to three-and-a-half hours due to the time needed for testing, examinations and treatment, and follow-up appointments can take from one-half to one-and-a-half hours. The application notes that almost all retina surgery is outpatient (same day) surgery and in Ashland, all retina surgeries are done at Asante Ashland Community Hospital (AACH). The application notes that AACH is the only hospital in the valley that does ophthalmologic surgery, and that all other eye surgery is done in outpatient surgery centers. The application also includes a request for Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards to allow automobile circulation between the building and the street to allow a patient drop-off area from Maple Street; a request for an Exception to Street Standards to allow a smaller than typically-required separation between driveways; and a Tree Removal Permit to remove two trees six-inches in diameter at breast height (d.b.h.) or greater. IL Project Impact Within the HC zoning district, Site Review for new buildings or additions greater than 15,000 square feet is subject to a "Type II" application procedure which requires a decision by the Planning Commission through a public hearing. Site Design Review approval is considered in light of the approval criteria in AMC 18.5.2.050 as wells as the "Building Placement, Orientation and Design" standards for non-residential development in AMC 18.4.2.040. Site Design Review The first criterion for Site Design Review approval is that, "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 application materials provided assert that the proposed development complies with applicable provisions for the underlying zone detailed in AMC 18.2 including setbacks, lot area, dimension, density, floor area, building height, building orientation, architecture, and other applicable standards. Planning Action 2017-01507 Ashland Planning Department - Staff Report / dds Applicant: Maple/Reitinger Page 3 of 14 i I l With regard to lot coverage, the application indicates that a Variance is requested to allow a 66 percent lot coverage where the HC zone limits coverage to 65 percent. However, the plans provided identify the project impervious surfaces as being limited to 64 percent. Staff I' believes that the 66 percent coverage proposed was based on an earlier iteration of the plan with a longer service corridor along the west property line, and that the expanded staff lawn area now shown in this location has resolved any coverage issue. The second approval criterion is that, "The proposal complies with applicable overlay zone requirements (part 18.3)." In this instance, the property is located within the Health Care Services District overlay zone. Within this overlay zone, both residential uses and clinics for doctors including but not limited to opticians are outright permitted uses. The proposal complies with the building height, setback and coverage requirements of the overlay. The third criterion for the Site Design Review approval is that, "The proposal complies with the applicable Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4, except as provided by subsection E (which addresses Exceptions) below." In this instance, the applicable standards are those for Basic Site Review found in AMC 18.4.2.040.B. seeking: ® Primary orientation toward a street rather than parking, with automobile circulation and parking not allowed between the building and the street and parking instead located behind or to one side. ® A building fagade or multiple building facades occupying a large majority of the street frontage. ® Building entrances oriented to the street and accessed from a public sidewalk, which entrances designed to be clearly visible, functional, and open to the public during all business hours. ® Building entrances located within 20 feet of the street, and where located on a corner lot, entrances oriented to the higher order street or the corner and the building located as close to the intersection corner as practicable. ® Public sidewalks. ® One street tree chosen from the street tree list shall be placed for each 30 feet of frontage. ® Landscaped areas at least ten feet in width shall buffer buildings adjacent to streets. ® Landscaping and recycle/refuse disposal areas provided. ® Noise and glare standards addressed. In this instance, the building is to be oriented to the comer, with the building facades occupying a large majority of the frontage. A patient drop-off drive with circulation between the building and the street is proposed from Maple Street, but parking is provided in the basement. Sidewalks with street trees are to be provided along Chestnut Street with pedestrian access directly to the corner entry, and landscaping provided in required yard areas along both street fiontages. Recycling and refuse disposal areas are screened from the service corridor provided uphill of the building. The application includes parking calculations indicating that 38.57 parking spaces are required for medical office use, while 3.5 parking spaces are required for the two proposed residential units for a total off-street parking requirement of 42.07 spaces. The applicants propose a mixed-use parking credit of 3.5 parking spaces as the peak parking demand of the Planning Action #2017-00615 Ashland Planning Department - Staff Report / dds Applicant: Ashworth/Rogue Page 4 of 14 medical and residential office uses would be materially off-set, and a 1.0 parking space credit for providing five additional bicycle parking spaces beyond the nine spaces required for the proposed use. This would reduce the off-street parking demand to 37.57 (38) spaces, and the application illustrates 39 spaces proposed including 36 spaces in the basement parking garage, two parallel spaces off of the delivery driveway, and one space off of the patient drop-off drive. In addition, the application illustrates six available on-street spaces along the subject property's frontage although no off-street parking credit is requested. The fourth approval criterion for Site Design Review addresses city facilities and requires that, "The proposal complies with the applicable standards in section 18.4.6Public 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." In consulting staff in the various public utilities, the following has been noted: ® Electricity: The Electric Department has noted that while there is available capacity in the adjacent overhead lines, there are no facilities currently in place in the immediate vicinity to serve the subject property. The applicants will need to extend services to the site and provide a new transformer on the property, which is complicated by the proposed on-site stormwater detention, site grades, and the need for the service corridor at the rear to maintain access to the trash and recycling facilities. The applicants are working with the Electric Department to identify the facilities necessary to serve the proposed building and develop a final electric service plan for the site. ® Water: The Public Works Department has noted that the property is currently served by six-inch water mains in the adjacent rights-of-way for both Maple and Chestnut Streets. New connections and services will need to be extended by the applicants. ® Sewer: The Public Works Department has noted that the property is currently served by six-inch sanitary sewer mains in the adjacent rights-of-way for both Maple and Chestnut Streets. New connections and services will need to be extended by the applicants. ® Urban storm drainage: The Public Works Department has noted that the property is currently served by a 12-inch storm sewer main in Maple Street, and that there is currently a catch basin in place at the northeast corner of the lot. Public Works/Engineering staff have noted that the storm drain and catch basin are not currently functioning properly as grades are such that drainage misses the existing catch basin; this is not a capacity issue but rather a problem in the design of the existing infrastructure and staff and the project civil engineer are working to correct this issue with a revised stormwater drainage plan for the site. ® Paved Access & Adequate Transportation: o Chestnut Street - The property has approximately 180 linear feet of frontage on Chestnut Street. Chestnut is a Neighborhood Collector Street and city standard frontage improvements would typically require five- to eight-foot parkrow planting strips with irrigated street trees every 30 feet, and a six- to eight-foot sidewalk. Chestnut Street is currently improved with paving, curb, gutter, and an approximately four-foot wide curbside sidewalk in place along the property's full frontage, and there are no parkrow planting strips in place. The applicants Planning Action 2017-01507 Ashland Planning Department - Staff Report / dds Applicant: Maple/Reitinger Page 5 of 14 propose a six-foot sidewalk with a five-foot hardscape parkrow, with street trees to be provided in standard five-foot tree wells with grates. While the application does not propose to rely on on-street parking credits to meet project parking requirements, this more commercial frontage treatment is intended to facilitate the use of on-street parking spaces along the subject property's street frontage. o Maple Street - The property has approximately 150 linear feet of frontage on Maple Street. Maple is a Neighborhood Street, and city standard frontage improvements would typically require seven- to eight-foot parkrow planting strips with irrigated street trees every 30 feet, and five- to six-foot sidewalks. Maple Street is currently improved with paving, curb, gutter, and an approximately four-foot wide curbside sidewalk in place along the property's full frontage, and there are no parkrow planting strips in place. The applicants propose to continue the existing curbside sidewalk configuration on this frontage, with street trees to be provided in the landscaped area proposed directly behind the sidewalk and existing trees to be preserved where possible. The application notes that should the Planning Commission prefer, a standard residential park c row planting strip could be accommodated on the Maple Street frontage but the removal of additional trees would be necessary. The application also includes an assessment by Kelly Sandow of Sandow Engineering, who has determined that: the project will generate no more than 49 vehicle trips during the PM peak hour; is not installing any traffic control devices or geometric improvements; and is not expected to generate more than 20 additional heavy vehicle trips during the day. As such, the proposal does not exceed any of the threshold levels which would trigger a Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA). ® Trash and Recycling: The application identifies a service corridor coming off of Maple Street which would share a driveway entrance with the patient drop-off and provide truck access to a screened trash and recycling enclosure. In preliminary review by Recology Ashland, they have indicated that the enclosure may not be large enough, and may require individual rolling cans forthe two residential units in addition to the commercial dumpsters proposed. The applicants have been made aware of this potential issue, and advised to contact staff at Recology Ashland. Conditions have been recommended below to require that final civil engineering plans including electric service and utility plans, street improvement plans, grading and drainage plans be provided for the review and approval of the Staff Advisor and city departments prior to the submittal of a building permit. Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards The application proposes a patient drop-off area to be accessed from a circular driveway from Maple Street, and requests an Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards (AMC 18.4.2.040.B. La) to allow automobile circulation between the building and the street. The approval criteria for an Exception are that, " ])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 Planning Action #2017-00615 Ashland Planning Department - Staff Report / dds Applicant: Ashworth/Rogue Page 6 of 14 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 application emphasizes that a patient drop-off which is safely off-street and a relatively short transport is essential to a medical practice of this specialty as many patients are too frail to manage more than getting out of their car, being assisted by a wheelchair or staff members, and transported a short distance into the clinic. The application further indicates that the site has a unique sloping conditions for a Health Care zone, and suggests that the solution proposed not only meets the needs of the medical practice but also helps reduce drop-off traffic congestion that would otherwise block the street or adjacent residential driveways. Exception to Street Standards The application also includes a request for an Exception to Street Standards (AMC 18.4.3.080.C) to allow a smaller than typically-required separation between driveways. Maple Street here is a neighborhood street and controlled access standards call for a minimum 24-foot separation between driveways for two units or fewer per lot, and a 50-foot separation for three or more units per lot. In this instance, the existing curb cut on Maple Street is 19 feet from the driveway uphill to the west, and the applicants propose to utilize this existing curb cut for access to serve both their service corridor and patient drop-off, noting that the drop-off is necessitated by fully 31 percent of patients are dropped off for their appointments by a driver leaving to do other things during the appointment time, and that the drop-off avoids traffic that would otherwise block Maple Street with drivers trying to make drop-off s from the street. The applicants note that the proposed configuration will keep larger vehicles off of the street while they are servicing the building for trash, recycling, delivery or other services, and patients using the one-way circulation of the drop-off will exit the property an additional 38 feet to the east. In addition, the applicants note that the existing driveway in this location serves 12 off-street parking spaces, and by shifting these spaces to basement parking they believe that there is an opportunity to positively impact the residential neighbors while retaining the existing curb cut and addressing the need for a patient drop-off on this site. Trees The application materials identify 14 trees on and adjacent to the property which are six- inches or greater in diameter at breast height, and note that these are a mix of deciduous and coniferous trees. The application suggests that some trees will be significantly impacted by sidewalk replacements, and those that will not be affected will be protected and preserved. The landscape plan provided identifies only two of the trees for removal: one conifer near the northwest corner of the existing building which is not identified on the tree survey but which will be impacted both by the demolition and by the placement of the new drop-off drive, and the other a ten-inch d.b.h. deciduous tree which will be located just south of the patient drop off drive and which will be impacted by the sidewalk replacement. Planning Action 2017-01507 Ashland Planning Department - Staff Report / dds Applicant; Maple/Reitinger Page 7 of 14 i } i As this document is being prepared, the Tree Commission has not yet reviewed the r application and a condition is recommended below to make their recommendations c conditions of approval. 4 c The application is somewhat unclear with regard to trees in that the narrative provided suggests that more trees are to be removed than are shown to be removed on the landscaping plan provided. In addition, no report from an arborist has been provided either to assess the trees' present conditions or abilities to accommodate the redevelopment of the site or to identify specific measures for their protection. In staff's preliminary assessment, the two trees identified for removal in the Landscaping Plan are likely necessary to accommodate the demolition of the existing building and redevelopment of the site as proposed, which is in keeping with the Health Care zoning. Staff has recommended that an arborist fully assess all of the site's trees and that a Tree Protection Plan based on the arborist's report be prepared for the review and approval of the Staff Advisor prior to the issuance of a building permit. Should the arborist determine that additional removals are necessary, a modification of the approval would be necessary, and would need to be considered by the Tree Commission. IR Procedural - Required Burden of Proof The criteria for Site Review approval from the Site Design Review Chapter are detailed in AMC 18.5.2.050 as follows: A. Underlying Zone: The proposal complies with all of the applicable provisions of the underlying zone (part 18.2), including but not limited to., building and yard setbacks, lot area and dimensions, density and floor area, lot coverage, building height, building orientation, architecture, and other applicable standards. B. Overlay Zones: The proposal complies with applicable overlay zone requirements (part 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 Y 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 I 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 Planning Action #2017-00615 Ashland Planning Department - Staff Report / dds Applicant: Ashworth/Rogue Page 8 of 14 1 I 2. There is no demonstrable difficult) 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 criteria for an Exception to Street Standards are described in AMC 18.4.6.020.8.1 as follows: a. There is demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements of this chapter due to a unique or unusual aspect of the site or proposed use of the site. b. The exception -w,ill result in equal or superior transportation facilities and connectivity considering the following factors where applicable. i. For transit facilities and related improvements, access, wait time, and ride experience. ii. For bicycle facilities, feeling of safety, quality of experience (i. e., comfort level of bicycling along the roadway), and frequency of conflicts with vehicle cross traffic. iii. For pedestrian facilities, feeling of safety, quality of experience (i. e., comfort level of walking along roadway), and ability to safety and efficiency crossing roadway. C. The exception is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty. d The exception is consistent with the Purpose and Intent of the Street Standards in subsection 18.4.6.040.A. The criteria for Tree Removal Permits are detailed in AMC 18.5.7.040.13 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 aforeseeable danger ofproperty 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. Stich mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit. 2. Tree That is Not a Hazard. A Tree Removal Permit for a tree that is not a hazard shall be granted if the approval authority finds that the application meets all of the following criteria, or can be made to conform through the imposition of conditions. 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 Planning Action 2017-01507 Ashland Planning Department - Staff Report / dds Applicant: Maple/Reitinger Page 9 of 14 i i in part 18. 10. b. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of sur face 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. IV. Conclusions and Recommendations The application notes that the proposed multi-level building serves a low-mobility patient demographic; provides unique solutions to a challenging sloped site and existing parking impacts imposed by the neighboring Ashland Community Hospital; and thoughtfully addresses the transition from healthcare to residential zones. Staff would concur with the applicant's assessment. Development of the property is challenged both by Maple Street's topography and by adjacent development. The presence of Asante Ashland Community Hospital (AACH) immediately across the street brings with it a considerable parking demand which frequently consumes all of the available on-street parking in the vicinity, including both of the subject property's full street frontages, and which makes it imperative that the subject property accommodate its full off-street parking demand on site rather than relying on on-street parking credits. The property's topography makes this a challenge in that it slopes from Chestnut up Maple by approximately 15 percent, and the applicants must not only accommodate parking on a sloped site but also do so in a way that will serve a clientele with physical and visual impairments. The applicants have responded by taking full advantage of the site's topography, excavating to place proposed parking in the basement beneath the first floor of medical suites while providing a patient drop-off directly to the first floor from Maple Street. Required off-street parking is accommodated entirely on the subject property while allowing for the full redevelopment of this long-dilapidated property in keeping with the underlying Health Care Services District overlay, and by using an existing curb cut on Maple Street to serve not only the drop-off but also a screened service corridor on the uphill side of the building, thereby providing a larger separation between the new building and the existing home above while site topography, associated retaining and proposed vegetative screening buffer the corridor. In staff's view, the proposal complies with all applicable standards found in the Ashland Land Use Ordinance and merits approval. Should the Commission concur, staff would recommend that following conditions be attached: Planning Action 42017-00615 Ashland Planning Department - Staff Report / dds Applicant: Ashworth/Rogue Page 10 of 14 I. That all proposals of the applicant shall be conditions of approval unless otherwise modified herein. 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 conformance with those approved as part of this application, an application to modify the current Site Design Review approval shall be submitted and approved prior to issuance of a building permit. 3. That permits shall be obtained from the Ashland Public Works/Engineering Division prior to any work in the public right of way. New driveway approaches shall be permitted through the Public Works/Engineering Division and driveway curb cuts shall be installed, inspected and approved prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 4. That the recommendations from the Tree Commission from its September 7, 2017 meeting shall be conditions of approval where consistent with applicable criteria and standards and with final approval by the Staff Advisor. 5. That a Demolition Permit shall be obtained from the Building Division if deemed necessary by the Building Official prior to any demolition of existing buildings. 6. That a sign permit shall be obtained prior to installation of any new signage. Signage shall meet the requirements of Chapter 18.4.7 and shall meet the requirements of 18.2.4.040 if located in a vision clearance area. 7. That the front entrance at the corner shall remain functional and open to the public during all business hours. 8. That the building permit submittals shall include: a. Building permit plans shall include the identification of all easements, including but not limited to any public or private utility easements. b. Building permit plans shall include solar setback calculations demonstrating that all new construction complies with the applicable solar access standard. Permit submittals shall include elevation drawings or cross sections clearly identifying the highest shadow producing point(s) and their height(s) from natural grade and calculations in the form of [(Height - 6)/(0.445 + Slope) _ Required Solar Setback]. C. That a final utility plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning, Engineering, and Building Divisions prior to signature of the final survey plat. The utility plan shall include the location of connections to all public facilities including the locations of water lines and meter sizes, fire hydrants, sanitary sewer lines, storm drain lines and electric services. d. That the location and final engineering for all storm drainage improvements associated with the project, shall be submitted for review and approval by the Departments of Public Works, Planning and Building Divisions prior to signature of the final survey plat. Storm water from all new impervious surfaces and run-off 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. Planning Action 2017-01507 Ashland Planning Department - Staff Report / dds Applicant; Maple/Reitinger Page 11 of 14 i i e. That the applicant shall submit an electric design and distribution plan including load calculations and locations of all primary and secondary services including transformers, cabinets and all other necessary equipment. This plan must be reviewed and approved by the Electric Department prior to the signature of the final survey plat. Transformers and cabinets shall be located in areas least visible from streets and outside of vision clearance areas, while considering the access needs of the Electric Department. f. That the engineered construction drawings for the public sidewalk along Chestnut Street shall be submitted for review and approval of the Ashland 4 Planning and Engineering Divisions prior to work in the street right-of-way and prior to installation of improvements in the pedestrian corridor. The sidewalk shall be a minimum of six-feet in width with five-foot width hardscape parkrows and street trees in city standard five-foot square tree grates between the sidewalk and the street. All frontage improvements, including but not limited to the sidewalk, street trees, and street lighting, shall be constructed across the entire frontage of the site, inspected and approved prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The sidewalk shall be constructed to City of Ashland Street Standards. If necessary to provide required frontage improvements, the area necessary for street improvements shall be dedicated as public street right-of-way or a public pedestrian access easement provide. Right-of-way dedications or easements shall be submitted for review and approval of the Planning and Engineering Divisions. g. That the engineered construction drawings for the public sidewalk along Maple Street shall be submitted for review and approval of the Ashland Planning and Engineering Divisions prior to work in the street right-of-way and prior to installation of improvements in the pedestrian corridor. The sidewalk shall be a minimum of five-feet in width installed curbside. All frontage improvements, including but not limited to the sidewalk, street trees in the landscaped areas behind the sidewalk, and street lighting shall be constructed across the entire frontage of the site, inspected and approved prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The sidewalk shall be constructed to City of Ashland Street Standards. If necessary to provide required frontage improvements, the area necessary for street improvements shall be dedicated as public street right-of-way or a public pedestrian access easement provide. Right-of-way dedications or easements shall be submitted for review and approval of the Planning and Engineering Divisions. h. That a final Landscaping and Irrigation Plan shall be provided for review and approval. This plan shall include: 1) irrigation details satisfying the requirements of the Water Conserving Landscaping Guidelines and Policies found in AMC 18.4.4; 2) identification of the placement and screening of the required recycling/refuse area; 3) final proposed lot coverage calculations including all building footprints, driveways, parking, and circulation areas. Lot coverage shall be limited to no more than 65 percent as allowed in the HC zoning district; 4) identification of two required mitigation trees. i. An arborist report assessing the condition of existing trees and their abilities to accommodate the proposed construction and a Tree Protection Plan prepared by a certified arborist to address trees on the subject property and on adjacent Planning Action #2017-00615 Ashland Planning Department - Staff Report / dds Applicant: Ashworth/Rogue Page 12 of 14 i properties within 15 feet of the property line shall be submitted for the review and approval of the Staff Advisor. j. Demonstration that exterior lighting shall be directed onto the property and shall not directly illuminate adjacent proprieties shall be provided for the review and approval of the Staff Advisor. Exterior lighting details including fixture specifications, placement details and shrouding details (if necessary) shall be provided on building permit submittals. lc. That exterior building materials and paint colors shall be compatible with the surrounding area and consistent with those described in the application materials. Sample exterior building colors shall be provided with the building permit submittals for review and approval of the Staff Advisor. Very bright or neon paint colors shall not be used in accordance with the Site Design and Development Standards. 1. That the building permit submittals shall include verification that required j; parking spaces and back-up areas meet the dimensional requirements of the land use ordinance. in. That the building permit submittals shall identify the required sheltered bicycle parking spaces. The building permit submittals shall verify that the bicycle parking design, spacing and coverage requirements in AMC 18.4.3.070 are met, and all bicycle parking shall be installed in accordance with the approved plan prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy. n. That the building permit submittals shall identify all proposed mechanical equipment in the elevation drawings, as required in AMC 18.5.2.040.B.4.a., and that these drawings shall include screening meeting the requirements of AMC 18.4.4.030.G.4 to limit the view of all roof-mounted mechanical equipment from public rights-of-way and adjacent residentially-zoned properties through the placement of parapets, walls or other sight-blocking features at least equal in height to the proposed mechanical equipment. Mechanical equipment installation and operation shall be consistent with the provisions of the Ashland Municipal Code, including but not limited to noise attenuation. 9. That prior to the issuance of a building permit: i a. That the tree protection fencing and other tree preservation measures shall be installed according to the approved plan, inspected and approved by the Staff Advisor prior to any site work, including demolition, staging or storage of materials, or issuance of the building permit. The tree protection shall be chain link fencing six feet tall and installed in accordance with 18.4.5.030.C. and no construction shall occur within the tree protection zone including dumping or storage of materials such as building supplies, soil, waste, equipment, or parked vehicles. b. That all necessary building permits fees and charges, including permits for new electric and water services, and system development charges for water, sewer, storm water, parks, and transportation shall be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit. C. The requirements of the Ashland Fire Department, including approved addressing, fire apparatus access, firefighter access pathway, fire hydrant Planning Action 2017-01507 Ashland Planning Department - Staff Report / dds Applicant; Maple/Reitinger Page 13 of 14 i clearance, fire department connection (FDC), and provisions for a key box must be complied with prior to issuance of the building permit or the use of combustible materials. Fire Department requirements shall be included on the engineered construction documents. If a fire protection vault is required, the vault shall not be located in the sidewalk corridor. 10. That prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy: a. That the required bicycle parking shall be installed according to the approved plan, inspected and approved by the Staff Advisor. b. That all landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with the approved plans, inspected and approved by the Staff Advisor. Replacement trees to mitigate the two trees removed shall be planted and irrigated according to the approved plan. C. That all public improvements including but not limited to the sidewalk, irrigated street trees, and street lighting along Maple and Chestnut Streets shall be installed under permit from the Public Works Department and in accordance with the approved plan prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. All street trees shall be chosen from the adopted Street Tree List and shall be planted in accordance with the specifications contained therein. The street trees shall be irrigated. d. That the screening for the trash and recycling containers shall be installed in accordance with the Site Design and Development Standards prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. An opportunity to recycle site of equal or greater size than the solid waste receptacle shall be included in the trash enclosure in accordance with 18.4.4.040. e. That all exterior lighting shall be directed on the property and shall not directly illuminate adjacent proprieties. Planning Action #2017-00615 Ashland Planning Department - Staff Report / dds Applicant; Ashworth/Rogue Page 14 of 14 i ASHLAND TREE COMMISSION PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENT SHEET September 7, 2017 I" i l PLANNING ACTION: PA-2017- 01507 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 330 Maple Street OWNER/APPLICANT: Maple LLC/Reitinger & Associates, Inc. DESCRIPTION: A request for Site Design Review approval to construct a new 29,400 square foot mixed-use building consisting of basement parking, medical suites on the first floor and two residential units on the second floor for the property located at 330 Maple Street. The application includes: a request for Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards to allow automobile circulation between the building and the street to allow a patient drop-off area from Maple Street; a request for an Exception to Street Standards to allow a smaller than typically-required separation between driveways; and a Tree Removal Permit to remove two trees six-inches in diameter at breast height (d.b.h.) or greater. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Health Care; ZONING: HC; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 1E 05D13; TAX LOT 2000 0, The Tree Commission recommends approving the application as submitted with the following recommendations below: 1. The street trees be selected from the Approved Street Tree Guide to be larger stature shade trees at maturity, and preferably three-inch caliper at planting. 2. That the staff recommendations (that an arborist fully assess all of the site's trees, that a Tree Protection Plan based on the arborist's assessment be provided for the review and approval of the Staff Advisor prior to the issuance of a building permit, and that should the arborist determine that additional removals are necessary, a modification of the approval would be necessary, and would need to be considered by the Tree Commission) be incorporated as conditions of approval. Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5350 CITY OF 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 " w LAN ED -ASri Planning Department, 51 Winbuu Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520 _ I ' 541-488-5305 Fax: 541-552-2050 www.ashland.or.us TTY: 1-800-735-2900 a 4. PLANNING ACTION: PA-2017-01507 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 330 Maple Street OWNERIAPPLICANT: Maple LLC/Reitinger & Associates, Inc DESCRIPTION: A request for Site Design Review approval to construct a new 29,400 square foot mixed-use building consisting of basement parking, medical suites on the first floor and two residential units on the second floor for the property located at 330 Maple Street. The application includes: a request for Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards to allow automobile circulation between the building and the street to allow a patient drop-off area from Maple Street; a request for an Exception to Street Standards to allow a smaller than typically-required separation between driveways; and a Tree Removal Permit to remove two trees six-inches in diameter at breast height (d.b,h,) or greater, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Health Care; ZONING: HC; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 391 E 05DB; TAX LOT : 2000 NOTE: The Ashland Tree Commission will also review this Planning Action on Thursday, September 7, 2017 at 6:00 PM in the Community Development and Engineering Services building (Siskiyou Room), located at 51 Winburn Way. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING:' MAPLE ST _ PA 'N, qPL 5 T 330 tv1A PLE ST SURJECT PROPERTY j -I U) LJJ - h COMMUNI r HOSPITAL i T I J Notice is hereby given that a PUBLIC HEARING on the following request with respect to the ASHLAND LAND USE ORDINANCE will be held before the ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION on meeting date shown above. The meeting will be at the ASHLAND CIVIC CENTER, 1175 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon. The ordinance criteria applicable to this application are attached to this notice. Oregon law states that failure to raise an objection concerning this application, either in person or by letter, or failure to provide sufficient specificity to afford the decision maker an opportunity to respond to the issue, precludes your right of appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) on that issue. Failure to specify which ordinance criterion the objection is based on also precludes your right of appeal to LUBA on that criterion. Failure of the applicant to raise constitutional or other issues relating to proposed conditions of approval with sufficient specificity to allow this Commission to respond to the issue precludes an action for damages in circuit court. A copy of the application, all documents and evidence relied upon by the applicant and applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost and will be provided at reasonable cost, if requested. A copy of the Staff Report will be available for inspection seven days prior to the hearing and will be provided at reasonable cost, if requested. All materials are available at the Ashland Planning Department, Community Development and Engineering Services, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520. During the Public Hearing, the Chair shall allow testimony from the applicant and those in attendance concerning this request. The Chair shall have the right to limit the length of testimony and require that comments be restricted to the applicable criteria. Unless there is a continuance, if a participant so requests before the conclusion of the hearing, the record shall remain open for at least seven days after the hearing. In compliance with the American with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Administrator's office at 541-488-6002 (TTY phone number 1-800-735-2900). Notification 72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting. (28 CFR 35.102.-35.104 ADA Title 1). If you have questions or comments concerning this request, please feel free to contact the Ashland Planning Division, 541-488-5305. S!; Wcomm-dev\planningTIanning Actions\Noticing Folder\N[ailed Notices & Signs\2017TA-2017-01507 _Typell.docx i SITE DESIGN AND USE STANDARDS 18.5.2.050 The following criteria shall be used to approve or deny an application: A. Underlying Zone: The proposal complies with all of the applicable provisions of the underlying zone (part 18.2), including but not limited to: building and yard setbacks, lot area and dimensions, density and floor area, lot coverage, building height, building orientation, architecture, and other applicable standards. B. Overlay Zones: The proposal complies with applicable overlay zone requirements (part 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. EXCEPTION TO STREET STANDARDS 18.4.6.020.B.1 Exception to the Street Design Standards. The approval authority may approve exceptions to the standards section in 18.4.6.040 Street Design Standards if all of the following circumstances are found to exist. a. There is demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements of this chapter due to a unique or unusual aspect of the site or proposed use of the site. b. The exception will result in equal or superior transportation facilities and connectivity considering the following factors where applicable. i. For transit facilities and related improvements, access, wait time, and ride experience. ii. For bicycle facilities, feeling of safety, quality of experience (i.e., comfort level of bicycling along the roadway), and frequency of conflicts with vehicle cross traffic. iii. For pedestrian facilities, feeling of safety, quality of experience (i.e., comfort level of walking along roadway), and ability to safety and efficiency crossing roadway. c, The exception is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty. d. The exception is consistent with the Purpose and Intent of the Street Standards in subsection 18.4.6.040.A. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT 18.5.7.040.13 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. 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 18.10, 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. GAcomm-dev\planningTIanning Actions\Noticing FolderWailed Notices & Signs\2017\PA-2017-01507_TypeIl.doex 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 August 30, 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-2017-01507, 330 Maple Street. r w Sign ture of Employe C:IUsersltrappr Desktop\TemplatestAFFIDAMT OF MAILING _Regan.docx 8/30/2017 t! j I o9Ls Many lijegeq ajzas!mn i ,dn•dod pjogaa alJal9A9J ap uge eingaeq elg za!lda8 i ' joadAse3assaipe,psapanbll3 ! s]ualed/woatiane:aed s4l,ege[)7eafaane Z91 IV r PA-2017-01507 391 E05DB 1000 PA-2017-01507 391 E05DB 1100 rA-2017-01507 391 E05DB 1508 ASHLAND COMMUNITY HEALTHCARE ASHLAND COMMUNITY HEALTHCARE BERGMANN ELODIE ANNE LIV TRUST ET SERVICES SERVICES j AL 280 MAPLE ST P 0 BOX 98 452 PARKSIDE DR ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2017-01507 391 E05DB 1500 PA-2017-01507 391 E05DB 1504 PA-2017-01507 391 E05DB 1800 BRINNAND JOHN P/SUZANNE BURNS KELLY W ET AL j CHESTNUT STREET LLC 523 CARROLL ST 64 THIRD ST 1820 CRESTVIEW DR SUNNYVALE, CA 94086 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 j i PA-2017-01507 391 E05DB 5001 PA-2017-01507 391 E05DB 1509 PA-2017-01507 391 E05DB 1300 DELUCA RONALD L TRUSTEE ET AL I DICKINSON JOYCE A FERGUSON KIRSTEN J ET AL 228 MORNINGLIGHT DR 340 WILEY 345 MAPLE ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 I PA-2017-01507 391 E05D61506 PA-2017-01507 PA-2017-01507 391 E05DB 900 FREY GEORGE UJO ANN MARIE j HOFFBUHR & ASSOCIATES INC j KUTCHER WILLIAM TRUSTEE ET AL 1305 NEIL CREEK RD 880 GOLF VIEW DR, SUITE 201 400 STRAWBERRY LN ASHLAND, OR 97520 MEDFORD, OR 97504 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2017-01507 391 E05DB 1510 PA-2017-01507 391 E05DB 2000 PA-2017-01507 391 E05DB 1501 LEVINE ALAN MAPLE LLC MCCANN CAROLYN TRUSTEE ET AL 540 MAPLE WAY 246 CATALINA DR 545 MAPLE WAY ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 I PA-2017-01507 391 E05DB 1503 PA-2017-01507 391 E05DB 1600 PA-2017-01507 391 E05DB 1400 MCDONALD ALAN C/FREDA NANCY J OPRAWSKI GRAZYNA PETERSON REIDER S 591 CHESTNUT ST 531 MAPLE WAY 367 MAPLE ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2017-01507 391 E05DB 1507 PA-2017-01507 391 E05DB 1900 I PA-2017-01507 PHILLIPS RUSSELL PURVES MARGARET YOUNG j REITINGER & ASSOCIATES, INC 2823 YVONNE RD 1190 SLAGLE CREEK RD 307 N. MAIN MEDFORD, OR 97504 GRANTS PASS, OR 97527 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2017-01507 391 E05DB 1701 PA-2017-01507 391 E05DB 1200 PA-2017-01507 391 E05DB 1702 SACKOWITZ KENNETH SAGER THOMAS W SCHULTZ PETER/LAURA 519 MAPLE WAY 605 CHESTNUT ST PO BOX 554 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2017-01507 391 E05DB 1505 PA-2017-01507 SKL & ASL LLC 330 MAPLE STREET 545 TERRACE ST 8/30/2017 TYPE 2 Notice of Public Hearing ASHLAND, OR 97520 25 j I it I ill ,I 09L5a4ejdwalA9nyasn i ®a6P3dn-dodasodxao;auil6uolepuag ®®9~JC sajeldW9j/ uoa'fGane of o~ ; slage-i ssaJppV jead Rse3 i F is } it j ? F 1 j, II I ~,,1~!3~? i Ni 1 4' I a dm f X low 1700 i 1., 11-1 1 `i a~ WitlLl' 1," 17017 fli ;i t"'1'5 1A I lifj ! ~ it it 11-4 ipt~ 6t" LAW tLillLG! fi, 4r13{ -'A a L I~~r ' ,j m, p i1 I ,1 G 1 Q, d_j' n'l F;, L ZONING PERMIT APPLICATION Planning Division 51 Winburn Way, Ashland OR 97520 FILE # CITY OF 541-488-5305 Fax 541-488-6006 -ASHLAND DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT Mixed use Medical & Residential new construction DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Pursuing LEEDO Certification? ❑ YES ❑ NO Street Address 330 Maple Street, Ashland OR 97520 Assessor's Map No. 391 E 39 1 E 05 DB-2000 Tax Lot(s) 2000 Zoning HC Comp Plan Designation Health Care APPLICANT Name Reitinger & Associates Inc. Phone 541-890-2704 E-Mail mlr@reitingerinc.com Address 307 N. Main City Ashland, OR Zip 97520 PROPERTY OWNER Name Maple LLC Phone 541-488-3192 E-Mail jnelson.rvcso@gmail Address 246 Catalina Drive City Ashland, OR Zip 97520 SURVEYOR, ENGINEER, ARCHITECT, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, OTHER Title Medical Design Name Reitinger & Assoicates Inc. Phone 541-482-2821 E-Mail mlr@reitingerinc.com Consultants Address 307 N. Main CityAshland, OR Zip 97520 Title Surveyor Name Hoffbuhr & Associates Inc. Phone 541-779-4641 -E-Mail dlh@hoffbuhr.com Address 880 Golf View Drive Suite 201 City Medford, OR Zip 97504 ! 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. l 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. l 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 furnishedjustifies the granting of the request,, 3) that the findings of fact furnished by me are adequate, and further 4) that all structures or im ovements are properly located on the ground. Failure in this re wi ult mo likely in no ly th est being set aside, but als~o ppossibly in my structures being built in reliance thereon being required to be remove y nse. if ave any s, l tsed to seek com tgntpro eessional advice and assistance. z4, - / Applkan s Slgna Date As owner of the property involved in this request, /have read and understood the complete application and its consequences tome as a property owner. Property Owner's Signature (required) Date fro be completed by City Staffj Date Received Zoning Permit Type Filing Fee $ OVER 0 GAcomm-de0planningkForms & HandoutsVoning Permit Application.doc i Maple Street Medical it i 330 Maple Street, Ashland Oregon Application Proposal City of Ashland 1 r Submitted by: Reitinger & Associates, Inc. 307 N Main Street Ashland, Oregon Date Submitted: July 24, 2017 Property Owner: Maple LLC 246 Catalina Drive Ashland, Oregon' Maple St, Medical Building Page 1 Application Proposal PREAMBLE This mixed-use medical building will be the first new construction within the hospital district in 30+ Years. Its presence will help maintain a medical community that uses & supports the neighboring Asante Ashland Community Hospital (AACH). This multi-level building services a low-mobility patient demographic and will provide unique solutions to: a typically challenging sloped site, existing parking impacts imposed by the neighboring AACH, and thoughtfully addresses the transition from healthcare to residential zones. PROJECT SUMMARY Project Name: Maple Street Medical Building Description: Mixed-use building with: medical suite(s) and residential Project Address: 330 Maple Street, Ashland OR Map/Tax Lot: 39 1E 05 DB-2000 Lot Size: 0.63 of an acre = 27,443 sq. ft. Zoning: Health Care (HC) Building Size: Parking Level (below grade) = 13,500 gross sq ft Medical Suite(s) (above grade) = 13,500 gross sq ft Residential (2nd floor) = 2,400 gross sq ft Total = 29,400 gross sq. ft. Lot Coverage: 66% percent* (65% maximum without exception) Lot Coverage (by percent): Main building (below grade) = 49% Screened Trash & Backup Gen. = 1% Site Circulation / Driveways = 14% Impervious Area Sub-Total = 64% Staff Courtyard = 6% Landscaping (total sq. ft. = 4,390) = 30% Pervious Area Sub-Total = 36% Total = 100% Maple St. Medical Building Page 2 Application Proposal i Parking Summary: Minimum required for medical use = 38.57 spaces Minimum required for residential use = 3.50 spaces Total Required = 42.07 spaces Parking Credits: Bicycle Parking Credit = -1.00 spaces Mixed Use Parking Credit = -3.50 spaces Total Parking Credits = -4.50 spaces Net Required = 38 spaces Satisfied by: Off-street - Below Grade Standard (9' x 18') = 14 spaces Compact (8'x 16') = 19 spaces ADA Standard = 2 spaces ADA Van = 1 space Off-Street -Above Grade Parallel (7' x 22') = 2 spaces Compact (8' x 16') = 1 space Total provided Off-Street = 39 spaces On-street (not counted above) Parallel (7' x 22') = 6 spaces Maple St. Medical Building Page 3 Application Proposal G THE APPLICANT While the property is owned in a separate LLC the medical practice developing this project is Retina & Vitreous Center of Southern Oregon, PC. Some helpful practice demographics include: ® Retina physicians and surgeons deal with the deep interior of the eye. Most patients have seen from one to three doctors before ending up at the retina specialists' office. ® Retina diseases are often blinding or sight diminishing ® Most retina patients are unable to drive themselves to their appointments and instead rely on a combination of family, friends, taxis, medical transport vans, and the bus o Most patients are temporarily, if not permanently, partially disabled due to vision issues ® 82% of the patients are over 65 years old ® 25% of the patients are over 85 years old ® New patient appointments typically last from 2-3.5 hours due to the time for testing, examination, and treatment ® Returning appointments can be from .5-1.5 hours ® Approximately 31% of all patients are dropped off for their appointment and picked up when they are done. o Another 2% take the bus, walk, or ride to an appointment ® Almost all retina surgery is outpatient (same day) surgery and all is done at AAHC ® Before Dr. Rodden, the founding member of this practice, opened in Ashland patients with Retina injuries or diseases were transported to Portland or San Francisco. ® Today a retina patient has a much better chance of retaining their vision due to improved testing, procedures, surgeries, and drugs injected into the eye. Maple St. Medical Building Page 4 Application Proposal i EXISTING SITE I 1. 1 i _5A ~r Zoning & Lot Features: ® Tax lot 2000 sits on the corner of Maple Street and Chestnut Street within the Health Care (HC) zone. ® The existing site is currently occupied by a very old single story medical building and a small single story storage structure. o Both structures are in poor condition and proposed to be demolished. ® The site is outside of the Historic District, however care and consideration to blend the new structure into the existing surroundings is being honored. ® Neighboring tax lot zones are the: o Heath Care Services District (HC), o Residential- Low Density Multiple Family (R-2) o Residential-Single Family (R-1-7.5) o Architectural styles range from commercial to ranch or craftsman-like style homes ® The corner lot is sloped with a grade change from the address side on Maple St to Chestnut Street below ® Chestnut is considered the higher order street for planning and setback purposes Maple St. Medical Building Page 5 Application Proposal I f Vii' r1 - y I Existing North West Fagade at Maple Street Existing East Fagade at Chestnut Street - 51,E i ~ Q h ~ I Neighboring Single Family Homes (Northof site) NeighboringViilli1iil,' )n ies (West of site) a, F ~ei; t ~ ~ tom, , - - 06 - Neighboring Ashland Community Hospital (East of site) Neighboring Medical and Residential (South of site) I Maple St. Medical Building Page 6 ' Application Proposal F c i c NEIGHBORHOOD OF SITE The property is located in the HealthCare (HC) Zone Across from Asante Ashland Community Hospital. There are many unique conditions relative to the Health Care Zone in Ashland which include, but are not limited to: is ® The only new construction in the HC Zone in the past 30+ years has been done by Ashland.. Community Hospital in expanding emergency and outpatient services ® The Ashland Community Hospital recently became Asante Ashland Community Hospital (AACH). It is unclear at this time what that will mean for healthcare in Ashland going forward o The two biggest surgical services at AACH are Retina and Orthopedics o AACH is the only hospital in the valley that does any ophthalmologic surgery. All other eye surgery is done in outpatient surgery centers. PROPOSE BUILDING Proposed mixed-use building features: ® Become an asset to the Healthcare community/neighborhood and a vast improvement to what is there now ® Provide an aesthetic architectural transition between the Healthcare and Residential zones ® Keep the building as low as possible, within the 35-foot height limit, for minimal effect on uphill residential views ® Subterranean parking garage accommodating both residential and commercial needs ® Medical suite(s) on the ground floor ® Two residential penthouse suites on the 2nd floor (above the medical suites) ® A prominent Main Entry is positioned at the front corner of Maple and Chestnut Streets to provide an obvious pedestrian cue and vertical circulation to the building. ® Building occupancy type shall be Business (B) and Residential (R-2) ® Elevator access will be available to all levels, originating in the parking garage ® Type II-A fire sprinklered building Maple St. Medical Building Page 7 Application Proposal Main Entry Pavilion: ® Positioned on the Corner of Maple & Chestnut street this strong entry feature is intended as entry focus for people, not for automobiles ® Entry into this foyer from both the parking garage and the street delivering patients to the clinic floor and residents to the residential floor ® The entry column ads an environmentally favorable element in providing a transition between outside temperatures to inside temperatures. The Subterranean parking garage does a number of things for this project: ® Aesthetically a parking garage under the building will keep the most of the parked cars hidden in this mixed Health Care/ Residential neighborhood o The parking under the building allows for a functional medical building while minimizing the visual impact of the cars o Reducing the visual impact of parking has long been a goal of the City planning team o The surface parking in the proposed plan is a 75% reduction from the current twelve surface parking spaces. ® The parking garage will daylight to the East onto Chestnut providing a smooth entrance and exit to Chestnut street making it easy access for staff, patients, and residents The total medical floor sq. ft. shall be 13,500 sq ft: ® There ends up being a sweet spot between number of parking spaces, building size, and lot coverage. 13,500 Square feet is that sweet spot. Due to parking space sizes and parameters making the building any smaller than this 'sweet spot' means that decreasing building size becomes substantial as a percentage and not incremental. This substantial loss makes the project a non- starter for the client. The two penthouse residential units have the following characteristics and advantages: ® -1200 square feet each unit ® 2400 square feet total for both units ® 20-30 % of the roof area is proposed for an aesthetic outdoor living area for the two suites ® Remaining rooftop areas will be used to house screened mechanical equipment for the building and maintain visual site lines from the street levels ® Help maintain the residential character of the neighborhood ® Help maintain the security of the medical building and neighborhood by having more constant presence than either an office building (days) or residents (nights and weekends) Site Circulation ® Automobile access to the parking structure from Chestnut Street ® Pedestrian and Bicycle through the front main entry pavilion ® Patient drop-off drive at the Clinic level on the North end of the building o This feature is imperative to the project due to the patient population ® Without this feature this project will not happen. 0 31% of all patients are dropped off by a driver who do not park on site Maple St. Medical Building Page 8 Application Proposal i tt o This will facilitate ADA and elderly patient access of the many patients with limited mobility and those who do not drive themselves ® Many have co-morbidities which require access to the clinic level free of prolonged physical effort ® 5-10% of all patients need clinic staff or wheelchair support to enter ® This gets patients who are being dropped off away from street traffic and mitigates potential dangers for patients and other drivers o One parking space in the drop-off area ® Some drivers will need to assist patient into the clinic or will go in to get assistance ® One parking space is also proposed in this area so that cars don't stack up o This drop-off will also re-route and traffic from driving up to the dead-end portion of Maple Street that services the neighboring residences o Every effort has been made to minimize the impact of this requested exception. o If this feature didn't exist patient's drivers would still drive up the hill to see if they could drop off a patient, turn around, and often let them out on the side of the road which could be quite dangerous i 7 Service entrance on the West (back side) of the building ® To utilize the same location of the existing curb cut ® Will double as the entry point to the clinic patient drop-off drive o This will keep those larger vehicles off the street while they are servicing the building for trash, recycle, service, and delivery access o Those drivers (of patients) who use the patient drop off will actually exit the property further than the 25 feet separation requirement for neighborhood streets. 0 Maple St. Medical Building Page 9 Application Proposal i is E i PARKING Parking Allocations: F dical Parking Required: 38.57 dential Parking Required: 3.50 l Parking Required: 42.07 Parking Credits: Bicycle Parking Credit -1.00 Mixed Use Credit -3.50 Total Parking Credits -4.50 NET Required Parking 38.00` Satisfied by: Off-Street Underground Parking: Standard (9'x18') 14 Compact (8'x16') 19 ADA Standard 2 ADA Van 1 Off-Street Above ground Parking: Parallel (7'x22') 3 Total Off-Street Parking spaces provided: 39.00 On-Street Parking (not applied above) 6.00 Special Parking Notes: ® While this site fully meets its parking requirements it may be helpful, in case the Commission has concerns, to review other positive impacts to the area parking created by this proposed building. o Off-street Parking was not applied to this project ® An allowance of the 6 available spaces could be credited to this project ® Historically the on-street parking was credited to the landowner o Underground Parking advantages: ® Aesthetically far more pleasing for the neighborhood than open paved parking for a large medical building Maple St. Medical Building Page 10 Application Proposal [I i It is very costly to provide underground parking but makes sense in this application ® While neither the Department nor Commission have a policy on this issue it is likely worthy of a parking credit of at least 5-10% of all provided underground parking ® Unusual parking conditions o 31% of all patients are dropped off for their appointment with the driver leaving to do other things during the appointment time ® An internal patient study performed by asking patients direct observation) at the clinic whether their driver stayed with them or left during their appointment time to do other things and returned to pick them up when finished produced the following: ® 27% of patients were delivered by a driver who left ® 4% of patients were delivered by senior or medical transport van service ® 2% of patients walk/take the bus/ ride to their appointment o Some patients do walk between the hospital for testing and the office and tend to park, if they have a car, at the first location of their day. ® This is also true for physicians doing surgery ® Parking In Summary o This site and parking plan provides adequate parking for the use and conditions ® 100% of the required parking is provided on-site ® In addition, there are a number of positive parking impacts created by the proposed building on area parking. PROPOSED LANDSCAPING & SITE DEVELOPMENT PARK ROWS & COMMERCIAL PARK ROWS ® Chestnut Street o On this property and the south neighboring residential property landscape park rows do not currently exist o For Chestnut Street we propose a hardscaped Commercial style park row with street tree wells. ® Allows for safer pedestrian access and from cars to the curb for the (4) parallel parking spaces along Chestnut Street. ® Maple Street o On this property and the west neighboring property landscape park rows do not currently exist o No park row is suggested in order to maintain existing street trees, and to reduce the impact of impervious area on the property's lot coverage. o However, if the Department or Commission prefer, on Maple Street side a residential park row can be accommodated ® However, this pushes the sidewalk back partially onto the owner's property increasing impervious lot coverage by 2% Maple St. Medical Building Page 11 Application Proposal i STREET PROPERTY LINE TREES Existing North Property Line (Maple) Street Trees € K 1. [ Ic _ I y ® There are a number of street trees existing on the (Maple St) Northern property line ® Most will be significantly impacted by the new sidewalk placement and will be removed ® For trees not affected by the new park row and sidewalk, protection and preservation will be sought Existing East Property Line (Chestnut) Street Trees 1,s f N 4"✓ i m Existing evergreen cedar tree at Southeast corner of site to Existing deciduous tree at Northeast corner proposed for be protected. protection. Note this tree is stationed in the vision clear area required at the street intersection. ® There are a number of street trees existing on the (Maple St) Northern property line ® There is a mix of deciduous and coniferous trees proposed for removal and replacement ® Most will be significantly impacted by the new sidewalk placement and will be removed ® For trees not affected by the new park row and sidewalk, protection and preservation will be sought o New Trees will be planted in the new Commercial Park Row Maple St. Medical Building Page 12 Application Proposal i i i WEST PROPERTY LINE VEGETATION (Back Property Line not bordering a street) The existing vegetation at the Western property line bordering the residential zone is in poor health o Removal of shrubs or trees within the property line will be replaced with a continuous fence and hedge to meet the requirements for privacy screening o Shrubs and trees located on the neighboring properties will be protected from damage T i _ Existing sprawling and overgrown junipers to be removed New continuous hedge to be added to fill in gaps within and replaced with a continuous hedge. existing vegetation. Proposed New Street Trees ® Where new street trees are proposed all shall conform to the City of Ashland's, "Recommended Street Tree Guide". o A few species currently being considered are: ® Acer Griseum (Paperbark Maple) ® Acer Grandidentatum (Bigtooth Maple) ® Prunus Cerasifera (Flowering Plum). ~ ~r I 1 5 -r 1 ~ Ulf, f a 1 ~ - +f~l 'y aT`v I Paperbark Maple Bigtooth Maple Flowering Plum Maple St. Medical Building Page 13 Application Proposal f TRAFFIC IMPACT ARIAL LADDER ACCESS ® Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Applicability: Consultation with Engineer, Kelly Sandow of Sandow Engineering, has determined that this project does not exceed the thresholds that would require a TIA. See attached statement and calculations from Sandow Engineering, "Maple Street Medical Building Trip Generation and TIA Applicability". ® Arial Ladder Access: Contact has been made with Margueritte Hickman of the Ashland Fire and Rescue, and it was agreed that Arial Ladder Access was no longer a requirement for this project. See attached letter from Ashland Fire & Rescue. SUMMARY The Maple Street Medical Building shall cater to both residential and healthcare needs in this Healthcare tax lot bordering Healthcare and Residential zones, by providing medical and residential suites. A subterranean parking structure will alleviate congested streets and give safe and direct access to the facility. It is our hope that a new medical building in the Health Care zone will go a long way to revitalizing Ashland's own medical community. We believe this facility will become an asset to the healthcare district and community for many years to come. Any comments made by the Planning Department that are not specifically addressed here are considered informational and will be addressed or developed within the permit set forthcoming. Submitted by: Aer Reitinger & Associates, Inc. Enclosures: ® Ashland Fire and Rescue Letter, "Pre-Application Comments, Revised 2122117" ® Sandow Engineering Letter and Calculations, "Maple Street Medical Building Trip Generation and TIA Applicability" ® Maple Street Medical Building Conceptual Drawings (G-001, A-201-204, V-001, C-001 & L-001) Maple St. Medical Building Page 14 Application Proposal 4. 455 Siskiyou Boulevard Ashland, OR 97520 541.482.2770 i Pre-Application Comments Date: 2/22/2017 Project Address: 330 MAPLE ST Permit Number: PL-2016-02058 Project Description: PreApp: 12/7/16 @ 2pm Ashland Fire & Margueritte,hickman@ash Rescue Contact: Margueritte Hickman 541-552-2229 land,or,us Fire department comments are based upon the 2014 Oregon Fire Code as adopted by the Ashland Municipal Code: Aerial Ladder Access - Structures exceeding 24 feet in height above the lowest level of fire apparatus access are required to provide access roads capable of accommodating fire department aerial apparatus. These access roads are required to be 26 feet in width in the immediate vicinity of the building. OFC Appendix D 105 as amended by AMC 15.28.070 K & L. The boil iiig foute on the west side of the building is required to meet aerial fife appafatus . Fire apparatus access shall have a 20 foot wide driving surface, must support 60,000 pounds, have, a maximum slope of 15 percent, and have vertical clearance of 13' 6". Inside turning radius is at least 20 feet and outside turning radius is at least 40 feet and must be indicated on site plans submitted for building permits. Fire apparatus access is required to be signed as "No Parking-Fire Lane". Fire apparatus access will be accepted from the streets adjacent to the property. Addressing - Building numbers or addresses must be at least 4 inches tall, be of a color that is in contrast to its background, and shall be plainly visible and legible from the street fronting the property. Additional directional signage may be necessary to guide emergency responders down a driveway, path or through a gate. All premises identification, street signs and building numbers, must be in place with temporary signs when construction begins and permanent signage prior to issuance of any occupancy. OFC 505 Firefighter Access Pathway - An approved footpath around the structure is required so that all exterior portions of the structure can be reached with the fire hose. Any changes in elevation greater than two feet in height (such as retaining walls) require stairs. The stairs shall be an all- weather surface, and meet the requirements as specified in the Oregon Structural Specialty Code. OFC 503, 1.1 Fire Hydrants Clearance - Hydrants must have 3 feet of clearance extending from the center nut of the hydrant all the way around. Fences, landscaping and other items may not obstruct the hydrant from clear view. Hydrants must be shown on site plan when submitting for building permits. 330 MAPLE ST - PL-2016-02058 - Page 1 of 3 Fire Department Connection (FDC) - The FDC is required to be a 2 /2" Siamese female connection installed 18" to 48" above finished grade. A single 2 /2" NST female swivel connection with rocker lugs and cap is acceptable if hydraulic calculations are provided that indicate a single 2 1/2 " line will adequately serve the system. Fire flow alarm shall be placed on the FDC. FDC shall be placed in a location approved by the fire department. Gates and Fences - Obstructions such as gates, fences, or any other item which would block or reduce the required fire apparatus access width must be shown on the plans and approved by Ashland Fire and Rescue. Ivey Box - A Knox Box is required for commercial buildings with fire sprinkler or fire alarms systems. The Knox Box must be a 3200 series or larger with a hinged door and may be either surface mounted or recessed into a wall. The installation location of the 1~,'1ox Box will be determined by Ashland Fire & Rescue. The Knox Box is required to be installed in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions. The Knox Box can be ordered at www.Inoxbox.com. Vegetation - Ashland Fire & Rescue recommends the planting and maintenance of fire resistive vegetation throughout the city of Ashland. Here's how you can create a landscape. Fire Season - If work will be completed during fire season, check fire season fire prevention requirements found at www.ashland.or.us/fireseason. Final determination of fire hydrant distance, fire flow, and fire apparatus access requirements will be based upon plans submitted for Building Permit review. Changes from plans submitted with this application can result in further requirements. Any future construction must meet fire code requirements in effect at that time. The fire department contact for this project is Fire Marshal Nlargueritte Hickman. She may be contacted at (541) 552-2229 or ,or ®ns i 330 MAPLE ST - PL-2016-02058 - Page 2 of 3 I i 160 MADISON STREET SUITE A EUGENE, OREGON 97402 541.5113376 D PROF March 20, 2017 G I Ne4 77929PE Karl Johnson, E.LT., Associate Engineer GREG City of Ashland, Public Works/Engineering 9N o` o 20 East Main St 4. Ashland, Oregon 97520 R . S RENEWAL 06 / 30 /18 RE: Maple Street Medical Building Trip Generation and TIA Applicability Sandow Engineering has prepared an estimation of the anticipated vehicle trips generated by the proposed Maple Street Medical Building on Maple Street in Ashland, Oregon. The applicant is proposing the construction of 13,500 sf Medical Office Building with two apartment units totaling 2,400 sf on the second floor and underground parking. TRIP GuEN4EIRATION The trip generation for the development was estimated using information contained within the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual 9th Edition. The site trips are estimated using the data provided for Medical-Dental Office Buildings (LUC 720) and Apartments (LUC 220). The site generated trips for the AM and PM peak hours are illustrated in Table 1. TABLE 1- RIP GENEFIATION EST d'O AT Trip Generation ITE Land Use Size Units Rate ;Trips AM Peak Hour 13.5 i ksf _ 2.39 32 720 -Medical -Dental Office Building 220 - Apartments 2 DU 0.51 1 - - - - Total Trips 33 PM Peak Hour 720 - Medical - Dental Office Building 13.5 ksf Ln(T) = 0.90 Ln(X) + 1.53 48 220-Apartments 2 DU i 0.62 1 Total Trips 49 As demonstrated, the proposed development is anticipated to generate 33 trips during the AM Peak Hour and 49 trips during the PM Peak Hour. P TI A AP PIU 9 CAMU` Y Ashland Code Requires a Traffic Impact Analysis when one of the following occurs: 1) Addition of 50 newly generated vehicle trips during the adjacent street peak hour From: Kelly Sandow PE Sandow Engineering RE: Maple Street Medical Building-Trip Generation and TIA applicability Date: 3/20/17 Page 2 The expansion is anticipated to generate 49 vehicles trips in the PM peak hour and 29 vehicle trips in the AM peak hour. This criteria is not met for warranting a TIA. 2) Installation of any traffic control device and/or construction of any geometric [ improvements that will affect the progression or operation of traffic traveling on, entering, or exiting the highway The applicant is not installing any traffic control devices or constructing any geometric improvements within the ROW. This criteria is not met for warranting a TIA. 3) Addition of 20 newly generated heavy vehicle trips during the day. The proposal is for a medical office building with two apartments. There are a limited number of delivery trucks per day for these uses. The development is not expected to not generate more than 20 additional heavy vehicle trips during the day. This criteria is not met for warranting a TIA. F I N D I N As demonstrated, the proposed development of the Maple Street Medical Building is anticipated to increase traffic to the site by 49 vehicle trips during the PM peak hour. The increase in traffic does not meet the City of Ashland thresholds for triggering a Traffic Impact analysis. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or if you need any additional information. Sincerely, Kelly Sandow PE v, LNGINEERING i ®®o®o p 6® p p p AFFLIGATION FFOFOSAL F- -7 T- 7 71 IIl T 11T ~ ~l ~l ~ ~ ~l E i h EAST CHESTNUT STREETSCAPE CONGEFTUAL ELEVATION NOT TO SCALE f: i II k' I` AB3LYtlT1111 ®®o®o D ~ D 0 D PGiOd~C~4 ~~JG~G~G1p~7 ~~4[ M~[ ~M 1G~aL ( DGgO(a C~~°3~4~L30Q OEM &F 10GdG1MOHm REITINCrER The Proposed medical building shall house several medical practices and two PROJECG MAPIE5TRPErMEDICAL BUIIDING PARIUNGRFAUIRENIMM: I$PAEEFER350SA Or BUILDINGCOCES 6001 PROJECT SUMMARY, 51TEWe5UMWRY,DESIGN CPJRGa & ASSOCIATES INC. residential penthouse suites above medical portion of building that Is In the current MAPNUMBLR: 39JE05DB 2014 OREGON STRUCTURAL SFE=TYCODE (0550 MAPDUDORCO9EPTPER,WRAH,ZONING INLMn -Ca-,A"° Healthcare zone.Thetotalmedlplfloorsquarefeetshallnatexceed13,5Wsf. Mrtm1Pa ylwl,d: 3857'DnBnORCDL~tP5PCCn4[ ~rITM 2014 ouGONDECTRlrnLSrcwttcooe(o®c7 TAx m, 2000 R.,ld-dal Pa,kPg 11 q11 3,W A-201 PROPo5m FAST DTmoR EIEVAnoN t MATERIAL OPTIONS xvEmw mauwN Thereare two proposed residential PenthouseunRsthatwould bee total of24W 52E: 0.630E AN ALREm 27,443 5q. FT n Parug n qwr d; m 2014 OREGON PLUMBING STROALTYCODE (OFEQ s,f.rooftop units. Theproposed Structure shall provide asubterranean paddng DT 2014 OREGON MECHANICAL SPECIALTY CODE (OM50 A-202 MF05EDNOUHE)rEwoRELEVATION 4MATERIAL OPTIONS garage which will provide the majority of the parking required by the use. The PROIECrADDRE75: 330 MAPLE5TREEr P'M'gGe': A-203 PROPOMI)WEST DxTERJORELEVATION tMATERIAL OPTIONS 02E%NPCFDU]rEU& mm~ ww.,.,~. w Creiit T -1W 1pd~°ba subteraneanparking will daylight wfthanentance andexhtotheparking ZONING: HEALTH CARE (HC) u:gdeParli"g OCCUPANCY CLASS, A-204 PRAro5ED5oumErcRORELEVATION mMATERIAL ovnONS 5.,E' structure off of Chestnut. A secondary entrance Is necessary for assisted patient OWNER: MAPLEUG MadD od1 a.sB GROUP 5. BUSINESSRROF.5DMCTSPIttSLWU V-001 ElOSTING SURVEfPVJI rBwranl~lvesu aso pick up and dro poff, andshallbeoffoftheNorth endofbuilding onMapleStreet 155T.GRO55MEDICAL 50.Fr: 13,500 GRO35 50. fr. 0001 PROPOSED PARKING PLAN PROJECT: on the clinic level. Service entrance, delivery, refuse, recycle, backup generator, MA. LOTCOVFRPGE, 65% xcrlSeaPa1P 30.00 RDT NTH L(UI FRDF05ZDLAN5CAPINGPLAN shall be at rear of building accessed off of Maple Street on the West side of building PROP05EDLOTCOVERAGB 66%® All IMPERVIOU55URFALE atr: at the existing curb cut. (VARIANCERWUE5TTOINCREA5E) o Nrenudgge aPadY: Construction Of building shall be a IYPe 11-A fire sprinkled building. ,z~,d(0v181 coNSRUCnouMA MATERIALS PROPOSED, All levels shall be REQUIRED SET BALKS: FROM YARD 20 Pr. -PWW.10 9 F05T 4 TENSION 5TRU1=RAL CONCRETE PARKING STRUCTURE accessed either by elevator or by stairs as an alternative exit. On the Residential 51DEYARD 6FL ADaswraa,a 2 LOWER LVB MAPLE STREET penthouse portion of upper level, a 20 to 30 percent of roof Is proposed for an REAR YARD 10 Fr. PM 5TORY ADAwn aesthetic outdoor living area for the twoPenthouse suites. Remaining areas will 51DEYARD OfCORNERMTIOFr. oYS1reMAmag,a aRanBB. MEDICAL house saeenedmechanfwlofthedlnMfrom residential outdoor lhdng and from MAX. HEIGHT OPBUILDING, 35 PT, enrali0 (7'.22) 3 visual site lines from the street levels, P"x"1'P.... ' 3°0 BUILDING The Intent for this proposed structure as It relates to the Healthcare zone and the Wabow Residential zone that It borders on, Is to blend it In aesthetically with the transitional zoning that occurs at this site. Keeping the building height as low as possible as not to affect or over power uphill residential area views and stay within the 35' height - - - limit. With this Intent, we think It will be a welcome asset to the Healthcare communtty/residential neighborhood and a vast improvement to what Is there now, 330 MAPLE STREET I ASHLAND, OR 97520 J83b4' t`I JACKSON COUNTY 48 AaPHN.T PAR:WY LOT I DRAWING INFORMATION: (40W 6PJ I--___--_______ Ek13TN6 BUILDWG TOM DEMOLISHED 10% SCHEMATICS (ea@SFJ "l DRAWN BY: .tK DAM' ~Y¢Mb SFIEEf SIZE CAD BYaaR DATE; 8 Ab ~ D y' I ( 1 . , - • I , I W0, RMOH DATE BY 0 Obi ACRES 'I i I i f A KY.F£RRE-A9'CCK1FN7e 04AIAT JX I B WV.FERFW-AFFCCK1W$2 06112111 UMc 1I , 9 \\exlailrG GRA&5r I I I I, i - ' ~~DEXQ. 60 HILLSIDE PENCE , i '7 i 1 I ' I 1 y CHESTNUT ST. b(15TItY SIDEWALK j ~ - _ tli CAD FILE: 0-001 Co- Sheetdwg PLOT DAM/TIME. 7/24/2017 - 2:411p. CITE DEMO FLAN ~ PG°T~OO eD~C~ I ~ SHEET TITLE: 606QUDOa N-~ COVER SHEET }97LBY DT. PARK P R-I75 PROJECT SUMMARY, ltnF w ar. MAPLE! TAT. E-1 SITE USE SUMMARY, 4pr HC INDEX OF DRAWINGS, E R-3 SITE DEMO PLAN, ASHLAND VICINITY MAP, DOMMUNI7Y E-I j HOPI AL R 1 PERSPECTIVE SKETCH R-2 _ - AC R-2 ~ONJ~NIW ° HC.. HC HEATH CARE 5ERYICES Y ~i ~f~rn+~lUl~ ,~TTl7A (Vl/1('0l~ R-I-7.5 SINGLE FAMILY, 75005,P, `Vv' IulUV ful 1u! aWvlloWwU' / \ R-2 MULTIFAMILY PMIDEN1IW. NOT TO SCALE ( ) _ _ VV VVV e-I EMPLOYMENT SHEET NUMBER: G-001 VICINITY' 4 ZONING EXTERIOR FERSFECTIVE CONCEPT I\ NOTT05CA1E I ) NOTT09CAIP Q VVV F turf"^_wnuer - - - - - - 4 - - - - - - 4g - - - - - - - - - REITINGER 11 0 ® i & ASSOCIATES INC. rTm RETINA 9CNiGR ar u 1901Ih UR=ERFLOORRE51DINfIAL rrE5 i 0 ~ Ollgfik'6pOJ7'gN1S -FLOOR MEDICAL 19V MID PROJECT. r MAPLE STREET - - - - - GRAPHIC SCALE MEDICAL ti E A S T E L E V A T I O N (CHESTNUT STREETSCAPE) 0 a' E' 18' BUILDING G aUOa~o~~ a~o~a4 aaaa~~o~ BUILDING HEIGHT= (H1+H2+H3+H4) MAXIMUM BUILDING HT. FOR ZONE IS 35' I(IUUVrfJ H=29 6^ 330 MAPLE STREET H22=29'-s^ ASHLAND, OR 97520 H3=24'-7" H4=26'- 4" JACKSON COUNTY ❑ SUM OF HI+H2+H3+yq=115 O~~ ~ ~IIIIIIJJJyiiiwvv~ 4 =26'-9"MEDIAN HT. DRAWING INFORMATION: D NOTE: THESE HEIGHTS HAVE BEEN DETERMINED BEFORE STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING AND WILL PROBABLY INCREASE, BUT WILL STILL REMAIN BELOW MAXIMUM HT. 10% SCHEMATICS I1VI7' Q4C L3~Qd W~ if G~04L5~ DRAIN BY. MR n-1/t4gi SHEET Size RAISED SEAM METAL ROOFING CHECKED BY: MR DATE: AaBD If F-11 b0. RRY69iDN DATE BY - - mP STUCCO EXTERIOR FINISH WI CONTROL 4,-~ JOINTS _ 4 ml m3 MASONRY VENEER OF: BRICK, STONE OR CULTURED STONE m4 ALUMINUM STOREFRONT WINDOWS & ENTRY SYSTEMS m5 PRE-FORMED/CAST STRUCTURAL COLUMNS FOR POST & TENSION SLAB AT I, _ gnl A-ly,1,.a^D 01 STREETSCAPE ELEVATIONS ONLY D FILE' DATE/WE: 02- /2a, 2., Ef a ie a m6 STEEL ENTRY AWNING WI ANCHOR STAYS i R - PRE CAST CONCRETE CAPS SHEET TITLE. V 0 CENTS ' RETLNA I - 0a ' _ - - ~ PINEAPPLE GROVE CONC. DECORATIVE MEDAUONS ARCHITECTURAL GALVANIZED DECORATIVE & SECURITY ( z r~9 SCREENICABLING FOR PARKING GARAGE I 2 ° 04 D POWDER COATED STEEL STRUCTURAL PROPOSED EAST EXTERIOR B KNEE BRACES ELEVATION & MATERIAL OPTIONS m w II EXTERIOR ACCENT LIGHTING SCONCE BUILDING HEIGHT ANALYISIS I I R.V.C.S.O. ' _ E r 09 Da 4 n E C, SHEET NUMBER: - EI - - - - - - GRAPHIC SCALE 0 2' 4' e' 1/4. = P_0. ~Q4LL30Q~ C3C~7C~04C~~ "`"r'°"T i1 RAISED SEAM METAL ROOFING I m2 STUCCO EXTERIOR FINISH W/ CONTROL JOINTS .T 03 MASONRY VENEER OF: BRICK, STONE OR D L'TTT1VTGE - - - CULTURED STONE & ASSOCIATES vLl~ 4~ ~ & INC. I I B4 ALUMINUM STOREFRONT WINDOWS &ti.~~~,a,oxrs - -----------1- 4g - - - - - - - - - - -------4--- ENTRY SYSTEMS n I I PRE-FORMEDICAST STRUCTURAL 1- ~ EN}t m BB COLUMNS FOR POST &TENSION SLAB AT STREETSCAPE ELEVATIONS ONLY c r~HiP Cfcwr8Nr6 RETIIIA.V CEMR 1 neI UPPER rtceR RESIDENTIAL surtES I - sD gTCaN...- . - - - i - STEEL ENTRY AWNING W! ANCHOR STAYS m6 w ~'tlUl PROSECT: x Ol PRE-CAST CONCRETE CAPS PINEAPPLE GROVE CONC. DECORATIVE HA - 0B MEDALIONS -isil nio ELad~ _ I 4 ' I CAST IN PLACE CONCRETE COLUMN CAPS MAPLE STREET GLU-LAM ABLED ENDOF PURLINS @ RESIDENTIAL G MEDICAL LMER LErL Pa GARdGE - - SCONCE II EXTERIOR ACCENT LIGHTING WALL BUILDING _ --T _ EXG.GR.a~Euhp,RDlFf#ERTr1.NE N O R T H E L E V A T I O N (MAPLE STREETSCAPE) 0 4RAPHI8. SCALE s' mm dvo0o - BUILDING HEIGHT= 1/8" - l'-D" (H1+H2+H3+H4) 4 MAXIMUM BUILDING HT. FOR ZONE IS 35' Ht=34'-7" 330 MAPLE STREET H2=29'-s" ASHLAND, OR 97520 H3=24'-7" H4=28'-4" JACKSON COUNTY V J~~ SUMOFH1+H2 4 +H3+H4=115 = 28'- 9" MEDIAN HT. 1 I\`UI ~1 a DRAWING INFORMATION: O (1 n I 1 M NOTE: THESE HEIGHTS HAVE BEEN DETERMINED BEFORE 13 STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING AND WILL PROBABLY W I Iv- 11 JI n M INCREASE, BUT WILL STILL REMAIN BELOW MAXIMUM HT. L~I~"vuU 10%a SCHEMATICS DRUM BY: MR DATR: T¢4m SHEET SIZE CHECKED BY- MR DATE: AW-H D ml NO. REVISION DATE BY - - - - - - - - - - A - - - m - - - - d - b 4D I I i 04 GN Fllf: Sht 02-F4.6., Eoralion Holght Wioly is.day eLor oATE/nve 7/24/2017 - I :3]pm i SHEET RETINA: V CENTER N I ! TITLE: @, 981 UPPER FLOOR RESIDENTIAL_ SUITES - ARCHITECTURAL r m3 R V. .5.0 Z Ell H m .o a PROPOSED NORTH EXTERIOR ELEVATION & MATERIAL m 04 04 OPTIONS F 1971 MID PLO BUILDING HEIGHT ANALYSIS yob `P~ - - - S na,' 4 4,1 44 P r r ° I i 961 LOUDER LEVEL PARKIN GARAGE r ' SHEET NUMBER: r► r _ - - - o z' a' e' A-202 EXG. GRADE a NORTH PROPCi~t"I"[ NE r c' 4'scALE I Ida' - 1'-°. WLSllI1VOD4L5~ tU xi,"At P-I RAISED SEAM METAL ROOFING j% m2 STUCCO EXTERIOR FINISH WI CONTROL i JOINTS fl3 CULTURED STONE OF: BRICK, STONE OR FJEITITV V EA 1&~AASSSOClIlAVTEESSLINC. ALUMINUM STOREFRONT WINDOWS & ENTRY SYSTEMS m5 PRE-FORMEDICAST STRUCTURAL ' COLUMNS FOR POST & TENSION SLAB AT 0906uIP OF DOa sns STREETSCAPE ELEVATIONS ONLY - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - a~ m6 STEEL ENTRY AWNING WI ANCHOR STAYS ---f---- - - - - - - - - - - - - PRE-CAST CONCRETE CAPS PROJECT: m8 PINEAPPLE GROVE CONC. DECORATIVE MEDALIONS T1 IN PLACE CONCRETE 'Ot U eR ROO!ZFEBIDFHT~A 6UITES-_-_- _ _ _ _ - p _ _ - 09 COLUMN CAPS MAPLE STREET l e I~ GLU-LAM STRUCTURAL ROOF PURLINS @ MEDICAL v RESIDENTIAL GABLED ENDS ® ® T „ II EXTERIOR ACCENT LIGHTING WALL BUILDING sil _ nim-ROOK ~Dlct.L , . . - SCONCE I I Q~od©oa~ aL~o~a4 Qa~d~~o~ k BUILDING HEIGHT= ?'oIL IFR LE4EL PAPoC1~Yi 64QA'iE_-_-_- _-_(HI+H2+H$+H4) t MAXIMUM BUILDING HT. FOR ZONE IS 35' WEST ELEVATION (REAR OF BUILIDING) RUD7 33D MAPLE STREET H2= 34 T" ASHLAND, OR 97520 GRAPHIC SCALE H2=29'-6" o 4' a' is' H6=24'-7" JACKSON COUNTY S nn n r/ UM26'-4" ~~~\~IY.U(/ ire =P-o SUM OF HI+H2+H3+H4=115 ❑ 4 =28'-9"MEDIAN HT. DRAWING INFORMATION: p~Q NOTE; THESE HEIGHTS HAVE BEEN DETERMINED BEFORE STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING AND WILL PROBABLY /'PTT /r INCREASE, BUT WILL STILL REMAIN BELOW MAXIMUM HT. 10% SCHEMATICS DRAWN BY: MR DATE:V14/R SHEET SIZE ml 01 CHECKED BY: MR DATE: d~ID - - -N0. R6175IDN DAIS BY - - - - - - - - - - - - I I mL ~ m7 m3 ms 4~ m7 ma i m4 I GN FIE: Sht 02-Fxlerlur FJevallan fielUM1l A,wly~ls.tlrvg PLOT DATE/WE: 7/24/2017 - 1:41pm ma m3 mz .l 'd. _r SHEET TITLE: UP4R FLOOR RESIDENTIAL SUITES SERVICE ENTRANCE ARCHITECTURAL JAI_ / \ ma PROPOSED WEST EXTERIOR m3 03' ma ELEVATION & MATERIAL OPTIONS MID-FLOOR MEDICAL I i I { ~I I ~ I I ~ ~ I I I I I I ~ I I I ~ I ' I I I III I I ~ ~ I ' ~ I I I I I { I I I I I~ I I I I L ER LEVEL PARKING GARAGE - - - - - - - - - - - ~-----~----------i-1---~------------------------------- j ----1-------------------------------------°-- SHEET NUMBER: L- - - - ---1-L - - L----------------- 1_ GRAPHIC SCALE A - 2 0 3 0 WEST ELEVATION (REAR OF BUILIDING) 1/4' _ O' WLS ll DV~ ll L5~ er uCX an9! !1I IDI RAISED SEAM METAL ROOFING ❑ STUCCO EXTERIOR FINISH WI CONTROL ID2 JOINTS ID3 MASONRY STONE OF. BRICK, STONE OR 1&~ALiSSOOC 11ATEESS1INC. - - - - - - - - - - ID4 ALUMINUM STOREFRONT WINDOWS 8 _ _ - ENTRY SYSTEMS x1Imurm r1 o5e~w w~ ,9-~4 4v ID5 PRE-FORMED(CAST STRUCTURAL COLUMNS FOR POST & TENSION SLAB AT DuIPOEOOOr.~ts {C, STREETSCAPE ELEVATIONS ONLY { " ID6 STEEL ENTRY AWNING W/ ANCHOR STAYS PROJECT: if" R RESiDENiIAL SJIiES PRE-CAST CONCRETE CAPS 1+3~ IFE__ _ - T Fo m,w PINEAPPLE GROVE CONC. DECORATIVE 1 MEDALIONS - ID9 GALVANIZED DECORATIVE & SECURITY SCREEWCABLING FOR PARKING GARAGE MAPLE S T R E E T reel MID-BOOR DILP1_- ! GLU-LAM STRUCTURAL GABLED END ROOF P MEDICAL ROOFURLINS II EXTERIOR SCONCES ACCENT LIGHTING WALL BUILDING Ld R L L PAW-W. GARAGE a~ 7_777-1- PURIOU[Mi HHUMV aaadr M SOUTH ELEVATION BUILDING HEIGHT= (H1+H2+H3+H4) 4 MAXIMUM BUILDING HT. FOR ZONE IS 35' HA=2,-I" 330 MAPLE STREET H2=2s'-B" ASHLAND, OR 97520 H3=24'-z" JACKSON COUNTY NTY E \~M GRAPHIC 11'SCAIE H4=26'-4" E (1~(\'JJ~1 IIJI~ o a' ' s' is' SUM OF HI+H2+H3+H4=715 4 =28'•9"MEDIAN HT. DRAWING INFORMATION: NOTE: THESE HEIGHTS E DETERMINED BEEN BEFORE STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING AND WILL PROBABLY p vlr`~ INCREASE, BUT WILL STILL REMAIN BELOW MAXIMUM HT. 10% SCHEMATICS DRAWN BY: taR DATE: 1124M SHEET SIZE 01 CHECI(CD BY: P4R DATE: ARCH D - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _H0. REMIT DATE BY 4C- ml M-4 D~ s71 CAD FILE Sh 02-ExWn., Devallon Height Maly.k,d g PLOT MTEATI!E 7/24/2017 - 1:49P. 63 D3 m3 SHEET TITLE: ARCHITECTURAL II PROPOSED SOUTH EXTERIOR - ELEVATION & MATERIAL OPTIONS r ► 06 HEIGHT ANALYSIS _1-~-- I { ; II II ~ ~ ~ I I I , I I I I I I I I I I ~ I I ~ II I I I I I ~ ~ I I ~ I I ~ ~ I I I I I I Gov I I I ~I I I- I II~ I II 1 I II~ i 1 I 1 I I f r ] F ~ ---------~---'-----------------------------------'-----`-----------------------------------`----'-----------------------------------'----J-------------------------------------`----`- --r---`----'---T SHEET NUMBER: ( GRAPHIC SCALE A - 2 0 4 0 2' 4' 8' S O U T H E L E V A T I O N I' i yy t6naeuTenrr "Wrv~e yQQJ W um. WO ~ V2 (L' REITINGER @ 3p "m n u _ " Ip`h>~~ S m ° ° E m u u w G & ASSOCIATES INC. m mr @`~' m o p' u ow o~ -4 pm Yn 0Q uuxu u"nr .ss vun. e um mum um n9- ® r om '~}-mom _ d mm 6tNii P mp tlyy-0 0 xuwaw-m uwu S n E® ~ 9 ~ N ~ @ sav ue--ru-.sass c, a ° "m, m + U as ~ur~DDDa Ns '1S 1f1NLS3HO °-3- mm ~ ~«~-•ed~e Nnry ~.+nmm r + m ry m 3m W9 QF } + - ~6' d m 5 eau r; um o °q s~ 6+~5 0~ m °m °a Q N olti° + 0 N 0 m q n .om O.B~OQ_W~ m ~Snpu m9 ~3 0 ~m ~m n on + F ~ n RFA m zzQ~DO ul PROTECT: ~rvErl A ro m sy a - n°m QUUZ 00 ~Fw 3 o h Q d a~ _ m - m ~WW 9 „mm ~ " N SOD'S 00 b°' - a U7~ _ tA2.01' r m m F(L~W'0.'OWW 71: A 3_ a ° r~ a` ti d x A ~~a MAPLE STREET s ~m F;Tp u)w a 0 - -b ~6 47 1 m D/ m 3 \ U ~D°"om MEDICAL x BUILDING eb ° m - u ~ > ID , r b s h mm ~ oi1 E r ~ u u / ° rEp m`-,cog =m amc~ >y m as m V !a /m r 1?6 gG 616' 41915 ` '~iv ~i«a°mo~ cnm9 «m° o«~ omox'm a°co Ey vn o'c9n°°_ a°"o vE*5o na°pm o1yo a; p`oD~ md~0 + 0090 n 00 k "0° ~m~ 0.' 3'ooooo"n°n°uo9 mD m~Nm Of mm RO E m p vi 3 0 pv : h m Si «a uvmmmo- m 3-o a nHnx«.°3 ° 69 @ m0 QA h ° w. mn 9 e +s 330 MAPLE STREET 3s + ' 6L I reo 156ss 3 nr @ u w ASHLAND, OR 97520 b 9 pub I D' I 11 II II u if II 11 11 fill II 11 u 11 If It If fill u 11 11 If fill A [1 11 a II fill N 111 fill sromis' DA g, m W a JACKSON COUNTY y. m 6w is7~p36 m $m m r a 8 45L%I~ u sD/ g N g m00Q t n Bi`6Dit01 m uS my J r u c ` c m << r W S r@ pse-0 9 *A^ n @~ "1 E~anaa 'ou 3 E dn,.r E`a @ et ~s @ ..@, m~ k SOe~ <D "m or@"4y'A 0 : @ 9 9 0 0 - o E na D nx E g a« DRAWING INFORMATION: _ s/se0s ea m° °m:;. uia° ~1t¢e$o~s/ a aa°~ ,((OBE m 09°x! m +n.. iDO._amma>rON>>N `ocaNPt«3onv> C..0.. `@3':3 .3 £b' 6~m6 -~NMN Od Ld tlU9 mm mV-WmP: Nr!EOaNNn NNNN««33 a.9 o, s m m 3 \ rn po9 `6 _ s 0 .0 " - £4' L6 mA m OEmL61 me 0 r 3 9 t6 LSP 9^mp Op 3v0 e 0Qry Sse_` B sE0L51 PP mtm a _,I~ mr m s D 9 h `~m'~ 3 A s 6j m W.m. .UmJ.' a 9Ftrv9m'UW6p ' ~Oma'm u6 aEl9l0b`l~'°.a + 6o1. L p:N , n t6 61 b 59m5'm0&0LL86L1 1 61 1aPs ~ z.pH a" Dime ryry Ywm ~ a m mu oa 10% SCHEMATICS m80L61 164 ITD r rm + N m Op > _11 ° a 9 0 o m h DR1flN BY: DEG DATE: SHEET SIZE m CHECK®BY: DLH DATE. AR"AID Q r m °'m m mm J~S`, eFf(61 S 4(S ° D mm CD/ ^ u O h c `4 m bmDi 9¢ a o m s ` N0. REVISION DATE BY e 61 h~\ m h- N 0 v m dd 9L' Y p) m o LLJ 9H1 n m r ~Nka: D m pAN o 9i W m u m 6 r w~ T. n~o . z O p° k°" RR A r '1 p s + at N m u" Dm u°-' ro w ° '°'~9 B aD r~~d ^ N 0 c 1,. W m Q G o 9 m n m man0 n z& u z ✓Ny n'I Ld L0 m °oa Il G m m E r co M 0 W 03 (n 4 z c ° U tl ,u° ci rn U F' D FILE C-001 Nee Site & P.Mlq PI-A,, N }m m CA V l Z y ^ W Z PLOT DATE/i141E: 9/14/1016 - 10:D5- N c 6`1 of /~7 ip b4F U /1 O IyJ p m> > O n W a o I) Lo 0 oD N u L) 0) ftF-4 f W SHEET TITLE: N _j b Lli Q v o m ro O Q .00 O W' m0 cf) N NI N) U 4- O N o 6`rs co m p 0 x o SURVEY PLAN co z o v l rr p~~ i Mo `J Q EXISTING SURVEY PLAN C3 to m ~ell, e z ® 0 = 39 1E 050B, TL 2000 tl) _c qj -4 V) U) O Z 0~~ ASS ® ~a Q e=; r L6'£6 dd £Z'4S 8'DV ,LO'96 M„40,99.OON 0 V' 1 W N /\YIY, 3-lddW S 1 N M o \ N N N / cS ~X_ o SHEET NUMBER: w M V®001 PG1aGS[IbC gM~1~57 tgxlnexxnnPT ' Medlrel Park ng Requ rd: 38.57 f 1l Residential Parking Required! 3.50 ) Total PahUeRequ red 42.07 LWIT. AND SCI IR6TRIP AN EN f Parking Credda: Aw ® Bicycle ParlanBCredil -1.00 ~T i Mixed Use Credit yg~~~y} 77 7 7 7 .3,50 +~+-aITi1YGER t?~ 1 r~ 3 + , r~ 7, Total Parking Credlts -4.50 &ASSOCIATES INC. 1,~--:.~' F\ l l l~ I~ k NET Required Parking 3800 _ mflN 2TLM2T~ M p 3 Y Satisfied by 0x-2ass t '/r 1~` l0 DLSLS~VLSW II I E WW Off-Street Underground Partin 8: C rv D A BY~> GMard 9'x18' ld V$T~EP CF DDDP DAbtl~r .I. 1~`•'`~:: ,Ia J DW~V'L5WQt1 "WK CwnPatt (8'rl6') 19 w...r.e.µrwa.xar.ab u,+ava ( yy ut- e-Q r+wimmrm ~~y •(\i ,`E a7;°.- -,°ve'v,,~•'- -,t~~", Q a / 0. ADAStandard 2 a AOAVan 1 Off-Street ALoveground Parking: PROJECT. ' Paallel(7x22) 3 ti o e o to e o e - 5' 201-0° Tota10R-Street Park ingsparesprovded: 39.00 I~ g -~-A T On-SVeetParkingQat applied above) 600 MAPLE STREET Z 'pe~ed Q MEDICAL a8 BUILDING I 330 MAPLE STREET o e e o ~o~~ W ASHLAND, OR 97520 DWVE AISLE pRl A10LE d' JACKSON COUNTY q. pp ~Ir ° ° ~4 E~ ~9~`d s E DRAWING INFORMATION: 1 I ~ III 10% SCHEMATICS "Q - - - - I,R&M ff. qK DATE: QM SHEET SIZE e - M - - - - - - - - ' I 1 e Q REVISION MR DAM MR1M A~ D ~ ~ / 'lc ~A°' V NO. . A6VI910N DATE BY A Rkt PER Ff£•dFP CqMM9 odANT JPK , REV. PER FE-APP Cq 1ZW$ 2 E6112111 MC E r. t~m~wt CMaNlUrf cOMMAM c m pMPACr o. i {1 \ _ ~Jfl - 0P _ J r 4~ +d CAD FILE: C-001 Porkln9 Pkn.deg PLOT DATE/T(M9 7/24/2017 - 3:03Pm f q V / (20, mw PeE6 VIII - - - - - - - - - - - - v~I l SHEET TITLE: - - - - - - - - - CIVIL PLAN V~ rpav V PROPOSED A r doq a 1 - p b 1 A c PARKING PLAN v F~ ev k A v+ .o o e 4: 4:3 v v vi VI81Pl G.R ATEA LF TIAY T j (22, MIK) CHESTNUT ST. _ 5' WSCALE GRAPIUC ~1~ 1 A 5' ID' 70' a 1, 10'-C ~~►J~ SHEET NUMBER: FROFOSED SITE F74f:;,KINe FLAN C®001 ~7, k &EHIEML MUM smlueenap L NORTH DPERTY LIFE VEGETATION PROPOSAL: I I TREE FP749ERVATION AND PROTECTION IB PROPOSED AND FENCED TOP OF EXC. BAN: EXIOTM 0JR5 CUT FOR TWO EXIBTIN3 TREES ON THE NORTH EAST 1 / TAT NEIGHBoRiw. CORNER THE ADDITION AND MODIFICATION OF THE G ENO RE `AT TRASBACKUP AT H SH / LD 4 LOT NEKoHBORIK. TAX DRIVE REQUIRED PARKRLW, SIDEWALK, AND CIRCULAR DRIVE II WILL REOUIR REMOVAL OF SOME EXISTING TREES. RECYCLE REA W/ EXISTING EVERGREEN END OF NEW NEW STREET TREES ARE FROP05ED WITHIN THE NEW AND SOUND B'" HEDGE PRIVACY SIDEWALK PARCRiall. ~T 6C SCREEN MOTE 4) PLANIIYSTRIP ( 1. EAST PROPERTY LINE VEGETATION FROPOSAL: p~ R ~'ITIl \ GER AND SCREEN G e. ALL NEW BTR`e5i 1TE5 CN THE EAST PROPERTY NEW KEYSTONE EXISTING CURB CUT RETAINING WALL AT PROJECT SITE LINE SHALL BE FLAMED IN STREET if~E WELLS AT & ASSOCIATES INC. L•3 m THE HARDSCAPED PARc~ROOA q u asar, v. n°vvm, a _ - - - - - - \ _ - - i b. A HARDWAPED PARKROW IS PROPOSED FOR ab°R1d'"a EASIER PEDESTRIAN PASSAGE TO AND FROM SITE.r eM P 4. eO1iH PROPERTY LINE VEGETATION Fr2aPC5AL- ~~ah-m~nn 19'10 - - - _ - _ - - - TREE PSESERVATION AND PROTECTION WILL BE F.x xa-'x-xu cv~ ~g15 PROVIDED FOR THE LARGE EVER3REEN CEDAR ON OWCF DCOPEU6 • • 6 CR751{ED - THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH. e Q~ i ~GRNIE 5. 0.457 PROPERTY LINE VEGETATION PROPOSA ~kwm 6 , ` !mFk P~qV du 1 e. A 5-FOOT CONTINUOUS PLANTING STRIP AND .'F,. y.`•`•"','`•`• 67 L tCW W r 0 FENCE SHALL PROVIDE SCREENING PROM . • " • ` "W'I . P~IUrACB W c~a aod~ oO N 1 9 W - / / ADJOINING RESIDENTIAL LOTS TO THE WEST. PROJECT: € C ` b. ANY LNHEALT14Y SH@UBS WITHIN THE CONTINUOUS ` ,1= t 0 / PLANTING STRIP, AND WITHIN THE PROPERTY LINES, MAY BE REMOVED AND NEW P'LANTIN6.5 SHALL BE R:5'^., "rV"5' ,4 .1.4'%• ",T:`5 - - - - 1 ~j ® \ ~ry w I / / INTRODUCED TO PROVIDE CO TMJWS BC.;~-ZENW. ` • K.;. \ - I f m F~ PFZON DELIVERY DRIVE AND RERUSE AREA ' f Anuu `J Ef MAPLE STREET Isoe -III : ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 3 I ~ ~ 6004 C~Oa~QG1C~iL MEDICAL 961 I , , L'D\ P _ _ L TOTAL ACRES TO BB DEVELOPED . 0.63 AC BUILDING ~I' r `Or _ i 7. LOT COVERAGE BY SQUARE FOOTAGE 4ll~a p Q MffER/IOUS `I QR BUILDWi (6R055 AT GRADE) 13,500 RESIDENTIAL IAIT9 TRASH RER15E 110 6 LEVEL ? -----fay. CLINIC ENTRY 5' 70- Ty':y°o CIRCULATION (DRIVES IWALKWAYS) 3559 "Y 1911ID-L0 GUI. ~Q~~~p ~0 H 1 IMPERVIOUS SMTOTAL (SP.) t1A99 L I CIS CUT AY / STAPP LAWN 1575 K 0 dpP BDJxq'rCF SLOPE LANDSCAPING 5,119 /FOR STORM WATER Q ~ ~V~IB ~~OU nOM® `,~4 0 - - MANAGEMENT TO PERVIOUS &1A10TAL (SF) • 9,944 L5 LSV W / BIOSWALETOT"(SpJ.siaa3 330 MAPLE STREET 965 „;d - / / ASHLAND, OR 97520 PARKING GARAGE (C*ROWO PLR) • 13,500 Sa FT. JACKSON COUNTY MEDICAL (LEVEL U : 13,500 SQ Fi. (•"'t't', /p`V J / / S. LOT COVERAGE BY PERCENTAGE RESIDENTIAL (LEVEL 7) • 1,400 8a Pt. • / i TOT •19,400 Sa FT. (r,G✓ } I / IMPERVIOUS e BUILDING (GROSS AT GRADE) 49x DRAWING INFORMATION: ° v TRASH R8i19E IR CIRCULATION (DRIVES 4 WALKWAYS) HR A o 11 i' " p W / / IMPERVIOUS SUBTOTAL (SP.) 64% PgRACLIS 5 t ST AFF COURTYARD 6% 1 LAVDSCAPWG 30R NEW STEEL POST SCREEN FENCE a~ .`fi,1 a,r••' ' ' I lgyy PERVIOUS S.EiOTA1(SFJ 56% 10% SCHEMATICS u ' r { TOTAI• • 1008 NRAAN BY kK DAM OeM116 SHEET SIZE _ ;5 • ,'t .4 L"J I CND BY. MR DATE lonUb AR71D 4. SITE BEIBAOKS NO. ISVISION DAIS BY 6' PRONT SETBACK. ZO PT A FEY.FRPRB-AFPOa'6ETS 04AN1 ,MK E= a L-3 SDE SET13ACK(COR4ER LOi)• 10 FT B NB/. FER PW-APP CO ENTS2 O6YUI1 XIK SIDE SETBACK (INTERIOR). 6 FT ~ q~ CIVI7 REAR (MILTI6TORY, La' PER LEVEL) • 20 FR MAN DID aT~ - - - 104 ' l?~G{14~GNJ(~' 6C6CG~IDD TOWER , 7D--` 10'•~ _ I / ETBA ROOF DOWNSPOUT EXISTING. TREE TO REMAIN INOISTURBED. TO BIOEWALE FOR PAW. ENTRY / EXIT I GARAGE ENTRY CAL) FILE L-001 L-d-ping Pland.g 1964 gM ~ W GR'~ FLOOR I GRONO FLOOR / 1-- - ' PLOT DAIE/nuE 7/12/2017 - 9:45- FN10m rXISTIW. TREE :V r / f• , _ ° / ♦ `j TO OE REMOVED OR SALVAGED. SHEET TITLE: f702MRU - - J v 4 Wo a NEW TREE (SPECIES TO BE SELECTED PROM CITY CF ASHLAID'6 RECC"'IENDED STREET TREEGUTDEJ (No 3) LANDSCAPING PLAN rA W l' { W AV s. FERtMNIALeHR1a9,T8D. PROPOSED LANDSCAPING PLAN • I - _ - - ss I _ ~.Q AWUALS, iBD. ~l v/ ° COQ v/ °p° - _ - 's o - p0,q` ; ` Ic :'iiir ii"c:,i:;{;:}(''ii%', ••;?f - 196 -aL \/lA d°o -g \nA vo 6 \ - 6 \ 0 a \ A e` - vp I. :?rii •:iii)ii}?. 'r:a O SPRINKLER-=D LAWN G L P \ L + .T .5 {i•: firi: •:fiiiii'r'r: iy, ENE / IS' 1 / BIOSLALS VWCN CLR AREA APK 84'-9 1/8° / (15' MW. BETWEEN DRIVEWAYS) DRIVEWAY m I \ / / / \ J / GRAPHIC SCALE r EXIST Y CUR$ Q MATCH ADA RAMP/ 0 5 10' 70' CUT AT ` NEIGHS HARDSCAFED PARKROWI - - - - Q. / MAINTAIN LOCATION OF MINE MMI HD / AND CURB CUT U THE EASE-eF BXG. AND SIDEWALK W/ STREET - CU . / OPPO81TE CP DRIVELLkh TREE WELLS 195,50 CHESTNJi ST. i' = ----f-------------------- - CHESTNUT, ST. L-I E EN 0 :30-35' L-I DRIP LINE: a-19' SHEET NUMBER: ~ joe n n I n\ 11 • 3 E EVERGREEN DRIP LINE, ' lI FRoFos D aNDSCAFIN FLAN L-4 E>er~ DECIDUOUS DRIP LINE, :r5'-'2'0' 15 W DECIDUOUS DRIP LINE: 10151 L-001 I'= 10`-0` K O V " 1\~f L-6 NEW DECIDUOUS DRIP LIFE: 70-95' i E Job Address: 330 MAPLE ST Contractor: ASHLAND OR 97520 Address: C A Owner's Name: MAPLE LLC 0 Phone: Il N State Lic No: P ~ Customer 01605 REITINGER & ASSOCIATES T City Lic No: Applicant: 307 N MAIN ST R Address: ASHLAND OR 97520 A c Sub-Contractor: A Phone: (208) 726-2237 r Address: N Applied: 08/0312017 0 T Issued: Expires: 01/30/2018 Phone: State Lic No: Maplot: 391 E05DB2000 City Lic No: DESCRIPTION: Commercial Site Review - Medical & Residential Building 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 Commercial Site Review (type2) 9,890.00 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 CITY Request Line: 541-552-2080 F ASHLAND 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: $ 9,890.00 $ 9,890.00 or local laws, ordinances, or regulations rests solely with the Sub-Total: $ 9,890.00 applicant. Fees Paid: $ 9,890.00 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.onus CITY OF Inspection Request Line: 541-552-2080 -AS F I L CATY OF -A U Date: 8/3/2017 Receipt Number 00030774 Applicant: REITINGER & ASSOCIATES Account Number: 01605 Type: CHARGE Description: 330 APL STREET Permit Number Fee Description Amount PA-2017-01507 Commercial Site Review (type2) 9,890.00 Total: 9,890.00 CTY OF ASHLND COMM DEV 20 E MAIN ST ASHLAND, OR 975202735 *01200 14,23:30 CREDIT CARD VISA SALE Card # XXXXXXXXXXXX3335 SEQ 6 Batch 1154 INVOICE 6 Approval Code; 02908G Entry Method: Manual Mode, Online Tax Amount; $0.00 Avs Code: NNN SALE AMOUNT CUSTOMER COPY I i i Community Development Tel: 541/488-5305 20 E. Main Street Fax: 5414488-6006 4 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800/735-2900 www.ashland.or.us - Important Points i ® For purposes of establishing the Permit Fee Multiplier, ® The BVD is not intended to apply to alterations or the estimated total annual construction value for a repairs D existing buildings. Because the scope of given time period (1 year) is the sum of each building's alterations or repairs to an existing building varies so value (Gross Area x Square Foot Construction Cost) greatly, the Square Foot Construction Costs table for that time period (e.g., 1 year). does not reflect accurate values for that purpose. However, the Square Foot Construction Costs table The Square Foot Construction Cost does not include can be used to determine the cost of an addition that is the price of the land on which the building is built. The basically a stand-alone building which happens to be Square Foot Construction Cost takes into account attached to an existing building. In the case of such everything from foundation work to the roof structure additions, the only alterations to the existing building and coverings but does not include the price of the would involve the attachment of the addition to the land. The cost of the land does not affect the cost of existing building and the openings between the related code enforcement activities and is not included addition and the existing building, in the Square Foot Construction Cost. Square Foot Construction Costs b,I Group (2015 International Building Code) IA 113 IIA IIB IIIA 1116 IV VA VB A-1 Assembly, theaters, with stage 229.26 221.37 216.01 207.16 194.94 189.29 200.61 178.00 171.48 A-1 Assembly, theaters, without stage 210.11 202.22 196.86 188.01 175.94 170.29 181.46 158.99 152.48 A-2 Assembly, nightclubs 179.28 174.08 169.68 162.81 153.48 149.24 157.08 138.97 134.26 A-2 Assembly, restaurants, bars, banquet halls 178.28 173.08 167.68 161.81 151.48 148.24 156.08 136.97 133.26 A-3 Assembly, churches 212.12 204.22 198.87 190.01 178.14 172.49 183.47 161.20 154.68 A-3 Assembly, general, community halls, libraries, museums 176.94 169.04 162.69 154.83 141.96 137.30 148.28 125.01 119.50 A-4 Assembly, arenas 209.11 201.22 194.86 187.01 173,94 169.29 180.46 156.99 151.48 B Business 182.98 176.21 170.40 161.91 147.69 142.14 155.55 129.66 123.97 E Educational 194.27 187.38 182.00 173.88 162.37 154.12 167.88 141.89 137.57 F-1 Factory and industrial, moderate hazard 109.64 104.60 98.57 94.77 85.03 81.17 90.78 71.30 66.75 F-2 Factory and Industrial, low hazard 108.64 103.60 98.57 93.77 85.03 80.17 89.78 71.30 65.75 HA High Hazard, explosives 102.63 97.58 92.55 87.75 79.22 74.36 83.76 65.48 N. P. H234 High Hazard 102,63 97.58 92.55 87.75 79.22 74.36 83.76 65.48 59.94 H-5 HPM 182.98 176.21 170.40 161.91 147.69 142.14 155.55 129.66 123.97 1-1 Institutional, supervised environment 183.95 177.72 172.57 165.30 152.29 148.15 165.39 136.43 132.19 1-2 Institutional, hospitals 307.93 301.16 295.35 286.86 271.68 N.P. 280.50 253.65 N. P. 1-2 Institutional, nursing homes 213.36 206.59 200.78 192.29 179.07 N.P. 185.93 161.04 N. P. 1-3 Institutional, restrained 208.19 201.43 195.62 187.12 174.39 167.85 180.76 156.37 148.68 14 Institutional, day care facilities 183.95 177.72 172.57 165.30 152.29 148.15 165.39 136.43 132.19 M Mercantile 133.57 128.37 122.97 117.10 107.27 104.03 111.38 92.75 89.05 R-1 Residential, hotels 185.63 179.39 174.24 166.97 153.72 149.58 167.06 137.86 133.61 R-2 Residential, multiple family 155.74 149.50 144.35 137.09 124.57 120.43 137.17 108.71 104.47 R-3 Residential, one- and two-family d 145.23 141.28 137.64 134.18 129.27 125.87 131.94 120.96 113.85 R4 Residential, care/assisted living facilities 183.95 177.72 172.57 165.30 152.29 148.15 165.39 136.43 132.19 S-1 Storage, moderate hazard 101.63 96.58 90.55 86.75 77.22 73.36 82.76 63.48 58.94 S-2 Storage, low hazard 100.63 95.58 90.55 85.75 77.22 72.36 81.76 63.48 57.94 U utility, miscellaneous78.63 74.24 69.76 66.20 59.84 55.88 63.23 47.31 45.09 a. Private Garages use Utility, miscellaneous b. For shell only buildings deduct 20 percent c. N.P. = not permitted d. Unfinished basements (Group R-3) _ ^521.00 per sq. ft. i I L (U U) ^ (U O 0 O °O CO 00 M M 00 O 00 1- t® LO LO I` O 00 CY) LO r Imo- LO O It It O (p L U) 0 ® a) r ~-T N N M LO `d° O LO r- O O O r O O~ M r O O O 4- -0 a o U U 0 U fJ r N d (6 d O r (6 f\ c~ O M N 00 N O M 14 M N CD r-~ L6 4- 0 0® p® to LO M M LO r LO N M (0 (D Z LO N CO Z Z t M O M O r M LO LO d° - U L ) U r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r Q) c _ a3 w +a c Q - ~0 U U) U (U , (U C U C U1 O ®'C p O O I` O r O (0 0 Q~ O M M O M LO d I` CO LO (0 r (fl M 00 00 r O O O O N O O (0 00 m M~ I° (D d• M O M r- 00 r` O It d d co (10 U) U O O c 0 0 (O ` ~ M M M (0 N LO N et r- I- CO M N M L (D M M 0)~ O N M~ ((D d• C C: 0 U) 0 N(1)-C N 0 r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r Q 0 N_0 +d 0 -0 0 U) O CO CO I` co O LO 00 00 00 (D M LO 0) O co co O co co I` d 0.) co co M 0 4- 0 +d C C U) 0 co d O O "t N ~ LO co t- I` I` ~ LO M LO 0) I` co M O r O M N O c U) 0o a) ^ C) L-t6 L U 1 U O r I® O C6 O LO r O O M M LO LO O LO O LO c I\ r LO N r CO 0 (v LL L C 4- O p O C O co LO LO CO d' 00 LO (0 m co co co LO (D co 00 CO (0 r CO CO M (0 00 co co +a U (U 0 C(~ 0+>- 0 N r r r r r r r r r r N r r r r r r r r Ol®~OLj 'wU 0-0 04- O 0 r C Q O c a M L O O 't O O m It N I` I- CO co LO V) LO co M co r` LO co CO co c 0 4 3 4- U7 C Uj fJ N N N N d CO N r r r r M r d M r O LO d° CO r 0') M - C (q (n C 0 m 0- 0 C O O O CD N r` 6 N 4 c- O 4~ N M h 00 M O M c0 M N LO 0 c O a 0 E p J co I- d r` M CO LO 00 00 It Z Z M d O d N N xt ra I- LA m> 0 X a) 0 C (U O r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r 0 00 0 0 ~ O 00 C 0 0 It d 00 00 It (O It m I` M N N m CD w I, O mm r` N I` ~ O N N d 4- +d 0 L 'L 0- U -0 0 0 M (A M CO O O N N O N CO O M N N I- LO N N N N w 0 O .L Q LL ~ 0 U) W O L" ` 4 LO M r Cd r M r` N L6 In CA rn r` N ~ w d' N re M d w N re r` O a) W a) +Z 4- C1 U1 Cp " O 4- C i N CA r-- Lo In r d d CO CO 00 t- d rn N r r ® r r r LO OE(UoE O0LLa)0C 9 Q 0 U > L U M r r r r CO r r 00 t` l0 N r O CO N O O 0) 00 O In LO O •C a)~ ®-0U) w w r O CD CO O 00 O m 00 r, ti CA co co N r co r O O r CO C` r- N O w (U U) 0 C 0 c 0. M 4- 0 w r` co N r O ~ r M -4 M~ le r LO CO N Ln to CO le d LO (0 LO (0 > (-00 ® =N C: ~0 N co co co 0') LO 00 O r 0-) O co M CO O N (A M CO r M r CO CD CO CO LL +0) > 4-- +J co (U fU L 0 r CO CO M ~ W (.0 O O ~ I` LO LO O ~ LO CO N I- r d LC) It I` LO LO (D ® ® O M (D CO 00 CO 00 d' O LO LO LO LO It LO M I\ O LO 0') N co O LO LO LO ~ U CO M O B CQ N d O N M Cd N N O N LO O LO N N 4~r-~ N O O CA r (A O O CA CO (A 00 CY) (A C1) (A ~ 1- CY) O m I` N r- It M I-- O m (O N r r r r r r r r r r N N r r r r r r r ~ t 0 N O 00 N't N r M J 0 CO CO r N O O CO N~ O O C0 N O 00 dt L 4 O 4) _O _0 (u ..C 0) 0 a) ® co N O O N O N N CO CD O LO LO N I` r LO d• ~ CO M LO N LO LO N O O -Z N Z. J U C: C -C ..C r N 4 M d r CO I~ ~t M I~ f~ CO I- c- CO r f~ M 6 6 1-: I~ CO LO d 4 rl- 0') (A I` U) 0 U) (U O O (U p a +J ® N O r` O (D O r-- 00 O O 0) 0') r. r` O O O r. N I` d It c CL a) Q411C O N N r r N r N r r r r r r CO N N r r r r r r O 0 'C 4-- 0 a- C 0 +L)m c~0-0 0 LL (o U) > 0 (n 0 C C a) a) CO r 00 00 N q r 00 d' M M CO LO co CD w LO r M d' M LO M co M N (A CO O CO CO r O LO (D L 0 +p a) 0 0) O N - N N r 0) r 0') N CO (D CO CO m 0') m o. W C: O)U (0 U O 6 M N (D O N d• 6 00 N N N M ~ M Cb M M LO LO 6 M e- O C6 $ (0 - O U N .0 N r I` r I- O 00 M O O O O M M O r O M M M LO It W 0 0 I` C ® O r p 'X N N r r N r N r r r r r r r r M N N r r r r r r r r p o (D 0 j; CU - C S 0 L 4- U) ~oU0U(UU+JO(UC~ o (U O c i p 0- 0 (U U) + +C N + o F ~m c Q 0 0)0)4 O 0-6) - oa) N X Q(o c) U C C 0 C N 0 H? O Uj CU U> (u -0 "Q C CU 6 N C d .I. 0 C O 0 = C 0 C 0 (D O c? N 7 p Cc Q (U -0 -0 (o L+ 0 _ `N N N 0) 0 L. U Q) V pj No C U E U 0. 'Q - 0 LL L 1L c :3 =3 i 75 O U (U C m p C a) 0- L II a N CD C: 4- _0 0 E boo C7 C-0La)UO OWN 1 ~Q 0 X ~0 X _ m Y ui c a~ : 0(A~ O N O- C0 o m 0 3 = o ~ 0+- N co ~ X y, vJ 44-- (ll o - (C6 (D a) L:3 0 r E E -o m E m cEa *uoi N ? ° ~ E N s N > D o a) 0 o-0 w 4_ m o N O 0 L O L_ 0 U m ro N s r 0 L M C N (U } 0 c ( L L o U m m c (1) c N o ro U) Q O y(/) > (U N O U 7 C N to N N p 2 c 'za V L (0 N N E c- 0 0 >1 r U (0 c c a) iZ 'N L a) (0 N 0 U O+ O > 0 0 C C (6 ro m L x m = b a) 0 N L 0 > O 0 C (6 N (6 a - 0 CU CO >a) ~~0 C0 U a) 0) U) ~c c c o n o m c E o U o r c ~c-C 0 11 ® 4 J 0 w (U -0 U U 4+ +7 ° +s C U O) N p tq C C L O 0 6 N U1 a L N m o o~ 11 c w+ CO~~00 C: cn (z C m (z (U(UOOX70 2:1 2:1 m ro N c C c c a) E U L0O C Cll 0 0 .0 -0 c ro= 0 0 0 0 c c c c L n ' LL Z I-Lro0) 2UlaNN 0cU Cv E E E E E EN E 0 o o g =5 C-0 ;o -0 ,-_oa m M a) a) o a) a) a) a) ai c 5 c 5 m N 0 ® N N N N N E N G U U Ol iA = n3 ci o a) co Q Q Q Q Q Q Q U- u_ d= c c c c c N CO d' e - e- N N c~ (7 j d 0a W N - - - - - i i i i i (V N r' N N Co 't r N (n (n Q Q Q Q Q Q E Q ED W Li ~ <L 2 2= L (r 0~ CL r w G i± c c Q 0 c 0 i (0M c a MU (6Oa)0 .E ~Q ~ ~ U U C 0 7 0) t' LO O L 3 t` as a3 a® _0 3 ^ O 0 O U) U1 O ° U O Q O70 + a X O O a) O 0~ U O v a)® U) L U) c) C L II a- (U U 0 LL- C O E _0 C+J U) 0 0- =3 ° U® + O r 0 O® O U) U N C:) 0® E II r co co OUP EO ® L o a) 0) C 0_ N 60- UO 4- U O ° 0 (6 C a 4- (n ) 0 Q M 0 .C CD O O O CO 0 0 O 0 7 C ~p X O _r,L C) L U) (n 0 r cm C) a U) C 0 (Q 0 C ®C a) co :3 691 p ® C) 4- 0) -0 O- °O x m U N+ a -0 Q U)~,- C C O O CD CT c) m - UM ® Q®C+ a) xN0 co 00>L ® ~ (n LC OU O O U) L) 0 N C ® Na 4- 4- a) 0 0 c- C:) CD c- U) CD Z3 C: 0 a) 6 U) LL L- -0 a) a) 0 v &U L 0 > ~-C-0* ILI aN o IL L cxa E ®o° II U) Uw co 4- . r- a) ) w OE a) E') c a) 0 M a) coop L N Jr r Nc0 ~ O c c N a L ®o ° a) L- Qn 0 11 II m II a) 11 0 O e 0o U N a a> a) c ~x = ~L U) a m uiU"~tJ-(SAN a) c E 2 0 c0 UU N 0 co II -poi cc, E a) 0 U) n 4- (n 4-1 0)0 C: (D 0 w :3 a) 0 C 'L a) a LL C +Co LL UQ 11 0 C N N a L D 0-- Z- --j 09 O C 0W Cm 0.~®~ 0_+ ~.o LL Q! UrNN~ p~m(Amd co II LU LL 4- 0) L 4a 0 U a^)` N +r LL - L L E L U O U L W L 4- O '°cnc~° E N ri E 0 _0 n m E a)m E N L Q) - a) a) U +La Q) x a) .N Lm a) '0 L a a) 0 U x U~ L n xi ~Q 2Li~ ~.~-0 U) m iL ® w u h I- a)a)--_aL LLc(nU(oC} 00'0 0)a)U,>1 0)"', Uu~ns~caa)m-oa)> 0c0*=ULU~ C: 000 CL~LOCU Oo~.C *'I--QQ(OC Q000m -E- OO,w~(n CCU) 7E E •M (f) L C: LL a a) L O O O O O O O L L L) (n 4- M O vii E®U cna- Ea a) a) v~ a~i O E a~i t~ >~yU_ °'u~, o > L m a) c u, a)~ a_ L c > 0+,~ 0+04 3 c cn (s c- D (T3 U> E W aC (n ~ N 0 C o~ Q (n ~ U C ~6 0-0 w - U C: 0-0 c O 4- MM Q) (Q L :3 •L a3 -0 O > U O 0 U C a) Oa a) c L- CU 0) a) no U) a E > c EAU ° 0-~ ~-m a cn a) o o~ a) a) 4-m o 0 U) 4- C 'M U) 0 4- 4)3 a) 0 N 7 a) a)a) NC 0 C 0) Lm U) 0C0+mCOn)(0 of Ear U coj-sL cU ~U) N 0 a) ro° 0~ U) 'S U) E . oU- N -73 L 0) 0 a) >00 0F- 0-0 0 U) 0 U N C 0+a L a) L 3 -0 -0-2 C 0 > + C L a) 0+ L C a) _ .C M a) 0- C a7 ~ E U 0 0 U) N a)L L) a) ~n'E-0 Q~a) a) LO) ®~0~~'-0 00} a-0(nE00.> OCOO U (n 0 L a) U L C 0 L L 0 0 C Q C a) f6 O L U) a L Q L 0 L L (6 4- O L (0 Q U) 0 E N J 0~ 0 }L O U 2i - C U) L a U) 0 O L a) U 4- + 0 4- 1 _a) + O N U L o) a) o C> L 0 U1 U D }U) - 0 U) + fl U L 0 a ®C a) -c N Q C O .0 U) 0 O E > L U) 0= a) n) 0 O L n3 0 0 C O C U > U ~a U U+ o c 00 a) ° a)E+ 4-.c a) a [0 ~U ® +J 0) .Q 4- L > U L -0 U) o co OC 0 aQ O O~ a) ateO (1) C 'O 4- C 0.0 O O O 0'= c c- a) 0 Ol .U E in C 0 Q 0 g 0 0 0 0 4- a) - 0 i--- U) > ®N E 0 (U 0 N Ul z O U E U) 0 > 0 0 - aC, C 0 C> U C 0 C- yU s > E 0 ;7, r- 0 Q p 0 "Fn -0 M ' 0® +•I ..m N O a) c~ O c) a) O/ L L O c: x a) 0 4- 0-04L- rn~ L ::3 0- 4-1 E Q 00 u, O ®xU cnry~~ ca ~.N Q cn a) C U) L W 0 U u) a- Q N 4- F- - ~ Q Q U) U) O Q w 0 U C (6 0 0_ 0 0 3 O U Q U) (n ^^,,®coA c -~W>~_a)> n5~ ~ 0a)~ °~roE/Q~~cQU N LsO^>`'~^~L,~~ \U ~y yQ a) 0) +J ® W (V I` ~ (n W (n a) V ,..0.- .U f •IJ W C V -0 U L -Y Q W a) L ~0~ L C4- a) (n a) - w U-0- U OL a) U (6 0(A(n 4- 0M O W sL 00 E -r- :3M 0 (II a) N U) 0 E C L a) L-6 m L 0 L +a a) 0 'C 0 0 U) - (n 0 ++J O C U L 0 Q 4- L co U O o, Q, U 0 C ~-0 O 4).L+- C E _0 E C ~C N a N C i 0 ~0 2_0 _0 0 O Q -0 0)~ Q :3 -0 M O -0 n a U_ a) r 0 a Q O~ a) U) 4- Q Q 0 U) U) 'U) 0 0 0 a) U) C._ 0 O C 0- a) CEO C 0U U f~4- 0' Q) N U) W O U) U N Q C m~ ~L c6 E (~6~ b QED O0 0(0E4) N~a) a)~ 4)®.CmU)~~a) 0,®0O~~ U)0~ =s 0)L 0+'-QC0 -m c °U~ E z3 0O-Q.-~ 4- COQ 0c0 Cm C~ C O-0 O 0 O O O GOO ° N 0 4) 0-0~ m m a) O U E c O- (6 ® 00 > 0 a) ® 4.. V 4- a) LL a U) O 4- a) C 0) U) C U) 4- M 4- 4- '1"' O U C C C O U U1 > Q~ 0 C 0 0 0 L n) X Q M Q 0 O 0 0] U) 0 0 0 O 0 r_ 0 E O 0 a) 0 (6 L N N E _ U) (n U) 0 _C co L- -5 (6 C U) 0 U a 0.2 41 'U a) U U a) C 4-1 ~QQ-0 U) ~ a)~~p0 0 N ULUmU-'-a E= U ~a)2U0 a)~w4-0 UU) .C=>aLU)0 .C 0" ONa)0 (0 00CL a)0 a) .CC0. C~00a(6~4- COOa)-r- m0 75 (n (o ~ U) a L1 > U > m U a -o Q l- 0) I- U 3 -0 a > (n > c~ I- > r 0 (n a) U