HomeMy WebLinkAboutEMain_835_&_839_PA-T1-2020-00089CITY OF
-ASHLAND
April 8, 2020
Notice of Final Decision
On April 7, 2020, the Community Development Director approved the request for the following:
Planning Action: PA-TI -2020-00089
Subject Property: 835 & 839 East Main
Applicant: Sainarra Burnett
Description: A request for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to authorize all increase of
the Maximum Permitted Floor Area (MPFA) for the addition of a new art/dance studio, and
additional habitable space to the upstairs unit. The property is currently developed with an 1,812
square foot duplex, and the proposed development includes 232 sq. ft. upstairs and 553 downstairs
for a total of 2,597 square feet. The property allows a total MPFA of 2,256 square feet, the proposal
as submitted would require the authorization of a —15% increase of MPFA. In addition to the
approval criteria for a Conditional Use Permit, the criteria for Historic District Design Standards
approval must be met. 'rhe application also includes the request to remove a single large tree from
the backyard due to its proximity to the proposed construction,
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Multi Family Residential; ZONING: R-2;
MAP: 39 IE 09 AC; TAX LOT: 9601
The Community Development Director approved the Planning Action, but DENIED the
requested free removal. The Community Development Director's decision becomes final and is
effective on the 12t" day after the Notice of Final Decision is mailed. Approval is valid for a
period of 18 months and all conditions of approval identified on the attached Findings are
required to be met prior to project completion.
The application, all associated documents and evidence submitted, and the applicable criteria are
available for review at the Ashland Community Development Department, located at 51
Winburn Way. Copies of file documents can be requested and are charged based on the City of
Ashland copy fee schedule.
Prior to the final decision date, anyone who was mailed this Notice of Final Decision may
request a reconsideration of the action as set forth in the Ashland Land Use Ordinance (ALUO)
18.5.1.050(F) and/or file an appeal to the Ashland Planning Commission as provided in ALUO
18.5.1.050(G). The ALUO sections covering reconsideration and appeal procedures are attached.
The appeal may not be made directly to the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals. If you have any
questions regarding this decision, please contact Aaron Anderson in the Community
Development Department at (541) 488-5305,
cc: Parties of record and property owners within 200 ft
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel: 541488-5305
51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900
SECTION 18.5.1.050 Type I procedure (Administrative Decision with Notice)
E. Effective Date of Decision. Unless the conditions of approval specify otherwise or the decision is appealed pursuant to
subsection 18.5.1.050.G, a Type I decision becomes effective 12 days after the City mails the notice of decision..
F. Reconsideration. The Staff advisor may reconsider- a Type I decision as set forth below.
1. Any party entitled to notice of the planning action, or any City department pray request reconsideration of tile action
after the decision has been made by providing evidence to the Staff Advisor that a factual error occurred through no
fault of the party asking for reconsideration, which in the opinion of the Staff Advisor, might affect t➢re decision.
Reconsideration requests are limited to factual errors and not the failure of all issue to be raised by letter or evidence
during the opportunity to provide public input on the application sufficient to afford t➢re Staff Advisor an opportunity
to respond to the issue prior to making a decision.
2. Reconsideration requests shall be received withinn five clays of mailing the notice of decision. The Staff Advisor shall
decide within three clays whether to reconsider the matter.
3. If the Staff Advisor is satisfied that all error occurred crucial to the decision, tine Staff Advisor shall withdraw the
decision for' prn'poses of reconsideration. The Staff Advisor shall decide within ten days to affirm, modify, or reverse
the original decision. The City shall send notice of the reconsideration decision to affirm, modify, or reverse to ally
party entitled to notice of the planning action.
4. If the Staff Advisor is not satisfied that all error occurred crucial to the decision, the Staff Advisor shall deny the
reconsideration request. Notice of denial shall be seat to those parties that requested reconsideration.
G. Appeal of Type I Decision. A Type I decision may be appealed to the Planning Commission, pursuant to the following:
1. Who May Appeal. The following persons have standing to appeal a Type I decision.
a. Tire applicant or owner of the subject property.
b. Any person who is entitled to written notice of the Type I decision prrr'srrant to Subsection
18.5.1.050.B.
c. Any other person who participated in the proceeding by submitting written commentson the application to the
City by the specified deadline.
2. Appeal Filing Procedure.
a. Notice of Appeal. Any person with standing to appeal, as provided in subsection 18.5.1.050.U.1, above, may
appeal a Type I decision by filing a notice of appeal and paying the appeal fee according to the procedures of this
subsection. The fee required in this section shall not apply to appeals made by neighborhood or community
organizations recognized by the City and whose boundaries include the site. If an appellant prevails at the hearing
or upon SUbsequent appeal, the fee for the initial hearing shall be refunded.
b. Time for Filing. A notice of appeal shall be filed with the Staff Advisor within 12 days of the date the notice of
decision is mailed.
c. Content ofNotice ofAppeal. The notice of appeal shall be accompanied by the required feting fee and shall contain.
i. Ali identification of the decision being appealed, including the date of the decision.
ii. A statement demonstrating the person filing the notice of appeal has standing to appeal.
iii. A statement explaining the specific issues being raised oil appeal.
iv. A statement dernornstrating that the appeal issues were: raised during the public comment period.
d. The appeal requirements of this section must be fully met or the appeal will be considered by the City as a
jurisdictional defect and will not be heard or considered.
3. Scope of Appeal. Appeal hearings on Type i decisions made by the Staff Advisor shall be de novo bearings before the
Planning Commission. The appeal sha'1'I not be limited to the application materials, evidence and other documentation,
and specific issues raised in the review leading Lip to tine Type I decision, but may include other relevant evidence and
arguments. The Commission may allow additional evidence, testirnorny, or argument concerning any relevant
ordinance provision.
4. Appeal. Hearing procedure. Hearings oil appeals of Type I decisions follow the Type 11 public bearing procedures,
pursuant to section 18.5.1.0�60, subsections A -- E, except that the decision of tine Nanning Commission is the final
decision of the City oil all appeal of a 'Type 1 decision. A decision on all appeal is final the date the City mails the
adopted and signed decision. Appeals of Commission decisions must be filed with the State Land Use Board of
Appeals, pursuant to ORS 197.805 - 197.860.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel:541-488-5305
51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 rUWs,
%N,% nw ash1and.or,us
ASHLAND PLANNING DEPARTMENT
FINDINGS & ORDERS
PLANNING ACTION: PA-T1-2020-00089
SUBJECT PROPERTY: 835 & 839 East Main.
OWNER/APPLICANT: Samarra Burnett
DESCRIPTION: A request for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to authorize an
increase of the Maximum Permitted Floor Area (MPFA) for the addition of a new art/dance studio,
and additional habitable space to the upstairs unit. The property is currently developed with an
1,812 square foot duplex, and the proposed development includes 232 sq. ft. upstairs and 553
downstairs for a total of 2,597 square feet. The property allows a total MPFA of 2,256 square feet,
the proposal as submitted would require the authorization of a-15% increase of MPFA. In addition
to the approval criteria for a Conditional Use Permit, the criteria for Historic District Design
Standards approval must be met. The application also includes the request to remove a single large
tree from the backyard due to its proximity to the proposed construction.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Multi Family Residential; ZONING: R-2;
MAP: 39 lE 09 AC; TAX LOT: 9601
SUBMITTAL DATE:
January 31, 2019
DEEMED COMPLETE DATE:
February 21, 2019 (2°a notice)
STAFF APPROVAL DATE:
April 7, 2020
DEADLINE TO APPEAL (4:30 p.m.):
April 20, 2020
FINAL DECISION DATE:
April 21, 2020
APPROVAL EXPIRATION DATE:
October 21, 2021
DECISION
The proposal is to construct approximately 785 of new habitable space to an existing duplex.
The plan is to remove an existing carport and replace it with a downstairs area of 553 sq. ft. which
would serve as a personal dance/art studio, and also add an addition of approximately 232 sq. ft.
above.
The property is located in the R-2 zoning district along East Main and is within the Railroad
Historic District. The surrounding neighborhood is exclusively zoned R-2 and is generally
characterized by single family development. The subject property is 0.14 avers in size, and is
developed with an 1,812 square foot duplex that was constructed in 1978 and is not a historically
contributing resource. Typically, such a request would not require a planning action, however
because of the historic district Maximum Permitted Floor Area (MPFA) regulations apply. The
property allows a total MPFA of 2,256 square feet. The existing duplex plus the proposed addition
would require the authorization of an approximate 15-percent increase over the MPFA limit. As
provided in AMC 18.2.5.070.0 an increase in allowable MFPA can be authorized up to a
maximum of 25-percent with a Conditional Use Permit.
In addition to the approval criteria for a Conditional Use Permit, the criteria for Historic District
Design Standards must be met.
PA-T1-2020-00089
835/839 E Main St./aa
Page 1
The application also includes the request to remove a single large box elder tree from the backyard
due to its proximity to the proposed construction.
The Tree Commission reviewed the application at their regular March 6, 2020 meeting. They
found that there was not sufficient evidence in the record to support the requested. Accordingly,
the Tree Commission recommended denial of the tree removal. The Staff Advisor reviewed the
Tree Commissions recommendation and concurred that there was a lack of evidence to make a
finding the requested tree removal met the criteria of AMC 18.5.7.040. As such the tree removal
is not approved.
The Historic Commission reviewed the application at their regular March 3, 2020 meeting. The
Historic Conunission made the following recommendations so that the proposal will be more
consistent with the Historic District Design Standards; Specially, Roof Shape, Rhythm of
Openings and exterior wall finish. The Historic Commission recommended approval with the
following reconmiendations:
• The flat roof with the balcony on the front and east side of the building is not a roof shape
or pitch that is historically used. The Historic Commission recommends using a gabled
roof on the street and east sides of the building and matching the pitch of the existing roof.
• The proposed door accessing the new ground level habitable space is confusing because it
appears more prominent than the existing font doors to the duplex units. Eliminate the
door from the street elevation to the new ground level habitable space and move the door
to the side or rear of the structure.
• The Historic Commission recommends matching the siding and trim on the front of the
existing building and not using vertical siding (e.g., T-111).
• Delineate siding and trim type and size on building permit submittals.
• The Historic Commission recommends matching the size of the windows on the street
elevation of the new additions to the size of the existing bay window on the front of the
building. Use off-white or buff colored windows, do not use white windows.
These recommendations will be included as conditions of approval.
During the public comment period several letters were received expressing concern with the
application. There was concern expressed about the intended use of the `dance studio' and that it
may be used for commercial purposes. Another letter addressed the fact that the proposed floor
plan on the 2" d floor didn't show a connection to the existing unit and was concerned that a new
dwelling was being created. In appreciation of these concerns the following conditions of approval
have been added to the application to ensure that the CUP does not have an adverse effect on the
neighborhood. That the 2" d floor addition have an interior connection to the upstairs unit, and that
no commercial activity be allowed with the exception of those which would be permitted with a
Home Occupation permit, if applied for.
The application complies with all of the applicable provisions of the R-2 zoning district, and the
property is currently served by adequate City facilities for water, sewer, storm drainage and
electricity. In staff s assessment, the proposal will not have a greater adverse material impact on
the impact area in terms of architectural compatibility, air quality, and generation of traffic, noise,
PA-T1-2020-00089
835/839 E Main St.laa
Page 2
light and glare and the development of adjacent properties. With regard to the target use allowable
within the zone, at 6200 feet the property is too small for a duplex under today's standards,
however the duplex was developed in 1978 and is considered legally non -conforming, thus the
addition of additional square footage without adding dwelling units will not have more impact than
the existing use.
The applicants have submitted materials to the Planning Department that demonstrate compliance
with these approval standards.
A Conditional Use Permit shall be granted if the approval authority finds that the application
meets all of the following criteria, or can he made to conform through the imposition of conditions.
AMC 18.5.4.050.A. Approval Criteria. A Conditional Use 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.
1. That the use would be in conformance with all standards within the zoning district in which
the use is proposed to be located, and in conformance with relevant Comprehensive plan
policies that are not implemented by any City, State, or Federal law or program.
2. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, electricity, urban storm drainage,
paved access to and throughout the development, and adequate transportation can and will be
provided to the subject property.
3. That the conditional use will have no greater adverse material effect on the livability of the
impact area when compared to the development of the subject lot with the target use of the
zone, pursuant with subsection 18.5.4.050.A.5, below. When evaluating the effect of the
proposed use on the impact area, the following factors of livability of the impact area shall be
considered in relation to the target use of the zone.
a. Similarity in scale, bull[, and coverage.
b. Generation of traffic and effects on surrounding streets. Increases in pedestrian,
bicycle, and mass transit use are considered beneficial regardless of capacity of facilities.
c. Architectural compatibility with the impact area.
d. Air quality, including the generation of dust, odors, or other environmental pollutants.
e. Generation of noise, light, and glare.
f. The development of adjacent properties as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan.
g. Other factors found to be relevant by the approval authority for review of the proposed
use.
4. A conditional use permit shall not allow a use that is prohibited or one that is not permitted
pursuant to this ordinance.
5. For the purposes of reviewing conditional use permit applications for conformity with the
approval criteria of this subsection, the target uses of each zone are as follows.
PA-T1-2020-00089
835/839 E Main St./aa
Page 3
c. R-2 and R-3. Residential use complying with all ordinance requirements, developed at
the density permitted by chapter 18.2.5 Standards for Residential Zones.
In staffs assessment, the application with the attached conditions complies with applicable
ordinances and meets all required criteria.
Planning Action #PA-TI-2020-00089 is approved with the following conditions. Further, if any
one or more of the following conditions are found to be invalid for any reason whatsoever, then
Planning Action # PA-TI-2020-00089 is denied. The following are the conditions and they are
attached to the approval:
1) That all proposals of the applicant shall be conditions of approval unless otherwise
specifically modified herein.
a. The request to remove the tree at the near of the property is not approved.
2) That all necessary building permits shall be obtained, and associated fees and charges
including applicable system development charges shall be paid prior to the issuance of a
building permit.
a. The 2" floor addition have an interior connection to the upstairs unit.
3) That there shall be no commercial activity authorized except that which would be
consistent with a Home Occupation approval in accordance with AMC 18.2.3.150.
d) That all recommendations of the Ashlatrd Historic Commission, where consistent with the
applicable ordinances and standards and with final approval of the Staff Advisor, shall be
conditions of approval. Specifically:
• The flat roof with the balcony on the front and east side of the building is not a roof
shape or pitch that is historically used. The Historic Commission recommends using a
gabled roof on the street and east sides of the building and snatching the pitch of the
existing roof.
• The proposed door accessing the new ground level habitable space is confusing because
it appears -more prominent than the existing front doors to the duplex units. Eliminate
the door from the street elevation to the new ground level habitable space and move
the door to the side or rear of the structure.
• The Historic Commission recommends matching the siding and trim on the front of the
existing building and not using vertical siding (e.g., T-111).
• Delineate siding and trim type and size on building permit submittals.
• The Historic Commission recommends matching the size of the windows on the street
elevation of the new additions to the size of the existing bay window on the front of the
building. Use off-white or buff colored windows, do not use white windows.
5) That the plans submitted for the building permit shall be in conformance with the
recommendations of the Historic Commissions. If the plans submitted for the building
PA-T 1-2020-00089
835/839 1; Main St./aa
Page 4
permit are not in substantial conformance with those approved as part of this application,
an application to modify the Site Review approval would need to be submitted and
approved prior to issuance of a building permit. Building permit submittals shall include:
a. Lot coverage calculations including all building footprints, driveways, parking, and
circulation areas shall be provided with the Building Permit. Lot coverage shall be
limited to no more than 65 percent as required in the R-2 zoning district.
b. Solar setback calculations demonstrating that all new construction complies with
Solar Setback Standard A in the formula [(Height — 6)/(0.445 + Slope) — Required
Solar Setback] and elevations or cross section drawings clearly identifying the
highest shadow producing point(s) and the height(s) from natural grade.
6) That storm water from all new impervious surfaces and runoff associated with peak
rainfalls must be collected on site and channeled to the City storm water collection system
(i.e., curb gutter at public stnect, 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.
7) That a Tree Verification Permit shall be applied for and approved by the Ashland Planning
Division prior to site work, tree removal, staging or storage of materials. The Verification
Permit is to inspect the identification of the installation of tree protection fencing for the
trees at the rear of the lot. The tree protection shall be chain link fencing six feet tall and
installed in accordance with 18.4.5.030.
Bill Molnar, Community Development Director
A ril 7 2020
Date
PA-T 1-2020-00089
835/839 E Mafti St./aa
Page 5
STATE OF OREGON
County of Jackson
The undersigned being first duly sworn states that:
1. l am employed by the City of Ashland, 20 East Main Street, Ashland,
Oregon 97520, in the Community Development Department,
2. On April 8, 2020 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 the Planning Action #PA-T1-2020-00089, 835-839 E.
sm
Wei M a - • �* •�
C:1UserGIsry�thdaAENHE'AppDatalocaN,�crosoffi%llindo,.MsYNetCachelContenLOutooR4PP634ZSgMFIDAVIT OF MAILING-835 839 E Mandacx 4)812020
PA-T1-2020-00089 391E09AC8800 PA-T1-2020-00089 391E09AC8900 PA-T1-2020-00089 391E09AC9600
MULLER HUGH HIGENEVIEVE ANN HAITHCOCK THOMAS JILEAH T GREENEWOOD HOMES LLC
3150 JUANIPERO WAY #312 89 7TH ST PO BOX 516
MEDFORD, OR 97504 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AC9601
BURNETT SAMARRA A ET AL
839 E MAIN ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AC 10500
KOENIGSBERG JILL L
PO BOX 367
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AC12600
ASHLAND CITY OF
CIO THE VILLAGE APARTMENTS
CITY HALL
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AC9400
SOLONIUK LEONARD TRUSTEE ET A
PO BOX 909
LOMA LINDA, CA 92354
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AC9800
PAGAN[ NANCY E TRUSTEE ET AL
850 C
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AC 10400
SNOOK DAVID W TRUSTEE ET AL
840 PAVILION PL
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AD8500
MC KINNEY RICHARD 0 TRUSTEE
117 8TH ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AD8800
CARLTON LYNNE K TRUSTEE ET AL
112 HARBOUR DR
HALF MOON BAY, CA 94019
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AC9700
MARTIN JAMES W TRUSTEE ET AL
820 C ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AC 10600
JUCKETT DARYL WARD
44 DEWEY ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AD70000
DELUCA RONALD L TRUSTEE
725 ROYAL AVE
MEDFORD, OR 97504
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AC9500
FEINSTEIN ALLAN DAVID TRUSTEE
777 E MAIN ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AC9900
LAZARO MARGARITA E
PO BOX 1347
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391E09AC12400
KEOPPEN KIM
36 MORTON ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AD8600
INGET EMILY
860 C ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AC9701
PEASLEY FREDERICK AIANNE M
840 C ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AC9800
DANHI MORRIS TRUSTEE ET AL
2420 SELROSE LN
SANTA BARBARA, CA 93109
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AC1300
CLAYTON GEOFFREY
108 SEVENTH ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AC9501
SOLONIUK LEONARD TRUSTEE ET A
1751 EL CAPITAN DR
REDDING, CA 96001
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AC10000
BAKER JEFFERY J TRUSTEE ET AL
867 E MAIN ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AC12600
POE PATRICIA L TRUSTEE FBO
27 DEWEY ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391E09AD8700
SEIBER SUZANNE J
880 C ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520
835-839 E Main
NOD 25
4/8/2020
PLANNING ACTION: PA-T1-2020-00089
SUBJECT PROPERTY: 835 & 839 East Main,
OWNER/APPLICANT: Samarra Burnett
DESCRIPTION: A request for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to authorize an
increase of the Maximum Permitted Floor Area (MPFA) for the addition of a new art/dance
studio, and additional habitable space to the upstairs unit. The property is currently developed
with an 1,812 square foot duplex, and the proposed development includes 232 sq. ft. upstairs
and 553 downstairs for a total of 2,597 square feet. The property allows a total MPFA of 2,256
square feet which would require the authorization of a —15% increase of MPFA. In addition to the
approval criteria for a Conditional Use Permit, the criteria for Historic District Design Standards
approval must be met. The application also includes the request to remove a single large tree
from the backyard due to its proximity to the proposed construction.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Multi Family Residential; ZONING: R-2; MAP: 39 1E 09
AC; TAX LOT: 9601
The Tree Commission recommends denying the request for tree removal.
The tree commission found that there was not sufficient evidence in the record to support the
approval of the tree removal.
Department of Community Development Tel: 541A88-5350 CITY I
51 Winbum Way Fax: 541-552-2050
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 AS H LA N D
iNiy%y,ashland,onus
840 C Street (530) 885-3300
Ashland, OR 97520 Fax: (541) 708-0083
March 11, 2020
Re: CUP Request for 835 and 839 East Main.
We have already provided on March 4, 2020 our written, comments regarding this
Request to the Ashland Historical Commission. We also made an appearance at the
March 4, 2020 hearing regarding this issue.
Please be advised that we did the same the following night to the Ashland Tree
Commission regarding the request to remove a healthy tree.
As to the tree removal, the photograph of the proposed construction evidences
that the tree requested to be removed is clearly to the side and deeper into the lot than
the proposed construction behind the existing duplex and in no way impacts said
construction. This healthy tree in fact is 18 inches in diameter and is located 5 and 1/2
feet away from the duplex. Its canopy covers the entire duplex since the tree is taller
than the duplex and its branches reach beyond the edges of the duplex, This is a tree
that begs to be saved.
So the question is should the tree be, removed due to the proposed construction
or shall it be retained?
The answer is clearly that it should be retained. City ordinances support and
require such an answer.
City Ordinances clarify that existing healthy tress shall be retained. (18.4.4,030 C
1). This is stated to be especially true in multi -family residential zones since they have
special landscaping circumstances and require reasonable regiulation. (18.5.7.010 E).
Noise buffering is pointed out as of significance. (18.5.7.010).
The tree in question is a healthy 18 inch tree with a large canopy. It would not
appear to impact the possible construction requiired. It does provide noise buffering as
well as sight buffering as well as shade to my residence which borders the property in
question.
It must be pointed out that proposed construction is for extra space beyond that
which is permitted on this R-2 lot. In addition, this proposed space includes an
art/dance studio that is not permitted in an R-2 area. A healthy tree, as exists on this
property, should not be sacrificed for such an addition that is not even permitted in an
R-2 lot.
MAR, 1, 2 2020
Although we believe the tree should be retained due to City Ordinances
mentioned above, there is an approach that should satisfy all parties. 'The new addition
that is said to approach the tree can be minimally modified so that the tree is saved. A
slight diagonal cut or a square cut to the north west side of the proposed addition would
permit the tree to remain and the applicant still obtains almost all of the additional space
she is requesting. She would also have all of the advantages of such a large tree with a
full canopy.
This Commission can work with its fellow commission the Ashland Tree
Commission. The applicant can have the addition she wants and the healthy tree can
remain; a goal of the Ordinances of Ashland.
The applicant also obtains almost all of the additional square feet more than
permitted in this R-2 duplex; and the tree is saved,
We all recognize that the goal is for healthy trees to not be removed; to be
retained. Since there are no rational reasons per the City Ordinances for the tree to be
removed; it should remain. Further, as discussed above, the applicant still has a way to
slightly modify her plans and have her additional space as well as the tree with all of the
benefits such tree would offer her. Hopefully the two Commissions can work together
and reach this resolution which is fair to all parties as well the goals of the City
Ordinances.
Thank you for this opportunity to comment again"yoon this Notice of Application.
Si
Rim Peasley
Anne P,easley
Aaron Anderson
From: Don Greene <greenewood204@9mail,corn>
Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2020 2:05 PM
To: Aaron Anderson
Subject: PA-Tl-2020-00089
[EXTERNAL SE]NDER]
RE: planning action PA-TI-2020-00089 835 & 839 East Main ...
For this development to mitigate any negative impacts on the neighborhood, as required by the CUP 18.5.4.050.4 3-e&g,
I request the following conditions be included:.
I- Clarification that the dancelart studio is only for the personal use of the occupants,
2-The applicant be familiarized with the noise ordinance. It should not be the adjacent neighbor's responsibility to nionitor noise.
3- The studio cannot be used as a separate living space.
4-The upstairs bedroom addition have direct internal connection to the existing unit.
These conditions would satisf}, my concerns.
Don L Greene
owner 30 & 60 7th Street
"Please let me know that your have received this email... thank you...
MAR 0 "")" 2020
1
ro, g
R E
MAR Ot',j 20211
Of Ashlo','And
Aaron Anderson
From: Dick & Di McKinney/Sly <romac@jeffnet.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2020 1:42 PM
To: Aaron Anderson
Subject: Planning Action PA-2020-00089
[EXTERNAL SENDER]
Aaron Anderson
Planning Department
City of Ashland
Good Afternoon Aaron,
As neighbors of the property at 835 & 839 East Main Street, we were notified about the planning
action noted in the Subject fine above. We stopped by the Planning Department this morning to see if
we could get more information about the proposal for this property. The person at the Planning Desk
said you were unavailable and suggested we contact you via email as the best way to get our
questions and concerns addressed before the deadline for comments on March 5th.
We see that the owner Samarra Burnett is seeking a Conditional Use Permit to, among other things,
add "...a new art/dance studio". Nowhere in the Notice of Application is this phrase defined.
Will this "studio" be for personal use or will it be a business? If a business is planned, what would be
the hours of operation? How many patrons or students will be allowed at one time? Will there be
enough off-street parking along 7th and C Streets to accommodate the patrons as well as local
residents?
Are there any plans for the city to define the uses allowed under the CUP?
Thanks for your consideration. You can reach us by return email or by phone
Diane Sly: 541-944-9725
Richard McKinney: 541-944-9728
"Z would feel more optimistic about a bright future for man if he spent less time proving
that he can outwit Nature and more time tasting her sweetness and respecting her
seniority."
Planning Department, 51 Winbu, ,, ay, Ashland, Oregon 97520 C I T Y 0 F
541-488-5305 Fax: 541-552-2050 www.ashland.or.us TTY: 1-800-735-2900 -ASHLAND
NOTICE OF APPLICATION
"REMNOTICE—DUioimmroTOANADDRESSINGERROR"'*
PLANNING ACTION: PA-T1-2020-00089
SUBJECT PROPERTY: 835 & 839 East Main
OWNER/APPLICANT: Samarra Burnett
DESCRIPTION: A request for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to authorize an increase of the Maximum Permitted
Floor Area (MPFA) for the addition of a new art/dance studio, and additional habitable space to the upstairs unit.
The property is currently developed with an 1,812 square foot duplex, and the proposed development includes 232
sq. ft, upstairs and 553 downstairs for a total of 2,597 square feet, The property allows a total MPFA of 2,256
square feet which would require the authorization of a —15% increase of MPFA. In addition to the approval criteria
for a Conditional Use Permit, the criteria for Historic District Design Standards approval must be met. The
application also includes the request to remove a single large tree from the backyard due to its proximity to the
proposed construction. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Multi Family Residential; ZONING: R-2; MAP:
39 1E 09 AC; TAX LOT: 9601.
NOTE: The Ashland Historic Commission will also review this Planning Action on Wednesday, March 4, 2020 at 6:00 PM in
the Community Development and Engineering Services building (Siskiyou Room), located at 51 Winburn Way.
NOTE: The Ashland Tree Commission will also review this Planning Action on Thursday, March 5, 2020 at 6:00 PM in
the Community Development and Engineering Services building (Siskiyou Room), located at 51 Winburn Way.
I I
A :r-1111 4 1'1164-1 IN Z 101 2111TI V1 a 9:10 9016 1 kyi 1:91LI11 NFUR e
Subject Properties
835&839 E Main St,
PA-TI-2020-00089
l 11 ��l ,l�ll�ll��� � ,
8210,-�
839
835
The Ashland Planning Division Staff has received a complete application for the property noted above.
Any affected property owner or resident has a right to submit written comments to the City of Ashland Planning Division, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland,
Oregon 97520 prior to 4:30 p.m. on the deadline date shown above.
Ashland Planning Division Staff determine if a Land Use application is complete within 30 days of submittal. Upon determination of completeness, a notice is sent to
surrounding properties within 200 feet of the property submitting application which allows for a 14 day comment period. After the comment period and not more than
45 days from the application being deemed complete, the Planning Division Staff shall make a final decision an the application. A notice of decision is mailed to the same
properties within 5 days of decision. An appeal to the Plann"ng Commission of the Planning Division Staff's decision must be made in writing to the Ashland Planning
Division within 12 days from the date of the mailing of final decision, (AMC I&S.1.050.(3)
The ordinance criteria applicable to this application are attached to this notice. Oregon law states that failure to raise an objection concerning this application, by letter,
or failure to provide sufficient specificity to afford the decision maker an opportunity to respond to the issue, precludes your right of appeal to the Land Use Board of
Appeals (LUBA) on that issue. Failure to specify which ordinance criterion the objection is based on also precludes your right of appeal to LUBA on that criterion. Failure
of the applicant to raise constitutional or other issues relating to proposed conditions of approval with sufficient specificity to allow this Department to respond to the
issue precludes an action for damages in circuit court,
A copy of the application, all documents and evidence relied upon by the applicant and applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost and will be provided at
reasonable cost, if requested, All materials are available at the Ashland Planning Division, Community Development & Engineering Services Building, 51 Winburn Way,
Ashland, Oregon 97520,
If you have questions or comments concerning this request, please feel free to contact Aaron Anderson at 541-488-53,05,
Q%comm-devylanningTtanning Actions\Noticing FaIderWailed Notices& Signs4-1020TA-TI-2020-O�6069-REN0710E doex
CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS
118.5.4,050.A
A Conditional Use 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.
1. That the use would be in conformance with all standards within the zoning district in which the use is proposed to be located, and in conformance
with relevant Comprehensive plan pclicies that are not implemented by any City, State, or Federal law or program.
2. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, electricity, urban storm drainage, paved access to and throughout the development, and
adequate transportation can and will be provided to the subject property.
3. That the conditional use will have no greater adverse material effect on the livability of the impact area when compared to the development of the
subject lot with the target use of the zone, pursuant with subsection 18,5.4,050,A,5, below. When evaluating the effect of the proposed use on the
impact area, the following factors of livability of the impact area shall be considered in relation to the target use of the zone,
a, Similarity in scale, bulk, and coverage,
b. Generation of traffic and effects on surrounding streets. Increases in pedestrian, bicycle, and mass transit use are considered beneficial
regardless of capacity of facilities.
c. Architectural compatibility with the impact area.
d. Air quality, including the generation of dust, odors, or other environmental pollutants.
e. Generation of noise, light, and glare.
f. The development of adjacent properties as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan.
g. Other factors found to be relevant by the approval authority for review of the proposed use.
4, A conditional use permit shall not allow a use that is prohibited or one that is not permitted pursuant to this ordinance.
5. For the purposes of reviewing conditional use permit applications for conformity with the approval criteria of this subsection, the target uses of each
zone are as follows.
a. WR and RR. Residential use complying with all ordinance requirements, developed at the density permitted by chapter 1825 Standards for
Residential Zones.
b. R-1, Residential use complying with all ordinance requirements, developed at the density permitted by chapter 18.2.5 Standards for Residential
Zones,
c. R-2 and R-3. Residential use complying with all ordinance requirements, developed at the density permitted by chapter 18.2.5 Standards for
Residential Zones.
d. C-1. The general retail commercial uses listed in chapter 1822 Base Zones and Allowed Uses, developed at an intensity of 0.35 floor to area
ratio, complying with all ordinance requirements; and within the Detailed Site Review overlay, at an intensity of 0,50floorto area ratio, complying
with all ordinance requirements,
e. C-1-D. The general retail commercial uses listed in chapter 1822 Base Zones and Allowed Uses, developed at an intensity of 1.00 gross floor
to area ratio, complying with all ordinance requirements.
f E-1. The general office uses listed in chapter 1822 Base Zones and Allowed Uses, developed at an intensity of 0.35 floor to area ratio,
complying with all ordinance requirements; and within the Detailed Site Review overlay, at an intensity of 0.50 floor to area ratio, complying with
all ordinance requirements.
g. M-1 . The general light industrial uses listed in chapter 1822 Base Zones and Allowed Uses, complying with all ordinance requirements,
h. CM-Cl. The general light industrial uses listed in chapter 18.3,2 Croman Mill District, developed at an intensity of 0,50 gross floor to area ratio,
complying with all ordinance requirements.
L CM -OE and CM -MU. The general office uses listed in chapter 18.3,2 Croman Mill District, developed at an intensity of 0.6,0 gross floor to area,
complying with all ordinance requirements.
k. CM -NC. The retail commercial uses listed in chapter 18.3.2 Croman Mill District, developed at an intensity of 0,60 gross floor to area ratio,
complying with all ordinance requirements.
1, HC, NM, and SOU. The permitted uses listed in chapters 183.3 Health Care Services, 18.3.5 North Mountain Neighborhood, and 18,33
Southern Oregon University District, respectively, complying with all ordinance requirements.
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 (pal 183),
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 18,43 Public Facilities and that adequate capacity of City facilities
forwater, 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.
GAcommAcv\ptanningTlanning Actiuns\Nodcing FolderWaRed Noakes & Signs'1-020TA-TI-2019-00083-RENOTICE.docx
MAIM Ale] a Tk, F-IT W r►My
STATE OF OREGON
County of Jackson
The undersigned being first duly sworn states that:
1. 1 am employed by the City of Ashland, 20 East Main Street, Ashland,
Oregon,97520, in the Community Development Department,
2. On March 3, 2020 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-Tl-2020-00089, 839 & 835 E Main,
0-
j",
Signature of Employe 4
C:Wsers4sd,thdaAFNHPDos.ktop'AFFIDIVi'r OF MUNG—ds.docx 3)312020
PA-T1-2020-00089 391E09AC10000 PA-T1-2020-00089 39IE09AC9601 PA-T1-2020-00089 391E09AD8800
BAKER JEFFERY TTEE ET AL BURNETT SAMARRA ET AL CARLTON LYNNE TTEE ET AL
867 E MAW ST 839 E MAIN ST 112 HARBOUR DR
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 HALF MOON BAY, CA 94019
PA-T1-2020-00089 391E09AC1300
CLAYTON GEOFFREY
108 SEVENTH ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AC9600
GREENEWOOD HOMES LLC
PO BOX 516
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AC 10600
JUCKETT DARYL WARD
44 DEWEY ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T 1 -2020-00089 391E09AC9900
LAZARO MARGARITA E
PO BOX 1347
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T 1 -2020-00089 391 E09AC8800
MULLER HUGHIGENEVIEVE ANN
3150 JUANIPERO WAY #312
MEDFORD, OR 97504
PA-T1-2020-00089 391E09AC12500
POE PATRICIA TRUSTEE FBO
27 DEWEY ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391E09AC9400
SOLONIUK LEONARD TRUSTEE
PO BOX 909
LOMA LINDA, CA 92354
03/02/20
835 & 839 E Main — RE -NOTICE
24
PA-T 1-2020-00089 391 E09AC9800
DANHI MORRIS TRUSTEE ET AL
2420 SELROSE LN
SANTA BARBARA, CA 93109
PA-T 1 -2020-00089 391 E09AC8900
HAITHCOCK THOMASILEAH T
89 7TH ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AC 12400
KEOPPEN KIM
36 MORTON ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T 1 -2020-00089 391E09AC9700
MARTIN JAMES TRUSTEE ET AL
820 C ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391E09AC9800
PAGANI NANCY TRUSTEE ET AL
850 C ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AD8700
SEIBER SUZANNE J
880 C ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AC9501
SOLONIUK LEONARD TRUSTEE
1751 EL CAPITAN DR
REDDING, CA 96001
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AC9500
FEINSTEIN ALLAN DAVID TTEE
777 E MAIN ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AD8600
INGET EMILY
860 C ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391E09AC10500
KOENIGSBERG JILL L.
PO BOX 367
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AD8500
MC KINNEY RICHARD TRUSTEE
117 8TH ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AC9701
PEASLEY FREDERICKIANNE
840 C ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AC10400
SNOOK DAVID W TRUSTEE ET AL
840 PAVILION PL.
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AD70000
DELUCA RONALD TRUSTEE
CIO THE VILLAGE APARTMENTS
725 ROYAL AVE
MEDFORD, OR 97504
r
Planning Department, 51 Winbur. ay, Ashland, Oregon 97520 CITY OF
541-488-5305 Fax: 541-552-2050 www.ashland.or.us TTY: 1-800-735-2900 -ASHLAND
NOTICE OF APPLICATION
PLANNING ACTION: PA-T1-2020-00089
SUBJECT PROPERTY: 835 & 839 East Main
OWNERJAPPLICANT: Samarra Burnett
DESCRIPTION: A request for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to authorize an increase of the Maximum Permitted
Floor Area (MPFA) for the addition of a new art/dance studio, and additional habitable space to the upstairs unit.
The property is currently developed with an 1,812 square foot duplex, and the proposed development includes 232
sq. ft. upstairs and 553 downstairs for a total of 2,597 square feet. The property allows a total MPFA of 2,256
square feet which would require the authorization of a —15% increase of MPFA. In addition to the approval criteria
for a Conditional Use Permit, the criteria for Historic District Design Standards approval must be met. The
application also includes the request to remove a single large tree from the backyard due to its proximity to the
proposed construction. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Multi Family Residential; ZONING: R-2; MAP:
39 1 E 09 AC; TAX LOT: 9661.
NOTE: The Ashland Historic Commission will also review this Planning Action an Wednesday, March 4,2020 at 6:00 PM in
the Community Development and Engineering Services building (&skiyou Room), located at 51 Winburn Way.
NOTE: The Ashland Tree Commission will also review this Planning Action on Thursday, March 5, 2020 at 6:010 PM in
the Community Development and Engineering Services building (Siskiyou Room), located at 51 Winburn Way,
NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: February 21, 2020
DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION OF WRITTEN COMMENTS: March 5,2020i
The Ashland Planning Division Staff has received a compete application for the property noted above.
Any affected property owner or resident has a right to submit written comments to the City of Ashland Planning Division, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland,
Oregon 97520 prior to 4:30 p.m. on the deadline date shown above.
Ashland Planning Division Staff determine if a Land Use application is complete within 30 days of submittal. Upon determination of completeness, a notice is sent to
surrounding properties within 200feet of the property submitting application which allows for a 14 day comment period. After the comment period and not more than
45 days from the application being deemed complete, the Nanning Division Staff shall make a final decision on the application. A notice of decision is mailed to the same
properties within 5 days of decision. An appeal to the Planning Commission of the Planning Division Staffs decision must be made in writing to the Ashland Planning
Division within 12 days from the date of the mailing of final decision. (AMC 18.5.1.050.G)
The ordinance criteria applicable to this application are attached to this notice. Oregon law states that failure to raise an objection concerning this application, by letter,
or failure to provide sufficient specificity to afford the decision maker an opportunity to respond to the issue, precludes your right of appeal to the Land! Use Board of
Appeals (LUBA) on that issue. Failure to specify which ordinance criterion the objection is based on also precludes your right of appeal to LUBA on that criterion. Failure
of the applicant to raise constitutional or other Issues relating to proposed conditions of approval with sufficient specificity to allow this Department to respond to the
issue precludes an action for damages in circuit court.
A copy of the application, all documents and evidence relied upon by the applicant and applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost and will be provided at
reasonable cost, if requested. All materials are available at the Ashland Planning Division, Community Development & Engineering Services Building, 51 Winburn Way,
Ashland, Oregon 97520.
If you have questions or comments concerning this request, please feel free to contact Aaron Anderson at 541-488-5305.
GAccmm-dcv\p1anning\P1inning ActicnsNcdcing FolderWailed Notkcs&
CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS,
18.5.4.05O.A
A Conditional Use 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.
1. That the use would be in conformance with all standards within the zoning district in which the use is proposed to be located, and in conformance
with relevant Comprehensive plan policies that are not implemented by any City, State, or Federal law or program.
2. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, electricity, urban storm drainage, paved access to and throughout the development, and
adequate transportation can and will be provided to the subject property,
3. That the conditional use will have no greater adverse material effect on the livability of the impact area when compared to the development of the
subject Iot with the target use of the zone, pursuant with subsection 18.5.4.050.A.5, below, When evaluating the effect of the proposed use on the
impact area, the following factors of livability of the impact area shall be considered in relation to the target use of the zone.
a. Similarity in scale, bulk, and coverage,
b. Generation of traffic and effects on surrounding streets, Increases in pedestrian, bicycle, and mass transit use are considered beneficial
regardless of capacity of facilities.
c. Architectural compatibility with the impact area.
d. Air quality, including the generation of dust, odors, or other environmental pollutants,
e. Generation of noise, light, and glare.
f. The development of adjacent properties as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan.
g. Other factors found to be relevant by the approval authority for review of the proposed use,
4. A conditional use permit shall not allow a use that is prohibited or one that is not permitted pursuant to this ordinance,
5. For the purposes of reviewing conditional use permit applications for conformity with the approval criteria of this subsection, the target uses of each
zone are as follows.
a. WR and RR, Residential use complying with all ordinance requirements, developed at the density permitted by chapter 18,2.5 Standards for
Residential Zones.
b. R-1. Residential use complying with all ordinance requirements, developed at the density permitted by chapter 18.2.5 Standards for Residential
Zones.
c. R-2 and R-3. Residential use complying with all ordinance requirements, developed at the density permitted by chapter 18.2.5 Standards for
Residential Zones.
d. C-1. The general retail commercial uses listed in chapter 18,2.2 Base Zones and Allowed Uses, developed at an intensity of 0,35 floor to area
ratio, complying with all ordinance requirements; and within the Detailed Site Review overlay, at an intensity of 0.50 floorto area ratio, complying
with all ordinance requirements,
e. C-1-D. The general retail commercial uses listed in chapter 18.2.2 Base Zones and Allowed Uses, developed at an intensity of 1,00 gross floor
to area ratio, complying with all ordinance requirements.
f, E-1� The general office uses listed in chapter 18.2,2 Base Zones and Allowed Uses, developed at an intensity of 0.35 floor to area ratio,
complying with all ordinance requirements; and within the Detailed Site Review overlay, at an intensity of 0.50 floorto area ratio, complying with
all ordinance requirements.
g, M-1. The general light industrial uses listed in chapter 18.2.2 Base Zones and Allowed Uses, complying with all ordinance requirements.
h. CM-Cl. The general light industrial uses listed in chapter 18.3.2 Croman Mill District, developed at an intensity of 0,50 gross floor to area ratio,
complying with all ordinance requirements.
L CM -OE and CM -MU, The general office uses listed in chapter 18,3,2 Croman Mill District, developed at an intensity of 0,60 gross floor to area,
complying with all ordinance requirements.
k, CM -NC. The retail commercial uses listed in chapter 18,3,2 Croman Mill District, developed at an intensity of 0.60 gross floor to area ratio,
complying with all ordinance requirements,
I. HC, NM„ and SOU. The permitted uses listed in chapters 18.33 Health Care Services, 18.3.5 North Mountain Neighborhood, and 183.6
Southern Oregon University District, respectively, complying with all ordinance requirements,
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 1183).
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.
Eception 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.
G:wcmm-dcv\p1anning\1NanninS ActionsMNoticing FolderWailed Notices & Signs1—%20\PA-TI-2020-0,0089.docx
0 a a I NYTIATj I &Q a iTj F-11 I I I LI
STATE OF OREGON
County of Jackson
The undersigned being first duly sworn states that:
1. I am employed by the City of Ashland, 20 East Main Street, Ashland,
Oregon 97520, in the Community Development Department.
2. On February 21, 2020 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-TI-2020-00089, 835 & 839 East Main.
Sij'hature of Employee
C.,IUsersiswithdaAFNHnDes,ktopW.FIDN41T OF MAUNG..ds docx W112020
PA-T1-2020-0008939IE09AC10000 PA-T1-2020-00089391E09AC9601 PA-T1-2020-00089391E09AD8800
BAKER JEFFERY J TRUSTEE ET BURNETT SAMARRA A ET AL CARLTON LYNNE K TRUSTEE ET
867 MAIN ST 839 MAIN ST 112 HARBOUR DR
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 HALF MOON BAY, CA 94019
PA-T1-2020-00089 391E09AC1300
CLAYTON GEOFFREY
108 SEVENTH ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AC9500
FEINSTEIN ALLAN DAVID TRUST
777 MAIN ST
ASHLAND, OR 97'520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AD8600
INGET EMILY
860 C ST
ASHLAND„ OR 97520
PA-T1 2020-00089 391 E09AC10500
KOENIGSBERG JILL L
PO BOX 367
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AD8500
MC KINNEY RICHARD O TRUSTEE
117 8TH ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AC 12500
POE PATRICIA L TRUSTEE FBO
27 DEWEY ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T1-200-00089 391 E09AC9501
SOLONIUK LEON!ARD TRUSTEE ET
1751 EL CAPITAN DR
REDDING, CA 96001
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AC9800
DANHI MORRIS TRUSTEE ET AL
2420 SELROSE LN
SANTA BARBARA, CA 93109
PA-T1-2020-00089 391E09AC9600
GREEN''EWOOD HOMES LLC
PO BOX 516
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T 1 -2020-00089 391E09AC10600
JUCKETT DARYL WARD
44 DEWEY ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AC9900
LAZARO MARGARITA E
PO BOX 1347
ASHLAND„ OR 97520
PA-T1-20,20-010,089 391E09AC8800
MULLER HUGH H/GENEVIEVE ANN
3150 JUANIPERO WAY 312
MEDFORD, OR 97504
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AD8700
SEIBER SUZANNE J
880 C ST
ASHLAND„ OR 97520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391E09AD700001
DELUCA RONALD L TRUSTEE
CIO THE VILLAGE APARTMENTS
725 ROYAL AVE
MEDFORD, OR 97504
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AC8900
HAITHCOCK THOMAS J/LEAN T
89 7TH ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391E09AC1400
KEOPPEN KIM
36 MORTON ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AC9700
MARTIN JAMES W TRUSTEE ET A
820 C ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AC9701
PEASLEY FREDERICK A/ANNE M
840 C ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA-T1-2020-00089 391 E09AC10400
SNOOK DAVID W 'TRUSTEE ET AL.
840 PAVILION PL
ASHLAND, OR 97520
835 & 839 East Main
2/20121
NOC'Ii '"
,r.
f
r
J l^.�d"a.>«a ���
WIMLA 111,11111ingDivision
( 11TY Of 51 WilIbLu'll Way, Ashland OR 97520
A14 L AN D, 54 1-488-5305 Fax 54 1-488-6006
DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
FILE # �4 J t
Street Address :33 5- 1/ 2 '_� M v� i-i, As � L, ti �
Assessor's Map No. 39 1 E (2, 11.1 L") 0 S A C Tax Lot(s)
Zoning Vs a Comp Plan Designation
Pursuing LEEDOCertification? El YES f9NO
APPLICANT
Name C11
V" 6, � \1 Y, Y\ Phon AOO E-Mail
Address
t city -AS,kkvd
zip 175-2-6
PROPERTY OWNER
Name S(_poQ Phone
F."rerom
E-Mail
City
SURVEYOR, ENGINEER , ARCHITECT, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, OTHER
Title Name '�)4Q-01 ,RQ
si � ki Q_ r Phone (5-% E-Mail 5 r po�oY, C 6 0/1
Address
Title Name
MON.=
city Atck f 0 V4 zip
Phone E-Mait
City
Zip
I hereby certify that the statements and information contained in this application, including the enclosed drawings and the required findings of fact, are in all respects,
true and correct. I understand that at/ property pins must be shown on the drawings and visible upon the site inspection. In the event the pins are not shown or their
location found to be incorrect, the owner assumes full responsibility. I further understand that if this request is subsequently contested, the burden will be on me to
establish:
1) that I produced sufficient factual evidence at the hearing to support this request;
2) that the findings of fact furnished justifies the granting of the request;
3) that the findings of fact furnished by me are adequate; and further
4) that all structures or improvements are property located on the ground.
Failure in this regard will result most likely in not only the request being set aside, but also possibly in my structures being built in reliance thereon being required to
be removed a n e pence. If I of professionaf advice and assistance.
-3 () -TO\. V\ V o' r, ;_1 0 2— 0
Applicant's Signature Date
As owner of the property Involved in this request, I have read and understood the complete application and its consequences (no,as p p,,r
owner.
I A M ri q emn,sin,
Property Owner's Signature (required) Date Jr,lul L) 1. &ULU
� k',
[To be cornp!eted by Oty Slaffl i'
a/% - I
Date Received Zoning Permit Type Filing Fee $
OVER di
G HandoulsZxriiiig Permit Applicafion doc
CUP Application
January 28, 2020
For Addition to 835/839 E Main. $.!,....Ashland, OR 97520
Owners: Samarra and Gene Burnett, Edward Thiessen
Contact: San-larra Burnett
549 B St, Apt 3, Ashland Or 97520
(2060 941-2291
saiiiai-i'abui-ii(,,tt(cl)�giiiail.coliI
1. The use Will be in conformance with all standards within the historic zoning district in which
the use is proposed to be located, and in conformance with relevant Comprehensive plan
policies that are not implemented by any City State, or Federal laA, or program.
2. Adequate capacity of City facilities lor water, sewer, electricity, urban storm drainage, paved
access to and throughout the development exist, and adequate transportation call and will be
provided to the subJect property,
3. The conditional use will have No greater adverse material effect on the livability of the
impact area, because:
a. The proposed building will be similar in scale, bulk and lot coverage to, all the
neighboring buildings. Of the five lots adjoining this site, three buildings appear to covet,
more than or a similar percentage of their lot as the proposed project.
b. The proposed use will not generate any increase in traffic.
c. It is architecturally compatible with the impact area, very similar in age and style to
several neighboring homes. Of the five houses neighboring this site one is from the same
era, two are newer, and two are older. The proposed project includes elements from all
the neighboring styles, and will help to unify the appearance of the neighborhood,
d. It will not create any environmentally irripactful results such as noise, glare, dust or odors
etc.
e. It does not conflict with any proposed development as envisioned ill the Comprehensive
plan, or have any other relevant undesirable features.
mm
12020
I
I
M 3 '1, "2020
Vt
-rw 0
Story
ro
[)u p('
o
story
5LOPE
O V L:
ire-e-5
Ack ck W� e-, kAl- 0 Y\
L St
ck A:5 k
jAN � ml, 2,020
a— -
S
F
m
N
S. LtREET
S,74'W4]'L. (P.R. Sjvnq)
370,
299 615,
m
(P.
s r v C.
6 .26, 61.5
L, 6
1,49 %
Pit
rn
e.
00
MEEMKOM
A
x
(A a
MI
O
CA
z 70
P
car X
z
P-2
o ":0
mo
a
��°
/1
r�
r�i
�f��� err 7Y
`� �' / /G' 0/ a^ r � �� H� // �ryq u
f �r ' ; � ��
s( %�f
y,"
,i
��� t%�� Y i���
���w .
t
� �.� � 1 � m e � � � �. � �. � a :.a, t � a s.. � ,y�
f .l a d� a� �, f �
rw a wr ^� 4, dk' � r`
�'� �
6
qE
j � Gi � � �4� � � S f " 5h
^�! l7 � �� E �' Irk i� � 1�11 � r^ l� ��� /���t�i� r � ��k
i e + t/ /i/ /%� r
,�� �� rM '�,F,mLbPrrw,,,,y q � �� gal/ltiF�'j / ���r ��y��r��i( �r/�+/�/r n�,
�, �� � ��� � � � � � � �i����������i1���1�717i"��lh� i`�irj q�ly�G ��.p � � ,
" N � ��{,/av�% ✓i ✓,/CIF i �,,,,,,, E�, �9d'' pry°
., ,-« ri
� e, � . , e �
y � .,, � � �
&¢ 1�� d a t V o t1 4
City of Ashland
Community Development Department
51 Winburn Way
Ashland, OR 97520
Telephone: 541-488-5305
Inspection Line: 541-552-2080
Plan Type: Type I Planning Action
Work Class: Type I Planning Action
PERMIT DUMBER
PA-T1-2020-00089
pply pate: 1/3112020
Map & Tax Lot Property Address
391E05AC311 839 N Main St
Owner Information
Applicant Information
Owner: Samarra Burnett
Applicant:
Samarra Burnett
Owner 549 B St 3
Applicant
549 B St 3
Address: Ashland, OR 97520
Address:
Ashland, OR 97520
Phone: (206)941-2291
Phone:
(206)941-2291
Project Description
CUP for additon to existing duplex 839/835 E Main
Fees
Fee Description:
Amount:
Conditional Use Permit (Type 1)
$1,092.00
Applicant: Elate:
Total Fees: $1,092,00