Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-02-14 Planning PACKET Note: Anyone wishing to speak at any Planning Commission meeting is encouraged to do so. If you wish to speak, please rise and, after you have been recognized by the Chair, give your name and complete address for the record. You will then be allowed to speak. Please note the public testimony may be limited by the Chair. February 14, 2023 AGENDA I.CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 p.m., Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 E. Main Street II.ANNOUNCEMENTS III.CONSENT AGENDA A.Approval of December 13, 2022 Minutes IV.PUBLIC FORUM Note: If you wish to discuss an agenda item, please contact PC-public- testimony@ashland.or.us by February 14, 2023, 10 a.m. to register to participate electronically. To speak to an agenda item in person you must fill out a speaker request form at the meeting and will then be recognized by the Chair to provide your public testimony. Written testimony can be submitted in advance or in person at the meeting. If you are interested in watching the meeting via Zoom, please utilize the following link: https://zoom.us/j/92132268888 V.TYPE II PUBLIC HEARINGS PLANNING ACTION: PA-T2-2023-00038 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 2308 Ashland Street APPLICANT & OWNER: MCA Architecture / Les Schwab DESCRIPTION: A request for Site Design Review approval to modernize and expand the existing Les Schwab tire facility. The proposal includes remodeling the existing overhang/work area and replacing it with a vestibule addition and new façade enhancing the Ashland St. Frontage. Additionally, the breezeway between the two main buildings is proposed to be enclosed creating two new Bay doors and warehouse space to the rear. In addition, there is proposed site work to install ADA / Pedestrian access to the intersection of Tolman and Ashland. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial; ZONING: C-1; MAP: 39-1E-14-BA; TAX LOT: 1100 VI.ADJOURNMENT: Next Meeting Date: February 28, 2023 In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please email scott.fleury@ashland.or.us. 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). Total Page Number: 1 Total Page Number: 2 ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING DRAFTMinutes December 13, 2022 I.CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 PM Chair Haywood Norton called the meeting to order at 7:00p.m.in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street. Commissioners Present: Staff Present: Michael Dawkins Brandon Goldman, InterimCommunity Development Director Haywood Norton Derek Severson, Senior Planner Lynn Thompson Aaron Anderson, Senior Planner Eric HerronMichael Sullivan, Executive Assistant Doug Knauer Absent Members:Council Liaison: Kerry KenCairn Paula Hyatt Lisa Verner II.ANNOUNCEMENTS Chair Norton noted that Commission Thompson was attending the meetingremotelydue to illness. Interim Community Development DirectorBrandon Goldmanmade the following announcements: The City Council approved PA-T3-2022-00004, 1511 Highway 99 North at its December 6, 2022 meeting. On January 3, 2023 the Council will hear an appeal of the Planning Commission’s decision to deny PA-T2-2022- 00037,165 Water Street.This was originally going to be heard by the Council on June 21, 2022, but was postponed at the request of the applicant. The Social Equity and Racial Justice Commission is requesting that a member of the Commission join them at a future meeting to discuss the Commission’s role is fostering social equity. III.CONSENT AGENDA A.Approval of Minutes 1.November 8, 2022 Regular Meeting 2.November 22, 2022 Study Session Commissioners Michael/Knauer m/s to approve the Consent Agenda.Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. 5-0. IV.PUBLIC FORUM – None V.LEGISLATIVE HEARING: A.PLANNINGACTION:PA-L-2022-00015 APPLICANT:CityofAshland ORDINANCEREFERENCES:AMC 18.2.2 BaseZones & AllowedUses AMC18.2.3.145 FoodTrucksandFoodCarts Total Page Number: 3 AMC18.3.2CromanMillDistrict AMC18.3.3HealthCareServicesDistrict AMC18.3.4NormalNeighborhoodDistrict AMC18.3.5N.MountainNeighborhoodDistrict AMC18.5.4ConditionalUsePermits AMC18.6.1.030.F Definitions REQUEST:The proposal would amend the Ashland Land Use Ordinance to provide additional options for food trucks and food carts in a new section AMC 18.2.3.145 ‘Food Trucks and Food Carts.’ Staff Presentation Senior Planner Derek Severson provided the Commission with a brief presentation on thecurrent state of draft ordinance PA-L- 2022-00015. He detailed the current limited allowances for food trucks, which include short-term events, permitting as an accessory to an existing use,orwith a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). Mr. Severson detailed the changes that staff had proposed to the allowances for short-term events and CUPs, but that the accessory to an existing use criteria would remain unchanged. As proposed, the Ministerial Permits would allow up to three food trucks in an approved plaza space or parking area at a time, with any exceptions requiring a Site Design Review.Mr. Severson stressed that food trucks or carts would not be permitted in residential areas, but that thetemporary use allowance currently in the Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) applies across zones and could permitfood trucks in residential or downtown areas for short-term events(see attachment #1). Deliberation and Recommendations Commissioner Thompson expressed concern that some of the references to approved plaza space within the draftordinance was unclear.She suggested that staff remove the term “existing approved plaza space”in subsection Aand replace it with “initial caps review plaza space.”Commissioner Thompson also recommended that staff addfurther clarity regarding food trucks on private property or approved plaza spaces in subsection E. Chair Norton closed the Public Hearing at 7:13 p.m. Chair Norton reopened the Public Hearing to give late attendants to the meeting an opportunity to speak on the matter. Chair Norton closed the Public Hearing at 7:17 p.m. Commissioners Dawkins/Knauer m/s to recommend the draft ordinance to the City Council with the proposed clarifications.Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. 5-0. VI.TYPE I PUBLIC HEARINGS - APPEAL A.PLANNING ACTION: PA-APPEAL-2022-00017 Appealing PA-T1-2022-00185 SUBJECT PROPERTY:897 Hillview Drive APPLICANT & OWNER:Suncrest Homes, LLC DESCRIPTION:An appeal of the administrative approval of planning action #PA-T1-2022-00185, An approval for a two-lot partition of a 0.36-acre lot. The tentative partition plat submitted with the application indicates that the two resultant parcels will be 0.18 and 0.17 acres in size. The application includes detailed findings explaining how the proposal meets the relevant criteria. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single Family Residential; ZONING: R-1-7.5; MAP: 39 1E 15 AC;TAX LOT:900 Chair Norton recited the public hearing procedures for land use hearings. Total Page Number: 4 Ex Parte Contact No ex parte contact was reported. Commissioners Dawkins, Knauer, and Norton conducted site visits. Staff Presentation Senior Planner Aaron Anderson began by noting a clerical error regarding the notice for this item. The planning action number was noticed as“PA-APPEAL-2022-00015”andshouldinstead haveread “PA-APPEAL-2022-00017.” Mr. Anderson briefly outlined the timeline for the project,includingits approval by staffon October 20, 2022and its subsequent appealon November 1, 2022.He drew the Commission’s attention to a map of the preliminary partition plat showing an eight-foot flagpole on the property, but added that the applicant was proposing an additional two-foot easement across parcel one so in order to provide a ten-foot legal access to the lot (see attachment #2). Mr. Anderson then listed the requisite approval criteria under AMC 18.5.3.050, noting that the application had satisfied all of those criteria, and recommended that the original staff approval be upheldand the appeal denied. Questions of Staff Commissioner Thompson inquired if this property was considered a flag lot, to which Mr. Anderson responded that it is. Commissioner Knauer commented that the map used in the noticing of this project seemed to indicate that the alley terminates prior to the property in question. Mr. Anderson responded that the City’s GIS may suggest that, but the alley actually ends at the northern end of the lot. Commissioner Knauer requested clarification on how this partition could impact the alley in terms of vehicle access to the lot. Mr. Anderson responded that there is currently only one lot with access to the alley, which would still be the case after the partition in question, so staff saw no increase in use of the alley. Mr. Anderson elaboratedthat staff had spoken to the Public Works Department, whose only requirement for this project would be additional grading and laying down gravel for the alley’s improvement. He added that staff does not require improvements to existing alleys.Commissioner Knauer remarked thatstaff’s requirement for the alley to be used for vehicular access would increase its use. Mr. Anderson pointed out that the lot owner is currently permitted to use and park vehicles down the alley, an allowance which will continue after the lot is partitioned. There was general discussion about the use of the alley for vehicular accessand parking. Commissioner Thompson requested clarification regarding the required 4ftwidepedestrian access to the back parcel, noting that the proposed pedestrian accessappeared toonly connect tothe front parcel.Mr. Anderson responded thatthe proposed pedestrian access would also serve the back parcel, and that the applicant would be providinga 10ft widepaveddriveway,which would fulfill the pedestrian access requirements andexceed the 4ft wide minimum. Mr. Anderson referred to page 94 of the Commission's packetto show how the proposed driveway would provide vehicular and pedestrian accessfrom Hillview Drive to parcel 2.He added that there would also be vehicular access to parcel 2 from the alley.Commissioner Knauer inquired if the driveway would run the length of the property between Hillview Drive and the alley. Mr. Anderson responded that the driveway would not provide a throughway connectionto the alleyfrom the street,but that such a connection could be approved in a future planning action if an applicant applied forit. Chair Norton remarked that the drivewaycould have provided vehicular access to both parcels without the need for any access from the alley, but that had not been proposed by the applicants. Mr. Goldman pointed out thatthe applicantshadproposed placing all three required parking spaces in front of the house, not along the alley. He added thatthe flag lot partition standards require thatparking access from the alleyway be accommodated, but that he believed that the applicant would not be utilizing those parking spaces. Applicant Presentation Applicant Charlie Hamilton gave a description of the developmental process that the project had gone through thus far, and detailedhis work with the City to ensure that nearby residents not be required to undergo an address change as a result of the partition.He noted nearby residents’opposition to parcel 2 having its primary access from the alley, and that that was why the driveway extensionfrom Hillview Drive was included in the proposal. Mr. Hamilton stated that he worked to assuage many of the concerns of the neighborsopposed to the partition, including those of the appellant, Chuck Smith. He outlinedhowmany of Mr. Smith’s concerns lay with water runoffand its impact on his propertyat 895 Hillview Drive.Mr. Hamilton listed the ways in which he would address these issues, including a catch-basin on the northwest corner of the lot,perimeter drains for each dwelling,and Total Page Number: 5 attempting to capture water runoff inundating Mr. Smith’s property. Mr. Hamilton concluded by detailing how his team had conducted an unrequired neighborhood meeting in order to address concerns from local residents. Appellant Presentation Mr. Smith requested that the Commission uphold the appeal and deny the original application. He citeda similar partition at 893 Hillview Drive that was denied by the Commission on December 12, 2005, and detailed how the nearly fifty neighbors he spoke with opposed the current partition. Mr. Smith stated that he opposed the partition primarily due to water runoff in the neighborhood, citingthe design standards dealing with surface water drainage in AMC 18.5.3.050.He providedthe Commission with a presentationdetailing the water damage that his property hadsustained due to water runoff.He related how he had already installed curtain drains on his property due tothewater runoff that passesthrough 897 Hillview Drive and saturates his propertyat 895 Hillview Drive, and requested that the applicant be required to install a French drain in order to mitigate water damage as a condition of approval.Mr. Smith detailed the drainage system that comes down from Ross Lane and connects with a dry well and drainage system along the alleyway, and stated that trees planted in the easement between 897 and 895 Hillview Drive are clogging his drain-line. He noted that the City had required that he install a wet trench with a 24inch-wide footing when he added an addition to his property. Mr. Smith then read testimony from the previous owner of 897 Hillview that was given at the December 12, 2005 Planning Commission Meeting (see attachment #4).He concluded by stating that a flag lot would be out of character with the neighborhood and requested that the Commission uphold the appeal and deny the project. Chair Norton asked if staff was aware of the easement before the meeting. Mr. Anderson responded that staff was made aware before the meeting of the easement for the TID drainage, and that there is alsoCity infrastructure along the easement. PublicTestimony Keith Kleinedler/Mr. Kleinedler voiced support for the appellant, and detailed the December 12, 2005 Planning Commission Meeting. He stated that the water runoff and flooding was his main reason to oppose the partition, and pointed to the flooding that the neighborhood already sustains from the alleyway. He implored the City to make substantial improvements to the drainage systems that are unable to handle the significant amount of water runoff from Ross Lane,and from theOur Lady of the Mountain churchparking lotat 987 Hillview Drive. Applicant Rebuttal Zac Moody stated that the Staff Report had detailed all the relevant materials.He noted that many of the appellant’s issues with the project were related to stormwater, and that the City’s Public Works departmenthadidentified areas that could drain water from the site to Hillview Drive. He added that additional impervious surface will be added as part of the partition, but that the added drainage systems will help to divert water from flowing onto the neighboring properties. Addressing the issue of the subject property having too much pavement, Mr. Moody pointed out that the applicant was required to include driveways and meet other building minimum standards. He notedthat the Comprehensive Plan allows for increased dwelling density in this neighborhood, particularlywith the adoption of House Bill 2001. Mr. Moody stated that the proposed partition is the minimum that could be done with the parcel in light of recent house bills,but that the applicants are content with the subject plan.He addedthat it is the intention of the applicants to provide additional housingin the neighborhood. Mr. Moody stated that easements are generally addressed at the final platby a surveyor,but that he was unaware of the easement until it was raised at the meeting. He assured the Commission that the buildings would not be built over the easement, because that would have resulted in a denial of the proposal during the applicationprocess. Mr. Moody stated that there are numerous criteria that any application has to meet in order to be approved, such as tree preservation, solar, wildfire hazard,and setbacks, andthe applicant will be removing cypress tress as they pose a potential fire hazard. Other trees may be removed if they interfere with the building footprint, but there is no current plan to remove any more trees than necessary. Mr. Moody noted that the footing issue raised by the appellant is not a partition standard or criteria, and will be addressed during the building application phase. Total Page Number: 6 Mr. Moody concluded by addressing Mr. Kleinedler’s comments regarding the housingapprovalstandards. He stated that much had changed in city planning since the December 12, 2005 decision by the Commission to deny the partition of 893 Hillview Drive. He reiterated that the new proposed partition is the minimum that could be done with the parcelin light of recent code changes. Chair Norton closed the Public Hearing and Public Record at 8:27 p.m. Deliberations and Decision Commissioner Dawkins sympathized with the neighbors who did not want to see thepartitioning of theparcel in question, but that the main topic in question was water runoff. He stated that he would have a difficult time denying the application based on criteria thatneitherthe applicant norappellant could control. Commissioner Dawkins stated that he appreciated the neighbor’s desire to keep the neighborhood as single dwellings only, which echoed the argument madeat the 2005 meeting. Commissioner Dawkins pointed out that the water runoff was coming down the alley from the south, aided by the parking lot from the nearby church, which is something that the City could examine and addressin the future. Chair Norton noted that the applicant had proposed four voluntary conditions for approval, butthatcondition #1should be removed because there would be no way for the City to enforce it. Commissioners Knauer/Herron m/s to deny the appeal with the conditionsproposed, excluding condition #1. Roll Call Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. 5-0. Chair Norton stated that the AMC has changed in the 17 years since a similar partition was deniedin 2005, and that variances and exceptions are no long required of such applications if they meet certaincriteria. He commented that the appellants are the first to come before the Commission with the new guidelines in place, and that the Commission may need to make some unpopular decisions in order to abide by recent code changes. He thanked the applicants and the appellant for theircivility. Mr. Goldman informed the Commission that staff had prepared the Findings for the item in the event that the appeal was denied, and that the Findings could be approved by the Commission at this time if it wished. He added that the first condition would be removed from the Findings in accordance with the Commission’s denial of the appeal. Commissioners Dawkins/Thompson m/s to approve the Findings with the conditions proposed, excluding condition #1. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. 5-0. VII.OPEN DISCUSSION Chair Norton informed the Commission that the Social Equity and Racial Justice Advisory Committee(SERJAC)hadrequested thata Commissioner attend a future committee meeting detailingtheir Commissionuses the lens of social equity when making land use decisions. Councilor DuQuenne commended the Commission’s earlier presentation given by Commissioner Knauer at the May 7, 2022 SERJACmeeting, and hoped that a member of the Commission would go before the Committee and provide a similar report.Commissioner Knauer commented that he would be willing to provide another presentation to SERJAC,but that any Commissioners should feel welcome to assumethat duty. Chair Norton statedthat the Commission is bound to the existing code,and must remain objective when makingland use decisions.Commissioner Knauer commented that it is his intention to bringSERJAC’srecommendationsback to the Commission to discuss how best to incorporate them into its decision-making process.Mr. Severson pointed out that the Housing Production Strategy, as well as the Climate-Friendly and Equitable Communities (CFEC) guidelines from the state, will incorporate an anti- displacement tool that will overlap with SERJAC’s recommendations. Mr. Goldman detailed how the Commission must use codified code standards when examining planning actions, but that it could use itsrole in advising legislation to promote social equity and racial justice. Chair Norton suggested that a member of staff accompany the attending Commissioner to theSERJAC meeting.Mr. Severson pointed out that the City’s CFEC representative will likely go before SERJAC before a member of the Commission will have an opportunity to attend their meeting. Total Page Number: 7 Commissioner Dawkins informed the Commission that he has been diagnosed with late-stageprostatecancer. He stated that he would may need to resign his position on the Commissionin the future, but that he will remain a member as long as he can. The Commission expressed appreciation for Commissioner Dawkins and offeredhimtheir support. There was general discussion regarding approved projects that have begun construction and will provide additional housing. Mr. Goldman stated that such developments could open up houses that are currently being used by college students for group housing. .ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 8:56p.m. Submitted by, Michael Sullivan, ExecutiveAssistant Total Page Number: 8 AMC 18.5.4 AMC 18.2.2.030.H Total Page Number: 9 Unchanged AMC 18.5.4 Added Section for Food Trucks Up to 1/Month Food Trucks Proposed in the Downtown ˃ Up to 3 Carts/Trucks Pod >3 In Residential Zones* Approved Plaza or Parking Or Outside Plaza or Parking ˄ Total Page Number: 10 ˅ Total Page Number: 11 waived by applicant +90 days Total Page Number: 12 Total Page Number: 13 Total Page Number: 14 Total Page Number: 15 waived by applicant +90 days Total Page Number: 16 Total Page Number: 17 Total Page Number: 18 -End of Soapbox Total Page Number: 19 Total Page Number: 20 Total Page Number: 21 Total Page Number: 22 Total Page Number: 23 Total Page Number: 24 Total Page Number: 25 Total Page Number: 26 Total Page Number: 27 Total Page Number: 28 Total Page Number: 29 Total Page Number: 30 Total Page Number: 31 Total Page Number: 32 Total Page Number: 33 Total Page Number: 34 Total Page Number: 35 Total Page Number: 36 Total Page Number: 37 Total Page Number: 38 Total Page Number: 39 Total Page Number: 40 Total Page Number: 41 Total Page Number: 42 Total Page Number: 43 Total Page Number: 44 Total Page Number: 45 Total Page Number: 46 Total Page Number: 47 Total Page Number: 48 Total Page Number: 49 Total Page Number: 50 Total Page Number: 51 Total Page Number: 52 NOTICE OF APPLICATION PLANNING ACTION:PA-T2-2023-00038 SUBJECT PROPERTY:2308 Ashland Street APPLICANT & OWNER:MCA Architecture / Les Schwab DESCRIPTION: A request forSite Design Review approval to modernize and expand the existing Les Schwab tire facility. The proposal includes remodeling the existing overhang/work area and replacing it with a vestibule addition and new façade enhancing the Ashland St. Frontage. Additionally, the breezeway between the two main buildings is proposed to be enclosed creating two new Bay doors and warehouse space to the rear. In addition, there is proposed site work to install ADA / Pedestrian access to the intersection of Tolman and Ashland.COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial;ZONING: C-1; MAP: 39-1E-14-BA;TAX LOT:1100 ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: TuesdayFebruary 14, 2023at 7:00 PM, Ashland Civic Center, 1175 East Main Street Total Page Number: 53 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. A copy of the application, including all documents, evidence and applicable criteria are available online at “What’s Happening . Copies of application materials will be provided at reasonable in my City” at https://gis.ashland.or.us/developmentproposals/ cost, if requested. Application materials may be requested to be reviewed in-person at the Ashland Community Development & Engineering Services Building, 51 Winburn Way, via a pre-arranged appointment by calling (541) 488-5305 or emailing planning@ashland.or.us. The ordinance criteria applicable to this application areattached 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. 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. If you have questions or comments concerning this request, please feel free to contact Aaron Andersonat 541-552-2052 or . aaron.anderson@ashland.or.us 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 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. Total Page Number: 54 ASHLAND PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT Before the Planning Commission - February 14, 2023 PLANNING ACTION: PA-T2-2023-00038 OWNER: LesSchwab APPLICANT: MCA Architects LOCATION: 2308 Ashland St. ZONE DESIGNATION: C-1 COMP. PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial ORDINANCE REFERENCES: 18.2.2Base Zones and Allowed Uses 18.4.1 Site Development & Design Standards 18.4.3 Parking, Access, and Circulation 18.4.4 Landscaping, Lighting, and Screening 18.5.2 Site Design Review SUBMITTAL DATE: January 6, 2023 DEEMED COMPLETE DATE: January 19, 2023 120-DAY DEADLINE: May 6, 2023 REQUEST: A request for Site Design Review approval to modernize and expand the existing Les Schwab tire facility. The proposal includes remodeling the existing overhang/work area and replacing it with a vestibule addition and new façade enhancing the Ashland St. Frontage. Additionally, the breezeway between the two main buildings is proposed to enclose existing space creating two new service bays and additional warehouse space to the rear. In addition, there is proposed site work to install ADA / Pedestrian access to the intersection of Tolman and Ashland. I.Relevant Facts Background In 1972 a 5,400 sq. ft. building was constructed for the Les Schwab Tire Center, but no planning records could be found relating to the project. In 1980 the Planning Commission approved a Site Review and Conditional Use Permit for a three-bayalignment center, a truck service canopy and a 2,500 sq. ft. warehouse building (PA#80-005). In spring of 2000 there was an application to build “2,000 sq. ft. truck canopy a new 5,700 sq. ft. building for an alignment center and warehouse” (PA#2000-045). The application was reviewed by the Planning Commission and was ultimately denied due to concerns with how the proposed building affected the streetscape. In 2005 a revised application was submitted which proposed a “more utilitarian service garage use to the south of the parcel, roughly 260 feet from the streetscape”(PA#2005-00875). This Total Page Number: 55 application was approved through a Type-1 land use action and resulted in the 4,300 square foot building inthe southeastcornerof the subject propertiesreferred to as the ‘alignment center’. The only other planning actions on file arefrom a routinetree removal permits. Detailed Description of the Site and Proposal Site Description The Les Schwab property includes four tax lots with a total combined area of approximately 2.7 acres, however this proposal is limited to tax lot 1100. The site is locatedat the southeast corner of the intersection of Ashland Street and Tolman Creek Road. The project site is mostly developed with the exception of an area reserved for a future building footprint to satisfy shadow plan / FAR requirements. Roughly half of the site is undevelopable due to the presence of a Hamilton Creek tributary and associated riparian area along the eastern boundary. Proposed Development The application describes the project as follows: “The current project proposes to “modernize” the Ashland Tire Center #203 to meet Les Schwab corporate design standards, and to improve working conditions for the technicians employed there. This includes moving servicing operations indoors, eliminating the outdoor (under-canopy) service bays, renovating the showroom and making it more visible from the street (by removing the canopy), reorganizing the interface between warehouse and service bays, replacing the electrical service, lighting, mechanical systems, plumbing systems, and bringing the building envelope into compliance with current energy code criteria. Minor (600SF) expansion of the building is planned, as well, to accommodate the service bays under what is currently an open breezeway. An additional aspect of the work is to remove the mansard fascia at the building perimeter, replacing it with a vertical fascia band to provide a graphic cap around the building.” These changes will improve the appearance and function of the current buildings. The proposal will significantly improve the sense of entry and provide increased visual interest to the Ashland Street frontage. II.Discussion Site Development & Design Standards As mentioned above the applicant has made considerable effort to make their project align with the City of Ashland Design Standards. At its core, the proposal is challenging based primarily that it is an auto-centric business that is located in an area that seeks to make “a positive contribution to the streetscape and enhances pedestrian and bicycle traffic.” The application points out that the nature of the facility is entirely designed to support the servicing of vehicles and that while it lies just outside of the freeway overlay the proximity to Total Page Number: 56 the interstate makes this a natural “motorized vehicle nexus.” The proposal includes a number of offsets along its length with various jogs in the roof line. In staff’s opinion the new proposed façade and entry tower for the showroom makes considerable improvement in the buildings sense of entry and orientation to the street. With regard to city facilities the project will have no increasedimpact on stormwater, sewer, water or electricity. The dedication of ROW on the western side of the property is required and is discussed further below. Applicants Submittal The applicants have submitted a compressive set of Findings addressing these approval criteria to demonstrate compliance with the applicable standards for the proposed development and by their reference are incorporated herein. Staff feels that in considering the existing development and the proposed changes the application addressesthe approval standards. Where the standards were not able to be met the application has explained in detail the reason(s) for the exceptions. There are two exceptions to the Site Design Standards: Location of the parking between the roadway and the building Number of parking spaces Exception to Site Design Standards The application includes an express exception to the standard with regard to parking being located between the building and the right-of-way as well as the number of allowed parking spaces. The Site Designs Standards both have a prohibition on vehicles between the road way and the buildings, and call for all cars and trucks to be screened from view from the public right of way ‘by a total sight-obscuring fence.’ The non-conforming nature of the building location dates back to the initial construction in 1972. The application further states for the Tire Center operation, the cars’ proximity to the service bays is functionally critical. It is also commercially critical, as it advertises the business to other passing drivers who will at some point need tire or alignment servicing for their vehicles.” To mitigate for thisthe applicant has proposed a two-foot tall, perforatedmetal screenor hedge. The application notes that “The nature of the Les Schwab Tire Center operation is that work is completed on a daily cycle. Vehicles on the property also communicate the function and quality of work performed on site.”While the proposed screen element does not fully comply with the screen requirementsto be “fully screened”, they suggest that this proposal Total Page Number: 57 enhances the pedestrian experience more than a completely sight obscuring fence would. The application makes note that due to the change in grade as the site is higher than the road, the two-foot screening element effectively provides four-feet of screening height. With regard to the number of parking spaces the application proposes a total of 41 spaces (presently there are 36). A strict application of our code would only require 35 parking spaces, and the code only allows for up to 110% of the parking demand which would be 38. To justify this exception for the three additional parking spaces the application again explains that the vehicle centric nature of the business makes it a requirement. The application explains, “It is also sometimes the case that customers leave their cars all day, so parking spaces are needed for vehicles whose drivers aren’t on the premises. It is reasonable to consider that for every service bay (five are proposed – same as current number) one parking space nearby is needed for vehicle staging.” Staff feels that theexistinguse (vehicle-centric use) and the existing location/building setback provides a ‘unique or unusual aspect’ which justifies the expectation that that the ‘approval of the exception will not substantially negatively impact adjacent properties’ and that the request is the minimum necessary. Staff recommends the approval of these exceptions. Floor to Area Ratio Development is required to meet a minimum Floor-Area-Ratio(FAR)of 0.50. The overall project site is approximately 2.7 acres, with a large unbuildable areadue to the presence of the Hamilton Creek riparian area. When excluding the unbuildable area the standard would require roughly 45,000 square feet of development on the four contiguous parcels. The applicant has included a shadow plan (as allowed for projects on sites of greater than 1/2 an acre) demonstrating that an area reserved for afuture three story building would meet this * standard.In an alternative analysiswe can look only at the development on tax lot 1100. When considering thatthe lot currently out of conformance with the FAR standard, and that the newly enclosed work area and breezeway adds additional square footage as well as the new pedestrian plaza space bringing the property’s FAR closer to conformity with the standard. Right-of-WayDedication Public Facilities are generally required to be installed at the time of development. The TSP and Pedestrian Places overlay have a future cross-section for the development of Tolman CreekRoad to include the possible addition of a new turn lane. Because that improvement would require ROW dedication on the opposite side of the street those full improvements are * It should be noted that in the past the use of a shadow plan to satisfy FAR has been controversial in the past. During the development of Rouge Credit Unionthe Planning Commission denied an application for Site Design Review on the basis that the shadowplan was not sufficient to satisfy the standard. On appeal before Council the denial was reversed and Council found that the Planning Commission erred in applying the Municipal Code with respect to shadow plans, and that the applicants met their burden ofproofas to the applicable criteria and associated Site Development and Design Standards. Total Page Number: 58 not possible at this time. However, to allow for the future expansion of Tolman Creek Road in accordance with the Pedestrian Place Overlay the city will require the dedication of 7.5- feet of right of way pursuant to AMC 18.4.6.050.B.1. Additionally the applicant will be required to sign in favor of the creation of any future LID. A condition of approval has been added for this agreement andROWdedicationconsistentwith Public Works Department’s requirements. Public Notice th Notice of the February 14 public hearing was mailed to all properties within 200 feet of the subject property and a physical noticewas posted along the frontage of the property on February 3, 2023, eleven days prior to the hearing.The notice included a staff contact name and phone number and email.At the time of this writing no public comment was received either in favor or against the proposed application. III.Approval Criteria The criteria for Site Review approval from the Site Design Review Chapter are detailed in AMC 18.5.2.050 as follows: 18.5.2.050Approval Criteria - An application for Site Design Review shall be approved if the proposal meets the criteria in subsections A, B, C, and D below. The approval authority may, in approving the application, impose conditions of approval, consistent with the applicable criteria. A. Underlying Zone. The proposal complies with all of the applicable provisions of the underlying zone (part 18.2), including but not limited to: building and yard setbacks, lot area and dimensions, density and floor area, lot coverage, building height, building orientation, architecture, and other applicable 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 bysubsection 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 part18.4if the circumstances in either subsection 1, 2, or 3, below, are found to exist. 1. There is a demonstrable difficulty meeting the specific requirements ofthe 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 Total Page Number: 59 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; 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; or 3. There is no demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements for a cottage housing development, but granting the exception will result in a design that equally or better achieves the stated purpose of section 18.2.3.090. IV.Conclusions and Recommendations In staff’s assessment, the application with the conditions of approval listed below, would comply with the Ashland Land Use Ordinance. Therefore, Staff recommends that the planning Commission approve the application with the suggested conditions of approval below. 1)That all proposals of the applicant shall be conditions of approval unless otherwise specifically modified herein. 2)The westerly seven-and-one-half-feet of the property shall be dedicated as public street right-of-way in such a manner and document as deemed appropriate by the Public Works Engineering Division and Staff Advisor. 3)That the property owner shall sign in favor of local improvement districts for the future street improvements, including but not limited to park-row and sidewalks, for the Tolman CreekRoadintersection. 4)That the plans submitted for the building permit shall be in 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 this Site Design Review approval shall be submitted and approved prior to the issuance of a building permit. 5)That prior to the installation of any signage, a sign permit shall be obtained. All signage shall meet the requirements of the Sign Ordinance (AMC 18.4.7). 6)That all requirements of the Fire Department shall be satisfactorily addressed, including approved addressing (OFC 505); commercial fire apparatus access including angle of approach and any necessary fire apparatus or shared access easements (OFC 503.2.8); limitations on the installation of gates or fences; fire flow (OFC Appendix B, Table B105.1); fire hydrant clearance; fire department connection (FDC); a Knox key box; and fire sprinklers where required for mixed-use buildings or due to access constraints. 7)That mechanical equipment shall be screened from view from surrounding rights-of-way, and the location and screening of all mechanical equipment shall be detailed on the building permit submittals. Total Page Number: 60 8)That prior to the installation of stairs, parking, or utility infrastructure within the public alley right-of-way, an encroachment permit from the Ashland Public Works Department shall be obtained. A final revised site plan illustrating the placement of these proposed improvements shall be provide for the review and approval of the Public Works/Engineering Department and Staff Advisor prior to the issuance of an encroachment permit. 9)That building permit submittals shall include: a)The identification of exterior building materials and paint colors for the review and approval of the Staff Advisor. Colors and materials shall be consistent with those approved in the application b)Final revised Site, Landscape and Irrigation plans shall be provided for the review and approval of the Staff Advisor with the building permit submittals. 10)That prior to the final approval of the project or issuance of a certificate of occupancy: a)That all hardscaping and landscaping improvements including plaza spaces, landscaping, and the irrigation system shall be installed according to the approved plan, inspected, and approved by the Staff Advisor. Replacement trees to mitigate the trees removed shall be planted and irrigated according to the approved plan. b)That all exterior lighting shall be directed on the property and shall not directly illuminate adjacent residential proprieties. Total Page Number: 61 Total Page Number: 62 Total Page Number: 63 Total Page Number: 64 City of Ashland Land Use Review Submission Les Schwab Tire Center #203 – 2308 Ashland Street January 4, 2023 Overview: We are requesting Planning Department approval of the proposed development of the 2.73-acre site at 2308 Ashland St (Tax Lot #391E14BA 200, 300, 400 and 1100). The site is located within the C-1 zone and within the Detailed Site Design Zone. A portion of the site is located within the 100-year floodplain in lots 200 & 300; no work is proposed in this area. The existing development consists of: - Showroom and Service Center .......................................... - Warehouse Structure ......................................................... - Alignment Service Center (at rear of property) ................. Total enclosed area ............................................................ Additional space under canopies - Service Bays in front of showroom ................................... - Breezeway between Showroom and Warehouse ............ Total area under roof ......................................................... -story structures - - Landscaping: 42% / - The proposed development plan is outlined below and illustrated in the attached materials: Entry vestibule addition at front (Ashland Street) facade, enclosure of “breezeway” between Street), interior tenant improvement, painting and re-cladding building exterior Site work includes: Access ramp from sidewalk to entry elevation, re-striping paved areas, concrete pad (replacing asphalt) at east end of warehouse. Total Page Number: 65 enclose center canopy space, connecting two buildings together and creating two service bays. It will also provide additional warehouse space in the rear. There are no current plans to alter any of the existing vegetation or landscaping except as required to construct the access ramp. construction. ppearanceand function of the current buildings by locating all service bays on the interior, expanding the entry/showroom space to make the entry more prominent, adding two feet to the new service bays to provide visual interest on the Ashland Street (front) façade, modernizing/refreshing the look of the building materials, improving pedestrian access from street corner to facility. The Les Schwab Tire Center is located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Ashland Street and Tolman Creek Road.The site is roughly 1000feet– Ashland Street interchange and just outside the City’s . The facility has been in operation at this location since 1973. Several additions have been made and renovations done over the years, including a 1981 addition to the primary building and the 2004 construction of the (independent structure) Alignment Center. The facility is entirely designed to support servicing of vehicles; automobiles, trucks, vans, RVs, trailers, and any other piece of equipment that has tires. It is located at what seems like an ideal place in the City for this kind of facility, within (or just outside) what has to be understood as a motorized vehicle nexus, where the Interstate Highway meets the primary artery for vehicle traffic moving into the City roadway network. The current project proposes to “modernize” the Ashland Tire Center #203 to meet Les Schwab corporate design standards, and to improve working conditions for the technicians employed there. This includes moving servicing operations indoors, eliminating the outdoor (under- canopy) service bays, renovating the showroom and making it more visible from the street (by removing the canopy), reorganizing the interface between warehouse and service bays, replacing the electrical service, lighting, mechanical systems, plumbing systems, and bringing expansion of the building is planned, as well, to accommodate the service bays under what is currently an open breezeway. An additional aspect of the work is to remove the mansard fascia at the building perimeter, replacing it with a vertical fascia band to provide a graphic cap around the building. The following narrative presents City of Ashland Site Design Approval Criteria and Les Schwab Design Team direct responses describing how the proposed project either conforms or compensates for non-conformance with the criteria. We request that you approve the approach to addressing City of Ashland Site Design Approval Criteria presented here. Total Page Number: 66 Underlying Zone: A. Per the Pre-Application Review, the building 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. One instance where the above statement may not be quite accurate is the following. Part 18.2.3.050 Automobile and Truck Repair Facility, Item A states: All cars and trucks … shall be screened from view from the public right-of-wayby a total sight-obscuring fence. This requirement may be intended to protect the public from having to view an untidy scene where vehicles are in all states of repair for extended periods. The nature of the Les Schwab Tire Center operation is that work is completed on a daily cycle. Vehicles on the property also communicate the function and quality of work performed on site. Having said this, the proposed design identifies “Screen Elements” in deference tothe above requirement. As two foot tall perforated metal screens, they may not meet the strictest reading of the requirement, but offer an approach that enhances the pedestrian (sidewalk) experience more than the “sight-obscuring fence” would. The low screens also allow for “eyes-on-the-street” from the property. B.Overlay Zones Per Pre-Application Review, the building complies with all overlay zone requirements (part 18.3). C.Site Development and Design Standards (Chapter 18.4.2) Purpose – a.enhancement via promoting alternative modes of transportation, b.provision of safe and comfortable business environment – “eyes on the street” c.reduce dependence on automobile – conserve energy, reduce congestion d.support resource conservation and renewable energy source development e.high quality development that makes a positive contribution to streetscape Les Schwab Tire Centers are located throughout the region and the organization strives to develop facilities that contribute positively to the streetscapes where they strives to develop facilities that contribute positively to the streetscapes are located. Les Schwab is sensitive to local “sense of place” and respects specific local “sense of place” andlocal “sense of place” andlocal “sense of place” andspecific respect respects local “sense of place” and respect design constraints, criteria and opportunities, even as they work to present a design constraints, criteria and opportunities, even as they work to present a recognizable “Les Schwab” identity through the designs of their facilities. The nature of thetire center operation – the need to accommodate and service vehicles – may Total Page Number: 67 sometimes seemingly conflict withobjectives related to streetscape enhancement for pedestrian traffic and reducing automobile trips, but the company attempts in their designs to make positive contributions to the local environment within the operational framework. Responses to criteria presented in AMC Part 18.4.2.040 Site Development Standards – Non-Residential Development: A.Purpose and Intent. Commercial and employment developments should have a positive impact upon the streetscape. Given the nature of Les Schwab Tire Center’s business, the company approaches this project with the intent of “having a positive impact” on the adjacent streetscapes. How this is achieved is presented in following responses. B.Basic Site Review Standards. 1. a.Buildings shall have their primary orientation toward the street and not a parking area. Automobile circulation or off-street parking is not allowed between the building and the street. Parking areas shall be located behind buildings, or to one side. The existing Les Schwab Tire Center is oriented toward Ashland Street. Due to the nature of the facility, the customer-focused vehicle servicing operation is oriented toward the street. This includes showroom and service bays. The facility celebrates the vehicle servicing operation. Naturally, almost all customers arrive by car, or other motorized transport. Having parking and a driveway between the street and the building is critical to the operation. Putting these elements “on display” is equivalent to other businesses presenting their storefronts to the street. The Les Schwab Tire Center is “of the road”, not merely next to it like most buildings are. b.A building façade or multiple building facades shall occupy a large majority of a project’s street frontage… As described above, the nature of a Les Schwab Tire Center is different from a “standard building” as presented in Figure 18.4.2.040.B.6. Ease of vehicular access to the facility and through the site is critical to its operational success. Parking spaces near Service Bays is also critical. Furthermore, it is important to remember that the Tire Center is an existing structure. Efforts to re-position the building on the site present significant hardship on the owner. The proposed design proposes significant Total Page Number: 68 modifications to visually connect the building interior (showroom) to the street by eliminating the canopy and service bays underneath. While not physically moving the space toward the street, the visual presence is anticipated to be improved by the new clear articulation of the entry tower on the façade. c.Building entrances shall be oriented toward the street and shall be accessed from a public sidewalk. The building entrance remains oriented toward Ashland Street and has been enhanced and made more obvious from the street by the development of a tower element that marks the (pedestrian) entry vestibule. A accessible ramp is planned to convey pedestrians from the property corner to the building entry, and also works to open up the view from the corner to the entry tower. d.Building entrances shall be oriented toward the street and shall be accessed from a public sidewalk. See response to item c, above. While the building entry is located further from the ROW than 20 feet, it will be prominent and is designed to be clearly visible, functional, and will be open to the public during all business hours. e.Where a building is located on a corner lot, its entrances shall be oriented toward the higher order street or to the lot corner at the intersection of the streets. This criterion is met. As stated above, the primary orientation of the building entry is toward Ashland Street. The accessible route from the intersection of Ashland Street and Tolman Creek Road strengthens the connection from the corner. f.Public sidewalks. This criterion is met. g.The standards “a” through “d”, above, may be waived if the building is not accessed by pedestrians, such as warehouses and industrial buildings without attached offices, and automotive service stations. The Les Schwab Tire Center, while not an “automotive service station” according to the definition in Part 18.6.1.030, is similar in terms of its relationship to vehicular movement to and through the site. It is also true to say that the facility will only minimally be accessed by pedestrians. Total Page Number: 69 2.Streetscape. Street trees are established along the two street frontages. Street trees will be replaced if the execution of the proposed design makes it necessary to remove existing trees. 3.Landscaping a.Landscape areas at least ten feet in width shall buffer buildings from adjacent streets,… Landscaping along Ashland Street frontage is greater than 10’ wide (approximately 12’ wide). Along Tolman Creek Road the existing buffer is approximately 6’ wide. The proposed design expands the depth of the buffer near the corner where the accessible pedestrian route from sidewalk elevation to building elevation is planned. The ramp/landscape area occupies a 30’ x 30’ square - half landscaping, and half walkway. This30’ deep development at the corner is intended to balance the narrower width to the south along Tolman Creek Road. b.Landscaping and recycle/refuse disposal areas shall be provided pursuant to chapter. This criterion shall be met. 4.Designated Creek Protection.This criterion does not apply. This criterion shall be met. 6.Expansion of Existing Sites and Buildings. The project represents a 2,921 sf increase in indoor area, but an overall 779 sf reduction in area under roof. For the proposed development, applying f the concept of “proportionality” is confusing in terms building area. One could argue that 2,921 sf / 8,790 sf (current indoor area) = a 33% expansion, so 33% of the site should be brought into compliance with applicable design standards. It could also be argued that the proposal reduces the building area by approximately 5%, so no increase (a reduction?) in site area being brought into compliance with applicable standards should be required. Clearly another means of determining what is a proportional improvement in compliance with applicable site design standards is needed. How to do this objectively may be difficult. Total Page Number: 70 C.Detailed Site Review Standards. 1. a. The Les Schwab Tire Center property includes a steep-sloped “natural drainage- way” area along Hamilton Creek on the east side of the property, whichwe believe should be removed from consideration when performing the FAR calculation, as presented below. With the 2004 Alignment Center project, a “Shadow Plan” was accepted that demonstrated where/how on the site development could be intensified in the future. If the calculation below is accepted, and the basis for setting the FAR is 89,267 sf, then the total building area required to meet the 0.50 FAR is 44,634 sf. If the LSTC occupies 15,711 sf, this leaves 28,923 sf of building area needed to meet the 0.50 FAR. A three- story building with a 10,000+ sf footprint can be accommodated along the Ashland Street frontage at the northeastern corner of the developable portion of the property as illustrated in the attached shadow plan. Project description: Site Area – 118,456 sf (2.7 acres) Unbuildable Site Area – 29,189 sf Usable Site Area 89,267 sf Existing “space under roof” – Tire Center Building - 12,490 sf (8,790 sf indoors / 3,700 sf outdoors) Alignment Center Building - 4,000 sf Total - 16,490 sf = 18.5% coverage of buildable area Proposed “space under roof” – Tire Center Building - 11,711 sf (all indoors) Plazas / Pedestrian Areas - 900 sf Alignment Center Building - 4,000sf Total - 16,611 sf = 18.6% lot coverage of buildable area Potential 3-story Building - 30,000 sf Total - 46,611 sf = 52.2% lot coverage of buildable area Total Page Number: 71 b.Building frontages greater than 100 feet in length shall have offsets, jogs, or have other distinctive changes in the building façade. The proposed Ashland Street façade integrates two offsets along its 146’ length. Working from the west (Tolman Creek Road) end, the 60’ long Showroom façade is broken in the center with a tower marking the primary customer entry to the retail / lounge area. This element comes forward by a foot (1’) and projects upward more than five (5) feet. East of the Showroom is the former Breezeway. The proposed design encloses this 36’ wide Service Bay space and offsets the volume toward the street by two feet (2’). The roof line of this area also bumps up approximately three feet (3’) above the neighboring volumes on either side. Moving east are two more Service Bays and a shop space. This 50’ long portion of the building sits two feet (2’) back from the neighboring volume to the west. We believe the criteria is met by the design. c.Any wall that is within 30 feet of the street, plaza, or other public or common open space shall contain at least 20 percent of the wall area facing the street in display areas, windows, or doorways. This criterion is met. d.Buildings shall incorporate lighting and changes in mass, surface or finish to give emphasis to entrances. This criterion is met. e.Infill or buildings, adjacent to public sidewalks, in existing parking lots is encouraged and desirable. With the infill of the existing Breezeway, we believe this criterion is met. f.Buildings shall incorporate arcades, roofs, alcoves, porticoes, and awnings that protect pedestrians from the rain and sun. Shallow awnings are provided above the Showroom windows. We believe the criteria is met by the provision of this element. 2.Streetscape a.Hardscape (paving material) shall be utilized to designate “people” areas. With the development of the plaza and pedestrian ramp from the corner, we believe this criterion is met. Total Page Number: 72 b.A building shall be set back not more than five feet from a public sidewalk unless the area is used for pedestrian activities such as plazas or outside eating areas, or for a required public utility easement. The existing Les Schwab Tire Center is set back approximately 50’ from Ashland Street. Due to the nature of the facility, the customer-focused vehicle servicing operation is oriented toward the street and requires space for vehicular movement between the building and the street. The facility celebrates the vehicle servicing operation by presenting it to the street. Naturally, almost all customers arrive by car, or other motorized transport. Having parking and a driveway between the street and the building is critical to the operation. Putting these elements “on display” is equivalent to other businesses presenting their storefronts to the street. The Les Schwab Tire Center is “of the road”, not merely next to it like most buildings are. The future development shown on the shadow plan is within five feet of the sidewalk. 3.Buffering and Screening. a.Landscape buffers and screening shall be located between incompatible uses on an adjacent lot. This criterion does not apply. b.Parking lots shall be buffered from the main street, cross streets, and screened from residentially zoned land. Due to the nature of the Les Schwab Tire Center facility, the customer-focused vehicle servicing operation is oriented toward the street. This includes showroom and service bays. The facility celebrates the vehicle servicing operation. Naturally, almost all customers arrive by car, or other motorized transport. Having parking and a driveway between the street and the building is critical to the operation. Putting these elements “on display” is equivalent to other businesses presenting their storefronts to the street. In deference to the parking lot buffering criterion, low (two foot high) intermittent perforated metal screening devices are proposed to screen parking from Ashland Street. The site sits up from the street at least two feet along its entire Ashland Street frontage, so the low screens will effectively provide a four-foot-high buffer element. 4. Building Materials a. Buildings shall include changes in relief such as cornices, bases, fenestration, and Total Page Number: 73 This criterion is met. b. Bright or neon paint colors used extensively to attract attention to the building or use are prohibited. This criterion is met. D. than 100 feet of building frontage) 1. a.Developments shall divide large building masses into heights and sizes that relate to human scale by incorporating changes in building masses or direction, sheltering roofs, a distinct pattern of divisions on surfaces, windows, trees, and small-scale lighting. As described earlier, the building mass is well broken down and this criterion is met. b. of existing buildings in the Detail Site Review overlay shall conform to the following standards: ….. This criterion is met. c.Inside the Downtown Design Standards overlay, ….. This criterion does not apply. 2.Detail Site Review Plaza Space Standards a. gross floor area, except for the fourth gross floor area. Per the principle of “proportionality” this criterion is met by the development of the accessible pedestrian plaza and way at the northwest property corner. b.Within the C-1-D zone, or Downtown Design Standards overlay, no plaza space shall be required. This criterion does not apply. c. A plaza space shall incorporate at least four of the following elements: Total Page Number: 74 i.Sitting Space – included in the plaza. Seating shall be a minimum of 16 inches in height and 30 inches in width. Ledge benches shall have a minimum depth of 30 inches. ii. A mixture of areas that provide both sunlight and shade. iii.Protection from wind by screens and buildings. iv. Trees – provided in proportion to the space at a minimum of one tree per v. Water features or public art. vi. Criterion shall be met by applying items i.-iv. 3.Transit Amenities.Transit amenities, bus shelters, pullouts, and designated bike lanes shall be required in accordance with the Ashland Transportation Plan and guidelines established by the Rogue Valley Transportation District. Criterion shall be met as required. E.City Facilities The proposal complies with all of the applicable standards in section 18.4.6 Public Facilities. Capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, electricity, urban storm drainage, paved access to and throughout the property, and transportation access can and will be provided to the property. A.Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards Per the review above, most City of Ashland Site Development and Design Standards have been met. As was stated previously, when one considers the nature of the Tire Center operation, criteria related to eliminating parking between building and street conflict with servicing motorized vehicles (mostly automobiles). For the Tire Center operation, the cars’ proximity to the service bays is functionally critical. It is also commercially critical, as it advertises the business to other passing drivers who will at some point need tire or alignment servicing for their vehicles. Parking spaces are not just for people who stop and shop at the Les Schwab Tire Center. Sometimes the parking requirement is doubled by folks dropping off their cars and at the same time being picked up by a friend or relativein a second vehicle. It is also sometimes the case that customers leave their cars all day, so parling spaces are needed for vehicles whose drivers aren’t on the premises. It is reasonable to consider that for every service bay (five are proposed – same as current number) one parking space nearby is needed for Total Page Number: 75 vehicle staging. These staging spaces should be consideredin addition to the number calculated using the Parking Ratios identified in Table 18.4.3.040. Parking Calculations: Retail Sales and Services – General: 1 space/350sf floor area Warehouse – 1 space/1000sf of gross floor area, or 1 space/2 employees (whichever is less) plus 1 space per company vehicle. Office space – General: 1 space/500sf floor area Retail Sales and Services in Tire Center – 5341 sf = 15.26 parking spaces Retail Sales and Services in Alignment Center – 4000 sf = 11.43 parking spaces Warehouse – 5646 sf = 5.64 parking spaces One Company Vehicle – 1 parking space Office – 360 sf = 1 parking space Total34.33 parking spaces 34.33 x 1.10 = 37.76 + 5 (per logic presented above) = 42.76 = 43 parking spaces Existing – 36 spaces Proposed – 41 spaces Total Page Number: 76 MBOE!VTF!TVCNJUUBM!EPDVNFOUBUJPO!.!12.15.34!.!FYIJCJU!2 Total Page Number: 77 12015034 01/04/23 MBOE!VTF!TVCNJUUBM!EPDVNFOUBUJPO!.!12.15.34!.!FYIJCJU!3 Total Page Number: 78 OPO.CVJMEBCMF TJUF!BSFB MBOE!VTF!TVCNJUUBM!EPDVNFOUBUJPO!.!12.15.34!. FYIJCJU!4!.!WJFX!LFZ!TJUF!QMBO Total Page Number: 79 WJFX!2 MFT!TDIXBC!UJSF!DFOUFS! 3419!BTIMBOE!TUSFFU MBOE!VTF!TVCNJUUBM!EPDVNFOUBUJPO!.!12.15.34!.!FYIJCJU!4!.!WJFXT Total Page Number: 80 3(!IJHI!TDSFFOJOH!FMFNFOU )IFEHF!PS!QFSGPSBUFE!NFUBM QBOFM*!.!DPOUJOVPVT!BMPOH BTIMBOE!TUSFFU!GSPOUBHF XJUI!CSFBL!DPSSFTQPOEJOH!UP TIPXSPPN!0!FOUSZ!GSPOUBHF WJFX!3 MFT!TDIXBC!UJSF!DFOUFS! 3419!BTIMBOE!TUSFFU MBOE!VTF!TVCNJUUBM!EPDVNFOUBUJPO!.!12.15.34!.!FYIJCJU!4!.!WJFXT Total Page Number: 81 3(!IJHI!TDSFFOJOH!FMFNFOU )IFEHF!PS!QFSGPSBUFE!NFUBM QBOFM*!.!DPOUJOVPVT!BMPOH BTIMBOE!TUSFFU!GSPOUBHF XJUI!CSFBL!DPSSFTQPOEJOH!UP TIPXSPPN!0!FOUSZ!GSPOUBHF WJFX!4 MFT!TDIXBC!UJSF!DFOUFS! 3419!BTIMBOE!TUSFFU MBOE!VTF!TVCNJUUBM!EPDVNFOUBUJPO!.!12.15.34!.!FYIJCJU!4!.!WJFXT Total Page Number: 82 WJFX!5 MFT!TDIXBC!UJSF!DFOUFS! 3419!BTIMBOE!TUSFFU MBOE!VTF!TVCNJUUBM!EPDVNFOUBUJPO!.!12.15.34!.!FYIJCJU!4!.!WJFXT Total Page Number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otal Page Number: 84 BDDFTTJCMF!SBNQ!GSPN 3(!IJHI!TDSFFOJOH!FMFNFOU!)IFEHF!PS QMB\[B!BU!TUSFFU!TJEFXBML QFSGPSBUFE!NFUBM!QBOFM*!.!DPOUJOVPVT FMFWBUJPO!BU!DPSOFS!UP BMPOH!BTIMBOE!TUSFFU!GSPOUBHF!XJUI CVJMEJOH!BOE!QBSLJOH!BSFB CSFBL!DPSSFTQPOEJOH!UP!TIPXSPPN!0 FMFWBUJPO/ FOUSZ!GSPOUBHF WJFX!7 MFT!TDIXBC!UJSF!DFOUFS! 3419!BTIMBOE!TUSFFU MBOE!VTF!TVCNJUUBM!EPDVNFOUBUJPO!.!12.15.34!.!FYIJCJU!4!.!WJFXT Total Page Number: 85 3(!IJHI!TDSFFOJOH!FMFNFOU!)IFEHF!PS QFSGPSBUFE!NFUBM!QBOFM*!.!DPOUJOVPVT BMPOH!BTIMBOE!TUSFFU!GSPOUBHF!XJUI CSFBL!DPSSFTQPOEJOH!UP!TIPXSPPN!0 FOUSZ!GSPOUBHF WJFX!8 MFT!TDIXBC!UJSF!DFOUFS! 3419!BTIMBOE!TUSFFU MBOE!VTF!TVCNJUUBM!EPDVNFOUBUJPO!.!12.15.34!.!FYIJCJU!4!.!WJFXT Total Page Number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otal Page Number: 87 9#!QSPKFDUJOH!FZFCSPX!BCPWF TIPXSPPN!FOUSZ!QSPKFDUT!GPSXBSE TUPSFGSPOU!HMB\[JOH-!UZQJDBM BOE!VQ!GSPN!QSJNBSZ!GBDF!PG BU!BTIMBOE!TUSFFU!FMFWBUJPO FMFWBUJPO/!UIJT!FMFNFOU!JT!NBEF!IJHIMZ WJTJCMF!GSPN!UIF!DPSOFS!BOE!TUSFFU CZ!UIF!DSFBUJPO!PG!UIF!QFEFTUSJBO QMB\[B!BOE!BDDFTTJCMF!SBNQ 3(.1#!QSPKFDUJOH FZFCSPX!BCPWF!FOUSZ QMB\[B!0!TJEFXBML!BSFB JO!GSPOU!PG TIPXSPPN!0!FOUSZ WJFX!: MFT!TDIXBC!UJSF!DFOUFS! 3419!BTIMBOE!TUSFFU MBOE!VTF!TVCNJUUBM!EPDVNFOUBUJPO!.!12.15.34!.!FYIJCJU!4!.!WJFXT Total Page Number: 88 QMB\[B!BU!BTIMBOE!TUSFFU!UPMNBO!DSFFL!SPBE 3(!IJHI!TDSFFOJOH!FMFNFOU!)IFEHF JOUFSTFDUJPO/!DPOGJHVSBUJPO!JT!MBSHF PS!QFSGPSBUFE!NFUBM!QBOFM*!. FOPVHI!UP!BMMPX!BDDFTT!BSPVOE!FYJTUJOH DPOUJOVPVT!BMPOH!BTIMBOE VUJMJUZ!JOGSBTUSVDUVSF!)QPMF!BOE!DBCMFT*/ TUSFFU!GSPOUBHF!XJUI!CSFBL QMB\[B!JT!BU!CPUUPN!PG!BDDFTTJCMF!SBNQ!UP DPSSFTQPOEJOH!UP!TIPXSPPN!0 CVJMEJOH!BOE!QBSLJOH!BSFB!FMFWBUJPO/ FOUSZ!GSPOUBHF WJFX!21 MFT!TDIXBC!UJSF!DFOUFS! 3419!BTIMBOE!TUSFFU MBOE!VTF!TVCNJUUBM!EPDVNFOUBUJPO!.!12.15.34!.!FYIJCJU!4!.!WJFXT Total Page Number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otal Page Number: 90 3 211(.1# 35(.1# BDDFTTJCMF QPUFOUJBM SPVUF!GSPN S!P!X GVUVSF 35(.1# 3 24 UISFF.TUPSZ QBSLJOH!DPVOU !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!14 41-111!TG !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!2: 22-722!TG!UJSF!DFOUFS CVJMEJOH !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!16 GPPUQSJOU!PG 25 UPUBM52 QSPQPTFE!SFOPWBUJPO GVUVSF!QBSLJOH : 256 3479 8 OPO.CVJMEBCMF TJUF!BSFB 2367 458 85(.1# : 92122232425 48(.1# 48(.1# VTBCMF!TJUF!BSFB!JT!=!:1-111!TG/! UP!NFFU!UIF!NBOEBUFE!G!B!S!!PG 1/6-!UIF!EFWFMPQNFOU!PG!56-111 TG!PG!DPOTUSVDUFE!GMPPS TQBDF!JT!EFNPOTUSBUFE!UP!CF 5-431!TG!BMJHONFOU QPTTJCMF!PO!UIF!TJUF/ DFOUFS PROPOSED SITE PLAN LES SCHWAB - 2308 ASHLAND ST 09.08.2017 2301603133 MBOE!VTF!TVCNJUUBM!EPDVNFOUBUJPO!.!12.15.34!.!FYIJCJU!5!.!TIBEPX!QMBO Total Page Number: 91 MBOE!VTF!TVCNJUUBM!EPDVNFOUBUJPO!.!12.15.34!.!FYIJCJU!6!.!JODMVEFE!GPS!SFGFSFODF Total Page Number: 92 MBOE!VTF!TVCNJUUBM!EPDVNFOUBUJPO!.!12.15.34!.!FYIJCJU!6!.!JODMVEFE!GPS!SFGFSFODF Total Page Number: 93 MBOE!VTF!TVCNJUUBM!EPDVNFOUBUJPO!.!12.15.34!.!FYIJCJU!6!.!JODMVEFE!GPS!SFGFSFODF Total Page Number: 94 MBOE!VTF!TVCNJUUBM!EPDVNFOUBUJPO!.!12.15.34!.!FYIJCJU!6!.!JODMVEFE!GPS!SFGFSFODF Total Page Number: 95 MBOE!VTF!TVCNJUUBM!EPDVNFOUBUJPO!.!12.15.34!.!FYIJCJU!6!.!JODMVEFE!GPS!SFGFSFODF Total Page Number: 96 MBOE!VTF!TVCNJUUBM!EPDVNFOUBUJPO!.!12.15.34!.!FYIJCJU!6!.!JODMVEFE!GPS!SFGFSFODF Total Page Number: 97 MBOE!VTF!TVCNJUUBM!EPDVNFOUBUJPO!.!12.15.34!.!FYIJCJU!6!.!JODMVEFE!GPS!SFGFSFODF Total Page Number: 98 MBOE!VTF!TVCNJUUBM!EPDVNFOUBUJPO!.!12.15.34!.!FYIJCJU!6!.!JODMVEFE!GPS!SFGFSFODF Total Page Number: 99 !QBSLJOH !!!!!DPVOU !!!!!!!!!!!!!16 !!!!!!!!!!!!!2: !!!!!!!!!!!!!16 25 UPUBM54 CVMMQFO 23678 45 VO.CVJMEBCMF!BSFB 9: 2122232425 MBOE!VTF!TVCNJUUBM!EPDVNFOUBUJPO!.!12.15.34!.!FYIJCJU!6!.!JODMVEFE!GPS!SFGFSFODF Total Page Number: 100 MBOE!VTF!TVCNJUUBM!EPDVNFOUBUJPO!.!12.15.34!.!FYIJCJU!6!.!JODMVEFE!GPS!SFGFSFODF Total Page Number: 101 MBOE!VTF!TVCNJUUBM!EPDVNFOUBUJPO!.!12.15.34!.!FYIJCJU!6!.!JODMVEFE!GPS!SFGFSFODF Total Page Number: 102 !UPMNBO!DSFFL!SPBE MBOE!VTF!TVCNJUUBM!EPDVNFOUBUJPO!.!12.15.34!.!FYIJCJU!6!.!JODMVEFE!GPS!SFGFSFODF Total Page Number: 103