HomeMy WebLinkAboutTransportation Packet August 2021Note: Anyone wishing to speak at any Transportation 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.
AASSHHLLAANNDD TTRRAANNSSPPOORRTTAATTIIOONN CCOOMMMMIISSSSIIOONN AAuugguusstt 1199,, 22002211 AGENDA I. CALL TO ORDER: 6:00 PM, Meeting held virtually via Zoom
II.ANNOUNCEMENTS
III.CONSENT AGENDAA. Approval of Minutes: July 15, 2021
IV.PUBLIC FORUM (6:05-6:20)A. Public Forum-if you wish to speak during public forum please register with Scott.fleury@ashland.or.us by 10am August 18th.
B. If you wish to provide public comment or discuss an agenda item please contact Scott.fleury@ashland.or.us by August 18th
by 10am to register to participate. Written comments can also be submitted in the same time frame. C. If you are interested in watching the meeting via Zoom please utilize the following link: https://zoom.us/j/91200648540
V. CRASH REPORT (6:20-6:30)
VI.NEW BUSINESSA. 192 North Mountain Annexation (6:30-7:30, action required, discuss development annexation and make recommendationsto Planning) B. Vision Zero Action Plan (7:30-7:45, action required, discuss and work on development of the Vision Zero Action Plan)
VII.OLD BUSINESSA. Traffic Calming Program (7:45-8:00, action required discuss current status of Traffic Calming Program and potentialupdates)
VIII.TASK LIST (If time allows)A. Discuss current action item list
IX. FOLLOW UP ITEMSA. None
X. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS (If time allows) A. North Mountain Traffic Calming Application
XI.COMMISSION OPEN DISCUSSION (If time allows)
XII.FUTURE AGENDA TOPICSA. Planning Department PresentationB. Residential Parking ProgramC. Crosswalk Policy
XIII.ADJOURNMENT: 8:00 PM
Next Meeting Date: September 16, 2021 Meeting
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the Public Works Office at 488-5587 (TTY phone number 1 800 735 2900). Notification 48 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).
Transportation Commission
Contact List as of February 2021
Name Title Telephone Mailing Address Email Address Expiration of Term
Mark Brouillard Commissioner 206-661-7085 159 Helman St mtbrouillard@msn.com 4/30/2023
Joe Graf Commissioner 541-488-8429 1160 Fern St. jlgtrans15@gmail.com 4/30/2024
Corinne Vièville Commissioner 541-488-9300 or541-944-9600 805 Glendale Ave. corinne@mind.net 4/30/2022
Derrick Claypool-Barnes Commissioner 503-482-9271 1361 Quincy St #6F dorkforest@gmail.com 4/30/2024
Linda Peterson Adams Commissioner 541-554-1544 642 Oak St gardengriotashland@gmail.com 4/30/2022
Katharine Danner Commissioner 541-482-2302 PO Box 628 ksdashland@gmail.com 4/30/2022
Vacant Commissioner
Non-Voting Ex Officio Membership
Scott Fleury Director, Public Works 541-488-5587 20 E. Main Street scott.fleury@ashland.or.us
Paula Hyatt Council Liaison 20 E. Main Street Paula.Hyatt@council.ashland.or.us
Brandon Goldman Planning Department 541- 488-5305 20 E. Main Street goldmanb@ashland.or.us
Steve MacLennan Police Department 541- 552-2433 20 E. Main Street maclenns@ashland.or.us
Vacant SOU Liaison 541-552-8328 1250 Siskiyou Blvd
Dan Dorrell, PE ODOT 541- 774-6354 100 Antelope Rd WC 97503 Dan.w.dorrell@odot.state.or.us
Edem Gómez RVTD 541-608-2411 3200 Crater Lake Av 97504 egomez@rvtd.org
Jenna Stanke ODOT 541- 774-5925 100 Antelope Rd WC 97503 Jenna.MARMON@odot.state.or.us
David Wolske Airport Commission david@davidwolske.com
Vacant Ashland Parks
Vacant Ashland Schools
Staff Support
Scott Fleury Public Works Director 541-488-5587 20 E. Main Street Scott.fleury@ashland.or.us
Karl Johnson Associate Engineer 541-552-2415 20 E. Main Street johnsonk@ashland.or.us
ASHLAND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES July 15, 2021
Transportation Commission July 15, 2021 Page 1 of 4
CALL TO ORDER: 6:03pm Commissioners Present: Mark Brouillard, Joe Graf, Corinne Vièville, Linda Peterson Adams, Katharine Danner, and Derrick Claypool-Barnes Commissioners Not Present Council Liaison Present: Paula Hyatt Staff Present: Scott Fleury Guests Present: None
ANNOUNCEMENTS – Chair Peterson-Adams announces that on July 14th fire danger was elevated to extreme. Comprehensive information regarding fire resources can be found at fireadaptedashland.org.
CONSENT AGENDA Approval of Minutes June 24, 2021 Danner motions to approve minutes with stated corrections, Vièville seconds. Commissioners approve minutes as amended. All ayes. Minutes approved.
PUBLIC FORUM None
CRASH REPORT: Officer MacLennan presents crash report. Sixteen crashes in the past month with no bicycle accidents and one pedestrian accident. The pedestrian accident was legally crossing when vehicle one stopped and vehicle two rear-ended vehicle one. Commissioner Brouillard asks about DUI timing in general. Officer MacLennan explains that DUI’s occur at all times during the day.
NEW BUSINESS A. Oregon Department of Transportation Intergovernmental Agreement “Ashland ADA Improvements” – Staff details the components of the Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) for crosswalk improvements within the North Main Street corridor. ODOT is in the process of engineering and constructing ADA ramp improvements under their jurisdiction as required by a legal settlement. Staff has been working with ODOT to have crosswalk improvements added to their ADA ramp improvement project.
ODOT is willing to include the crosswalk improvements at Nursery Street and Van Ness Street as part of their overall project, with the crosswalk improvements at Van Ness Street including Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs). The crosswalk improvements including the RRFB has been on the radar of the Transportation Commission for multiple years after the initial corridor analysis was completed by a consultant traffic engineering determining the safest locations to cross outside of the Maple Street and Laurel Street signalized intersections. The improvements are defined in the City’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Staff originally estimated the improvements at $75,000 and an updated estimate by ODOT has the improvements at $95,000. The IGA specifies the City is to cover the cost of the crosswalk/flashing beacon improvement and staff is looking for a recommendation from the group to the City Council to authorize the IGA and cover the cost of the improvements. Staff believes the additional cost potential could be covered by Street Fund ending fund balance. ODOT will be managing all the phases of the project instead of City staff developing the CIP project, which provides a more efficient process overall, including State Traffic Engineer approvals.
ASHLAND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES July 15, 2021
Transportation Commission July 15, 2021 Page 2 of 4
The IGA also details the locations of all ramps along ODOTs jurisdiction within town and that the City is responsible for any and all utility re-locates of City utilities that are in conflict with the proposed work. Vièville asks about the projects schedule and if the crosswalks could be completed first. Staff explains the contract is expected to be released this fall with the contractor awarded the contract establishing the final construction schedule. Staff can request that the Ashland ramps be expedited, but the contractor will have the final say.
Danner motions to recommend City Council approve the IGA with ODOT for the ramp and crosswalk improvements. Vièville seconds.
All Ayes, Motion Carries.
Staff explains next steps will be to get the final IGA from ODOT and schedule the item to be placed on a Council agenda.
Old Business- A. Vision Zero Program and Resolution - Chair Peterson-Adams asks if the group has any further adjustments to the draft resolution. Chair Peterson-Adams asks for a motion to send the resolution forward to City Council.
Danner motions to recommend City Council approve the Vision Zero Resolution. Graf seconds.
All Ayes, Motion Carries.
Chair Peterson-Adams asks if anyone has comments on the draft Council staff report requesting approval of the Vision Zero Resolution. Staff explains this is the first rough draft to be refined moving forward. Staff to work with the Chair on finalizing the staff report and scheduling the Council presentation. Chair Peterson-Adams asks if the resolution will be scheduled at the same meeting as the request to approve the Transportation System Plan Update contract with Kittelson Associates. Staff is trying to coordinate both approvals occurring at the same meeting as the TSP update and the Vision Zero program will go hand in hand moving forward.
Chair Peterson-Adams asks group if the other Commissions should be noticed informing them the resolution will be going forward to Council for approval. Commission agrees the Chair should connect with Chairs of other Commissions regarding the Vision Zero Resolution and action plan, including the Planning Commission. Council Liaison Hyatt will help facilitate a connection to the Planning Commission as she is also their Council Liaison. Graf mentions the Commission’s code change a few years back adding language that the Transportation Commission advises the Planning Commission on transportation related items. The only formal requirement for Transportation Commission participation in a land use action is associated with Type III actions and the concept was to figure out a mechanism where the Transportation Commission could provide more input on other land use actions that have significant transportation elements. This would be an extension of what Public Works already does internally during the pre-application process with respect to commenting on development proposals prior to a land use action or hearing.
B. Transportation System Plan Scope Review – Commission discusses updated scope of services and Council staff report. Brouillard questions the definition of “streets” in the Council goals section of the staff report. Brouillard is concerned this might only mean the pavement section and not the whole street. Staff explains in their interpretation it means the complete street including sidewalk, parkrow, curb, gutter and
ASHLAND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES July 15, 2021
Transportation Commission July 15, 2021 Page 3 of 4
pavement section. The Council goals were generated in 2019 and staff would have to go back and review to determine Council’s vision at the time. Staff recommends adding an asterisk to the staff report that states, the Transportation Commission and Public Works view the definition on streets as the complete street section.
Graf motions to recommend the Ashland City Council approve a professional services contract with Kittelson Associates for the Transportation System Plan Update. Danner seconds.
All Ayes, Motion Carries.
TASK LIST A. Discuss current action item list- The Commission discusses the action item list. The CIP recommendation is complete and will be removed from the task list. Staff states Public Works will be working with the Council and developing the CIP in the off year of the budget biennium and thus the Transportation Commission will be working through the recommendation process again next summer.
Main Street truck parking-Staff informs Commission that ODOT is looking at signalizing that intersection which will manage truck parking in the area to a certain degree as they will not be allowed to park within the signalized intersection.
The group discusses the parking prohibition on A Street and First Street that was enacted last year and review of parking restrictions at a future meeting along with policy standards for when decisions are made. Discussion also includes bicycle safety improvements in the railroad district. The Commission is hopeful that major issues can be discussed and fully developed in the TSP update and that a high level of public input and participation will go a long way to validate the document and the process.
FOLLOW UP ITEMS A. None
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS- A. Staff updates Commission on new bike racks installed in downtown. New racks were installed where the old Rogue Bike Share station was installed opposite the Plaza and near the bus stop and two racks were installed near the bridge to the playground at Lithia Park. Commissioner Brouillard questions the potential of installation of a bike corral system in downtown and associated cost. Staff explains bike corral systems can range in cost of a thousand to a few thousand dollars. A system cannot be installed in a parking space downtown as it is ODOT right of way and not allowed.
COMMISSION OPEN DISCUSSION- None
FUTURE AGENDA TOPICS A. Residential Parking Program B. Street User Fee/Gas Tax (budget/TSP) C. Crosswalk Policy
ASHLAND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES July 15, 2021
Transportation Commission July 15, 2021 Page 4 of 4
ADJOURNMENT: @ 7:56pm
Respectfully submitted, Scott Fleury PE, Public Works Director **Full Video Available by Request**
From:City of Ashland, Oregon
To:Scott Fleury; Taina Glick
Subject:Transportation Commission Contact Form Submitted
Date:Wednesday, August 04, 2021 4:01:11 PM
[EXTERNAL SENDER]
*** FORM FIELD DATA***
Full Name: Rebecca EscobarPhone: 4086440066
Email: rebecca.l.escobar@gmail.comSubject: Cross walk
Message: Hello, I am writing to formally request a crosswalk on Pinecrest Terracemarking where the T.I.D. Crosses between 1435 Pinecrest Ter and 1455 Pinecrest Ter.The T.I.D. is one of the few flat trails open to pedestrians, and many elderly and childrentake advantage of its easy accessibility. There is also a turn close to the desired crosswalk section that reduces visibility to cars going down the hill while picking up speed. Ifeel that one of the aspects that makes Ashland particularly desirable is the ability tosafely enjoy the amazing abundant trails and the ease of access for all abilities. This crosswalk would make the crossing safer for those that enjoy this trail.
Attachment 1 file: Attachment 2 file:
Attachment 3 file:
*** USER INFORMATION ***SubscriberID: -1
SubscriberUserName: SubscriberEmail:
RemoteAddress: 66.241.70.76RemoteHost: 66.241.70.76
RemoteUser:
June 2021 Accidents
Motor Vehicle (18)
Bike/Ped Involved (1)
Previous 2021 Accidents
Motor Vehicle (64)
Bike/Ped Involved (5)
Traffic AccidentsJune 2021
NO. OF ACCIDENTS: 19
Rep DATE TIME DAY LOCATION NO.
VEH
PED
INV.
BIKE
INV.INJ.DUII Cited Police
On Site
PROP
DAM.
HIT/
RUN
CITY
VEH.CAUSE - DRIVER ERROR
NR 1 8:15 Tue Tolman Creek Rd near Siskiyou
Blvd 2 N N N N N Y N N N Dv1 paused in traffic, waiting to make a
turn, when v2 ran into the back of v1. Minor
damage, no citation.
NR 2 14:37 Wed N Main St at the Plaza 2 N N N N N Y N N N Dv1 crashed into the rear of v2 in the Plaza
area. Information exchanged.
R 5 19:37 Sat E Main St at Sherman 2 N N N N Y Y Y Y N Dv1 sideswiped v1 which was waiting at a stop sign. Dv1 cited for hit and run.
NR 7 11:00 Mon Tolman Creek Rd near Grizzly Dr 2 N N N N N Y N N N Dv1 and 2 were waiting in construction traffic when dv2 began backing, and v2
backed into v1. Information exchanged.
NR 9 13:54 Wed Tolman Creek Rd near Ashland
St 2 N N N N N Y Y N N Dv2 sideswiped parked v1. Minor damage
only, information exchanged.
R 10 15:40 Thur N Main St near Glenn St 2 Y N N N N Y Y N N
Dv1 stopped behind another veh which had
stopped for a ped crossing the street, and
while paused, v2 rearended v1. Information exchanged.
R 12 1:43 Sat E Main St near Pioneer St 2 N N N Y Y Y Y N N
Dv1 attempted to merge into the right lane.
V2 was occupying the right lane, traveling about the same speed. Dv1 crashed into the side of v2, and was arrested for DUII
and Reckless Driving.
R 12 2:54 Sat Winburn Way near Nutley St 1 N N N N N Y N N N
Dv was sleeping in vehicle in a parking spot facing the creek. Driver accidentally shifted
veh out of park while sleeping, and it drifted
over the curb, down an embankment and
came to rest on a tree.
R 12 14:10 Sat Siskiyou Blvd near Tolman Creek
Rd 2 N N N N N Y Y N N
Dv2 did not stop at the stop sign, and
crashed into Dv1 who was turning left onto
Tolman Creek Road. Information exchanged.
MONTH: JUNE 2021
MOTOR VEHICLE CRASH SUMMARY
Rep DATE TIME DAY LOCATION NO.
VEH
PED
INV.
BIKE
INV.INJ.DUII Cited Police
On Site
PROP
DAM.
HIT/
RUN
CITY
VEH.CAUSE - DRIVER ERROR
R 14 18:00 Mon Ashland St at Tolman Creek Rd 2 N N N N N Y Y N N
Dv1 travelling west on Ashland St with a
green light was struck by v2. Dv2 made a left turn north on Tolman Creek Road on a
blinking yellow light causing the collision.
R 15 20:28 Tue Morton St near Siskiyou Blvd 2 N N N U N Y Y Y N Unknown driver crashed into parked vehicle
1 and left the area. No leads.
R 18 12:47 Fri Oak St near E Main St 2 N N N N Y Y Y N N
Dv1 was traveling on Oak St when v2
pulled out from a parking lot and crashed
into the side of v1. Dv2 cited for failure to
yield.
R 20 12:02 Sun Ashland St near Washington St 2 N N N N N Y Y N N
Dv1 was attempting to enter the median to
make a left turn when v2 tried to pass on
the left. the 2 vehicles side crashed. No
fault determined.
R 21 11:28 Mon Clay St at Siskiyou Blvd 2 N N N Y Y N Y Y N Driver struck parked vehicle and was
arrested for DUII, hit and run.
R 22 16:30 Tue Ashland St at Park St 2 N N P N N Y Y N N
Dv2 was eastbound on Ashland St when
Dv1 pulled out from Park St and crashed
into v2. Dv2 had possible injury, information
exchanged.
R 27 19:33 Sun Highway 66 at Applegate Wy 2 N N N N Y Y Y N N Dv1 pulled out from a side street to merge
onto Highway 66 and struck v2. Dv1 cited
for failure to obey traffic control device.
NR 28 15:30 Mon Washington St 2 N N U U N N Y Y N Dv1 called to report a hit and run to a
parked vehicle that occurred the day prior.
R 29 13:10 Tue E Main St near Pioneer St 2 N N N N N Y Y N N
Dv1 pulled over to park, and realizing she
was in a loading zone, pulled back into the
travel lane, impacting v2. Information
exchanged.
R 30 12:58 Wed Clover Lane at Ashland St 2 N N N N Y Y N N N Dv1 was stopped at intersection when
rearended by v2. Dv2 reported being
distracted. Dv2 cited for driving uninsured.
July 2021 Accidents
Motor Vehicle (17)
Bike/Ped Involved (2)
Previous 2021 Accidents
Motor Vehicle (82)
Bike/Ped Involved (6)
Traffic AccidentsJuly 2021
NO. OF ACCIDENTS: 19
Rep DATE TIME DAY LOCATION NO.
VEH
PED
INV.
BIKE
INV.INJ.DUII Cited Police
On Site
PROP
DAM.
HIT/
RUN
CITY
VEH.CAUSE - DRIVER ERROR
R 3 7:20 Sat Iowa St at California St 1 N N N N Y Y N N N Driver drifted off road and hit a utility pole causing minor damage, no injury. Driver was
cited for driving while suspended.
NR 5 19:26 Mon Private parking lot off Ashland St 1 N N U U N Y Y Y N Driver of moving van struck and damaged
overhang on a business and left the area.
Vehicle was not able to be located.
R 6 13:14 Tue Helman St near Central Av 2 N N N N N Y Y N N Dv1 was distracted and sideswiped a parked
car causing extensive damage. No citation, info
exchanged.
NR 6 17:15 Tue N Main St near Helman St 2 N N N N N Y N N N Dv2 was stopped for a red traffic light when v1 rearended v2. No injury, no citation, information
exchanged.
NR 7 19:11 Wed A St near N Pioneer 1 N N N Y Y Y Y N N Driver took a corner too fast, struck curb and totaled vehicle. Reported as DUII, and arrested, no further info.
R 8 13:12 Thr Lithia Wy near N Second St 2 N N P N N Y N N N Dv1 was stopped at a red light. Dv2 was behind v1 and rear ended v1. Information exchanged,
possible injury.
R 10 16:27 Sat Lithia Wy near E Main St 2 N N N N N Y Y N N Dv1 stopped in traffic and was rearended by
dv2, information exchanged.
R 12 18:20 Mon Ashland St near Clover Ln 2 N N N N N Y Y N N Dv1 attempted to make a U-turn causing
collision with V2. Dv1 referred for driver
evaluation.
R 15 14:37 Thr Oak St near E Main St 2 N N N N N Y Y N N
Dv1 was attempting to make a u-turn in the
middle of the street and impacted the driver
side of v2 which had just turned onto the street.
Dv1 warned about improper u-turn.
MONTH: JULY 2021
MOTOR VEHICLE CRASH SUMMARY
Rep DATE TIME DAY LOCATION NO.
VEH
PED
INV.
BIKE
INV.INJ.DUII Cited Police
On Site
PROP
DAM.
HIT/
RUN
CITY
VEH.CAUSE - DRIVER ERROR
R 19 15:33 Mon Siskiyou Blvd near Walker Av 2 N N P N N Y N N N
Dv1 was stopped at a red light at Walker Av
when rearended by v2. Dv2 reported just spacing out and running into v1. Info
exchanged, no citation.
R 19 18:11 Mon Siskiyou Blvd at Tolman Creek
Rd 2 N N P N N Y Y N N
Dv1 was northbound and in the intersection when v2 entered the intersection from the east
and struck the side of v1. Possibly minor injury
to dv1, no citation.
NR 19 21:30 Mon Third St near E Main St 2 N N N N N N N N N
Ov1 reported that v1 was struck while parked,
and a note was left by dv2. Dv2 reported that
the impact occurred when backing and information had been exchanged. Report only.
R 21 16:56 Wed Winburn Way at the Perozzi
Fountain 1 Y N Y N Y Y N N N
Pedestrian, a child, ran down the steps at the
fountain and out into the road. Driver struck
child head on. Child was transported to RRMC. Driver was cited for driving while suspended,
driving uninsured, and careless driving.
R 21 18:41 Wed Chestnut St at Wimer St 1 N N N N N Y Y N N V1 caught fire, driver attemted a uturn to park
on the curb and ran into shrubs, catching them
on fire. No injury, no citation.
R 22 12:15 Thr Sixth St near B St 2 N N N N N Y Y N N Dv2 opened or left open driver door of parked
v2 while getting into vehicle. While traveling
past, dv1 struck door. Information exchanged.
R 22 17:14 Thr Ashland St 1 N Y N N Y Y N N N
Driver of vehicle was exiting parking lot and struck bicyclist traveling against traffic either in
the bike lane or the sidewalk. Cyclist cited for
unsafe bicycle operation.
R 23 14:33 Fri Tolman Creek Rd 2 N N Y N Y Y Y N N
Dv2 was making a left turn from Ashland St onto NB Tolman Creek Rd on a green light
when v1 entered the intersection causing
collision. Dv1 cited for careless driving.
Rep DATE TIME DAY LOCATION NO.
VEH
PED
INV.
BIKE
INV.INJ.DUII Cited Police
On Site
PROP
DAM.
HIT/
RUN
CITY
VEH.CAUSE - DRIVER ERROR
R 26 11:01 Mon E Main St near Third St 2 N N N N N Y Y N N Dv1 was travelling on E Main St towards Lithia
Way when Dv2 pulled out of gas station lot and
collided with v1. Information exchanged.
R 30 14:57 Fri Lithia Way at N Pioneer 2 N N P N Y Y Y N N
Dv2 entered the intersection right after the light turned green, heading north. Dv1 failed to stop
at the light, and ran into the side of v2. Dv1 cite
for failure to obey traffic control device.
Memo
Date: August 11, 2021
From: Scott A. Fleury
To: Transportation Commission RE: 192 North Mountain Avenue Annexation
BACKGROUND: Before the Commission is a development and annexation proposal for the property located at 192
North Mountain Avenue. Planning staff have developed a packet of information for review and it
is attached.
Planning staff will also present critical development information to the Commission for discussion and the property developer will also be available for questions.
CONCLUSION:
Ashland Municipal Code requires the Transportation Commission provided comments on Type
III development proposals at the preapplication phase.
Memo
Date: August 11, 2021
From: Scott A. Fleury
To: Transportation Commission RE: Vision Zero Action Plan Development
BACKGROUND: The Transportation Commission over previous meetings has discussed and developed a Vision
Zero Resolution that will be brought before Council with a recommendation to approve. Part of
the resolution focuses on development of a Vision Zero Action Plan. Staff has scheduled the Vision Zero Resolution and Transportation System Plan Update on the Council look ahead for August 17, 2021.
The link below is for “Guidelines for an Effective Vision Zero Action Plan” to be used as a baseline reference for starting development of a comprehensive action plan.
Moving from Vision to Action
The Foundational Elements of a Vision Zero Action Plan include: 1. Robust Data Framework
2. Actionable Strategies3.Implementation4. Evaluation
Staff has also included a template format document with some basic information that can be
utilized as the starting point for plan development.
Links below are for other jurisdictions developed and adopted action plans for reference purposes.
Sacramento Vision Zero Action Plan
Eugene Vision Zero Action Plan
City of Alexandria Vision Zero Action Plan
Somerville Vision Zero Action Plan
Watsonville Vision Zero Action Plan
As the Commission and Public Works staff move forward with the Transportation System Plan Update process, there will be a direct connection to development of strategies, goals, projects
and timelines that can be utilized to construct the formal action plan.
Discussion Questions: 1. How does the Commission wish to address the framework of a Vision Zero Action Plan?a.Vision Zero Task Force
i.Transportation Commission
ii. Othersb. Community Input (Engage Ashland)i.Communities of Concern (equity)c. Data Sources & Framework
i.ODOT
ii.City of Ashlandiii.Census Informationiv.Planning/Zoningd.Goals & Timelines
i.What does success look like
ii.Who is primarily responsible for achieving goals in associated timeframe?iii. What are the conditions and limitations for success?e. Strategies & Accountabilityi.Fundable
f.Transparency
i.Websiteii.Continuous Feedbackiii.Regular Meetingsiv.Assessments
g. Project List development based on Community Input
2.How do we tie in the Transportation System Plan Update?a.Community Input (Public Involvement Plan)i.Communities of Concern
b. Project List development based on Community Input
i. Prioritization processii.Funding scenarios/optionsCONCLUSION:
Action required: Commission should discuss and work on development of a Vision Zero Action Plan. A template is attached for reference along with the Vision Zero Action Plan Guidelines. Discussion should also include how developmental elements can be incorporated into the
Transportation System Plan Update, specifically community engagement and outreach through the TSP Public Involvement and Communication Plan (see below).
From TSP Update Scope: 1.4 PICP
Consultant shall prepare draft and Final Public Involvement and Communications Plan (PICP) with input from the City to gain input throughout the duration of Project and at key milestones. Elements of the PICP must include, but are not limited to, the following: • Public involvement goals for the Project;
• Identification of key populations and stakeholder groups for the plan;
• Identification of City and Consultant roles and responsibilities for public involvement;
• Strategy for accomplishing inclusive public outreach, including Title VI/Environmental justicecommunity outreach and reporting;
• Description of methods used to reach various stakeholders;
• Recommendations for engaging key existing committees; and
• Schedule for public involvement activities that are consistent with the Refined Project
Schedule.
Consultant shall submit Draft PICP to PMT for review and make revisions to address comments.
Memo
Date: August 11, 2021
From: Scott A. Fleury
To: Transportation Commission RE: Traffic Calming Program Analysis
BACKGROUND: The Transportation Commission worked with staff over multiple meetings in 2019 to develop a
neighborhood traffic calming program. The final document is attached for reference. To date we
have had multiple neighborhoods go through phase 1 of the program with none of them meeting the criteria to advance to phase 2. The Commission has expressed interest in re-evaluating the program and associated criteria.
Staff has reviewed numerous Traffic Calming Programs developed by other municipalities and in
general all programs have the same base components as the City’s current program. There are minor changes with how scoring is viewed and what criteria is included in the overall score. Main criteria always include speed, volume and accident data. Scoring varies in association with the data set. Many communities set a minimum 85% speed of 30+ miles an hour to even be
considered for traffic calming projects.
Staff has included a couple of other municipalities programs for reference in the discussion (links below).
City of Rock Hill
Greenwood Village
Lathrop
St. Johns County
City of Westerville
City of Prairie Village
Discussion items: 1.Activity generatorsa.Schools
b. Bus Stops/Routes
c.Employment centers2. Additional education/outreach componentsa.More in phase 1?i.Neighborhood letter or flyer
b.Add reader board after speed traileri.“Residential Neighborhood, Slow DOWN”ii.“Drive like your kids live here”
3. 20 is plenty/bike boulevard reductions and improvementsa.Petition as separate action or wait to do things comprehensivelyb. Incorporate more information/measures into TSP update
4. Formally develop plan for improvements and adjacent property owner reimbursement
a.Buy in from residentsb.Similar to the Local Improvement District process
CONCLUSION:
Commission should discuss the Traffic Calming Program and potential updates or changes that
could be incorporated into the document.
Transportation Commission Action Item List
August 19, 2021Action Items:
1.TSP Update (2020-21)
•Solicitation documents have been submitted and scored by project team
•Scope, schedule and fee documents under review (TC December 2019/January 2020/February
2020)
•Professional services contract requires Council approval
•Schedule Council approval (April 7, 2020)
•TSP Postponed until timing to start project is more appropriate (FY22/23)
•Review Scope and Fee (May & June 2021)
•Recommend approval of a contract with Kittelson Associates to City Council
•August 2021 approval anticipated
2. Main St. Crosswalk truck parking (no change)
•Analysis is included in the revitalize downtown Ashland plan and was recently discussed during
the kickoff meeting.
•The Revitalize Downtown Ashland Transportation Growth and Management grant project has
begun that will assess safety and parking in the downtown core. (February 2020) No change-
March 2020
•The Revitalize Downtown Ashland Project has been cancelled with the expectation to re-start
the project at a more appropriate time in the future (1-2 years).
3. Siskiyou Blvd. and Tolman Creek Intersection Improvements
•The Oregon Department of Transportation removed median island and restriped Tolman
Creek portion of intersection to allow for better right-hand turning truck movements.
•The Oregon Department of Transportation is also looking at curb ramp design changes to the
intersection. (February 2020) No change-March 2020
•Reference ODOT Intersection Change Schematic Drawing (September 2020)
•Forwarded TC comments to ODOT regarding review of 60% Design (September 2020)
•ODOT Provided Advance Plans of intersection redesign (March 2021)
4.20 is Plenty Subcommittee Work (November 2021 start)
•Mark Brouillard is participating in the 20 mph is plenty subcommittee work with the Climate
Policy Commission representatives.
•Commission endorsed recommendation developed in the 20 is Plenty report discussed at the
January 2021 meeting. Next steps include continued discussion of program and associated
strategies for public outreach (education, engineering, enforcement, evaluation), inclusion into
the TSP update, updating CIP, and holding a formal Council discussion.
•20 Is Plenty programmatic discussion to be scheduled for April 2021.
•Commission recommended moving forward with the Vision Zero program and associated
resolution. Options to meet the Vision Zero goal could include the 20 Is Plenty Program and
other associated safety improvements (vehicular, bike & ped). The TSP update could assist at
a programmatic level in meeting Vision Zero goals.
•Vision Zero Resolution drafted and recommendation to approve by Council made by the
Transportation Commission.
5.Railroad District Parking Limitations Review
•At a future meeting TBD, discuss current parking limitations in railroad district.
G:\comm-dev\planning\Planning Actions\PAs by Street\M\Mountain, North\MountainN_192\NMountain_192_PA-T3-2021-00003\Noticing\NMountain_192_PA-T3-2021-00003_NOC.docx
Planning Department, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520
541-488-5305 Fax: 541-552-2050 www.ashland.or.us TTY: 1-800-735-2900
NOTICE OF ELECTRONIC PUBLIC HEARING
PLANNING ACTION: PA-T3-2021-00003
SUBJECT PROPERTY: 192 North Mountain Avenue
OWNER: The Hodgins Family Trust (Robert & Beverly Hodgins, trustees); The Mary G. Walter Living Trust
(Mary G. Walter, trustee); Steve White
APPLICANT: KDA Homes, LLC
DESCRIPTION: A request for annexation of 7.9 acres and Outline Plan approval for a 52-unit residential subdivision
for the property located at 192 North Mountain Avenue. With annexation, 7.9 acres of the ten-acre property would be brought
into the city with R-1-5 Single Family Residential zoning, and the entire ten-acres would be subdivided to create 52 residential
lots and eight common areas. The application also includes requests for an Exception to Street Standards to not install a
parkrow planting strip with street trees on the proposed bridge over Beach Creek; a Limited Activities & Uses Permit to install
a bridge over Beach Creek in order to provide street connectivity to North Mountain Avenue; and a Tree Removal Permit to
remove four of the site’s 25 trees. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single Family Residential; ZONING: Existing
–City R-1-5 & County RR-5, Proposed – City R-1-5; ASSESSOR’S MAP: 39 1E 10; TAX LOT #’s: 800.
ELECTRONIC TREE COMMISSION MEETING: Thursday, August 5, 2021 at 6:00 PM
ELECTRONIC ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: Tuesday, August 10, 2021 at 7:00 PM
G:\comm-dev\planning\Planning Actions\PAs by Street\M\Mountain, North\MountainN_192\NMountain_192_PA-T3-2021-00003\Noticing\NMountain_192_PA-T3-2021-00003_NOC.docx
Notice is hereby given that the Tree Commission will hold an electronic public hearing on the above described planning action on the meeting date and time shown on Page 1. If you would like to watch and listen to the Tree Commission meeting virtually, but not participate in any discussion, you can use the Zoom link posted on the City of Ashland calendar website https://www.ashland.or.us/calendar.asp .
Anyone wishing to submit written comments can do so by sending an e-mail to PC-public-testimony@ashland.or.us with the subject line “Advisory Commission Hearing Testimony” by 10:00 a.m. on Monday, August 9, 2021. If the applicant wishes to provide a rebuttal to the testimony, they can submit the rebuttal via e-mail to PC-public-testimony@ashland.or.us with the subject line “Advisory Commission Hearing Testimony” by 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, August 10, 2021. Written testimony received by these deadlines will be available for Tree Commissioners to review before the hearing and will be included in the meeting minutes.
Oral testimony will be taken during the electronic public hearing. If you wish to provide oral testimony during the electronic meeting, send an email to PC-public-testimony@ashland.or.us by 10:00 a.m. on Monday, August 9, 2021. In order to provide testimony at the public hearing, please provide the following information: 1) make the subject line of the email “Advisory Commission Testimony Request”, 2) include your name, 3) specify the date and commission meeting you wish to testify at, 4) specify the agenda item you wish to speak to, 5) specify if you will be participating by computer or telephone, and 6) the name you will use if participating by computer or the telephone number you will use if participating by telephone.
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).
Notice is hereby given that the Ashland Planning Commission will hold an electronic public hearing on the above described planning action on the meeting date and time shown on Page 1. You can watch the meeting on local channel 9, on Charter
Communications channels 180 & 181, or you can stream the meeting via the internet by going to rvtv.sou.edu and selecting ‘RVTV Prime.’
The ordinance criteria applicable to this planning action are attached to this notice. Oregon law states that failure to raise an
objection concerning this application, or failure to provide sufficient specificity to afford the decision makers 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.
Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, application materials are provided online and written comments will be accepted by email. Alternative arrangements for reviewing the application or submitting comments can be made by contacting (541) 488-
5305 or planning@ashland.or.us.
A copy of the application, including all documents, evidence and applicable criteria relied upon by the applicant, and a copy of the staff report will be available on-line at www.ashland.or.us/PCpackets seven days prior to the hearing. Copies of application materials will be provided at reasonable cost, if requested. Under extenuating circumstances, 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.
Anyone wishing to submit comments can do so by sending an e-mail to PC-public-testimony@ashland.or.us with the subject line “August 10 PC Hearing Testimony” by 10:00 a.m. on Monday, August 9, 2021. If the applicant wishes to provide a rebuttal to the testimony, they can submit the rebuttal via e-mail to PC-public-testimony@ashland.or.us with the subject line
“August 10 PC Hearing Testimony” by 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, August 10, 2021. Written testimony received by these deadlines will be available for Planning Commissioners to review before the hearing and will be included in the meeting minutes.
Oral testimony will be taken during the electronic public hearing. If you wish to provide oral testimony during the electronic meeting, send an email to PC-public-testimony@ashland.or.us by 10:00 a.m. on Monday, August 9, 2021. In order to provide testimony at the public hearing, please provide the following information: 1) make the subject line of the email “August 10 Speaker Request”, 2) include your name, 3) the agenda item on which you wish to speak on, 4) specify if you will be
participating by computer or telephone, and 5) the name you will use if participating by computer or the telephone number you will use if participating by telephone.
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). If you have questions or comments concerning this request, please feel free to contact Senior Planner Derek Severson, the staff planner assigned to this application, at 541-488-5305 or e-mail: derek.severson@ashland.or.us
G:\comm-dev\planning\Planning Actions\PAs by Street\M\Mountain, North\MountainN_192\NMountain_192_PA-T3-2021-00003\Noticing\NMountain_192_PA-T3-2021-00003_NOC.docx
The Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) Land Use Ordinance (LUO) is available online in its entirety at: https://ashland.municipal.codes/LandUse
(ANNEXATION) APPROVAL CRITERIA & STANDARDS (AMC 18.5.8.050)
An annexation may be approved if the proposed request for annexation conforms, or can be made to conform through the imposition of conditions, with all of
the following approval criteria:
A. The land is within the City’s Urban Growth Boundary.
B. The proposed zoning for the annexed area is in conformance with the designation indicated on the Comprehensive Plan Map, and the project, if
proposed concurrently with the annexation, is an allowed use within the proposed zoning.
C. The land is currently contiguous with the present City limits.
D. Adequate City facilities for the provision of water to the site as determined by the Public Works Department; the transport of sewage from the site to
the waste water treatment plant as determined by the Public Works Department; the provision of electricity to the site as determined by the Electric
Department; and urban storm drainage as determined by the Public Works Department can and will be provided to and through the subject property.
Unless the City has declared a moratorium based upon a shortage of water, sewer, or electricity, it is recognized that adequate capacity exists system-
wide for these facilities.
E. Adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property. For the purposes of this section "adequate transportation" for
annexations consists of vehicular, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit transportation meeting the following standards.
1. For vehicular transportation a 20-foot wide paved access exists, or can and will be constructed, along the full frontage of the project site to
the nearest fully improved collector or arterial street. All streets adjacent to the annexed area shall be improved, at a minimum, to a half-
street standard with a minimum 20-foot wide driving surface. The City may, after assessing the impact of the development, require the full
improvement of streets adjacent to the annexed area. All streets located within annexed areas shall be fully improved to City standards.
Where future street dedications are indicated on the Street Dedication Map or required by the City, provisions shall be made for the dedication
and improvement of these streets and included with the application for annexation.
2. For bicycle transportation safe and accessible bicycle facilities exist, or can and will be constructed. Should the annexation be adjacent to
an arterial street, bike lanes shall be provided on or adjacent to the arterial street. Likely bicycle destinations from the project site shall be
determined and safe and accessible bicycle facilities serving those destinations shall be indicated.
3. For pedestrian transportation safe and accessible pedestrian facilities exist, or can and will be constructed. Full sidewalk improvements shall
be provided on one side adjacent to the annexation for all streets adjacent to the proposed annexed area. Sidewalks shall be provided as
required by ordinance on all streets within the annexed area. Where the project site is within one-quarter (1/4) mile of an existing sidewalk
system, the sidewalks from the project site shall be constructed to extend and connect to the existing system. Likely pedestrian destinations
from the project site shall be determined and the safe and accessible pedestrian facilities serving those destinations shall be indicated.
4. For transit transportation, should transit service be available to the site, or be likely to be extended to the site in the future based on information
from the local public transit provider, provisions shall be made for the construction of adequate transit facilities, such as bus shelters and bus
turn-out lanes. All required transportation improvements shall be constructed and installed prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy
for any new structures on the annexed property.
F. For all residential annexations, a plan shall be provided demonstrating that the development of the entire property will ultimately occur at a minimum
density of 90 percent of the base density for the zone, unless reductions in the total number of units is necessary to accommodate significant natural
features, topography, access limitations, or similar physical constraints. The owner or owners of the property shall sign an agreement, to be recorded
with the County Clerk after approval of the annexation, ensuring that future development will occur in accord with the minimum density indicated in the
development plan. For purposes of computing maximum density, portions of the annexed area containing undevelopable areas such as wetlands,
floodplain corridor lands, or slopes greater than 35 percent shall not be included.
G. Except as provided in subsection 18.5.8.050.G.7, below, annexations with a density or potential density of four residential units or greater and involving
residential zoned lands, or commercial, employment or industrial lands with a Residential Overlay (R-Overlay) shall meet the following requirements.
1. The total number of affordable units provided to qualifying buyers, or to qualifying renters, shall be equal to or exceed 25 percent of the base
density as calculated using the unit equivalency values set forth herein. The base density of the property for the purposes of this calculation
shall exclude any undevelopable portions of the property such as wetlands, floodplain corridor lands, water resource areas, slopes greater
than 35 percent, or land area dedicated as a public park.
a. Ownership units restricted to households earning at or below 120 percent the area median income shall have an equivalency value
of 0.75 unit.
b. Ownership units restricted to households earning at or below 100 percent the area median income shall have an equivalency value
of 1.0 unit.
c. Ownership or rental units restricted to households earning at or below 80 percent the area median income shall have an
equivalency value of 1.25 unit.
2. As alternative to providing affordable units per subsection 18.5.8.050.G.1, above, the applicant may provide title to a sufficient amount of
buildable land for development complying with subsection 18.5.8.050.G.1.b, above, through transfer to a non-profit (IRC 501(c)(3)) affordable
housing developer or public corporation created under ORS 456.055 to 456.235.
a. The land to be transferred shall be located within the project meeting the standards set forth in
subsections 18.5.8.050.G.5 and 18.5.8.050.G.6.
b. All needed public facilities shall be extended to the area or areas proposed for transfer.
c. Prior to commencement of the project, title to the land shall be transferred to the City, an affordable housing developer which must
either be a unit of government, a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, or public corporation created under ORS 456.055 to 456.235.
d. The land to be transferred shall be deed restricted to comply with Ashland’s affordable housing program requirements.
e. Transfer of title of buildable land in accordance with this subsection shall exempt the project from the development schedule
requirements set forth in subsection 18.5.8.050.G.4.
G:\comm-dev\planning\Planning Actions\PAs by Street\M\Mountain, North\MountainN_192\NMountain_192_PA-T3-2021-00003\Noticing\NMountain_192_PA-T3-2021-00003_NOC.docx
3. The affordable units shall be comparable in bedroom mix with the market rate units in the development.
a. The number of bedrooms per dwelling unit in the affordable units within the residential development shall be in equal proportion to
the number of bedrooms per dwelling unit in the market rate units within the residential development. This provision is not intended
to require the same floor area in affordable units as compared to market rate units. The minimum square footage of each affordable
unit shall comply with the minimum required floor based as set forth in Table 18.5.8.050.G.3, or as established by the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for dwelling units developed under the HOME program.
Table 18.5.8.050.G.3
Unit Type Minimum Required Unit Floor Area (Square Feet)
Studio 350
1 bedroom 500
2 bedroom 800
3 bedroom 1,000
4 bedroom 1,250
4. A development schedule shall be provided that demonstrates that that the affordable housing units per subsection 18.5.8.050.G shall be
developed, and made available for occupancy, as follows:
a. That 50 percent of the affordable units shall have been issued building permits prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for
the last of the first 50 percent of the market rate units.
b. Prior to issuance of a building permit for the final ten percent of the market rate units, the final 50 percent of the affordable units
shall have been issued certificates of occupancy.
5. That affordable housing units shall be constructed using comparable building materials and include equivalent amenities as the market rate
units.
a. The exterior appearance of the affordable units in any residential development shall be visually compatible with the market rate
units in the development. External building materials and finishes shall be substantially the same in type and quality for affordable
units as for market rate units.
b. Affordable units may differ from market rate units with regard to floor area, interior finishes and materials, and housing type;
provided, that the affordable housing units are provided with comparable features to the market rate units, and shall have generally
comparable improvements related to energy efficiency, including plumbing, insulation, windows, appliances, and heating and
cooling systems.
6. Exceptions to the requirements of subsections 18.5.8.050.G.2 through 18.5.8.050.G.5, above, may be approved by the City Council upon
consideration of one or more of the following:
a. That an alternative land dedication as proposed would accomplish additional benefits for the City, consistent with the purposes of
this chapter, than would development meeting the on-site dedication requirement of subsection 18.5.8.050.G.2.
b. That the alternative phasing proposal not meeting subsection 18.5.8.050.G.4 provided by the applicant provides adequate
assurance that the affordable housing units will be provided in a timely fashion.
c. That the materials and amenities applied to the affordable units within the development, that are not equivalent to the market rate
units per subsection 18.5.8.050.G.6, are necessary due to local, State, or Federal Affordable Housing standards or financing
limitations.
7. The total number of affordable units described in this subsection 18.5.8.050.G shall be determined by rounding down fractional answers to
the nearest whole unit. A deed restriction or similar legal instrument shall be used to guarantee compliance with affordable criteria for a
period of not less than 60 years for units qualified as affordable rental housing, or 30 years for units qualified as affordable for-purchase
housing.
H. One or more of the following standards are met:
1. The proposed area for annexation is to be residentially zoned, under the Comprehensive Plan, and the applicant will obtain planning action
approval for an outright permitted use, special permitted use, or conditional use in conformance with the annexation request.
2. The proposed lot or lots will be zoned M-1, CM, E-1, or C-1 under the Comprehensive Plan, and the applicant will obtain Site Design Review
approval for an outright permitted use, or special permitted use concurrent with the annexation request.
3. A current or probable public health hazard exists due to lack of full City sanitary sewer or water services.
4. Existing development in the proposed annexation has inadequate water or sanitary sewer service, or the service will become inadequate
within one year.
5. The area proposed for annexation has existing City water or sanitary sewer service extended, connected, and in use, and a signed consent
to annexation agreement has been filed and accepted by the City.
6. The lot or lots proposed for annexation are an island completely surrounded by lands within the City limits. (Ord. 3195 § 4, amended,
12/01/2020)
G:\comm-dev\planning\Planning Actions\PAs by Street\M\Mountain, North\MountainN_192\NMountain_192_PA-T3-2021-00003\Noticing\NMountain_192_PA-T3-2021-00003_NOC.docx
OUTLINE PLAN SUBDIVISION APPROVAL (AMC 18.3.9.040.A.3)
Approval Criteria for Outline Plan. The Planning Commission shall approve the outline plan when it finds all of the following criteria have
been met.
a. The development meets all applicable ordinance requirements of the City.
b. Adequate key City facilities can be provided including water, sewer, paved access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage,
police and fire protection, and adequate transportation; and that the development will not cause a City facility to operate beyond capacity.
c. The existing and natural features of the land; such as wetlands, floodplain corridors, ponds, large trees, rock outcroppings, etc., have been identified
in the plan of the development and significant features have been included in the open space, common areas, and unbuildable areas.
d. The development of the land will not prevent adjacent land from being developed for the uses shown in the Comprehensive Plan.
e. There are adequate provisions for the maintenance of open space and common areas, if required or provided, and that if developments are done in
phases that the early phases have the same or higher ratio of amenities as proposed in the entire project.
f. The proposed density meets the base and bonus density standards established under this chapter.
g. The development complies with the Street Standards.
LIMITED ACTIVITIES & USES PERMIT (AMC 18.3.11.060.D)
All Limited Activities and Uses described in section 18.3.11.060 shall be subject to a Type I procedure in section 18.5.1.050. An application for a Limited Activities
and Uses Permit shall be approved if the proposal meets all of the following criteria.
1. All activities shall be located as far away from streams and wetlands as practicable, designed to minimize intrusion into the Water Resources Protection
Zone and disturb as little of the surface area of the Water Resource Protection Zone as practicable.
2. The proposed activity shall be designed, located and constructed to minimize excavation, grading, area of impervious surfaces, loss of native
vegetation, erosion, and other adverse impacts on Water Resources.
3. On stream beds or banks within the bank full stage, in wetlands, and on slopes of 25 percent or greater in a Water Resource Protection Zone,
excavation, grading, installation of impervious surfaces, and removal of native vegetation shall be avoided except where no practicable alternative
exists, or where necessary to construct public facilities or to ensure slope stability.
4. Water, storm drain, and sewer systems shall be designed, located and constructed to avoid exposure to floodwaters, and to avoid accidental discharges
to streams and wetlands.
5. Stream channel repair and enhancement, riparian habitat restoration and enhancement, and wetland restoration and enhancement will be restored
through the implementation of a mitigation plan prepared in accordance with the standards and requirements in section 18.3.11.110 Mitigation
Requirements.
6. Long term conservation, management and maintenance of the Water Resource Protection Zone shall be ensured through preparation and recordation
of a management plan as described in subsection 18.3.11.110.C, except a management plan is not required for residentially zoned lots occupied only
by a single-family dwelling and accessory structures.
EXCEPTION TO THE STREET DESIGN STANDARDS (AMC 18.4.6.020.B.1)
Exception to the Street Design Standards. The approval authority may approve exceptions to the standards section in 18.4.6.040 Street Design Standards if
all of the following circumstances are found to exist.
a. There is demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements of this chapter due to a unique or unusual aspect of the site or proposed use of
the site.
b. The exception will result in equal or superior transportation facilities and connectivity considering the following factors where applicable.
i. For transit facilities and related improvements, access, wait time, and ride experience.
ii. For bicycle facilities, feeling of safety, quality of experience (i.e., comfort level of bicycling along the roadway), and frequency of conflicts with
vehicle cross traffic.
iii. For pedestrian facilities, feeling of safety, quality of experience (i.e., comfort level of walking along roadway), and ability to safety and
efficiency crossing roadway.
c. The exception is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty.
d. The exception is consistent with the Purpose and Intent of the Street Standards in subsection 18.4.6.040.A.
TREE REMOVAL PERMIT (AMC 18.5.7.040.B)
1.Hazard Tree. A Hazard Tree Removal Permit shall be granted if the approval authority finds that the application meets all of the following criteria, or
can be made to conform through the imposition of conditions.
a. The applicant must demonstrate that the condition or location of the tree presents a clear public safety hazard (i.e., likely to fall and injure
persons or property) or a foreseeable danger of property damage to an existing structure or facility, and such hazard or danger cannot
reasonably be alleviated by treatment, relocation, or pruning. See definition of hazard tree in part 18.6.
b. The City may require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each hazard tree pursuant to section 18.5.7.050. Such mitigation
requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit.
2. Tree That is Not a Hazard. A Tree Removal Permit for a tree that is not a hazard shall be granted if the approval authority finds that the application
meets all of the following criteria, or can be made to conform through the imposition of conditions.
a. The tree is proposed for removal in order to permit the application to be consistent with other applicable Land Use Ordinance requirements
and standards, including but not limited to applicable Site Development and Design Standards in part 18.4 and Physical and Environmental
Constraints in part 18.10.
b. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees,
or existing windbreaks.
c. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes, canopies, and species diversity within 200 feet of
the subject property. The City shall grant an exception to this criterion when alternatives to the tree removal have been considered and no
G:\comm-dev\planning\Planning Actions\PAs by Street\M\Mountain, North\MountainN_192\NMountain_192_PA-T3-2021-00003\Noticing\NMountain_192_PA-T3-2021-00003_NOC.docx
reasonable alternative exists to allow the property to be used as permitted in the zone.
d. Nothing in this section shall require that the residential density to be reduced below the permitted density allowed by the zone. In making
this determination, the City may consider alternative site plans or placement of structures of alternate landscaping designs that would lessen
the impact on trees, so long as the alternatives continue to comply with the other provisions of this ordinance.
e. The City shall require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each tree granted approval pursuant to section 18.5.7.050. Such mitigation
requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit.
1 | P a g e
“BEACH CREEK SUBDIVISION”
APPLICATION
FOR A
ANNEXATION, OUTLINE PLAN SUBDIVISION,
STREET STANDARD EXCEPTION, A WATER RESOURCE
PROTECTION ZONE PERMIT AND A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT
SUBMITTED TO
CITY OF ASHLAND
FOR
KDA HOMES
604 FAIR OAKS COURT
ASHLAND, OR 97520
Comprehensive Plan Map
JUNE 21ST, 2021
Subject Property
(single tax lot)
City Boundary
2 | P a g e
I. PROJECT INFORMATION:
PROJECT NAME: “Beach Creek Subdivision”
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: 391E 10 Tax Lot 800
APPLICANT:
KDA Homes, LLC
604 Fair Oaks Court
Ashland, OR 97520
Tel: 541.821.3752
SURVEYOR:
Polaris Land Surveying, LLC
151 Clear Creek Dr #101,
Ashland, OR 9752
Tel: 541-482-5009
DESIGNER:
Lindemann Design
550 W. Nevada Street
Ashland, OR 97520
Tel: 503.866.4742
BIOLOGIST:
Schott & Associates
21018 NE Hwy 99E
Aurora, OR 97002
Tel: 503.678.6007
ENGINEERS:
Construction Engineering Consultants
P.O. Box 1724
Medford, Oregon 97501
Tel: 541.779.5268
LANDSCAPE DESIGN / ARBORIST:
Madara Design, Inc.
2994 Wells Fargo Road
Central Point, OR 97502
Tel: 541.944.4287
PROJECT ZONING: The property is partially in the City and County with roughly 2.1 acres within City
limits zoned R-1-5 and the remaining 7.9 acres is within the County and zoned RR-5, Rural Residential,
but will be zoned R-1-5 once annexed into City limits.
PROJECT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Single Family Residential.
PROJECT PROPOSAL: The applicants will be requesting an Annexation, Outline Plan Subdivision,
Street Standards Exception, Water Resource Protection Zone Permit and a Tree Removal Permit.
PROJECT DATA:
Lot Acreage: City: 2.1 acres County: 7.9 acres Total: 10 acres
Base Density: R-1-5 = 4.5 units per acre Total: 45 units
Base Density (City): R-1-5 = 2.1 acres X 4.5 units per acre Total: 9.45 units
Base Density (County): R-1-5 = 7.9 X 4.5 units per acre Total: 35.55 units
Permitted Bonus Density (60%): Total: 72 units
Proposed Density Bonus for Affordable Housing (16%): Total: 7 units
Total Proposed Units: Total: 52 units
Affordable Units Base Dens: County (7.90 acres) less unbuildable (.29 ac) Total: 7.61 acres
Affordable Units: 25% of Base Density (7.61 X 4.5 X .25) Total: 8.561 units
Affordable Units Required: @ 80% AMI = 1.25 “equivalency value” Total: 6.84 units (6)
Affordable Units Provided: 5 (3-bedroom) & 3 (2-bedroom) Total: 8 units
Affordable Units “Extra” Required 6 / Provided 8 Total: 2 units
Open Space Required (5%): 10 acres X .05 = 21,780 sq. ft. Total: .05 acres
Open Space Proposed (21.2%) (49,995 Riparian / 42,439 Common*) Total: 2.12 acres
* Not including future open space with proposed cottage area
3 | P a g e
PROJECT HISTORY & SITE DESCRIPTION: To the best of the applicant’s knowledge, the subject
property has no land use development history and has remained in single family ownership for many years.
The property lays within the center of the City of Ashland, but has remained an “island” of County land
surrounded by City limits. The property is bound by City limits with North Mountain Avenue to the west,
the Central Oregon Pacific Railroad (to the south), the Ashland Village Subdivision (c1997) to the north
and various subdivisions to the east (Ashland Willows (c1998), Sunnyview (c1993), Bear Grass Village
(c2007) and Ashland Parkview (c 1995).
The property includes a single family structure (c1895) along North Mountain Avenue (192 North Mountain
Avenue) and five accessory buildings, three within the close vicinity of the residence and two within the
site’s open field area. Three driveway openings exist along the North Mountain Avenue frontage as well as
a public sidewalk, planting strip and bike lane. A narrow dirt driveway exists crossing Beach Creek, from
the residence to the out building in the rear open field.
Beach Creek traverses through the property, day lighting at its southern end adjacent to the railroad tracks
and extending northerly to and through the adjacent subdivision to the north. A number of large trees exist,
but primarily within the vicinity of the house and a few along Beach Creek. An extensive amount of
Blackberry patches exists along the entire southern boundary, within the Beach Creek riparian area and
periodically near adjoining properties. The property is relatively unobstructed with a gradual south to north
slope of roughly 3%.
No
r
t
h
M
o
u
n
t
a
i
n
A
v
e
n
u
e
SubjectProperty
Orchid Street
Old Willow Lane
Kirk Lane
Vi
l
l
a
g
e
Pa
r
k
D
r
.
“B” Street
4 | P a g e
II. PROPOSAL:
1) Annexation: The applicants are proposing to annex into the City of Ashland the property’s 7.9 acres
within the City’s Urban Growth Boundary under the procedures of AMC 18.5.8. The subject property is
surrounded by City limits, urbanized property, and various transportation connections. The annexation
proposal is being requested to be processed under ORS 222.170.
2) Outline Plan Subdivision: The applicants are proposing to divide the property into a 52 lot residential
subdivision and eight common area lots. The proposed 52 lot subdivision is being processed herein under
AMC 18.3.9, Performance Standards Options Subdivision and will include various strategies related to
conscientious planning for urban infill sites, human scale streetscape design, affordable housing, resource
protection and pedestrian friendly mobility.
3) Street Standard Exception: The applicants are requesting an exception to the City’s Street Standards
to exclude the park row (planting strip) and street trees adjacent to the street’s curb for the portion of the
box culvert / bridge extending over Beach Creek. No other exceptions are proposed.
4) Limited Activities and Uses Permit (Water Resource Protection Zone Permit): Beach Creek is
classified as an Intermittent and Ephemeral Stream channel on the City’s Water Resource Protection Zone
map which includes a swath of land that is 30’ upland of the stream’s centerline (30’ each side). The
applicants are proposing to install a box culvert / bridge within the creek channel in order for a street to be
extended from North Mountain Avenue, into and out of the property. The street connection is identified on
the City’s Transportation System Plan and a requirement.
5) Tree Removal Permit: A Tree Removal Permit to remove 4 of the site’s 25 trees which are greater than
6” in diameter at breast height is requested. The trees in question have been deemed by a licensed Arborist
to be seriously damaged, conflicting with electrical lines or are in poor condition.
III. SPECIFIC PLAN PROPOSALS:
1) Annexation: As noted, the applicants are proposing to annex into the City of Ashland the property’s 7.9
acres that are within the City’s Urban Growth Boundary under the procedures of AMC 18.5.8. The property
is one single parcel of 10 acres, but roughly 2.1 acres is within City limits and 7.9 acres outside City limits.
The entire property is not only surrounded by the City of Ashland’s City limit boundary, but also completely
surrounded by urban development and within walking distance to public schools, City parks and various
essential services. Overall, the property is essentially an island of vacant land within the center of the City
formed after many years of annexation expansions and urban development surrounding the property while
the current property owners continued to maintain the property as a farm. Unfortunately, the property is no
longer a viable farm due various market factors, the surrounding urbanization and the inability of the family
to keep up with its extensive maintenance.
The inclusion of the 7.9 acre area into the City of Ashland’s City limits makes obvious sense and addresses
the Annexation Criteria of AMC 18.5.8.050 (Ord 3195, adopted 12/1/20). The property’s Comprehensive
5 | P a g e
Plan designation is Single Family Residential and due to the existing urbanization surrounding the property
with various points of entry via four public rights-of-way and one proposed main entry from North
Mountain Avenue, there is more than adequate infrastructure and transportation connections to serve the
property.
The proposal includes a request to develop a 52 residential lot subdivision which will include eight
independent lots to be built as four affordable housing homes and four affordable cottages. All of the
affordable units will be constructed by Habitat for Humanity with the applicants providing for all off-site
improvements related to roads, sidewalks, utility stubs, etc.
The affordable units will be
restricted to households earning
80% or less of the area median
income. The applicants are working
with Habitat for Humanity to ensure
the units’ exterior appearance and
quality are visually compatible with
the market rate units and will
include comparable improvements
related to solar panels and other
energy efficiency standards (Earth
Advantage Platinum).
2) Subdivision Plan: The general
design of the proposed subdivision
is based on a number of factors, but
primarily based on the physical
characteristics of the property and
the existing street pattern in the area
that connects to the subject property.
Specifically, the street leading into
the subdivision from North
Mountain Avenue was carefully
located to not only avoid two large
mature trees as noted in the photo
below, but to also provide as much
clearer distance from the railroad
and North Mountain Avenue
crossing as feasibly possible, in this case roughly 170’. The street’s location was also important to minimize
the expanse of the crossing over Beach Creek in a narrower section of the creek as directed under Chapter
18.3.10, Physical and Environmental Constraints Overlay as noted above. Most important, the new street
matches the location identified on the City’s Transportation System Plan.
6 | P a g e
There are also a number of existing streets along the site’s north and east property lines that currently “dead-
end” at the property. All but one of the streets (Orchid Street) will be fully “connected” with the
development of the subject property. The connection to the exterior streets, including one to the north
(Village Park Drive), create an obvious street pattern for the proposed development as a whole, but also
complies with the City’s Transportation System Plan maps and policies relating to street connectivity which
support dispersing vehicular trips, but also gives more options for alternative forms of transportation and
connects the surrounding subdivisions to and through the new development with the intent to “finalize the
puzzle” to create a larger and more cohesively connected neighborhood.
As noted, Orchid Street will not be fully connected into the subdivision due to “cut-through” traffic concerns
from Mountain Avenue to East Main, but will include a pedestrian connection for non-vehicle mobility.
The connectivity issue was raised by neighbors along Orchid Street during initial neighborhood discussions
where it was shown to connect, but after consultation with the application’s Land Use Planner and
Transportation Engineer, it was determined the connection would negatively and unnecessarily bring “cut-
through” vehicle trips to and through the subdivision and into the Orchid Street neighborhood in order to
avoid the controlled intersection at North Mountain Avenue and East Main Street. Further, by not including
the Orchid Street connection and the reverse circuitous design of the proposed looped system within the
proposed subdivision, the applicants contend any added traffic will be marginal.
192 S. Mountain Avenue (looking east).
proposed street location
(between mature trees)
7 | P a g e
A 12’ dedication of property along the south property line (parallel with Central Oregon Pacific Railroad)
will occur at the time of the Final Plat for a future bike path in accordance with the adopted Transportation
System Plan (TSP). The TSP illustrates a duel bike path along both sides of the railroad tracks from Tolman
Creek Road to a site just west of Fourth Street (see insert above). Considering the number of private parcels
between the two end points, various physical constraints and the associated costs for acquisition and
construction to accomplish the north side bike path, the completion will be challenging and likely take many
years, if ever. Regardless, the 12’ dedication along the property’s southern frontage will be provided with
the subdivision’s plat and although the applicant’s do not question the vision of the future bike path, they
do question its probability but have also concluded 12’ strip will more than likely remain as additional
buffer space between the railroad tracks and habitable spaces.
The central area of the development, generally “framed” by the existing street and urbanization pattern, is
to be served by a looped street system providing access to the center of the property, perimeter lots and
existing neighborhood street system. Within the central looped area, two alleys are proposed for vehicular
access to the rear of the units with the intent to provide housing design opportunities for porches, interesting
facades and to encourage pedestrian mobility and activity. In this vein, two different pedestrian pathways
are also proposed linking the proposed subdivision’s sidewalk system with the adjacent subdivisions. The
applicants also intend to create additional foot paths within the site’s open space areas for added recreational
opportunity, maintenance and fire suppression.
Existing Bike Path (south side)
Ashland Transportation System Plan (Fig 8-1)
Future Bike Path (north side)
Site
8 | P a g e
Note: In meetings with the neighboring subdivision’s property owners to the north, Ashland Village
Subdivision, the applicants have agreed to provide an access maintenance easement, via only a footpath,
to the Beach Creek corridor area behind their properties in order to maintain the open space tract for
debris removal and fuel reduction. The applicants have also expressed a desire to work with the neighboring
property owners in promoting an annual Blackberry removal plan within the Beach Creek corridor to
manage fuel reduction from the railroad tracks down to North Mountain Park. The applicants intend to
incorporate such provisions within the subdivision’s CC&Rs for the area with the Beach Creek Subdivision,
but the overall intent would be to reduce fuel within the subdivision’s common area and to also
encourage/promote outside participation from other property owners who may not have the independent
ability (access, labor, equipment or finances) to complete the Blackberry removal on their properties.
Beach Creek Riparian Zone
One of the subdivision’s most unique design features is the inclusion of a common promenade and
pedestrian corridor traversing through the central housing area with units fronting onto the promenade and
backing to either of the two abutting alleys with the goal of encouraging neighborly interaction, place
9 | P a g e
making and pedestrian mobility. The housing units lining the promenade corridor will also be designed to
include porches and creative architecture, similar to the housing proposed for the rest of the subdivision’s
housing, but without garages or driveways dominating the corridor. The applicant’s also hope the ally’s
themselves will become semi-pedestrian environments due to their short lengths and limited vehicular use.
Another unique component of the subdivision plan is the applicants’ intent to retain the existing old house
and its pastoral setting among the massive Oak trees surrounding it. To this point, the applicants have
intentionally placed an open space tract behind and south of the old house not only to secure preservation
of the Oak trees, but to also retain the old home and its open farm setting as much as feasibly possible in
the wake of urbanization. The applicant’s believe the large open space area will be a valuable asset to the
North Mountain streetscape and an attractive entry feature leading into the subdivision. Note: it should be
stated that because of the old home’s age and somewhat neglected condition, it remains unclear if the house
will remain as desired by the applicants. Every attempt will be taken to retain the old house but in no case
will any disturbance of the house or surrounding area occur until further analysis and permits are obtained.
Including the property’s existing old house, there are four houses proposed along North Mountain Avenue
with two having direct access from North Mountain Avenue and two from a shared private drive off of the
new entry street. There are currently three driveways from North Mountain Avenue, two of which will be
retained. The applicants have attempted to reduce the number of driveways along North Mountain Avenue
in order to improve access management and pedestrian mobility along the street.
The proposal includes an area of land to be developed as “cottage housing” by the applicant’s and Habitat
for Humanity under AMC 18.2.3.090 as a “portion” of the application’s affordable housing requirement.
This area is to be located within the southeast corner of the property abutting Orchid Street. The plans for
this area are for illustration purposes only intended to illustrate how the property could be developed and
how many units are possible. In the concept presented, there are four units total, three 2-bedroom units less
than 800 square feet in size and one 3-bedroom, not to exceed 1,000 square feet. The illustration also
identifies “public” pedestrian link between the new and existing neighborhood, a six-space parking lot and
an open space area. A Site Review Permit will be obtained prior to finalization of the cottage area’s
landscaping, parking and building design.
In addition to the four proposed affordable cottage housing units noted above, the proposal includes an
additional four standard affordable units dispersed throughout the subdivision. All of the affordable units
within the subdivision will be built by Habitat for Humanity and sold to qualifying buyers with household
incomes being equal to or less than 80% of the areas medium income (AMI). The land for the eight
affordable lots as well as the infrastructure, curbs, gutters, street trees, etc. will be constructed by the
applicants with all on-site work such as vertical construction, utilities, landscaping, etc. will be completed
by Habitat for Humanity.
A total of “six” affordable units are required in order to meet the City’s annexation criteria and “eight” are
proposed. Note: It should also be clarified that initial planning efforts (pre-application) intended to produce
a total of 12 affordable cottage housing units under the City’s recently adopted “Cottage Housing
Ordinance”, but due to the unit size limitations within the ordinance and Habitat for Humanity’s need for
10 | P a g e
more 3-bedroom affordable units, the plan was revised for five 3-bedroom and three 2 bedroom affordable
housing units.
As noted, the applicants are working with Habitat for Humanity to develop affordable housing within the
proposed subdivision in accordance with the annexation requirements of AMC 18.5.8.050 G. which requires
25% of the annexed area’s “base density”, less any undevelopable areas of the property, multiplied by the
affordable housing “equivalency factors” noted in AMC 18.5.8.050. G.1. a – c. for a total of 6 affordable
units, but 8 affordable housing units are proposed – 5 three-bedroom and 3 two-bedroom units.
343,688 sq. ft. (7.89 acres) area to be annexed;
12,720 sq. ft. undevelopable area (riparian);
330,968 sq. ft. (7.59 acres) net acres;
7.59 X 4.5 units per acre (R-1-5 base density) = 34.155 units
Multiplied by 25% = 8.538 units
8.538 units / 1.25 (< 80% AMI) = 6.83 total dwelling units or 6 “required” affordable units;
8 “provided” affordable units
3)Street Standard Exception: The applicants are proposing an exception to the City of Ashland’s Street
Standards to not include a park row (plant strip) and street trees for the area along the bridge crossing over
Beach Creek and small sections on either side of the bridge. The inclusion of such a design feature is not
appropriate due its location on top of a bridge where added width, weight and irrigation for such elements
require not only substantially more volume and disturbance to the Beach Creek Riparian Corridor the bridge
is intended to protect, but adding water from the irrigation system into tree wells within various cavities of
the bridge as well as unpredictable tree root systems would diminish the bridge’s integrity over time and
thus become a safety hazard.
4)Limited Activities and Uses Permit (Water Resource Protection Zone Permit): Beach Creek is classified
as an Intermittent and Ephemeral Stream channel on the City’s Water Resource Protection Zone map which
includes a swath of land that is 30’ upland of the stream’s centerline (30’ each side). As evidenced with the
attached plans, the water resource is protected by the dimensional setback standards, but for a box culvert /
bridge within the creek channel in order for a new road to be extended from North Mountain Avenue, into
and out of the property. The street connection is identified on the City’s Transportation System Plan and a
requirement to be installed.
The bridge, as well as underlying service utilities, are permissible encroachments per the AMC 18.3.11.060
A.3.a., as the bridge is deemed necessary to maintain a functional street system.
It should also be noted, the applicants have explored other possible locations for the bridge’s connectivity
“to and through” the subdivision per the adopted Transportation System Plan, but due to the overwhelming
evidence related to the old house’s location on the property, the site’s various mature trees and their
protection zones, the vicinity of the railroad crossing and the need to preserve a clear distance, plus the
section of Beach Creek with a relatively narrow channel in the chosen location, there really was no other
11 | P a g e
reasonable alternate location but in fact, is a perfect location which coincidentally provides a framed
“welcoming” gateway effect between the two mature trees as one comes into the heart of the subdivision.
5)Tree Removal Permit: A Tree Removal Permit to remove 4 of the site’s 25 trees which are greater than
6” in diameter at breast height (dbh). The trees in question have been deemed by a licensed Arborist to be
seriously damaged, conflicting with electrical lines or are in poor condition. A Tree Survey plan and
narrative are included in the application which identifies the site’s tree locations, observed health condition
and the status if they should be removed or preserved. The remaining 21 trees on-site will be preserved and
pruned to improve their health and life span. A Tree Protection Plan, in accordance with AMC 18.4.5.030,
is also included within the application materials to identify the trees to be preserved in coordination with
the site’s development.
Tree # 6 – Wester Red Cedar Tree #4 – White Oak
12 | P a g e
Tree #3 – White Oak
Tree #16 – Black Oak (evidence of needed pruning)
13 | P a g e
Other Important Factors Associated with the Proposed Beach Creek Subdivision:
• Initial Site Analysis: Prior to the application submittals, the applicants completed an analysis of the sites
physical features such as the large Oak Trees around the old farm house, the old farm house itself, the Beach
Creek corridor and for any possible site wetlands. The analysis played a critical role in the formation of the
plan which includes:
• Preservation of site’s Oak Trees: All of the sites mature Oak Trees are planned to be retained. The vast
majority of the Oak Trees, some of which are incredibly expansive and majestic trees, surround the old
farm house and possibly pre-date it. As such, the applicants designed the subdivision to preserve the trees
or mitigate any potential impact by minimizing development near the trees or creating building envelopes,
in concert with the project’s Arborist, to minimize potential root disturbance.
• Preservation of other mature trees: Other mature trees within the subdivision will also be preserved,
but those trees mainly lay within the Beach Creek corridor where there is no tree disturbance planned. In
this case, the location of the bridge was specifically planned to traverse between two large mature trees, one
a 60” DBH Black Oak Tree and the other a 30” DBH Ponderosa Pine Tree. There were other factors as
explained throughout this narrative that determined the bridge’s location, but the preservation of these two
beautiful mature trees was the primary factor.
• Preservation of old farm house: The site has a number of older structures on the 10 acre property, but
the primary residential structure lays along the frontage of North Mountain Avenue, addressed at 192 North
Mountain Avenue. The structure is two-stories, roughly 1,900 square feet in size, and was constructed in
1895. In 2020, the residential structure was vacated and later boarded-up do to vandalism. The intent is to
preserve the old house, but remove the site’s various accessory structures which are mostly in a hazardous
state, within the Water Resource Protection Zone, in planned common open space, within root zones and/or
within the developable area of the property. Such removal for structures greater than 500 square feet in area
will be coordinated with the Ashland Building Division under AMC 15.04.216.
• Preservation of Beach Creek corridor: The proposed subdivision plan has been designed to
“incorporate” the corridor as a visible amenity along the street rights-of-way. This is in contrast to typical
subdivisions where housing is placed along a natural feature and thus has limited public viewing whereas
the proposed design “hi-lights” the corridor and exposes its natural features for everyone. Note: Beach
Creek is a City identified riparian corridor traversing the property from south to north. It varies in width
from roughly 80’ to 200’ and depth from roughly 8’ to 12’. The southern beginning of the corridor extends
from two culverts, roughly 200’ apart, extending from under the Central Oregon & Pacific Railroad tracks.
There is no physical evidence of Beach Creek beyond the railroad tracks as the pipes extend under and/or
adjacent to the City’s corporation yard. In fact, the only “exposed” area of a water source / creek is within
the rear of the Ashland High School parking lot off Iowa Street and S. Mountain Avenue, but from beyond
that location, various small tributaries above Southern Oregon University.
• In addition to a tree assessment, traffic assessment and various civil engineers, the applicants enlisted
the help of two wetland biologists from Martin Schott and Associates to determine if there were any on-site
wetlands on the property. The two biologists completed two field surveys, one on February 12th, 2020 and
the other in March 16th, 2021 and found no evidence of any on-site wetlands.
• Consultation with ODOT staff occurred early in the process as it relates to the subdivision’s primary
entry street from North Mountain Avenue where it was determined that a 100’ distance from the railroad
14 | P a g e
crossing was required and the applicants are proposing 170’ distance from the railroad crossing’s furthest
northern boundary.
• Open Spaces: As noted, the Beach Creek riparian corridor traverses through the property from south to
north, daylighting from the railroad tracks and extending through the subdivision to the north where it
eventually connects with Bear Creek (Illustration on Page 5). The proposal will include a box culvert and
roadway crossing the creek and the remaining area left in a natural state to be maintained by the project’s
Home Owners Association (HOA). The riparian corridor is roughly 49,995 square feet in area or 11.5% of
the site. Not including the future bike path dedication along the south property line (9,571 sq. ft.), an
additional 42,439 square feet of open space/common area or 9.7% of the site, located within eight different
areas dispersed around the subdivision, have been incorporated into the overall design. As such, roughly
21% of the entire 10 acre subdivision will be open space, managed by the future Home Owner’s
Association. The vast majority of the open space is to be natural, but for the streets’ park rows (not included
in the overall open space percentage), pedestrian promenade and two corner open spaces along Beach Creek
Way (south) for an area of approximately 10,341 square feet or only 2% irrigated landscape of the 10 acre
property. Note: The applicants and Habitat for Humanity have agreed the four affordable cottage housing
units would be exempt from the HOA’s “overall” common area expenses, but for the single common area
within the cottage area itself to be budgeted and maintained by those owners in order to reduce monthly
maintenance expenses for those particular units.
• Climate & Energy Goals: The applicants have a very positive record in Ashland and are known
throughout the Pacific Northwest for their conservation efforts and intend to develop the subject property
with certain goals and policies outlined within the City’s recently adopted Climate & Energy Action Plan.
For example, the applicants intend to:
a) Develop the housing units, including all affordable housing units, as “Net Zero” homes with solar panels
to produce equal or more electricity than the home uses on an average basis;
b) Construct the homes under the “Earth Advantage Platinum Certification” level which provide each
home with the most energy efficient construction techniques and appliances;
c) Provide each of the single family homes with 20amp services for AC Level 1 Electric Vehicle (EV)
charging within garages;
d) Retain the majority of the planned open space areas as they are today for zero domestic water use, but
for the subdivision’s pedestrian promenade and two pocket open-space areas which will include low water
demand plants and shrubs (2% +/- of 10 acre site). No natural turf or spray irrigation will be permitted
within the subdivision’s single family or cottage housing lots and will be written into the subdivision’s
CCR’s. Note: Some domestic irrigation will be necessary within the first couple of years for plantings within
the disturbance area around the box culvert to stabilize earth disturbance.
e) Design the roof orientation, as well as the orientation of lots, where possible to best utilize solar
orientation for ultimate collection;
• Solar Access: All of the proposed lots, including those illustrated within the cottage housing area, will
comply with the Solar Access Performance Standards, AMC 18.4.8.040 B., which allows a predetermined
solar access point in order to protect the applicable solar access standard. In this proposal’s case, all of the
15 | P a g e
proposed lots will comply with the standard solar access setback which allows for a 6’ shadow (similar to
a 6’ fence) at the shared property line or will not exceed a shadow line above the window sill of any
adjoining house to the north. At the time of a Building Permit application, plans will be submitted which
clearly identify solar access compliance.
Example Proposed Housing Styles • Architectural Design: All but the homes along North Mountain Avenue will be modern contemporary
in nature, similar to the homes the applicants built within the Verde Village Subdivision near the Ashland
Dog Park. The applicants contend the design provides for more efficient housing and has been readily
accepted by the market. That said, each house will include a 6’ x 8’ porch, be oriented toward the public
right-of-way or promenade corridor. For those units without alley access and garages fronting the street,
the applicants are proposing minimum setbacks for the garage and maximum setbacks for the porches so as
to encourage a more recessed garage and more articulated front façade that includes house and porch. At a
minimum, the garage face will remain at least 6’ back from the front of the porch. The homes along North
Mountain Avenue will have similar porch and garage setback restrictions, but their design will reflect the
more traditional housing design found along North Mountain Avenue.
16 | P a g e
Example Proposed Housing Styles
17 | P a g e
Example Proposed Housing Styles • Street & Parking Standards: The proposed subdivision’s streets, alleys and pedestrian pathways have
been sized in accordance with the City’s adopted Street Standards and include sidewalks, park rows and
on-street parking. No parking bays are proposed at this time, although final engineering may determine
otherwise. A total of 148 parking spaces, not including 6 surface parking spaces tentatively planned within
the cottage housing area, have been identified on the proposed site plan. 53 parking spaces are located along
the streets, 79 in one or two car garages and another 16 in surface parking areas between units. Combined,
the total average number of parking spaces for the standard 48 units is 3.08 parking spaces per unit – more
than adequate based on national and local parking standards. Overall, the general intent with the parking
plan is to encourage use of on-street parking along the curbs and planting strips, but to also design parking
along the two proposed alleys which provides for a more attractive and human scale neighborhood plan. .
• Written Statement per AMC 18.3.9.040 A.2.i: As part of a Performance Standards Option Subdivision
application, a written statement containing an explanation of the following is required:
i. The character of the proposed development and the manner in which it has been designed to take
advantage of the performance standards concept.
As expressed throughout this document, the character of the proposed subdivision has been designed to take
advantage of the performance standards concept, in lieu of a “standard” subdivision layout which often
includes standardized lot and street patterns that do not consider natural elements of the property or reflect
human scale interactions such as houses with front porches or pedestrian links separated from the street
system. The proposed subdivision is unique in that it attempts to work with the site’s natural features
(mature trees and creek corridor) as well as pre-existing features (neighboring house and street patterns).
The inclusion of alleys where possible provides opportunities for not only attractive house designs along
the streets, but also neighborly interaction which will hopefully produce a sense of pride. Overall, there are
numerous components of this particular subdivision that are very positive, as explained throughout this
document, that are possible due to the Performance Standards Option Chapter.
18 | P a g e
ii.The proposed manner of financing.
The project will be financed through conventional loaning practices as well as self-financing. The affordable
units will also be both financed through conventional loaning as well as government subsidies and
fundraising.
iii.The present ownership of all the land included within the development.
The present ownership of the subject property is owned by Robert Hodgins, Trustee.
iv. The method proposed to maintain common areas, such as common open space, common buildings and
private drives and driveways.
The maintenance of all common areas will be completed by the Subdivision’s Home Owners Association
through Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and the Association’s Bylaws. Monthly dues will be
collected for both the operating and maintenance expenses to maintain all common areas. A copy of the
CC&Rs and Bylaws will be provided to the City staff at the time of the Final Plan submittal and recorded
with the subdivision’s Final Plat.
v.The proposed time schedule of the development.
The proposed time schedule is largely market and labor dependent, but it is the applicant’s desire to begin
initial excavation for infrastructure in early 2022 and vertical construction by the summer of 2022.
vi. The findings of the applicant showing that the development meets the criteria set forth in this ordinance
and the Comprehensive Plan.
Findings of Fact have been included at the end of this document verifying the proposal meets the applicable
criteria.
• Wildfire Mitigation Planning: In addition to the neighborhood planning effort to reduce fuel reductions
annually within the Beach Creek Riparian area from the railroad tracks to North Mountain Park, all of the
proposed homes will comply with the recently adopted wildfire mitigation efforts (ORS R327.4) which
include:
A)Roofing to be asphalt shingles, metal roofing or equivalent Class B rated roof assembly;
B)Gutters to be provided with cover or material filler to prevent accumulation of leaves and debris;
C)Ventilation openings to be covered with non-combustible and corrosion resistant metal wire mesh;
D)Exterior walls to be non-combustible materials, including under eave overhangs and porch
extensions;
E)All decks and porch surfaces to be constructed of fire retardant wood or con-combustible materials;
F)All exterior windows will be tempered glass or similar rating;
G)All areas within 5’ of the perimeter of the house will be non-combustible in accordance with AMC
18.3.10.100.B;
H)All fencing will be non-combustible (vinyl) within 5’ of a house;
19 | P a g e
I) All standing dead and dying vegetation shall be removed from the property prior to initial
construction;
J) All new plantings, including trees, shrubs and ground cover throughout the site are devoid of any
plant materials listed on the Prohibited Flammable Plant List;
• Neighborhood Outreach: At the time of this writing, the applicants have had a total of six neighborhood
meetings, three “follow-up” neighborhood meetings and multiple one-on-one neighbor phone calls or on-
site meetings. Each of the six neighborhood meetings were specific to a specific neighborhood, usually
delineated by the abutting public street. The neighborhood meetings occurred the weeks of February 15th
and February 22nd, 2021 via Zoom video and included questions and answers. In total, the number of
individual neighbors who have inquired or participated in the zoom meetings was 143.
Note: the subdivision plans presented herein have been revised multiple times, somewhat significantly,
based on input from the various neighborhood meetings. The meetings were positive, informative and
helpful from both side’s perspectives and helped produce a better and more cohesive plan. And, although
the number of units have decreased by roughly six units, adjusted lot orientation to protect views and traffic
patterns revised, the applicants also understand that not all of the neighbors will consider the proposal a
positive development plan and will continue to have concerns as to the proposed development’s impacts on
neighborhood livability, property values, views, parking, traffic, etc.
• Site Design Review: The proposal will include a number of attached single family residential units that
will have some form of common wall construction, primarily connected at the garage wall. These are best
illustrated on the Beach Creek Site Plan where it shows a total of 14 units with attached garages (Lots #11,
12, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 30, 31, 32 and 33). In accordance with the AMC, a Site Review Permit
will be obtained for any of the attached units prior to construction. The purpose of the attached garages,
specifically adjacent to the alley, provides for better space planning within the lot boundary, but also
provides opportunity to improve the streetscape appearance and encourage pedestrian mobility.
A Site Review Permit will also be obtained for the cottage housing area which may or may not include
attached housing, but will need review for landscaping and parking lot design. The Beach Creek Site Plan
illustrates detached units, but because the plan for that area remains preliminary, it remains unknown if
there will be attached housing in that area.
• Traffic Impact: A Traffic Analysis was completed for the proposed project by Alex Georgevitch, a local
Traffic Engineering Consulting (Scoping Analysis and Neighborhood Review - May 2021). The analysis
concluded none of the streets will be adversely impacted by the proposed annexed property and its
development, but it’s also important to note the number of peak period vehicle trips fall below the threshold
50 p.m. peak hour trips for a Traffic Impact Analysis. The Executive Summary concludes:
“Though not required, the developer has asked that we look at impacts to the surrounding
neighborhood and residential streets. A review of the existing traffic counts in the area indicates
that a majority of the site trips will use North Mountain to get to other destinations in the
community. Using a very conservative split of 80% to North Mountain and 20% through the
20 | P a g e
surrounding neighborhood results in a total of 10 PM peak hour trips on those streets. Half of
the PM peak hour trips will use Orchid to get to the cottage cluster. The remaining five (5) PM
peak hour trips will utilize the remaining streets including Kirk, Village Park and Old Willow.
No streets will be adversely impacted by the annexation or the proposed development plan.“
Regardless, in response to neighborhood comments and concerns during the various neighborhood
meetings, the street design and connectivity pattern of the subdivision was finalized in consultation with
the project’s Traffic Engineer in an attempt to evaluate and mitigate any potential traffic impacts.
To this point, the internal street connection with Orchid Street was eliminated. This connection was deemed
by the Orchid Street neighborhood to be a potential for “cut-through” traffic in order to avoid the
intersection of North Mountain Avenue and East Main Street. After consultation with the Traffic Engineer,
the plan was revised to sever the connection and instead link the two neighborhoods by a pedestrian
42
18
16
16
28
48 units
proposed in annexation area 4
21 | P a g e
pathway. In doing so, potential cut-through traffic will be mitigated as the route to and through the
subdivision is significantly more circuitous. It’s also important to note the City’s Transportation System
Plan does NOT identify future street connectivity through the subject property and through the various
adjacent streets accept for Kirk Lane. As such, the applicants are proposing Kirk Lane, Old Willow Lane,
Village Park Drive and the pedestrian link to Orchid Street. This connectivity not only “connects”
neighborhoods, but it also distributes vehicular traffic so that no one street becomes the dominate traffic
route, especially if such streets are circuitously designed.
With the redesign and elimination of the Orchid Street connection, it provides two unique opportunities.
First, it provided additional land for housing ideal for “cottage” or cluster type housing with access only
from Orchid Street. This is discussed in greater detail below. Second, the redesign assured that any traffic
from this area of the development would only use Orchid Street. Thus, assuring “some” portion of vehicle
trips from the proposed development be diverted to and through the existing Orchid Street neighborhood
and not to and through other connecting streets.
Finally, it should be noted that Village Park Drive, Old Willow Way, Kirk Lane as well as the proposed
streets within the Beach Creek Subdivision have or will be designed in compliance with City Street
Standards for Neighborhood Streets. Such streets are designed to connect with other higher order streets
and planned to accommodate 1,500 average daily motor vehicle trips per day which is significantly higher
than currently existing vehicle trips and proposed vehicle trips to be generated by the proposed subdivision.
• Earth Advantage & Net Zero Certification: As noted, all of the proposed units, including the affordable
units, will include solar panels in an attempt to produce Net Zero housing throughout the subdivision. In
addition, all units are to be Earth Advantage Certified, certified by a third party, in order to produce more
energy efficient and energy conscientious housing.
• Phasing Plan: The proposed subdivision will likely be developed in one phase, but for financing and
market reasons, four phases are to be proposed due to the size of the area and amount of infrastructure. That
said, the first phase would be the portion along North Mountain Avenue, between the street and Beach
Creek. This would also include the new street up to the creek, but not the bridge. The second phase would
be the south side of the property, from the promenade to the railroad tracks and include the bridge and the
connection to Kirk Lane. The third phase would be the area north of the promenade from the north side of
the property to the promenade and include the street connections to Village Park Drive, Old Willow Lane
and the pedestrian connection into Ashland Village Subdivision. The final phase would be the area of the
cottages, but it should be clear, all infrastructure serving the cottages would be completed with the third
phase. A more detailed phasing plan will accompany the subdivision’s Final Plan submittal which will
include specific engineering details for the entire development which will identify utility connections
beyond any of the phases necessary to develop the property as proposed.
• Lot Coverage: As part of the Performance Standards purpose to encourage more flexible and creative
design, the proposed 52 lots will be allocated a percentage of lot coverage proportional with the site’s open
spaces, less unbuildable areas such as the Beach Creek riparian corridor and less 5% of the required open
space amount for subdivisions with 10 or more lots. In this case, the property is zoned R-1-5 with a 50%
22 | P a g e
lot coverage maximum and the subdivision includes 37,590 square feet of open space and 49,995 square
feet of land within the Beach Creek riparian corridor. After exclusion of the riparian corridor area and
exclusion of the 5% open space requirement, the remaining lot coverage allocation to each lot would be 176
sq. ft. and described as follows:
Acreage of Project: 435,600 sq. ft. (10 acres)
Riparian Corridor: 49,995 sq. ft. (1.14 acres)
Open Space Provided: 37,590 sq. ft. (.86 acres)
Open Space Required (5%): 19,275 sq. ft. (based on 8.85 acres)
Excess Open Space Provided: 18,315 sq. ft.
R-1-5 Lot Coverage (50%): 9,157 sq. ft. (50% of Excess Open Space)
Per Lot Allocation (52 lots): 176 sq. ft. (50% of Excess Open Space / 52 lots)
• Housing Types: The applicants have attempted to provide for a mixture of housing types and sizes with
the intent to create a more economically and socially diverse neighborhood – similar to the mixture of
abutting neighborhoods. As such, the proposed site plan includes example house footprints with optional
house sizes primarily relating to the number of bedrooms, second story additions, attached and detached
housing as well as clustered housing (cottages). The tying component of the housing types will be through
the initial coordination of architectural design, commonality of materials, flow of pedestrian amenities and
shared open spaces.
• Cottage Housing: The proposal does include an “example” site plan illustrating four cottage housing
units within the property’s southeast corner. The applicant’s intent is to “boost” the number of affordable
housing units required within the subdivision from 6 to 8 by utilizing the provisions of the recently adopted
Cottage Housing Ordinance. As such, the cottage housing area of four “cottage” lots, as well as four
“standard” affordable lots within the subdivision will be gifted to Habitat for Humanity who will then build
eight affordable housing units under AMC 18.5.8.050 G.1.c. and sell or rent such units to qualified families
earning at or below 80% of the area’s median income.
As illustrated, the cottage site plan identifies one 1,000 sq. ft. unit and three 800 sq. ft. units separated by a
large open space area. The cottages will be single story and meet all setback standards, including a 10’
setback (6’ required) between Lot 41 and the adjacent neighbor to the east who requested the additional
setback during the neighborhood meetings. The plan also illustrates a six space parking lot and turn-around
in addition to a “public” easement for a sidewalk connecting Orchid Street and Beach Creek Way. Lastly,
Lot #42 is not part of the Cottage Housing cluster, but due to its close relationship with the cottages and
public pedestrian sidewalk, the applicants and Habitat for Humanity are working on plans to orientate and
design the unit so that it appears as a seamless extension of the cottages with similar design, fencing
materials, fence height and sidewalk connectivity.
Again, the four cottage lots and common open space will be created at the time of the subdivision and the
open space and parking lot design will be subject to a Site Review Permit per AMC 18.2.3.090 (Cottage
Housing). At the time of the project’s subdivision and infrastructure installation, the applicants will provide
the cottage housing properties, as well as the four other affordable housing lots, lateral utility connections,
curbs, gutters, sidewalks, street trees and the short “public” pedestrian sidewalk link traversing through the
23 | P a g e
cottage lot. The applicants also intend to assist Habitat for Humanity with the cottage housing permitting
and design work, but due to timing and specific floor planning needs, separating the application allows
Habitat for Humanity additional time to work through their preferred designs, financial needs and
management plans.
Overall, the applicants contend the initial site analysis and neighborhood planning efforts of the proposed
subdivision have been well thought-out. The end result will be a neighborhood that is appealing, sustainable
and a more diverse neo-traditional neighborhood with the inclusion of:
• Two extra affordable housing units (eight total);
• A neighborly street connectivity pattern;
• Houses with porches for neighborly interaction and human scale design;
•A range of different housing types and sizes;
• Retention and design considerations for the site’s many mature trees;
• Retention of the site’s historic house;
• The incorporation of added open spaces in key visual areas;
•Street trees to be added within the park row along the Mountain Avenue frontage per City Street Standards;
• The placement of streets along open spaces corridors for visual “public” benefit;
• Inclusion of alleys where possible to increase human scale streetscape along the public rights-of-way;
• The linking of pedestrian paths with surrounding neighborhoods;
• The inclusion of an attractive promenade corridor along housing fronts for active neighborly interaction;
• An attractive and inviting entry corridor or gateway into the subdivision;
• 100% of homes being “Net Zero”;
• 100% of the homes being Earth Advantage Platinum;
•A street design with little to zero parking bays and instead consistent park row and tree canopy street tree
design.
IV. PROJECT FINDINGS OF FACT:
The following information has been provided by the applicants to help the Planning Staff, Planning
Commission and neighbors better understand the proposed project. In addition, the required findings of fact
have been provided to ensure the proposed project meets the requirements and procedures outlined in the
Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) pertaining to Annexation Criteria and Standards in Chapter 18.5.8, the
Performance Standards Options Subdivision requirements in Chapter 18.3.9, Water Resource Protection
Zones, Chapter 18.3.11 and Tree Removal Permit in Chapter 18.5.7.040.
For clarity reasons, the following documentation has been formatted in “outline” form with the City’s
approval criteria noted in BOLD font and the applicant’s response in regular font. Also, there are a number
of responses that are repeated in order to ensure that the findings of fact are complete.
AMC 18.5.8.050 Annexation Approval Criteria and Standards
An annexation may be approved if the proposed request for annexation conforms, or can be made to
conform through the imposition of conditions, with all of the following approval criteria:
24 | P a g e
A. The land is within the City’s Urban Growth Boundary.
The subject property to be annexed is within the City of Ashland’s Urban Growth Boundary as evidenced
by the City of Ashland’s Comprehensive Plan Map (inserted below).
B. The proposed zoning for the annexed area is in conformance with the designation indicated on
the Comprehensive Plan Map, and the project, if proposed concurrently with the annexation, is an
allowed use within the proposed zoning.
As evidenced with the inserted City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan Map above, the subject property has
a Single Family Residential designation and the proposed single family residential subdivision is an allowed
use.
C. The land is currently contiguous with the present City limits.
As evidenced with the inserted City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan Map above, the subject property is
contiguous with the City of Ashland’s City limits.
D. Adequate City facilities for the provision of water to the site as determined by the Public Works
Department; the transport of sewage from the site to the waste water treatment plant as determined
by the Public Works Department; the provision of electricity to the site as determined by the Electric
Subject Property
(single tax lot)
City UGB Boundary
25 | P a g e
Department; and urban storm drainage as determined by the Public Works Department can and will
be provided to and through the subject property. Unless the City has declared a moratorium based
upon a shortage of water, sewer, or electricity, it is recognized that adequate capacity exists system-
wide for these facilities.
As noted, the subject property to be annexed into City limits is surrounded by existing urbanized lands with
adequately sized facilities to accommodate the annexed property and its proposed development. After
various meetings and communications with the project’s Civil Engineers, and City’s Public Works and
Electric Departments, there have been no determinations relating to inadequate capacity.
As evidenced with the submission of the attached Conceptual Drainage & Utility Plan, North Mountain Avenue, Village Park Drive, Old Willow Lane, Kirk Lane and Orchid Street all have water, sewer, electric,
phone and other utility and service connections within their rights-of-way and abutting the property. The
plan conceptually illustrates the various utility connections as well as storm water retention and outflow points.
E. Adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property. For the purposes of this section "adequate transportation" for annexations consists of vehicular, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit transportation meeting the following standards.
1. For vehicular transportation a 20-foot wide paved access exists, or can and will be constructed,along the full frontage of the project site to the nearest fully improved collector or arterial street. All streets adjacent to the annexed area shall be improved, at a minimum, to a half-street standard with a minimum 20-foot wide driving surface. The City may, after assessing the impact of the development, require the full improvement of streets adjacent to the annexed area. All streets located within
annexed areas shall be fully improved to City standards. Where future street dedications are indicated on the Street Dedication Map or required by the City, provisions shall be made for the dedication and improvement of these streets and included with the application for annexation.
Adequate vehicular transportation is to be provided to and through the subject property. All internal streets
have been sized and designed in accordance with the adopted City Street Standards and Transportation
System Plan. North Mountain Avenue, Village Park Drive, Old Willow Lane, Kirk Lane and Orchid Street are pre-existing “improved” streets, all paved and at least 20’ in width for vehicular and large truck ingress, egress and turning mobility as provided for in the adopted Street Design Standards for residential streets. At the time of the abutting streets initial construction, they were designed with the expectation the subject
property would be developed and streets connected.
2. For bicycle transportation safe and accessible bicycle facilities exist, or can and will be constructed.Should the annexation be adjacent to an arterial street, bike lanes shall be provided on or adjacent to the arterial street. Likely bicycle destinations from the project site shall be determined and safe and accessible bicycle facilities serving those destinations shall be indicated.
All internal streets, as well as the pre-existing abutting streets to the east and north, have been designed as
residential streets with shared vehicular and bicycle facilities. North Mountain Avenue currently has a separate bicycle lane parallel with North Mountain Avenue and the property’s frontage and meets this criterion.
26 | P a g e
Further, a 12’ dedication of property along the south property line (parallel with Central Oregon Pacific Railroad) will occur at the time of the Final Plat for a future bike path in accordance with the adopted
Transportation System Plan (TSP). The TSP illustrates a duel bike path along both sides of the railroad
tracks from Tolman Creek Road to a site just west of Fourth Street.
3. For pedestrian transportation safe and accessible pedestrian facilities exist, or can and will be constructed. Full sidewalk improvements shall be provided on one side adjacent to the annexation for all streets adjacent to the proposed annexed area. Sidewalks shall be provided as required by ordinance on all streets within the annexed area. Where the project site is within one-quarter (1/4) mile of an existing sidewalk system, the sidewalks from the project site shall be constructed to extend
and connect to the existing system. Likely pedestrian destinations from the project site shall be determined and the safe and accessible pedestrian facilities serving those destinations shall be indicated.
All proposed streets within the annexed area will include sidewalks and adjacent park rows with a tree lined
canopy and planting strips in accordance with the adopted City’s adopted Street Standards. Such facilities will connect to the existing sidewalk facilities at the time of street construction, including the short section of Old Willow Lane and Kirk Lane which abut the subject property with unimproved hammerhead turn-arounds. This is not an unusual circumstance in this particular situation and was likely granted approval with the initial subdivision’s design with the expectation the curbs and sidewalks would continue to extend
to the subject property. This is confirmed by the existence of 1’ street plugs (a “street plug” is a strip of property at the end of a right-of-way intended to ensure municipal control over access to a vacant parcel of land so that future access management and street connectivity is assured). Nevertheless, the City of Ashland likely required a cash bond to finalize the street improvements at the time the subject property was to be developed.
4. For transit transportation, should transit service be available to the site, or be likely to be extended
to the site in the future based on information from the local public transit provider, provisions shall be made for the construction of adequate transit facilities, such as bus shelters and bus turn-out lanes. All required transportation improvements shall be constructed and installed prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any new structures on the annexed property.
The applicants have reviewed the RVTD 2040 Transit Master Plan and found no planned improvements in
the vicinity of the site and also reached out to RVTD staff who did not express interest in a transit facility
along this property.
27 | P a g e
Transportation Facility Photos - “adjacent to subject property”
North Mountain Ave. – looking northeast
North Mountain Ave. – looking south
North Mountain Ave. – looking south – from RR tracks
28 | P a g e
Old Willow Lane
Village Park Drive
1’ Street Plug(s) (City Owned)
29 | P a g e
Kirk Lane
Orchid Street
30 | P a g e
F. For all residential annexations, a plan shall be provided demonstrating that the development of
the entire property will ultimately occur at a minimum density of 90 percent of the base density for
the zone, unless reductions in the total number of units is necessary to accommodate significant
natural features, topography, access limitations, or similar physical constraints. The owner or owners
of the property shall sign an agreement, to be recorded with the County Clerk after approval of the
annexation, ensuring that future development will occur in accord with the minimum density
indicated in the development plan. For purposes of computing maximum density, portions of the
annexed area containing undevelopable areas such as wetlands, floodplain corridor lands, or slopes
greater than 35 percent shall not be included.
For the purposes of computing minimum density, the subject property is one parcel of 10 acres to be zoned
R-1-5 which has a base density 4.5 dwelling units per acre or 45 total units (AMC 18.3.9.050 A). The
proposal is for 48 units, not including the four “cottage” units noted herein as future units for a total of 52
units or 116% of base density and therefore the proposal meets the minimum density criterion. At the time
of the annexation approval, the owners of the property will sign an agreement, to be recorded with the
County Clerk, ensuring that any future development will occur in accordance with the minimum densities
indicated with the development plan or densities established through the annexation’s Final Order.
For the purposes of computing maximum density, less the area within the Beach Creek Riparian Corridor
that is “within” the annexed area (.29 acres), the AMC allows for maximum 60% increase in density based
on various provisions outlined in AMC 18.3.9.050 B. which include density bonus provisions for
conservation housing, common open space and affordable housing. In this particular case, the proposal will
include “all” three density bonus provisions as all of the proposed units, including the affordable housing
units, and will meet and exceed the standards for each:
1) Conservation Housing: The applicants propose that 100% of the homes will be built to meet the
minimum requirements for certification as an Earth Advantage home. In this particular case, each
home will “exceed” the minimum Earth Advantage Standards and be Earth Advantage “Platinum”
and each will include solar panels and be “Net Zero” housing, thus producing more energy than
typically consumed. Evidence of proposed methodologies meeting such requirements will be
provided with each building permit submitted to the City. In this case, the proposal complies and is
eligible for a 15% density bonus as outlined in AMC 18.3.9.050.B.1.
2) Common Open Space: As exhibited with the attached Site and Landscaping Plans, the proposed
subdivision includes a combination of open space areas that are both natural and passive recreational
spaces. Specifically, the entire length of the Beach Creek corridor (1.14 acres) will remain “natural”
other than a proposed 24” - 30” trail within the corridor for the purpose of maintaining the riparian
area’s Blackberries, including a section of dirt trail leading to the adjacent subdivision’s open space
to the north which currently has little to no access from that side of the property.
The subdivision will also include multiple areas of passive recreational space which include .70
acres in areas such as the subdivision’s central promenade, the entry “feature” or open space south
of the old house and the two small pocket open spaces as illustrated on the plans. In total, 1.84 acres
of the 10 acre property are to remain in some form of open space, not including the areas dedicated
31 | P a g e
for the future bike path, pedestrian links to other neighborhoods or any open space area within the
Cottage Housing phase of the proposal.
Overall, the applicants contend the provided open space areas will be a significant amenity to project
residents, as well as surrounding community, as the vast majority of the open space areas are to be
“exposed” along the public rights-of-way for all of the public to see the site’s Oak Trees and its
riparian environment. Of particular importance to the project’s open space design is the large open
space area south of the existing house which was intentionally designed to remain as open space,
along with the adjacent swath of Beach Creek in the background, with the intent to respect the
home’s current farm setting and history along North Mountain Avenue.
The applicants contend the proposal complies and is eligible for a 10% density bonus as outlined in
AMC 18.3.9.050.B.2.a & b. as the total open space area proposed is 1.84 acres or roughly 18% of
the entire property. In this case, the applicants would be eligible for a 13% density bonus in this
category (less 5% open space for the initial subdivision standards). Note: although more open space
is being provided than required, only a maximum of 10% is permissible in accordance with AMC
18.3.9.050 B.2 and 18.4.4.070 Open Spaces.
3.Affordable Housing. Based on the Ashland Municipal Code, “a maximum density bonus of 35
percent is allowed for developments including affordable housing. Developments shall receive a
density bonus of two units for each affordable housing unit provided. Affordable housing bonus shall
be for residential units that are guaranteed affordable in accordance with the standards of section
18.2.5.050, Affordable Housing Standards”. In this particular case, the proposal will include eight
(8) affordable housing units to be constructed by Habitat for Humanity. Such units will be sold or
rented to families/individuals earning equal or less than 80% of the Area’s Median Income. As such,
for the eight provided affordable units, 16 “market rate units” or 35% of the base density is
permissible.
It should be clearly understood, that although the applicants meet and exceed all of the density bonus
provisions for additional “bonus” housing beyond the property’s base density, the applicants are NOT
requesting a 60% density bonus as permitted which would be equivalent to a 72 unit (an extra 20
units) subdivision, but instead only seven additional units or a 16% density bonus under the
Affordable Housing option. The primary reason for such a limited request is the applicant’s response
to neighbors requesting the density remain in context with the surrounding neighborhood(s), but also
the applicant’s belief the proposed subdivision plan will produce a very positive living experience as
currently designed.
G. Except as provided in subsection 18.5.8.050.G.7, below, annexations with a density or potential
density of four residential units or greater and involving residential zoned lands, or commercial,
employment or industrial lands with a Residential Overlay (R-Overlay) shall meet the following
requirements.
1. The total number of affordable units provided to qualifying buyers, or to qualifying renters, shall
be equal to or exceed 25 percent of the base density as calculated using the unit equivalency values
32 | P a g e
set forth herein. The base density of the property for the purposes of this calculation shall exclude
any undevelopable portions of the property such as wetlands, floodplain corridor lands, water
resource areas, slopes greater than 35 percent, or land area dedicated as a public park.
a. Ownership units restricted to households earning at or below 120 percent the area median income
shall have an equivalency value of 0.75 unit.
b. Ownership units restricted to households earning at or below 100 percent the area median income
shall have an equivalency value of 1.0 unit.
c. Ownership or rental units restricted to households earning at or below 80 percent the area median
income shall have an equivalency value of 1.25 unit.
A total of eight affordable units are proposed by the applicants to be provided with this development which
are restricted to households earning at or below 80 percent the area’s median income and thus will comply
with 18.5.8.050.G.1.c. (an equivalency factor of 1.25 units). The calculations are as follows:
Affordable Units Base Dens: County (7.90 acres) less unbuildable (.29 ac) Total: 7.61 acres
Affordable Units: 25% of Base Density (7.61 X 4.5 X .25) Total: 8.561 units
Affordable Units Required: @ 80% AMI = 1.25 “equivalency value” Total: 6.84 units (6)*
Affordable Units Provided: 5 (3-bedroom) & 3 (2-bedroom) Total: 8 units
Affordable Units “Extra” Required 6 / Provided 8 Total: 2 units
* Affordable housing density is “rounded down” per AMC 18.5.8.050G.7 (below).
2. As alternative to providing affordable units per subsection 18.5.8.050.G.1, above, the applicant
may provide title to a sufficient amount of buildable land for development complying with subsection
18.5.8.050.G.1.b, above, through transfer to a non-profit (IRC 501(c)(3)) affordable housing
developer or public corporation created under ORS 456.055 to 456.235.
As noted, the applicants are partnering with Habitat for Humanity to provide eight affordable housing units
within the subdivision. Habitat for Humanity is a local non-profit affordable housing developer experienced
in working with affordable housing and municipal affordable housing programs.
In this case, the applicants will be providing Habitat for Humanity title to nine properties (including one
common area) within the proposed subdivision. Four properties will be interspersed throughout the
subdivision and the four parcels and common area lot located within the subdivision’s southeast corner.
a. The land to be transferred shall be located within the project meeting the standards set forth in
subsections 18.5.8.050.G.5 and 18.5.8.050.G.6.
The applicants propose to transfer a total of eight parcels and one common area lot within the subdivision
to generate eight affordable housing units – all within the project’s boundary.
The proposal does meet the standards noted in AMC 18.5.8.050 G.5 and 18.5.8.050 G.7 as described below.
33 | P a g e
b.All needed public facilities shall be extended to the area or areas proposed for transfer.
The applicants will extend all public facilities necessary for the eight affordable housing units to be
transferred to Habitat for Humanity. All noted infrastructure will be installed per the phasing plan. This
includes the infrastructure relating to sidewalks, curbs, gutters, planter strips, street trees, paving and all
lateral extensions into the property line. Further, the applicants will install the public sidewalk from Orchid
Street to Beach Creek Way. Exclusions include the common area improvements within the cottage housing
area such as the parking lot, driveway to parking lot, private sidewalks, planting or trees within the cottage
housing area of the property.
c.Prior to commencement of the project, title to the land shall be transferred to the City, an
affordable housing developer which must either be a unit of government, a non-profit 501(c)(3)
organization, or public corporation created under ORS 456.055 to 456.235.
The noted five parcels of land accommodating eight affordable housing units will be transferred to Habitat
for Humanity, a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, at the time the subdivision’s final plat has been recoded.
d.The land to be transferred shall be deed restricted to comply with Ashland’s affordable housing
program requirements.
The parcels of land to be transferred to Habitat for Humanity will be deed restricted to comply with
Ashland’s affordable housing program requirements. Habitat for Humanity representatives have been in
contact with the City’s Affordable Housing Program Specialist and a deed restriction for each of the
transferred lots will be recorded with the plat.
e.Transfer of title of buildable land in accordance with this subsection shall exempt the project from
the development schedule requirements set forth in subsection 18.5.8.050.G.4.
Applicants are aware of this provision.
3. The affordable units shall be comparable in bedroom mix with the market rate units in the
development.
a. The number of bedrooms per dwelling unit in the affordable units within the residential
development shall be in equal proportion to the number of bedrooms per dwelling unit in the market
rate units within the residential development. This provision is not intended to require the same floor
area in affordable units as compared to market rate units. The minimum square footage of each
affordable unit shall comply with the minimum required floor based as set forth in Table
18.5.8.050.G.3, or as established by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
for dwelling units developed under the HOME program.
34 | P a g e
Unit Type Minimum Required Unit Floor Area (Square Feet)
Table 18.5.8.050.G.3.
Studio 350
1 bedroom 500
2 bedroom 800
3 bedroom 1,000
4 bedroom 1,250
The applicants will be transferring a total of eight parcels of land intended to provide a total of eight
affordable units where only six affordable units are required under the provisions of AMC 18.5.8.050 G.1.c.
As such, the total number of bedrooms within the market rate units will be in proportion to the six required
affordable units.
4. A development schedule shall be provided that demonstrates that that the affordable housing units
per subsection 18.5.8.050.G shall be developed, and made available for occupancy, as follows:
a. That 50 percent of the affordable units shall have been issued building permits prior to issuance
of a certificate of occupancy for the last of the first 50 percent of the market rate units.
b. Prior to issuance of a building permit for the final ten percent of the market rate units, the final
50 percent of the affordable units shall have been issued certificates of occupancy.
In accordance with AMC 18.5.8.050 G.2.e., this application proposal is exempt from this criterion.
However, it is the applicant’s desire that at least four of the required six affordable units will be made
available for occupancy prior to 50% of the market rate units receiving Certificate of Occupancy permits.
5. That affordable housing units shall be constructed using comparable building materials and
include equivalent amenities as the market rate units.
a. The exterior appearance of the affordable units in any residential development shall be visually
compatible with the market rate units in the development. External building materials and finishes
shall be substantially the same in type and quality for affordable units as for market rate units.
It is the applicants’ intention and expectation the proposed eight affordable housing units to be designed
and constructed by Habitat for Humanity will be constructed using comparable building materials and
include equivalent amenities as the market rate units, including a visually compatible exterior design, use
of materials and overall appearance of quality.
b. Affordable units may differ from market rate units with regard to floor area, interior finishes and
materials, and housing type; provided, that the affordable housing units are provided with
comparable features to the market rate units, and shall have generally comparable improvements
35 | P a g e
related to energy efficiency, including plumbing, insulation, windows, appliances, and heating and
cooling systems.
The proposed eight affordable units will have comparable improvements related to energy efficiency,
including plumbing, insulation, windows, appliances, and heating and cooling systems. All of the proposed
affordable units will include solar panels for Net Zero efficiency and be built to Earth Advantage Platinum
standards.
6. Exceptions to the requirements of subsections 18.5.8.050.G.2 through 18.5.8.050.G.5, above, may
be approved by the City Council upon consideration of one or more of the following:
a. That an alternative land dedication as proposed would accomplish additional benefits for the City,
consistent with the purposes of this chapter, than would development meeting the on-site dedication
requirement of subsection 18.5.8.050.G.2.
b.That the alternative phasing proposal not meeting subsection 18.5.8.050.G.4 provided by the
applicant provides adequate assurance that the affordable housing units will be provided in a timely
fashion.
c.That the materials and amenities applied to the affordable units within the development, that are
not equivalent to the market rate units per subsection 18.5.8.050.G.6, are necessary due to local, State,
or Federal Affordable Housing standards or financing limitations.
No exceptions to the requirements of subsections 18.5.8.050.G.2 through 18.5.8.050.G.5 are being
proposed.
7. The total number of affordable units described in this subsection 18.5.8.050.G shall be determined
by rounding down fractional answers to the nearest whole unit. A deed restriction or similar legal
instrument shall be used to guarantee compliance with affordable criteria for a period of not less than
60 years for units qualified as affordable rental housing, or 30 years for units qualified as affordable
for-purchase housing.
A total of eight affordable units are proposed by the applicants to be provided with this development which
are restricted to households earning at or below 80 percent the area’s median income and thus will comply
with 18.5.8.050.G.1.c. (an equivalency factor of 1.25 units). The calculations are as follows:
Affordable Units Base Dens: County (7.90 acres) less unbuildable (.29 ac) Total: 7.61 acres
Affordable Units: 25% of Base Density (7.61 X 4.5 X .25) Total: 8.561 units
Affordable Units Required: @ 80% AMI = 1.25 “equivalency value” Total: 6.84 units (6)*
Affordable Units Provided: 5 (3-bedroom) & 3 (2-bedroom) Total: 8 units
Affordable Units “Extra” Required 6 / Provided 8 Total: 2 units
As noted, the parcels of land to be transferred to Habitat for Humanity will be deed restricted to comply
with Ashland’s affordable housing program requirements which includes restrictive language relating to
36 | P a g e
guaranteed compliance with rental and resale restriction periods. Habitat for Humanity representatives have
been in contact with the City’s Affordable Housing Program Specialist and a deed restriction for each of
the transferred lots will be recorded with the plat.
H. One or more of the following standards are met:
1. The proposed area for annexation is to be residentially zoned, under the Comprehensive Plan, and
the applicant will obtain planning action approval for an outright permitted use, special permitted
use, or conditional use in conformance with the annexation request.
The proposal complies with 18.5.8.050 H.1. as the subject property is residentially zoned under the City’s
Comprehensive Plan and the application herein includes a request for a residential single family subdivision.
Single family residences, as well as the planned residential cottages, are outright permitted or special
permitted uses per AMC 18.2.2.030.
2. The proposed lot or lots will be zoned M-1, CM, E-1, or C-1 under the Comprehensive Plan, and
the applicant will obtain Site Design Review approval for an outright permitted use, or special
permitted use concurrent with the annexation request.
Not applicable as the subject property is zoned residential.
3. A current or probable public health hazard exists due to lack of full City sanitary sewer or water
services.
Not applicable. There are no known or probable public health hazards that exists due to lack of full City
sanitary sewer or water services.
4. Existing development in the proposed annexation has inadequate water or sanitary sewer service,
or the service will become inadequate within one year.
Not applicable as the subject property to be annexed is vacant, other than small accessory farming structures
without water or sanitary services.
5. The area proposed for annexation has existing City water or sanitary sewer service extended,
connected, and in use, and a signed consent to annexation agreement has been filed and accepted by
the City.
Not applicable as the subject property to be annexed is vacant, other than small accessory farming structures
without water or sanitary services.
6. The lot or lots proposed for annexation are an island completely surrounded by lands within the
City limits.
The proposal complies with 18.5.8.050 H.6. as the subject property to be annexed is an island completely
surrounded by lands within the City limits.
37 | P a g e
AMC 18.3.9.040 A.3. Outline Plan Approval Criteria (Subdivision)
3. Approval Criteria for Outline Plan. The Planning Commission shall approve the outline plan
when it finds all of the following criteria have been met.
a. The development meets all applicable ordinance requirements of the City.
Unless otherwise noted herein, the applicants contend the proposed subdivision meets all applicable
ordinance requirements of the City of Ashland.
That said, the Purpose Statement of the Performance Standards Option Subdivision (AMC 18.3.9.010) “is
to allow an option for more flexible design than is permissible under the conventional zoning codes. The
design should stress energy efficiency, architectural creativity, and innovation; use the natural features of
the landscape to their greatest advantage; provide a quality of life equal to or greater than that provided
in developments built under the standard zoning codes; be aesthetically pleasing; provide for more efficient
land use; and reduce the impact of development on the natural environment and neighborhood”.
As such, through the use of flexible design, the applicants have:
1) Stressed energy efficiency, architectural creativity and innovation: The applicants are proposing to
construct Earth Advantage homes with an architectural style that provides for a variety of housing
types that are consistent with the volume and mass of housing in the adjoining subdivisions;
2) Used the natural features of the landscape to their greatest advantage: The plan recognizes the
site’s significant natural features such as the site’s large riparian Beach Creek traversing through the
property or the large mature Oak Trees and Pine Trees and have not only incorporated such features
into the design, but have also made such features an integral part of the subdivision’s human scale
character.
3) Provide for a quality of life equal to or greater than that provided in developments built under the
standard zoning codes: The applicants have generated a plan that incorporates the site’s natural
elements and embraced the “human scale” concepts of found in other Performance Standard Options
Subdivisions which have produced neighborhoods such as the Kestrel Park, Ashland Village, North
Mountain and Clay Creek Gardens neighborhoods which include various neo-traditional elements
such as street connectivity, use of alleys where possible, mitigated garage façades, street facing
homes, etc.;
4) Provide for more efficient land use: The mixture of housing types within the planned range of
densities in an integrated pattern improves transportation options and maximizes community
interaction;
5) Reduces the impact of development on the natural environment and neighborhood: The proposed
design is predicated upon the preservation and incorporation of the site’s riparian corridor, large
mature trees and existing street pattern found in the surrounding neighborhoods. The applicants
contend the overall design and inclusion of the these elements reduce the impacts of development
on the natural environment and surrounding neighborhoods.
38 | P a g e
b.Adequate key City facilities can be provided including water, sewer, paved access to and through
the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, police and fire protection, and adequate
transportation; and that the development will not cause a City facility to operate beyond capacity.
All of the site’s utilities will extend to the subject property from the various public utility easements
and street rights-of way surrounding site. Based on discussions with the various service providers, there
is adequate capacity to serve the development. All utilities will extend to and through the property as
identified on the Conceptual Utility Plan. At the time of the application’s Final Plan submittal, Civil
Engineered drawings will be submitted identifying specific utility details and information.
c.The existing and natural features of the land; such as wetlands, floodplain corridors, ponds, large
trees, rock outcroppings, etc., have been identified in the plan of the development and significant
features have been included in the open space, common areas, and unbuildable areas.
To the best of the applicants’ abilities, the site’s natural features have been identified and included in the
open space, common areas, and unbuildable areas of the development. Overall, the plan recognizes the
site’s significant natural features such as the Beach Creek riparian corridor traversing through the property
and the large mature Oak and Pine Trees and have not only incorporated such features into the design, but
have also made such features an integral part of the subdivision’s human scale character.
d.The development of the land will not prevent adjacent land from being developed for the uses
shown in the Comprehensive Plan.
The subject property is surrounded on all sides by urbanized lands in compliance with the City’s
Comprehensive Plan, including existing residential subdivisions to the north, east and west (Single Family
Residential), as well as the City’s corporation yard and Central Pacific Railroad tracks to the south
(Employment). As such, the development of the subject property will not prevent adjacent land from being
developed for the uses shown in the Comprehensive Plan.
e.There are adequate provisions for the maintenance of open space and common areas, if required
or provided, and that if developments are done in phases that the early phases have the same or
higher ratio of amenities as proposed in the entire project.
At this early juncture, the applicants believe the subdivision will be completed in one to two phases with
the only unknown being the condition of the economy at the time of construction. If it is determined that
phasing is necessary, the phasing would occur as illustrated on the attached preliminary Phasing Plan, with
the entry street from North Mountain Avenue and the box culvert over Beach Creek being developed
initially with either phase. A final Phasing Plan will be submitted with the project’s Final Plan application
when the project’s final civil engineering. All open space areas within either phase will be left in their
natural state, such as the Beach Creek Riparian Corridor, or improved as illustrated on the plans and that if
the subdivision is phases, the initial phase will be completed and have the same or higher ratio of amenities
proposed within the second phase.
39 | P a g e
Further, all identified open spaces within the planned subdivision will be owned and managed in perpetuity
by the subdivision’s Home Owner’s Association (HOA) and include Conditions, Covenants and
Restrictions (CC&Rs) outlining the HOA’s budget and maintenance responsibilities for such open spaces.
A draft copy of the CC&Rs will be provided with the Final Plan application submittal.
f. The proposed density meets the base and bonus density standards established under this chapter.
As noted on Page 2, the subject property is 10 acres and zoned R-1-5 with a base density of 4.5 units per
acre or 45 total units. The applicants are proposing 52 units with the addition of a 16% density bonus which
meets the base and density bonus standards of AMC 18.3.9.
g. The development complies with the Street Standards.
As evidenced with the attached street cross-sections, Exhibit C.2, the proposed streets comply with the
City’s adopted Street Standards and/or are consistent with the existing right-of-way widths and street
improvements currently abutting the subject property. The applicants are requesting an exception to the
Street Standards for the park row (planting strip) and street trees abutting the travel lanes for the area of the
bridge crossing.
AMC 18.3.11.060 D. Limited Activities and Uses within Water Resource Protection Zones
As provided in AMC 18.3.11.060 A.3., the building and grading activities within identified Water Resource
Protection Zones may be authorized when the location and construction of a public street, bridge, trail,
multi-use paths and utilities are deemed necessary to maintain a functional system and upon finding that no
other reasonable, alternate location outside the Water Resource Protection Zone exists. The City’s Land
Use Ordinance, the Comprehensive Plan, Transportation System Plan, adopted utility master plans, and
other adopted documents shall guide this determination.
In the applicant’s review of the surrounding area’s street system, Land Use Ordinance, Comprehensive
Plan, Zoning Plan and most significantly the Transportation System Plan, it was determined a street
connection between North Mountain Avenue and Fordyce Street was deemed necessary to maintain a
functional system. The applicants also contend the street connection between North Mountain Avenue and
Fordyce, as well as the connectivity of surrounding neighborhoods, complies with various policies within
the Comprehensive Plan and Transportation System Plan relating to street connectivity, reduced vehicle
miles traveled and multi-use mobility. Further, the connection provides an additional emergency service
route for the various surrounding neighborhoods. To this end, a Limited Activities and Uses Permit is being
requested by the applicants for the construction of a “bridge” or bottomless box culvert within the Beach
Creek riparian area in accordance with the approval criteria of AMC 183.11.060 D, as follows:
D. Limited Activities and Uses Permit. All limited activities and uses described in section 18.3.11.060
shall be subject to a Type I procedure in section 18.5.1.050. An application for a limited activities and
uses permit shall be approved if the proposal meets all of the following criteria:
40 | P a g e
1. All activities shall be located as far away from streams and wetlands as practicable, designed to
minimize intrusion into the Water Resource Protection Zone and disturb as little of the surface area
of the Water Resource Protection Zone as practicable.
The proposed crossing over the Beach Creek riparian corridor will be via a bottomless box culvert which
will allow street connectivity through the subdivision from North Mountain Avenue, into the heart of the
subdivision and to and through the adjoining streets to the north and east, including Kirk Lane which is on
the City’s Transportation System Plan as a required connection from North Mountain Avenue to Fordyce
Street.
Ashland Transportation System Plan - 2012
The proposed bottomless box culvert is a system designed to minimize intrusion into the Water Resource
Protection Zone and disturb as little of the surface area of the protection zone as feasibly practicable.
Included with the request for the box culvert is an exception request from the City’s Street Standards to
exclude the bridge’s planter strips and street trees for the section that crosses the riparian area in an attempt
to limit the culvert’s width within the corridor and further minimize its intrusion.
2. The proposed activity shall be designed, located and constructed to minimize excavation, grading,
area of impervious surfaces, loss of native vegetation, erosion, and other adverse impacts on water
resources.
As noted, the proposed bottomless box culvert is a system designed to minimize intrusion into the Water
Resource Protection Zone and disturb as little of the surface area of the protection zone as feasibly
practicable. The location of the crossing was chosen for a multitude of reasons, one being the preservation
of the site’s mature trees as well as the street’s intersection distance from the railroad crossing, but also the
Crossing location of Beach Creek per TSP.
Table 10-3 Preferred Plan Intersection & Roadway Projects – Project R30
North Mountain Avenue
Kirk Lane
41 | P a g e
narrowness of the riparian channel at this location which limits excavation, grading, area of impervious
surfaces, loss of vegetation, erosion and any other adverse impact on the creek. Again, included with the
request for the box culvert is an exception request from the City’s Street Standards to exclude the bridge’s
planter strips and street trees for the section that crosses the riparian area in an attempt to limit the culvert’s
width within the corridor and further minimize its intrusion.
3. On stream beds or banks within the bank-full stage, in wetlands, and on slopes of 25 percent or
greater in a Water Resource Protection Zone, excavation, grading, installation of impervious
surfaces, and removal of native vegetation shall be avoided except where no practicable alternative
exists, or where necessary to construct public facilities or to ensure slope stability.
The proposed bottomless box culvert will intrude into the banks of the Beach Creek corridor which has
slopes greater than 25% as no practicable alternative location of the bridge for transportation ingress and
egress exists. However, the excavation of the banks for the box culvert’s insertion and adjoining retaining
walls have been designed to be minimized. The bottomless box culvert not only limits disturbance of the
stream water and habitat within the creek channel itself, the accompanying wing walls ensures the slope
stability around and adjacent to it.
4. Water, storm drain, and sewer systems shall be designed, located and constructed to avoid
exposure to floodwaters, and to avoid accidental discharges to streams and wetlands.
The proposed box culvert, wing walls and all related utilities will be designed by licensed civil engineers
and such plans will be reviewed by City of Ashland’s civil engineers prior to installation. Such utility and
grading plans will be designed to avoid exposure to floodwaters and designed to avoid accidental discharges
to streams and wetlands.
5. Stream channel repair and enhancement, riparian habitat restoration and enhancement, and
wetland restoration and enhancement will be restored through the implementation of a mitigation
plan prepared in accordance with the standards and requirements in section 18.3.11.110, Mitigation
Requirements.
Plantings within the Water Resource Protection Zone corridor shall follow the Prescriptive Option of
Mitigation as defined in the City of Ashland Code 18.3.11.110 for Ephemeral Streams. The area being
addressed is the space affected by the installation of a bottomless culvert on Beach Creek Drive and the
adjacent area. The elements specific to this project include the removal of non-native plant materials, the
protection of any existing trees to remain, control of disturbed soil during construction, placement of
temporary irrigation to aid in establishing new plantings, and timely replanting with native materials, some
trees, shrubs and a cover crop of native grasses.
6. Long-term conservation, management and maintenance of the Water Resource Protection Zone
shall be ensured through preparation and recordation of a management plan as described in
subsection 18.3.11.110.C, except a management plan is not required for residentially zoned lots
occupied only by a single-family dwelling and accessory structures.
42 | P a g e
Included in this process is a Management plan, for the prescribed duration, that will clearly define
expectations and methods to promote the healthy growth of the area affected while curtailing the intrusion
of non-native materials.
AMC 18.4.6.020 B.1 Exception to Street Design Standards
B. Exceptions and Variances. Requests to depart from the requirements of this chapter are subject
to chapter 18.5.5 Variances, except that deviations from section 18.4.6.040 Street Design Standards
are subject to 18.4.6.020.B.1 Exceptions to the Street Design Standards, below.
1. Exception to the Street Design Standards. The approval authority may approve exceptions to the
standards section in 18.4.6.040 Street Design Standards if all of the following circumstances are found
to exist.
a. There is demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements of this chapter due to a
unique or unusual aspect of the site or proposed use of the site.
The applicants are proposing an exception to the City of Ashland’s Street Standards to not include a park
row (plant strip) and street trees for the area along the bridge crossing over Beach Creek and small sections
on either side of the bridge. The inclusion of such a design feature is demonstrably difficult due its location
on top of a bridge where added width, weight and irrigation for such elements require not only require
substantially more volume and disturbance to the riparian area it is intended to protect, but the irrigation
and tree root systems would diminish the bridge’s integrity over time and thus become a safety hazard.
b.The exception will result in equal or superior transportation facilities and connectivity considering
the following factors where applicable.
i.For transit facilities and related improvements, access, wait time, and ride experience.
ii.For bicycle facilities, feeling of safety, quality of experience (i.e., comfort level of bicycling along
the roadway), and frequency of conflicts with vehicle cross traffic.
iii.For pedestrian facilities, feeling of safety, quality of experience (i.e., comfort level of walking along
roadway), and ability to safety and efficiency crossing roadway.
As noted, the proposed street to and through the subject property has been identified and is a requirement
as part of the City’s Transportation System Plan. The street and it’s connectivity to surrounding
neighborhoods can only be accomplished via a bridge crossing over Beach Creek and thus the two create a
superior transportation opportunity for not only proposed residents, but also adjacent neighborhoods to the
north and east.
No transit facilities relate to the street exception request, but both bicycle and pedestrian facilities will
remain as part of the bridge’s design which will accommodate a shared bicycle lane and include raised
sidewalks and curbs connecting with planned and existing sidewalk systems.
43 | P a g e
c. The exception is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty.
The proposed exception is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty as the exception only applies
to the bridge area and not surrounding streets.
d. The exception is consistent with the Purpose and Intent of the Street Standards in subsection
18.4.6.040.A.
A. Purpose, Intent, and Background.
1. Purpose. This section contains standards for street connectivity and design as well as cross sections
for street improvements. The standards are intended to provide multiple transportation options,
focus on a safe environment for all users, design streets as public spaces, and enhance the livability
of neighborhoods, consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
2. Intent. Ashland’s streets are some of the most important public spaces in the community. The
Street Design Standards outline the art and science of developing healthy, livable streets, and are
intended to illustrate current standards for planning and designing the streets of Ashland. The
standards are to be used in the development of new streets, and reconstruction of existing streets or
portions thereof (i.e. improving a paved local street by adding sidewalks). The standards area also
intended as a resource for use by home builders, developers, and community members in the pursuit
of quality development practices.
A series of street types is offered including the multi-use path, alley, neighborhood street, commercial
neighborhood street, neighborhood collector, commercial neighborhood collector, avenue, and
boulevard. Street cross sections provide a model for building streets the traditional way. Variations
can be made from these basic types to fit the particular site and situation. However, the measurements
of each street component must be used to create and maintain the desired low-speed environment
where people feel comfortable and the maximum number of people walk, bicycle and use transit.
All streets in Ashland shall be designed using the following assumptions.
• All designs encourage pedestrian and bicycle travel.
• Neighborhood streets (Neighborhood Collectors and Neighborhood Streets) are designed for 20
mile-per-hour (mph).
• All new streets and alleys are paved.
• All streets have standard vertical, non-mountable curbs.
• Gutter widths are included as part of the curb-to-curb street width.
• New avenues and boulevards have bicycle lanes.
• Parkrow and sidewalk widths do not include the curb.
• Sidewalks are shaded by trees for pedestrian comfort.
• All streets have parkrows and sidewalks on both sides. In certain situations where the physical
features of the land create severe constraints, or natural features should be preserved, exceptions
may be made. Exceptions could result in construction of meandering sidewalks, sidewalks on only
44 | P a g e
one side of the street, or curbside sidewalk segments instead of setback walks. Exceptions should be
allowed when physical conditions exist that preclude development of a public street, or components
of the street. Such conditions may include, but are not limited to, topography, wetlands, mature
trees, creeks, drainages, rock outcroppings, and limited right-of-way when improving streets
through a local improvement district (LID).
• Parkrows and medians are usually landscaped.
• Garages are set back from the sidewalk so parked vehicles are clear of sidewalks.
• Building setbacks and heights create a sense of enclosure.
The proposed subdivision plan is consistent with the City of Ashland’s Street Design Standards, but for the
short section of bridge crossing Beach Creek for the reasons noted above. All of the streets are to include
landscaped and tree lined park rows (plant strips) between the sidewalks and street curbs as evidenced with
the attached Landscape Plan (L101). The applicants have not only designed the subdivision’s streets in
compliance with the City’s Street Standards which are intended to provide multi-purpose modes of
transportation options for bicyclists, pedestrians and vehicle movement consistent with the purpose and
intent of AMC 18.4.6.040, but intend to design homes with porches and recessed garages where possible to
encourage a more positive and livable street environment. Coupled with these factors, the applicants have
also gone to great lengths to include alleys as well as pedestrian paths where possible linking the project
within and to abutting neighborhoods and nearby destinations.
AMC 18.5.7.040 Tree Removal Permit Criteria
B. Tree Removal Permit.
1. Hazard Tree. A Hazard Tree Removal Permit shall be granted if the approval authority finds thatthe application meets all of the following criteria, or can be made to conform through the imposition of conditions.
a. The applicant must demonstrate that the condition or location of the tree presents a clear public
safety hazard (i.e., likely to fall and injure persons or property) or a foreseeable danger of property damage to an existing structure or facility, and such hazard or danger cannot reasonably be alleviated by treatment, relocation, or pruning.
b.The City may require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each hazard tree pursuant tosection 18.5.7.050. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit.
According to the project Arborist, the four trees requesting to be removed are considered to be in poor
health or will eventually have a conflict with the power line along North Mountain Avenue. The trees in
poor health are structurally unsound due to neglect or close proximity to a foundation. Such trees are
potentially hazardous and could present a public safety hazard to property owners, tenants or pedestrians.
The project Arborist has confirmed the trees cannot be reasonably treated or pruned to alleviate their loss.
Nevertheless, the proposal does include 138+ replacement trees throughout the subdivision as well as a
pruning plan for the remaining site trees which have been somewhat neglected over the years.
45 | P a g e
V. CONCLUSION:
Once all of the shine of a new subdivision eventually wears-off and the site’s street trees and landscaping
mature, the applicants believe the proposed subdivision will blend into the fabric of the larger neighborhood
and become another successful urban neighborhood like many others found in the City of Ashland. The
City’s land use planning efforts over the past 35 years has been impressive to say the least, but what many
may not know is how overtime these efforts have consistently improved - based on sound land use policies,
code amendments and collaboration. Each has become more community centric, livable, sustainable and
designed at a human scale where neighbors walk and talk with other neighbors between old and new
neighborhoods. This project is no different and we hope the Ashland citizenry, Planning Commission and
City Council do also.
Scoping Analysis and Neighborhood Review
Beach Creek
Subdivision
Ashland, Oregon
Prepared For:
KDA Homes
604 Fair Oaks Court
Ashland, OR 97520
Prepared By:
Alex Georgevitch Consulting
642 Faith Avenue
Ashland, Oregon 97520
541-482-8934
Project No.: 21-001
May 2021
May 2021
Beach Creek Subdivision
Scoping Analysis and Neighborhood Review
Alex Georgevitch Consulting
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ 2
Project Description.......................................................................................................................... 3
Scope of Report............................................................................................................................... 3
Traffic Impacts Analysis Determination ......................................................................................... 4
Neighborhood Review .................................................................................................................... 6
Existing Traffic Conditions......................................................................................................... 6
Site Trip Generation .................................................................................................................... 7
Site Trip Distribution and Assignment ....................................................................................... 7
May 2021
Beach Creek Subdivision
Scoping Analysis and Neighborhood Review
Alex Georgevitch Consulting
Executive Summary
Beach Creek subdivision is located along Mountain Avenue the railroad tracks in the heart of Ashland. The project is named for Beach Creek that flows through the westerly portion of the project and the riparian area takes approximately 1-acre of the site. The site consists of an existing 2.1-acres that is in the City of Ashland and zoned R-1-5 and 7.89-acres that is outside of
the City but is proposed to be annexed. This review will concentrate on the 7.89-acres to be
annexed. The proposed site plan shows 8 affordable cottage units and 40 single family residential (SFR) units in the area to be annexed. Four additional SFR units are shown along with a large open
space on the site plan. There are several existing roads stubbed into this site. To the north is
Village Park Drive and to the east is Old Willow Lane, Kirk Lane and Orchid Street. No access exists to the south because of the railroad tracks. A new road connection to North Mountain Street is proposed and will approximately align with Kirk Lane. The site plan creates a central loop to minimize cut-through traffic but still providing connections to all the existing roadways
with the exception of Orchid Street. Orchid street will be connected via a multi-use path to allow
bicycle and pedestrian connectivity. The site will generate 43 PM peak hour trips which falls below the City’s threshold for a full traffic impact analysis (TIA). Therefore, no TIA is required to annex the 7.89 acres of the site or
for the development proposal of 40 single family residential (SFR) units and 8 affordable
cottages. The remaining 2.1-acres of the site is already zoned for residential development and there are another four (4) SFR units planned along with open space. Though not required, the developer has asked that we look at impacts to the surrounding
neighborhood and residential streets. A review of the existing traffic counts in the area indicates
that a majority of the site trips will use North Mountain to get to other destinations in the community. Using a very conservative split of 80% to North Mountain and 20% through the surrounding neighborhood results in a total of 10 PM peak hour trips on those streets. Half of the PM peak hour trips will use Orchid to get to the cottage cluster. The remaining five (5) PM
peak hour trips will utilize the remaining streets including Kirk, Village Park and Old Willow.
No streets will be adversely impacted by the annexation or the proposed development plan.
May 2021
Beach Creek Subdivision
Scoping Analysis and Neighborhood Review
Alex Georgevitch Consulting
Project Description
Beach Creek subdivision is located along Mountain Avenue the railroad tracks in the heart of
Ashland. The project is named for Beach Creek that flows through the westerly portion of the project and the riparian area takes approximately 1-acre of the site. The site consists of an existing 2.1-acres that is in the City of Ashland and zoned R-1-5 and 7.89-acres that is outside of the City but is proposed to be annexed. This review will concentrate on the 7.89-acres to be
annexed.
The proposed site plan shows 8 affordable cottage units and 40 single family residential (SFR) units in the area to be annexed. Four (4) additional SFR units are shown along with a large open space on the site plan. There are several existing roads stubbed into this site. To the north is
Village Park Drive and to the east is Old Willow Lane, Kirk Lane and Orchid Street. No access
exists to the south because of the railroad tracks. A new road connection to North Mountain Street is proposed and will approximately align with Kirk Lane. The site plan creates a central loop to minimize cut-through traffic but still providing connections to all the existing roadways with the exception of Orchid Street. Orchid street will be connected via a multi-use path to allow
bicycle and pedestrian connectivity.
The proposed site plan is included in the appendix. Scope of Report The scoping analysis is used to determine if a full traffic impact analysis (TIA) will be required for this project. The City has provided written guidance as to when a TIA will be required in
their December 2, 2020 pre-application comments. Specifically, if a development proposes
direct or indirect access to a State highway or a Boulevard classified street then a TIA shall be provided for the project if 50 newly generated peak hour trips, or 20 newly generated heavy vehicle trips come from the development. In a follow-up email it was further clarified that only the area to be annexed (7.89-acres) is considered for a TIA as the remaining 2.1-acres is already
in the City and zoned for residential use.
North Mountain Street is classified as an Avenue in the City’s current Transportation System Plan. All other adjoining streets are classified as Neighborhood Streets. The site does not propose direct access to a Boulevard classified street but likely meets the requirement of indirect
access to a said classification. Therefore, a test of peak hour trips will be provided for.
The City did not request a review of the surrounding neighborhood streets, but this report will also discuss the likely traffic related impacts to the connected neighborhood streets at the full development proposal.
May 2021
Beach Creek Subdivision
Scoping Analysis and Neighborhood Review
Alex Georgevitch Consulting
Traffic Impacts Analysis Determination
Estimates of daily vehicle trip ends for the proposed development were based on empirical observations at similar developments. These observations are summarized in the standard reference Trip Generation, 10th Edition, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). The ITE Trip Generation manual does not include affordable cottages but the California
Department of Transportation (CALTRANS) has done an extensive study to determine the AM and PM peak hour rates for affordable housing. This analysis proposes to use the CALTRANS method as the best available data. CALTRANS Affordable Housing Trip Generation Strategies and Rates study dated September 14, 2018 summarizes the data in tables 4 and 5 from their study:
May 2021
Beach Creek Subdivision
Scoping Analysis and Neighborhood Review
Alex Georgevitch Consulting
From the above data you can see that the CALTRANS data falls in line with several other studies
throughout California and the west coast. From this data we can determine that the PM peak hour for an affordable unit is 0.40 trips. The project proposes to annex 7.89-acres of land and construct 8 affordable cottages and 40 SFR homes as part of the Beach Creek development. The project also includes 4 additional SFR units
that are already zoned R-1-5 and therefore are not part of this analysis.
Proposed Trip Generation Estimates for Residential
Affordable Housing (CALTRANS) Trips/Dwelling Unit (DU) No. DU Trips
Total Enter Exit
50% 50%
Daily N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
65% 35%
PM Peak Hour 0.40 8 3 2 1
30% 70%
AM Peak Hour 0.53 8 4 1 3
May 2021
Beach Creek Subdivision
Scoping Analysis and Neighborhood Review
Alex Georgevitch Consulting
Proposed Trip Generation Estimates Single Family (ITE Code 210) Trips/Dwelling Unit (DU) No. DU Trips
Total Enter Exit
50% 50%
Daily 9.44 40 378 189 189 63% 37%
PM Peak Hour 0.99 40 40 25 15
25% 75%
AM Peak Hour 0.74 40 30 7 23
Proposed Trip Generation Totals
Time Period
Trips
Total Enter Exit
50% 50% Daily (calculated) 410 205 205
63% 34%
PM Peak Hour 43 27 16 27% 73%
AM Peak Hour 34 8 26
Based on the proposed site plan and the trip generation estimate the development does not warrant a traffic impact analysis per the City of Ashland guidelines. The site is anticipated to generate only 43 PM peak hour trips which is less than the 50-trip threshold. Neighborhood Review
Existing Traffic Conditions
The proposed project is on the east side of North Mountain Street just north of the Central Oregon & Pacific Railroad lines. North Mountain Street is an Avenue classification and connects to East Main and Siskiyou Boulevard (Highway 99) to the south and Hersey Street to the north. The transportation system plan shows approximately 275 northbound and 320
southbound PM peak hour trips along the frontage of the property.
The project proposes a new street access to North Mountain along with local street connections to Kirk Lane and Old Willow Lane to the east and Village Park Drive to the north. Two homes (one existing) will have direct access to North Mountain and 4 proposed affordable cottages will
take access to Orchid Street. The existing street network to the north and east are all residential streets with low volumes. There are no known safety concerns documented with the City per a review of the Transportation Commission agendas over the last two-years.
May 2021
Beach Creek Subdivision
Scoping Analysis and Neighborhood Review
Alex Georgevitch Consulting
Site Trip Generation The proposal is for a 7.89-acre annexation into the City of Ashland. The site plan for the annexation includes 40 single family residential units and 8 affordable cottage units. Trip generation for the annexation area is approximately 410 average daily trips and 43 PM peak hour
trips. Of the 43 PM peak hour trips 27 trips are entering the site and 16 trips will be leaving the
site.
Data from the ITE manual Trip Generation, 10th Edition and CALTRANS Affordable Housing Trip Generation Strategies and Rates was used to estimate trip generation for the proposed
development.
Site Trip Distribution and Assignment The site trip distribution is based upon existing traffic counts as well as engineering judgment and knowledge of the area. PM peak hour trips will be used to determine how many trips will be entering and exiting the surrounding neighborhood. Existing traffic on East Main and North
Mountain are split fairly evenly in direction and distribution. This is likely because of the connections to the south Ashland interchange (Exit 14 on Interstate 5) along East Main and to the north Ashland interchange (Exit 19 on Interstate 5) via North Main.
It is anticipated that most traffic will use the new connection to North Mountain and then head
either north or south to the major roadways within Ashland. We anticipate conservatively that 80% will follow this pattern and 20% will travel to the north or east via the connecting neighborhood streets. This split would have 13 vehicles exiting and 22 vehicles entering on the new connection to North Mountain. The remaining 5 entering and 3 exiting PM peak hour trips utilizing the neighborhood.
It is anticipated, based on the proposed site plan, that five (5) of the PM peak hour trips will use Orchid with 3 entering and 2 exiting the parking area. This leaves two (2) entering trips and one (1) exiting trips to distribute through the neighborhood. Based on engineering judgement we anticipate two (2) trips to enter the site and one (1) to exit the site from Kirk Lane or Old Willow
Lane and there is a chance one (1) entering and one (1) exiting trip to use Village Park Drive. These numbers exceed the total but there is no way to have a partial vehicle trip.
There is no precise number for how people will use the surrounding streets but under any scenario the trips will be low. There are no known safety or capacity concerns on any of the
surrounding streets. All residential streets will have little impact and will likely have only a few cars from this development traverse the surrounding streets. Likewise, it is anticipated that the surrounding streets will provide more connectivity to North Mountain and will likely serve the entire community by the connections proposed on the site plan. No mitigation is required to surrounding residential streets as a result of this development proposal.
May 2021
Beach Creek Subdivision
Scoping Analysis and Neighborhood Review
Alex Georgevitch Consulting
Appendix
May 2021
Beach Creek Subdivision
Scoping Analysis and Neighborhood Review
Alex Georgevitch Consulting
Site Plan
May 2021
Beach Creek Subdivision
Scoping Analysis and Neighborhood Review
Alex Georgevitch Consulting
ITE Trip Generation
May 2021
Beach Creek Subdivision
Scoping Analysis and Neighborhood Review
Alex Georgevitch Consulting
CALTRANS Study
May 2021
Beach Creek Subdivision
Scoping Analysis and Neighborhood Review
Alex Georgevitch Consulting
This page left blank intentionally.
1860
1865
1870
1875
1860
1865
1870
1875
1855
185
5
186
0
186
5
1855
1860
1865
1870
1875
1880
1855
1860
1865
1870
1880
187
5
187
0
1865
185
5
1860
1855
3
4
5 6 7 8 9 10
11
12
13
24 25
28 26
27
46
47
48
49
50
51
1
2
18 17 16 15 14
19 20 2122
34 33 32 31 30 29
35 36
59'x107' 6,314 s.f.
52'x85'4,421 s.f.
58.5'x61' 3,519 s.f.
53'x85'4,465 s.f.
59'x106' 6,252 s.f.
4,396 s.f.
5,238 s.f.
64.5'x85' 5,487 s.f.
80'x110'
58.5'x68'3,978 s.f.23
10'-6"
57'x61' 3,477 s.f.2,855 s.f.
8'x8' porch
8'-6"to C.L.
5,118 s.f.
10'-7"
1,592 s.f. 1-story3-bed/2-bath
12'x8'porch
8'-0"48.5'x68'3,298 s.f.44.5'x68' 3,026 s.f.
12'x20'garage
55'x68'
1,113 s.f. 1-story2-bed/2-bath/office—or— 1,400 s.f. 11/2-story3-bed/2-bath(master down)
12'x20'garage
12'x8'porch
38
44'x107' 4,694 s.f.
52
6,469 s.f.
32'-0"
1,220 s.f. 1-story3-bed/2-bath—or—2,200 s.f. 11/2-storyor 4-bed/3-bath
18'-0"20'-0"
6'-0"
12'x20'garage
8'x8' porch918 s.f. 1-story2-bed/2-bath
1,048 s.f. 1-story2-bed/2-bath—or —1,350 s.f. 11/2-story3-bed/2-bath(master down)
22'-0"
10'-2 1/4"
22'x20'garage
1,064 s.f. 1-story2-bed/2-bath—or— 1,360 s.f. 11/2-story3-bed/2-bath(master down)
12'x20'garage
12'x8'porch
1,760 s.f. pervious
1,717 s.f. imperv. (49.4%)
1,437 s.f. pervious
1,419 s.f.impervious(49.7%)
10'-0"
2,050 s.f.pervious
1,928 s.f.impervious(48.5%)
37
15'-0"
12'x20'garage 12'x20'garage 20'x20'garage
14'-0"
2,589 s.f. pervious
2,528 s.f. imperv.(49.4%)
1,763 s.f. pervious
1,756 s.f. impervious (49.9%)
3,740 s.f.
1,939 s.f. pervious
1,831 s.f. imperv. (49.0%)
10'-0"
20'x20'garage 20'x20'garage20'x20'garage
6,790 s.f.
6,090 s.f.
4,621 s.f.
20'x20'garage
18'x20'garage
20'x20'garage
20'x20'garage 20'x20'garage 20'x20'garage 20'x20'garage 20'x20'garage 20'x20'garage
20'x20'garage
20'x20'garage
20'x20'garage
20'x20'garage
20'x20'garage
20'x20'garage
20'x20'garage
20'x20'garage
20'x20'garage
20'x20'garage
10'-0"34'-0"
9'x18'parking
9'x18'parking
10'-0"
8'-0"
944 s.f. 1-story2-bed/2-bath—or— 1,260 s.f. 11/2-story3-bed/2-bath(master down)
820 s.f. 1-story2-bed/2-bath—or— 1,250 s.f. 11/2-story3-bed/2-bath(master down)
15'-0"
14'-0"
10'x6'porch
960 s.f. 1-story2-bed/2-bath—or— 1,260 s.f. 11/2-story3-bed/2-bath(master down)
8'x11'8'x11'
1007 s.f.2-bed/2-bath—or— 1,300 s.f. 11/2-story3-bed/2-bath(master down)
962 s.f.2-bed/2-bath—or— 1,260 s.f. 11/2-story3-bed/2-bath(master down)
12'x20'garage 12'x20'garage 12'x20'garage12'x20'garage 12'x20'garage
48.5'x68'44.5'x68'3,822 s.f.
55'x85' 4,675 s.f.
55'x85' 4,657 s.f.
1,970 s.f. pervious
10'-2"
7'-0"
1,852 s.f. imperv.(48.5%)
20'-0"
priva
t
e
d
r
i
v
e
3,260 s.f. pervious
1,840 s.f. 1-story3-bed/office/2-bath
2,992 s.f. impervious (47.6%)
2,232 s.f.pervious
2,206 s.f. impervious (49.7%)
12'x8' porch
52'x85' 4,450 s.f.56'x85' 4,805 s.f.56'x85' 4,781 s.f.56'x85' 4,733 s.f.52'x85' 4,439 s.f.
12'x10'porch
2,446 s.f. pervious
2,174 s.f. impervious (47.0%)
2,070 s.f. 2-story4-bed/3-bath& 400 s.f. ARU(above garage)
53.5'x87.5' 4,658 s.f.53.5'x87.5' 4,633 s.f.
53'x87.5' 4,658 s.f.53'x87.5' 4,589 s.f.
20'x20'garage
41
42
40
39
990 s.f. cottage3-bed/2-bath
1,752 s.f. 1-story3-bed/office/2-bath
2-bed11/2-bath
12'x20'garage
compactParking
12'x20'garage
22'x20'garage
11'-8"
10'-1"
1,164 s.f. 1-story2-bed/2-bath/office—or—1,450 s.f. 11/2-story3-bed/2-bath(master down)
20'x20'garage
5,572 s.f.
2,008 s.f. 1-story4-bed/2-bath
20'x20'garage
6,556 s.f.
5,777 s.f.
16'x20'garage
44'x107' 4,650 s.f.
privat
e
yard
4,291 s.f.
com
p
a
c
t
park
i
n
g
37'-0"
37'-0"
37'-0"
55'-0"872 s.f.imperv. (42.8%)
2,036 lot size
47'-9"
63'-6
"
3,024 lot size
1,086 s.f.impervious (35.9%)
10'-0"
1,234 s.f. 1-story3-bed/2-bath
7'-0"
1,428 s.f. 1-story3-bed/2-bath
10'x8' porch
3,080 s.f. impervious (48.8%)
1,976 s.f. 1-story4-bed/2-bath
10'x8' porch
16'x20'garage
10'
x
8
'
por
c
h
2,248 s.f. impervious (48.3%)
1,308 s.f. 1-story3-bed/2-bath—or—2,000 s.f. 2-story 4-bed/3-bath
11'-
1
0
"
12'x8' porch
1,360 s.f. 1-story3-bed/2-bath—or—2,000 s.f. 11/2 story4-bed/3-bath
2,324 s.f. impervious (49.9%)
1,325 s.f. 1-story3-bed/2-bath—or—1,950 s.f. 11/2 story4-bed/3-bath
2,289 s.f. impervious (49.4%)
20'x20'garage
12'x8' porch
10'-0"6'-0"
1,220 s.f. 1-story3-bed/2-bath—or—2,200 s.f. 11/2-storyor 4-bed/3-bath
12'x8' porch
1,428 s.f. 1-story3-bed/2-bath
10'x8' porch
10'x8' porch
1,428 s.f. 1-story3-bed/2-bath
16
'
x
8
'
porc
h
10'
x
8
'
por
c
h
16'
x
8
'
po
r
c
h
18'
x
8
'
po
r
c
h
com
p
a
c
t
par
k
i
n
g
com
p
a
c
t
par
k
i
n
g
com
p
a
c
t
par
k
i
n
g
com
p
a
c
t
par
k
i
n
g
8'x8' porch 1,048 s.f. 1-story2-bed/2-bath—or —1,350 s.f. 11/2-story3-bed/2-bath(master down)
8'x8' porch1,048 s.f. 1-story2-bed/2-bath—or —1,350 s.f. 11/2-story3-bed/2-bath(master down)
8'x8' porch
10'x8'porch
com
p
a
c
t
par
k
i
n
g
(parking credit required)
57'x61' 3,477 s.f.57'x61' 3,477 s.f.
820 s.f. 1-story2-bed/2-bath—or— 1,250 s.f. 11/2-story3-bed/2-bath(master down)
944 s.f. 1-story2-bed/2-bath—or— 1,260 s.f. 11/2-story3-bed/2-bath(master down)
10'x6'porch
10'x8'porch
co
m
p
a
c
t
par
k
i
n
g
co
m
p
a
c
t
par
k
i
n
g
48.5'x68'3,298 s.f.44.5'x68' 3,026 s.f.55'x68'3,740 s.f.
1,113 s.f. 1-story2-bed/2-bath/office—or— 1,400 s.f. 11/2-story3-bed/2-bath(master down)
12'x8'porch
co
m
p
a
c
t
par
k
i
n
g
52'x85'4,421 s.f.
52'x85'4,420 s.f.
52'x85'4,420 s.f.
2,100 s.f. 2-story4-bed/3-bath
10'x8'porch
2,183 s.f. pervious
2,108 s.f. impervious (49.1%)
2,100 s.f. 2-story4-bed/3-bath
10'x8'porch
2,200 s.f. 2-story4-bed/3-bath
2,200 s.f. 2-story4-bed/3-bath
10'x8'porch
10'x8'porch2,200 s.f. 2-story4-bed/3-bath
2,200 s.f. 2-story4-bed/3-bath
10'x8'porch
10'x8'porch
43
44
45
12'x6'porch
12'x6'porch
12'x6'porch
12'x8'porch
800 s.f.
1,360 s.f. 1-story3-bed/2-bath—or—2,000 s.f. 11/2 story4-bed/3-bath
1,325 s.f. 1-story3-bed/2-bath—or—1,950 s.f. 11/2 story4-bed/3-bath
12'x8' porch12'x8' porch
20'x20'garage 20'x20'garage
1,540 s.f. 1-story3-bed/2-bath12'
x
8
'
por
c
h
2,016 s.f. 1-story3-bed/office/2-bath
12'x8'porch
1,308 s.f. 1-story3-bed/2-bath
10
'
x
8
'
porc
h
1,308 s.f. 1-story3-bed/2-bath—or—2,000 s.f. 2-story 4-bed/3-bath
10'x
8
'
por
c
h
1,344 s.f. 1-story3-bed/2-bath
10'-0"
10' Min. Solar Setback
12'-0" (Solar Setback)
1,888 s.f. 1-story3-bed/office/2-bath—or— 2,400 s.f. 11/2-story4-bed/office/2-bath
16'x8'porch Option: 400 s.f. ADUabove garage
1,750 s.f. 11/2-story3-bed/21/2-bath
10'x8'porch
MIN. 15'
9'-0" (solar setback)
c ompactParking
compactParking
compactParking
co
m
p
a
c
t
par
k
i
n
g
2,400 s.f. 2-story4-bed/3-bath
12'x8'porch
10'x8' porch
1,960 s.f. 2-story4-bed/3-bath
EXISTING HOME(to be restored)
C R
E
E
K
36" OAK
192 NORTHMOUNTAIN AVE
30" OAK
24" PINE
C R E E K
C R
E
E
K
49,995 sq. ft. total riparian(excludes street bridge)
435,568 sq. ft. TOTAL PARCEL
P E R V I O U S S U R F A C E S
49,985 sq. ft. Riparian (Common) (11.5%)
55,996 sq. ft. Common Landscaping/Parkrows (12.9%)
SUBTOTAL: 105,981 s.f. (24.3%)
I M P E R V I O U S S U R F A C E S
61,446 sq. ft. Asphalt Streets (14.1%)
19,710 sq. ft. Concrete Sidewalks (4.5%)
5,646 sq. ft. Concrete Curbs/Aprons (1.3%)
SUBTOTAL: 86,802 s.f. (19.9%)
U N I M P R O V E D L O T S
242,757 sq. ft. (55.7%)
51' ROW
51' ROW
51' ROW
47' ROW
5' p
e
r
m
e
a
b
l
e
si
d
e
w
a
l
k
A C K E R M A N A L L E Y
B E A C H C R E E K W A Y
B E A C H C R E E K D R I V E
B E A C H C R E E K W A Y
V I
L
L
A
G
E
P
A
R
K
D
R
I V
E
51'
R
O
W
R O S E M A R Y A L L E Y
H E S S P R O M E N A D E
N . M
O
U
N
T
A
I
N
A
V
E
.
C E N T R A L B
I K E P A T H
S O U
T
H
E R N O R E G O N R . R .
(4) C O T T A G E S
K I R K L A N E
O L D W I L L O W L A N E
C A L Y P S O C O U R T
V I
L
L
A
G
E
P
A
R
K
D
R
I V
E
V I L L A G E S Q U A R E D R I V E
PARKING
Street Parking: 53 spaces
2-Car Garages: 66 spaces
1-Car Garages: 13 spaces
Private Surface Parking: 16
(excludes cottages parking)
TOTAL: 148
6,288 s.f. Open Space
15' solar setback for 10' roof eave height abv. nat. grade 15' solar setback for 10' roof eave height abv. nat. grade
47
'
R
O
W
B E
A
C
H
C
R
E
E
K
W
A
Y
19,500 s.f. Open Space(excludes riparian area)
5' w
a
l
k
p
a
t
h
5' walk path
5' walk path
16'-0"
47' ROW
6,899 s.f. 12'
W
i
d
e
Ope
n
Spac
e
1,263 s.f.OpenSpace
2,790 s.f.OpenSpace
MIN. 15'
Min. 10' solar setback
6'-0"
10'-0
"
MIN. 10'
Cottage Open Space5,996 s.f. (28%)
(Min. 20'x20' dimensions)
CIT
Y
L
I
M
I
T
S
<
1
2
,7
2
0
s
.f
. a
n
n
e
x
e
d
r
i
p
a
r
i
a
n
>
<
a
n
n
e
x
e
d
r
i
p
a
r
i
a
n
>
Min. 10' solar setback
solar setback Min. 10' solar setback
(4)9'x18'parking spaces(2)8'x16'compact spaces(4)bike sheds
= PRIVATE LOT = AFFORDABLE LOT = TYPICAL LOT COVERAGE CALC
21,348 s.f. (0.49 ac.) total cottage parcel
10'-0"
Ne
w
C
u
r
b
C
u
t
Ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
C
u
r
b
C
u
t
Beach Creek Park Proposed Site Plan
Scale: 1" = 100'-0"E
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 FT
Outline Plan Exhibit | June 18, 2021
11x17 printed sheet
(Note: scale valid when printed at this size)
City of Ashland Vision Zero Action Plan
Acknowledgements
City of Ashland Council
Mayor Julie Akins
Shaun Moran
Paula Hyatt
Gina DuQuenne
Stef Seffinger
Tonya Graham
Stephen Jensen
City of Ashland Transportation Commission
Derrick Claypool-Barnes
Corrine Vievielle
Joseph Graf
Linda Peterson Adams
Katharine Danner
Mark Brouillard
Table of Contents
Section 1: Introduction .................................................................................................................... 4
Section 1.1 Purpose ..................................................................................................................... 4
Section 1.2 Vision Zero Resolution ............................................................................................ 5
Section 2: Guiding Principles ......................................................................................................... 5
Section 2.1: Equity ...................................................................................................................... 5
Section 2.2: Data Driven Decision Making ................................................................................ 6
Section 2.3: Coordination and Accountability ............................................................................ 6
3.0 Transportation in Ashland ......................................................................................................... 6
3.1 High Crash Network .............................................................................................................. 6
3.2 Communities of Concern ...................................................................................................... 6
Section 1: Introduction
Section 1.1 Purpose
“Vision Zero is a strategy to eliminate all traffic fatalities and severe injuries, while increasing
safe, healthy, equitable mobility for all”.
Vision Zero starts with the ethical belief that everyone has the right to move safely in their
communities, and that system designers and policy makers share the responsibility to ensure safe systems for travel.
Vision Zero is a significant departure from the status quo in two major ways:
1. Vision Zero recognizes that people will sometimes make mistakes, so the road system and related policies should be designed to ensure those inevitable mistakes do not result
in severe injuries or fatalities. This means that system designers and policymakers are
expected to improve the roadway environment, policies (such as speed management), and other related systems to lessen the severity of crashes. 2. Vision Zero is a multidisciplinary approach, bringing together diverse and necessary stakeholders to address this complex problem. In the past, meaningful, cross-disciplinary
collaboration among local traffic planners and engineers, policymakers, and public health professionals has not been the norm. Vision Zero acknowledges that many factors contribute to safe mobility -- including roadway design, speeds, behaviors, technology, and policies -- and sets clear goals to achieve the shared goal of zero fatalities and severe injuries.
The Vision Zero Program and Action Plan outline the City of Ashland’s commitment and long-
term strategy for eliminating deaths and serious injuries from the transportation system with a
focus on equity.
Section 1.2 Vision Zero Resolution
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND,
OREGON SETTING AS OFFICIAL POLICY THE VISION ZERO GOAL
THAT NO LOSS OF LIFE OR SERIOUS INJURY ON OUR
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM IS ACCEPTABLE.
RECITALS:
A. The life and health of the City of Ashland’s residents are our utmost priority.
B. No one should die or be seriously injured on our transportation system.
C. Communities of Concern face a disproportionate risk of traffic injuries and fatalities.
D. Vision Zero is an approach to transportation safety that accepts no loss of life or serious
injuries on the transportation system.
THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The Ashland City Council sets as official policy Vision Zero’s goal of zero
fatalities or serious injuries on our transportation system.
SECTION 2. The Ashland City Council supports efforts by the City of Ashland and our regional
partners to eliminate deaths and serious injuries on our transportation system, with an emphasis
on the most vulnerable users.
SECTION 3. The Ashland City Council supports efforts by the City of Ashland’s Transportation, to
develop a Vision Zero Action Plan that develops and prioritizes safety improvements for people walking,
bicycling, using mobility devices and driving motorized vehicles.
SECTION 4. This Resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. This resolution was duly
PASSED and ADOPTED this day of (Month) 2021.
Section 2: Guiding Principles
Section 2.1: Equity
The City’s Vision Zero Action Plan shall be equitable and acknowledge the disproportionate
burden of traffic crashes on people of color, low-income households, people with limited English
proficiency, persons with disabilities or other mobility impairments, and other vulnerable groups.
It will prioritize safety improvements for these populations.
The action plan will focus on filling gaps in transportation infrastructure where injuries and
fatalities occur and where missing links limit transportation options, particularly for the
underserved communities.
It will employ enforcement strategies that focus primarily on the most dangerous behaviors like
speeding, impairment, and distraction. It will not result in racial profiling.
Section 2.2: Data Driven Decision Making
Crash, speed and volume data will be regularly gathered and uipdated to identify the locations,
behaviors, and other conditions related to deaths and serious injuries on our streets.
Demographic data will be used to prioritize underserved communities.
The impacts and effectiveness of actions taken will be evaluated and publicly reported.
Section 2.3: Coordination and Accountability
Actions will have clearly defined roles, responsibilities and expectations among the departments
working on implementation.
The City will work local and regional partners to maximize the impact of the Vision Zero Action
Plan.
3.0 Transportation in Ashland
3.1 High Crash Network
3.2 Communities of Concern
City of Ashland Pilot Traffic Calming and Safety
Improvement Program
Acknowledgements
City of Ashland Council
Mayor John Stromberg
Dennis Slattery
Rich Rosenthal
Stef Seffinger
Tonya Graham
Julie Akins
Stephen Jensen
City of Ashland Transportation Commission
Bruce Borgerson
Derrick Claypool-Barnes
Corrine Vievielle
Joseph Graf
Linda Peterson Adams
Katharine Danner
Mark Brouillard
Table of Contents
Section 1: Introduction .................................................................................................................... 4
Section 1.1 Traffic Calming and Safety Improvement Program Overview ................................ 4
Section 1.2 Program Timelines ................................................................................................... 4
Section 2: Project Request and Review Process ............................................................................. 5
Section 2.1: Petition & Pre-application Process.......................................................................... 5
Section 2.2: Phase One Immediate Actions ................................................................................ 5
Radar Speed Trailer ................................................................................................................ 5
Police Enforcement ................................................................................................................. 6
Temporary Speed Signage ...................................................................................................... 6
Section 2.3: Phase Two Project Ranking and Acceptance .......................................................... 6
Section 2.4: Phase Two “Neighborhood Meeting” ..................................................................... 7
Section 3.0: Phase Two ............................................................................................................... 8
Traffic Safety Campaign ......................................................................................................... 8
Vegetation and Vision Clearance ............................................................................................ 8
Signage .................................................................................................................................... 9
Pavement Markings ................................................................................................................ 9
Intersection Painting ............................................................................................................. 10
Curb Extensions .................................................................................................................... 10
In Street Speed Reduction Measures .................................................................................... 11
Diverters ................................................................................................................................ 15
Gateway Treatments ............................................................................................................. 15
Stationary Radar Signs .......................................................................................................... 16
Other ..................................................................................................................................... 16
Monitoring ............................................................................................................................ 16
Appendixes ................................................................................................................................... 17
Appendix A: Petition & Pre-application ................................................................................... 17
Section 1: Introduction
Section 1.1 Traffic Calming and Safety Improvement Program Overview
The City of Ashland’s Traffic Calming and Safety Improvement Program is part of the City’s
commitment to the safety and livability of our neighborhoods and shall incorporate the goals,
policies and objectives of the City’s comprehensive plan. A collaborative effort of City staff, the
Transportation Commission and residents, the program is designed to reduce the impacts of
traffic and provide for a safe roadway network for all users. Through active participation by area
residents, the City can identify the problem, plan the approach, implement solutions and evaluate
the effectiveness.
The program is open to all roadways within the City and works in two distinct phases. The initial
phase focuses on data collection along with passive and easily implementable measures such as
law enforcement, radar speed trailer placement and temporary signage. If phase one does not
prove effective in meeting the defined goals for traffic calming or safety improvement, then a
project can move to phase two. Phase two calls for engineering and construction of permanent
physical treatments to address the defined problem.
Section 1.2 Program Timelines
Figure 1 shows the general timeline for activities for the City’s Traffic Calming and Safety
Improvement Program. Overall timeline can be affected by staff availability and scheduling of
public meetings.
Cumulative duration shown here is the anticipated maximum. If prior phases are completed
earlier in the duration window given, then subsequent steps also could be completed earlier.
Figure 1:
Section 2: Project Request and Review Process
Section 2.1: Petition & Pre-application Process
The petition and pre-application process are meant to create neighborhood support for potential
Traffic Calming and Safety Improvement Program implementation within a neighborhood or
project area. The petition and pre-application forms are attached as Appendix A.
The petition and pre-application require a minimum of five (5) adult signatures* from distinct
addresses within the neighborhood showing they are in favor of entering into the Traffic Calming
and Safety Improvement Program. The application also requires summary details of the issues
encountered within the neighborhood.
Once a verified petition is submitted to Public Works Engineering, the City will define the initial
study area and begin data collection. After data collection is complete, the City will move
forward with targeted enforcement, speed trailer placement and distribution of temporary yard
signage if requested.
The study area will initially be influenced by street system configuration, location of schools,
hospitals, and/or business centers. Data collection within the study area will include review of
accident reports and capturing speed and traffic volumes.
*Signature must be from resident who has property rights control over distinct address.
Section 2.2: Phase One Immediate Actions
After data collection is completed, and the data shows some measures are warranted, the City
will move forward with two directly implementable soft measures for traffic calming. The two
items below represent passive traffic calming measures that will be implemented after a
successful traffic calming petition is verified by Public Works.
Radar Speed Trailer
The Ashland Police Department can place a portable trailer mounted radar unit that detects
vehicular speed and displays it on a digital reader board. The trailer shows the drivers actual
speed vs. the posted speed limit. The unit employed by the City of Ashland also collects driver
speeds and volumes that can be compared to the previously collected information.
Police Enforcement
After data collection phase is completed the Ashland Police Department can use the information
collected to perform targeted enforcement within study area during known times of excessive
speed.
Temporary Speed Signage
The City offers free of charge “keep kids alive drive 25” temporary yard signs. The signs can be
picked up at 51 Winburn Way at the Community Development Building. A total of five signs
will be given to residents for each block/neighborhood request.
Section 2.3: Phase Two Project Ranking and Acceptance
The City of Ashland has established criteria for phase two improvements that must be met to
proceed forward. Data from the collection phase will be used to score and rank the project.
Criteria Definition Value Points
Average Daily Traffic
(ADT)
Traffic volume over a 24-hour
period
<500
500-1000
1000-1500
1500-2000
2000-3000
>3000
0
1
2
3
4
5
Posted speed limit
25 MPH-residential
85% Threshold
The speed at or below
which 85 percent of all vehicles are
observed to travel under free-
1-5
5-10
10+
2
4
6
flowing conditions. This is
considered what roadway users
consider to be a safe travel speed
based on roadway conditions
Accidents Number of reported accidents,
correctable by traffic calming on the
project street within the last 5
years
1
2
3
4
>5
2
4
6
8
10
A total score of 8 points is required to move forward with any phase two solution.
For continued evaluation as part of phase 2 ranking and implementation, other factors may
be considered including, but not limited to, the following:
Pedestrian Generators Public and private facilities on or
near the project street, such as
schools, parks, community
houses, senior housing, etc.,
which generate a substantial
amount of pedestrian traffic
Bus Stops Access to transit within ¼ mile
of project street
Sidewalks Existing facilities
Bicycle Facilities Existing Facilitates
Section 2.4: Phase Two “Neighborhood Meeting”
If the City of Ashland receives numerous traffic calming program applications during any budget
biennium, each application will be ranked and phase one data assessed to determine project
prioritization. Phase two work begins once projects are ranked and the need for traffic calming
and safety improvements is verified. Public Works will verify if the minimum criteria are met to
proceed forward with any phase two actions. If the project fails to meet the minimum established
criteria it will not move forward to phase two, but the City will still place the radar speed trailer
onsite perform periodic targeted enforcement and offer free temporary speed signs.
To move forward with any phase two improvements the minimum scoring based on the
established criteria shall be 8 points.
After projects are prioritized public meetings will be scheduled at a regular Transportation
Commission meeting starting with the highest priority project. Resident support for a traffic
calming and safety program is inherent to its success. To develop full support and consensus on
project goals and potential solutions, the public hearing will be held by the Transportation
Commission at a regularly scheduled meeting where goals and solutions will be discussed and
agreed upon. The public hearing will consist of a report prepared by Engineering staff, public
input from neighborhood residents and discussion by the Commission. Based on all information
provided and discussion The Commission can recommend to the Director of Public Works
potential phase two solutions for implementation. A majority of phase 2 solutions have budget
ramifications that must be accounted for in the timing and approval of solutions.
Section 3.0: Phase Two
After completion of the data collection phase and immediate implementable actions have been
enacted, the City and Transportation Commission will rank all projects in the program and
schedule public hearings with neighborhood groups to discuss the potential of phase two actions.
A clear set of goals with respect to traffic calming actions should be established in the public
meeting, which will enable the pursuit of solutions that match with defined goals. Phase two
installations can be considered “pilot” or final in-place solutions depending on the evolution of
phase two.
The following phase two measures are listed in general order of cost and difficulty of
implementation. Some measures could be implemented in the near term using available funds in
the current Public Works budget. Other measures, particularly those requiring significant
changes to the roadway, will be implemented only if initial measures fail to calm traffic, and may
require inclusion in future budgets as a capital improvement project.
Traffic Safety Campaign
An information letter is prepared by the City and mailed to residents within the study area. The
letter explains traffic volumes and speeds captured during data collection. The informational
packet will also contain traffic calming features, traffic laws and bicycle and pedestrian safety
information. The goal is to heighten traffic safety awareness within the project area.
Vegetation and Vision Clearance
Removal of vegetation that obscures sight lines or traffic control signage, creating a hazardous
situation, shall be considered as a phase two improvement. Removal shall be done by either
homeowners or City staff depending on property ownership.
Signage
The addition of appropriate signage shall be considered, including additional speed limit signs,
parking restrictions, and pedestrian and bicyclist informational signs.
Pavement Markings
The addition of pavement markings shall be considered. Markings can include centerlines, fog
lines, identification of crossings and speed limits.
Intersection Painting
The City of Ashland has a permit approval process for intersection street painting on low volume
residential roadways. Painted intersections help create a community identity and are a great way
to organize your neighbors around a common goal. They may also have indirect effects on
helping to slow traffic in your neighborhood by making drivers aware that residents take pride in
their neighborhood, encouraging them to be more respectful while driving down your street.
Curb Extensions
Curb extensions visually and physically narrow the roadway, creating safer and shorter crossings
for pedestrians while increasing the available space for street furniture, benches, plantings, and
street trees. Curb extensions may be implemented on downtown, neighborhood, and residential
streets, large and small.
Curb extensions have multiple applications and may be segmented into various sub-categories,
ranging from traffic calming to bus bulbs and midblock crossings.
(NACTO Image)
In Street Speed Reduction Measures
Median
Medians create a pinchpoints for traffic in the center of the roadway and can reduce pedestrian
crossing distances.
Median refuge islands are protected spaces placed in the center of the street to facilitate bicycle
and pedestrian crossings. Crossings of two-way streets are facilitated by allowing bicyclists and
pedestrians to navigate only one direction of traffic at a time. Medians configured to protect
cycle tracks can both facilitate crossings and function as two-stage turn queue boxes.
(NACTO Image)
Pinchpoints
Chokers or pinchpoints restrict motorists from operating at high speeds on local streets and
significantly expand the sidewalk realm for pedestrians.
(NACTO Image)
Chicane
Offset curb extensions on residential or low volume downtown streets create a chicane effect that
slows traffic speeds considerably. Chicanes increase the amount of public space available on a
corridor and can be activated using benches, bicycle parking, and other amenities.
(NACTO Image)
Speed Hump/Cushion
Speed cushions are either speed humps or speed tables that include wheel cutouts to allow large
vehicles to pass unaffected, while reducing passenger car speeds. They can be offset to allow
unimpeded passage by emergency vehicles and are typically used on key emergency response
routes. Speed cushions extend across one direction of travel from the centerline, with
longitudinal gap provided to allow wide wheel base vehicles to avoid going over the hump.
(NACTO Image)
Roundabout/Traffic Circle
Mini roundabouts and neighborhood traffic circles1 lower speeds at minor intersection crossings
and are an ideal treatment for uncontrolled intersections.
Mini roundabouts may be installed using simple markings or raised islands but are best applied
in conjunction with plantings that beautify the street and the surrounding neighborhood. Careful
attention should be paid to the available lane width and turning radius used with traffic circles.
(NACTO Image)
Diverters
A traffic diverter breaks up the street grid, requiring motor vehicles to turn while allowing
passage for pedestrians and bicyclists.
(NACTO Image)
Gateway Treatments
Curb extensions are often applied at the mouth of an intersection. When installed at the entrance
to a residential or low speed street, a curb extension is referred to as a “gateway” treatment and is
intended to mark the transition to a slower speed street.
(NACTO Image)
Stationary Radar Signs
A radar speed sign is an interactive sign that displays vehicle speed as motorists approach. The
purpose of radar speed signs is to slow cars down by making drivers aware when they are driving
at speeds above the posted limits. They are used as a traffic calming device in addition to or
instead of physical devices such as speed humps, speed cushions, speed tables, and speed bumps.
Other
As transportation network solutions evolve so to can traffic calming and safety improvements.
Other solutions may be brought to light during the analysis and public hearings that can be
implemented and will not be disregarded if not specifically mentioned within this document.
Monitoring
After approved phase one activities have been implemented the City will monitor changes in
driver behavior including speed and accident reduction. The monitoring phase will begin 4-6
months after the end of phase one activities.
The City and Ashland and its Transportation Commission would like to thank the National
Association of Transportation Officials (NACTO) for allowing the use of some images
contained within this document.
Appendixes
Appendix A: Petition & Pre-application
Petition to Initiate Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program
Location: _____________________________________________________________________________
A resident of __________ has requested initiation of the City of Ashland Traffic Calming program to address
concerns of ___________ on ______________. In order to begin the process, this petition must be signed
by at least 5 adult citizens representing separate properties on ____________ between ______________
and ___________. This level of neighborhood support is needed to justify data collection, analysis, and
development of a traffic calming plan.
Please sign the attached petition, include your address and telephone number, and indicate whether you
support (yes) or oppose (no) this proposal. If this petition receives the necessary neighborhood support, the
City of Ashland staff will collect data about traffic conditions in the identified area for use in developing a
Proposed Improvement Plan.
Printed name: Phone:
Address: Support Oppose
Signature: Date:
Printed name: Phone:
Address: Support Oppose
Signature: Date:
Printed name: Phone:
Address: Support Oppose
Signature: Date:
Printed name: Phone:
Address: Support Oppose
Signature: Date:
Printed name: Phone:
Address: Support Oppose
Signature: Date:
Printed name: Phone:
Address: Support Oppose
Signature: Date:
Printed name: Phone:
Address: Support Oppose
Signature: Date:
Printed name: Phone:
Address: Support Oppose
Signature: Date:
Printed name: Phone:
Address: Support Oppose
Signature: Date:
Printed name: Phone:
Address: Support Oppose
Signature: Date:
Printed name: Phone:
Address: Support Oppose
Signature: Date:
Printed name: Phone:
Address: Support Oppose
Signature: Date:
Printed name: Phone:
Address: Support Oppose
Signature: Date: