HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-05-27 Planning PACKET
Note: Anyone wishing to speak at any Planning Commission meeting is encouraged to do so. If you wish to speak,
please rise and, after you have been recognized by the Chair, give your name and complete address for the record.
You will then be allowed to speak. Please note that the public testimony may be limited by the Chair and normally is
not allowed after the Public Hearing is closed.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
SPECIAL MEETING
MAY 27, 2014
AGENDA
I. CALL TO ORDER:
7:00 PM, Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street.
II. ANNOUNCEMENTS
III. AD-HOC COMMITTEE UPDATES
IV. PUBLIC FORUM
V. TYPE II PUBLIC HEARING
A. PLANNING ACTION: 2014-00307
SUBJECT PROPERTY: 777 Oak Street
OWNERS: Martha Howard-Bullen
DESCRIPTION: A request for a Physical and Environmental Constraints Review and Water
Resource Protection Zone Reduction Permit approval to construct a new 3,414 square foot,
single-story single family residence. The application also requests a Conditional Use Permit
approval for a 615 square foot Accessory Residential Unit for the property located at 777 Oak
Street. The property is subject to the Physical Constraints and Water Resource permits due to the
location of the proposed development within the adopted floodplain for Ashland Creek. The
existing approximately 720 square foot residence on the site is proposed to be retained and
added onto with the new construction. The application includes a request to remove 13 trees on
site. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single Family Residential; ZONING: R-1-5;
ASSESSOR’S MAP/TAX LOTS: 39 1E 04CA 2707.
Continued from May 13, 2014 Meeting. – Public Hearing is Closed.
VI. OTHER BUSINESS
A. Election of Officers.
VII. ADJOURNMENT
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please
contact the Community Development office at 541-488-5305 (TTY phone is 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 1).
777 Oak Street
Please bring the 777 Oak Street (PA-2014-00307) materials from the
May 13 packet with you to the meeting.
If you need a replacement copy please contact
April Lucas at 541-552-2041 or email april.lucas@ashland.or.us
ASHLAND PLANNING DIVISION
STAFF REPORT
Addendum
May 27, 2014
PLANNING ACTION:
2014-00307
APPLICANT:
Martha Howard-Bullen
LOCATION:
777 Oak Street
ZONE DESIGNATION:
R-1-5
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION:
Single Family Residential
APPLICATION DEEMED COMPLETE:
April 4, 2014
120-DAY TIME LIMIT:
October 1, 2014
ORDINANCE REFERENCE:
18.20 R-1 Single Family Residential District
18.62 Physical and Environmental Constraints
18.63 Water Resource Protection Zone
18.104 Conditional Use Permits
REQUEST:
A request for a Physical and Environmental Constraints Review permit and Water
Resource Protection Zone Reduction approval to construct a new 3,414 square foot, single-story
single family residence with an approximately 775 square foot garage. The application also
requests a Conditional Use Permit approval for a 615 square foot Accessory Residential Unit for
the property located at 777 Oak Street. The application includes a request to remove 13 trees on
site.
I. Background
The application was continued from the May 13, 2014 Planning Commission meeting
due to concerns regarding whether the proposal complied with the criteria for a Physical
and Environmental Constraints Review Permit for Floodplain Development. The
applicant submitted a revised proposal at the meeting. The Planning Commission
continued the meeting to the May 27, 2014 meeting date in order for there to be time for
staff and the Commission to review the revised proposal. The applicant provided a 60-
day extension of the 120 day decision period, extending the application to October 1,
2014.
A. Description of Revised Proposal
The revised proposal shifts the new primary residence, outdoor areas, garage, and
parking to the east, away from Ashland Creek by 15-feet, but the revised location
Planning Action 2014-00307 ADDENDUM Ashland Planning Division – Staff Report adg
Applicant: M. Howard-Bullen Page
1 of 11
remains entirely within the Floodplain Corridor. The revised proposal also
includes the demolition of the existing 720 square foot vacant single family
residence. Finally, the applicant’s revised findings state that the change in the
proposed home location removes all structures from the Water Resource
Protection Zone.
II. Project Impact
Based on the record of decision from the adoption of the Ashland Floodplain Corridor,
staff does not concur with the applicant’s assertion that the Floodplain Corridor line was
drawn for insurance purposes only. The Ashland Floodplain Corridor line does not have
any implications on whether a property owner is required to carry flood insurance. Flood
protection insurance is required by Federal law on structures within the Federally
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) 100-year floodplain.
The Ashland Floodplain Corridor was adopted in 1989 by the City Council, and the
decision to include area on either side of the FEMA Floodplain was to minimize risk to
life and damage to private property and public infrastructure. The decision was based on
documented accounts which depicted erratic behavior of floodwaters. The erratic
flooding is due to the high velocity of the floodwaters that carry large pieces of debris
which plugged culverts and redirected floodwaters. Water naturally follows the path of
least resistance and meanders to create that course. Ashland’s Floodplain Corridor takes
into account the natural meandering forces of waters which were not accounted for when
FEMA created the federal floodplain maps. The Ashland Floodplain Corridor does not
merely establish a flood elevation. Rather, the findings discuss the width of the Ashland
Floodplain Corridor was established to provide a setback from the flood source.
Additionally, the adoption of development regulations for the Ashland Floodplain
Corridors was in response to public safety issues posed by development in proximity to
creeks with potential for flooding. Protections for the floodplain corridors are adopted in
the City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan.
Planning Action 2014-00307 ADDENDUM Ashland Planning Division – Staff Report adg
Applicant: M. Howard-Bullen Page
2 of 11
Figure
Above is a map, Figure 1, with the elevation contours of the subject site demonstrating
the “benches” created by the movement of floodplain waters through the site. There are
four benches or drops in elevation between Oak Street and Ashland Creek.
The subject property is a flag lot. At Oak Street, the elevation of the lot located between
Oak Street and the subject parcel is 1,804 feet. As a result, the neighboring residences
adjacent to Oak Street are located on the first and highest “bench”.
Moving to the west down the driveway, the grade drops eight feet. The front property line
of the subject site is 1,793 feet, which is ten feet lower than the street. This is the second
“bench”. The Ashland Floodplain Corridor boundary is at 1,793 feet.
The elevation of the third “bench” is 1,792 feet and is located approximately 141 feet
west of the front property line. The fourth “bench” is the final drop to the creek bank.
III. Decision Points
A. Physical and Environmental Constraints Review for Floodplain Development
The property is subject to the Physical and Environmental Constraints Review permit due
proposed development occurring within the boundaries of the Floodplain Corridor Lands
Planning Action 2014-00307 ADDENDUM Ashland Planning Division – Staff Report adg
Applicant: M. Howard-Bullen Page
3 of 11
for Ashland Creek. The lot is approximately 44,524 square feet. Of that, approximately
36,044 square feet is within the Floodplain Corridor and 8,480 square feet is outside of
the Floodplain Corridor. According to the applicant’s findings, approximately 90 percent
of the property is within the Floodplain.
1.Placement of Structure
The development standards for floodplain corridor lands require residential
structures to be placed outside Floodplain Corridor lands to the maximum extent
feasible
AMC 18.62.070.E
To the maximum extent feasible, structures shall be placed on
other than Flood plain Corridor Lands. In the case where
development is permitted in the Flood plain corridor area, then
development shall be limited to that area which would have the
shallowest flooding.
The subject lot includes a buildable area approximately 8,500 square feet in size
(grey area on Figure 32) which is outside of the Floodplain Corridor. See Figure 3
2on the following page. The revised application does not address why the
proposed residence cannot be moved away from the source of flooding. The
revised proposal locates the primary residence, garage, parking and outdoor areas
entirely within the Floodplain Corridor. The application does not address the
criteria from AMC 18.62.070.E.
Decision Point –
Does the application address why the proposed residence cannot be
located to the maximum extent feasible on land outside of the Floodplain Corridor, and
therefore meet the development standard for floodplain corridor lands in 18.62.070.E?
Planning Action 2014-00307 ADDENDUM Ashland Planning Division – Staff Report adg
Applicant: M. Howard-Bullen Page
4 of 11
Figure
Placement (continued)
The development standards for floodplain corridor land also have a provision for
development when more than 50 percent or more of the lot is within the
floodplain.
AMC 18.62.070.F
.
Existing lots with buildable land outside the Flood plain Corridor
shall locate all residential structures outside the Corridor land,
unless 50% or more of the lot is within the Flood plain Corridor.
For residential uses proposed for existing lots that have more than
50% of the lot in Corridor land, structures may be located on that
portion of the Flood plain corridor that is two feet or less below
the flood elevations on the official maps, but in no case closer than
20 feet to the channel of a Riparian Preservation Creek identified
on the official maps adopted pursuant to section 18.62.060.
Construction shall be subject to the requirements in paragraph D
above.
Planning Action 2014-00307 ADDENDUM Ashland Planning Division – Staff Report adg
Applicant: M. Howard-Bullen Page
5 of 11
A variety of development standards for the floodplain corridor may apply to a
property given the lot configuration, zoning, and creation date. As a result, the
applicable standards may overlap. Typically, overlapping standards are not
independently applied when evaluating an application, but rather worked through
in a hierarchal fashion. According to the code, whichever imposes the more
stringent restrictions shall prevail.
AMC 18.62.020
Where this Chapter and any other ordinance, easement, covenant
or deed restriction conflict or overlap, whichever imposes the more
stringent restrictions shall prevail. It is likely that there will be
some overlap between the regulations in this Chapter and those in
Chapter 18.63 Water Resources. Where two (2) regulations are in
conflict, the most stringent shall govern.
The applicant’s findings address that approximately 90 percent of the property is
within the floodplain. The findings go on to address the proposed construction as
a replacement of previous non-conforming structures. According to the applicant,
there were three structures which were utilized as residences. The City records
find that there was one residence and two outbuildings, a barn and art studio on
the site totaling approximately 1,680 square feet in area. Two structures were
removed and with the revised proposal the existing vacant 720 square foot
residence on the site will also be removed. According to the applicant, the
existence of these structures provides justification of replacement residence in a
similar location.
Generally, when non-conforming structures are removed, new construction must
comply with the setback requirements and any other applicable requirements.
Staff questions the validity of replacement considering the area of existing non-
conforming, vacant residence is 720 square feet. The proposed building area is
approximately 4,170 square feet in size or more than 5 times the area covered by
the existing non-conforming residence. Additional new areas of disturbance in the
Floodplain Corridor include the significantly larger residence, garage, parking
area and various outdoor living areas.
Decision Point –
Does the existing non-conforming structure justify locating the
proposed residence in the Floodplain Corridor? If so, is the more than doubling of the
area of disturbance in the Floodplain Corridor resulting from the proposed home and
garage footprint reasonable?
B. Water Resource Protection Zone reduction -
Ashland Creek is a federal, state and locally protected fish bearing stream. It is the
highest order of stream in the City of Ashland and has a 50 foot from the top of bank
Planning Action 2014-00307 ADDENDUM Ashland Planning Division – Staff Report adg
Applicant: M. Howard-Bullen Page
6 of 11
Riparian Protection Zone, from here on described as the Water Resource Protection Zone
.
(WRPZ)
The applicant has stated that the revised proposal eliminates the request for a Water
Resource Protection Zone reduction. The applicant’s finding also state that the proposed
patio, at rear of residence, northwest corner of the structure, will comply with the porous
solid surface patio exemption.
AMC18.63.060.B.4
Outdoor patio areas consisting of porous solid surfaces up to 150 square
feet in size per lot, but not including decks, may be constructed in the
upland half of the riparian buffer furthest away from the stream.
Porous solid surfaces are defined in the Ashland Municipal Code as a permeable surface
built with an underlying stone reservoir that temporarily stores surface runoff before it
infiltrates into the subsoil. Porous solid surfaces include pervious asphalt, pervious
concrete, grass or permeable pavers.
Without details regarding the patio, it is difficult for staff to discern if the standards are
met. Based on the elevation of the structure (1794.6) and the elevation of grade
(1793.15), there is a low wall and an area noted of up to 12-inches of fill and stairs to get
from grade to the patio deck. The patio does not appear to meet the standard because
there appears to be fill under the patio area in order to raise it to the height necessary to
exist the residence. The presence of fill would indicate that the patio is not a porous solid
surface. Additionally, there is a wall around the patio which is not permitted in the
WRPZ.
There is ample lot area outside of the WRPZ where the residence could be located and,
the intent is for new construction to move away from the WRPZ.
Decision Point –
Does the proposed patio comply with the standard for exemption
from the Water Resource Protection Zone ordinance and the definition of a porous
solid surface?
As noted in the previous staff report, the applicant has proposed to restore and enhance
the remaining WRPZ by eliminating a previously constructed holding pond area, removal
of non-native noxious plant material and the removal of dead/dying trees. The applicant’s
landscape architect has provided a detailed landscaping plan for the site showing re-
vegetation of the site utilizing a mixture of native, riparian zone appropriate plant
materials. The landscaping plan will need be revised to address the modified site layout.
A condition to this effect has been added.
The amended application retains the proposed request to remove 13 trees on site. The
proposed Conditional Use Permit approval for an accessory residential unit is also
retained in the amended proposal and no modifications to the tree removal or Conditional
Use Permit request are included in the application. The discussion of the compliance of
these items is addressed in the May 13, 2014 staff report.
Planning Action 2014-00307 ADDENDUM Ashland Planning Division – Staff Report adg
Applicant: M. Howard-Bullen Page
7 of 11
III. Procedural - Required Burden of Proof
The criteria for Physical and Environmental Constraints approval are described in
18.62.040 as follows:
The following criteria shall be used to approve or deny an application:
A. All applicable City ordinances have been met or will be met by the proposed development.
B. All requirements of the Site Review Chapter have been met or will be met.
C. The development complies with the Site Design Standards adopted by the City Council for
implementation of this Chapter.
D. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, paved access to and through the
development, electricity, urban storm drainage, and adequate transportation can and will be
provided to and through the subject property. All improvements in the street right-of-way shall
comply with the Street Standards in Chapter 18.88, Performance Standards Options. (Ord.
2655, 1991; Ord 2836 S6, 1999)
The criteria for an reduction to the Water Resource Protection Zone are described in
18.72.090 as follows:
A. There is a demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements of the Site Design
Standards due to a unique or unusual aspect of the proposed use of a site;
B. Approval of the variance will not substantially negatively impact adjacent properties;
C. Approval of the variance is consistent with the stated purpose of the Site Design and Use
Chapter; and
D. The variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the difficulty.
The criteria for a Conditional Use approval are described in AMC Chapter 18.72.070, as
follows:
A. That the use would be in conformance with all standards within the zoning district in which the
use is proposed to be located, and in conformance with relevant Comprehensive plan policies
that are not implemented by any City, State, or Federal law or program.
B. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, paved access to and through the
development, electricity, urban storm drainage, and adequate transportation can and will be
provided to and through the subject property.
C. That the conditional use will have no greater adverse material effect on the livability of the
impact area when compared to the development of the subject lot with the target use of the
zone. When evaluating the effect of the proposed use on the impact area, the following factors
of livability of the impact area shall be considered in relation to the target use of the zone:
1. Similarity in scale, bulk, and coverage.
Planning Action 2014-00307 ADDENDUM Ashland Planning Division – Staff Report adg
Applicant: M. Howard-Bullen Page
8 of 11
2. Generation of traffic and effects on surrounding streets. Increases in pedestrian, bicycle, and
mass transit use are considered beneficial regardless of capacity of facilities.
3. Architectural compatibility with the impact area.
4. Air quality, including the generation of dust, odors, or other environmental pollutants.
5. Generation of noise, light, and glare.
6. The development of adjacent properties as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan.
7. Other factors found to be relevant by the Hearing Authority for review of the proposed use.
The criteria for an Accessory Residential Unit are described in AMC Chapter 18.20.030.H, as
follows:
H. Accessory residential units, subject to the Type I procedure and criteria, and the following
additional criteria:
1. The proposal must conform with the overall maximum lot coverage and setback requirements
of the underlying zone.
2. The maximum number of dwelling units shall not exceed 2 per lot.
3. The maximum gross habitable floor area (GHFA) of the accessory residential structure shall
not exceed 50% of the GHFA of the primary residence on the lot, and shall not exceed 1000
sq. ft. GHFA.
4. Additional parking shall be in conformance with the off-street Parking provisions for single-
family dwellings of this Title.
IV. Conclusions and Recommendations
The primary issue with the proposal remains the building placement. The applicant has
not addressed the floodplain development standards for locating proposed residences to
the maximum extent feasible outside of the Ashland Floodplain Corridor. Specifically,
the application does not address the buildable area located outside the Ashland
Floodplain Corridor. Though the lot has more than 50 percent of the parcel in the
Ashland Floodplain Corridor, the standards do not guarantee the replacement of existing
nonconforming structures in the protected area. The modified proposal appears to have
encroachments into the Water Resource Protection Zone which do not meet the
exemption requirements. There is ample lot area outside of the WRPZ which could be
utilized for development.
Staff believes the application as proposed should not be approved because it does not
demonstrate compliance with the Floodplain Development Standards.
There is a possibility of another continuance for the applicant to make additional
modifications and demonstrate compliance with the Floodplain Development Standards
Planning Action 2014-00307 ADDENDUM Ashland Planning Division – Staff Report adg
Applicant: M. Howard-Bullen Page
9 of 11
based on the direction of the Planning Commission. With the previously provided 60-day
extension, additional time from the applicant would not be necessary at this time.
Should the Commission believe adequate information and facts are provided to approve
the project, Staff recommends the following conditions.
1) That all proposals of the applicant shall be conditions of approval unless
otherwise modified here.
2) That building permit submittals shall include:
a) Structural engineering demonstrating the single family residence can be
retained and added on-to shall be provided at the time of building permit
submittals.
b) The new residence shall demonstrate compliance with Solar Setback
Standard A. The building permit submittals shall include identification of
the highest shadow producing point, identification of the height of the
shadow producing point from natural grade and the solar setback
measurement called out to the north property line.
c) That individual lot coverage shall not exceed 50 percent of the lot area in
accordance with the lot coverage regulations of the zoning district. Lot
coverage calculations including all impervious surfaces shall be provided
with building permit submittals.
d) That the Fire Department requirements for Fire Apparatus Access shall be
complied with either through the installation of a fire truck turnaround or
fire sprinklers. Evidence of compliance shall be provided for with the
building permit submittals.
e) That a revised landscaping and irrigation plan shall be provided with the
building permit submittals. The landscaping and irrigation plan shall
comply with the native plant material requirements for the Water Resource
Protection Zone and the City of Ashland, landscaping and irrigation plan
requirements.
3) That prior to the issuance of a building permit:
a) Tree protection fencing shall be installed according to the approved Tree
Protection Plan prior to any site work, storage of materials or permit
issuance. The tree protection shall be chain link fencing six feet tall and
installed in accordance with 18.61.200.B.
b) A Tree Verification Permit shall be applied for and approved by the
Ashland Planning Division prior to permit issuance, site work, building
demolition, and/or storage of materials. The Verification Permit is to
Planning Action 2014-00307 ADDENDUM Ashland Planning Division – Staff Report adg
Applicant: M. Howard-Bullen Page
10 of 11
inspect installation of tree protection fencing for the trees to be retained on
site, and on adjacent properties.
c) The FEMA Floodplain boundary shall be identified on site and protected
with silt fencing, and the installation of this silt fencing at the Floodplain
line shall be inspected and approved by the Staff Advisor prior to the
issuance of a building permit.
4) That prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy:
a) That the lowest habitable floor elevation shall be a minimum of one foot
above the 100 year Floodplain level and shall be certified (by a registered
surveyor) at two-feet above the FEMA base flood elevation or at or above
the City of Ashland Flood Plain Corridor elevation, whichever is greater,
in compliance with 18.62.070.D.
b) There shall be at least three off-street parking spaces situated in such a
manner as to eliminate the necessity for backing out installed on site.
These parking spaces shall be shown on the building permit submittals for
the primary residence, and shall be installed prior to the issuance of a
certificate of occupancy for the new primary residence.
c) Two additional parking spaces shall be installed on site in such a manner
to eliminate the necessity for backing out prior to the issuance of the
certificate of occupancy for the Accessory Residential Unit.
d) The driveway area shall be signed as a no parking, fire apparatus access
land if deemed necessary by the Fire Department and the building official
to maintain required fire apparatus access. The vegetation along the
driveway shall be pruned to achieve a width of 20-feet wide and 13.6-feet
vertical clearance.
e) That a separate electric meter for the accessory residential unit shall be
installed in accordance with Ashland Electric Department requirements
prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy.
f) That an opportunity to recycle site shall be located on the site, or an
individual recycle bin shall be provided to the accessory residential unit in
conformance with 18.72.040 prior to issuance of the certificate of
occupancy for the accessory residential unit.
Planning Action 2014-00307 ADDENDUM Ashland Planning Division – Staff Report adg
Applicant: M. Howard-Bullen Page
11 of 11