Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-07-28 Planning PACKET ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING July 28, 2020 AGENDA I. CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 PM, Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 E. Main Street II. ANNOUNCEMENTS III. PUBLIC FORUM IV.TYPE III PUBLIC HEARING A. PLANNING ACTION: #PA-T3-2019-00001 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 1511 Hwy 99 N OWNER/AGENTS/APPLICANT: Linda Zare/Casita Developments, LLC & Kendrick Enterprise, LLC/ Rogue Planning & Development Services, LLC DESCRIPTION: A request for Annexation of a 16.87-acre parcel and Zone Change from County RR- 5 Rural Residential) to City R-2 (Low Density, Multi-Family Residential) for the properties located at 1511 Highway 99 North. The annexation is to include adjacent railroad property and state highway right-of-way. The application includes conceptual details for the future phased development of 196 apartments (1- and 2-Bedrooms, ranging from 480-701 square feet) in 14 two- story buildings; Outline Plan subdivision and Site Design Review development approvals are not requested here, and would be applied for subsequent to annexation. The application also requests an Exception to Street Standards to deviate from city standard parkrow and sidewalk improvements to respond to constraints of right-of-way width and existing encroachments. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Multi-Family Residential; ZONING: Existing County RR- 5, Proposed City R-2; V. LEGISLATIVE PUBLIC HEARING A. PLANNING ACTION: PA-L-2020-00008 APPLICANT: City of Ashland DESCRIPTION: A public hearing on ordinance amendments to the Ashland Land Use Ordinance to update and clarify the open space requirements and design standards for multifamily and single-family housing developments, and to correct terminology related to open space and other minor wording edits. The proposed amendments include two ordinances: 1) An ordinance amending Chapters 18.2.5 Standards for Residential Zones, 18.3.9 Performance Standards Option and PSO Overlay, 18.4.2 Building Placement, Orientation, and Design, 18.4.4 Landscaping, Lighting, and Screening, and 18.6 Definitions of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance to amend the open space requirements and design standards, and 2) an ordinance amending chapters 18.2.2 Base Zones and Allowed Uses, 18.2.3 Special Use Standards, 18.2.5 Standards for Residential Zones, 18.3.2 Croman Mill District, 18.3.4 Normal Neighborhood District, 18.3.5 North Mountain Neighborhood District, 18.3.9 Performance Standards Option and PSO Overlay, 18.3.10 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). Physical and Environmental Constraints Overlay, 18.3.11 Water Resources Protection Zones (Overlays), 18.3.14 Transit Triangle Overlay, 18.4.2 Building Placement, Orientation, and Design, 18.4.2 Parking, Access, and Circulation, 18.4.4 Landscaping, Lighting, and Screening, 18.4.5. Tree Preservation and Protection, 18.4.6. Public Facilities, 18.5.2 Site Design Review, 18.5.3 Land Divisions and Property Line Adjustments, and 18.5.7 Tree Removal Permits of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance for consistency in terminology related to open space and other minor wording edits. VI.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). WRITTEN TESTIMONY _________________________________ PA-T3-2019-00001 1511 HWY 99 N TYPE III PUBLIC HEARING _________________________________ PA-T3-2019-00001 1511 HWY 99 N Planning Department, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520 541-488-5305 Fax: 541-552-2050 www.ashland.or.us TTY: 1-800-735-2900 PLANNING ACTION: PA-T3-2019-00001 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 1511 Highway 99 North and Adjacent Railroad Property and State Highway Right-of-Way OWNER: Linda Zare AGENTS: Casita Developments, LLC & Kendrick Enterprise, LLC APPLICANT: Rogue Planning & Development Services, LLC DESCRIPTION: A request for Annexation of a 16.87-acre parcel and Zone Change from County RR-5 Rural Residential) to City R-2 (Low Density, Multi-Family Residential) for the properties located at 1511 Highway 99 North. The annexation is to include adjacent railroad property and state highway right-of-way. The application includes conceptual details for the future phased development of 196 apartments (1- and 2-Bedrooms, ranging from 480-701 square feet) in 14 two-story buildings; Outline Plan subdivision and Site Design Review development approvals are not requested here, and would be applied for subsequent to annexation. The application seeks exception treet design standards to deviate from city standard parkrow and sidewalk improvements in some areas to respond to constraints of right-of-way width and existing COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION:ZONING: encroachments. Multi-Family Residential; Existing County RR-5, Proposed City R-2; ELECTRONIC ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING:Tuesday June 23, 2020 at 7:00 PM Notice is hereby given that a PUBLIC HEARING with respect to the ASHLAND LAND USE ORDINANCE on the above described request will be conducted electronically by the ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION on the meeting date and time shown above. 9ǣĻĭǒƷźǝĻ hƩķĻƩ ϔЋЉΏЊЏ, this meeting will be held electronically. 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 w tƩźƒĻ The ordinance criteria applicable to this application 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. 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 seven days prior to the hearing. Anyone wishing to provide testimony can submit comments via e-mail to http://www.ashland.or.us/Agendas.asp?SectionID=0&CCBID=198 PC-public-testimony@ashland.or.us WǒƓĻ ЋЌ t/ IĻğƩźƓŭ ĻƭƷźƒƚƓǤ by 10:00 a.m. on Monday, June 22, 2020. 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 WǒƓĻ ЋЌ t/ IĻğƩźƓŭ ĻƭƷźƒƚƓǤ 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, June 23, 2020. Written testimony received by these deadlines will be available for Commissioners to review before the hearing and will be included in the meeting minutes. In compliance with the American with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to pa-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 application, please feel free to contact Senior Planner Derek Severson at 541-488-5305 or via e-mail to planning@ashland.or.us . G:\\comm-dev\\planning\\Planning Actions\\PAs by Street\\H\\Highway 99\\1511 Hwy 99 N\\PA-T3-2019-00001\\Notices\\Hwy 99_1511_PA-T3-2019-00001_NOC_6.23.20.docx ANNEXATIONS - Approval Criteria and 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; 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 a quarter of a 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 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. 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 unitsrestricted to households earning at or below 80 percent the area median income shall have an equivalency value of 1.25 unit. d. Ownership or rental units restricted to households earning at or below 60 percent the area median income shall have an equivalency value of 1.5 unit. 2. As alternative to providing affordable units per section 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(3)(c) 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 18.5.8.050.G, subsections 4 - 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 nonprofit 501(C)(3) organization, or public corporation created under ORS 456.055 to 456.235. d. 3. The affordable units shall be comparable in bedroom mix and housing type 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 G:\\comm-dev\\planning\\Planning Actions\\PAs by Street\\H\\Highway 99\\1511 Hwy 99 N\\PA-T3-2019-00001\\Notices\\Hwy 99_1511_PA-T3-2019-00001_NOC_6.23.20.docx 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. 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 b. The required on-site affordable units shall be comprised of the different unit types in the same proportion as the market dwelling units within the development. 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 distributed throughout the project 6. 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 interior finishes and materials 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. 7. Exceptions to the requirements of 18.5.8.050, subsections G.2 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 an alternative mix of housing types not meeting the requirements of subsection 18.5.8.050.G.3.b would accomplish additional benefits to the City consistent with this chapter, than would the development providing a proportional mix of unit types. c. 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. d. That the distribution of affordable units within the development not meeting subsection 18.5.8.050.G.5 is necessary for development of an affordable housing project that provides onsite staff with supportive services. e. That the distribution of affordable units within the development as proposed would accomplish additional benefits for the city, consistent with the purposes of this chapter, than would development meeting the distribution requirement of subsection 18.5.8.050.G.5. f.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. 8. The total number of affordable units described in this section 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. Properties providing affordable units as part of the annexation process shall qualify for a maximum density bonus of 25 percent. H. One or more of the following standards are met. 1. The proposed area for annexation is to be residentially zoned, and there is less than a five-year supply of vacant and redevelopable land in the which development has already occurred but on which, due to present or expected market forces, there exists the likelihood that existing development will be converted to more intensive residential uses during the planning period. The five-year supply shall be determined from vacant and redevelopable land inventories and by the methodology for land need projections from the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The proposed lot or lots will be zoned CM, E-1, or C-1 under the Comprehensive Plan, and that 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. G:\\comm-dev\\planning\\Planning Actions\\PAs by Street\\H\\Highway 99\\1511 Hwy 99 N\\PA-T3-2019-00001\\Notices\\Hwy 99_1511_PA-T3-2019-00001_NOC_6.23.20.docx 6. The lot or lots proposed for annexation are an island completely surrounded by lands within the city limits. EXCEPTION TO STREET 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. G:\\comm-dev\\planning\\Planning Actions\\PAs by Street\\H\\Highway 99\\1511 Hwy 99 N\\PA-T3-2019-00001\\Notices\\Hwy 99_1511_PA-T3-2019-00001_NOC_6.23.20.docx Memo DATE: July 28, 2020 TO: Ashland Planning Commission FROM: Derek Severson, Senior Planner RE: Grand Terrace Annexation application since last fall as they currently stand. At this stage, staff recommends that the Planning Commission forward a favorable recommendation to the Council with regard to the requested annexation application, and have attached draft findings which reflect that recommendation. Contiguity & The Adjacent Railroad Property As has previously been discussed, the subject properties are separated from the city by railroad property which is not considered to be right-of-way and as such the properties are not currently contiguous with the city limits. AMC 18.5.8.060 provides that "When an annexation is initiated by a private individual, the Staff Advisor may include other parcels of property in the proposed annexation to make a boundary extension more logical and to avoid parcels of land which are not incorporated but are partially or wholly surrounded by the City. The Staff Advisor, in a report to the Planning Commission and City Council, shall justify the inclusion of any parcels other than the parcel for which the petition is filed. The purpose ofthis section is to permit the Commission and Council to make annexations extending the boundaries more logical and orderly." On that basis, staff is recommending that both the adjacent railroad property and the ODOT right-of-way for Highway 99N be included to provide a more logical and orderly boundary. If the railroad property were to remain as a barrier, all of the property within the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) to the north of the current city limits could not be annexed, and inclusion of the ODOT highway right-of-way enables necessary utility extensions. The most recent public notices have included these properties, and were sent to their owners. Subsequent to receiving notice, ODOT has expressed their agreement to the inclusion of their property while representatives of the railroad have indicated they do not wish to be annexed. In looking at the state statutes relative to annexation, ORS 222.170 to allow annexation by consent - through public hearing - without referring the matter to an election when: Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us More than one-half of the owners with land in the area to be annexed consent to the annexation; Owners of more than one-half the land in the area to be annexed consent to the annexation; and That land represents more than one-half of the total assessed value in the area to be annexed. ORS 222.170 also specifically addresses how railroad property is considered, noting that the railroad shall not be considered when determining the number of owners, the area of land or the assessed statement consenting to or opposing annexation. In this case, both the Railroad and ODOT have provided statements relative to annexation and as such must be considered in reaching the Triple Majority. after discussion with the City Attorney, with the consent of the applicant and ODOT we believe that the Commission cou adjacent state highway right-of-way and railroad property recommended by staff to achieve contiguity, nsent. Affordability At the June 23, 2020 meeting, the Planning Commission discussed AMC 18.5.8.050.G.1 which reads, 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.Based on that discussion, Commissioners determined that there is no provision to reduce the base density by excluding constrained lands (hillsides, water resource protection zones for streams and wetlands, and lands with significant natural features) when calculating the number of required affordable units for annexations as there is in calculating the minimum density requirement. As such, Commissioners seemed ready to recommend that the Council require that the number of affordable units included in the formal Site Design Review application be increased to account for the full base density of the subject properties. The R-2 subject properties have a based density of 13½ dwelling units per acre, which for this 16.87 acre property equates to a 227¾ dwelling unit base density and would require 56 dwelling units of affordable housing or, for units offered at 60 percent of area median income, this could be adjusted down to 37 dwelling units. (This is 7-10 more affordable units than would be required if sloped areas and wetlands were allowed to be excluded.) Transportation Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) nical memorandum in TIA review comments. In speaking with ODOT staff, they have indicated that at this point, ODOT has given their final sign-off to the TIA with the addition of the technical memorandum. Access Easement The applicant has indicated that access to the property is provided by a 30-foot wide ingress access easement and notes that there are no reservations or limits noted upon the easement. The applicant further explains that there is a 25-foot wide right of access to the highway from the easement, and that included a survey noting the easement area along with the easement language. Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us While the adjacent property owners have raised questions as to the original intent underlying the granting of the easement, at the last meeting made clear that their role is not to analyze the history and legitimacy of the existing easement, but rather based on the easement in place to determine if adequate transportation can be provided. In this instance, multi-family zoned property is not required to provide dedicated public streets with development (AMC 18.4.6.040.C.1), howeverAMC 18.4.3.080.C.3.d requires that two driveway access points be provided if a multi-family development will generate over 250 trips per day. The intent of this standard is to provide options for the orderly flow of traffic into and out of the site. Two driveways are proposed, and the supplement to the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) indicates that ODOT will be permitting unrestricted turning movements at both driveways allowing both right- in/right-out and left-in and left-out movements. City standards in AMC 18.4.3.080.DParking areas of more than seven parking spaces shall be served by a driveway 20 feet in width and constructed to: facilitate the flow of traffic on or off the site, with due regard to pedestrian and vehicle safety; be clearly and permanently marked and defined; and provide adequate aisles or turn-around areas so that all vehicles may enter the street in a forward manner. parking and loading have a five-foot wide landscaped screening strip where abutting a property line. In this instance, the 30-foot easement width would accommodate a 20-foot driveway with five feet of landscaped screening strip on each side. Pedestrian, Bicycle & Transit Facilities Frontage Improvements The pedestrian transportation standards for annexation in AMC 18.5.8.050.E.3 call for safe and accessible pedestrian facilities and full sidewalk improvements along the frontage, and where the project site is within a quarter of a mile of an existing sidewalk system, the sidewalks from the project site shall be extended to connect to the existing system. The applicant has addressed required frontage improvements with a mix of standard (parkrow and sidewalk) and curbside sidewalk installations that would connect existing sidewalks from the north of the site in the county to the south within the city. The sidewalk installation proposed equates to approximately 0.63 miles. Existing bike lanes would remain. Planning and ODOT staff have discussed the potential for incorporating a two-way multi-use path rather than sidewalks and bike lanes from the driveway north to deal with bicyclists wishing to go left out of the driveway across Highway 99N. ODOT has indicated that such a facility may be possible under their standards, and that they would be open to discussing it further, but that the key issue would be the extent of such a facility and how and where it could transition to existing facilities to the north and south when new crossings are not feasible. where the installation of the bus pull-out lane and bus shelter instead necessitate an eight-foot curbside frontages, where right-of-way is constrained, curbside sidewalks are proposed. standards have been provided although until annexation occurs, the roadway here is a state highway and subject to ODOT standards. The applicant discusses specific sidewalk sections in terms of the station numbers on the civil drawings. Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us Stations 1-16 (North of Land of Paws ): An 8-foot curbside sidewalk is proposed. The applicant explains that there is a large roadside ditch and private property belonging to Anderson Autobody which prevent parkrow installation, and this curbside sidewalk will connect to existing curbside sidewalk to the north. Stations 16-23: A 3-foot bike buffer, 6-foot bike lane, 7-½ foot parkrow, and 6-foot sidewalk are proposed along this section of the property frontage. Stations 23-27: A bus pull-out lane, bus stop and 8-foot curbside sidewalk are proposed along this section of the property frontage.Parkrow here has been replaced by the bus pull- out lane. Station 27-34: A 3-foot bike buffer, 6-foot bike lane, and 8-foot curbside sidewalk are proposed. The applicant explains that this section is physically constrained by a steep roadside embankment and by the railroad trestle. Station 34 Schofield/North Main: A 6-foot bike lane, 7½ -foot parkrow and 6-foot sidewalk are proposed in this section. Southbound RVTD Bus Stop Planning Commissioners asked that the applicant work with RVTD and ODOT to provide design details need to include a pull-out, shelter with lighting, sidewalk, accessible loading pad and accessible route to the site, any necessary retaining, and a merge lane for the bus to re-enter the travel lane at an appropriate speed. The applicant has met with RVTD and its Bus Stop Committee, and a new, southbound bus pull-out lane, bus stop pad and future electric conduit to provide low voltage power is proposed to be provided south of the main driveway entrance to the site. - out lane, shelter and street light placement, and a proposed walkway connecting from the shelter onto the project site. Northbound RVTD Bus Stops within 1,800 to 2,00 feet of the property, with one near the intersection of North Main Street and Highway 99N and the other near Valley View and Highway 99N. The applicant has explored the potential for enhancing crossings, but indicates that ODOT has determined that appropriate given the speeds, traffic volumes, sight and stopping distances when weighed against the anticipated number of pedestrians. The applicant further indicates that ODOT does support a median The applicant emphasizes that the subject property and its proximity to both northbound stops and the new proposed southbound stop are within Transit Supportive Areas in the RVTD 2040 Transit Master quarter mile are within a typical five-minute walk at a normal walking pace. The applicant concludes that like most areas in the community, there is not a northbound and southbound bus stop along the property frontage and this does not prevent commuters from crossing Highway 99N (or Siskiyou Boulevard or Highway 66) to access transit stops where they are not directly connected via a crosswalk or signalized intersection. Speed reduction The applicant has suggested that with a change in roadside culture through annexation and the introduction of higher density residential development, driving habits on the corridor may change. They suggest that after improvements are made, a formal speed study to seek a reduction in highway speeds Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us can be undertaken and eventually, if speeds are reduced and pedestrian volumes increase, potential marked crossings could be approved by the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT). ODOT has jurisdiction on highway markings for pedestrian crossings and for highway speed limits on this state highway. A request to initiate a speed study will ultimately need to come from the City, and Planning and Engineering staff have begun preliminary discussions with ODOT staff and they are open toconducting a speed study, which has not been done for this corridor since the lane reconfiguration completed a few years ago. Staff recommends that with annexation approval, that Council provide direction to staff to work with ODOT to initiate a speed study to see if a speed reduction is merited. Street Lighting The Planning Commissioners had requested that the applicant provide details for street-lighting to increase pedestrian safety along the highway corridor, with particular focus on the driveway locations, and planning staff suggested that the applicant consider how they might more clearly delineate the northern driveway entrance at the street for drivers in conjunction with proposed frontage improvements. -standard cobra style street light or City-standard pedestrian-scaled streetlight will be placed near the improved driveway apron. In addition, Exhibits C.3 and C.4 illustrate a total of five additional lights to be installed along the property frontage. Staff Recommendation As discussed above, ODOT has indicated that the TIA is satisfactory, that the bus lane is satisfactory with a taper adjustment, and that they support a median cut to provide a pedestrian refuge at North Main Street. ODOT has further indicated that they are satisfied with bicycle and pedestrian facilities as proposed, emphasizing the need for a six-foot sidewalk under the trestle; and that ODOT permits will be required to complete improvements. ODOT has also noted that they will need to review and approve final storm-drainage engineering at Site Review since storm drainage is to outflow into ODOT right-of- way. At this point, with the installation of roughly 3,340 linear feet or 0.63 miles - of sidewalk connecting from the existing terminus of sidewalk in Jackson County near El Tapatio restaurant south into the city limits to the existing sidewalk at Schofield Street; the installation of a new bus stop with pull-out and merging lane; improvements to the crossing from North Main Street across Highway 99N to the northbound RVTD flag stop to include an improved median refuge and pedestrian crossing signage; and the clear understanding that Site Design Review approval will need to be obtained before development of the site, staff believe the Planning Commission can forward a recommendation to Council that the criteria for annexation have been met. Draft findings reflecting this staff recommendation are attached. Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION July 28, 2020 IN THE MATTER OF PA-T3-2019-00001, A REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION OF TWO) PARCELS TOTALING 16.87 ACRES, WITH A CURRENT ZONING OF JACKSON ) COUNTY RR-5 (RURAL RESIDENTIAL) AND A PROPOSED ZONING OF CITY ) OF ASHLAND R-2 (LOW DENSITY, MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) FOR THE ) PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 1511 HIGHWAY 99 NORTH. THE ANNEXATION ) IS TO INCLUDE ADJACENT RAILROAD PROPERTY & STATE HIGHWAY ) RIGHT-OF-WAY AT THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE STAFF ADVISOR. ) THE APPLICATION INCLUDES CONCEPTUAL DETAILS FOR THE FUTURE ) FINDINGS, PHASED DEVELOPMENT OF 196 1- & 2- BEDROOM APARTMENTS RANGING ) CONCLUSIONS, FROM 480-701 SQUARE FEET IN 14 2-STORY BUILDINGS. OUTLINE PLAN ) ORDERS & SUBDIVISION AND SITE DESIGN REVIEW DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS ARE ) RECOMMENDATION NOT REQUESTED HERE, AND WOULD BE APPLIED FOR SUBSEQUENT TO ) ANNEXATION. THE APPLICATION ALSO REQUESTS AN EXCEPTION TO ) STREET STANDARDS TO DEVIATE FROM CITY STANDARD PARKROW ) AND SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS TO RESPOND TO CONSTRAINTS OF ) RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH AND EXISTING ENCROACHMENTS. ) ) OWNER: Linda Zare ) APPLICANT: Casita Developments, LLC & Kendrick Enterprise, LLC) ) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- RECITALS: 1) Tax lots #1700 and #1702 of Map 38 1E 32 are located at 1511 Highway 99 North, which is presently outside the city limits, and is zoned RR-5, Jackson County Rural Residential. 2) The applicants are requesting annexation of two parcels totaling 16.87 acres with a current zoning of Jackson County RR-5 (Rural Residential) and a proposed zoning of City of Ashland R-2 (Low Density, Multi-Family Residential) for the properties located at 1511 Highway 99 North. The annexation is to include adjacent railroad property and state highway right-of-way at the recommendation of the Staff Advisor. The application includes conceptual details for the future phased development of 196 apartments (1- and 2-Bedrooms, ranging from 480-701 square feet) in 14 two-story buildings. Outline Plan subdivision and Site Design Review development approvals are not requested here, and would be applied for subsequent to annexation. The application also requests an Exception to Street Standards to deviate from city standard parkrow and sidewalk improvements to respond to constraints of right-of-way width and existing encroachments. The proposal is outlined in plans on file at the Department of Community Development. PA #2018-00154 April 10, 2018 Page 1 3) The approval criteria for Annexation are described in AMC 18.5.8.050 as follows: 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; 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 PA #2018-00154 April 10, 2018 Page 2 annexed area. Where the project site is within a quarter of a 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 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. 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 units restricted to households earning at or below 80 percent the area median income shall have an equivalency value of 1.25 unit. d. Ownership or rental units restricted to households earning at or below 60 percent the area median income shall have an equivalency value of 1.5 unit. PA #2018-00154 April 10, 2018 Page 3 2.As alternative to providing affordable units per section 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(3)(c) 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 18.5.8.050.G, subsections 4 - 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 nonprofit 501(C)(3) organization, or public corporation created under ORS 456.055 to 456.235. d. affordable housing program requirements. 3. The affordable units shall be comparable in bedroom mix and housing type 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. 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 PA #2018-00154 April 10, 2018 Page 4 b. The required on-site affordable units shall be comprised of the different unit types in the same proportion as the market dwelling units within the development. 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 distributed throughout the project 6. 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 interior finishes and materials 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. 7. Exceptions to the requirements of 18.5.8.050, subsections G.2 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 an alternative mix of housing types not meeting the requirements of subsection 18.5.8.050.G.3.b would accomplish additional benefits to the PA #2018-00154 April 10, 2018 Page 5 City consistent with this chapter, than would the development providing a proportional mix of unit types. c. 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. d. That the distribution of affordable units within the development not meeting subsection 18.5.8.050.G.5 is necessary for development of an affordable housing project that provides onsite staff with supportive services. e. That the distribution of affordable units within the development as proposed would accomplish additional benefits for the city, consistent with the purposes of this chapter, than would development meeting the distribution requirement of subsection 18.5.8.050.G.5. f. 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. 8. The total number of affordable units described in this section 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. Properties providing affordable units as part of the annexation process shall qualify for a maximum density bonus of 25 percent. H. One or more of the following standards are met. 1. The proposed area for annexation is to be residentially zoned, and there is less than a five-year supply of vacant and redevelopable land in the proposed land use zoned for residential use on which development has already occurred but on which, due to present or expected market forces, there exists the likelihood that existing development will be converted to more intensive residential uses during the planning period. The five-year supply shall be determined from vacant and redevelopable land inventories and by the methodology for land need projections from the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The proposed lot or lots will be zoned CM, E-1, or C-1 under the Comprehensive Plan, and that 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. PA #2018-00154 April 10, 2018 Page 6 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. 4) The criteria for Site Design Review approval are described in AMC 18.5.2.050 as follows: Underlying Zone: A. The proposal complies with all of the applicable provisions of the underlying zone (part 18.2), including but not limited to: building and yard setbacks, lot area and dimensions, density and floor area, lot coverage, building height, building orientation, architecture, and other applicable standards. Overlay Zones: B. The proposal complies with applicable overlay zone requirements (part 18.3). Site Development and Design Standards: C. The proposal complies with the applicable Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4, except as provided by subsection E, below. City Facilities: D. The proposal complies with the applicable standards in section 18.4.6 Public Facilities and that adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, electricity, urban storm drainage, paved access to and throughout the property and adequate transportation can and will be provided to the subject property. Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards. E. The approval authority may approve exceptions to the Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4 if the circumstances in either subsection 1 or 2, below, are found to exist. 1.There is a demonstrable difficulty meeting the specific requirements of the Site Development and Design Standards due to a unique or unusual aspect of an existing structure or the proposed use of a site; and approval of the exception will not substantially negatively impact adjacent properties; and approval of the exception is consistent with the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design; and the exception requested is the minimum which would alleviate the difficulty.; or 2. There is no demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements, but granting the exception will result in a design that equally or better achieves the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design Standards. 5) The criteria for an Exception to Street Standards are described in AMC 18.4.6.020.B.1 as follows: a. There is demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements of this chapter due to a unique or unusual aspect of the site or proposed use of the site. PA #2018-00154 April 10, 2018 Page 7 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. 6) The Planning Commission, following proper public notice, held public hearings on November 12, 2019 and June 23, 2020 at which time testimony was received and exhibits were presented. Subsequent to the closing of the hearing, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve the Annexation request subject to a number of conditions, and that the Council direct staff to work with the Oregon Department of Transportation to initiate a speed study to determine whether a reduction in the speed limit is possible on the adjacent state highway corridor. Now, therefore, the Planning Commission of the City of Ashland finds, concludes and recommends as follows: SECTION 1. EXHIBITS For the purposes of reference to these Findings, the attached index of exhibits, data, and testimony will be used. Staff Exhibits lettered with an "S" Proponent's Exhibits, lettered with a "P" Opponent's Exhibits, lettered with an "O" Hearing Minutes, Notices, Miscellaneous Exhibits lettered with an "M" SECTION 2. FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS 2.1 The Planning Commission finds that it has received all information necessary to make a decision based on the staff report, public hearing testimony and the exhibits received. 2.2 The Planning Commission finds that the proposal for Annexation meets the applicable criteria in AMC 18.5.8.050. PA #2018-00154 April 10, 2018 Page 8 2.3 The Planning Commission notes that the approval standards for an Annexation require that the subject property be located within the City's Urban Growth Boundary, that the proposed zoning for the annexed area be in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan Map designation, and that the land be currently contiguous with the present city limits. In this instance, the subject property is located within the Urban Growth Boundary, and the requested R- Multi-Family Residential While Site Design Review approval is not currently requested for development of the site, a conceptual multi-family development plan is provided to demonstrate how the property could be developed to the required minimum density in keeping with applicable standards. , however the Planning Commission notes that AMC 18.5.8.060 provides that "When an annexation is initiated by a private individual, the Staff Advisor may include other parcels of property in the proposed annexation to make a boundary extension more logical and to avoid parcels of land which are not incorporated but are partially or wholly surrounded by the City. The Staff Advisor, in a report to the Planning Commission and City Council, shall justify the inclusion of any parcels other than the parcel for which the petition is filed. The purpose of this section is to permit the Commission and Council to make annexations extending the boundaries more logical and orderly." The Planning Commission finds that the Staff Advisor has recommended Public Facilities The Commission further notes that annexation requests must demonstrate that adequate public facilities can and will be provided to and through the subject property. With regard to specific public facilities: Water: The Water Department has noted that the property is not currently served by a water main, and a new main will need to be installed to connect to the existing city water system. The nearest PA #2018-00154 April 10, 2018 Page 9 point of connection is the intersection of North Main Street and Highway 99 North. The applicant notes that water lines to service the property are proposed to be extended, and indicates that these will be adequately sized to provided water pressure for residential service and fire suppression systems. The Water Department has indicated that with extension of a new main, there will be adequate supply of potable water available to the site subject to the following: The City will require the applicant to extend the existing 12-inch main line at a location uphill and o south of the site, between Fox & Schofield Streets to a location north of the railroad trestle at the o pressures at the meter (160+ psi). This will require a pressure reducing valve (PRV) at the point building. It is understood that the applicant will likely install one water meter for the southernmost building o and a second "master meter" for the remainder of the site near the northernmost driveway. Water meters must be placed in the public right-of-way and within the city limits. As such, the o proposed annexation should extend at least to centerline of the adjacent state highway right-of- way. Fire hydrants to be installed on-site will be located on private property and will require yearly o The existing well on site will need to abandoned, or the applicant will be required to install o premises isolation measures (RPZ/double check). The applicant will need to work with the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) on any necessary o modifications to proposed site improvements and associated permitting to address the "Billings Siphon" irrigation easement and associated federal requirements. The City will need to review a more formal plan for on-site services with the eventual Site Design o Review application to develop the site. The review here is limited to extending adequate capacity of public facilities to the subject property. Sanitary Sewer & Storm Drainage: City code requirements typically necessitate that all utilities transition to city services with annexation, however in this instance the property is well outside and would be needed in place between the City of Ashland, Jackson County and the Bear Creek Valley Sanitary Authority - now Rogue Valley Sewer Service - which dates to November 8, 1995 and which provides that with annexation, the sewer district shall continue to provide an urban level of sanitary sewer and/or storm water services that it has historically provided joint provision of service to areas within the City or its UGB by contract, mutual agreement or other method. As proposed by the applicant here, RVSS will continue to provide these services to the subject properties per the 1995 agreement. RVSS has indicated that their sanitary sewer system has adequate capacity for the proposed development, and there is an eight-inch main in the right-of-way due north of the project site. On-site storm water drains to a roadside ditch that is within the state highway right-of-way and maintained by the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT). The PA #2018-00154 April 10, 2018 Page 10 application indicates that the future development of the property is required to be compliant with the regionally-adopted Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual, and further notes that the project Civil Engineers have performed preliminary stormwater generation calculations based on the maximum coverage areas in the zone and have proposed potential surface detention, and recognize that below- grade collection, detention and treatment will be necessary with the future development of the site. With the 1995 agreement, the existing sanitary and storm sewer services to the property would continue, but may need to be formalized with an intergovernmental agreement between the City, RVSS and ODOT to finalize the logistics of RVSS providing sewer and storm water service to the properties once annexed to the City. Electric: The application explains that the property is currently served by Pacific Power, but that with the development the property will be served by the City of Ashland Electric Department with the installation of new electrical infrastructure by the applicant. The application explains that there is presently low-voltage city electric service in place to power street and landscape lighting in and around the central median at the railroad trestle overpass. With the proposal, electric lines are to be provided in or adjacent to the highway right-of-way to provide adequate infrastructure to the proposed development and future development in the vicinity. The Electric Department has in the necessary capacity to serve anticipated future development of the property. They have further noted that this preliminary service plan does not consider how development would be served on site, and is limited to bringing necessary capacity to the property. The site is nearly 17-acres and is largely vacant, and the Commission has recommended that with annexation, a condition be included to make clear that all utility installations shall not disturb the wetland or its water resources protection zone. The Planning Commission finds that the proposal is somewhat unique in that annexations, whether for commercial or residential land, have historically been associated with concurrent development proposals that provide clear trigger points for the completion of improvements and a measure of certainty with regard to the ultimate build-out. In this instance, while the applicant has provided a development plan to conceptually demonstrate how the property could be developed at minimum density in keeping with the zoning, there is no concurrent development approval requested and the proposal involves the provision of some public services by entities other than the city. The Commission finds that separating the annexation request and subsequent development into phases as proposed seems a reasonable approach given the complexity and costs associated with installing infrastructure and frontage improvements, and the additional upfront costs associated with preparing Site Design Review plan submittals. The Commission however finds that annexation approval should include a clear requirement that the properties be deed restricted to require that final civil drawings be reviewed and approved and public utility infrastructure and transportation facilities required for annexation be installed, or adequate security to insure their completion provided, prior to any development of the site. Adequate Transportation The Planning Commission notes that annexations are required to provide necessary transportation facilities to and through the subject property, and transportation facilities must address all modes including motor vehicle, bicycle, pedestrian and transit. To satisfy transportation facility requirements for motor PA #2018-00154 April 10, 2018 Page 11 vehicles, annexation standards require that, at a minimum, 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 and that 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. Annexation standards further provide that the city may, after assessing the impact of the development, require full improvement of streets adjacent to the annexed area while all streets located within the annexed areas are to be fully improved to City standards. For bicycle transportation, a finding that safe and accessible bicycle facilities exist, or can and will be constructed is required, and for annexation along an arterial street, bike lanes are to be provided on or adjacent to the arterial street and safe and accessible facilities to likely bicycle destinations from the project site shall be considered. For pedestrian transportation, full sidewalk improvements are to be provided on one side for all streets adjacent to the proposed annexed area and on all streets within the annexed area. Where the project site is within a quarter of a mile of an existing sidewalk system, the sidewalks from the project site shall be constructed to extend and connect to the existing system, and safe and accessible facilities to likely pedestrian destinations from the project site shall be considered. Where transit service is available or likely to be extended in the future, provisions are required to 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 subject properties front on Highway 99 North, sometimes referred to as the Rogue Valley Highway, which is a state highway under the jurisdiction of the Oregon Department of Transportation. Highway 99 North becomes North Main Street within the city limits. North Main Street is a boulevard or arterial as classified in the Transportation System Plan (TSP). City street standards for an arterial street generally call for 11-foot motor vehicle travel lanes, a 12-foot median/center turn lane, six-foot bike lanes on each side, eight- to nine-foot parking lanes where on-street parking is appropriate, a six-inch curb, a seven- to eight-foot parkrow planting strip with irrigated street trees, and six-foot sidewalks. As it currently exists under The Road Diet in each direction separated by a single, shared center turn lane, and variable width bicycle lanes on the shoulder. There are no curbs in place along the property frontage, and roadside ditches are present in some locations. On the opposite side of the roadway, a guardrail is in place at the outside edge of the bike lane. Motor Vehicle Transportation Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) The technical memorandum which evaluates the impacts of the proposal. Key findings of the TIA include: The TIA shows all studied intersections (Hwy 99N at South Valley View, Highway 99N at Jackson Road, North Main Street at Jackson Road, North Main Street at Maple Street, and Hwy 99N at the PA #2018-00154 April 10, 2018 Page 12 project access points) will meet the mobility standards through the Year 2034 with the addition of the traffic associated with anticipated development of the subject property. The addition of development traffic will not substantially increase queuing conditions over the background conditions. The TIA technical memo further explains that the recent reduction in through lanes with the road diet has resulted in increased queuing lengths when disruptions to traffic such as garbage trucks, stopped buses or cars stopping for pedestrians create back- mitigation is recommended to address these queue lengths. All site driveways are projected to operate safely and efficiently. The TIA recommends that Highway 99N be restriped to include a left-turn lane for vehicles entering the site. The TIA concludes that the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) has been demonstrated to be met. Access Easement The Planning Commission notes that the applicant has indicated that one of the two access points to the property is to be provided via a 30-foot wide ingress access easement and notes that there are no reservations or limits noted upon the easement. The applicant further explains that there is a 25-foot wide ney has reviewed the easement and found no restrictions. The applicant has included a survey noting the easement area along with the easement language. The Planning Commission finds that while the adjacent property owners have raised questions as to the original intent underlying the granting of the easement, it is not the Commissioners role to analyze the history and legitimacy of the existing easement, but rather based on the easement in place to determine if adequate transportation can be provided. The Planning Commission finds that while city standards generally seek a gridded, interconnected street system within and through the development that provides for broader connectivity, the presence of the railroad tracks along one boundary of the subject properties combined with site topography prevents connection to the adjacent street system. In this instance, multi-family zoned property is not required to provide a dedicated public street with development (AMC 18.4.6.040.C.1), howeverAMC 18.4.3.080.C.3.d requires that two driveway access points be provided if a multi-family development will generate over 250 trips per day. The intent of this standard is to provide options for the orderly flow of traffic into and out of the site. Two driveways are proposed, and the supplement to the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) indicates that ODOT will be permitting unrestricted turning movements at both driveways allowing both right-in/right-out and left-in and left-out movements. Parking areas of more than seven parking spaces shall be served by a driveway 20 feet in width and constructed to: facilitate the flow of traffic on or off the site, with due regard to pedestrian and vehicle safety; be clearly and permanently marked and defined; and provide adequate aisles or turn-around areas so that all vehicles may enter the street in a forward manner.ing, parking and loading have a five-foot wide landscaped screening strip where abutting a property line. The Planning Commission finds that in this instance, the 30-foot easement width would accommodate a 20-foot driveway with five feet of landscaped screening strip on each side. PA #2018-00154 April 10, 2018 Page 13 Bicycle & Pedestrian Transportation Frontage Improvements The pedestrian transportation standards for annexation in AMC 18.5.8.050.E.3 call for safe and accessible pedestrian facilities and full sidewalk improvements along the frontage, and where the project site is within a quarter of a mile of an existing sidewalk system, the sidewalks from the project site shall be extended to connect to the existing system. The Planning Commission finds that the applicant has addressed required frontage improvements with a mix of standard (parkrow and sidewalk) and curbside sidewalk installations to connect existing sidewalks from the north of the site in the county to the south within the city. The sidewalk installation proposed equates to approximately 0.63 miles. Existing bike lanes would remain in place. The Planning Commission finds that a standard sidewalk and parkrow configuration is proposed along the -out lane and bus shelter necessitate an eight--of-way is constrained, curbside sidewalks are proposed. An ODOT-standard cobra-head style street light or City-standard pedestrian-scaled streetlight will be placed near the improved driveway apron, and a total of five additional street lights are proposed to be installed along the property frontage. Exception findings to address those standards have been provided although until annexation occurs, the roadway here is a state highway and subject to ODOT standards. The applicant discusses specific sidewalk sections in terms of the station numbers on the civil drawings. Stations 1-16 (North of Land of Paws ): An 8-foot curbside sidewalk is proposed. The applicant explains that there is a large roadside ditch and private property belonging to Anderson Autobody which prevent parkrow installation, and this curbside sidewalk will connect to existing curbside sidewalk to the north. Stations 16-23: A 3-foot bike buffer, 6-foot bike lane, 7-½ foot parkrow, and 6-foot sidewalk are proposed along this section of the property frontage. Stations 23-27: A bus pull-out lane, bus stop and 8-foot curbside sidewalk are proposed along this section of the property frontage.Parkrow here has been replaced by the bus pull-out lane. Station 27-34: A 3-foot bike buffer, 6-foot bike lane, and 8-foot curbside sidewalk are proposed. The applicant explains that this section is physically constrained by a steep roadside embankment and by the railroad trestle. Station 34 Schofield/North Main: A 6-foot bike lane, 7½ -foot parkrow and 6-foot sidewalk are proposed in this section. 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. PA #2018-00154 April 10, 2018 Page 14 Southbound RVTD Bus Stop The Planning Commission finds that the applicant has worked with RVTD, the RVTD Bus Stop Committee frontage to include a pull-out, shelter with lighting, sidewalk, accessible loading pad and accessible route to the site, any necessary retaining, and a merge lane for the bus to re-enter the travel lane at an appropriate s the proposed bus pull-out lane, shelter and street light placement, and a proposed walkway connecting from the shelter onto the project site. Northbound RVTD Bus Stops The Planning Commission finds that thewithin 1,800- 2,000 feet of the property, with one near the intersection of North Main Street and Highway 99N and the other near Valley View and Highway 99N. The applicant has explored the potential for enhancing similar treatments are not appropriate given the speeds, traffic volumes, sight and stopping distances when weighed against the anticipated number of pedestrians. The applicant further indicates that ODOT does The Planning Commission concludes that the subject property is within a Transit Supportive Area in the -of transit stops, which typically equates to a five-minute walk at a normal pace, and that the applicant is providing a new southbound stop to support transit use by future residents of the property. Speed reduction The Planning Commission notes that the applicant has suggested that with a change in roadside culture through annexation and the introduction of higher density residential development, driving habits on the corridor may change. They further suggest that after improvements are made, a formal speed study to seek a reduction in highway speeds could be undertaken and eventually, if speeds are reduced and pedestrian volumes increase, marked crossings could potentially be approved by the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT). The Planning Commission finds that ODOT has jurisdiction on this section of state highway with regard to issues including highway markings for pedestrian crossings and speed limits. A request to initiate a speed study will ultimately need to come from the City, and Planning and Engineering staff have indicated that preliminary discussions with ODOT staff have begun and they are open to conducting a speed study, which has not been done for this corridor since the lane reconfiguration completed a few years ago. The Planning Commission recommends that with annexation approval, that Council provide direction to staff to work with ODOT to initiate a speed study in hopes that a speed reduction can be implemented to make the corridor a more pedestrian, bicycle and transit friendly facility. The Planning Commission notes that the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT), which has jurisdiction over the state highway here, has indicated that the TIA is satisfactory, that the bus lane is satisfactory with a slight adjustment to its taper, and that they support a median cut to provide a pedestrian refuge at North Main Street and pedestrian crossing signage. ODOT has further indicated that they are PA #2018-00154 April 10, 2018 Page 15 satisfied with bicycle and pedestrian facilities as proposed, emphasizing the need for a six-foot sidewalk under the trestle; and that ODOT permits will be required to complete improvements. ODOT has also noted that they will need to review and approve final storm-drainage engineering at Site Review since storm drainage is to outflow into a ditch in the ODOT right-of-way. With regard to adequate transportation, the Planning Commission finds that with the installation of roughly 3,340 linear feet or 0.63 miles - of sidewalk connecting from the existing sidewalk terminus near El Tapatio restaurant south into the city limits to the existing sidewalk at Schofield Street; the installation of a new bus stop with pull-out and merging lane; improvements to the crossing from North Main Street across Highway 99N to the northbound RVTD flag stop to include an improved median refuge and pedestrian crossing signage; and the clear understanding that Site Design Review approval will need to be obtained before development of the site, the applicants have demonstrated that adequate transportation can and will be provided. Minimum Density The Planning Commission notes that for all residential annexations, a plan is required to be provided to demonstrate 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 code further provides that for purposes of computing 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. To ensure compliance with this requirement, the code also requires that the owner sign an agreement for recording with the annexation, ensuring that future development will occur in accord with the minimum density indicated in the development plan. The Planning Commission finds that after excluding undevelopable areas due to significant natural features and physical constraints posed by slopes exceeding 35 percent, the riparian drainage area, and the wetland area and its buffer zone, the developable area of the property is 13.75 acres. For the proposed R- 2 zoning, the base density for 13.75 acres is 185.625 dwelling units and the minimum density is 167 dwelling units (13.75 acres x 13.5 dwelling units/acre = 185.625 dwelling units x 0.90 minimum density = 167.0625 dwelling units). The application notes that the property owner will sign an agreement with annexation that future development will occur in accord with this minimum density, and the applicant has provided a conceptual development plan including building designs, site lay-out and findings to demonstrate how this could be achieved on site. Affordability Requirement The Planning Commission notes that annexations are required to demonstrate that they will meet the affordability requirements set forth in AMC 18.5.8.050.G., which generally requires that the total number of units shall equal or exceed 25 percent of the base density of the subject property. The application explains that the project is proposed as rental units and that the affordable rental units will be restricted to 60 percent of the area median income (AMI) as provided in AMC 18.5.8.080.G.1. At this level, each rental unit provided counts as 1.5 units for the purposes of meeting the standard, and the applicant explains PA #2018-00154 April 10, 2018 Page 16 that these type units will be provided with the future Site Design Review for multi-family development of the property. The affordable units are to be evenly dispersed through the development and will be of a comparable bedroom mix to the market rate units, and it is anticipated that 12 of the future buildings would contain two units each while two of the future buildings would contain three units each for a total of 30 affordable units. The applicant notes that they envision the future development to consist of 28 two bedroom units and 168 one bedroom units of around 500 square feet in area. The Planning Commission further notes that AMC 18.5.8.050.G.1 requires thatThe 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 equivaThe Planning Commission finds that while there is a provision which allows for the exclusion of constrained lands (hillsides, water resource protection zones for streams and wetlands, and lands with significant natural features) when calculating the minimum density of a property, there is no similar provision to exclude these lands from the base density when calculating the required number of affordable units for annexations. The Commissioners therefore conclude that the number of affordable units required with annexation of the property must be increased to account for the full base density of the subject properties. The R-2 subject properties here have a based density of 13½ dwelling units per acre, which for this 16.87 acre property equates to a 227¾ dwelling unit base density and would require 37 affordable dwelling units offered at 60 percent of area median income rather than the 30 affordable dwelling units discussed in the application. Five-Year Supply The Planning Commission notes that the final annexation criterion is that one or more of the standards in AMC 18.5.8.050.H. are met. Of these, the applicable standard addressed with the current proposal is a demonstration that there is less than a five-year supply of vacant and re-developable land in the proposed land use classification within the current city limits. The applicant has provided detail based on city data which notes there is a 4.8-year supply of available Multi-Family Residential land combined between the R-2 and R-3 zones. The Planning Commission finds that the area is envisioned and proposed for annexation as Multi-Family Residential, and based on city data in the Housing Element and Buildable Lands Inventory there is less than a five-year supply of available Multi-Family Residential zoned land. 2.4 The Planning Commission notes that the application submittal includes written findings responding to AMC 18.5.9.020 to address a Zoning Map Amendment for the zone change from the current County zoning of RR--2 (Low Density, Multi-Family Residential) The Planning Commission finds that annexation of the property into the city with zoning corresponding to the Comprehensive Plan designation does not necessitate a Zoning Map Amendment and is necessary for Annexation to occur. 2.5 The Planning Commission finds that while neither Outline Plan subdivision nor Site Design Review approvals for development of the property are requested here, the application includes conceptual details for the future phased development of 196 apartments (One- and Two-Bedrooms, ranging from 480- 701 square feet) in 14 two-story buildings with building placement and site and building designs to address PA #2018-00154 April 10, 2018 Page 17 Site Review criteria to address the requirement that the application include a plan demonstrating that with annexation, the property will develop to at least 90 percent of the base density. A deed restriction will be recorded on the property to require that it be developed to the minimum density. The Planning Commission finds that the site plan details presented for future development here are conceptual, and that Site Review approval for development of the property is not being considered at this time. Outline Plan subdivision, Site Design Review and any other necessary land use approvals will need to be obtained before the site can be developed, subsequent to Annexation approval. 2.6 The Planning Commission finds that while the site has a generally consistent grade and is moderately sloped with an approximate ten- to 15-percent slope from southeast to northwest, the western half of Tax Lot #1700, west of the existing residence, consists of large terraces with areas of steep slopes between and a substantial amount of this lot has slopes in excess of 35 percent which, by city codes, would which are unbuildable. The Planning Commission further finds that there is a riparian land drainage identified as a tributary of Bear Creek at the north end of Tax Lot #1700, and that two wetlands have been identified on the subject properties. One is only 60-square feet and is located at the base of a small depression northwest of the existing single family residence on Tax Lot #1700. The other is larger at approximately 4,606 square feet in area and located on Tax Lot #1702. Conditions have been recommended below to require that the applicant provide evidence of concurrence from the Oregon Department of State Lands (DSL) with the wetland delineation prior to a development application for the site, and to include the property in the Wildfire Lands, Physical & Environmental Constraints Hillside Lands and Severe Constraints, and Water Resource Protection Zones maps and associated overlays in order to fully incorporate land-use based protection of the features with annexation and subsequent development. SECTION 3. DECISION annexation of two parcels totaling 16.87 acres with a current 3.1 The application includes a request for the zoning of Jackson County RR-5 (Rural Residential) and a proposed zoning of City of Ashland R-2 (Low Density, Multi-Family Residential) for the properties located at 1511 Highway 99 North. The annexation is to include adjacent railroad property and state highway right-of-way at the recommendation of the Staff Advisor. The application includes conceptual details for the future phased development of 196 apartments in 14 two-story buildings. Outline Plan subdivision and Site Design Review development approvals are not requested here, and are to be applied for subsequent to annexation approval. The applicant has requested an Exception to Street Standards to deviate from city standard parkrow and sidewalk improvements in response to constraints of right-of-way width and existing encroachments. The application includes conceptual details for the future phased development of 196 apartments (One- and Two-Bedrooms, ranging from 480-701 square feet) in 14 two-story buildings. Outline Plan subdivision and Site Design Review approvals are not requested here, and would be applied for subsequent PA #2018-00154 April 10, 2018 Page 18 to annexation, however the property would be deed restricted to ensure that future development would occur in keeping with the minimum density and affordability requirements associated with annexation. The subject properties present a number of challenges to annexation and development. There are significant road cuts and significant areas of unimproved right-of-way along the property frontage providing a barrier between the state highway and the developable area of the property. There are limited improvements currently in place to provide utilities or transportation facilities to the property, and railroad right-of-way limits connectivity between the property and contiguous areas of the city. Site topography, -foot wide easement. Established commercial uses along the highway limit access between the subject property and the roadway for a large proportion of its width. Given these challenges, Commissioners find that the two- step land use approval process being pursued by the applicant, which separates the annexation from a subsequent development application, but provides assurances with restrictive covenants on the deed of the property to guarantee the future installation of public facilities and provisions for achieving the required minimum density and affordable housing, is an appropriate approach. Rogue Valley Sewer Services, Rogue Valley Transportation District, Oregon Department of Transportation, Talent Irrigation District and the Bureau of Reclamation to address these challenges, the proposal as detailed herein and with the conditions recommended below can be found to satisfy the standards for annexation. Therefore, based on our overall conclusions, the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the requested annexation subject to each of the conditions below. In addition, the Commission recommends that the Council direct Planning and Engineering staff to work with the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) to initiate a speed study for Highway 99N from Valley View south to the existing city limits with the end goal being a speed limit reduction on the corridor. 1)That all proposals of the applicants shall be conditions of approval unless otherwise modified herein. 2)That prior to any work within the right-of-way: a.A final utility plan for the project shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning, Public Works/Engineering, Electric, and Building Divisions; Oregon Department of Transportation; and Rogue Valley Sewer Services. The utility plan shall include the location of connections to all public facilities in and adjacent to the development, including the locations of water lines and meter sizes, sewer mains and services, manholes and clean-outs, storm drainage pipes and catch basins. Utility installations, including any necessary meters or fire protection vaults shall be placed outside of the pedestrian corridor and outside of water resource protection zones, and necessary public utility easements on the property shall be shown in the future Site Design Review application. PA #2018-00154 April 10, 2018 Page 19 b.The applicant shall submit a final electric plan including any necessary load calculations and locations of all primary and secondary services including transformers, cabinets, streetlights and all other necessary equipment. Electric services shall not be installed within the wetland or its buffer. With annexation, the property will no longer be served by Pacific Power and Light; se expense. This plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning, Engineering and Electric Departments prior installation. Transformers and cabinets shall be located outside of the pedestrian corridor, and in those areas least visible from the street while considering the access needs of the Electric Department. c.Engineered construction drawings fo Highway 99N frontage, from the existing terminus of the sidewalk south of the site near Schofield Street to the existing terminus of the sidewalk north of the site near El Tapatio restaurant shall be provided for review and approval by the Oregon Department of any work within the street right-of-way or pedestrian corridor. The required improvements shall be as described he generally consist of: Stations 1-16 (North of Land of Paws: i.) An 8-foot curbside sidewalk. There is a large roadside ditch and private property belonging to Anderson Autobody which prevent parkrow installation, and this curbside sidewalk will connect to existing curbside sidewalk to the north. Stations 16-23: ii. A 3-foot bike buffer, 6-foot bike lane, 7-½ foot parkrow, and 6- foot sidewalk along this section of the property frontage. Stations 23-27: iii.A bus pull-out lane, bus stop and 8-foot curbside sidewalk are proposed along this section of the property frontage.Parkrow here has been removed to accommodate the bus pull-out lane, and the final design shall reflect taper adjustments required by ODOT. Station 27-34: iv. A 3-foot bike buffer, 6-foot bike lane, and 8-foot curbside sidewalk are proposed. This section is physically constrained by a steep roadside embankment and by the railroad trestle. Station 34 Schofield/North Main: v.A 6-foot bike lane, 7½ -foot parkrow and 6- foot sidewalk are proposed in this section. In addition, the final civil drawings shall include modifications to the existing medians to create a median refuge for pedestrians and associated pedestria flag stop near the intersection of Highway 99 North and North Main Street. vi.Private sidewalks would also be extended into the subject properties along the driveway with ultimate development of the site. PA #2018-00154 April 10, 2018 Page 20 The final engineered designs shall include details of the transition from the existing sidewalks, and any additional right-of-way necessary to accommodate these improvements shall be provided through a right-of-way dedication if deemed necessary by the Public Works/Engineering Department. d.The applicants shall obtain any necessary permit approvals from ODOT, ODOT Rail & CORP Rail. The applicants shall provide evidence of permit approval, including copies of all approved plans, for all work to be done within ODOT right-of-way prior to the commencement of work. e.The applicants shall also obtain any necessary plan and permit approvals from the City of Ashland Public Works Department/Engineering Division. The applicants shall obtain all required Public Works inspection approvals for work completed within the right-of-way. f.That the applicant shall obtain any necessary permits or approvals from the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) and/or Talent Irrigation District (TID) for any work within the ion easement. 3)That the applicants shall obtain required land use approvals including but not limited to Outline Plan subdivision and Site Design Review approvals, as applicable, as well as any necessary federal or state approvals necessary, for development of the property. The current approval is limited to the utility infrastructure and frontage improvements associated with Annexation, with site development to be addressed subsequently. 4)That prior to final approval and annexation of the property, the applicant shall provide: a.A final revised boundary description and map of the properties to be included in the annexation prepared by a registered land surveyor in accordance with ORS 308.255, to include the adjacent Highway 99N right-of-way and the adjacent railroad property. The boundary shall be surveyed and monumented as required by statute subsequent to City Council approval of the proposed annexation. b.A final, signed irrevocable consent to annexation as required in AMC 18.5.8.020.A. c.A final signed agreement to deposit an amount sufficient to retire any outstanding indebtedness of special districts defined in ORS 222.510 as required in AMC 18.5.8.020.B. d.A deed restriction agreement ensuring that any future development will occur in accord with the m in the development plan, as required in AMC 18.5.8.050.F. e.A deed restriction agreement that development of the property shall comply with the affordability requirements for annexations in AMC 18.5.8.050.G, and that future development of the site shall address these affordability requirements at Site Design Review, including but not limited to the affordability levels, number of affordable units, PA #2018-00154 April 10, 2018 Page 21 and how the applicant will qualify potential renters and provide annual reporting to the city to verify compliance with these requirements. (The number of affordable units required shall be calculated on the base density of the subject property, with no reductions in the total number of units for significant natural features, topography, access limitations, or similar physical constraints.) f.A deed restriction agreement that the required utility infrastructure and street frontage improvements approved herein shall be completed, or sufficient security to insure their completion shall be provided, prior to any development of the site. 5)That prior to the Outline Plan subdivision or Site Design Review applications, the applicants shall obtain and provide evidence of concurrence from the Division of State Lands (DSL) for a wetland delineation. 6)That with annexation, the Wildfire Lands, Physical & Environmental Constraints - Hillside Lands and Severe Constraints, and Water Resource Protection Zones maps and associated overlays be revised to f property shall be subject to regulation under these overlays. July 28, 2020 Planning Commission Approval Date PA #2018-00154 April 10, 2018 Page 22 ATTN: LEGAL PUBLICATIONS ELECTRONIC PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE July 28, 2020 On , the Ashland Planning Commission will hold an electronic public hearing regarding proposed land use ordinance amendments to Title 18 Land Use in the Ashland Municipal Code related to the open space requirements for multifamily and single-family residential development. The Planning Commission will review the ordinance amendments and make a recommendation to the Ashland City Council. After the Planning Commission holds a public hearing and makes a recommendation, the City Council will also hold a public hearing at a future date that is to be determined. The City Council makes the final decision on any land use ordinance amendment. The proposed ordinance amendments are available for review online at http://www.ashland.or.us/openspace. Copies of the ordinance and file information are available for purchase if requested. For additional information concerning these ordinance amendments, email maria.harris@ashland.or.us or call the Ashland Planning Division at (541) 488-5305. The Planning Commission will hold a continued public hearing regarding a request for Annexation of a 16.87-acre parcel and Zone Change from County RR-5 Rural Residential) to City R-2 (Low Density, Multi-Family Residential) for the properties located at 1511 Highway 99 North. The annexation is to include adjacent railroad property and state highway right-of-way. The application includes conceptual details for the future phased development of 196 apartments (1- and 2- Bedrooms, ranging from 480-701 square feet) in 14 two-story buildings; Outline Plan subdivision and Site Design Review development approvals are not requested here, and would be applied for subsequent to annexation. The application also requests an Exception to Street Standards to deviate from city standard parkrow and sidewalk improvements to respond to constraints of right-of-way width and existing encroachments. The electronic public hearing will be held at 7:00 p.m. on July 28, 2020. The meeting will be televised on local channel 9 or channels 180 and 181 for Charter Communications customers or will also be available live stream by going rvtv.sou.edu to and selecting RVTV Prime. July 28 PC Written testimony will be accepted via email to PC-public-testimony@ashland.or.us with the subject line Meeting Testimony by 10:00 a.m. on Monday, July 27, 2020. If the applicant wishes to provide a rebuttal to the testimony, July 28 PC Hearing they can submit the rebuttal via e-mail to PC-public-testimony@ashland.or.us with the subject line TestimonyJuly 28, 2020 by 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, . Written testimony received by the deadlines will be available to the Planning Commission before the meeting and will be included in the meeting minutes. Oraltestimony will be taken during the electronic public hearing. If you wish to provide oral testimony during the July 27, 2020. electronic meeting, send an email to PC-public-testimony@ashland.or.us by 10:00 a.m. on Monday, In order to provide testimony at the public hearing, please provide the following information: 1) make the subject line of the July 28 PC Speaker Request email 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. By the order of Bill Molnar, Community Development Director In compliance with the Americans 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 themeeting will enable the city to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting (28 CFR 35.102- 35.104 ADA Title I). Publish: July 17, 2020 E-mailed: July 13, 2020 Purchase Order: #118250 PACKET MATERIALS FROM THE JUNE 23, 2020 MEETING APPLICANTS REBUTTAL _________________________________ PA-T3-2019-00001 1511 HWY 99 N Robert J Kendrick Casita Development LLC PL 2019-0001_T3 June 22, 2020 City of Ashland Commission Attn: Derek Severson 20 E Main Street Ashland Or 97520 RE: PL 2019-0001_T3 Annexation and Zone Change 1511 Hwy 99N Grand Terrace Agrihood Dear Planning Commission & Planning Division Staff Re: Traditional City of Ashland Railroad Annexations Methodology to obtain and maintain Contiguity of the City of Ashland's city limits. The records of the City of Ashland show that annexations are made possible by reaching over Railroad land to the City Limit Boundary when contiguity is needed for Annexation. The City of Ashland routinely reach's over Railroad land to obtain contiguity. The City also annexed Railroad land to bring it into the City Boundary for the future purpose of annexing other lands that need contiguity. Fact: When the Railroad is adjacent to land that is to be annexed and needs contiguity the Railroad is annexed. Fact: If a piece of land annexed that does not need contiguity because it has it by other means but is adjacent to a Railroad, the City will annex the Railroad. Fact: The Railroad is not noticed either before the action to annex or after the annexation was approved. Current Application: In the first submission for the Grand Terrace Annexation request on October 8, 2019 before the City of Ashland Planning Commission the Staff Report noted the following: October 8, 2019 Staff stated "that the land is currently contiguous to the present city limits;" pg,4. Received 6/22/2020 The October 8, 2019 meeting was postponed until November 12, 2019. November 12, 2019 before the City of Ashland Planning Commission the Staff Report noted the following: "the subject property is located within the Urban Growth Boundary and is contiguous with the existing city limits boundary to the south." Pg,5. At the November 12, 2019 meeting the Ashland Planning Commissions Chairman of the Planning Commission stated the land was not adjacent to the City Limits because the Rail Road was between the land to be annexed and the City Boundary. Also, the Railroad was Private Property, not a public right away and could not be annexed without approval, or notification to the Railroad. In the past the Common Procedure for the Annexation of Railroad land had similar City of Ashland rational, "a railroad should be annexed if adjacent to a city limit line in order to bring contiguity to the application parcel in need of contiguity". Standard set by the City is "If a Railroad stood between the land requesting annexation and a City Limit Line there will be contiguity, by annexation of the Railroad". Also, where a parcel of land was within the City Limit and adjacent to a Railroad that was not adjacent to a City Limit Boundary the City of Ashland annexed the Railroad. ANNEXATION NO 1 In the following request for annexation the land location was in an UGB and no other properties around it were located near a City Boundary, there was no contiguity. The land was adjacent to the Railroad to the North. The City Limits boundary line laid to the south side of the Railroad. The following are the Staff Reports and City Commission findings. Planning Commission January 12, 1999 Staff Report Planning Action 99-006 (attached Exhibit "A"). Contiguity "Molnar explained that if the legal boundary for the city limits is on the southerly extent of the railroad right of way that portion of railroad right of way would need to be brought in Received 6/22/2020 "to create contiguity with the city with this annexation limits" .pg,4 City Planning Commission Resolution: Planning Commission Resolution No 99-50 August 17, 1999 ORS 222-125 permits the city to annex the property described in the attached Exhibit "B" SECTION 1. The land described in the attached Exhibit "A" is MYX^SQ_Y_\]^Y^ROMS^cYP3\]RVKXNd"7bRSLS^4# City Council Ashland City Council February 2, 1999 FINDINGS RECITALS: 2.2 C. The land is currently contiguous with the present City Limits. The property, with the inclusion of the railroad right of way, is contiguous to the existing City Limits that runs along the railroad tracks. As the records show both the Planning Commission and the City Council approved an Annexation when they swept the Railroad into the Annexation to fulfill the requirement of Contiguity to the City Limits. The City Council notes the rational in the findings, " with the inclusion of the railroad right of way, is contiguous to the existing City Limits". ANNEXATION NO 2 Exhibit (C) Planning Action 2006-00366 City Council Meeting May 16, 2006 This was a request for annexation, the property was in an UGB, the adjacent surrounding properties were within the City Boundary and the Southern boundary of the property was adjacent to the Railroad. The Southern portion of the Railroad property line was adjacent to the City Limits. The Council declared the applicant land and the Railroad property Annexed, Pursuant to ORS 222.120 and ORS 222.524 Section 2. Received 6/22/2020 The land described in the attached Exhibit is declared to be annexed to the City of Ashland. See "C" There were no mail outs to the Railroad or any communication and or request as to whether or not they objected. As shown in the Exhibit the Railroad was drawn into the annexed lot description and made part of the City. The above annexations are only but a few and I'm sure there are many others since the City is built around the entire Railroad line. The two examples of Annexation above show the City annex's Railroad property in order to obtain contiguity. It also shows both the Department of Planning, the Planning Commission and City Council all agree contiguity is obtained by annexing the Railroad property when the City Limit Boundary is the only way to obtain contiguity. The example above also shows that when an application for annexation is made and its property line is attached to the Railroad, and contiguity is not needed, the City will automatically annex the Railroad into the City. No notices are made to the Railroad in either case. Conclusion The City has a history and common use of Annexations of Railroad lands and in the case for the Annexation of the land under PL 2019-0001_T3, Annexation and Zone Change 1511 Hwy 99N the same criteria should apply and no notice to the Railroad needs to be made and no approval from the Railroad is needed. If these are the requirements the Railroad should be notified of all annexations made over Railroad land. Thank you Robert Kendrick Casita Development LLc Grand Terrace Agrihood Received 6/22/2020 Other findings: Besides the two examples noted above, the State of Oregon Statues under "Definitions for Contiguous" (see below ORS 321.700) ORS 321.700 Definitions $!?'5491/:5:8@3.*480*;14/*,53354+5:4-*ry that is greater than a single point. %!?'5491/:5:86*7,.28@& (a)Includes parcels separated by public or county roads, state highways, nonnavigable streams or nonnavigable rivers. (b)Does not include parcels that are separated by an interstate highway, a navigable stream or a navigable river, unless there is an underpass, a bridge or another direct access between the separated parcels. (2)Contiguous-" a common boundary that is greater than a single point". The parcel requesting annexation is within a community of similar housing types and uses, under a jurisdiction of land use rules and laws binding everyone together. They use the same means of commerce and think of themselves as a unit and not separate, they are a community and that is the boundary. A commonality in living standards, with the same rules and regulations sharing the same infrastructure, roads and utilities and treat each civil unit. The Railroad "a single point" is not greater than the boundary of the resident's set themselves in, which is their common values, use of land, or the area they use together. The railroad is "a single point" that does not separate this community boundary. +!'5491/:5:890.7.18*4:4-.76*88">>>>#+.9<..490.8.6*7*9.-6*7,.28# Together they use the Railroad underpass to conduct their daily lives and this is their contiguity. Thank you, Robert Kendrick Received 6/22/2020 Received 6/22/2020 Received 6/22/2020 Received 6/22/2020 Received 6/22/2020 Received 6/22/2020 Received 6/22/2020 Received 6/22/2020 Received 6/22/2020 Received 6/22/2020 Received 6/22/2020 Received 6/22/2020 Received 6/22/2020 Received 6/22/2020 Received 6/22/2020 Received 6/22/2020 Received 6/22/2020 Received 6/22/2020 Received 6/22/2020 Received 6/22/2020 Received 6/22/2020 Received 6/22/2020 Received 6/22/2020 Received 6/22/2020 Received 6/22/2020 PACKETMATERIALS FROMTHE JUNE 9, 2020 MEETING _________________________________ PA-T3-2019-00001 1511HWY 99 N APPLICANTS REBUTTAL _________________________________ PA-T3-2019-00001 1511 HWY 99 N WRITTEN TESTIMONY _________________________________ PA-T3-2019-00001 1511HWY 99 N Transportation Commission Comments _________________________________ PA-T3-2019-00001 1511HWY 99 N Memo Date: June 8, 2020 From: Scott Fleury PE, Interim Public Works Director To: Planning Commission RE: Grand Terrace Annexation-Transportation Commission Comments Background: Below is a series of comments generated by the Transportation Commission with respect to the Grand Terrace Development project and its associated connection to the local transportation network. In addition, numerous goals with focused objectives were established in the 2013 Transportation System Plan. These goals and objectives have been included for reference as they are important and should be wholly considered when new development enters the planning process as part of the system of approvals. TSP Goals: Goal #1: plate for other communities in the state and nation to follow. Objectives for Goal 1: 1B. Expand active transportation infrastructure to include features that encourage non-auto travel. Potential features include bicycle boulevards, bicycle lanes, wider bicycle trails, and improved lighting for bicycles and pedestrians. 1D. Develop plans for pedestrian-oriented, mixed land-use activity centers with an active transportation focus and green infrastructure. 1E. Identify ways to reduce carbon impacts through changes to land use patterns and transportation choices to make travel by bicycle, as a pedestrian and by transit more viable. 1G. Implement environmentally responsible or green design standards. Goal #2: Make safety a priority for all modes of travel. Objectives for Goal 2: 2E. Recommend appropriate means for managing state highways and major arterials to meet local and through traffic needs in terms of mobility, access, and safety. Goal #3: Maintain small-town character, support economic prosperity and accommodate future growth. Objectives for Goal 3: 3B. Consider modal equity when integrating land use and transportation to provide travel options for system users. 3C. Identify opportunities, guidelines and regulations for bicycle, pedestrian and transit supportive land uses within the City of Ashland. 3D. Identify transportation projects or system adjustments that improve development potential and support increased mixed use development within the current Urban Growth Boundary. C:\\Users\\smithda.AFNHE\\AppData\\Local\\Microsoft\\Windows\\INetCache\\Content.Outlook\\PP634ZS9\\TC Grand Terrace Comments Complete (Final).doc 3E. Identify adjustments to transportation and land use codes and regulations that will facilitate higher density developments in transit corridors, and shorter trip length and non-motorized modes of travel throughout the City of Ashland. Goal #4: Create a system-wide balance for serving and facilitating pedestrian, bicycle, rail, air, transit, and vehicular traffic in terms of mobility and access within and through the City of Ashland. Objectives for Goal 4: 4C. Upgrade pedestrian facilities to ADA compliant standards. 4G. Create a comprehensive transportation system by better integrating active transportation modes with transit and travel by auto. Transportation Commission Comments: General: The Grand Terrace project has the potential for adding vehicular traffic and creating congestion, or it could provide a sustainable development showcase that aligns with Ashlands values developed as goals and objectives in the Transportation System Plan and the Climate Energy Action Plan. It is on an established transit line. There is great potential for bike facilities, shared vehicles, electric charging infrastructure, permeable parking lots, bike path and trail development, not to mention solar and other , like stormwater filtration systems and community gardens. Pedestrian and bicyclist scale lighting needs to be considered along the project length in order to provide safety for these modes at night. Speed: Speed reduction along this part of 99 needs to be considered (to Valley View) along with the physical/environmental changes that facilitate a driver to slow down. (see comment regarding speed associated with bicycle connectivity below) Speed reduction needs to consider the potential queuing increased at Valley View and Highway 99 intersection. Ingress/Egress: There is concern about egress from the proposed driveway location, specifically a left-hand turn movement heading northbound with limited site distance along with potential right-hand ingress movements occurring into the development. Appropriate signage and striping should be considered and installed to reduce conflicts and make drivers aware. Pedestrian connectivity: The pedestrian connection is adequate (southbound) as proposed, but safety is still a concern and speed reduction should be considered along the corridor to the intersection with Valley View. In addition, a physical barrier is needed to separate the southbound bike lane and sidewalk from the traffic lane. If width is a problem, better to slightly narrow the sidewalk/parkrow to accommodate a physical barrier. (See NACTO guidance chart below for a separated facility based on speed/volume). Concerns regarding the increased density and its effects on pedestrian/cyclist safety, in particular crossing the highway near or in front of the project. C:\\Users\\smithda.AFNHE\\AppData\\Local\\Microsoft\\Windows\\INetCache\\Content.Outlook\\PP634ZS9\\TC Grand Terrace Comments Complete (Final).doc Bicycle connectivity: Bicycle connectivity is minimally adequate southbound; northbound is problematic as this requires dangerous merging with auto traffic to access the left turn lane into the property. Reduction of the speed limit to 35 mph and/or crosswalk wouldprovidesafety needed.Current standards associated with the speedand volume of theroadwayin the current condition call for a protectedbike facility, not just a stripped buffer.Ifleft-hand turn egress for cyclists cannot be improved a contraflow bike facility shouldbe considered northbound to the protected signal crossing. Transit connectivity: Southbound would be minimally adequate with upgrading of flag stop at North Main (Ashland Mine Road) to at least signed stop. (I was walked, and it does fallbarely within five minutes even for a senior walking uphill.) However, the proposed dedicated stop in front of property is preferred if bus merging can be accommodated.Again, this would greatly benefit from reduction of speed limit to 35 mph. Transit connectivity northbound is very problematic.Existing stop at Valley View is too far away.Crossing safely to access flag stop at North Main (Ashland Mine Road) requires significant upgrading of the crosswalk and median refuge facility.If striping and flashing signal cannot be assured, I am not certain that signage and new median refuge would be adequate. Accordingly, public transit use with current RVTD transit model (full size buses only)would likely be limited. Significant public transituse in both directions would require new transit models, likely on flexible routes and employing smaller vehicles able to turn around at or enter into the property. C:\\Users\\smithda.AFNHE\\AppData\\Local\\Microsoft\\Windows\\INetCache\\Content.Outlook\\PP634ZS9\\TC Grand Terrace Comments Complete (Final).doc PACKET _________________________________ PA-T3-2019-00001 1511HWY 99 N Planning Department, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520 541-488-5305 Fax: 541-552-2050 www.ashland.or.us TTY: 1-800-735-2900 PLANNING ACTION: PA-T3-2019-00001 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 1511 Highway 99 North and Adjacent Railroad Property and State Highway Right-of-Way OWNER: Linda Zare AGENTS: Casita Developments, LLC & Kendrick Enterprise, LLC APPLICANT: Rogue Planning & Development Services, LLC DESCRIPTION: A request for Annexation of a 16.87-acre parcel and Zone Change from County RR-5 Rural Residential) to City R-2 (Low Density, Multi-Family Residential) for the properties located at 1511 Highway 99 North. The annexation is to include adjacent railroad property and state highway right-of-way. The application includes conceptual details for the future phased development of 196 apartments (1- and 2-Bedrooms, ranging from 480-701 square feet) in 14 two-story buildings; Outline Plan subdivision and Site Design Review development approvals are not requested here, and would be applied for subsequent to annexation. The application seeks exception treet design standards to deviate from city standard parkrow and sidewalk improvements in some areas to respond to constraints of right-of-way width and existing COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION:ZONING: encroachments. Multi-Family Residential; Existing County RR-5, Proposed City R-2; ELECTRONIC ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING:Tuesday June 9, 2020 at 7:00 PM Notice is hereby given that a PUBLIC HEARING with respect to the ASHLAND LAND USE ORDINANCE on the above described request will be conducted electronically by the ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION on the meeting date and time shown above. 9ǣĻĭǒƷźǝĻ hƩķĻƩ ϔЋЉΏЊЏ, this meeting will be held electronically. 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 w tƩźƒĻ The ordinance criteria applicable to this application 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. 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 seven days prior to the hearing. Anyone wishing to provide testimony can submit comments via e-mail to http://www.ashland.or.us/Agendas.asp?SectionID=0&CCBID=198 PC-public-testimony@ashland.or.us wi WǒƓĻ В t/ IĻğƩźƓŭ ĻƭƷźƒƚƓǤ by 10:00 a.m. on Monday, June 8, 2020. Written testimony received by this deadline will be available for Commissioners to review before the hearing and will be included in the meeting minutes. In compliance with the American with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please -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 application, please feel free to contact Senior Planner Derek Severson at 541-488-5305 or via e-mail to derek.severson@ashland.or.us . G:\\comm-dev\\planning\\Planning Actions\\Noticing Folder\\Mailed Notices & Signs\\2020\\PA-T3-2019-00001_JUNE2020.docx ANNEXATIONS - Approval Criteria and 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; 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 a quarter of a 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 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. 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 unitsrestricted to households earning at or below 80 percent the area median income shall have an equivalency value of 1.25 unit. d. Ownership or rental units restricted to households earning at or below 60 percent the area median income shall have an equivalency value of 1.5 unit. 2. As alternative to providing affordable units per section 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(3)(c) 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 18.5.8.050.G, subsections 4 - 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 nonprofit 501(C)(3) organization, or public corporation created under ORS 456.055 to 456.235. d. The land to be 3. The affordable units shall be comparable in bedroom mix and housing type 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 G:\\comm-dev\\planning\\Planning Actions\\Noticing Folder\\Mailed Notices & Signs\\2020\\PA-T3-2019-00001_JUNE2020.docx 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. 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 b. The required on-site affordable units shall be comprised of the different unit types in the same proportion as the market dwelling units within the development. 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 distributed throughout the project 6. 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 interior finishes and materials 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. 7. Exceptions to the requirements of 18.5.8.050, subsections G.2 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 an alternative mix of housing types not meeting the requirements of subsection 18.5.8.050.G.3.b would accomplish additional benefits to the City consistent with this chapter, than would the development providing a proportional mix of unit types. c. 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. d. That the distribution of affordable units within the development not meeting subsection 18.5.8.050.G.5 is necessary for development of an affordable housing project that provides onsite staff with supportive services. e. That the distribution of affordable units within the development as proposed would accomplish additional benefits for the city, consistent with the purposes of this chapter, than would development meeting the distribution requirement of subsection 18.5.8.050.G.5. f.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. 8. The total number of affordable units described in this section 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. Properties providing affordable units as part of the annexation process shall qualify for a maximum density bonus of 25 percent. H. One or more of the following standards are met. 1. The proposed area for annexation is to be residentially zoned, and there is less than a five-year supply of vacant and redevelopable land in the proposed land use classifica already occurred but on which, due to present or expected market forces, there exists the likelihood that existing development will be converted to more intensive residential uses during the planning period. The five-year supply shall be determined from vacant and redevelopable land inventories and by the methodology for land need projections from the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The proposed lot or lots will be zoned CM, E-1, or C-1 under the Comprehensive Plan, and that 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. G:\\comm-dev\\planning\\Planning Actions\\Noticing Folder\\Mailed Notices & Signs\\2020\\PA-T3-2019-00001_JUNE2020.docx 6. The lot or lots proposed for annexation are an island completely surrounded by lands within the city limits. EXCEPTION TO STREET 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. G:\\comm-dev\\planning\\Planning Actions\\Noticing Folder\\Mailed Notices & Signs\\2020\\PA-T3-2019-00001_JUNE2020.docx PACKETMATERIALS FROMTHE MAY12, 2020 MEETING _________________________________ PA-T3-2019-00001 1511HWY 99 N PA-T3-2019-00001 1511 HWY 99 _________________________________ Applicant & Presentations (Received 5/8/20) ROGUE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC May 8, 2020 RE: 2019-0001_T3 Annexation and Zone Change for the Property at 1511 Hwy. 99 N Grand Terrace Dear Planning Commissioners and Planning Division Staff, This letter is intended to provide additional information for the record addressing the information that has been received by the City of Ashland and is provided for the Planning Commission May 12 Hearing in lieu of a 15 minute applicant presentation. Contiguous Property: The contiguity issue is not resolved at this point. The applicant and the City of Ashland have been in communication with the representatives of Genessee-Wyoming, the track owners, and Central Oregon and Pacific Railroad (CORP). Contiguity and the railroad is of major concern for the applicant and it should be a major concern for the City of Ashland as the Railroad’s position could prevent Ashland’s Long-Range Planning and Comprehensive Planning Efforts since the 1980s from ever being realized. If the Railroad refuses annexation, it appears that the Comprehensive Plan, the Housing Needs Analysis, Economic Development Plans, Regional Problem Solving efforts, Normal Avenue Neighborhood among others would need to be revised to alter Ashland’s growth areas to not include out-of-city Railroad Properties. The representative of the Railroad have requested detailed information as to what impacts there are to the railroad when their property is annexed. The attached map was shared with Gennesse-Wyoming Real estate Division Manager in January 2020. This issue is still being worked through and should not impact the Planning Commission Recommendations since the City Council is the approval authority. Access Easement and Driveway Construction: One of the accesses to the property is provided by a 30-foot wide ingress access easement. This is the secondary access with the primary access directly from the highway. Adequate transportation can be provided to the nearest public street (Hwy 99 N) via the use of the easement. The proposal does not include the creation of any new public rights-of-way, public or private streets, nor the creation of a private driveway. As per the code 18.5.8.050.E.1. the improvement of the public street (Hwy. 99 N) to city standards is requested. 1 ROGUE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC The proposal seeks to improve the driveway within the easement area above and beyond the minimum improvement standards of a 20-foot paved width as required when driveways are greater than 50-feet in length and access more than seven parking spaces (AMC 18.4.3.080.D.3.) through the development of a driveway with street like features as required in AMC 18.4.3.080.4., which is most similar to a Shared Street standards. References to Shared Street are for illustrative purposes only because as stated in the application materials, no public streets or private streets are proposed nor is the dedication of public right-of-way, public streets or private streets or driveways required. The driveway on the north end of the development (accessed via the existing driveway) would be widened within the easement areato accommodate the proposed improvements. The driveway is not proposed as the primary access as presented in the letter from Mr. Knox’s attorney. The northern driveway is intended to be a secondary access. The Ashland Municipal Code 18.4.3.080. Access Regulations for Multi-Family Developments,C. 3.d.requiresthatall multi-family developments which will have automobile trip generation in excess of 250 vehicle trips per day shall provide at least two driveway access points to the development. There are more than 250 vehicle trips per day thus two driveways are required. In the event that it would be allowed, the applicant would be willing to reduce access to the north driveway to emergency vehicle or emergency vacation of the property by the tenants. Further, the municipal code requires driveways be shared (AMC 18.4.3.080.C.4) for developments where access to arterials is limited and for multi-family developments. Joe Kellerman, Hornecker Cowling LLP provided the attached assessment of the easement. The issues raised by Mr. Knox and his Attorney appear to be moot points as the Knox property is the servient easement holder and the encroachments into the easement that at present restrict the width are created and maintained by Mr. Knox. The “intent” of the easement expressed in the letter from the Van Dijk’s is not founded in the actual easement language. Additionally, in 1989, the subject property was within the City of Ashland Urban Growth Boundary Area as a future City of Ashland, Low-Density, Multi-Family Residential Comprehensive Plan area. Traffic Impact Analysis: ODOT has provided a preliminary review of the Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) and has provided formal review comments to the project team and to the City of Ashland. There are some minor suggestions and considerations to be made, for example the barrier and five-foot sidewalk under the trestle will be six-foot sidewalk with no barrier and the bus pull out taper needs to be increased. Both of these items will be addressed on the Civil Engineering documents that get submitted with the Site Design Review of the apartment complex development. Both driveways will be permitted as full movement driveways. This means Right in and Right out / Left in and Left out turning movements are allowed and no restrictions will be imposed. 2 ROGUE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC Frontage Improvements: The proposal makes every attempt to provide sidewalk and landscape park row to the city of Ashland and ODOT standards from the connection at Schofield to and through the property that demonstrates compliance. Public sidewalk, landscape park row, bicycle lane and other physical improvements to the Hwy. 99 right- of-way have been reviewed by the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT), and the Public Works Department. Where the Ashland standards need exception is to not provide landscape parkrow for the entirety of the sidewalk improvements, ODOT standards require an eight-foot curbside sidewalk, which is proposed. An email was received by Mr. Brian LeBlanc of Anderson Autobody regarding the frontage improvements along his street frontage and questioning their location on his property. Based on a review by the project surveyor (Polaris Land Surveying, surveyed subject property, Anderson Autobodyproperty and Mr. Knox’s property) there is no encroachment of the proposed sidewalks and right-of-way improvements encroaching upon Anderson Autobody property. Conclusion: The project team finds that the continuity issue needs to be further explored and seeks legal advice from the city on the validity of the comprehensive plan maps when there is no connection to the city limits due to the presence of the railroad. The proposal demonstrates compliance with the standards for annexation of the last, large acre multi- family residentially zoned land provided on in the city’s urban growth boundary. The proposed conceptual plans are generally consistent with applicable standards, and other than minor considerations with respect to the street standards, it can be found that with the requested exception to the street design standards as addressed in the application Findings of Fact and the Staff Report. The project team believes that it can be found that adequate vehicle, pedestrian, bicycle and transit facilities can be provided to service the annexed area. Many of the annexation criteria require concurrence of the Public Works Director, additionally, there has been verbal agreements regarding the extension of services and how to address the overlapping service district for the disposal of sanitary sewer and stormwater sewer. It is the property owners desire to have staff from Public Works present at the hearing to address any concerns regarding the proposed public infrastructure. Thank you, Amy Amy Gunter 3 ROGUE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC Rogue Planning & Development Services, LLC Amygunter.planning@gmail.com ATTACHMENTS: EXHIBIT A: Powerpoint presentation EXHIBIT B: Joe Kellerman, Attorney with Hornecker Cowling LLP letter regarding easement (attached as Exhibit D to letter) EXHIBIT C: ODOT TIA Review, Dated May 7, 2020 4 GRAND TERRACE ANNEXATION AND SITE DESIGN REVIEW FOR THE PROPERTY AT 1511 HWY. 99 N ZONING AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PROPOSED ZONING MAP DENSITY 18.5.8.050F.requiresthatallresidentialannexationsG.Except as provided in 18.5.8.050.G.7, below, provideaplandemonstratingthatdevelopmentoccurannexations with a density or potential density of four ataminimumdensitythatis90percentofthebaseresidential units or greater and involving residential densityinthezone unlessareductioninthetotal zoned lands, or commercial, employment or industrial numberofunitsisnecessarytoaccommodate lands with a Residential Overlay (R-Overlay) shall meet significantnaturalfeatures,topography,access the following requirements. limitations,orsimilarconstraints. Thefollowingsectiondiscussesthenumberofaffordable 1.The total number of affordable units provided to housingunitsbasedonthebasedensity.Thissection qualifying buyers, or to qualifying renters, shall be equal notedabovethough,providesthatareductioninthe to or exceed 25 percent of the base density as calculated numberofunitsisallowedduetophysicalconstraints, using the unit equivalency values set forth herein. andaccesslimitations.Bothoftheseapplytothis property.Theapplicantarguesthatthedensityas The project team contends that it was not intended that describedin18.5.8.050.Fdeterminesthenumberof the number of affordable housing units be determined affordableunitsasdescribedinthefollowingsection. based on a density standard that is not achievable due to physical and access constraints that restrict the actual number of dwelling units able to be constructed. CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN ADDITIONAL HOUSING IS NEEDED PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS Kelly Sandow PE, of Sandow Engineering, LLC has evaluated the impacts of the proposal. Key findings of the TIA include Ïthese are addressed in the Technical Memorandum and the TIA Review Response Letter from ODOT dated May 7, 2020: at South Valley View, Highway 99N at Jackson Road, North Main Street at Jackson Road, North Main Street at Maple Street, and Hwy 99N at the project access points) will meet the mobility standards through the Year 2034 with the addition of the traffic associated with anticipated development of the subject property. tantially increase queuing conditions over the background conditions. include a left-turn lane for vehicles entering the site. sportation Planning Rule (TPR) has been met. OREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SIDEWALK, PARK ROW, BIKE LANE IMPROVEMENTS There are numerous variations in the topography, roadside improvements, uses of the frontage, etc. along the frontage of the property and within the public right-of-way for the highway frontage The proposal seeks to come as close to the City of Ashland Street Standards and comply with ODOT standards when considering the topography and adjacent improvements. The proposed improvements will provide additional measures of traffic calming and provide a safer pedestrian environment than presently found in the area. ANDERSON AUTOBODY FRONTAGE Concern that the improvements were encroaching onto Anderson Autobody property were raised. All sidewalk improvements are outside of the private property area and are approximatly six-inches outside of the easement that extends from Anderson Autobody into the ODOT ROW. In the event that public utilities within the easements along the frontage of the property are impacted, they will be restored to pre-construction condition. EASEMENT The use of the existing easement by the proposed development is prohibited by the written word nor by the ÑintentÒ as expressed by the van DijkÔs. When the easement was granted the area was within the Comprehensive Planned Urban Growth Boundary and designated as multi-family. If the intent was to restrict the access to the single-family residence, that should have been recorded. Additionally, according to the property ownerÔs attorney, the Knox Property is not the owner of the easement and is the servient user. Staged photos should not be included in the record as evidence of the impacts of the proposed multi- family residential development of the subject property. ROGUE VALLEY TRANSIT DISTRICT The proposed south bound bus pull out area, the transit stop and the improvements were reviewed by RVTD and ODOT. The standards differ slightly between the two organizations and a minor modification is necessary, but overall, RVTD supports the proposal. Department of Transportation Region 3 Planning and Programming 100 Antelope Drive White City, Oregon 97503 Phone: (541) 774-6299 March 7, 2020 Mr. Derek Severson City of Ashland Community Development 51 Winburn Way Ashland, OR 97529 RE: PA-T3-2019-00001, 1511 Highway 99 North Dear Mr. Severson, Thank you for providing the Oregon Department of Transportation with the opportunity to provide comments associated withthezone change and annexation of approximately 16.87 acres find solutions which work for all parties. Please find our comments below regarding this proposal. i.ODOT has reviewed theTraffic Impact Analysis (TIA)prepared by the Sandow Engineering and believe thatit satisfiesthe requirements of the Transportation Planning Rule (OAR 660- 012). ii.The proposed southbound bus pullout has satisfactory width, striping, and exit taper. The . iii.ODOT is amenable to the proposed median cut north of the intersection of N Main St. and Highway 99. A stripedcrosswalk would not be appropriate at this location given traffic speed and sight visibility. iv.ODOT will requirea hydraulic report demonstrating the proposal will not adversely affect State facilities. We understand this will be conducted during the final engineering phase of the project, after Planning Commission. As such, approval of PA-T3-2019-00001should be conditioned on written approval from ODOTofasatisfactoryhydraulics report. ODOT is satisfiedwith the proposed sidewalk and bike facilities with the exception of the v. sidewalkunder the trestle which should be at least 6in width. Approval should be conditioned on the applicant obtainingareservation indenture, access vi. permits and misc./utility permitsfrom ODOT.The applicant may begin theseprocessesby contacting Julee Scruggs atJulee.Y.Scruggs@odot.state.or.us. Please feel free to contact me at Micah.HOROWITZ@odot.state.or.usor 541-774-6331should you have any questions or concerns. Sincerely, Micah Horowitz, AICP Senior Transportation Planner PUBLIC COMMENTS _________________________________ PA-T3-2019-00001 1511 Hwy 99 APPLICANTS REBUTTAL _________________________________ PA-T3-2019-00001 1511HWY 99 N STAFF REPORT APPLICATION _________________________________ PA-T3-2019-00001 1511HWY 99 N Memo DATE: May 12, 2020 TO: Ashland Planning Commission FROM: Derek Severson, Senior Planner RE: Grand Terrace Annexation hearing for the Grand Terrace annexation proposal back in November, a number of issues were identified by the Planning Commission as needing to be further addressed by the applicant. The Planning Commission continued the matter, and asked that the applicant work with the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) and Rogue Valley Transportation District (RVTD) to address some outstanding transportation items and then take the proposal back to the Transportation Commission for a recommendation before returning to the Planning Commission. The item was scheduled to be heard by the Transportation Commission in March, however with the COVID-19 pandemic and associated emergency declarations by the city and state, the March Transportation Commission meeting was canceled and subsequent advisory commission meetings have been suspended indefinitely. Staff believed it was prudent at this point to bring the matter back to the Planning Commission for an evidentiary hearing to consider how each of the identified issues has been addressed, and identify where Commissioners believe more attention is still needed that a decision be made at the meeting tonight, but rather that Commissioners have a chance to refamiliarize themselves with the proposal and the issues as they currently stand after six months, to provide any feedback, and to schedule the matter for a later meeting if Commissioners believe it is appropriate to do so at this stage. The issues identified by the Planning Commission are summarized below, along with a summary of the sponse for each to date and any staff comments: CONTIGUITY & THE RAILROAD PROPERTY During the initial public hearing it was noted that the property was separated from the city by railroad property which is not considered to be right-of-way and as such the property cannot be found to be "currently contiguous" to the city as required in AMC 18.5.8.050.C. There was some discussion of the possibility of extending a of Highway 99 right-of-way from the existing city limits to connect the property to the city limits. Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us Applicant Response In a January 28, 2020 letter responding to the outstanding issues, the applicant notes that railroads have historically been a quasi-public entity and that railroad right-of-way intersecting streets or highway has never prevented annexations as the railroad was built for public use similar to highway right-of-way, rather than as private land for development purposes. This letter and its associated exhibits also speak to the history of donation land claims in the vicinity. The applicant has also indicated that they are attempting to communicate with the railroad to obtain consent to annexation. Staff Comments The surveying unit from the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) has provided deed records indicating that the Highway 99 corridor under the railroad overpass crosses the railroad property via easement and as such, ODOT granting a "cherry stem" connection of their right-of-way along the property frontage is not an option to resolve the issue. In considering this issue, staff notes that AMC 18.5.8.060 provides that "When an annexation is initiated by a private individual, the Staff Advisor may include other parcels of property in the proposed annexation to make a boundary extension more logical and to avoid parcels of land which are not incorporated but are partially or wholly surrounded by the City. The Staff Advisor, in a report to the Planning Commission and City Council, shall justify the inclusion of any parcels other than the parcel for which the petition is filed. The purpose of this section is to permit the Commission and Council to make annexations extending the boundaries more logical and orderly." Staff would further note that ORS 222.170 discusses "Annexation by consent before public hearing or order for election" in subsection 4, noting that "Real property... or railroad... shall not be considered when determining the number of owners, the area of land or the assessed valuation required to grant consent to annexation under this section unless the owner of such property files a statement consenting to or opposing annexation with the legislative body of the city on or before a day described in subsection (1) of this section." Based on the above, the current hearing was re-noticed as including both the state highway right- of-way and the railroad property abutting the property. This notice was sent to representatives of the railroad. Subsequent to mailing of the hearing notice, representatives of the railroad contacted staff via e-mail (see attached April 29, 2020 e-mail from CORP Railroad representative Chad Mullarkey) Without having more information to go off of the railroad does not intend to allow its property to be annexed and does not approve of any developments that include railroad property at this time.-mailed and left voicemail with an explanation of the situation seeking further discussion and are awaiting a response. At this point, this issue has not been resolved. AFFORDABILITY Several of the Planning Commissioners noted that the affordability requirement for annexations in AMC 18.5.8.050.G does not provide for the exclusion of unbuildable areas from the base density used in calculating the required number of affordable units. Commissioners asked that the applicant address the affordability requirements based on the language in the Land Use Ordinance. Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us Applicant Response The applicant asserts that while the Municipal Code requires that the number of affordable housing units be determined by the base density of the property, where substantial areas of the property are undevelopable it should exclude those areas. The applicant further emphasizes that the Oregon Revised Statutes in ORS 660-008-005 defines buildable land to mean residentially designed land within the urban growth boundary, including both vacant and developed land likely to be redeveloped that is suitable, available and necessary for residential Land is generally considered suitable and available unless it: a) Is severely constrained by natural hazards as determined under Statewide Planning Goal 7; b) Is subject to natural resource protection measures determined under Statewide Planning Goals 5,6,15,16,17 or 18; c) Has slopes of 25 percent or greater; d) Is within the 100-year flood plan; or e) Cannot be provided with public facilities. The applicant emphasizes that buildable land is considered in preparing the Buildable Lands Inventory (BLI), that the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan notes that density should decrease with an increase in slope to avoid excessive erosion and hillside cuts (Policy 17), and minimum density standards in AMC 18.2.5.080.B and 18.5.8.050.F provide for reductions in minimum densities for significant natural features. The applicant argues that physically constrained areas are not considered to be buildable lands and as such should not be considered as part of the area for development for purposes of calculating density. Here, a substantial area of the property has slopes of more than 35 percent, riparian drainages and wetlands that will prevent the extension of infrastructure and construction of dwellings and should be excluded from density calculations. Staff Comments , the issue for the Commission in November was not whether unbuildable lands were to be excluded from base density and minimum density calculations. AMC 18.5.8.050.F 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 issue raised by Commissioners back in November 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 equival There is no clear provision for a reduction in the base density when calculating the number of required affordable units for annexations as there is in calculating the minimum density requirement. Staff would note that City regulations require that constrained lands (hillsides, water resource protection zones for streams and wetlands, and lands with significant natural features) be excluded from development andhistorically these lands have been excluded from the affordability calculations as well as from the minimum density. TRANSPORTATION ISSUES Existing Easement Planning Commissioners asked that the applicant provide evidence that the existing 30-foot wide mutual access easement in place near the veterinary hospital will support the eventual access proposed in the conceptual development plan in terms of its width, location, any restrictions in easement language and ability to accommodate accessible improvements. Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us Applicant Response The applicant has indicated that access to the property is provided by a 30-foot wide ingress access easement and notes that there are no reservations or limits noted upon the easement. The applicant further explains that there is a 25-foot wide right of access to the highway from the easement restrictions. The applicant has included a survey noting the easement area along with the easement language. Staff Comments Multi-family zoned property is not required to provide dedicated public streets with development. City standards in AMC 18.4.3.080.D.3 Parking areas of more than seven parking spaces shall be served by a driveway 20 feet in width and constructed to: facilitate the flow of traffic on or off the site, with due regard to pedestrian and vehicle safety; be clearly and permanently marked and defined; and provide adequate aisles or turn-around areas so that all vehicles may enter the street in a forward manner. that areas for vehicle maneuvering, parking and loading have a five-foot wide landscaped screening strip where abutting a property line. A 30-foot width would accommodate a 20-foot driveway with five feet of landscaping on each side. Street Lighting The Planning Commissioners requested that the application include details for street-lighting to increase pedestrian safety along the corridor, with particular focus on the driveway locations. Planning staff have also suggested that the applicant consider how they might more clearly delineate the northern driveway entrance at the street for drivers in conjunction with proposed frontage improvements. Applicants Response The applicants January 28, 2020 response letter indicates that an ODOT-standard cobra style street light or City-standard pedestrian-scaled streetlight will be placed near the improved driveway apron. In addition, Exhibits C.3 and C.4 illustrate a total of five additional lights to be installed along the property frontage. Staff Comments The applicant has provided details of lighting placement along the frontage. Southbound RVTD Bus Stop Planning Commissioners asked that the applicant work with RVTD and ODOT to provide design need to include a pull-out, shelter with lighting, sidewalk, accessible loading pad and accessible route to the site, any necessary retaining, and a merge lane for the bus to re-enter the travel lane at an appropriate speed. Applicant The applicant notes that the project team has met with RVTD and its Bus Stop Committee, and a new, southbound bus pull-out lane, bus stop pad and future electric conduit to provide low voltage power is proposed to be provided south of the main driveway entrance to the site. Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us Staff Comments The applicants Exhibit C.4 illustrates the proposed bus pull-out lane, shelter and street light placement, and a proposed walkway connecting from the shelter onto the project site. It appears that this issue has been addressed. Bicycle & Pedestrian Connectivity to Northbound RVTD Stop/s The Planning Commissioners asked that the applicant address safe bicycle and pedestrian to include an enhanced crossing from the flag stop across Highway 99N, and also asked that the -wide shared use path generally from the enhanced crossing to the southern driveway on site. (The approval criteria for annexation include that, Likely pedestrian destinations from the project site shall be determined and the safe and accessible pedestrian facilities serving those destinations shall be indicated (AMC 18.5.8.050.E.3) Applicant Response In the January 28, 2020 letter, the applicant notes that there are two northbound RVTD stops within 1,800 to 2,00 feet of the property. The first is near the intersection of North Main Street and Highway 99N, and the applicant emphasizes that it is a legal pedestrian crossing. The applicant indicates that in conversation with ODOT traffic engineers, while they support that the intersection is a pedestrian crossing, it cannot be marked with new striping, rapid flash beacons , volume of pedestrians, volume of vehicle traffic and vehicle speeds to rise to the threshold for allowing a marked crossing. The applicant further indicates that ODOT does support a median refuge at the intersection of North Main and Highway 99N along w that the median in this area that would have provided a pedestrian refuge was recently removed to better enable vehicles crossing at this intersection. A smaller median is in place south of the intersection, but improvements would be necessary to create an adequate pedestrian refuge. The other northbound stop is near the intersection of Valley View Road and Highway 99N. This is a signaled intersection with a painted crosswalk in place on three of the four legs of the crossing. The applicant emphasizes that the subject property and its proximity to both northbound stops and the new proposed southbound stop are within Transit Supportive Areas in the RVTD 2040 Transit Master Plan as the property is within the consists of areas that are within a typical five-minute walk at a normal walking pace. The applicant concludes that like most areas in the community, there is not a northbound and southbound bus stop along the property frontage and this does not prevent commuters from crossing Highway 99N (or Siskiyou Boulevard or Highway 66) to access transit stops where they are not directly connected via a crosswalk or signalized intersection. Staff Comments In conversations with ODOT staff, they have indicated that they do not believe any new pedestrian crossings of Highway 99 are appropriate given the speeds, traffic volumes, sight and stopping distances when weighed against the anticipated number of pedestrians. Staff have not seen designs drawings for any potential improvements to the existing median at the intersection of North Main Street and Highway 99N to provide pedestrian refuge and signage. Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us Exception to Street Standards/Curbside Sidewalks At least one Planning Commissioner has questioned whether Exceptions to the Street Design Standards are merited, and others have inquired whether a curbside sidewalk is appropriate adjacent to a 45 MPH travel lane. Staff have recommended that the applicant more clearly articulate the basis for the requested Exceptions to not provide standard parkrow in terms of the on-site conditions in specific sections of the roadway (i.e. based on available right-of-way, topography, existing constraints, etc.). Applicant Response In the January 28, 2020 response letter, the applicant speaks to frontage improvements, explaining that along the entire frontage of the subject property a standard sidewalk and parkrow configuration is proposed except where the installation of the bus pull-out lane and bus shelter instead necessitate an eight-foot curbside sidewalk. The applicant discusses specific sidewalk sections in terms of the station numbers on the civil drawings. Stations 1-16 (North of Land of Paws): An 8-foot curbside sidewalk is proposed. The applicant explains that there is a large roadside ditch and private property belonging to Anderson Autobody which prevent parkrow installation, and this curbside sidewalk will connect to existing curbside sidewalk to the north. Stations 16-23: A 3-foot bike buffer, 6-foot bike lane, 7-½ foot parkrow, and 6-foot sidewalk are proposed along this section of the property frontage. Stations 23-27: A bus pull-out lane, bus stop and 8-foot curbside sidewalk are proposed along this section of the property frontage. Parkrow here has been replaced by the bus pull-out lane. Station 27-34: A 3-foot bike buffer, 6-foot bike lane, and 8-foot curbside sidewalk are proposed. The applicant explains that this section is physically constrained by a steep roadside embankment and by the railroad trestle. Station 34 Schofield/North Main: A 6-foot bike lane, 7½ -foot parkrow and 6-foot sidewalk are proposed in this section. Staff Comments The applicant here has explained the improvements proposed and where/why exceptions to city standards are needed. Speed reduction Based on the Planning Commission discussion, staff have also suggested that it may be in the ighway 99 North corridor from Valley View Road south into Ashland as one means of addressing pedestrian safety and the ability of the RVTD buses to merge back into traffic from a stop. Applicant The applicant notes that ODOT is the authority on highway markings for pedestrian crossings and for highway speed limits, and at this time there is not enough justification for speeds to be lower. The applicant indicates that with a change in roadside culture through annexation and development, driving habits can change. They suggest that after improvements are made, a formal speed study to seek a reduction in highway speeds can be undertaken and eventually, if speeds are reduced and pedestrian volumes increase, potential marked crossings could be approved by ODOT. Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us Staff Comments Speed reduction would ultimately require an application to ODOT after which they would conduct a zonal analysis and a decision would ultimately come from the state traffic engineer. Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) ODOT had previously provided comment (October 25, 2019) on the Grand Terrace TIA, noting among other things that they had observed queuing significantly greater than that noted in the TIA for both the OR99 & Valley View and the Main & Maple intersections. Applicant Response Thhas submitted a technical memorandum in . In the January 28, 2020 letter from the applicant responding to outstanding issues, the applicant notes that ODOT has provided preliminary review comments on the technical memorandum to the applicant team with minor suggestions, but that generally there were no major issues or concerns to require additional TIA data or off-site intersection improvements. The applicant has provided a February 24, 2020 e-mail from Wei (Michael) Wang, P.E. & M.S., the Region 3 Interim Access Management Engineer with ODOT which indicates that ODOT had reviewed the technical memorandum and had no further review comments at this time. Staff Comments In speaking with ODOT staff, they have indicated that at this point, ODOT has given their final sign- off to the TIA with the addition of the technical memorandum. Formal written comments to this effect from ODOT have not been provided, however ODOT has been notified of the upcoming thth electronic meeting on May 12, and may provide additional written comments prior to May 12. Next Steps Staff believes that at this stage, it would be helpful for the Planning Commissioners to weigh in on the above issues. From there, the Commission might either continue discussions and deliberation to a date certain, or identify the outstanding areas where they believe further information from the applicant is needed. Supporting Information: Packet Materials Provided for May 12 Meeting 2020-0504 E-mail from Amy Gunter re: ODOT TIA comments 2020-0504 Written Submittal from Sydnee Dryer for neighbor Scott Knox 2020-0429 E-Mail and Attachment from CORP Railroad Representative Chad Mullarkey 2020-0428 E-Mail from Anderson Autobody 2020-0228 Severson e-mail re: ODOT update 2020-0203 Applicantl Memo 2020-0128 Applicants Letter Responding to PC Issues 2020-0107 ODOT Survey Unit Materials re: Railroad Right-of-Way 2020-0106 E-mail from Barbara Allen 2019-1112 Exhibits Submitted during November PC Hearing Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us http://www.ashland.or.us/files/2019-10- Link to the October 2019 Planning Commission Packet: 08_PC_Packet-web.pdf NOTE: This hearing distributed via the link above. http://www.ashland.or.us/files/2019-11- Link to the November 2019 Planning Commission Packet: 12_PC_Packet_web.pdf Link to the November 2019 Planning Commission Video: https://videoplayer.telvue.com/player/w9sPsSE7vna3XTN_39bs1rEXjVWF0kfP/media/525050?fullscree n=false&showtabssearch=true&autostart=true&jwsource=cl Link to the March 2020 Transportation Commission Packet: https://www.ashland.or.us/files/TC_Packet_3.19.20.pdf NOTE: This hearing was canceled to the COVID-19 emergency declaration, but packet material was distributed via the link above. The packet includes new transportation-related Information provided by the applicant since the initial Planning Commission hearing including: Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us EXHIBIT B EXHIBIT B EXHIBIT B EXHIBIT B EXHIBIT B EXHIBIT B ROGUE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC Contiguous Property: ROGUE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC Access Easement: Traffic Impact Analysis: ROGUE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC Frontage Improvements: ROGUE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC Public Transit: ROGUE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC Residential Density: hƩĻŭƚƓ wĻǝźƭĻķ {ƷğƷǒƷĻƭ Λhw{ ЏЏЉΏЉЉБΏЉЉЎΜʹ .ǒźƌķğĬƌĻ \[ğƓķ ƒĻğƓƭ ƩĻƭźķĻƓƷźğƌƌǤ ķĻƭźŭƓğƷĻķ ƌğƓķ ǞźƷŷźƓ ƷŷĻ ǒƩĬğƓ ŭƩƚǞƷŷ ĬƚǒƓķğƩǤͲ źƓĭƌǒķźƓŭ ĬƚƷŷ ǝğĭğƓƷ ğƓķ ķĻǝĻƌƚƦĻķ ƌğƓķ ƌźƉĻƌǤ Ʒƚ ĬĻ ƩĻķĻǝĻƌƚƦĻķͲ ƷŷğƷ źƭ ƭǒźƷğĬƌĻͲ ğǝğźƌğĬƌĻ ğƓķ ƓĻĭĻƭƭğƩǤ ŅƚƩ ƩĻƭźķĻƓƷźğƌ ǒƭĻƭ͵ tǒĬƌźĭƌǤ ƚǞƓĻķ ƌğƓķ źƭ ŭĻƓĻƩğƌƌǤ ƓƚƷ ĭƚƓƭźķĻƩĻķ ğǝğźƌğĬƌĻ ŅƚƩ ƩĻƭźķĻƓƷźğƌ ǒƭĻƭ͵ \[ğƓķ źƭ ŭĻƓĻƩğƌƌǤ ĭƚƓƭźķĻƩĻķ ƭǒźƷğĬƌĻ ğƓķ ğǝğźƌğĬƌĻ ǒƓƌĻƭƭ źƷʹ ΛğΜ Lƭ ƭĻǝĻƩĻƌǤ ĭƚƓƭƷƩğźƓĻķ ĬǤ ƓğƷǒƩğƌ ŷğǩğƩķƭ ğƭ ķĻƷĻƩƒźƓĻķ ǒƓķĻƩ {ƷğƷĻǞźķĻ tƌğƓƓźƓŭ Dƚğƌ Аͳ ΛĬΜ Lƭ ƭǒĬƆĻĭƷ Ʒƚ ƓğƷǒƩğƌ ƩĻƭƚǒƩĭĻ ƦƩƚƷĻĭƷźƚƓ ƒĻğƭǒƩĻƭ ķĻƷĻƩƒźƓĻķ ǒƓķĻƩ {ƷğƷĻǞźķĻ tƌğƓƓźƓŭ Dƚğƌƭ ЎͲ ЏͲ ЊЎͲ ЊЏͲ ЊА ƚƩ ЊБͳ ΛĭΜ Iğƭ ƭƌƚƦĻƭ ƚŅ ЋЎ ƦĻƩĭĻƓƷ ƚƩ ŭƩĻğƷĻƩͳ ΛķΜ Lƭ ǞźƷŷźƓ ƷŷĻ ЊЉЉΏǤĻğƩ Ņƌƚƚķ ƦƌğźƓͳ ƚƩ ΛĻΜ /ğƓƓƚƷ ĬĻ ƦƩƚǝźķĻķ ǞźƷŷ ƦǒĬƌźĭ ŅğĭźƌźƷźĻƭ͵ ROGUE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC ROGUE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC Conclusion: Amy ROGUE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC Zoning Map This is to certify that this is the Official Zoning Map referred to in Section 18.12.030 of Title 18.12 of the Ashland Municipal Code. Adopted as Ordinance No. 2951 Signed: Mayor __________________________________________ Date ____________________ City Recorder _____________________________________ Date ____________________ EXHIBIT D EXHIBIT D EXHIBIT E EXHIBIT F EXHIBIT G EXHIBIT G EXHIBIT G EXHIBIT G EXHIBIT G EXHIBIT G SANDOWENGINEERING 160 MADISON STREET, SUITE A EUGENE, OREGON 97402 541.513.3376 TECH MEMO TO: Michael Wang PE Oregon Departments of Transportation FROM: Kelly Sandow P.E. Sandow Engineering DATE: February 3, 2020 RE: Grand Terrace Residential Development TIA-Response to ODOT Comments The following provides a response to the October 25, 2019 ODOT comments provided as part of the review of the Grand Terrace TIA. /ƚƒƒĻƓƷ ϔЊ: ODOT private approach permit and access reservation indenture applications will be required for the proposed easterly access. Please contact ODOT permit specialist for these applications. wĻƭƦƚƓƭĻ Ʒƚ /ƚƒƒĻƓƷ ϔЊʹ The applicant will provide applications for the approach permits as required by ODOT once the development proposal has been approved. /ƚƒƒĻƓƷ ϔЋʹ ODOT reviewed the sight distance in the field and measured a distance of 307 feet. Therefore, the recommendation was a restricted access to right in, right out, left-in movements. wĻƭƦƚƓƭĻ Ʒƚ /ƚƒƒĻƓƷ ϔЋʹ ODOT revised the sight distance measurement based on a more accurate location of the site access onto Highway 99. With the revision then found that the sight distance is met and that the access can be a full movement. /ƚƒƒĻƓƷ ϔЌʹ ODOT staff observed existing queuing issue at OR 99 & Valley View intersection at least 700 feet and the queuing issue at the Main & Maple intersection of over 3500 feet. The TIA th only shows 95 percentile queuing of 250 feet at the OR 99 & Valley View and 350 feet at the Main & Maple. wĻƭƦƚƓƭĻ Ʒƚ /ƚƒƒĻƓƷ ϔЌʹ The Synchro and Simtraffic models were built according to ODOT standards as per the Analysis Procedures Manual. The input variables are as follows: 1)Saturation Flow Rate: 1750 as per ODOT standards for this area 2)Peak Hour Factor: Taken from the traffic counts Tech Memo From: Kelly Sandow PE Sandow Engineering RE: Response to Comments Date: 2.3.2020 Page 2 3)Traffic Counts: taken by Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering as part of the road diet project and the additional as needed for this project. The counts were performed to standard methodologies 4)Signal timing parameters: According to the Analysis Procedures Manual. The Synchro model was completed following all standards and methodology typically required for this type of project. As Sandow Engineering understands it, the road diet has created an unstable traffic flow. What this means is that the traffic flow can be moving as normal and something within the system will cause a delay in travel that will cause backups for the remainder of the peak travel time. This delay is commonly caused by buses stopping to pick up/drop off riders, garbage trucks stopping, vehicles stopping for pedestrians not crossing at signalized intersections, and other factors within the roadway. Unfortunately, this type of instability within the system is not able to be modeled within Synchro. Synchro does not model a bus or garbage truck stopping within the roadway midblock. The only way to model the levels of queuing that ODOT is referencing is to make modifications to the input parameters at the intersections. The modifications made were: 1)Increase pedestrian calls to provide more delay on the main line 2)Reduce the peak hour factor to 0.50 for all movements at all intersections 3)Reduce the signal cycle length 4)Reduce the green time to the major movements at the traffic signals 5)Reduced the saturation flow rate from 1750 to 1600. The queueing results from the modifications to the Synchro model are illustrated in Table 1. The outputs are included as an attachment. SANDOW ENGINEERINGSANDOW Tech Memo From: Kelly Sandow PE Sandow Engineering RE: Response to Comments Date: 2.3.2020 Page 3 TABLE 1: INTERSECTION QUEUING: PM PEAK HOUR 2021 No-Build 2021 Build 2034 No-Build2034 Build Available 95th 95th 95th 95th Movement Avg Avg Avg Avg Storage Percentile Percentile Percentile Percentile S. Valley View at Rogue Valley Highway (S Jackson/Valley View & 99) SEB Left-Highway 225 25 75 25 50 25 5075225 SEB Thru >500 100 200 100 200 100 200 250 600 SEB Thru- Right>500 50 125 50 150 50 150 200 550 NWB Left-Highway 475 25 50 25 50 25 502550 NWB-Thru >500 75 100 75 125 75 125 75125 NWB-Thru >500 75 125 75 125 75 150 100 175 NWB-Right 100 75 125 50 125 50 125 75150 NB-Left-Thru- 75 25 50 25 50 25 502575 NB-Right 100 25 50 25 50 25 502550 SB-LTR-Valley View >500 600 1000 925 1475 700 1425 1100 2325 Jackson Road at Rogue Valley Highway (99 & Jackson) SEB Left 100 25 50 25 75 25 5025100 NWB Left 100 25 25 25 25 25 252525 NEB Left-Thru-Right 100 50 150 75 175 75 225 150 300 SWB Left-Thru- 200 100 225 125 275 150 300 175 350 Jackson Road at Main Street SW Left- Right 175 25 25 25 25 25 25 25100 SB Left 50 25 25 25 25 25 25 2550 Maple Street at Main Street EB Left-Thru-Right 400 75 150 75 150 75 175 150 300 WB Left-Thru-Right 175 25 50 25 50 25 502550 NB Left 150 225 600 250 600 250 600 275 625 NB Thru >500 1000 1300 100 1275 1050 1275 1025 1300 NB Right 160 50 200 50 200 25 150 50200 SB Left 75 25 100 25 125 50 125 25100 SB Thru >500 1150 2750 1475 3250 1775 3550 2075 4275 SB Right 195 150 400 175 400 225 425 175 400 As illustrated, the queuing is shown to be more in line with what ODOT observed in the field. The queuing lengths along Highway 99 are a result of the recent reduction in through lanes as part of ƷŷĻ /źƷǤ ƚŅ !ƭŷƌğƓķ͸ƭ Ʃƚğķ ķźĻƷ͵ ŷĻƩĻ źƭ Ɠƚ ƩĻĭƚƒƒĻƓķĻķ ƒźƷźŭğƷźƚƓ ŅƚƩ ƩĻķǒĭźƓŭ ƷŷĻ ƨǒĻǒĻ ƌĻƓŭƷŷƭ͵ Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or need any additional information 541.513.3376 SANDOW ENGINEERINGSANDOW Queuing and Blocking Report 02/05/2020 2019 PM Existing Intersection: 3: Main Street & Jackson Road, Interval #1 MovementSBSW Directions ServedLLR Maximum Queue (ft)1611 Average Queue (ft)42 95th Queue (ft)2012 Link Distance (ft)303 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)50 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 3: Main Street & Jackson Road, Interval #2 MovementSBSW Directions ServedLLR Maximum Queue (ft)2324 Average Queue (ft)14 95th Queue (ft)1020 Link Distance (ft)303 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)50 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 3: Main Street & Jackson Road, All Intervals MovementSBSW Directions ServedLLR Maximum Queue (ft)2829 Average Queue (ft)23 95th Queue (ft)1319 Link Distance (ft)303 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)50 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Casita Subdivision - Ashland, OregonSimTraffic Report Page 1 Queuing and Blocking Report 02/05/2020 2019 PM Existing Intersection: 4: 99 & Jackson Rd., Interval #1 MovementSENWNESW Directions ServedLLLTRLTR Maximum Queue (ft)27115644 Average Queue (ft)822417 95th Queue (ft)31156043 Link Distance (ft)219234 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)100100 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 4: 99 & Jackson Rd., Interval #2 MovementSENWNESW Directions ServedLLLTRLTR Maximum Queue (ft)34297486 Average Queue (ft)942437 95th Queue (ft)31195780 Link Distance (ft)219234 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)100100 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 4: 99 & Jackson Rd., All Intervals MovementSENWNESW Directions ServedLLLTRLTR Maximum Queue (ft)38307886 Average Queue (ft)942432 95th Queue (ft)31195874 Link Distance (ft)219234 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)100100 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Casita Subdivision - Ashland, OregonSimTraffic Report Page 2 Queuing and Blocking Report 02/05/2020 2019 PM Existing Intersection: 7: S Jackson/Valley View & 99, Interval #1 MovementNBNBSBSESESENWNWNWNW Directions ServedLTRLTRLTTRLTTR Maximum Queue (ft)2429339431082735909698 Average Queue (ft)7112071657810575542 95th Queue (ft)2733372441122734969998 Link Distance (ft)2282142895895696696 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)65225475100 Storage Blk Time (%)10 Queuing Penalty (veh)60 Intersection: 7: S Jackson/Valley View & 99, Interval #2 MovementNBNBSBSESESENWNWNWNW Directions ServedLTRLTRLTTRLTTR Maximum Queue (ft)4729696611507242103144119 Average Queue (ft)121236617751511575945 95th Queue (ft)403571948129493210011398 Link Distance (ft)2282142895895696696 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)65225475100 Storage Blk Time (%)001 Queuing Penalty (veh)031 Intersection: 7: S Jackson/Valley View & 99, All Intervals MovementNBNBSBSESESENWNWNWNW Directions ServedLTRLTRLTTRLTTR Maximum Queue (ft)4729696611547251103144122 Average Queue (ft)101232817711310575845 95th Queue (ft)37356654712644329911098 Link Distance (ft)2282142895895696696 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)65225475100 Storage Blk Time (%)010 Queuing Penalty (veh)031 Casita Subdivision - Ashland, OregonSimTraffic Report Page 3 Queuing and Blocking Report 02/05/2020 2019 PM Existing Intersection: 9: Main St/Main Street & Maple St, Interval #1 MovementEBWBNBNBNBSBSBSB Directions ServedLTRLTRLTRLTR Maximum Queue (ft)71222895601155026689 Average Queue (ft)39959304171215023 95th Queue (ft)752725665211754267102 Link Distance (ft)136323510803264 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)15016070195 Storage Blk Time (%)1819 Queuing Penalty (veh)811 Intersection: 9: Main St/Main Street & Maple St, Interval #2 MovementEBWBNBNBNBSBSBSB Directions ServedLTRLTRLTRLTR Maximum Queue (ft)114324501039260123494295 Average Queue (ft)528235700291624678 95th Queue (ft)9927588112015683503267 Link Distance (ft)136323510803264 Upstream Blk Time (%)0 Queuing Penalty (veh)3 Storage Bay Dist (ft)15016070195 Storage Blk Time (%)4129 Queuing Penalty (veh)2726 Intersection: 9: Main St/Main Street & Maple St, All Intervals MovementEBWBNBNBNBSBSBSB Directions ServedLTRLTRLTRLTR Maximum Queue (ft)114324501039260123494295 Average Queue (ft)498192605261522265 95th Queue (ft)9427538109614877464238 Link Distance (ft)136323510803264 Upstream Blk Time (%)0 Queuing Penalty (veh)3 Storage Bay Dist (ft)15016070195 Storage Blk Time (%)3527 Queuing Penalty (veh)2222 Casita Subdivision - Ashland, OregonSimTraffic Report Page 4 Queuing and Blocking Report 2021 PM background 1301603131 Intersection: 3: Main Street & Jackson Road, Interval #1 NpwfnfouTCTX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMMS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*2835 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*47 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*2836 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*414 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*61 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Intersection: 3: Main Street & Jackson Road, Interval #2 NpwfnfouTCTCTX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUMS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*392535 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*325 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*272332 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*447414 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*61 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*1 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*1 Intersection: 3: Main Street & Jackson Road, All Intervals NpwfnfouTCTCTX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUMS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*3:2541 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*416 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*272133 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*447414 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*61 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*1 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*1 Dbtjub!Tvcejwjtjpo!.!Btimboe-!PsfhpoTjnUsbggjd!Sfqpsu Qbhf!2 Queuing and Blocking Report 2021 PM background 1301603131 Intersection: 4: 99 & Jackson Rd., Interval #1 NpwfnfouTFOXOFTX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMMMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*3:43265354 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*23::5257 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*4644285373 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*32:345 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*126 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*11 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*211211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Intersection: 4: 99 & Jackson Rd., Interval #2 NpwfnfouTFOXOFTX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMMMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*4539267351 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*:44467 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*4228213281 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*32:345 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*6 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*1 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*211211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Intersection: 4: 99 & Jackson Rd., All Intervals NpwfnfouTFOXOFTX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMMMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*454427735: Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*2155989 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*4333242319 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*32:345 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*18 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*11 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*211211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Dbtjub!Tvcejwjtjpo!.!Btimboe-!PsfhpoTjnUsbggjd!Sfqpsu Qbhf!3 Queuing and Blocking Report 2021 PM background 1301603131 Intersection: 7: S Jackson/Valley View & 99, Interval #1 NpwfnfouOCOCTCTFTFTFOXOXOXOX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUUSMUUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*61487957534431752221263225 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*2:3355847268:127738975 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*64578::7636232756217265231 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*33932539:69:67:77:7 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*76336586211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*11232 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*112356 Intersection: 7: S Jackson/Valley View & 99, Interval #2 NpwfnfouOCOCTCTFTFTFOXOXOXOX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUUSMUUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*583:973632375448214229227 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*::7392766825686357 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*44422118542183945:6:6:8 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*33932539:69:67:77:7 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*76336586211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*111 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*131 Intersection: 7: S Jackson/Valley View & 99, All Intervals NpwfnfouOCOCTCTFTFTFOXOXOXOX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUUSMUUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*66499737834431757223273228 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*2323695329138256:6961 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*4:47:896328722548:9225215 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*33932539:69:67:77:7 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*76336586211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*11121 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*11183 Dbtjub!Tvcejwjtjpo!.!Btimboe-!PsfhpoTjnUsbggjd!Sfqpsu Qbhf!4 Queuing and Blocking Report 2021 PM background 1301603131 Intersection: 9: Main St/Main Street & Maple St, Interval #1 NpwfnfouFCXCOCOCOCTCTCTC Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*2::4455:21:4273:335213:6 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*23323358216:453522242:2 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*32:4672123242792173464523 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*247434621914375 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*22 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*332 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*261271812:6 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*6563 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*86:8 Intersection: 9: Main St/Main Street & Maple St, Interval #2 NpwfnfouFCXCOCOCOCTCTCTC Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*2454755:21:8371234399:3:6 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*529327:374:292245243 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*:439678237929::1396746: Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*247434621914375 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*4 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*32 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*261271812:6 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*51146 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*29133 Intersection: 9: Main St/Main Street & Maple St, All Intervals NpwfnfouFCXCOCOCOCTCTCTC Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*3235356121:9371234399:3:6 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*72:335:694931223:257 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*25941689238:295:53859486 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*247434621914375 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*6 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*82 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*261271812:6 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*5414: Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*43151 Dbtjub!Tvcejwjtjpo!.!Btimboe-!PsfhpoTjnUsbggjd!Sfqpsu Qbhf!5 Queuing and Blocking Report 2034 PM background 1301603131 Intersection: 3: Main Street & Jackson Road, Interval #1 NpwfnfouTCTCTX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUMS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*294735 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*516 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*2:133 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*447414 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*61 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*2 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*1 Intersection: 3: Main Street & Jackson Road, Interval #2 NpwfnfouTCTCC2TX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUUMS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*3:217533: Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*32655 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*242395:31 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*447575414 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*2 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*8 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*61 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*14 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*11 Intersection: 3: Main Street & Jackson Road, All Intervals NpwfnfouTCTCC2TX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUUMS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*41217533: Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*32345 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*262215331 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*447575414 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*2 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*6 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*61 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*14 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*11 Dbtjub!Tvcejwjtjpo!.!Btimboe-!PsfhpoTjnUsbggjd!Sfqpsu Qbhf!2 Queuing and Blocking Report 2034 PM background 1301603131 Intersection: 4: 99 & Jackson Rd., Interval #1 NpwfnfouTFOXOFTX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMMMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*614429935: Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*376225283 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*683631941: Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*32:345 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*255 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*11 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*211211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Intersection: 4: 99 & Jackson Rd., Interval #2 NpwfnfouTFOXOFTX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMMMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*654129135: Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*3464788 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*613223332: Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*32:345 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*226 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*11 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*211211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Intersection: 4: 99 & Jackson Rd., All Intervals NpwfnfouTFOXOFTX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMMMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*66442:635: Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*35666211 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*633326:367 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*32:345 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*234 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*11 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*211211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Dbtjub!Tvcejwjtjpo!.!Btimboe-!PsfhpoTjnUsbggjd!Sfqpsu Qbhf!3 Queuing and Blocking Report 2034 PM background 1301603131 Intersection: 7: S Jackson/Valley View & 99, Interval #1 NpwfnfouOCOCTCTFTFTFOXOXOXOX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUUSMUUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*493::456935232747228239229 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*3129713442742212586857: :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*585221117138135549242261242 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*33932539:69:67:77:7 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*76336586211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*1333 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*1237: Intersection: 7: S Jackson/Valley View & 99, Interval #2 NpwfnfouOCOCTCTFTFTFOXOXOXOX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUUSMUUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*453:23356123:645622221:224 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*::::6246:2126636152 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*424225:5482234949:1:6:5 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*33932539:69:67:77:7 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*76336586211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*111 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*122 Intersection: 7: S Jackson/Valley View & 99, All Intervals NpwfnfouOCOCTCTFTFTFOXOXOXOX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUUSMUUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*543:23356935232761235256234 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*2222:1129954526686759 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*474525635829624549214224217 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*33932539:69:67:77:7 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*76336586211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*1222 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*1194 Dbtjub!Tvcejwjtjpo!.!Btimboe-!PsfhpoTjnUsbggjd!Sfqpsu Qbhf!4 Queuing and Blocking Report 2034 PM background 1301603131 Intersection: 9: Main St/Main Street & Maple St, Interval #1 NpwfnfouFCXCOCOCOCTCTCTC Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*2814755:21:327321136753:6 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*21427374217651322274289 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*2814:7282311299:93738511 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*247434621914375 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*23 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*349 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*261271812:6 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*6562 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*86:: Intersection: 9: Main St/Main Street & Maple St, Interval #2 NpwfnfouFCXCOCOCOCTCTCTC Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*21:3556121:637123841493:6 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*559347:724636266727: :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*:236699237128821844:44:7 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*247434621914375 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*51 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*391 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*261271812:6 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*5452 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*3138 Intersection: 9: Main St/Main Street & Maple St, All Intervals NpwfnfouFCXCOCOCOCTCTCTC Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*2824756121:637123841493:6 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*6921353:9747352572282 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*2363:6:6237629121643484:8 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*247434621914375 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*71 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*921 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*261271812:6 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*5655 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*4456 Dbtjub!Tvcejwjtjpo!.!Btimboe-!PsfhpoTjnUsbggjd!Sfqpsu Qbhf!5 Queuing and Blocking Report 2034 PM background 1301603131 Intersection: 3: Main Street & Jackson Road, Interval #1 NpwfnfouTCTCC2TX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUUMS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*282119539 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*52238 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*312332:3: Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*447575414 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*4 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*64 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*61 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*5 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*1 Intersection: 3: Main Street & Jackson Road, Interval #2 NpwfnfouTCTCC2C37C3TX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUUUUMS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*534613382543841 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*478583445 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*334113933164131 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*4475756622548414 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*963 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*664424 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*61 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*22 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*1 Intersection: 3: Main Street & Jackson Road, All Intervals NpwfnfouTCTCC2C37C3TX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUUUUMS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*544613382543845 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*464472836 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*333783552883733 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*4475756622548414 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*852 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*663621 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*61 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*: Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*1 Dbtjub!Tvcejwjtjpo!.!Btimboe-!PsfhpoTjnUsbggjd!Sfqpsu Qbhf!2 Queuing and Blocking Report 2034 PM background 1301603131 Intersection: 4: 99 & Jackson Rd., Interval #1 NpwfnfouTFOXOFTX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMMMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*3:3332435: Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*2482312:7 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*4638343425 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*32:345 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*2468 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*11 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*211211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Intersection: 4: 99 & Jackson Rd., Interval #2 NpwfnfouTFOXOFTX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMMMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*453432235: Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*22566222 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*443128:387 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*32:345 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*:39 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*11 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*211211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Intersection: 4: 99 & Jackson Rd., All Intervals NpwfnfouTFOXOFTX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMMMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*453432935: Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*22682242 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*45333123:9 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*32:345 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*2146 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*11 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*211211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Dbtjub!Tvcejwjtjpo!.!Btimboe-!PsfhpoTjnUsbggjd!Sfqpsu Qbhf!3 Queuing and Blocking Report 2034 PM background 1301603131 Intersection: 7: S Jackson/Valley View & 99, Interval #1 NpwfnfouOCOCTCTFTFTFOXOXOXOX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUUSMUUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*67579356:36533842231241214 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*2:336563828921127797:65 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*6563:257136733848229262221 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*33932539:69:67:77:7 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*76336586211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*21322 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*112335 Intersection: 7: S Jackson/Valley View & 99, Interval #2 NpwfnfouOCOCTCTFTFTFOXOXOXOX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUUSMUUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*494521935727921561215267234 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*:8849267324266:6:57 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*44392628512296651::22721: Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*33932539:69:67:77:7 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*76336586211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*11122 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*11142 Intersection: 7: S Jackson/Valley View & 99, All Intervals NpwfnfouOCOCTCTFTFTFOXOXOXOX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUUSMUUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*6761219:713653386123828:235 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*22227:229:14526737259 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*4:482518582:423:4:215237221 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*33932539:69:67:77:7 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*76336586211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*11122 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*11193 Dbtjub!Tvcejwjtjpo!.!Btimboe-!PsfhpoTjnUsbggjd!Sfqpsu Qbhf!4 Queuing and Blocking Report 2034 PM background 1301603131 Intersection: 9: Main St/Main Street & Maple St, Interval #1 NpwfnfouFCXCOCOCOCTCTCTC Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*3415255:21:432525:3:563:6 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*24829435219651492556297 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*3485376121:729924:4184517 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*247434621914375 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*231 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*3:22 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*261271812:6 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*6664 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*9:227 Intersection: 9: Main St/Main Street & Maple St, Interval #2 NpwfnfouFCXCOCOCOCTCTCTC Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*2434356121:527923443693:6 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*558326213826352964315 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*:5376782384215214476552: Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*247434621914375 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*51 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*452 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*261271812:6 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*5252 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*3341 Intersection: 9: Main St/Main Street & Maple St, All Intervals NpwfnfouFCXCOCOCOCTCTCTC Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*3435256121:637126143693:6 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*7721352215232382865311 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*26:426:7236:23:224464:527 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*247434621914375 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*71 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*:92 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*261271812:6 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*5555 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*4:63 Dbtjub!Tvcejwjtjpo!.!Btimboe-!PsfhpoTjnUsbggjd!Sfqpsu Qbhf!5 Queuing and Blocking Report 2034 PM Build 1301603131 Intersection: 3: Main Street & Jackson Road, Interval #1 NpwfnfouTCTX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMMS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*2729 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*45 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*2831 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*414 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*61 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Intersection: 3: Main Street & Jackson Road, Interval #2 NpwfnfouTCTCC2C37C3TX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUUUUMS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*83547662751254983 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*:34:3973::69737 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*646748278:72812214 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*4475756622548414 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*6661564 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*22:721:4:9967 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*61 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*167 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*17 Intersection: 3: Main Street & Jackson Road, All Intervals NpwfnfouTCTCC2C37C3TX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUUUUMS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*83547662751254983 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*929332833855632 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*5862275381:2611:1 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*4475756622548414 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*5248453 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*9:893185253 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*61 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*153 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*15 Dbtjub!Tvcejwjtjpo!.!Btimboe-!PsfhpoTjnUsbggjd!Sfqpsu Qbhf!2 Queuing and Blocking Report 2034 PM Build 1301603131 Intersection: 4: 99 & Jackson Rd., Interval #1 NpwfnfouTFOXOFTX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMMMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*39225958 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*843437 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*38286665 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*32:345 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*211211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Intersection: 4: 99 & Jackson Rd., Interval #2 NpwfnfouTFTFC9C9OXOFTX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSUMMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*2355418478413934535: Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*3924:3272636281325 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*:85678627373339842: Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*4587:77:732:345 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*412136389 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*7722173411 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*211211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*43 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*22 Intersection: 4: 99 & Jackson Rd., All Intervals NpwfnfouTFTFC9C9OXOFTX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSUMMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*2355418478413934535: Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*34216275226624627: :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*974:976565332392442 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*4587:77:732:345 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*34834:69 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*5:78:2911 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*211211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*35 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*: Dbtjub!Tvcejwjtjpo!.!Btimboe-!PsfhpoTjnUsbggjd!Sfqpsu Qbhf!3 Queuing and Blocking Report 2034 PM Build 1301603131 Intersection: 7: S Jackson/Valley View & 99, Interval #1 NpwfnfouOCOCTCTFTFTFOXOXOXOX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUUSMUUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*283:525462286135:4223225 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*52239124762821696659 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*32455864:2286339211228226 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*33932539:69:67:77:7 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*76336586211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*21 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*81 Intersection: 7: S Jackson/Valley View & 99, Interval #2 NpwfnfouOCOCTCTFTFTFOXOXOXOX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUUSMUUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*766532:954588:86965255327236 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*3632244:733:63652:899779 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*6:5:356:35:76571557238276245 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*33932539:69:67:77:7 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*3142 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*53811 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*76336586211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*213842 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*112:517 Intersection: 7: S Jackson/Valley View & 99, All Intervals NpwfnfouOCOCTCTFTFTFOXOXOXOX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUUSMUUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*766532:954588:86965256327236 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*312:2194613512:828848974 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*665734273286:465654234268242 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*33932539:69:67:77:7 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*2632 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*43111 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*76336586211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*213132 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*1125435 Dbtjub!Tvcejwjtjpo!.!Btimboe-!PsfhpoTjnUsbggjd!Sfqpsu Qbhf!4 Queuing and Blocking Report 2034 PM Build 1301603131 Intersection: 9: Main St/Main Street & Maple St, Interval #1 NpwfnfouFCXCOCOCOCTCTCTC Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*:43555:2159322535482:3 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*579338877512137977 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*9:37693219229:6266134: Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*247434621914375 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*2 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*7 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*261271812:6 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*5644 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*3536 Intersection: 9: Main St/Main Street & Maple St, Interval #2 NpwfnfouFCXCOCOCOCTCTCTC Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*4545:56121:837123843753:6 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*2682:388218649343742316 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*4165574222912932175394527 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*247434621914375 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*252 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*45336 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*261271812:6 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*6867 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*:3236 Intersection: 9: Main St/Main Street & Maple St, All Intervals NpwfnfouFCXCOCOCOCTCTCTC Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*4545:56121:837123843753:6 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*24127376211249313172282 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*393527322394295:653794:7 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*247434621914375 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*222 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*3692: Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*261271812:6 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*6561 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*86211 Dbtjub!Tvcejwjtjpo!.!Btimboe-!PsfhpoTjnUsbggjd!Sfqpsu Qbhf!5 LEGISLATIVE PUBLIC HEARINGS _________________________________ PA-L-2020-00008 Open Space Ordinance Amendments ASHLAND PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT Addendum 2 July 28, 2020 PLANNING ACTION: PA-L-2020-00008 APPLICANT: City of Ashland ORDINANCE REFERENCES: AMC 18.2.5 Standards for Residential Zones AMC 18.3.9 Performance Standards Option and PSO Overlay AMC 18.4.2 Building Placement, Orientation, and Design AMC 18.4.4 Landscaping, Lighting, and Screening AMC18.6.1 Definitions REQUEST: The proposal includes a series of amendments to the Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) Title 18 Land Use to update and clarify the open space requirements for multifamily and single-family housing developments. The area and design requirements for open space are consolidated in one section in AMC 18.4.4 Landscaping, Lighting, and Screening. Currently, the standards are located in AMC 18.3.9 Performance Standards Option and PSO Overlay and AMC 18.4.2 Building Placement, Orientation, and Design. The total amount of required open space is unchanged. New design standards are proposed and the existing design standards for open space are retained. The density bonus for major recreational facilities is deleted. The definitions for common area, open space and yard are revised to eliminate inconsistent use of the term open space. Several new definitions area included and the definition of unbuildable area and buildable area are revised to correct an unintended omission in the 2015 code update. I. Ordinance Amendments A. Project Background The Planning Commission held public hearings at the April 28, 2020 and May 26, 2020 meetings and unanimously recommended approval of two ordinances at the May 26, 2020 meeting. The Planning Commission did not receive any oral or written testimony at the public hearings. Prior to the public hearings, the Planning Commission discussed Planning Action PA-L-2020-00008 Ashland Planning Division Staff Report Applicant: City of Ashland Page 1 of 10 amendments to the open space standards at five public meetings including January 22, 2019, March 26, 2019, August 27, 2019, October 22, 2019 and February 25, 2020. After the Planning Commission recommended approval of the amendments to the open space standards, the legislative amendment was scheduled for a public hearing at the City Council on June 16, 2020. Before the scheduled meeting, a member of the development community expressed concerns about the proposed surfacing standard and the impact of the new standard on future development proposals. There were also some more minor changes suggested that are covered in section C. Other Standards of this report, below. The primary concern raised was with the wording in A minimum of 50 percent of the common open space must be covered in suitable surfaces for human use, such as lawn The issues identified were the application of the areas and recreational fields or courts. standard to new planning applications and consistency of the standard with current climate change and environmental issues. As the Planning Commission knows, the rewriting of the surfacing standard during the previous public hearings was the topic of considerable discussion and proved somewhat challenging. Staff believes that combining the open space standards into one section to make the code more user-friendly and to maintain consistency is the best approach. However, the initial process of combining the standards resulted in open space design standards, specifically those currently in 18.4.2.030.H, newly applying to detached single-family development. Currently, the open space standards in 18.4.2.030.H do not apply to detached single- family development. Between the April 28, 2020 and May 26, 2020 meeting, the play area standard that is currently located in 18.4.2.030.H.4 was moved to the new R-2 and R-3 zones section in 18.4.4.070.C.6 for this reason. B. Code Revisions 1. Surfacing Standard Currently, the open space design standards including the existing surfacing standard (see below) are located in Chapter 18.4.2 Building Placement, Orientation, and Design. The open space standards in 18.4.2.030.H apply to developments of multifamily housing and attached single-family housing but do not apply to developments of detached single- family housing. 18.4.2.030 Residential Development H. Open Space . Residential developments that are subject to the provisions of this chapter shall conform to all of the following standards. 1. Recreation Area. An area equal to at least eight percent of the lot area shall be dedicated to open space for recreational use by the tenants of the development. 2. Surfacing.Areas covered by shrubs, bark mulch, and other ground covers that do not provide suitable surface for human use may not be counted towards this requirement. Planning Action PA-L-2020-00008 Ashland Planning Division Staff Report Applicant: City of Ashland Page 2 of 10 3. Decks and Patios. Decks, patios, and similar areas are eligible for open space. 4. Play Areas. Play areas for children are required for projects of greater than 20 units that are designed to include families. Play areas are eligible for open space. The proposed surfacing standard is in 18.4.4.070.C.4.a (see below) of original Ordinance 1 that was in the June 16 City Council meeting packet. Ordinance 1 is attached. As currently written, this standard applies to all common open space in multifamily, attached single-family and detached single-family developments. a. A minimum of 50 percent of the common open space must Surfacing. be covered in suitable surfaces for human use, such as lawn areas and recreational fields or courts. Up to 50 percent of the common open space may be covered by shrubs, mulch, and other grounds covers that do not provide suitable surfaces for human use if the area is usable for the intended residents, such as community gardens or a natural area with benches and walking paths. 2. Code Revisions There are three versions of the proposed section 18.4.4.070 Open Space attached to this report. Version 1: No changes to originally proposed draft This is the originally drafted 18.4.4.070, as it went to the City Council for the June 16, 2020 meeting. Version 2: Move surfacing standard to R-2 and R-3 zones Staff recommends that the proposed amendments to the open space standards are revised to address the concerns raised with the surfacing standard. Staff believes the existing surfacing standard was originally intended for multifamily housing developments to provide a flexible outdoor space for residents because private open space may be limited or not provided. In contrast, detached single-family subdivisions include larger individual lots and private yard areas simply due to lot coverage and setback requirements. Single-family subdivisions require more site area and therefore more common open space than multifamily housing developments with the same number of dwelling units (see table below). As a result, the area comprised of areas and recreational areas or will also be larger for a single-family subdivision. For example, the common open space required for a 10-unit single-family subdivision is almost four to six times the size of the area required for common open space in a multifamily housing development. Planning Action PA-L-2020-00008 Ashland Planning Division Staff Report Applicant: City of Ashland Page 3 of 10 R-2 Zone R-3 Zone R-1-5 Zone Total Area .75 Ac .50 Ac 2.3 Ac Required for 10 units Minimum Total 2,614 sq. ft. 1,742 sq. ft. 5,009 sq. ft. Open Space Minimum 1,307 sq. ft. 871 sq. ft. 5,009 sq. ft. Common Open Space Minimum Area 653 sq. ft. 436 sq. ft. 2,505 sq. ft. Suitable for Human Use Moving the surfacing standard to the subsection for the multifamily zones, 18.4.4.070.C.6 R-2 and R-3 zones, would retain a portion of the common open space as a usable area that essentially provides a shared yard space for multifamily housing developments. Staff recommends moving the surfacing standard to subsection18.4.4.070.C.6 so that the standard applies to new development in the multifamily zones and not to new development in the single-family zones. As discussed below, the surfacing standard currently applies to multifamily and attached single-family housing developments but does not apply to detached single-family developments (i.e., subdivisions). This would address concerns regarding the impact of expanded or new regulations since the surfacing standard currently and would continue to apply to multifamily housing developments. Version 3: Other Recommended Changes Three other issues were raised with the proposed section 18.4.4.070 Open Space and are incorporated into the attached Version 3. While the additional revisions detailed in the attached Version 3 are less significant, Staff believes the changes improve the proposed open space standards. Table 18.4.4.070.A: Concern that the second and third columns t o make it clear that the percentages are not additive. For the 18.3.9 Performance Standards Option row, the concern was that it might be interpreted to mean that 10 percent of open space was required rather than a total of 5 percent. 18.4.4.070.D. Private Open Space: Delete provision that allow o walkway and storage space to be counted as private open space (D.1.b) Planning Action PA-L-2020-00008 Ashland Planning Division Staff Report Applicant: City of Ashland Page 4 of 10 and instead increase required private open space area for ground-floor dwelling units to 60 square feet rather than 48 square feet (D.2). 18.4.4.070.C.4.b Fences and Walls: Suggested cross referencing in the o other section of code that outline fence requirements and multi-use path requirements. C. Current Standards and Applicability Chapter 18.4.2 Building Placement, Orientation, and Design, including the residential development standards in 18.4.2.030 and the current open space standards in 18.4.2.030.H, do not currently apply to developments of detached single-family homes. 18.4.2.020 Applicability A. Chapter 18.4.2 applies to residential, commercial, and manufacturing developments that are subject to chapter 18.5.2 Site Design Review. Note that some standards apply differently to developments located within Detailed Design Review, Downtown Design Review, and Historic Design Review overlays. 18.4.2.030 Residential Development B. Applicability. Except as otherwise required by an overlay zone or plan district, the following standards apply to residential development pursuant to section 18.5.2.020. See conceptual site plan of multi-family development in Figure 18.4.2.030. The residential development that is subject to Site Design Review includes multifamily development (i.e., more than one dwelling unit on a lot) and attached single family development. Detached single-family homes and related accessory structures are exempt from Site Design Review. See the highlighted sections of the code below. 18.5.2.020 Applicability Site Design Review is required for the following types of project proposals. Commercial, Industrial, Non-Residential, and Mixed Uses A. . Site Design Review applies to the following types of non-residential uses and project proposals, including proposals for commercial, industrial, and mixed-use projects, pursuant to section 18.5.2.030 Review Procedures. 1. New structures, additions, or expansions in C-1, E-1, HC, CM, and M-1 zones. 2. New non-residential structures or additions in any zone, including public buildings, schools, churches, and similar public and quasi-public uses in residential zones. 3. Mixed-use buildings and developments containing commercial and residential uses in a residential zoning district within the Pedestrian Place Overlay. Planning Action PA-L-2020-00008 Ashland Planning Division Staff Report Applicant: City of Ashland Page 5 of 10 4. Any exterior change, including installation of Public Art, to a structure which is listed on the National Register of Historic Places or to a contributing property within an Historic District on the National Register of Historic Places that requires a building permit. 5. Expansion of impervious surface area in excess of ten percent of the area of the site, or 1,000 square feet, whichever is less. 6. Expansion of any parking lot, relocation of parking spaces on a site, or any other change that alters or affects circulation onto an adjacent property or public right-of-way. 7. Any change of occupancy from a less intense to a more intensive occupancy, as defined in the building code, or an change in use that requires a greater number of parking spaces. 8. Any change in use of a lot from one general use category to another general use category, e.g., from residential to commercial, as defined in the zoning regulations of this ordinance. 9. Installation of mechanical equipment not fully enclosed in a structure and not otherwise exempt from site design review per section 18.5.2.020.C. 10. Installation of wireless communication facilities in accordance with section 18.4.10. Residential Uses B. . Site Design Review applies to the following types of residential uses and project proposals, pursuant to section 18.5.2.030 Review Procedures. 1. Two or more dwelling units on a lot in any zoning district, including the addition of an accessory residential unit, unless exempt from Site Design Review per subsection 18.2.3.040.A. 2. Construction of attached (common wall) single-family dwellings (e.g., townhomes, condominiums, rowhouses) in any zoning district. 3. Any exterior change, including installation of Public Art, to a structure individually listed on the National Register of Historic Places that requires a building permit. 4. Any change to off-street parking or landscaping in a residential development where such parking or landscaping is provided in common area (e.g., shared parking) and is approved pursuant to chapter 18.3.9 Performance Standards Option. 5. Any change in use that requires a greater number of parking spaces. 6. Installation of mechanical equipment not fully enclosed in a structure and not otherwise exempt from Site Design Review per subsection 18.5.2.020.C. 7. Installation of wireless communication facilities (e.g., accessory to a Planning Action PA-L-2020-00008 Ashland Planning Division Staff Report Applicant: City of Ashland Page 6 of 10 residential use), in accordance with section 18.4.10. C.Exempt From Site Design Review . The following types of uses and projects are exempt from Site Design Review. 1. Detached single-family dwellings and associated accessory structures and uses. 2. Accessory residential units meeting the requirements of subsection 18.2.3.040.A. 3. Land divisions and property line adjustments, which are subject to review under chapter 18.5.3. 4. The following mechanical equipment. a. Private, non-commercial radio and television antennas not exceeding a height of 70 feet above grade or 30 feet above an existing structure, whichever height is greater, and provided no part of such antenna shall be within the setback yards required by this ordinance. A building permit shall be required for any antenna mast or tower over 50 feet above grade or 30 feet above an existing structure when the same is constructed on the roof of the structure. b. Not more than three parabolic disc antennas, each under one meter in diameter, on any one lot or dwelling unit. c. Roof-mounted solar collection devices in all zones, with the exception of E-1 and C-1 zoned properties located within designated historic districts. The devices shall comply with solar setback standards described in chapter 18.4.8 and the height standards of the respective zoning district. d. Roof-mounted solar collection devices on E-1 and C-1 zoned properties located within designated historic districts if the footprint of the structure is not increased, the plane of the system is parallel to the slope of the roof and does not extend above the peak height of the roof or existing parapets, or is otherwise not visible from a public right- of-way. The devices shall comply with solar setback standards described in chapter 18.4.8 and height requirements of the respective zoning district. e. Installation of mechanical equipment other than those exempted in 18.5.2.020.C.3, subsections a d, above, and which is not visible from a public right-of-way, except alleys, or adjacent residentially zoned property and consistent with other provisions of this ordinance, including solar access in chapter 18.4.8, and noise and setback requirements of subsection 18.2.4.020.B. See also, screening standards for mechanical equipment in subsection 18.4.4.030.G.4. f. Routine maintenance and replacement of existing mechanical equipment in all zones. Planning Action PA-L-2020-00008 Ashland Planning Division Staff Report Applicant: City of Ashland Page 7 of 10 D. Legislative History The exclusion of land divisions and related single-family developments from the Site Design Standards was included in the chapter when it was original adopted in 1982 (Ord. 2228). This original code language, see below, was in place from 1982 until 2008. SECTION 18.72.030 Application. Site Design and use standards shall apply to all zones of the city and shall apply to all development indicated in this Chapter, except for those developments which are regulated by the Subdivisions (18.80), the Partitioning (18.76), Manufactured Housing (18.84) and Performance Standards (18.88). In 2008, the applicability standards were revised and identified specific types of residential development that were subject to Site Design Review (Ord. 2951). See the attached section of Ord. 2951. The current open space standards in 18.4.2.030, including the existing surfacing standards, were adopted in 1992 (Ord. 2690). E. Consistency with City Goals and Policies One of the concerns raised with the existing and proposed surfacing standards, which tend to result in lawn or occasionally paved areas, is the consistency with adopted City policies on water conservation and climate change. The policies listed below are from adopted City of Ashland documents. Ashland Comprehensive Plan XI. Energy, Air and Water Conservation 7.c. Irrigation is a large water usage and it also can be accomplished with lower quality water. Therefore, water conservation efforts shall be directed toward an overall reduction of water usage (conservation) and substitution of lower quality water for outdoor irritation. Climate and Energy Action Plan (CEAP) BE-5-1. Encourage heat-tolerant building approaches such as cool roofs and passive cooling. NS-2-1. Evaluate the value and potential for incentives for practices that reduce use of potable water for non-potable purposes and recharge ground water. NS-2-2. Explore water-efficient technologies on irrigation systems and consider requiring them during permitting. NS-2-3. Expand water conservation outreach and incentive programs for residents and businesses PHSW-1-1. Promote the expansion of tree canopy in urban heat islands or areas that need air conditioning such as schools. PHSW-3-2. Identify and minimize potential urban heat impacts. Planning Action PA-L-2020-00008 Ashland Planning Division Staff Report Applicant: City of Ashland Page 8 of 10 The current standard often results in the common open space developed as lawn which requires higher amount of water than other landscaping alternatives. The proposed A minimum of 50 percent of the common open space must be standard requires covered in suitable surfaces for human use, such as lawn areas and recreational fields or courts. Staff believes it is safe to assume that the proposed standard would also result in lawn areas and possibly paved courts. Paved areas are a concern because of the contribution to increased temperatures or heat islands. The following excerpt regarding the impacts of high temperatures is from the City of adopted Climate Energy and Action Plan (CEAP). Climate change is expected to increase the number and severity of heat waves in Ashland, putting vulnerable people at greater risk of heat-related health complications and reducing the quality of life for all Ashland residents. The City can take steps to minimize the risks presented by heat waves by identifying where heat-related impacts will be most pronounced and working to encourage and/ or directly implement strategies for offsetting these impacts, such as by designating cooling centers through the city, improving cooling systems in schools and senior centers, and incentivizing cooling strategies such as cool roofs/pavements and expanded tree canopy. II. Procedural 18.5.9.020 Applicability and Review Procedure Applications for Plan Amendments and Zone Changes are as follows: B. Type III. It may be necessary from time to time to make legislative amendments in order to conform with the Comprehensive Plan or to meet other changes in circumstances or conditions. The Type III procedure applies to the creation, revision, or large-scale implementation of public policy requiring City Council approval and enactment of an ordinance; this includes adoption of regulations, zone changes for large areas, zone changes requiring comprehensive plan amendment, comprehensive plan map or text amendment, annexations (see chapter 18.5.8 for annexation information), and urban growth boundary amendments. The following planning actions shall be subject to the Type III procedure. 1. Zone changes or amendments to the Zoning Map or other official maps, except where minor amendments or corrections may be processed through the Type II procedure pursuant to subsection 18.5.9.020.A, above. 2. Comprehensive Plan changes, including text and map changes or changes to other official maps. 3. Land Use Ordinance amendments. 4. Urban Growth Boundary amendments. Planning Action PA-L-2020-00008 Ashland Planning Division Staff Report Applicant: City of Ashland Page 9 of 10 III. Conclusions and Recommendations Staff recommends revising the proposed amendments to the open space standards to address the concerns raised with the surfacing standard. Staff believes the existing surfacing standard was originally intended for multifamily housing developments to provide a flexible outdoor space for residents because private open space may be limited or not provided. In contrast, detached single-family subdivisions include larger individual lots and private yard areas simply due to lot coverage and setback requirements. Moving the surfacing standard to subsection 18.4.4.070.C.6 R-2 and R-3 Zones would retain a portion of the common open space for multifamily developments as a usable area that essentially provides a shared yard space. Single-family subdivisions require more site area and therefore more common open space than multifamily housing developments with the same number of dwelling units. As a result, the area comprised of areas and recreational areas or will also be larger for a single-family subdivision. For example, the common open space required for a 10-unit single-family subdivision is almost four to six times the size of the area required for common open space in a multifamily housing development. Staff recommends moving the surfacing standard to subsection18.4.4.070.C.6 so that the standard applies to new development in the multifamily zones and not to new development in the single-family zones. The surfacing standard currently applies to multifamily and attached single- family housing developments but does not apply to detached single-family developments (i.e., subdivisions). This would address concerns regarding the impact of expanded or new regulations since the surfacing standard currently and would continue to apply to multifamily housing developments. While the additional revisions detailed in the attached Version 3 are less significant, Staff believes the changes improve the proposed open space standards. Staff will forward the Planning recommendation to the City Council for a public hearing. The draft amendments to the open space standards and accompanying terminology corrections are tentatively scheduled for a public hearing and first reading at the September 22, 2020 City Council meeting. Planning Action PA-L-2020-00008 Ashland Planning Division Staff Report Applicant: City of Ashland Page 10 of 10 ORDINANCE NO. 1 2 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTERS 18.2.5, 18.3.9, 18.4.2, 18.4.4 AND 18.6 OF THE ASHLAND LAND USE ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE 3 OPEN SPACE STANDARDS 4 5 Annotated to show deletions and additions to the Ashland Municipal Code sections being 6 bold lined throughbold underlined. modified. Deletions are , and additions are 7 8 WHEREAS, Article 2. Section 1 of the Ashland City Charter provides: 9 Powers of the City The City shall have all powers which the constitutions, statutes, and common 10 law of the United States and of this State expressly or impliedly grant or allow municipalities, as 11 fully as though this Charter specifically enumerated each of those powers, as well as all powers 12 not inconsistent with the foregoing; and, in addition thereto, shall possess all powers hereinafter 13 specifically granted. All the authority thereof shall have perpetual succession. 14 15 WHEREAS, the above referenced grant of power has been interpreted as affording all 16 legislative powers home rule constitutional provisions reserved to Oregon Cities. City of 17 20 Or. App. 293; 18 531 P 2d 730, 734 (1975); and 19 20 WHEREAS , the City of Ashland Planning Commission considered the above-referenced 21 recommended amendments to the Ashland Comprehensive Plan at a duly advertised public 22 hearings on April 28, 2020 and May 26, 2020, and following deliberations, recommended 23 approval of the amendments by a vote of 6-0; and 24 25 WHEREAS , the City Council of the City of Ashland conducted a duly advertised public hearing 26 on the above-referenced amendments on June 16, 2020; and 27 28 WHEREAS , the City Council of the City of Ashland, following the close of the public hearing 29 and record, deliberated and conducted first and second readings approving adoption of the 30 Ordinance in accordance with Article 10 of the Ashland City Charter; and 119 ORDINANCE NO. # Page of WHEREAS 1 , the City Council of the City of Ashland has determined that in order to protect and 2 benefit the health, safety and welfare of existing and future residents of the City, it is necessary 3 to amend the Ashland Land Use Ordinance in the manner proposed, that an adequate factual base 4 exists for the amendments, the amendments are consistent with the Ashland Comprehensive Plan 5 and that such amendments are fully supported by the record of this proceeding. 6 THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: 7 SECTION 1. 8 Ashland Municipal Code Title 18 Land Use is hereby amended as follows. 9 SECTION 2. 10 Section 18.2.5.080 \[Residential Density Calculation in R-2 and R-3 Zones - Standards for Residential Zones\] of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance is hereby amended to read 11 as follows: 12 18.2.5.080 Residential Density Calculation in R-2 and R-3 Zones 13 A. Density Standard. Except density gained through bonus points under section 18.2.5.080 or and PSO Overlay 14 chapter 18.3.9 Performance Standards Option , development density in the R-2 and R-3 zones shall not exceed the densities established by this section. 15 B. Density Calculation. 16 1. Except as specified in the minimum lot area dimensions below, the density in R-2 an R-3 17 zones shall be computed by dividing the total number of dwelling units by the acreage of the project, including land dedicated to the public, and subject to the exceptions below. 18 2. Units less than 500 square feet of gross habitable area shall count as 0.75 units for the 19 purposes of density calculations. 20 3. Accessory residential units are not required to meet the density or minimum lot area 21 requirements of this section. See section 18.2.3.040 for accessory residential unit standards. 22 C.Minimum Density. 23 1. The minimum density shall be 80 percent of the calculated base density. 24 2. Exceptions to minimum density standards. The following lots are totally or partially 25 exempt from minimum density standards. 26 a. Lots less than 10,000 sq. ft. in existence prior to the effective date of this ordinance. 27 b. Lots located within any Historic District designated within the Ashland Municipal 28 Code. c. Lots with existing or proposed conditional uses may be exempt for that portion of the 29 property that is subject to the conditional use for calculations of the minimum base 30 density standard. prior to d. Where a lot is occupied by a single-family residence January 9, 2005 (Ord. 219 ORDINANCE NO. # Page of 1 2914), the single-family residence may be enlarged or reconstructed without being subject to the minimum base density standard. 2 e. In the event that a fire or natural hazard destroys a single-family residence, such 3 residence may be replaced without being subject to the minimum base density standard. 4 f. Where floodplains, streams, land drainages, wetlands, and/or steep slopes exist 5 upon the lot an exception to minimum density requirements may be obtained to 6 better meet the standards of chapter 18.3.10 Physical and Environmental Overlay Constraints . 7 g. A lot that is nonconforming in minimum density may not move further out of 8 conformance with the minimum density standard. However, units may be added to 9 the lot which bring the lot closer to conformance without coming all the way into conformance provided it is demonstrated that the minimum density will not be 10 precluded. 11 D.Base Densities and Minimum Lot Dimensions. 12 1. R-2 Zone. Base density for the R-2 zone shall meet the following standards: 13 a. Minimum lot area for one unit shall be 5,000 square feet, except as allowed in 14 section 18.2.3.040 for accessory residential units. 15 b. Minimum lot area for two units shall be 7,000 square feet. 16 c. Minimum lot area for three units shall be 9,000 square feet, except that the residential density bonus in subsection 18.2.5.080.F, below, may be used to increase 17 density of lots greater than 8,000 square feet up to three units. 18 d. For more than three units, the base density shall be 13.5 dwelling units per acre. The 19 permitted base density shall be increased by the percentage gained through the residential density bonus is subsection 18.2.5.080.F. 20 2. R-3 Zone. Base density for the R-3 zone shall meet the following standards: 21 a. Minimum lot area for one unit shall be 5,000 square feet, except as allowed in 22 section 18.2.3.040 for accessory residential units. 23 b. Minimum lot area for two units shall be 6,500 square feet. 24 c. Minimum lot area for three units shall be 8,000 square feet. 25 d. For more than three units, the base density shall be 20 dwelling units per acre. The permitted base density shall be increased by the percentage gained through the 26 residential density bonus is subsection 18.2.5.080.F, below. 27 E. Exceptions. An accessory residential unit is not required to meet density or minimum lot 28 area requirements per section 18.2.3.040. 29 F. Residential Density Bonus. 30 1. Density Bonus Points Authorized. Except as allowed under chapter 18.3.9 Performance and PSO Overlay Standards Option, the permitted base density shall be increased only pursuant to this section. 319 ORDINANCE NO. # Page of Density 1 2. Maximum Bonus Points. The total maximum bonus permitted shall be 60 percent. 2 Density 3. Bonus Point Criteria. The following bonuses shall be awarded: 3 a. Conservation Housing. The maximum bonus for conservation housing is 15 percent. 4 One hundred percent of the homes or residential units approved for development, density after bonus point calculations, shall meet the minimum requirements for 5 certification as an Earth Advantage home, as approved by the Conservation Division 6 -6. 7 b. Common OpenOutdoor Recreation Space. The maximum bonus for provision of common openoutdoor recreationabove minimum requirement space 8 established by this ordinanceA one percent bonus shall be is ten percent. 9 awarded for each one percent of the total project area in common open space in excess of any common or private open space required by section 18.4.4.070 10 and this ordinance. The common open space shall meet the standards in 11 section 18.4.4.070. The purpose of the density bonus for outdoor recreational space is to permit areas that could otherwise be developed as a recreational 12 amenity. It is not the purpose of this provision to permit density bonuses for 13 incidental open spaces that have no realistic use by project residents on a day-to-day basis. One percent increased density bonus for each percent of the 14 project dedicated to outdoor recreation space beyond the minimum 15 requirement of this ordinance. 16 c. The maximum bonus for provision of major Major Recreational Facilities. recreational facilities is ten percent. Density bonus points shall be awarded for 17 the provision of major recreational facilities, such as tennis courts, swimming 18 pools, playgrounds, or similar facilities. For each one percent of the total project cost devoted to recreational facilities, a six percent density bonus shall 19 be awarded to a maximum of ten percent. Total project cost shall be defined as 20 the estimated sale price or value of each residential unit times the total number of units in the project. Estimated value shall include the total market value for 21 the structure and land. A qualified architect or engineer using current costs of 22 recreational facilities shall estimate the cost of the recreational facility for City review and approval. 23 dc . Affordable Housing. The maximum bonus for affordable housing is 35 percent. 24 Developments shall receive a density bonus of two units for each affordable housing 25 unit provided. Affordable housing bonus shall be for residential units that are guaranteed affordable in accord with the standards of section 18.2.5.050. 26 27 SECTION 3. Section 18.3.9.050 \[Performance Standards for Residential Developments - 28 Performance Standards Option and PSO Overlay\] of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance is hereby 29 amended as follows: 30 18.3.9.050 Performance Standards for Residential Developments A. Base Densities. The density of the development shall not exceed the density established 419 ORDINANCE NO. # Page of 1 by this section. The density shall be computed by dividing the total number of dwelling units by the acreage of the project, including land dedicated to the public. Fractional portions of 2 the final answer, after bonus point calculations, shall not apply towards the total density. 3 Accessory residential units are not required to meet the density requirements of this chapter in accordance with section 18.2.3.040. 4 5 1. The base density, for purposes of determining density bonuses allowed under this 6 section, for developments other than cottage housing, is as provided in Table 18.3.9.050. 7 8 Table 18.3.9.050.A.1 Base Densities for Determining Allowable 9 Density Bonus with Performance Standards Option 10 ZoneAllowable Density 11 (dwelling units per acre) 12 WR-2 0.30 du/acre 13 WR-2.5 0.24 du/acre WR-50.12 du/acre 14 WR-10 0.06 du/acre 15 WR-200.03 du/acre 16 RR-1 17 0.60 du/acre 18 RR-.5 1.2 du/acre 19 R-1-10 2.40 du/acre 20 R-1-7.5 3.60 du/acre 21 R-1-5 4.50 du/acre 22 R-1-3.5 7.2 du/acre 23 R-2 13.5 du/acre 24 R-320 du/acre 25 26 2. Cottage Housing. The base density for cottage housing developments, for purposes of 27 determining density bonuses, allowed under this section is as provided in Table 28 Cottage housing developments are not eligible for density bonuses 18.3.9.050.A.2. pursuant to subsection 18.3.9.050.B. 29 30 519 ORDINANCE NO. # Page of 1 2 Table 18.3.9.050.A.2 Base Densities for Determining Allowable Density Bonus with Performance Standards Option 3 Minimum 4 number of Maximum number Minimum lot size Maximum Maximum cottages per of cottages per (accommodates 5 ZonesCottage Floor Area cottage cottage housing minimum number DensityRatio (FAR) housing developmentof cottages) 6 development 7 1 cottage R-1-5, dwelling unit per 8 NN-1-5 3127,500 sq.ft.0.35 2,500 square NM-R-5 feet of lot area 9 1 cottage 10 R-1-7.5 dwelling unit per 31211,250 sq.ft.0.35 NM-R-1-7.53,750 square 11 feet of lot area 12 13 14 Common subject to this section 3. Open Space Required. All developments with a base common open space density of ten units or greater shall be required to provide 15 pursuant to section 18.4.4.070. a minimum of five percent of the total lot area in 16 Open Space; that area is not subject to bonus point calculations, however, density bonuses shall be awarded to open space in excess of the five percent required by 17 this subsection . 18 B. Density Bonus Point Calculations. The permitted base density shall be increased by the 19 density percentage gained through bonus points. In no case shall the density exceed that allowed under the Comprehensive Plan. The maximum density bonus permitted shall be 60 20 percent (base density x 1.6), pursuant to the following criteria. 21 1. Conservation Housing. A maximum 15 percent bonus is allowed. One-hundred percent 22 of the homes or residential units approved for development, after bonus point calculations, shall meet the minimum requirements for certification as an Earth 23 24 Earth Advantage program as adopted by resolution 2006-06. 25 Provision of 2. Common Open Space. A maximum ten percent bonus is allowed, pursuant to the following. 26 a. Purpose. Common open spaces may be provided in the form of natural areas, 27 wetlands, playgrounds, active or passive recreational areas, and similar areas in 28 All areas set aside for common open space may be common ownership. counted for base density, unless otherwise excluded by subsection 29 18.3.9.050.A.2. However, for the purposes of awarding density bonus points, the 30 Planning Commission shall consider whether or not the common open space is a significant amenity to project residents, and whether project residents will realistically interact withuse or enjoycommon the open space on a day-to-day 619 ORDINANCE NO. # Page of The purpose of the density bonus for common open space is to permit 1 basis. areas, which could otherwise be developed or sold as individual lots, to be 2 retained in their natural state or to be developed as a recreational amenity. It 3 is not the purpose of this provision to permit density bonuses for incidental open spaces that have no realistic use by project residents on a day-to-day 4 basis. Open space provided in cottage housing developments, meeting the 5 standards of section 18.2.3.090 Cottage Housing, is not eligible for density bonus points. 6 b. Standard. Developments with fewer than ten units that provide more than two 7 percent of the project area for common open space, or for developments of ten units 8 common or greater that provide more than five percent open space, a one percent bonus shall be awarded for each one percent of the total project area in common 9 in excess of any common open space required by section open space 10 18.4.4.070 and this ordinance. The common open space shall meet the standards in section 18.4.4.070. 11 3. Provision of Major Recreational Facilities. A maximum ten percent bonus is 12 allowed, pursuant to the following. 13 a. Points may be awarded for the provision of major recreational Purpose. facilities. 14 b. For each percent of total project cost devoted to recreational Standard. 15 facilities, a six percent density bonus may be awarded up to a maximum of ten 16 percent bonus. Total project cost shall be defined as the estimated sale price or value of each residential unit times the total number of units in the project. 17 Estimated value shall include the total market value for the structure and land. 18 A qualified architect or engineer shall prepare the cost of the recreational facility using current costs of recreational facilities. 19 c Major recreational facilities provided in cottage housing developments, 20 meeting the standards of section 18.2.3.090 Cottage Housing, are not eligible 21 for density bonus points. 22 43 . Affordable Housing. A maximum bonus of 35 percent is allowed. Developments shall receive a density bonus of two units for each affordable housing unit provided. 23 Affordable housing bonus shall be for residential units that are guaranteed affordable in 24 accordance with the standards of section 18.2.5.050 Affordable Housing Standards. 25 26 SECTION 4. Section 18.4.2.030 \[Residential Development Building Placement, Orientation, and Design\] of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance is hereby amended as follows: 27 28 18.4.2.030 Residential Development A. Purpose and Intent. For new multi-family residential developments, careful design 29 considerations must be made to assure that the development is compatible with the 30 surrounding neighborhood. For example, the use of earth tone colors and wood siding will blend a development into an area rather than causing contrast through the use of overwhelming colors and concrete block walls. 719 ORDINANCE NO. # Page of 1 1. Crime Prevention and Defensible Space. a. Parking Layout. Parking for residents should be located so that distances to 2 dwellings are minimized. However, avoid designs where parking areas are 3 immediately abutting dwelling units because there is little or no transition from public to private areas. Parking areas should be easily visible from adjacent areas and 4 windows. 5 b. Orientation of Windows. Windows should be located so that vulnerable areas can be 6 easily surveyed by residents. 7 c. Service and Laundry Areas. Service and laundry areas should be located so that they can be easily observed by others. Windows and lighting should be incorporated 8 to assure surveillance opportunities. Mail boxes should not be located in dark 9 alcoves out of sight. Barriers to police surveillance such as tall shrubs and fences should be avoided. 10 d. Hardware. Reliance solely upon security hardware in lieu of other alternatives is 11 discouraged. 12 e. Lighting. Site development should utilize lighting prudently. More lighting does not 13 necessarily mean better security. Lighting should be oriented so that areas vulnerable to crime are accented. 14 f. Landscaping. Plant materials such as high shrubs should be placed so that 15 surveillance of semi-public and semi-private areas is not blocked. Thorny shrubs will 16 discourage crime activity. Low shrubs and canopy trees will allow surveillance, hence, reduce the potential for crime. 17 B. Applicability. Except as otherwise required by an overlay zone or plan district, the following 18 standards apply to residential development pursuant to section 18.5.2.020. See conceptual 19 site plan of multi-family development in Figure 18.4.2.030. 20 1. Accessory Residential Units. Unless exempted from Site Design Review in 18.2.3.040.A, only the following standards in Chapter 18.4.2 apply to accessory residential units: 21 building orientation requirements in 18.4.2.030.C, garage requirements in 18.4.2.030.D, 22 and building materials in 18.4.2.030.E. If an accessory residential unit is located in the Historic District overlay, the standards in 18.4.2.050 also apply. See the Special Use 23 Standards for accessory residential units in section 18.2.3.040. 24 C. Building Orientation. Residential buildings that are subject to the provisions of this chapter 25 shall conform to all of the following standards. See also, solar orientation standards in section 18.4.8.050. 26 1. Building Orientation to Street. Dwelling units shall have their primary orientation 27 toward a street. Where residential buildings are located within 20 feet of a street, they 28 shall have a primary entrance opening toward the street and connected to the right-of- way via an approved walkway. 29 2. Limitation on Parking Between Primary Entrance and Street. Automobile circulation 30 or off-street parking is not allowed between the building and the street. Parking areas shall be located behind buildings, or on one or both sides. 819 ORDINANCE NO. # Page of 3. Build-to Line. 1 Where a new building is proposed in a zone that requires a build-to line or maximum front setback yard, except as otherwise required for clear vision at 2 intersections, the building shall comply with the build-to line standard. 3 D. Garages. The following standards apply to garages, carports, canopies, and other permanent and temporary structures used for parking or storing vehicles, including those 4 parking and vehicle storage structures accessory to detached single-family dwellings. The 5 standards a vehicle access to their homes with the public interest in maintaining safe and aesthetically 6 pleasing streetscapes. The standards therefore promote pedestrian safety and visibility of 7 public ways, while addressing aesthetic concerns associated with street-facing garages. For 8 the purpose of this subsection, a garage opening is considered to be facing a street where the opening is parallel to or within 45 degrees of the street right-of-way line. 9 1. Alleys and Shared Drives. Where a lot abuts a rear or side alley, or a shared driveway, 10 including flag drives, the garage or carport opening(s) for that dwelling shall orient to the alley or shared drive, as applicable, and not a street. 11 2. Setback for Garage Opening Facing Street. The minimum setback for a garage (or 12 carport) opening facing a street is 20 feet. This provision does not apply to alleys. 13 E. Building Materials. Building materials and paint colors should be compatible with the 14 surrounding area. Very bright primary or neon-type paint colors, which attract attention to the building or use, are unacceptable. 15 F. Streetscape. One street tree chosen from the street tree list shall be placed for each 30 feet 16 of frontage for that portion of the development fronting the street pursuant to subsection 17 18.4.4.030.E. 18 G. Landscaping and Recycle/Refuse Disposal Areas. Landscaping and recycle/refuse disposal areas shall be provided pursuant to chapter 18.4.4. 19 H. Open Space.Residential developments that are subject to the provisions of this 20 chapter shall conform to all of the following standards. Common and/or private open 21 space are required to be provided pursuant to section 18.4.4.070. 22 1. Recreation Area. An area equal to at least eight percent of the lot area shall be dedicated to open space for recreational use by the tenants of the development. 23 2. Surfacing. Areas covered by shrubs, bark mulch, and other ground covers that do 24 not provide suitable surface for human use may not be counted towards this 25 requirement. 26 3. Decks and Patios.Decks, patios, and similar areas are eligible for open space. 27 4. Play Areas. Play areas for children are required for projects of greater than 20 units that are designed to include families. Play areas are eligible for open space. 28 29 30 919 ORDINANCE NO. # Page of 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Figure 18.4.2.030 18 Multi-Family Conceptual Site Design 19 20 SECTION 5. Section 18.4.4.020 \[Applicability Landscaping, Lighting, and Screening\] of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance is hereby amended to read as follows: 21 22 18.4.4.020 Applicability 23 The requirements of chapter 18.4.4 apply, as follows. 24 A. Landscaping and Screening. Section 18.4.4.030 establishes design standards for landscaping and screening, and applies to residential, commercial, and manufacturing 25 developments that are subject to chapter 18.5.2 Site Design Review. 26 B. Recycling and Refuse. Section 18.4.4.040 establishes design standards for recycle and 27 refuse disposal areas, and applies to residential, commercial, and manufacturing developments that are subject to chapter 18.5.2 Site Design Review. 28 C. Outdoor Lighting. Section 18.4.4.050 establishes standards for outdoor lighting, and 29 applies to all new outdoor lighting installed or replaced after \[effective date\]. 30 D. Fences and Walls. Section 18.4.4.060 establishes design standards for fences and walls. This section applies where a fence or wall is erected, extended, or otherwise altered; it also 1019 ORDINANCE NO. # Page of 1 applies to hedges and screen planting and situations where this ordinance requires screening or buffering. 2 E.Open Space. Section 18.4.4.070 establishes standards for open space, and applies to 3 residential developments that are subject to chapter 18.5.2 Site Design Review and/or 18.3.9 Performance Standards Option and PSO Overlay. Certain sections of this 4 ordinance require common and/or private open space as part of review under chapter 5 18.5.2. Site Design Review or chapter 18.3.9 Performance Standards Option and PSO Overlay. Certain other sections allow common open space to be provided in order to 6 obtain density bonuses. All those section reference 18.4.4.070, which establishes 7 standards for common and private open space. 8 EF. Exceptions and Variances. Requests to depart from the landscaping and screening requirements in section 18.4.4.030, recycling and refuse requirements in 18.4.4.040, and 9 outdoor lighting in section 18.4.4.050 are subject to subsection 18.5.2.050.E Exception to 10 the Site Development and Design Standards. Requests to depart from the fence and wall requirements in section 18.4.4.060 are subject to chapter 18.5.5 Variances. 11 12 SECTION 6. Section 18.4.4.070 Open Space \[Landscaping, Lighting, and Screening\] is added 13 to the Ashland Land Use Ordinance as follows. 14 18.4.4.070 Open Space 15 A. Required Area. Table 18.4.4.070.A contains the minimum areas when common or private open space is required by this ordinance. See definition of open space in part 16 18-6. 17 18 Table 18.4.4.070.A Minimum Area Required in Common or Private Open Space 19 20 Required Planning Minimum Area Minimum Area Open Space Density Bonus ActionRequired for Open Required for Requirement May Available for 21 SpaceCommon Open Be Met by Common Open SpaceCombining Space in Excess of 22 Common and Base Requirement Private Open 23 Spaces 24 4 percent of total lot area for 25 18.5.2 Site Design 8 percent of total After 8 percent of developments with yes Reviewlot areatotal lot area is met a base density of 26 10 units or more 27 After 5 percent of total lot area is met 28 5 percent of total 5 percent of total for developments 18.3.9 lot area for lot area for with a based density 29 Performance developments with developments with noof 10 units or more Standards Option a base density of a base density of 30 and PSO Overlay 10 units or more10 units or moreAfter 2 percent of total lot area for developments with 1119 ORDINANCE NO. # Page of 1 Table 18.4.4.070.A Minimum Area Required in Common or Private Open Space 2 Required Planning Minimum Area Minimum Area Open Space Density Bonus 3 ActionRequired for Open Required for Requirement May Available for SpaceCommon Open Be Met by Common Open 4 SpaceCombining Space in Excess of Common and Base Requirement 5 Private Open Spaces 6 less than 10 units 7 8 9 10 11 12 18.5.2 Site Design 4 percent of total 13 Review and 18.3.9 lot area for 8 percent of total After 8 percent of Performance developments with yes lot areatotal lot area is met 14 Standards Option a base density of and PSO Overlay10 units or more 15 16 B. General Standards. 17 1. Common and Private Open Space. For developments that are subject to chapter 18 18.5.2 Site Design Review, the required open space area may be met by combining 19 common and private open spaces meeting the requirements of this section. 20 2. Density Calculation. All areas set aside for open space shall be counted for base density. The required open space is not subject to bonus point calculations. 21 3. Utilities. Areas occupied by utility vaults and pedestals shall not be counted in the 22 required open space area. 23 4. Timing. 24 a. Common Open Space. Common open space shall be constructed and landscaped prior to submission of the final plat or issuance of a building 25 permit, whichever is later. The City may approve a final plat or building permit 26 prior to completion of required common open space improvements if the 27 applicant provides a bond by a surety authorized to do business in the State of Oregon, irrevocable letter of credit from a surety or financial institution 28 acceptable to the City, cash, or other form of security acceptable to the City. 29 Phased developments shall meet the requirements of subsection 18.3.9.040.A.4. 30 b. Private Open Space. Private open space shall be constructed and landscaped prior to final occupancy of the respective dwelling unit. 1219 ORDINANCE NO. # Page of 5. Ownership and Maintenance.Common open space shall be set aside as common 1 area for the use of residents of the development. Maintenance of common open 2 space shall be the responsibility of the property owner(s) or by an association of 3 owners (i.e., homeowners association). C. Common Open Space. Common open space shall meet the following standards. See 4 definition of common open space in part 18-6. 5 1. Dimensional Standards. Common open space shall have no dimension that is less 6 than 20 feet and a minimum area of 400 square feet, except as described below. 7 a. Walkways and multi-use paths shall contribute Pedestrian Connections. toward meeting the required common open space area when at least one 8 common open space is provided that meets the dimensional standards in 9 subsection 18.4.4.070.C.1, above. Pedestrian connections may be located within a required buffer or perimeter yard area. Sidewalks in the public right- 10 of-way (i.e., public street) and walkways providing access to individual units 11 may not be counted towards this requirement. 12 b. Common open space may include areas that provide for the Natural Features. preservation or enhancement of natural features that meet the requirements of 13 this section and the definition of common open space. See definition of 14 common open space in part 18-6. Natural features located in common open space shall be counted toward meeting common open space requirements. 15 Natural features may be located within a required buffer or perimeter yard area. 16 2. Location. Common open space shall not be located within a required yard 17 abutting a street, except for pedestrian connections and natural features as provided in subsection 18.4.4.070.C.1, above. 18 3. Slope.ommon open space designed for active use, such as lawn and picnic C 19 areas, shall be located on slopes less than five percent, except for areas regulated 20 by the Building Code (e.g., walkways). Natural areas designed for passive use, such as riparian corridors and wetlands, may be located on slopes greater than 21 five percent. 22 4.Improvements.The common open space shall contain one or more of the 23 following: outdoor recreational area or facilities, lawn and picnic areas, community gardens, natural area with benches, seating areas, walking paths, or 24 similar outdoor amenities as appropriate for the intended residents. 25 a. A minimum of 50 percent of the common open space must be Surfacing. 26 covered in suitable surfaces for human use, such as lawn areas and recreational fields or courts. Up to 50 percent of the common open space may 27 be covered by shrubs, mulch, and other grounds covers that do not provide 28 suitable surfaces for human use if the area is usable for the intended residents, such as community gardens or a natural area with benches and 29 walking paths. 30 b. Common open space may include structures and outdoor furniture Structures. typically associated with outdoor recreation such as decks, gazebos, arbors, 1319 ORDINANCE NO. # Page of benches, and tables. Structures located in common open space shall be 1 unenclosed and uninhabitable. Unenclosed for the purpose of this subsection 2 means 50 percent or more of the walls are 42 inches in height or less, but the 3 structure may be covered. c. Fences, walls, hedges, and screen planting that are located Fences and Walls. 4 on the perimeter of common open space shall not exceed four feet in height, 5 except that fences in front yards and on the perimeter of the development shall meet the fence height requirements of section 18.4.4.060. This requirement 6 shall not apply to fences located on properties adjoining but not located within 7 a proposed development. See section 18.4.4.060 Fencing and Walls for fence 8 permit and design standard requirements. d. Common open space shall be landscaped in accordance with Landscaping. 9 section 18.4.4.030 Landscaping and Screening. 10 6. R-2 and R-3 Zones. In addition to the standards in subsection 18.4.4.070.C, above, 11 common open space in the R-2 and R-3 zones shall meet the following requirements. 12 a. Play areas for children are required for projects of greater than 20 Play Areas. 13 units that are designed to include families. Play areas are eligible for common 14 open space. 15 b. A credit of up to 50 percent for common open Credit for Proximity to a Park. space may be granted when the development is located within one-eighth of a 16 mile walking distance of an existing public park. Distance from the 17 development to the park shall be measured from the lot line via a sidewalk, multi-use path or pedestrian way located in a public right-of-way or public 18 pedestrian easement. 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 1419 ORDINANCE NO. # Page of 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Figure 18.4.4.070.C 22 Common Open Space 23 D. Private Open Space Private open space that is provided to meet the minimum . required open space area in 18.4.4.070.A shall meet the following standards. See 24 definition of private open space in part 18-6. 25 1Eligible Spaces.Decks, patios, porches, balconies, side and rear yards, and . 26 similar areas are eligible for private open space. 27 a. Private open space shall be directly accessible by a door from the Access. interior of the individual dwelling unit served by the space. 28 b. The minimum area required for private open Walkways and Storage Space. 29 space shall not include area for ingress and egress to a ground-floor dwelling unit (e.g., walkway to dwelling unit door) or storage space 30 (storage or bicycle rack). The ingress and egress area shall be measured as 36 inches in width and the length of the pedestrian route. 1519 ORDINANCE NO. # Page of 2. Ground-Floor Dwelling Units.Decks, patios, porches, or yards shall be at least six 1 feet deep and measuring at least 48 square feet. Ground-floor private open space 2 shall not be located within 12 feet of recycling and refuse disposal areas. See 3 definition of ground-floor dwelling unit in part 18-6. 3. Upper-Floor Dwelling Units. Balconies shall be at least six feet deep and 4 measuring at least 48 square feet. See definition of upper-floor dwelling unit in 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Figure 18.4.4070.D 27 Private Open Space 28 SECTION 7. Section 18.6.1.030 \[Definitions Definitions\] of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance is hereby amended to read as follows: 29 30 Buildable Area. That portion of an existing or proposed lot that can be built upon. 1619 ORDINANCE NO. # Page of Common Areaby an association of owners or permanently designated 1 . Land jointly owned for the use of all residents of a development tothat sshared site facilities and include 2 amenities such as streets, driveways, , loading open space, landscaping, parking 3 areasor recreation, recycling and refuse disposal areas, and storage structures(e. g., may be managed by a homeowners' association) . 4 5 Ground-Floor Dwelling Unit.A residential unit with the entrance, front or rear, that is 6 within five feet of the finished grade. The distance to finished grade is measured vertically at a right angle from the doorsill to the finished grade. 7 8 Open Space.A common area designated on the final plans of the development, 9 permanently set aside for the common use of the residents of the development. Open 10 space area is landscaped and/or left with a natural vegetation cover, and does not include thoroughfares, parking areas, or improvements other than recreational 11 facilities. Land or water with its surface predominately open to the sky or 12 predominantly undeveloped unless otherwise specified, that is designated or set aside to serve the purpose of providing park and recreation activities, conserving 13 natural resources, collecting and treating storm water, providing amenity space for 14 private developments, or creating a pattern of development. Open space does not thoroughfares, parking areas or improvements other than recreational include 15 facilities areas such as streets, driveways, parking, loading areas, recycling and 16 refuse disposal areas, and storage structures . 17 1. Common Open Space. An area for the use or enjoyment of all residents of a development (e.g., multifamily dwelling units) or subdivision such as recreational 18 areas or facilities, lawn and picnic areas, community gardens, and natural areas 19 with benches, seating areas, or walking paths. 20 2. Private Open Space. An area intended for private outdoor use by residents of an individual dwelling unit. Private open space includes decks, patios, porches, 21 balconies, side and rear yards, and similar areas. 22 3. Public Open Space or Park. An area owned or managed by a public or private 23 agency and maintained for the use and enjoyment of the general public. Examples of public open space include public parks and recreation facilities, trail easements 24 and systems, nature preserves, public plazas, and other public outdoor meeting 25 areas. 26 27 Park. See definition of Public Open Space. 28 29 Play Area. A piece of land specifically designed for and equipped to enable children to play outdoors. 30 Upper-Floor Dwelling Unit.A residential unit with the entrance, front or rear, that is more 1719 ORDINANCE NO. # Page of than five feet above the finished grade. The distance from finished grade is measured 1 vertically at a right angle from finished grade to the doorsill. 2 3 Unbuildable Area. All areas outside of building envelopes and within open space. That 4 portion of an existing or proposed lot that building upon is restricted by regulations. Unbuildable area includes but is not limited to required yards, easements, and Flood 5 Plain Corridor, Hillside, and Severe Constraints Lands as classified in section 6 18.3.10.060. For the purposes of implementing chapter 18.4.8 Solar Access, unbuildable area does not include a required solar setback area. 7 8 Yard.open space onoutdoor area of , except as An a lot which is unobstructed by a structure 9 allowed in section 18.2.4.050 Yard Requirements and General Exceptions , and 10 measured from a lot line to the nearest point of a building. May also be an area defined by required setbacks (e.g., between a building or structure and nearest property line). 11 Yard, Front. 4. A yard between side lot lines and measured horizontally at right angles to 12 the front lot line from the front lot line to the nearest point of the building. 13 Yard, Side.nopen spaceyard 5. A between the front and rear yards measured 14 horizontally and at right angles from the side lot line to the nearest point of the building. 15 Yard, Rear. 6. A yard between side lot lines and measured horizontally at right angles to the rear yard line from the rear yard line to the nearest point of the building. 16 17 SECTION 8. Codification. In preparing this ordinance for publication and distribution, the City 18 Recorder shall not alter the sense, meaning, effect, or substance of the ordinance, but within such 19 limitations, may: 20 (a) Renumber sections and parts of sections of the ordinance; 21 (b) Rearrange sections; 22 (c) Change reference numbers to agree with renumbered chapters, sections or other parts; 23 (d) Delete references to repealed sections; 24 (e) Substitute the proper subsection, section, or chapter numbers; 25 (f) Change capitalization and spelling for the purpose of uniformity; 26 (g) Add headings for purposes of grouping like sections together for ease of reference; and 27 (h) Correct manifest clerical, grammatical, or typographical errors. 28 29 SECTION 9.Severability. Each section of this ordinance, and any part thereof, is severable, 30 and if any part of this ordinance is held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of this ordinance shall remain in full force and effect. 1819 ORDINANCE NO. # Page of 1 2 The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X, Section 2(C) 3 of the City Charter on the _____day of ____________, 2020, and duly PASSED and ADOPTED 4 this ____ day of _____________, 2020 . 5 6 _______________________________ Melissa Huhtala, City Recorder 7 8 SIGNED and APPROVED this day of ____________, 2020. 9 10 ________________________ 11 John Stromberg, Mayor 12 Reviewed as to form: 13 14 ______________________________ 15 David H. Lohman, City Attorney 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 1919 ORDINANCE NO. # Page of Version1:NoChangestoOriginallyProposedDraft 18.4.4.070OpenSpace A.Required Area. Table 18.4.4.070.A contains the minimum areas when common or private open space is required by this ordinance.See definition of open space in part 18-6. Table18.4.4.070.A–MinimumAreaRequiredinCommonorPrivateOpenSpace RequiredPlanningMinimumAreaMinimumAreaOpenSpaceDensityBonus ActionRequiredforOpenRequiredforRequirementMayAvailablefor SpaceCommonOpenBeMetbyCommonOpen SpaceCombiningSpaceinExcessof CommonandBaseRequirement PrivateOpen Spaces 4percentoftotallot areafor 18.5.2SiteDesign8percentoftotallotAfter8percentof developmentswithayes Reviewareatotallotareaismet basedensityof10 unitsormore After5percentof totallotareaismet fordevelopmentswith 5percentoftotallot5percentoftotallot abaseddensityof10 18.3.9Performance areaforareafor unitsormore StandardsOptiondevelopmentswithadevelopmentswithano andPSOOverlaybasedensityof10basedensityof10 After2percentof unitsormoreunitsormore totallotareafor developmentswith lessthan10units 18.5.2SiteDesign4percentoftotallot Reviewand18.3.9 areafor 8percentoftotallotAfter8percentof Performancedevelopmentswithayes areatotallotareaismet StandardsOptionbasedensityof10 andPSOOverlayunitsormore B.General Standards. 1.CommonandPrivateOpenSpace.Fordevelopmentsthataresubjecttochapter18.5.2 SiteDesignReview,therequiredopenspaceareamaybemetbycombiningcommon andprivateopenspacesmeetingtherequirementsofthissection. 2.DensityCalculation.Allareassetasideforopenspaceshallbecountedforbase density.Therequiredopenspaceisnotsubjecttobonuspointcalculations. 3.Utilities.Areasoccupiedbyutilityvaultsandpedestalsshallnotbecountedinthe requiredopenspacearea. 4.Timing. a.CommonOpenSpace.Commonopenspaceshallbeconstructedandlandscaped Version1 7/28/2020 Page 1 priortosubmissionofthefinalplatorissuanceofabuildingpermit,whicheveris later.TheCitymayapproveafinalplatorbuildingpermitpriortocompletionof requiredcommonopenspaceimprovementsiftheapplicantprovidesabondbya suretyauthorizedtodobusinessintheStateofOregon,irrevocableletterofcredit fromasuretyorfinancialinstitutionacceptabletotheCity,cash,orotherformof securityacceptabletotheCity.Phaseddevelopmentsshallmeettherequirementsof subsection18.3.9.040.A.4. b.PrivateOpenSpace.Privateopenspaceshallbeconstructedandlandscapedprior tofinaloccupancyoftherespectivedwellingunit. 5.OwnershipandMaintenance.Commonopenspaceshallbesetasideascommonarea fortheuseofresidentsofthedevelopment.Maintenanceofcommonopenspaceshall betheresponsibilityofthepropertyowner(s)orbyanassociationofowners(i.e., homeownersassociation). C. CommonOpen Space. Common open space shall meet the following standards. See definition of common open space in part 18-6. 1.Dimensional Standards.Common open space shall have no dimension that is less than 20 feet and a minimum area of 400 square feet, exceptas described below. a.Pedestrian Connections.Walkways and multi-use paths shall contribute toward meeting the required common open space area when at least one common open space is provided that meets the dimensional standards in subsection 18.4.4.070.C.1, above. Pedestrian connections may be located within a required buffer or perimeter yard area. Sidewalks in the public right-of-way (i.e., public street) and walkways providing access to individual units may not be counted towards this requirement. b.Natural Features.Common open space may include areas that provide for the preservation or enhancement of natural features that meet the requirements of this section and the definition of common open space. See definition of common open space in part 18-6. Natural features located in common open space shall be counted toward meeting common open space requirements. Natural features may be located within a required buffer or perimeter yard area. 2. Location.Common open space shall not be located within a required yard abutting a street,except for pedestrian connections and natural features as provided in subsection 18.4.4.070.C.1, above. 3. Slope.Common open space designed for active use, such as lawn and picnic areas, shall be located on slopes less than five percent, except for areas regulated by the Building Code (e.g., walkways). Natural areas designed for passive use, such as riparian corridors and wetlands, may be located on slopes greater than five percent. 4.Improvements.The common open spaceshall contain one or more of the following: outdoor recreational area or facilities, lawn and picnic areas, community gardens, natural area with benches, seating areas, walking paths, or similar outdoor amenities as appropriate for the intended residents. a.Surfacing. A minimum of 50 percent of the common open space must be covered in Version1 7/28/2020 Page 2 suitable surfaces for human use, such as lawn areas and recreational fields or courts. Up to 50 percent of the common open space may be covered by shrubs, mulch, and other grounds covers that do not provide suitable surfaces for human use if the area is usable for the intended residents, such as community gardens or a natural area with benches and walking paths. b.Structures. Common open space may include structures and outdoor furniture typically associated with outdoor recreation such as decks, gazebos, arbors, benches, and tables. Structures located in common open space shall be unenclosed and uninhabitable. Unenclosed for the purpose of this subsection means 50 percent or more of the walls are 42 inches in height or less, but the structure may be covered. c.Fences and Walls.Fences, walls, hedges, and screen planting that are located on the perimeter of common open space shall not exceed four feet in height, except that fences in front yards and on the perimeter of the development shall meet the fence height requirements of section 18.4.4.060. This requirement shall not apply to fences located on properties adjoining but not located within a proposed development. See section 18.4.4.060 Fencing and Walls for fence permit and design standard requirements. d. Landscaping. Common open space shall be landscaped in accordance with section 18.4.4.030 Landscaping and Screening. 5.R-2 and R-3 Zones.In addition to the standards in subsection 18.4.4.070.C, above, common open space in the R-2 and R-3 zones shall meet the following requirements. a.Play Areas.Play areas for children are required for projects of greater than 20 units that are designed to include families. Play areasare eligible for common open space. b.Credit for Proximity to a Park. A credit of up to 50 percent for common open space may be granted when the development is located within one-eighth of a mile walking distance of an existing public park. Distance fromthe development to the park shall be measured from the lot line via a sidewalk, multi-use path or pedestrian way located in a public right-of-way or public pedestrian easement. Version1 7/28/2020 Page 3 Figure 18.4.4.070.C Common Open Space D.Private Open Space .Private open space that is provided to meet the minimum required open space area in 18.4.4.070.A shall meet the following standards. See definition of private open space in part 18-6. 1.Eligible Spaces.Decks, patios, porches, balconies, side and rear yards, and similar areas are eligible for private open space. a.Access.Private open space shall be directly accessible by a door from the interior of the individual dwelling unit served by the space. b.Walkways and Storage Space.The minimum area required for private open space shall not include area for ingress and egress to a ground-floor dwelling unit (e.g., walkway to dwelling unit door) or storage space (storage or bicycle rack). The ingress and egress area shall be measured as 36 inches in width and the length of the pedestrian route. 2. Ground-Floor Dwelling Units.Decks, patios, porches, or yards shall be at least six feet Version1 7/28/2020 Page 4 deep and measuring at least 48 square feet. Ground-floor private open space shall not be located within 12 feet of recycling and refuse disposal areas. See definition of ground-floor dwelling unit in part 18-6. 3.Upper-Floor Dwelling Units.Balconies shall be at least six feet deep and measuring at least 48 square feet. See definition of upper-floor dwelling unit in part 18-6. Figure18.4.4070.D PrivateOpenSpace Version1 7/28/2020 Page 5 Version2:MovesurfacingstandardtoR-2andR-3zones Amendedtextisshowninred 18.4.4.070OpenSpace A.Required Area. Table 18.4.4.070.A contains the minimum areas when common or private open space is required by this ordinance.See definition of open space in part 18-6. Table18.4.4.070.A–MinimumAreaRequiredinCommonorPrivateOpenSpace RequiredPlanningMinimumAreaMinimumAreaOpenSpaceDensityBonus ActionRequiredforOpenRequiredforRequirementMayAvailablefor SpaceCommonOpenBeMetbyCommonOpen SpaceCombiningSpaceinExcessof CommonandBaseRequirement PrivateOpen Spaces 4percentoftotallot areafor 18.5.2SiteDesign8percentoftotallot After8percentof developmentswithayes Reviewareatotallotareaismet basedensityof10 unitsormore After5percentof totallotareaismet fordevelopmentswith 5percentoftotallot5percentoftotallot abaseddensityof10 18.3.9Performance areaforareafor unitsormore StandardsOptiondevelopmentswithadevelopmentswithano andPSOOverlaybasedensityof10basedensityof10 After2percentof unitsormoreunitsormore totallotareafor developmentswith lessthan10units 18.5.2SiteDesign 4percentoftotallot Reviewand18.3.9areafor 8percentoftotallotAfter8percentof Performancedevelopmentswithayes areatotallotareaismet StandardsOptionbasedensityof10 andPSOOverlayunitsormore B.General Standards. 1.CommonandPrivateOpenSpace.Fordevelopmentsthataresubjecttochapter18.5.2 SiteDesignReview,therequiredopenspaceareamaybemetbycombiningcommon andprivateopenspacesmeetingtherequirementsofthissection. 2.DensityCalculation.Allareassetasideforopenspaceshallbecountedforbase density.Therequiredopenspaceisnotsubjecttobonuspointcalculations. 3.Utilities.Areasoccupiedbyutilityvaultsandpedestalsshallnotbecountedinthe requiredopenspacearea. 4.Timing. Version 2 7/28/2020 Page 1 a.CommonOpenSpace.Commonopenspaceshallbeconstructedandlandscaped priortosubmissionofthefinalplatorissuanceofabuildingpermit,whicheveris later.TheCitymayapproveafinalplatorbuildingpermitpriortocompletionof requiredcommonopenspaceimprovementsiftheapplicantprovidesabondbya suretyauthorizedtodobusinessintheStateofOregon,irrevocableletterofcredit fromasuretyorfinancialinstitutionacceptabletotheCity,cash,orotherformof securityacceptabletotheCity.Phaseddevelopmentsshallmeettherequirementsof subsection18.3.9.040.A.4. b.PrivateOpenSpace.Privateopenspaceshallbeconstructedandlandscapedprior tofinaloccupancyoftherespectivedwellingunit. Commonopenspaceshallbesetasideascommonarea 5.OwnershipandMaintenance. fortheuseofresidentsofthedevelopment.Maintenanceofcommonopenspaceshall betheresponsibilityofthepropertyowner(s)orbyanassociationofowners(i.e., homeownersassociation). C. CommonOpen Space. Common open space shall meet the following standards.See definition of common open space in part 18-6. 1.Dimensional Standards.Common open space shall have no dimension that is less than 20 feet and a minimum area of 400 square feet, exceptas described below. a.Pedestrian Connections.Walkways and multi-use paths shall contribute toward meeting the required common open space area when at least one common open space is provided that meets the dimensional standards in subsection 18.4.4.070.C.1, above. Pedestrian connections may be located within a required buffer or perimeter yard area. Sidewalks in the public right-of-way (i.e., public street) and walkways providing access to individual units may not be counted towards this requirement. b.Natural Features.Common open space may include areas that provide for the preservation or enhancement of natural features that meet the requirements of this section and the definition of common open space. See definition of common open space in part 18-6. Natural features located in common open space shall be counted toward meeting common open space requirements. Natural features may be located within a required buffer or perimeter yard area. 2. Location.Common open space shall not be located within a required yard abutting a street,except for pedestrian connections and natural features as provided in subsection 18.4.4.070.C.1, above. 3. Slope.Common open space designed for active use, such as lawn and picnic areas, shall be located on slopes less than five percent, except for areas regulated by the Building Code (e.g., walkways). Natural areas designed for passive use, such as riparian corridors and wetlands, may be located on slopes greater than five percent. 4.Improvements.The common open space shall contain one or more of the following: outdoor recreational area or facilities, lawn and picnic areas, community gardens, natural area with benches, seating areas, walking paths, or similar outdoor amenities as appropriate for the intended residents. Version 2 7/28/2020 Page 2 a.Surfacing. A minimum of 50 percent of the common open space must be covered in suitable surfaces for human use, such as lawn areas and recreational fields or courts. Up to 50 percent of the common open space may be covered by shrubs, mulch, and other grounds covers that do not provide suitable surfaces for human use if the area is usable for the intended residents, such as community gardens or a natural area with benches and walking paths. ab.Structures. Common open space may include structures and outdoor furniture typically associated with outdoor recreation such as decks, gazebos, arbors, benches, and tables. Structures located in common open space shall be unenclosed and uninhabitable. Unenclosed for the purpose of this subsection means 50 percent or more of the walls are 42 inches in height or less, but the structure may be covered. bc.Fences and Walls.Fences, walls, hedges, and screen planting that are located on the perimeter of common open space shall not exceed four feet in height, except that fences in front yards and on the perimeter of the development shall meet the fence height requirements of section 18.4.4.060. This requirement shall not apply to fences located on properties adjoining but not located within a proposed development. See section 18.4.4.060 Fencing and Walls for fence permit and design standard requirements. cd.Landscaping. Common open space shall be landscaped in accordance with section 18.4.4.030 Landscaping and Screening. 5.R-2 and R-3 Zones.In addition to the standards in subsection 18.4.4.070.C, above, common open space in the R-2 and R-3 zones shall meet the following requirements. a.Surfacing. A minimum of 50 percent of the common open space must be covered in suitable surfaces for humanuse, such as lawn areas,recreational fields,or courts. Up to 50 percent of the common open space may be covered by shrubs, mulch, and other grounds covers that do not provide suitable surfaces for human use if the area is usable for the intended residents, such as community gardens or a natural area with benches and walking paths. ba.Play Areas.Play areas for children are required for projects of greater than 20 units that are designed to include families. Play areas are eligible for common open space. cb.Credit for Proximity to a Park. A credit of up to 50 percent for common open space may be granted when the development is located within one-eighth of a mile walking distance of an existing public park. Distance from the development to the park shall be measured from the lot line via a sidewalk, multi-use path or pedestrian way located in a public right-of-way or public pedestrian easement. Version 2 7/28/2020 Page 3 Figure 18.4.4.070.C Common Open Space D.Private Open Space .Private open space that is provided to meet the minimum required open space area in 18.4.4.070.A shall meet the following standards. See definition of private open space in part 18-6. 1.Eligible Spaces.Decks, patios, porches, balconies, side and rear yards, and similar areas are eligible for private open space. a.Access.Private open space shall be directly accessible by a door from the interior of the individual dwelling unit served by the space. b.Walkways and Storage Space.The minimum area required for private open space shall not include area for ingress and egress to a ground-floor dwelling unit (e.g., walkway to dwelling unit door) or storage space (storage or bicycle rack). The ingress and egress area shall be measured as 36 inches in width and the length of the pedestrian route. 2. Ground-Floor Dwelling Units.Decks, patios, porches, or yards shall be at least six feet Version 2 7/28/2020 Page 4 deep and measuring at least 48 square feet. Ground-floor private open spaceshall not be located within 12 feet of recycling and refuse disposal areas. See definition of ground-floor dwelling unit in part 18-6. 3.Upper-Floor Dwelling Units.Balconies shall be at least six feet deep and measuring at least 48 square feet. See definition of upper-floor dwelling unit in part 18-6. Figure18.4.4070.D PrivateOpenSpace Version 2 7/28/2020 Page 5 Version3:OtherRecommendedChanges Amendedtextisshowninred 18.4.4.070OpenSpace A.Required Area.Table 18.4.4.070.A contains the minimum areas when common or private open space is required by this ordinance.See definition of open space in part 18-6. Table18.4.4.070.A–MinimumAreaRequiredinCommonorPrivateOpenSpace Commented \[MH1\]: Edits to table to address public comments regarding clarity. RequiredPlanningMinimumTotalMinimumAreaMaximumAreaDensityBonus Action AreaRequiredforRequiredforAllowedinPrivateAvailablefor OpenSpace CommonOpenOpenSpaceCommonOpen Space OpenSpaceSpaceinExcessof RequirementMayBeBaseRequirement MetbyCombining CommonandPrivate OpenSpaces 4%oftotallotarea 4%oftotallotarea fordevelopments 18.5.2SiteDesignfordevelopmentsAfter8%oftotallot 8%oftotallotarea withabasedensityof Review withabasedensityareaismet 10unitsormore of10unitsormore yes After5%oftotallot areaismetfor developmentswitha 5%oftotallotarea5%oftotallotareaN/A,5%oftotallotbaseddensityof10 18.3.9Performance fordevelopmentsunitsormore fordevelopmentsareamustbe StandardsOption withabasedensity withabasedensitycommonopenspace andPSOOverlay of10unitsormore of10unitsormorenoAfter2%oftotallot areafor developmentswith lessthan10units 18.5.2SiteDesign4%oftotallotarea 4%oftotallotarea Reviewand18.3.9fordevelopments fordevelopmentsAfter8%oftotallot Performance8%oftotallotarea withabasedensityof withabasedensityareaismet StandardsOption10unitsormore of10unitsormore andPSOOverlay yes B.General Standards. 1.CommonandPrivateOpenSpace.Fordevelopmentsthataresubjecttochapter18.5.2 SiteDesignReview,therequiredopenspaceareamaybemetbycombiningcommon andprivateopenspacesmeetingtherequirementsofthissection. 2.DensityCalculation.Allareassetasideforopenspaceshallbecountedforbase density.Therequiredopenspaceisnotsubjecttobonuspointcalculations. 3.Utilities.Areasoccupiedbyutilityvaultsandpedestalsshallnotbecountedinthe requiredopenspacearea. 4.Timing. Version 3 7/28/2020 Page 1 a.CommonOpenSpace.Commonopenspaceshallbeconstructedandlandscaped priortosubmissionofthefinalplatorissuanceofabuildingpermit,whicheveris later.TheCitymayapproveafinalplatorbuildingpermitpriortocompletionof requiredcommonopenspaceimprovementsiftheapplicantprovidesabondbya suretyauthorizedtodobusinessintheStateofOregon,irrevocableletterofcredit fromasuretyorfinancialinstitutionacceptabletotheCity,cash,orotherformof securityacceptabletotheCity.Phaseddevelopmentsshallmeettherequirementsof subsection18.3.9.040.A.4. b.PrivateOpenSpace.Privateopenspaceshallbeconstructedandlandscapedprior tofinaloccupancyoftherespectivedwellingunit. 5.OwnershipandMaintenance.Commonopenspaceshallbesetasideascommonarea fortheuseofresidentsofthedevelopment.Maintenanceofcommonopenspaceshall betheresponsibilityofthepropertyowner(s)orbyanassociationofowners(i.e., homeownersassociation). C. Common Open Space.Commonopen space that is provided to meet the minimum required open space area in 18.4.4.070.A shall meet the following standards.Common open space shall meet the following standards.See definition of common open space in part 18- Commented \[MH2\]: For consistency with subsection D. 6. Private Open Space below. Also, in review of approved subdivisions over last 20 years, common open space 1.Dimensional Standards.Common open space shall have no dimension that is less than exceeded required 5% of total lot area. Standard should be clear that it applies to required common space and does not 20 feet and a minimum area of 400 square feet, except as described below. apply to additional common open space provided by the a.Pedestrian Connections.Walkways and multi-use paths shall contribute toward applicant. meeting the required common open space area when at least one common open space is provided that meets the dimensional standards in subsection 18.4.4.070.C.1, above. Pedestrian connections may be located within a required buffer or perimeter yard area. Sidewalks in the public right-of-way (i.e., public street) and walkways providing access to individual units may not be counted towards this requirement. b.Natural Features.Common open space may includeareas that provide for the preservation or enhancement of natural features that meet the requirements of this section and the definition of common open space. See definition of common open space in part 18-6. Natural features located in common open space shall be counted toward meeting common open space requirements. Natural features may be located within a required buffer or perimeter yard area. 2. Location.Common open space shall not be located within a required yard abutting a street,except for pedestrian connections and natural features as provided in subsection 18.4.4.070.C.1, above. 3. Slope.Common open space designed for active use, such as lawn and picnic areas, shall be located on slopes less than five percent, except for areas regulated by the Building Code (e.g., walkways). Natural featuresareasdesigned for passive use, such as riparian corridors and wetlands, may be located on slopes greater than five percent. 4.Improvements.The common open space shall contain one or more of the following: outdoor recreational area or facilities, lawn and picnic areas, community gardens, natural Version 3 7/28/2020 Page 2 area with benches, seating areas, walking paths, or similar outdoor amenities as appropriate for the intended residents. Commented \[MH3\]: Redundant – repeats definition of common open space and language in surfacing standard a.Surfacing. A minimum of 50 percent of the common open space must be covered in suitable surfaces for human use, such as lawn areas and recreational fields or courts. Up to 50 percent of the common open space may be covered by shrubs, mulch, and other grounds covers that do not provide suitable surfaces for human use if the area is usable for the intended residents, such as community gardens or a natural featureareawith benches and walking paths. Commented \[MH4\]: For consistent use of terminology in section and land use code. b.Structures. Common open space may include structures and outdoor furniture typically associated with outdoor recreation such as decks, gazebos, arbors, benches, and tables. Structures located in common open space shall be unenclosed and uninhabitable. Unenclosed for the purpose of this subsection means 50 percent or more of the walls are 42 inches in height or less, but the structure may be covered. c.Fences and Walls.Fences, walls, hedges, and screen planting that are located on the perimeter of common open space shall not exceed four feet in height, except that fences in front yards andon the perimeter of the development shall meet the fence height requirements of section 18.4.4.060. This requirement shall not apply to fences located on properties adjoining but not located within a proposed development. See section 18.4.4.060 Fencing and Walls for fence permit and design standard requirements. d. Landscaping. Common open space shall be landscaped in accordance with section 18.4.4.030 Landscaping and Screening,except for natural features as provided in subsection 18.4.4.070.C.1, above. Commented \[MH5\]: The Landscaping and Screening standards are intended for finished and improved areas 5.R-2 and R-3 Zones.In addition to the standards in subsection 18.4.4.070.C, above, rather than natural features such as creeks and wetlands. common open space in the R-2 and R-3 zones shall meet the following requirements. a.Play Areas.Play areas for children are required for projects of greater than 20 units that are designed to include families. Play areas are eligible for common open space. b.Credit for Proximity to a Park. A credit of up to 50 percent for common open space may be granted when the development is located within one-eighth of a mile walking distance of an existing public park. Distance from the development to the park shall be measured from the lot line via a sidewalk, multi-use path or pedestrian way located in a public right-of-way or public pedestrian easement. Version 3 7/28/2020 Page 3 Figure 18.4.4.070.C Common Open Space D.Private Open Space.Private open space that is provided to meet the minimum required open space area in 18.4.4.070.A shall meet the following standards. See definition of private open space in part 18-6. 1.Eligible Spaces.Decks, patios, porches, balconies, side and rear yards, and similar areas are eligible for private open space. a.Access.Private open space shall be directly accessible by a door from the interior of the individual dwelling unit served by the space. b.Walkways and Storage Space.The minimum area required for private open space shall not include area for ingress and egress to a ground-floor dwelling unit (e.g., walkway to dwelling unit door) or storage space (storage or bicycle rack). The ingress and egress area shall be measured as 36 inches in width and the length of the pedestrian route. Commented \[MH6\]: Edit to address public comment. 2. Ground-Floor Dwelling Units.Decks, patios, porches, or yards shall be at least six feet Version 3 7/28/2020 Page 4 deep and measuring at least 6048square feet. Ground-floor private open space shall Commented \[MH7\]: Edit to address public comment. not be located within 12 feet of recycling and refuse disposal areas. See definition of ground-floor dwelling unit in part 18-6. 3.Upper-Floor Dwelling Units.Balconies shall be at least six feet deep and measuring at least 48 square feet. See definition of upper-floor dwelling unit in part 18-6. Figure18.4.4070.D PrivateOpenSpace 18.4.4.060FencesandWalls A.Permitting.Permits, granted through Ministerial review, are required prior to installing any permanent fence or wall to ensure compliance with City standards. The propertyowner should obtain a property boundary survey where property boundaries are not otherwise identified. Where a development is subject to land use approval, the Citymay require installation of screening walls or fences as a condition of approval for development, as Version 3 7/28/2020 Page 5 provided by other ordinance sections. Abuilding permit may be required for some fences and walls, pursuant to applicable building codes. B.Design Standards.Fences, walls, hedges, and screen planting shall meet the following standards, where height is measured pursuant to subsection 18.4.4.060.B.2, below. See Figure 18.4.4.060.B.1 for illustration of maximum fence heights. 1.Height.Fences, walls, hedges, and screen planting shall not exceed the following heights. a.Front Yard.In any required front yard, not more than 3 ½ feet in height. b.Rear and Side Yard.In any rear or side yard, not more than 6 ½ feet in height. c.Street-Side Yard.In any rear or side yard abutting a public street, except alleys, not more than four feet in height where located within ten feet of said street. d.Deer Fencing. See subsection 18.4.4.060.B.6, below. e.Open Space. See maximum fence heights for common open space in section 18.4.4.070, and for cottage housing in section 18.2.3.090. Commented \[MH8\]: Edit to address public comment. 18.4.4.060.GStandardsIllustrated 7.Multi-use Path Multi-use paths are off-street facilities used primarily for walking and bicycling. These paths can be relatively short connections between neighborhoods, or longer paths adjacent to rivers, creeks, railroad tracks,and open space. See Figure 18.4.6.040.G.7. See maximum fence heights for common open space in section 18.4.4.070,and for cottage housing in section 18.2.3.090. Commented \[MH9\]: Edit to address public comment. Version 3 7/28/2020 Page 6 Figure 18.4.6.040.G.7 Multi-Use Path Street FunctionProvide short connections for pedestrians and bicyclists between destinations,and longer paths in situations where a similar route is not provided on the street network. ConnectivityEnhances route options and shorten distances traveled for pedestrians and bicyclists. Right-of-Way Width10 ft –18 ft ImprovementWidth6ft–10ftpaved with 2 ft –4 ft gravelor planted strips on both sides Curb and Gutternot required Version 3 7/28/2020 Page 7