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 !ƭŷƌğƓķƭ 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