HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-02-09 Planning PACKET
1
2
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES- Draft
January 12, 2021
I. CALL TO ORDER:
Chair Haywood Norton called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m.
Commissioners Present: Staff Present:
Michael Dawkins Bill Molnar, Community Development Director
Alan Harper Derek Severson, Senior Planner
Haywood Norton April Lucas, Development Services Coordinator
Kerry KenCairn Brandon Goldman, Senior Planner
Roger Pearce
Lynn Thompson
Absent Members: Council Liaison:
Lisa Verner Stef Seffiner, absent
g
II. ANNOUNCEMENTS
Community Development Director Bill Molnar issued the following announcements:
The January Study Session has been canceled and instead the commission will have a joint meeting with the
Housing & Human Services Commission to discuss the Housing Capacity Analysis. The virtual meeting will be held
on January 28 from 4:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m.
Pro Tem City Manager Adam Hanks has updated the City Council on KDA’s presentation to the Planning
Commission regarding potential opportunities for housing on commercial and employment zone lands. The City
Council expressed interest on this topic and staff is working to determine potential next steps.
City staff is looking at a local building codes amendment that would require new residential construction to
incorporate fire resistant materials.
III. CONSENT AGENDA
A.Approval of Minutes
1. December 8, 2020 Regular Meeting.
2. December 22, 2020 Study Session.
The minutes of December 8, 2020 and December 22, 2020 were approved as presented.
IV. PUBLIC FORUM – None
V. TYPE II PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. PLANNING ACTION: PA-T2-2020-00023
SUBJECT PROPERTY: 196 & 200 Clear Creek Drive
OWNER/APPLICANT: Rogue Planning & Development Services, LLC/Bryan & Stephanie DeBoer
DESCRIPTION: The Planning Commission will re-open the public hearing to consider proposed
modifications to a request for Site Design Review approval to allow the construction of an 11,220
square-foot, two-story mixed-use building for the properties at 196 and 200 Clear Creek Drive. The
proposed building would consist of 1,268 square feet of office space, 8,052 square feet of warehouse
space, and a single 1,584 square foot residential unit on the second floor. The application also
includes a request for a property line adjustment to allow the consolidation of the two lots. Since the
initial public hearing in December, requests for a Variance and Major Modification of the New Addition
Ashland Planning Commission
January 12, 2020
Page 1 of 4
3
subdivision approval (PA-2000-096) to allow a driveway to be installed from Clear Creek Drive have
been removed from the proposal. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Employment; ZONING: E-1;
MAP: 39 1E 09AB; TAX LOT #: 6604 & 6605.
Chair Norton read aloud the rules for electronic public hearings.
Commissioners Harper/Pearce m/s to reopen the public hearing. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed 6-0.
Ex Parte Contact
No ex parte contact was reported.
Staff Report
Senior Planner Derek Severson presented the staff report and stated at the commission’s December 8, 2020 meeting the
Planning Commission denied the applicant’s request for a Major Modification and Variance and determined it was not
merited due to the existing alley access for the property. The applicants have since modified their proposal to remove the
Variance/Major Modification components and are requesting the commission revisit their decision in light of the proposed
changes.
Mr. Severson reviewed the modifications to the proposal, which include:
Removal of the driveway curb cut on Clear Creek Dr., eliminating the need for the Major Modification and Variance.
Three additional off-street parking spaces have been provided on-site, with access to all parking taken from the
alley.
The use of parking management strategies to reduce required off-street parking has been adjusted, and now
requests an approximate 8.89 percentage reduction using two on-street credits along Clear Creek Dr.
The screening wall along the Clear Creek Dr. frontage has been extended to enclose the parking area.
The building length has been reduced by 4 ft., and the steepness of the ramp at the rear of the building has been
reduced.
The building area has been reduced from 11,220 sq.ft. to 10,956 sq.ft.
The overhead garage door on the east side of the structure has been shifted to the north approx. 6 ft.
The pedestrian entrance to the Warehouse B space has been moved to the east side of the garage door,
eliminating a section of walkway.
The trash and recycling enclose has been relocated slightly to accommodate a hinged gate rather than a sliding
gate.
Ms. Severson stated staff is supportive of approving the application with the proposed modifications.
Questions of Staff
None
Applicant’s Presentation
Amy Gunter, Rogue Development Services/Explained they have developed a plan that works with the elimination of the
vehicle access off Clear Creek Drive and reviewed the proposed changes. Ms. Gunter stated they have some concerns
regarding deliveries for the end users of this development and noted this is something that will need to get worked out. She
also commented that the approval condition regarding the alley improvement, which states that “Any damage to the alley or
sidewalk from utility installation or construction vehicles shall be repaired under permit from the Public Works Department,
inspected and approved” is overly broad given the existing conditions of the alley. She stated they have reached out to the
Public Works department regarding this concern. Ms. Gunter stated the concerns expressed by the commission at the last
hearing have been addressed in the amended proposal and stated the end result will be a very nice addition to the
employment zone.
Ashland Planning Commission
January 12, 2020
Page 2 of 4
4
Carlos Delgado, Carlos Delgado Architects/Commented that the rearrangement of the landscaping and parking area
complies with the parking lot standards, even though this area may not be deemed a parking lot since it is only 6 spaces. He
stated they have a phased plan if future intensity of the parking area is needed.
Questions of the Applicant
The applicant was asked to clarify the location for the exception for the reduction in buffer. Ms. Gunter clarified this is the
parking space along the east property line. There is a tree at the corner where the area narrows and then widens back out.
The applicant was asked about the existing condition of the alley and who will be responsible for improvements. Ms. Gunter
stated the alley as well as the sidewalk are in poor condition. She stated the alley is a public right-of-way and is the city’s
responsibility; however, it was installed 20 years ago and has not been well maintained. Mr. Delgado noted along with this
site there are two adjacent properties also developing and the alley’s condition will worsen. He noted that in the past the
Public Works department has approved deferring maintenance until the construction work is completed and is hoping that
will be the case here as well. Ms. Gunter stated they do not have any specific language to suggest for the alley condition
and are comfortable working this out with the Public Works Department.
Comment was made that there is a language in the draft findings that states “full screening and security fencing will allow for
uses in Warehouse Unit A that need additional safety measures while also allowing for adaptive re-use by a business
requiring screened outdoor storage (subject to a Conditional use Permit in E-1” and it questioned what will be going into this
space that might require additional safety measures. Ms. Gunter explained this was included to provide as much flexibility as
possible for the future tenants and to avoid the need to have to go through another approval process.
Public Testimony - None
Chair Norton closed the public hearing and the record at 7:45 p.m.
Deliberation and Decision
Commissioner Thompson stated she is supportive of the revised proposal but requested clarification from staff on the
parking credit percentages. Mr. Severson stated staff used the 12.07 figure to calculate the reduction before rounding up;
however, this method could be modified to round up first. Commissioners Thompson and Pearce voiced support for
rounding up first (to 13) to determine the percentage listed in the Findings.
Commissioners Thompson/Dawkins m/s for PA-T2-2020-00023 to be approved with the conditions as set forth in
the staff report, subject to modification of the condition relating to the alley improvements to clarify that the
applicant will consult with the Public Works Department and be responsible for any damage caused by the
applicant. DISCUSSION: Commissioner Harper commended the applicant for modifying their proposal and coming back to
the Planning Commission, but stated this could have been avoided if this detail was worked out at the staff level before
bringing it before the group. Commissioner Peace requested clarification regarding the alley improvement condition and
whether the motion modifies what is listed in the Findings. Commissioner Thompson stated she is supportive of modifying
her motion to remove reference to this condition if they feel it is clear that this condition only applies to damage created by
the applicant. The commission voiced agreement with this statement. Commissioners Thompson/Dawkins m/s to
approve this change to the motion. Roll Call Vote: Commissioners Dawkins, Pearce, Thompson, KenCairn, Harper,
and Norton, YES. Motion passed 6-0.
Commissioner Pearce commented that the standards regarding parking strategies are unclear and recommended this be
revisited at a later date.
Ashland Planning Commission
January 12, 2020
Page 3 of 4
5
VI. ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 7:55 p.m.
Submitted by,
April Lucas, Development Services Coordinator
Ashland Planning Commission
January 12, 2020
Page 4 of 4
6
7
8
9
Threeadditionaloff-streetparkingspaceshavebeenprovidedon-site,withaccesstoall
Thebuildinglengthhasbeenreducedbyfourfeet,andthesteepnessoftherampattherearof
parkingtobefromthealley.Theuseofparkingmanagementstrategiestoreducepercentreductionusingjusttwoon-streetparkingcreditsalongtheClearCreekDriveThescreeningwallalongtheClearCreekDrivefrontagehasbeenexte
ndedtoenclosethe
requiredoff-streetparkinghasbeenadjusted,andnowrequestsanapproximate8.89TheoverheadgaragedoorontheEastsideofthestructurehasbeenshiftedtothenorthbyThepedestrianentrancedoortothe“WarehouseB”space,onthe
southelevation,hasbeen
to
ThedrivewaycurbcutfromClearCreekDrivehasbeenremoved,eliminatingtheneed
slightly
10
Thetrashandrecyclingenclosureattherearofthepropertyhasbeenrelocated
Thebuildingareahasbeenreducedfrom11,220squarefeetto10,956squarefeet.
fortheMajorModificationandVariancecomponentsoftheoriginalrequest.
thebuildinghasbeenreducedbyreducingtheoveralllengthofthebuilding.
movedtotheeastsideofthegaragedoor,eliminatingasectionofwalkway.
accommodateahingedgateratherthanaslidinggate.
approximatelysixfeet.
parkingarea.
frontage.
11
12
CLEAR CREEK DRIVE
SITE DESIGN REVIEW
13
14
SITE PLAN MODIFICATIONS
15
CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN TO DEMONSTRATE
COMPLIANCE WITH AREA REQUIREMENTS
16
17
18
ALLEY IMPROVEMENT CONDITION
19
20
DRAFT -BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSIONDRAFT
February 9, 2021
IN THE MATTER OF PLANNING ACTION #PA-T2-2020-00023,A REQUEST FOR )
SITE DESIGN REVIEW APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT AN 10,956 SQUARE FOOT,)
TWO-STORY, MIXED-USE BUILDING FOR THE PROPERTIES AT 196 AND 200)
CLEAR CREEK DRIVE. THE PROPOSED BUILDING WOULD CONSIST OF 1,268 )
SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE SPACE, 7,788 SQUARE FEET OF WAREHOUSE SPACE)
AND A SINGLE 1,584 SQUARE FOOT RESIDENTIAL UNIT. THE APPLICATION)
)DRAFT
ALSO REQUESTS A PROPERTY LINE ADJUSTMENT TOALLOWFOR THE CON-
FINDINGS,
SOLIDATION OF THE TWO LOTS. (REQUESTS FOR A VARIANCEANDMAJOR)
CONCLUSIONS,
MODIFICATION OF THE ORIGINAL SUBDIVISION APPROVAL \[PA #2000-096\])
& ORDERS
TO )
)
SUBDIVISION APPROVAL BOTH PROHIBIT DRIVEWAY ACCESS BECAUSE )
ALLEY ACCESS IS AVAILABLEWERE WITHDRAWN BY THE APPLICANT )
DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS.))
)
APPLICANT/OWNERS:
Rogue Planning & Development Services, LLC/)
Bryan & Stephanie DeBoer)
)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RECITALS:
1)Tax lots#6604and #6605 of Map 39 1E 09ABare the vacant Lots#5and #6 of the New Addition
subdivision on Clear CreekDrive, and are zoned Employment (E-1) and are within both the Residential,
Detail Site Review and Wildfire Lands overlayzones.
2)The applicant is requestingSiteDesignReviewapprovaltoallowtheconstructionofa10,956
square-foot,two-storymixed-usebuildingforthepropertiesat196and200ClearCreekDrive.The
proposedbuildingwouldconsistof1,268squarefeetofofficespace,7,788squarefeetofwarehouse
space,andasingle1,584squarefootresidentialunitonthesecondfloor.Theapplicationalsoincludes
arequestforapropertylineadjustmenttoallowtheconsolidationofthetwolots.Additionalrequests
foraMajorModificationoftheNewAdditionsubdivisionapproval(PA-2000-096)andforaVariance
toallowadrivewaytobeinstalledfromClearCreekDrivewheretheAccessandCirculation
inAMC18.4.3.080.C.5andtheoriginalsubdivisionapprovalbothprohibitdrivewayaccess
fromClearCreekDrivebecausealleyaccessisavailablewerewithdrawnbytheapplicantduringthe
publichearingprocess.The proposal is outlined in plans on file at the Department of Community
Development.
AMC 18.5.2.050
3)The criteria for Site Design Review approval are detailed in 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,
21
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.
AMC 18.5.3.120.B
4)The approval criteria for a Property Line Adjustment are detailed in as follows:
1.Parcel Creation.No additional parcel or lot is created by the lot line adjustment.
2.Lot Standards.Except as allowed for nonconforming lots, pursuant to chapter
18.1.4, or as required by an overlay zone in part18.3, all lots and parcels conform
to the lot standards of the applicable zoning district, including lot area,
dimensions, setbacks, and coverage, per part18.2. If a lot does not conform to
the standards of the applicable zoning district, it shall not be made less
conforming by the property line adjustment. As applicable, all lots and parcels
shall identify a buildable area free of building restrictions for physical constraints
(i.e., flood plain, greater than 35 percent slope, water resource protection zones).
3.Access Standards.All lots and parcels conform to the standards in section
18.4.3.080 Vehicle Area Design. Lots and parcels that do not conform to the
access standards shall not be made less conforming by the property line
adjustment.
5)On April 15, 2020 Governor Kate Brown issued Executive Order #20-16Keep Government
Working: Ordering Necessary Measures to Ensure Safe Public Meetings and Continued Operations by
Local Government During Coronavirus (COVID-19) Outbreak.
public bodies hold public meetings by telephone, video,or through some other electronic or virtual
means, whenever possible; that the public body make available a method by which the public can listen
22
to or virtually attend the public meeting or hearing at the time it occurs; that the public body does not
have to provide a physical space for the public to attend the meeting or hearing; thatrequirements that
oral public testimony be taken during hearings be suspended, and that public bodies instead provide a
means for submitting written testimony by e-mailorother electronic methods that the public body can
consider in a timely manner.The subsequently adopted House Bill #4212 further authorized governing
bodies in Oregon to conduct all public meetings using telephone or video conferencing technology or
through other electronic or virtual means.
8)The Planning Commission, following proper public notice, held an electronic public hearingon
December 8, 2020. In keeping with Executive Order #20-16and subsequent House Bill #4212, this meeting
was broadcast live on local television channel 9 and on Charter Communications channels 180 & 181,
and was live-streamed over the internet on RVTV Prime at http://www.rvtv.sou.edu. A copy of the
application, including all documents, evidence and applicable criteria relied upon by the applicant, and
a copy of the staff report were made available on-line seven days prior to the hearing. Those wishing to
provide written testimony were able to submit it via e-mail in advance of the hearing, as detailed the
mailed and posted notices, and allwritten testimony received by theestablished deadlineswas made
available for Commissioners to review before the hearing and was included in the meeting minutes. In
addition, those wishing to participate during the hearing couldarrange to provide oral testimony by
making arrangements to do so in advance ofthe meeting.
Following the closingof the initial public hearing and the record, the Planning Commissionconsidered the
materials received and testimony presented and denied the project, noting that a requested Major
Modification of the original subdivision approval and an associated Variance to allow a new driveway from
Clear Creek Drive were not merited and that the applicant had indicated during the hearing process that the
project could not be redesigned without a new driveway access.
Subsequent to this decision, but before the written findings formalizing the denial were adopted, the
applicant submitted a revised proposal modifyingtheir application by removing the request for the new
driveway,eliminating the Major Modification and Variance, granting an extension of time, and asking that
the Planning Commission reopen the public hearing to review the application as modified.
The Planning Commission, following proper public notice, reopened the electronic public hearing on
January 12, 2021 at which time written testimony submitted in advance of the hearing was considered and
new oral testimony was presented. Following the closing of the public hearing and the record, the Planning
Commission considered the materials received and testimony presented and approved the project, subject
to a number of conditions pertaining to the appropriate development of the site.
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.
23
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
2.1The Planning Commission finds that it has received all information necessary to make a decision
based on theapplication materials, staff report, public testimony and exhibits received.
2.2The Planning Commission finds that the amended proposal forSite Design Reviewand Property
Line Adjustmentmeets all applicable criteria forSite Design Review described in AMC 18.5.2.050and for
a Property Line Adjustment described inAMC 18.5.3.120.B.
2.3The Planning Commission concludes that the proposal satisfies all applicable criteria for Site
Design Review approval.
The first approval criterion for Site Design Review approval addresses the requirements of the
underlying zone, requiring that, The proposal complies with all of the applicable provisions ofthe
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
The Planning Commission finds that the building and yard setbacksand
other applicable standards have been evaluated to ensure consistency with the applicable provisions of
part 18.2, and all regulations of the underlying E-1zoning will be satisfied.
The second approval criterion deals with overlay zones, and requires that,The proposal complies with
The Planning Commission finds that the property
iswithin the Detail Site Review, Residential and WildfireLandsoverlay zones.
The Detail Site Review overlay requires that the application address the Detail Site ReviewStandards
in AMC 18.4.2.040.C. Where proposed buildings are greater than 10,000 square feet in gross floor area
as is the case here or contain more than 100 feet of building frontage, the Additional Standards for
Large Scale Projects in AMC 18.4.2.040.D must also be addressed. Compliance with these standards is
discussed with regard to part 18.4 below, under the next criterion.
Within the Residential (R) overlay zone,the requirements of AMC 18.3.13.010.Ccome into play where
residential units are proposed, and require: 1) For mixed-use developments, if there is one building on
a site, ground floor residential uses shall occupy not more than 35 percent of the gross floor area of the
ground floor. Where more than one building is located on a site, not more than 50 percent of the total
lot area shall be designated for residential uses. At least 65 percent of the gross floor area ofthe ground
floor shall be designated for permitted uses and uses permitted with special use standards, not including
24
residential uses; 2)Residential densities shall not exceed 15 dwelling units per acre. For the purpose of
density calculations, units of less than 500 square feet of gross habitable floor area shall count as 0.75
of a unit; and 3)Residential uses shall be subject to the same setback, landscaping, and design standards
as for permitted uses in the E-1 District. The Planning Commission findsthat: 1) 316 square feet of the
9,372square foot ground floor is dedicated to the foyer and stairway for the residential unit, with the
remainder of the ground floor dedicated to permitted or special permitted uses in the zone other than
residential. This equates to only approximately 3.3 percent of the ground floor (316 square feet/9,372
square feet = 0.0337), with the remaining 96.7 percent to be dedicated to permitted or special permitted
uses within the E-1 zone; 2) At theallowed residential densityof 15 dwelling units per acre, the property
has an allowed residential density of 7.997dwelling units (0.533acres x 15 dwelling units/acre = 7.997
dwelling units), and the single residential unit proposed does not exceed the allowed density; and 3) The
proposal is being considered in light of the same setback, landscaping and design standards as any E-1
project.
The Planning Commission further finds that the subject property is located within the Wildfire Lands
overlayzone, and as such a Fire Prevention and Control Plan addressingthe General Fuel Modification
Area requirements in AMC 18.3.10.100.A.2 will need to be provided for the review of theFire Marshal
prior to bringing combustible materials onto the property, and any new landscaping proposed will need
tocomply with these standards and shall not include plants listed on the Prohibited Flammable Plant
Listper Resolution #2018-028.The applicant asserts that the proposed landscape plan complies with
the applicable Wildfire Lands requirements, and does not use plants from the prohibited plant list. A
condition hasbeen included below to require a final Fire Prevention and Control Plan andplant list be
provided for the reviewand approval of the Fire Marshal prior tothe issuance of a building permit or to
bringingany combustibles onto the site.
Based on the foregoing, the Planning Commission finds that this criterion is satisfied.
Theproposal
complies with the applicable Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4, except as provided
The application discusses the Basic Site Development and Design Standards for Non-Residential
Development, noting thatthe
with parking placed behind the building and with no automobile parking or circulation between the
building and the street. façadeis 104-feet of the 141-foot wide frontage, and the building
faade occupies a large majority -nearly 74 percent -of the lot frontage.The building entrances are
located within 20-feet of the street right-of-way. The entrances are clearly visible, and an eight-foot door
with transom window, lighting, pedestrian covering, and material changes is provided to emphasize the
entrance.
Along the west side of the property, there is a five-foot pedestrian easement, and a corresponding five-
foot easement is in place on the property to the west to provide a ten-foot wide pedestrian connection
from Clear Creek Drive to the alley. The applicant proposes to improve this easement with compacted
gravel to provide a walking surface.
25
A public sidewalk and parkrow planting strip were installed with the subdivision in 2000, and city
standard street trees are proposed to be installed along the frontage. A new pedestrian plaza area, with
hardscape surface treatments between the sidewalk and the building, will provide pedestrian access to
the street-facing business entrances directly accessible from the public sidewalk.
Nearly 17 percent of the site is to be provided as a landscape areato comply with the applicable standards
of the zone, and a common recycle and refuse area is provided near the rear of the property, screened
from view, and accessible from the alley.All artificial lighting is noted as complying with the standards
ofAMC18.4.4.050, and there are no residential zones in the immediate vicinity of the project site.
The application discusses the Detail Site Review Standards, noting that the proposed structure and the
pedestrian plaza area provided combine to comply with the Floor Area Ratio(FAR) standard calling for
a minimum 0.50FAR. The proposed structure is 10,956square feet and there is1,215square feet of
plaza area proposed for a total of 12,171square feet, which is more than the required 11,761 square feet
needed to meet a 0.50 FAR.
The building frontage is 104-feet in length, and distinctive offsets and material changes are provided in
in the façadetobreak-up the massing and scale of the structure.All of the front façadewalls are within
30-feet of the public street, and more than 20 percent of the wall area facing the street is inwindowsor
doorways. Large windows are proposed on either side of the commercial business entrance, and there
is a cantilevered overhang to protect pedestrians from the elements.
More than 15 percent of the exterior walls have substantial changes in relief. There is a substantial base;
changes in façadematerials with the use of vertical standing seam metal siding, split-face concrete block,
horizontal, wooden plank siding, and hardboard. There are bronze-colored, aluminum storefront style
windows and doors.
Landscape buffers are proposed between the surface parking spaces adjacent to the alley and the west
property line, and a landscape buffer of six-feet is proposed along the east side of the parking area. The
parking area and the interior area of the site are proposed to be screened from the adjacent railroad
property with a six-foot-tall solid panel and CMU screenwall.
The property is within the Detail Site Review overlayzone, and the proposed building to be more than
10,000 square feet in areaand as such is subject to Additional Standards for Large Scale Projects. The
application explains that the building is oriented towards Clear Creek Drive, and that the buildings mass
along the street is divided into two separate masses. The structure has a human scale incorporated though
the changes in setback and orientation in materials, and a sheltering roof is proposed to provide
pedestrian shelter while adding a horizontal element to the front faade. The pattern of the windows and
the doors is distinct and relates to the spaces within the structure.
The application materials note that the building requires 1,096square feet of plaza space, and 1,215
square feet ofplaza spaceare proposed between the sidewalk and building. This space will incorporate
sitting areas, space for eating, a mixture of sunlight and shade areas under the marquee and near the
plaza area trees, and the plaza area surface will include colored and/or scored concrete.
26
With regard to required off-street parking and parking management strategies, the Planning Commission
finds that the project as proposed requires 12.074 off-street parking spaces, which isrounded to 13 off-
street parking spaces by code.
OFFICE:
1,268 square feet of office at one space per 500 square feet requires
1,268/500 = 2.536 spaces
WAREHOUSE:
7,788 square feet of warehouse at one space per 1,000 square feet requires
7,788/1000 = 7.788 spaces
RESDIENTIAL:
A two-bedroom residential unit requires
1.75 spaces
TOTAL OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIRED: 12.074 spaces
The Planning Commission finds that 11 off-street parking spacesare proposed, with five spaces accessed
directly from the public alley at the rear of the property. A driveway extends from the alley into the
property where six additional off-street parking spaces are provided three are within an enclosed
carport, two are surface spaces adjacent tothe carport, and a sixth space is provided parallel to the
building under a canopy. One of the 11 spaces to be provided is shown as a required accessible parking
space.
The Planning Commission finds that vehicular access to the site is to be from the public alley, and the
proposed internal parking and maneuvering area is to be screened with a block wall and an electric gate
that fully screens the site from the public rights-of-way of the street and the alley, and from the adjacent
properties to the east. The application explains that full screening and security fencing will allow for
uses in Warehouse Unit A that need additional safety measures while also allowing for adaptive re-use
by a business requiring screened outdoor storage (subject to a Conditional Use Permit in E-1).
The Planning Commission further finds that application proposes to utilize Parking Management
AMC 18.4.3.060
Strategies as provided in , requesting an On-Street Parking Credit to reduce required
off-street parking by two spaces as there are four on-street parking spaces available along the frontage
of the property. The combined reduction in required parking requested is approximately 15.4percent
(11 spaces provided/13spaces required = 0.846; 1.0 0.846 = 0.154)
. The Planning Commission
finds that the requested reduction is a reasonable application of the discretion provided to the
Commission in the Parking Management Strategies section.
The Commission further finds that bicycle parking is proposed to be dispersed around the site to provide
-
at the front of the building, visible from Clear Creek Drive. Within the covered carport, and additional
two spaces are proposed. And each warehouse unit will include additional spaces as proposed. The
application emphasizes that all proposed bicycle parking areas will comply with the bicycleparking
standards, and will be located in a manner that provides adequate commercial customer and residential
bicycle parking. Conditions requiring that adequate bicycle parking be illustrated in the building permit
submittals and inspected on site before occupancy have been included below.
The Planning Commission finds that parking to be provided will comply with the dimensional, surfacing
and back-up space requirements, and notes that the five spaces adjacent to the alley are to be buffered
27
from the structure with landscape planters which will function as stormwater swales to capture and treat
surface run-off. The three parking spaces within the carport are to be covered, which will reduce the
micro-climatic impacts of the parking spaces. The application materials note that parking lot shade trees
and landscape buffers complying with the standards for parking area design will be provided.
Based on the foregoing, the Planning Commission concludes that the proposal complies with the
applicable Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4.
The fourth approval criterion addresses city facilities, specifically requiring that, 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
The Planning Commission notes that the application asserts that adequate city facilities exist to serve
the proposed development, and that final development plansbased on the current proposal will be
submitted to the City of Ashland Public Works, Engineering, Planning, Building, Electric and Fire
Departments for review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. Specific facilities are
discussed as follows:
Water:
The application notes that the subject properties are currently served by an eight-inch
water main in adjacent Clear Creek Drive right-of-way, and that the new water services and
meters proposed will be installed off of this main.
Sanitary Sewer
The application explains that the subject properties are currently served by an
eight-inch sanitary sewer main in the adjacent Clear Creek Driveright-of-way, further explaining
that the existing main ends short of the end of the current street improvements butwill be
extended from the existing terminus to serve the proposed development.
Electric:
An existing electrical box was installed with the subdivision at the northeast corner of
the property, and services will be extended to serve the project. The Electric Department has
preliminarily approved the electric service plan for the project.
Urban Storm Drainage:
The application explains that the subject properties are currently
served by a 12-inch storm drainage sewer main in Clear Creek Drive, and that because the
proposed development will create more than 2,500 square feet of impervious surface, the project
civil engineer has proposed a stormwater drainage facility planwhich complies with the
requirements of the DEQ MS4 General Permit Phase 2follows the guidance and
requirements set forth in the current Rogue Valley Stormwater Quality Design Manual.
Adequate Transportation:
Clear Creek Driveis considered to be aCommercial Neighborhood
Collector, and is ultimately intended to provide a commercial corridor connecting Oak Street to
North Mountain Avenue. The improvements envisioned for a Commercial Neighborhood
Collector are illustrated in AMC 18.4.6.040.G.3and includea28-to36-foot paved curb-to-curb
widthwithin a 55-to 63-foot right-of-way, seven-foot landscaped parkrow, and an eight-to ten-
foot sidewalk. The existing right-of-way way here is60 feetwide with an approximate curb-to-
curb width of 28 feet which will accommodate on-street parking on one side, and was improved
withpavement, curbs, gutters, park rows and sidewalksto city standards at the time of the
subdivision approval, however the parkrow planting striphere lacksstreet treesor street lights,
28
and a condition of approval has been included below to require that street trees be selected from
the Recommended Street Tree Guide, planted according to standards with irrigation, and
inspected, and that street lights be installed along the frontage, prior to the issuance of a
certificate of occupancy.
At the rear of the property, an alley is in place. Typical alley standards envision a 12-foot paved
width within a 16-foot right-of-way, however here the alley has a 16-foot paved width within a
20-foot right-of-way, and includes a central valley gutterfor drainage. With the approval of
the subdivision under PA #2000-096, there was also an easement for a 10-foot pedestrian and
bike path easement south of the alley, on the railroad property.With the subdivision approval,
all necessary public facilities, utilities and
services are available to serve the six tax lots. Public facilities are located within the right-of-
way of Clear Creek Drive and within the public alley adjacent to the project. The Commission
finds that the multi-use path adjacent to the alley is required in lieu of increasing the Clear Creek
Drive right-of-way to accommodate bicycle lanes. As a result, the multi-use path is a required
street improvement that must be either installed, or planned and bonded for as part of the
subdivision.
The application includes apreliminary grading, utility and erosion control plan prepared by Registered
Professional Engineer Mark Dew of Dew Engineering. These plans identify facilities available in the
adjacent rights-of-way along with proposed connections; meter placement; and storm water control,
extended to and through the subject property from public utility easements and street right-of-way
adjacent to the site, and that based on the conceptual plans, adequate key city facilities are available
within the adjacent rights-of-way and will be extended by the applicant to serve the proposed
development. Conditions have been included below to require that final electric service, utility and civil
plans be provided for the review and approval of the Staff Advisor and city departments in conjunction
with the building permitsubmittals, and that civil infrastructure be installed by the applicants, inspected
and approved prior to occupancy.With these conditions, the Planning Commission finds that adequate
capacity of city facilities, paved access to and throughout the property, and adequate transportation can
and will be provided to the subject property. The Commission concludes that this criterion has been
satisfied.
The Planning Commission notes that the application materials include a request for
an Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards to allow an approximately 18-foot section
of the landscape buffer along the east property line to be reduced to three feet in width where the
MC 18.4.4.030.F.2.a call for a five-foot
landscaped strip to screen parking abutting a property line. The application materials indicate that in
addition to the three feet of surface buffering proposed with landscaping, a six-toeight-foot solid panel
fence and masonry wall is proposed to provide additional screening at the property line, while on the
adjacent property there is a ten-footwide stormwater drainage easementwith an open ditch. The
application materials argue that the combination of landscape screening and construction of a solid wall
provides equal screening while better providing for public safety by creating a physical barrier as
29
protection from the drop off into the open ditchon the adjacent, undeveloped property. The application
further asserts that the proposal will not have a negative impact on the livability of the adjacent
employment-zoned property which does not have a Residential overlay, concluding that the exception
requested is minimal as it is limited to a two-foot reduction in buffer width for only 18-feet of a 258-
foot length of thedriveway surface. While the Planning Commission recognizes the benefit of the
proposed wall installation as a barrier preventing falls into the adjacent open ditch, the Commission also
finds that the angled property line which has 143 feet of frontage along Clear Creek Drive but reduces
this width to approximately 85 feetalong the alley poses a demonstrable difficulty in responding to the
standard, that approval of theException for this relatively minimal 18-foot segment of the property line
will not substantially negatively impact the adjacent property, and that the combination of the reduced
buffer and the proposed wall will adequately serve to reduce development impacts on adjacent uses.
The Planning Commission concludesthat as detailed above and with the conditions discussed, the
proposal complies with the requirements for Site Design Review approval.
2.5The Planning Commission finds that the proposal satisfies all applicable standards specific to a
Property Line Adjustment.
The first criterion for a Property LinNo additional parcel or lot is created by the
lot line adjustment.In this instance, the proposal would consolidate the two contiguous lots being
considered and would not create an additional parcel or lot.
The second Except as allowed for nonconforming lots,
pursuant to chapter 18.1.4, or as required by an overlay zone in part 18.3, all lots and parcels conform
to the lot standards of the applicable zoning district, including lot area, dimensions, setbacks, and
coverage, per part 18.2. If a lot does not conform to the standards of the applicable zoning district,
it shall not be made less conforming by the property line adjustment. As applicable, all lots and parcels
shall identify a buildable area free of building restrictions for physical constraints (i.e., flood plain,
greater than 35 percent slope, water resource protection zones).The Planning Commission finds that
with the requested adjustment, the property will conform to the applicable lot standards of the E-1 zoning
district as discussed elsewhere in this document.
All lots and parcels conform to the standards
in section 18.4.3.080 Vehicle Area Design. Lots and parcels that do not conform to the access standards
shall not be made less conforming by the property line adjustment.The Planning Commission finds
thattheproposal complies with the applicable Vehicle Area Design requirements.
Based on the foregoing, The Planning Commission concludes that, as detailed above, the proposal is
consistent with the applicable standards and criteria for a Property Line Adjustment.
SECTION 3. DECISION
3.1Based on the record of the Public Hearing on this matter, the Planning Commission concludes that
the proposal forSiteDesignReviewapprovaltoconstructan10,956squarefoot,two-storymixed-use
30
buildingandforaPropertyLineAdjustmenttoallowtheconsolidationoftwolotsis supported by
evidence contained within the whole record.
The building proposed will be an attractive addition to the Clear Creek Drive streetscape, and
Commission concerns identified during the initial public hearing with the requested Variance/Major
Modification to allow a new driveway off of Clear Creek Drive and the requested reductions in off-
street parkinghave been well addressed inthe amended proposal now being considered, which no longer
includes a new driveway and which limits the reduction in required parking to only two off-street
parking credits.
As amended, the Commission concludes that theproposal merits approvalwith the conditions detailed
below.Therefore, based on our overall conclusions, and upon the proposal being subject to each of the
following conditions, we approve Planning Action #PA-T2-2020-00023.Further, if any one or more of the
conditions below are found to be invalid, for any reason whatsoever, then Planning Action #2020-00023is
denied. The following are the conditions and they are attached to the approval:
1.That all proposals of the applicant shall be conditions of approval unless otherwise modified herein,
including but not limited to that there shall be no driveway curb cut from Clear Creek Drive.
That the plans submitted for the building permit shall be in substantial conformance with those
2.
approved as part of this application. If the plans submitted for the building permit are not in
substantial conformance with those approved as part of this application, an application to modify
this Site Design Review approval shall be submitted and approved prior to issuance of a building
permit.
3.That any new addresses shall beassigned by City of Ashland Engineering Department.
4.That permits shall be obtained from the Ashland Public Works Department prior to any work in the public
right of way.
That the windows on the ground floor shall not be tinted so as to prevent views from into the
5.
interior of the building
That the front entrances adjacent to Clear Creek Drive shall remain functional and open to the
6.
public during all business hours.
That a sign permit shall be obtained prior to installation of any new signage. Signage shall meet
7.
the requirements of Chapter 18.4.7.
8.That the building permit submittal shall include:
a.Identification of all easements, including public and private utility easements, public
pedestrian access easements, and fire apparatus access easements.
b.Solar setback calculations demonstrating that all new construction complies with Solar
Setback Standard Bin the formula \[(Height 16)/(0.445 + Slope) = Required Solar
Setback\] and elevations or cross section drawings clearly identifying the highest shadow
producing point(s) and the height(s) from natural grade.
c.Lot coverage calculations including all building footprints;driveways, parking,and
circulation areas; and any other areas other than natural landscaping. Lot coverage shall
be limited to no more than 85percent as required in AMC 18.2.6.030.
31
d.Final electric service, utility and civil engineering plansincluding grading, erosion
control and drainage. All civil infrastructure shall be installed by the applicants,
inspected and approved prior to final inspection/occupancy approval.
e.The utility plan shall include the location of connections to all public facilities including
the locations of water lines and meter sizes, fire hydrants, sanitary sewer mains and
services, manholes and clean-outs,and storm drainage pipes and catch basins, along with
any backflow prevention measures required by the Water Department. Any required
private orpublic utility easements shall be delineated on the civil plans.
f.The final electric design and distribution plan shall include load calculations and
locations of all primary and secondary services including transformers, cabinets and all
other necessary equipment with the Final Plan application. This plan must be reviewed
and approved by the Electric Department prior to the signature of the final survey plat.
Transformers and cabinets shall be located in areas least visible from streets and outside
of vision clearance areas, while considering the access needs of the Electric Department.
g.That storm water from all new impervious surfaces and runoff associated with peak
rainfalls must be collected on site and channeled to the City storm water collection system
(i.e., curb gutter at public street, public storm pipe or public drainage way) or through an
approved alternativein accordance with Ashland Building Division policy BD-PP-0029.
On-site collection systems shall be detailed on the building permit submittals.The storm
drainage plan shall detail the location and final engineering for all storm drainage
improvements associated withthe project, and shall be submitted for review and approval
by the Departments of Public Works, Planning and Building Divisions. The storm
drainage plan shall demonstrate that post-development peak flows are less than or equal
to the pre-development peak flow for the site as a whole, and that storm water quality
mitigation has been addressed through the final design.
h.Final site lighting details.
i.Afinal size-and species-specific landscaping plan including irrigation details satisfying
the Water Conserving Landscaping Guideline in AMC 18.4.4.030.I. New landscaping
shall comply with the General Fuel Modification Area requirements and shall not include
plants listed on the Prohibited FlammablePlant List adopted by Resolution #2018-028.
All landscaping shall be installed according to the approved plan, and tied into the
existing irrigation system, inspected and approved prior to the issuance of a certificate of
occupancy.
j.That the requirements of the Ashland Fire Department relating toapproved addressing;
fireapparatus access; a firefighter access pathway; fire flow; hydrant installation, spacing
and clearance; applicable fire sprinklers and alarm monitoring; fire department
connection; key box; extinguishers; limitations on obstructions to fire access; and
wildfire hazard area requirements shall be satisfactorily addressed in the permit
submittals.
k.AFire Prevention and Control Plan addressingthe General Fuel Modification Area
requirements in AMC 18.3.10.100.A.2 shall be provided prior to bringing combustible
materials onto the property, and any new landscaping proposed shall comply with these
adopted with Resolution #2018-028.
32
l.The building permit submittals shall verify that the bicycle parking, spacing and coverage
requirements are met in accordance with 18.4.3.070.I. Inverted U-racks shall be used for
the bicycle parking, and all bicycle parking shall be installed in accordance with design
and rack standards in 18.4.3.070.I and J, inspected and approved by the Staff Advisor
prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy. If bicycle parking is to be provided
within the proposed buildings, final interior dimensions of the dedicated bicycle parking
areas shall be detailed on the building permit plans to insure adequate space has been
provided. A bicycle parking space located inside of a building for employee bike parking
shall be a minimum of six feet long by three feet wide by four feet high, shall be
accessible without moving another bicycle, and shall be clearly marked as reserved for
bicycle parking only.
9.That prior to the final inspection approval or issuance of a certificate of occupancy:
a.That street trees, one per 30 feet of street frontage, shall be installed in the Clear Creek
Drive frontage, inspected and approved by the Staff Advisor. All street trees shall be
chosen from the adopted Street Tree List and shall be installed in accordance with the
specifications noted in Section E of the Site Design and Use Standards. The street trees
shall be irrigated.
b.That all landscaping in the new landscaped areas, and the irrigation system, shall be
installed according to the approved plan, inspected and approved by the Staff Advisor.
c.Civil improvements including but not limited to utility installations shall be completed
according to approved plans, inspected and approved.Public improvements including
but not limited to street treesand street lighting shall be installed to City of Ashland
standards under permit from the Public Works Department and in accordance with the
approved plan, inspected and approved.
d.Any damage to the alleyor sidewalk from utility installation or construction vehicles
shall be repaired under permit from the Public Works Department, inspected and
approved.
e.That all exterior lighting shall be directed on the property and shall not directly illuminate
adjacent proprieties.
f.That the bicycle parking facilities shall be installed according to the approved plan,
inspected and approved by the Staff Advisor.
g.That the required 22-foot clear back-up area shall be provided behind parking spaces
The required back-up area may include the full, improved width of the alley.
February 9, 2021
Haywood Norton, ChairDate
Planning Commission Approval
33
34
35
36
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-T2-2020-00025
SUBJECT PROPERTY:
Tax Lot #600 on the newly constructed Independent Way
APPLICANT/OWNER:
Rogue Planning & Development Services/IPCO Development Corporation
DESCRIPTION:
A request for Site Design Review approval for the construction of two new commercial/industrial buildings
on Tax Lot #600 adjacent to Independent Way, the newly installed public street between Washington Street and Tolman
Creek Road. Both buildings would be part of the IPCO Development Corporation service building complex, and would share
driveway accesses, parking areas and landscaped areas. The first building is proposed to be 10,919 square feet and would
be constructed adjacent to Independent Way. The second proposed building would be 17,859 square feet and would be near
the south property line. The application includes a request for an Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards
(AMC 18.4.2.040.B.3.a) which call for a ten-foot wide landscape buffer between the building and the street.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATIONZONING:S MAP #:TAX LOT
: Employment; E-1; 391E14BA; : 600
ELECTRONIC ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: Tuesday February 9, 2021 at 7PM
37
Notice is hereby given that the Ashland Planning Commission will hold an electronic public hearingon the above described
planning action on the meeting date and time shown above. 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.eduand selecting
RVTV Prime.
The ordinance criteria applicable to this planning actionare 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 issuesrelating to proposed conditions of approval with sufficient
specificity to allow this Commission to respond to the issue precludes an action for damages in circuit court.
Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, application materials are provided online and written comments will be accepted by
email.Alternative arrangements for reviewing the application or submitting comments can be made by contacting (541)
488-5305 or planning@ashland.or.us.
A copy of the application, including all documents, evidence and applicable criteria relied upon by the applicant, and a copy
of the staff report will be available on-line atwww.ashland.or.us/PCpacketsseven days prior to the hearing.Copies of
application materialswill be provided at reasonable cost, if requested.Under extenuating circumstances, application
materials may be requested to be reviewed in-person at the Ashland Community Development & Engineering Services
Building, 51 Winburn Way, via a pre-arranged appointment by calling (541) 488-5305 or emailing planning@ashland.or.us.
Anyone wishing to submit comments can do so by sending an e-mail to PC-public-testimony@ashland.or.uswith the
February 9, 2021PC Hearing TestimonyMonday, February 8, 2021
.If the applicant
wishes to provide a rebuttal to the testimony, they can submit the rebuttal via e-mail to PC-public-testimony@ashland.or.us
February 9, 2021 PHHearing TestimonyTuesday, February 9, 2021.
Written
testimony received by these deadlines will be available for Planning Commissioners to review before the hearing and will
be included in the meeting minutes.
Oraltestimonywillbetakenduringtheelectronicpublichearing.Ifyouwishtoprovideoraltestimonyduringtheelectronic
TuesdayFebruary9,2021.
meeting,sendanemailtoPC-public-testimony@ashland.or.usby10:00a.m.onInorderto
providetestimonyatthepublichearing,pleaseprovidethefollowinginformation:1)makethesubjectlineoftheemail
February9SpeakerRequest
,2)includeyourname,3)theagendaitemonwhichyouwishtospeakon,4)specifyifyou
willbeparticipatingbycomputerortelephone,and5)thenameyouwilluseifparticipatingbycomputerorthetelephone
numberyouwilluseifparticipatingbytelephone.
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 request, please feel free to contact staff project planner Derek Severson
at541-535-5305 or derek.severson@ashland.or.us.
38
SITE DESIGN AND USE STANDARDS
18.5.2.050
The following criteria shall be used to approve or deny an application:
A. Underlying Zone: The proposal complies with all of the applicable provisions of the underlying zone (part 18.2), including but not limited to: building and
yard setbacks, lot area and dimensions, density and floor area, lot coverage, building height, building orientation, architecture, and other applicable
standards.
B. Overlay Zones: The proposal complies with applicable overlay zone requirements (part 18.3).
C. Site Development and Design Standards: The proposal complies with the applicable Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4, except as
provided by subsection E, below.
D. City Facilities: The proposal complies with the applicable standards in section 18.4.6 Public Facilities and that adequate capacity of City facilities for water,
sewer, electricity, urban storm drainage, paved access to and throughout the property and adequate transportation can and will be provided to the subject
property.
E. Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards: The approval authority may approve exceptions to the Site Development and Design Standards
of part 18.4 if the circumstances in either subsection 1 or 2, below, are found to exist.
1. There is a demonstrable difficulty meeting the specific requirements of the Site Development and Design Standards due to a unique or unusual aspect
of an existing structure or the proposed use of a site; and approval of the exception will not substantially negatively impact adjacent properties; and
approval of the exception is consistent with the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design; and the exception requested is the minimum
which would alleviate the difficulty.; or
2. There is no demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements, but granting the exception will result in a design that equally or better achieves
the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design Standards.
39
40
41
42
44
BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION
March 9, 2021
IN THE MATTER OF PLANNING ACTION #PA-T2-2020-00025,A REQUEST FOR )
SITE DESIGN REVIEW APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCTTWO NEW COMMERCIAL/)
INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS ON THE VACANT TAX LOT #600 ON INDEPENDENT)
WAY, THE NEWLY CONSTRUCTED PUBLIC STREET BETWEENWASHINGTON)
STREET AND TOLMAN CREEK ROAD. BOTH BUILDINGSWOULD BE PART OF)
THE IPCO DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION SERVICEBUILDING COMPLEX AND)
)
WOULDSHARE DRIVEWAY ACCESSES, PARKING AREAS AND LANDSCAPING.
FINDINGS,
THE FIRST BUILDING IS PROPOSED TO BE 10,919 SQUARE FEET AND WOULD)
CONCLUSIONS,
BE CONSTRUCTED ADJACENT TO INDEPENDENT WAY. THE SECOND WOULD)
& ORDERS
BE 17,859 SQUARE FEET AND WOULD BE NEAR THE SOUTH PROPERTY LINE.)
THE APPLICATION INCLUDES A REQUEST FOR AN EXCEPTION TO THE SITE)
DEVELOPMENT AND DESIGN STANDARDS (AMC 18.4.2.040.B.3.A) WHICH CALL)
FOR A TEN-FOOT WIDE LANDSCAPE BUFFER BETWEEN THE BUILDING AND )
THE STREET.)
)
APPLICANT/OWNERS:
Rogue Planning & Development Services, LLC/)
IPCO Development Corporation)
)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RECITALS:
1)Tax lot#600of Map 39 1E 14BAis a vacant 2.07 acre parcel and is zoned Employment (E-1).
2)The applicant is requestingSite Design Review approval for the construction of two new
commercial/industrial buildings on Tax Lot #600 adjacent to Independent Way, the newly installed
public street between Washington Street and Tolman Creek Road. Both buildings would be part of the
IPCO Development Corporation service building complex, and would share driveway accesses, parking
areas and landscaped areas. The Building 6is proposed to be 10,919 square feet and
would be constructed adjacent to Independent Way. The proposed Building5would be
17,859 square feet and would be Building 6near the south property line. The
application includes a request for an Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards (AMC
18.4.2.040.B.3.a) which call for a ten-foot wide landscape buffer between the building and the street.
The proposal is outlined in plans on file at the Department of Community Development.
AMC 18.5.2.050
3)The criteria for Site Design Review approval are detailed in 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).
45
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.
4)On April 15, 2020 Governor Kate Brown issued Executive Order #20-16
Working: Ordering Necessary Measures to Ensure Safe Public Meetings and Continued Operations by
Local Government During Coronavirus (COVID-
public bodies hold public meetings by telephone, video, or through some other electronic or virtual
means, whenever possible; that the public body make available a method by which the public can listen
to or virtually attend the public meeting or hearing at the time it occurs; that the public body does not
have to provide a physical space for the public to attend the meeting or hearing; thatrequirements that
oral public testimony be taken during hearings be suspended, and that public bodies instead provide a
means for submitting written testimony by e-mailor other electronic methods that the public body can
consider in a timely manner.The subsequently adopted House Bill #4212 further authorized governing
bodies in Oregon to conduct all public meetings using telephone or video conferencing technology or
through other electronic or virtual means.
8)The Planning Commission, following proper public notice, held an electronic public hearingon
February 9, 2020. In keeping with Executive Order #20-16and subsequent House Bill #4212, this meeting
was broadcast live on local television channel 9 and on Charter Communications channels 180 & 181,
and was live-streamed over the internet on RVTV Prime at http://www.rvtv.sou.edu. A copy of the
application, including all documents, evidence and applicable criteria relied upon by the applicant, and
a copy of the staff report were made available on-line seven days prior to the hearing. Those wishing to
provide written testimony were able to submit it via e-mail in advance of the hearing, as detailed inthe
mailed and posted notices, and allwritten testimony received by thedeadlineswas made available for
Commissioners to review before the hearing and was included in the meeting minutes. In addition,
those wishing to participate during the hearing couldarrange to provide oral testimony by making
arrangements to do so in advance of the meeting.Following the closingofthe public hearing and the
46
record, the Planning Commissionconsidered the materials receivedand testimony presented and approved
the application subject to conditions pertaining to the appropriate development of the site.
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
2.1The Planning Commission finds that it has received all information necessary to make a decision
based on theapplication materials, staff report, public testimony and exhibits received.
2.2The Planning Commission finds that the proposal forSite Design Reviewapproval meets the
applicable criteria forSite Design Review described in AMC 18.5.2.050.
2.3The Planning Commission concludes that the proposal satisfies all applicable criteria for Site
Design Review approval.
The first approval criterion for Site Design Review approval addresses the requirements of the
underlying zone, requiring that, 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
The application materials explain that the subject property and all adjacent properties are zoned E-1
(Employment). There are no minimum setbacks within the E-1 zone, and the application explains that
theproposed setbacks are theminimum necessary. Alongthe newly constructed street Independent
Way, is proposed to have a five-foot setback from the public street, and has
been designed to comply with Solar Access Standard B, whichallows the structure to cast the same
shadow that would be cast by a 16-foot tall fence constructed on the north property line. Within the E-
1 zoning district, 40 feet is the maximum building height; here, Building 6 is proposed at just over 20
feet in height, while Building 5 is proposed to be 22 feet tall.
47
The application materials further explain that the proposed lot coverage is less than the allowed 85
percent in the zone, as the 2.07-acre parcel is proposed to have total lot coverage of approximately
69,495 square feet, or 77.08 percent. 28,775 square feet of this coverage is building footprints, while
approximately 40,718 square feetis paved. There will be approximately 4,952 square feet of new
landscapedareas within the parking areas proposed.
The property is not located within a Residential-overlay, and as such no residences are proposed and
residential density is not considered. Similarly, Floor Area Ratios (FAR) are not considered outside of
the Detail Site Review zone. Building 6 occupies the majority of the property frontage, placing the
wider side of the building to the street, and is accessed directly from the sidewalk via a centralized
stairway that extends from the sidewalk to the raised walkway .The building
has architectural details common to metal buildings in the Employment zoning district.The application
materials further note that to allow for potential intensification of uses, at the front of the buildingan
entry/exit door is framed but not installed to preserve the future possibility of creating an additional
tenant space, and on the south side of Building 6, area for future windows hasbeen accommodated in
the design.
Building 5 is substantially more than 20-feet from the public street, and as such is not required to be
oriented to Independent Way. Building 5 incorporates additional areas for openings for roll-up doors
and pedestrian entrances on both its frontfaçade(north side) and east side.
The Planning Commission finds that the building and yard setbacks and other applicable standards have
been evaluated to ensure consistency with the applicable provisions of part 18.2, and all regulations of
the underlying E-1 zoning will be satisfied.
The second approval criterion deals with overlay zones, and requires that,The proposal complies with
The Planning Commission finds that the property
contains a reach of Hamilton Creek near the east property line, and as such is subject to both the Physical
& Environmental Constraints Overlay (AMC 18.3.10.080) for flood plain corridor lands and to the
Water Resources Protection Zones Overlay (AMC 18.3.11)
Eph
and as such is subject to the standards in AMC 18.3.10.100.
The application materials explain that the property contains a Water Resource Protection Zone(WRPZ)
and a FEMA Special Flood Hazard Area floodplain for Hamilton Creek, and further notes that Hamilton
Creek exits from a 60-inch culvert along the east property line.The proposed development, excepting
very small areasof the driving and parking area,is setback more than 30-feet from the mapped centerline
of Hamilton Creek. Theapplication further notes that the 2015 Site Review application(PA #2015-
00422)which approved the installation of Independent Way included a Limited Activities and Uses
permit for the bridge crossingand also permitted a small area of encroachment into the WRPZ to
accommodate an area of the drive aisle curbing and a bio-swale/detention area.The application
materials assert that the proposal complies with the 2015 approval, and that there are no additional
impacts to the WRPZor floodplain with the developmentproposed.
48
The Planning Commission finds that the subject property is also subject to the Physical & Environmental
Constraints Overlay standards for wildfire lands, and as such a Fire Prevention and Control Plan
addressingthe General Fuel Modification Area requirements in AMC 18.3.10.100.A.2 will need to be
provided for the review of the Fire Marshal prior to bringing combustible materials onto the property,
and any new landscaping proposed will need to comply with these standards and shall not include plants
listed on the Prohibited Flammable Plant Listper Resolution #2018-028.A condition hasbeen
included below to require a final Fire Prevention and Control Plan and plant list be provided for the
reviewand approval of the Fire Marshal prior tothe issuance of a building permit or to bringingany
combustibles onto the site.
Based on the foregoing, the Planning Commission finds that this criterion dealing with overlay zone
requirements is satisfiedwith the proposal.
Theproposal
complies with the applicable Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4, except as provided
In this instance, the subject property is outside of the Detail Site Review and
Historic District overlay zones, and as such the applicable standards are the Building Placement,
Orientation and Design Standardsfrom Chapter 18.4.2, and specifically the standards for Non-
Residential Development in AMC 18.4.2.040; the Parking, Access & Circulation standards in Chapter
18.4.3; the Landscaping, Lighting and Screening standards in Chapter 18.4.4; and the Tree Preservation
and Protection standards in Chapter 18.4.5.
Basic Site Review Standards for Non-Residential Development (AMC 18.4.2.040)
In addressing these standards, the application materials note that proposed Building 6 is oriented towards
Independent Waywhich is newly constructed with sidewalks and parkrow planting strips with street
trees in place. The proposed design provides for direct pedestrian access from the public street to the
entrances of the building. The pedestrian entrances are accessed via a raised walkway served by a wide,
central stair that leads directly from the public sidewalk to the walkway and entrances. Each pedestrian
entrance is clearly visible from the street with commercial entry doors, sidelight windows, awnings to
provide pedestrian coverage from sun and rain, and lighting that all enhance the sense of entry to the
tenant spaces. There is no automobile circulation or off-street parking between the building and the
street. Parking areas are proposed to be placed to theside and rear of the street-fronting building.
The application continues, noting that the the
proposed Building 6, and that the driveways are to the sides of the building allowing positioning of the
wider side of the building to the streetwith no gaps in the frontage. Driveway aprons, vehicle aisles and
parking areas are to the sides and rear of the building.
The application materials explain that the proposed site plan does not include the required ten-foot
landscape buffer adjacent to the street. The application materials suggest thatthe purchase agreement
when the city acquiredright-of-way to construct the new street,shared understandings were detailed
with the purchase includingthatwith planning approval, the required landscape buffer would instead be
the landscape park rowandthatsince thepark row was installed at seven feet, three feet of landscape
49
buffer remain. The application includes a request for an Exception to eliminate the required landscape
buffer entirelywhich is addressed further below.Asize-, species-and planting-specific landscape and
irrigation plan will be provided for the review and approval of the Staff Advisor with the building permit
submittal.
Refuse and recycle containers are to be located within the buildingsand placed outside for pick-up on
garbage day each week. The application explains that this is how the majority of the tenants of the
property operate, that the arrangement is formalized in the lease agreements, and has worked well for
the property owner and for Recology.
The application materials point out that proposed exterior lights are dusk to dawnlights
recessed under the awningsand downward directed to avoid directly illuminating adjacent properties.
Noises generated by the site are anticipated to be consistent with whatcan be expected in an Employment
zone where uses may include production, manufacturing, and repair.
Parking, Access & Circulation (AMC 18.4.3)
The parking ratio industrial, manufacturing, production, warehousing, and freight uses isthe lesser of
one parking space per 1,000 square feetof gross floor areaor one space for every two employees, plus
one space for a company vehicle. Based on the 28,778 square feet of new building area proposed, a
total of 29 parking spaces are required(28,778/1,000 = 28.778). The application materials note that 32
off-street parking spaces are proposed to address the parking demand here, along with an additional
In total, there are 40
off-street parking spaces provided including29standard spaces, eight compact spaces and three ADA
spaces. The application materials note that the minimum required back-up area of 22-feet is available
for each parking space, and that theparking area will be developed to address requirements for
landscaping, shade trees, micro-climatic impacts and stormwater quality managementfurther
explaining that the parking lot has been designed to minimize adverse environmental impacts through
the use of a bio-swale filtration as provided in the Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual. While the
application materials indicate that the design minimizes the micro-climatic and environmental impacts
of the parking area, the Commission finds that it isunclear which of the strategies in AMC
18.4.3.080.B.5.a is proposed, and a condition has accordingly been added to require that the building
permit submittal clearly address which of these standards (i.e. light-colored or porous paving, additional
shade through structures or extra trees) is to be relied upon in the final design.
All of the IPCO Development Corporation Service Building sites are interconnected and accommodate
semi-truck and other vehicular traffic through the properties. The new parking area is proposed to be
accessed from the driveways that extend from Independent Way. With the new development, pedestrian
access is extended from Independent Way along both sides of the proposed Service Building #6 and
extends to the entrances of Service Building #5. The sidewalks are raised when crossing drive aisles as
required by code. The parking areas provide for adequate back-up and turn around area is provided for
on the site plans.
50
The application materials further note that the area along thecurb adjacent to the Hamilton Creek
corridor are intended to provide for semi-truck staging on-site, but have the potential to be restriped for
parking if the use of the property were to intensify. Bicycle parking is proposed to be located within the
buildings.
Tree Preservation & Protection (AMC 18.4.5)
Theapplication explains that in addition to the newly-planted street trees, there are parking lot shade
trees along the west property line that will be protected from construction impacts. There are also
existing trees in the riparian drainage area on the east side of the driveway and parking area. A tree
protection fencing plan has been provided to address the three trees in the parking area. The application
details the placement of requisite tree protection fencing in the form of six-foot tall, chain link fencing
at the driplines of the trees identified on the provided tree inventory, and further notes that silt fencing
will be provided to prevent erosion into the Water Resource Protection Zone before site disturbance.
The application recognizes that fencing will need to be installed flush with gradeand inspected by the
Staff Advisor prior to any site work, and further indicates that no construction activityor excavation
will occur within the identified tree protection zonesand that no building supplies, soil, equipment,
vehicle parkingor waste, includingchemically injurious materials or liquids, construction debris, run-
off, or excess concrete excess, will be allowed in the tree protection zones.
The Commission finds that the newly-planted street trees in the park row planting strip on Independent
Way will also need protection during site development, and a condition has been required to require a
revised tree protection planwhich also addresses the street trees shall be provided for the reviewand
approval of the Staff Advisorwith the building permit submittals.
Based on the foregoing, the Planning Commission concludes thatother than the single Exception
requested, which is discussed further below,the proposal complies with the applicable Site Development
and Design Standards of part 18.4.
The fourth approval criterion addresses city facilities, specifically requiring that, 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
Theapplication indicates thatpublic infrastructure wasextended with the construction of Independent
Wayto serve the subject property, noting that required improvements for a neighborhood commercial
collector street including pavement, curb, gutter, a six-foot sidewalk, a seven-foot-wide landscape park
row with street trees, and streetlightswere installedand utilities were extended.The application
materials further detail that utilities in place include an eight-inch water main, an eight-inch sanitary
sewer main and a 12-inch storm sewer mainwithin the Independent Wayright-of-way.In addition, the
application indicates that large electric transformers were installed with previous site work as well as
the street installation, providing sufficient electric service capacity tosupport underground electric
service to serve development of theproperty, and that associated private utility easements were extended
through the property with theseinstallations. The application concludes by noting that the installation
51
of adequate utilities to serve the property was contemplated with the development of Independent Way,
and the civil engineer who designed the street extension is also the engineer of record for the current
application. Public Works and Engineering staff have confirmed that adequate capacity of utilities to
enable the envisioned development of the site was planned and installed with the Independent Way
project.
property from public utility easements and street right-of-way adjacent to the site, and that based on the
findings and conceptual plansprovided, adequate key city facilities are available within the adjacent
rights-of-way and will be extended by the applicant to serve the proposed development. Conditions
have been included below to require that final electric service, utility and civil plans be provided for the
review and approval of the Staff Advisor and city departments in conjunction with the building permit
submittals, and that civil infrastructure be installed by the applicants, inspected and approved prior to
final project approval.
ThePlanning Commission finds that adequate capacity of city facilities, paved access to and throughout
the property, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to the subject property. The
Commission concludes that this criterion has been satisfied.
The application includes a request for a single Exception to the Site Development
and Design Standard in AMC 18.4.2.040.B.3.a whichLandscape areas at least ten feet
in width shall buffer buildings adjacent to streets, except the buffer is not required in the Detail Site
Review, Historic District, and Pedestrian Place overlays.Detail
Site Review, Historic District or Pedestrian Place overlay, but an Exception is requested to not provide
the required buffer.
The applicable criterion provides that:
ŷĻ ğƦƦƩƚǝğƌ ğǒƷŷƚƩźƷǤ ƒğǤ ğƦƦƩƚǝĻ ĻǣĭĻƦƷźƚƓƭ Ʒƚ ƷŷĻ {źƷĻ 5ĻǝĻƌƚƦƒĻƓƷ ğƓķ 5ĻƭźŭƓ {ƷğƓķğƩķƭ ƚŅ ƦğƩƷ ЊБ͵Ѝ źŅ
ƷŷĻ ĭźƩĭǒƒƭƷğƓĭĻƭ źƓ ĻźƷŷĻƩ ƭǒĬƭĻĭƷźƚƓ Њ ƚƩ ЋͲ ĬĻƌƚǞͲ ğƩĻ ŅƚǒƓķ Ʒƚ ĻǣźƭƷʹ
Њ͵ ŷĻƩĻ źƭ ğ ķĻƒƚƓƭƷƩğĬƌĻ ķźŅŅźĭǒƌƷǤ ƒĻĻƷźƓŭ ƷŷĻ ƭƦĻĭźŅźĭ ƩĻƨǒźƩĻƒĻƓƷƭ ƚŅ ƷŷĻ {źƷĻ 5ĻǝĻƌƚƦƒĻƓƷ ğƓķ 5ĻƭźŭƓ
{ƷğƓķğƩķƭ ķǒĻ Ʒƚ ğ ǒƓźƨǒĻ ƚƩ ǒƓǒƭǒğƌ ğƭƦĻĭƷ ƚŅ ğƓ ĻǣźƭƷźƓŭ ƭƷƩǒĭƷǒƩĻ ƚƩ ƷŷĻ ƦƩƚƦƚƭĻķ ǒƭĻ ƚŅ ğ ƭźƷĻͲ ğƓķ
ğƦƦƩƚǝğƌ ƚŅ ƷŷĻ ĻǣĭĻƦƷźƚƓ Ǟźƌƌ ƓƚƷ ƭǒĬƭƷğƓƷźğƌƌǤ ƓĻŭğƷźǝĻƌǤ źƒƦğĭƷ ğķƆğĭĻƓƷ ƦƩƚƦĻƩƷźĻƭͳ ğƓķ ğƦƦƩƚǝğƌ ƚŅ
ƷŷĻ ĻǣĭĻƦƷźƚƓ źƭ ĭƚƓƭźƭƷĻƓƷ ǞźƷŷ ƷŷĻ ƭƷğƷĻķ ƦǒƩƦƚƭĻ ƚŅ ƷŷĻ {źƷĻ 5ĻǝĻƌƚƦƒĻƓƷ ğƓķ 5ĻƭźŭƓͳ ğƓķ ƷŷĻ
ĻǣĭĻƦƷźƚƓ ƩĻƨǒĻƭƷĻķ źƭ ƷŷĻ ƒźƓźƒǒƒ Ǟŷźĭŷ Ǟƚǒƌķ ğƌƌĻǝźğƷĻ ƷŷĻ ķźŅŅźĭǒƌƷǤͳ ƚƩ
Ћ͵ ŷĻƩĻ źƭ Ɠƚ ķĻƒƚƓƭƷƩğĬƌĻ ķźŅŅźĭǒƌƷǤ źƓ ƒĻĻƷźƓŭ ƷŷĻ ƭƦĻĭźŅźĭ ƩĻƨǒźƩĻƒĻƓƷƭͲ ĬǒƷ ŭƩğƓƷźƓŭ ƷŷĻ ĻǣĭĻƦƷźƚƓ Ǟźƌƌ
ƩĻƭǒƌƷ źƓ ğ ķĻƭźŭƓ ƷŷğƷ ĻƨǒğƌƌǤ ƚƩ ĬĻƷƷĻƩ ğĭŷźĻǝĻƭ ƷŷĻ ƭƷğƷĻķ ƦǒƩƦƚƭĻ ƚŅ ƷŷĻ {źƷĻ 5ĻǝĻƌƚƦƒĻƓƷ ğƓķ 5ĻƭźŭƓ
{ƷğƓķğƩķƭͳ
52
Exception Discussion
Request
The application materials assert that when the City of Ashland purchased the property from the
current property owners in 2012 to construct the new street, the purchase agreement stipulated that
the required landscape buffer would be accommodated within the park row. The application
Buyer agrees, subject to Planning approval,
to allow seller to credit park row landscape for sellers required landscape associated to any future
With the installation of Independent Way, the park row planting
ch the
application suggests leaves an additional three feet of buffer width required. The applicant
requests exception from the standard entirely, proposing not to install any portion of the required
buffer along the frontage of the property, and explainsthat the proposed building has been designed
with a direct pedestrian connection to the public sidewalk and that there are numerous issues with
transients camping and loitering on the property and increased landscape areas encourage loitering.
The application materials provided respond to subsection 2 of the criterion above, explaining that
there is a landscape buffer at the west side of the structure and between the western driveway
access but not along the building frontage. Additionally, the application suggests that due to the
riparian buffer zone, there is an abundant landscaped area provided on the property, substantially
more than a typical Employment zoned property. The application materials further assertthat not
providing a landscape buffer in the zone where no setbacks are required, does not reduce public
health or safety and suggests that the wall adjacent to the sidewalk will not harm the livability of
the adjacent employment zoned lands as there is no residential zoning. The application materials
indicate that the proposed building will make a positive contribution to the streetscape and that the
area is not a highly-traveled arterial street but is rather a manufacturing and industrial area where
the application materials suggest standardscan be flexed to achieve the purpose of the zone which
is described as functional, employment zoned land that has access and parking area for large
vehicles and business traffic.
The application materials go on to discuss that when the street connection application was made,
minor concessions associated with the street design were made to provide a major, City of Ashland
TSP driven connectivity project. The application suggests that the reduced buffer is minor when
considering the substantial compliance with other standards of the Site Design and Use Standards,
the Water Resource and Riparian Protection Zone buffer, grading of the existing site determining
the finished grade of proposed site development and the large investment into flexible space for
large or small warehouse, storage, distribution, and production facilities. The parking lot layout
and the number of spaces provided on-site allow for intensification of the site uses in close
proximity to the Ashland Street commercial corridor and Exit 14.
Theapplication materials explain that the entrances for Building 6 are oriented tothe public right-
of-way and are within 20feet of the sidewalk. The proposal seeks an Exception to eliminate the
53
required landscape buffer along the frontage of the property adjacent to the public street to locate
the entry closer than 20-feet of the right-of-way, and suggests that the reduced landscape buffer
allows for improved large vehicle access to the loading/unloading areas, parking areas and vehicle
maneuvering areas. The proposed reduced buffer allows for a wider than standard 22-foofback-
up area to allow better turning movements for the large vehicles that presently utilize the IPCO
site and will be utilizing the proposed service buildings.
The applicationasserts that in the Employment Zone, it is critical for the site grades to allow easy
access for delivery vehicles, forklifts, pallet movers, etc., cross accessing the internal spaces and
the IPCOpropertiesretention of slight cross-grade, a single finished floor level within the
structures, and the existing grades of the developed portions of the site dictated the grade of the
building site area.The application materials point out that based on thecivil drawings from the
2015 Site Review there was 6½-to8½-feet of grade change from the back of the sidewalk to the
building pad. This grade change at the back of the sidewalk and the need for the site to have a
relatively consistent grade from this tax lot to the other tax lots in the IPCO Service Center complex
are the reasons this building is raised above the sidewalk with a retaining wall along the frontage.
Theapplication materials emphasize that there is no on-street parking on this side of the street,
that the property is Employment-zoned,and that the businessesthat presently occupy the majority
of the IPCO Service Center are not pedestrian-oriented but instead rely heavily upon delivery
traffic.The application concludes that even so, the proposal provides a clear, distinctpedestrian
entranceviastairs directly from the sidewalk to the Building #6 entry.
Staff Response
For staff, it is first important to note that a sales agreement could not legally grant a discretionary
land use approval outside of the required land use hearing process, and in this case, contrary to the
assertion in the application materials, the agreement did not stipulate that the parkrow landscaping
would be credited to offset the buffer requirement but rather provided that the buyer (the City) was
agreeablewith crediting parkrow landscaping toward the overall site landscaping requirements
provided that the seller (the current applicant) could obtain the requisite land use approvals.In
to allow parkrow landscaping
to be credited to the 15 percent site landscaping requirements for E-1 zoned property rather than
to allow park row landscaping, which is part of the required street corridor improvements, to be
substituted for a design standard-required buffer between the street corridor and the building. This
would be generally consistent with AMC18.4.6.050.C.Non-conformitiesCreatedbyStreet
Dedication"whichprovidesthat,Whenthelotareaorsetbacksofalotthatconformstothe
requirementsoftheapplicablezoningdistrictarereduced...asaresultofdedicationofright-of-
wayforimprovementofastreet,theremaininglotisdeemedincompliancewiththe...lot
coverage...requirementsofthezone."Inreadingofthecode,thelotcoveragerequirements
inAMCTable18.2.6.030arenotthesameasthedesignstandards-requiredbufferinAMC
18.4.2.040.B.3.a.
54
The application materials also speak to minor concessions having been made in the original street
design as it wasa city project. Independent Way is considered aCommercial Neighborhood
Collector, and while Exceptions to the Street Design Standards were initially requestedinPA-
2015-00422 to eliminate park rows on the north side of the street, staff noted at that time that
Washington Street and Croman employment areas, its anticipated level of vehicle trips with build-
out in the area, and the truck circulation associated with the anticipated development of the
on the north side. Staff believes it would be difficult to find that a substandard corridor is equal
orsuperioror that the width reduction is necessary to alleviate any difficulty when the street is
new and the right-of-way proposed is of a width intended to accommodate standard improvements.
Staff has accordingly recommended a condition to require that the full 13-foot width -not counting
curb -The decision ultimately required full
city-standard improvements on the north side, with the exception of not requiring a parkrow with
street trees on the bridge crossing itselfto limit impacts in the water resource protection zone and
floodplain. While south side sidewalks were not considered in that application, conditions
nonetheless included that any additional southside improvements meet city standards and that
future development applications consider theremaining sidewalk sections on the south side.
Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards independentof the previous application
-of-way. For staff, while the
application makes clear why the applicant wishestoforgo the requisite landscape buffer, it does
not clearly
truck circulation prevents providing the full ten-foot wide landscaping buffer on a more than two
acre site, or that the exception would be consistent with the stated purpose of the chapter which
Enhance the environment to encourage alternative modes of transportation, such as
walking, bicycling, and transitRequire high quality development that makes a positive
contribution to the streetscape and maintains a sense of place that is distinctly Ashland.Absent
a stronger demonstration that the site cannot accommodate the full-width buffer, staff cannot
support the Exception request.
The Planning Commission finds that the Exception request fails to meet the approval criteria, and the
Exception is denied. A condition has been included below to require that a full ten-foot width landscape
buffer be provided between the building and the sidewalkin the building permit submittals.
The Planning Commission concludesthat as detailed above and with the conditions discussed, the
proposal complies with the requirements for Site Design Review approval.
55
SECTION 3. DECISION
3.1Based on the record of the Public Hearing on this matter, the Planning Commission concludes that
the proposal forSite Design Review approval to construct two new industrial buildings along the newly-
constructed Independent Wayis supported by evidence contained in the whole record. For the
Commission, the primary issue with the request is the proposed Exception to the Site Development and
Design Standards seeking not to provide the required ten-foot wide landscape buffer between the
building and the street called for in AMC 18.4.2.040.B.3.a. For the Commission, thestandards broadly
Enhance the environment to encourage alternative modes of
transportation, such as walking, bicycling, and transitRequire high quality development that
makes a positive contribution to thestreetscape and maintains a sense of place that is distinctly
Ashland.The required buffer would positively contribute to the pedestrian streetscape, buffering the
industrial building adjacent to the sidewalk which is particularly important given that the building will
sit above the sidewalk with a blank retaining wall topped by railing. Ultimately the Commission cannot
-focused site circulation preventsproviding a buffer,
and as such the Commission denies the Exception request and has included a condition that the full
buffer be provided in the building permit submittals.
With that, the Commission concludes that the developmentmerits approvalwith the conditions detailed
below.Therefore, based on our overall conclusions, and upon the proposal being subject to each of the
following conditions, we approve Planning Action #PA-T2-2021-00025.Further, if any one or more of the
conditions below are found to be invalid, for any reason whatsoever,then Planning Action #2021-00025is
denied. The following are the conditions and they are attached to the approval:
1.That all proposals of the applicant shall be conditions of approval unless otherwise modified herein.
That the plans submitted for the building permit shall be in substantial conformance with those
2.
approved as part of this application. If the plans submitted for the building permit are not in
substantial conformance with those approved as part of this application, an application to modify
this Site Design Review approval shall be submitted and approved prior to issuance of a building
permit.
3.That any new addresses shall beassigned by City of Ashland Engineering Department.
4.That permits shall be obtained from the Ashland Public Works Department prior to any work in the public
right of way, including but not limited to permits for new driveway approaches or any necessary
encroachments.
That the windows on the ground floor shall not be tinted so as to prevent views from into the
5.
interior of the building.
That the front entrances adjacent to Independent Way shall remain functional and open to the
6.
public during all business hours.
That a sign permit shall be obtained prior to installation of any new signage. Signage shall meet
7.
the requirements of Chapter 18.4.7.
8.That the building permit submittal shall include:
a.Identification of all easements, including public and private utility easements, public
pedestrian access easements, and fire apparatus access easements.
56
b.Solar setback calculations demonstrating that all new construction complies with Solar
Setback Standard Bin the formula \[(Height 16)/(0.445 + Slope) = Required Solar
Setback\] and elevations or cross section drawings clearly identifying the highest shadow
producing point(s) and the height(s) from natural grade.
c.Lot coverage calculations including all building footprints;driveways, parking, and
circulation areas; and any other areas other than natural landscaping. Lot coverage shall
be limited to no more than 85percent as required in AMC 18.2.6.030.
d.Final electric service, utility and civil engineering plansincluding grading, erosion
control and drainage. All civil infrastructure shall be installed by the applicants,
inspected and approved prior to final inspection/occupancy approval.
e.The final utility plan shall include the location of connections to all public facilities
including the locations of water lines and meter sizes, fire hydrants, sanitary sewer mains
and services, manholes and clean-outs,and storm drainage pipes and catch basins, along
with any backflow prevention measures required by the Water Department. Any required
private or public utility easements shall be delineated on the civil plans.
f.The final electric design and distribution plan shall include load calculations and
locations of all primary and secondary services including transformers, cabinets and all
other necessary equipment with the Final Plan application. This plan must be reviewed
and approved by the Electric Department prior to the signature of the final survey plat.
Transformers and cabinets shall be located in areas least visible from streets and outside
of vision clearance areas, while considering the access needs of the Electric Department.
g.That storm water from all new impervious surfaces and runoff associated with peak
rainfalls must be collected on site and channeled to the City storm water collection system
(i.e., curb gutter at public street, public storm pipe or public drainage way) or through an
approved alternativein accordance with Ashland Building Division policy BD-PP-0029.
On-site collection systems shall be detailed on the building permit submittals.The storm
drainage plan shall detail the location and final engineering for all storm drainage
improvements associated with the project, and shall be submitted for review and approval
by the Departments of Public Works, Planning and Building Divisions. The storm
drainage plan shall demonstrate that post-development peak flows are less than or equal
to the pre-development peak flow for the site as a whole, and that storm water quality
mitigation has been addressed through the final design.
h.Final site lighting details.
i.Afinal size-and species-specific landscapingplan including irrigation details satisfying
the Water Conserving Landscaping Guideline in AMC 18.4.4.030.I. New landscaping
shall comply with the General Fuel Modification Area requirements and shall not include
plants listed on the Prohibited Flammable Plant List adopted by Resolution #2018-028.
All landscaping shall be installed according to the approved plan, and tied into the
existing irrigation system, inspected and approved prior to the issuance of a certificate of
occupancy.
j.That a revised Tree Protection Plan consistent with the standards described in 18.4.5 be
submitted for review and approval of the Staff Advisor prior to the issuance of a building
permit. The plan shall identify the location and placement of fencing around the drip lines
oftrees identified for preservation and shall include the newly planted street trees in the
57
parkrow planting strip in front of the proposed Building 6 along Independent Way. The
amount of fill and grading within the drip line shall be minimized. Cuts withinthe drip
line shall be noted on the tree protection plan, and shall be executed by handsaw and kept
to a minimum. No fill shall be placed around the trunk/crown root.
k.That the requirements of the Ashland Fire Department relating toapproved addressing;
fire apparatus accessand turn-around; a firefighter access pathway; fire flow; hydrant
installation, spacing and clearance; work area; applicable fire sprinklerrequirements; fire
department connection; key box; extinguishers; limitations on obstructions to fire access;
and wildfire hazard areaand vegetationrequirements shall be satisfactorily addressed in
thepermit submittals.
l.AFire Prevention and Control Plan addressingthe General Fuel Modification Area
requirements in AMC 18.3.10.100.A.2 shall be provided prior to bringing combustible
materials onto the property, and any new landscaping proposed shall comply with these
standards and shall not include plants listed on
adopted with Resolution #2018-028.
m.The building permit submittals shall verify that the bicycle parking, spacing and coverage
requirements are met in accordance with 18.4.3.070.I. Inverted U-racks shall be used for
the bicycle parking, and all bicycle parking shall be installed in accordance with design
and rack standards in 18.4.3.070.I and J, inspected and approved by the Staff Advisor
prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy. If bicycle parking is to be provided
within the proposed buildings, final interior dimensions of thededicated bicycle parking
areas shall be detailed on the building permit plans to insure adequate space has been
provided. A bicycle parking space located inside of a building shall be a minimum of six
feet long by three feet wide by four feet high, shall be accessible without moving another
bicycle, and shall be clearly marked as reserved for bicycle parking only.
n.The building permit submittals shall be modified to reflect the full ten-foot width
landscape buffer between the building and the sidewalk required in the Site Development
and Design Standards.
o.The building permit submittals shall clearly identify which of the strategies in AMC
18.4.3.080.B.5.a is being utilized to minimize the environmental and micro-climatic
impacts of the paved areas (i.e.light colored paving, porous paving, or additional shade
through added tree canopy or structures).
9.That prior to the issuance of a building permit:
a.That a Tree Verification Permit shall be applied for and approved by the Staff Advisor
prior to permit issuance, tree removal, or any site work including demolition, staging,
storage of materials, or excavation. The Tree Verification Permit is to inspect the
identification of the tree to be removed and the installation of tree protection fencing for
the trees to be protected on and adjacent to the site. The tree protection shall be chain link
fencing six feet tall and installed in accordance with AMC 18.4.5.030.
b.Silt fencingor other approved means of stream corridor protection and erosion control
shall be installedon-site, inspected in conjunction with the Tree Verification Permit, and
approved by the Staff Advisor prior to permit issuanceorsite work.
58
10.That prior to the final inspection approval or issuance of a certificate of occupancy:
a.That all landscaping in the new landscaped areas, and the irrigation system, shall be
installed according to the approved plan, inspected and approved by the Staff Advisor.
b.Any modifications to the driveway curb-cuts/approachesshall be installed under permit
from the Public Works Department and in accordance with the approved plan, inspected
and approved prior to the submittal of the final survey plat for signature.The driveway
curb cut, apron and entry area shall be sized tostandard turn-around dimensions as
illustrated in AMC 18.4.6.040.G.5.
c.Civil improvements including but not limited to utility installations shall be completed
according to approved plans, inspected and approved
d.That all exterior lighting shall be selected, placed and down-directed/shrouded so as not
directly illuminate adjacent proprieties.Compliance shall be site-verified by the Staff
Advisory prior to final inspection approval or issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
e.That the bicycle parking facilities shall be installed according to the approved plan,
inspected and approved by the Staff Advisor.
March 9, 2021
Haywood Norton, ChairDate
Planning Commission Approval
59
60
!
)Up!cf!dpnqmfufe!cz!uif!Bqqmjdbou!boe!sfuvsofe!up!uif!Djuz!pg!Btimboe!Qmboojoh!Ejwjtjpo*!
Sf;!
QB.U3.3131.11136-!Joefqfoefou!Xbz!
Ebuf!Bqqmjdbujpo!Fyqjsft
;!!!Nbz!28-!3132!
Qvstvbou!up!bo!Jodpnqmfufoftt!Efufsnjobujpo-!J-!uif!voefstjhofe!bqqmjdbou!ps!bhfou!gps!uif!bqqmjdbou-!
fmfdut!pof!pg!uif!uisff!pqujpot!cfmpx!cz!jojujbmjoh;!
ADG
)!`````*!
2/Tvcnju!Bmm!pg!uif!Njttjoh!Jogpsnbujpo
)Jojujbm!jg!fmfdufe*!
J!bn!tvcnjuujoh!bmm!pg!uif!jogpsnbujpo!sfrvftufe!jo!uif!Jodpnqmfufoftt!Efufsnjobujpo!mfuufs/!
Vomftt!difdlfe!cfmpx-!J!bn!sfrvftujoh!uibu!uif!Djuz!pg!Btimboe!Qmboojoh!Ejwjtjpo!sfwjfx!uijt!beejujpobm!
jogpsnbujpo!xjuijo!41!ebzt!pg!tvcnjttjpo!up!efufsnjof!xifuifs!uif!bqqmjdbujpo!jt!dpnqmfuf/!J!
voefstuboe!uibu!uijt!41.ebz!sfwjfx!gps!dpnqmfufoftt!qfsjpe!gps!uif!ofx!jogpsnbujpo!qsftfswft!nz!
pqqpsuvojuz!up!tvcnju!beejujpobm!nbufsjbmt-!tipvme!ju!cf!efufsnjofe!uibu!uif!bqqmjdbujpo!jt!tujmm!
jodpnqmfuf!bgufs!uif!tfdpoe!sfwjfx/!!)!Uif!231.
Opuf;!
efufsnjobujpo!pg!dpnqmjbodf!xjui!bqqmjdbcmf!dsjufsjb!epft!opu!dpnnfodf!voujm!uif!beejujpobm!sfwjfx!
gps!dpnqmfufoftt!qfsjpe!jt!dpnqmfufe/*!
Difdl!jg!eftjsfe!
J!xbjwf!gvsuifs!sfwjfx!pg!uif!jogpsnbujpo!tvcnjuufe!gps!dpnqmfufoftt!boe!ejsfdu!sfwjfx
pg!uif!jogpsnbujpo!tvcnjuufe!gps!dpnqmjbodf!xjui!uif!Dpnnvojuz!Efwfmpqnfou!Dpef
dsjufsjb-!sfhbsemftt!pg!xifuifs!uif!bqqmjdbujpo!jt-!jo!gbdu-!mbufs!efufsnjofe!cz!uif!tubgg!up
cf!jodpnqmfuf/
J!voefstuboe!uibu!cz!difdljoh!uif!bcpwf!tubufnfou!uif!bqqmjdbujpo!xjmm!cf!fwbmvbufe!cbtfe!vqpo!
uif!nbufsjbm!tvcnjuufe!boe!op!opujdf!pg!boz!njttjoh!jogpsnbujpo!xjmm!cf!hjwfo/!Jg!nbufsjbm!
jogpsnbujpo!jt!njttjoh!gspn!uif!bqqmjdbujpo-!uif!bqqmjdbujpo!xjmm!gbjm!up!nffu!uif!cvsefo!pg!
tipxjoh!uibu!bmm!dsjufsjb!bsf!nfu-!boe!uif!bqqmjdbujpo!xjmm!cf!efojfe/!
61
!
)!``*!
3/!Tvcnju!Tpnf!pg!uif!Sfrvftufe!Jogpsnbujpo;!!!
)Jojujbm!jg!fmfdufe*
!!Efdmjof!up!Qspwjef!Puifs!Jogpsnbujpo!
!
J!bn!tvcnjuujoh!tpnf!pg!uif!jogpsnbujpo!sfrvftufe!boe!efdmjojoh!up!tvcnju!puifs!jogpsnbujpo!sfrvftufe!
jo!uif!Jodpnqmfufoftt!Efufsnjobujpo!mfuufs/!J!voefstuboe!uibu!cz!efdmjojoh!up!tvcnju!bmm!jogpsnbujpo!uif!
Djuz!pg!Btimboe!cfmjfwft!ofdfttbsz-!uif!Btimboe!Qmboojoh!Ejwjtjpo!nbz!dpodmvef!uibu!uif!bqqmjdbcmf!
dsjufsjb!bsf!opu!nfu!boe!b!Efojbm!xjmm!cf!jttvfe!ps!sfdpnnfoefe/!
)!`````*!!
4/!Efdmjof!up!Qspwjef!boz!pg!uif!Sfrvftufe!Jogpsnbujpo
)Jojujbm!jg!fmfdufe*!
J!efdmjof!up!qspwjef!boz!pg!uif!jogpsnbujpo!sfrvftufe/!!J!voefstuboe!uibu!uif!Dpnnvojuz!Efwfmpqnfou!
Efqbsunfou!nbz!dpodmvef!uibu!uif!bqqmjdbcmf!dsjufsjb!bsf!opu!nfu!boe!b!Efojbm!xjmm!cf!jttvfe!ps!
sfdpnnfoefe/!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!!!!!
Tjhofe!boe!Bdlopxmfehfe!
!!!!!!!)*!
!
!
!
12/24/2020
!
!!!!!!!
Ebuf!
!
!
Sfuvso!up;!
Djuz!pg!Btimboe-!Qmboojoh!Ejwjtjpo!
Buuo;!Efsfl!Tfwfstpo-!Tfojps!Qmboofs!
d0p!Djuz!Ibmm-!31!Fbtu!Nbjo!Tusffu!
Btimboe-!PS!:8631!
!
!
62
IPCO Development Corp
Site Review for Commercial Development
IPCO Phase 2, Service Buildings 5 and 6
Independent Way
63
December 28, 2020
Site Design Review for the construction
of two new commercial/industrial buildings in the Employment Zone
Subject Property
Property Address: Independent Way(formerly part of 688 Tolman Creek Road)
Map: 39 1E 14BA
Tax lot:600
Comprehensive Plan Designation: Employment
Zoning: E-1
Overlay Zones: Hamilton Creek FEMA Special Flood Hazard Area
Water Resources Protection Zone
Wildfire Hazards
Severe Constraints Slopes
Owner: IPCO Development Corporation
1425 Greenmeadows Way
Ashland, OR 97520
Design / Build: JB Steel Inc.
PO BOX 4460
Medford, OR 97501
Engineer: Thornton-Daley Engineering
Kirk Daley
PO BOX 476
Jacksonville, OR 97530
Land Use Consultant: Rogue Planning & Development Services
1314-B Center Dr., PMB 457
Medford, OR 97501
64
Request:
The request is for Site Design Review approval for the construction of two new commercial/industrial
buildings as part of the IPCO Development Corporation service building complex. Service Building #5 is a
17,858.5 square foot commercial building. This structure is located near the south property line. Building
#6 is proposed as a 10,919 square foot structure. Building #6 is proposed to be adjacent to the newly
installed public street, Independent Way. Independent Way connects Washington Street to Tolman
Road. Building #5 is proposed to be to the south of Building #6 with shared driveway accesses, parking
areas, and landscape areas.
Property Description:
The subject property is a 2.07-acre parcel (Parcel 3) of a four-
lot partition plat from 2002.
The trapezoidal-shaped lot has approximately 230 feet of
frontage along Independent Way. The lot extends
approximately 168 feet to the south on the west side of the
lot and 355 feet south along the east side of the property. The
rear property line abuts the property at 688 Tolman Creek
Road which is a site developed as a warehouse space, parking,
and driving surfaces.
Along the east property line is Hamilton Creek, an
intermittent/ephemeral stream according to the Water
Resource Protection Zone maps. Hamilton Creek is partially
culverted along the east property line but daylights
into the riparian preservation and creek restoration
project area at the location of the new Independent
IPCO
Way bridge crossing of Hamilton Creek.
DEVELOPMENT
AREA
Hamilton Creek is a FEMA floodplain. A Letter of
Map Revision (LOMR) was approved in March 2014
that reduced the regulated floodplain width through
the property and modified the Special Flood Hazard
Area, greatly reducing the boundaries, depths and
area of the FEMA floodplain.
There are no other significant natural features on
the site.
65
The area of development is to the east of the former location of a large-scale, three-shift, employer,
Independent Printing Company, founded in 1910. With a reduction in paper needs as we entered a digital
era, the printing company closed in 2016. The property owners have since created a multi-structure,
physically connected, employment service center. The Service Buildings are part of the IPCO properties
that extend along the north and south sides of Independent Way, south to the Railroad Tracks, and west
along Hamilton Creek. The service buildings consist of four, existing commercial/employment buildings
that house businesses ranging from food processing and packaging, product research and development,
sales, service, offices, karate studio, and photography studio. The former IPCO structure (Service Building
#1), and the two older tenant structures (Service Buildings #2 and #3) have connected vehicular,
including semi-truck, circulation. With the recent development of Service Building #4 in the southeast
corner of the IPCO properties, the driveway was extended to Building #4 (PA-T1-2019-00066).
The property proposed for development is served by the public infrastructure has been extended with
the construction of Independent Way. Along Independent Way, pavement, curb, gutter, a six-foot
sidewalk, a seven-foot-wide landscape park row with street trees, streetlights, and utilities have been
installed. Independent Way is open, connecting Tolman Creek Road to Washington Street.
There is an 8-inch water main in Independent Way. An 8-inch sanitary sewer main, and a 12-inch storm
sewer main in Independent Way. There is a substantial amount of electric service capacity too and
through the property. The service exists underground, large transformers have been installed as part of
previous site work and the street installation.
The subject property and the immediately adjacent
properties are zoned Employment (E-1). The property to the
north is Employment and is occupied by a residential
structure and outbuildings. To the northeast, the property is
zoned Commercial (C-1). The property to the southeast is
zoned Industrial (M-1). The property to the south is
Employment and owned in common by the IPCO
Development Corporation. Properties to the west are
Employment with Residential Overlay and further west,
across Tolman Creek Road, properties are zoned Commercial
(C-1).
Proposal:
The proposal is for the development of the 2.07 acres Employment zoned lot with two, metal buildings
that will provide commercial/industrial tenant shell spaces that are adaptable for business and
employment needs including warehouse to office spaces. The structures are designed in a manner that
allows for uses similar to the other uses in the E-1 zone on the property and the immediate vicinity.
66
Service Building #5is proposed as the south building. The preliminary building design demonstrates
general compliance with the building design standards for E-1 zoned lands and the Basic Site Review
Standards. This structure is substantially more than 20-feet from the public street. Service Building #5
is proposed as a 17,858.5 square foot, 22-foot tall structure. The main body of the building is proposed
as vertical, multi-rib, metal siding. Under the eave line, a clear panel to allow daylight into the tenant
space is shown. There are commercial entry doors with sidelights on the north and east façades of the
structure. There are four-foot awning overhangs at the entries. The building has structural design and
engineering that will allow for openings for additional entry doors and/or additional roll-up doors as
the spaces evolve.
Service Building #6 is a metal building that is 10,919 square feet. This single-story structure is proposed
to be 18-feet tall. The building is proposed as a vertical ribbed, metal building. There are four, framed
openings for commercial type, aluminum and glass, pedestrian entrance/exits to the building.
Windows that provide a view into and out of the tenant spaces are proposed on the street fronting
facade. Awnings for pedestrian shelter that extend along the entire façade of the structure (as shown),
or individual awnings at each entrance will be provided on the final building permit submittal.
Recessed soffit lights under the awning are proposed to illuminate the entrance of the individual
tenant space.
Service Building #6 extends across the majority of the property’s street frontage. There is a significant
grade change from Independent Way and the sidewalk up to the grade of the property. The finished
floor of the building is higher than the sidewalk grade so pedestrian access to the entrances of the
tenant’s spaces is from a central stair leading up the raised walkway that extends along the frontage of
the building. On the east sides of the building, a ramp is provided to the grade of the driveway and
pedestrian walkway leading to the parking area and Service Building #5.
The proposal seeks an exception to the landscape buffering standard along the front of the
development between the street and the retaining wall. There is no minimum front, side, or rear yard
setback in the Employment Zone but there is a landscape. When the purchase and street improvement
agreements were made between the property owners and the City of Ashland, the required ten-foot
landscape buffer for developments in the Employment Zone a landscape area of ten feet in width is
required to buffer buildings adjacent to streets.
Site Use:
The request is for metal buildings that are capable of many types of commercial tenant space. The
proposed uses are designated as light industrial, warehousing, and office facility. Other businesses on
Tolman Creek Road include food production, light manufacturing facilities, shopping, auto repair,
dining, and warehousing.
67
The proposal is consistent with the Economic Element of the Comprehensive Plan which states that
“the exact mixof retailing, services, wholesaling, and manufacturing is impossible to predict and
difficult to control, so forecasting should err on the side of allowing ample, rather than restrictive
policies for land availability." In this case, allowing for the construction of commercial buildings in the
zone that have the flexibility to convert to a higher intensity employment use while conforming to the
Site Design and parking standards, development in the employment zone should be encouraged to
provide a predictable outcome to the approval process when standards are met. (Comprehensive Plan;
Economic Element, Chapter 7.04)
Both of the proposed buildings are designed in a manner that allows for internal partitions. See
attached elevations and floor plans.
Building 6 which is required to occupy the majority of the property frontage and to be parallel to
Independent Way requires the building to be at one finish floor to attract the highest and best uses for
warehouse or industrial tenants. The existing grade between entrances drop +/-13’ between the two
drive approaches, so by using methods of balancing the site and maintaining minimal slope across the
parking lots for truck deliveries, pedestrian accessand handicapped accessibility require the use of a
retaining wall system as shown. To attract Class "A" tenants a developer must remove barriers to client
indifference. Creating barriers like finish floors at multiple elevations is counterproductive and
counterintuitive to the needs of distribution or process manufacturing for the class “A” tenant the
property owners are seeking. These types of customers look for and rely on continuous workflow to
expedite their processes of work. Associated General Contractors' (AGC) National Chief economist Ken
Simonsen states that the #2 growth sector for the construction and development market should be for
regional warehouses to supplement the demand for direct shipments of online shopping due to the void
of retailers that will survive the Covid-19 pandemic event. The IPCO Development site with
interconnected driveways, accesses, and street access, is just the site to meet the needs of the shipping,
warehousing, manufacturing markets.
Parking:
The parking demand for industrial, manufacturing, production, warehousing, and freight uses is one
parking space per 1,000 square feet gross floor area or one space for every two employees whichever is
less, plus one space for a company vehicle. Specific types of these uses are not identified in the land use
ordinance. There is a total of 29 required parking spaces based on the warehousing calculation. The
proposal provides for a maximum number of parking spaces of 32. There are an additional, eight,
formalized parking spaces (labeled IPCO) on the site plan. These spaces are provided for Service Building
#1 on the adjacent property. In total, there are 40 parking spaces provided with 29 of those as standard
automobile spaces, and three (3) ADA parking spaces, eight (8) are compact. There is a minimum of 22-
feet of back up provided for each parking space. The parking areas will be developed as per the
requirements for parking lot design for shade trees, microclimatic impacts, and stormwater quality
management.
68
Along the Hamilton Creek Corridor where the curbing is located, these spaces are presently shown as
the semi-truck staging area. If the property development intensifies, there would be an opportunity to
stripe these spaces to accommodate higher levels of parking demand if necessary.
Bicycle parking is proposed to be located within the building and as demonstrated on the floorplans.
Site Circulation:
All of the IPCO Development Corporation Service Building sites are interconnected and accommodate
semi-truck and other vehicular traffic through the properties. The new parking area is proposed to be
accessed from the driveways that extend from Independent Way. With the new development,
pedestrian access is extended from Independent Way along both sides of the proposed Service Building
#6 and extends to the entrances of Service Building #5. The sidewalks are raised when crossing drive
aisles as required by code. The parking areas provide for adequate back-up and turn around area is
provided for on the site plans.
Tree Protection:
There will are newly planted street trees and there are parking lot shade trees along the west property
line that will be protected from construction impacts. There are also treesin the riparian drainage area
on the east side of the driveway and semi-parking area. A tree protection fencing plan for the three trees
in the parking area, utilizing, six-foot-tall chain link fence is proposed to be installed at the perimeter of
the trees as indicated on the sheet L-1 of the plans.
Water Resource Protection Zone and Floodplain:
The 2015 City of Ashland request for site design review and exception to street standards application,
included a Limited Use Permit / Water Resource Protection Zone Reduction for Construction in the Water
Resource Protection Zone decision (PA-2015-00422) that allowed for the Independent Way creek
crossing and the riparian restoration on the north and south sides of the street has been completed and
the street connection between Tolman Creek Road and Washington Street.
At the time of the 2015 decision, it was proposed that the stormwater quality detention area was
provided within the Hamilton Creek Water Resource Protection Zone, as shown on the Civil Engineering
plans and the Covey/Pardee Impact and Mitigation Area plan (sheet L-3 of 2015-00422) submitted with
the proposal delineate the impact and mitigation areas. Additionally, the stormwater would be sent to
the Filterra bio-retention systems. Along the east edge of the development, there is a slight
encroachment into the water resource protection zone. This disturbed area represents a very minimal
area of disturbance in the 40-foot from centerline buffer of a creek that is actually in a culvert and not
daylighted in the area where the encroachment occurs.
69
The proposal is consistent with the Physical Constraints Review for the floodplain crossing that was
approved in 2015 for Independent Way. The proposal does not impact the previously approved
encroachments into the floodplain.
Findings of fact addressing the criteria from the Ashland Municipal Code are provided on the following
pages. For clarity, the criteria are infont and the applicant’s responses are inCalibri
Times New Roman
font.
70
Criteria from the Ashland Land Use Ordinance
Site Development and Design Review
18.5.2.050 Approval Criteria
A. Underlying Zone. The proposal complies with all of the applicable provisions of the underlying zone
(part 18.2), including but not limited to: building and yard setbacks, lot area and dimensions, density and
floor area, lot coverage, building height, building orientation, architecture, and other applicable standards.
Finding:
The subject property and the adjacent properties are zoned Employment (E-1). The proposed
development will have a positive impact on the newly installed public street through the development
of a vehicle-oriented warehouse, industrial development that must provide adequate vehicular access
and circulation, functional structures that allow for highest and best uses in the employment zoned area
while still providing pedestrian access and structural orientation to the street.
There are no minimum setbacks in the E-1 zone. Setbacks proposed are minimums necessary for the site
development. Along Independent Way, Service Building #6 is proposed to have a five-foot setback from
the public street. The proposed structure complies with the solar setback standard B. The structure is
proposed to be 18-feet from grade with an average height of just over 20-feet in average height.
Building #5 is proposed to be 22-feet tall.
The proposed lot coverage from new development is less than the allowed 85 percent in the zone. The
2.07-acre parcel is proposed to have 28,775 square feet of the building and approximately 40,718 square
feet of asphalt. There are 4,951.52 square feet of new landscape areas within the parking areas
proposed. The proposed total lot coverage is 69,495 square feet which is 77.08 percent of the 2.07-acre
site.
There are no residences proposed and residential density does not apply. The floor area ratios(FAR)are
not applicable in the Basic Site Review zone. The buildings are both less than the maximum height of 40-
feet allowed in the zone.
Service Building #5 is substantially more than 20-feet from the public street and is not oriented towards
the public street.
Service Building #6 occupies the majority of the property frontage. The building is accessed directly from
the sidewalk via a centralized stairway that extends from the sidewalk to theraised walkwaythat extends
along the frontage of the structure. The building has architectural details that are commonly found on
metal buildings in the Employment zone.
71
To allow for potential intensification of uses, at the front of the building, an entry/exit door is framed
but not installed to create additional tenant space. Additionally, on the south side of Service Building #6,
the area for future windows have been accommodated in the design. Service Building #5 incorporates
additional areas for openings for roll-up doors and pedestrian entrances on the front façade (north side)
and the east side.
The proposed parking area of 40-new parking spaces is to the rear and side of the street fronting
structure, Service Building #6. The parking area complies with the parking lot design standards specified
in section 18.4.3. Parking lot shade trees will be planted in the landscape buffers and within the parking
lot, shade tree planting islands. The parking area is proposed to be surfaced with asphalt, and concrete,
or comparable surfaces. The parking areas will be constructed to standards on file in the office of the
City Engineer. Provisions have been made for the on-site collection of drainage waters to eliminate sheet
flow of such waters onto sidewalks, public rights-of-way, and abutting private property (see Preliminary
Grading Plan).
B. Overlay Zones. The proposal complies with applicable overlay zone requirements (part 18.3).
Finding:
The property is within the Water Resource Protection Zone and a FEMA Special Flood Hazard Area
floodplain has been identified on the property. Hamilton Creek exits from a 60-inch culvert along the
east property line. The proposed development, excepting a very small area of the driving and parking
area, is setback more than 30-feet from the mapped centerline of Hamilton Creek. The 2015 Site Review
application that allowed for the installation of Independent Way included a Limited Use permit for the
Independent Way bridge crossing which was approved. At that time, a small area of encroachment
within the Water Resource Protection Zone was proposed. The area of the drive aisle curbing that is
within the WRPZ was detailed in the 2015 application site plans as was the bioswale/detention feature.
The proposal can be found to comply with the existing 2015 approval that allowed for Independent Way
bridge crossing, stormwater detention, and minor impacts into the Water Resource Protection Zone.
New findings addressing the Water Resource Protection Zone Limited Use Activity and Floodplain
Development Standards have not been provided as the previous decision assigned conditions of
approval for the impacts to the Water Resource Protection Zone. A multi-year management plan for the
stormwater facility was discussed in the previous decision. It is anticipated that no additional impacts to
the riparian area will be necessary for the proposed site development.
C. Site Development and Design Standards. The proposal complies with the applicable Site
Development and Design Standards of part 18.4, except as provided by subsection E, below.
18.4.2.040.B. Basic Site Review Standards.
72
1. Orientation and Scale.
a. Buildings shall have their primary orientation toward the street and not a parking area.
Automobile circulation or off-street parking is not allowed between the building and the street.
Parking areas shall be located behind buildings or to one side.
Finding:
Proposed Service Building #6is oriented towards the public street, Independent Way. The
structure has direct access from the public street to the entrances of the building by pedestrians.
Entry doors are indicated with the large awning overhangs and the commercial storefront style
door with sidelight. There are also windows provided along the frontage. No automobile
circulation or off-street parking occurs between the building and the street. The parking areas
are to the side and rear of the street fronting building.
b. A building façade or multiple building facades shall occupy a large majority of a project’s street
frontage as illustrated in Figure 18.4.2.040.B, and avoid site design that incorporates extensive
gaps between building frontages created through a combination of driveway aprons, parking areas,
or vehicle aisles. This can be addressed by, but not limited to, positioning the wider side of the
building rather than the narrow side of the building toward the street. In the case of a corner lot,
this standard applies to both street frontages. Spaces between buildings shall consist of landscaping
and hard durable surface materials to highlight pedestrian areas.
Finding:
The majority of the property’s street frontage is occupied by proposed Service Building #6. The
driveways are to the sides of the building allowing positioning of the wider side of the building to
the street.
There are no gaps in the frontages. The driveway aprons, vehicle aisles and parking areas are to
the sides and to the rear of the building.
c. Building entrances shall be oriented toward the street and shall be accessed from a public
sidewalk. The entrance shall be designed to be clearly visible, functional, and shall be open to the
public during all business hours.
Finding:
The pedestrian entrances doors of the structure of Service Building #6 are clearly visible in their
orientation towards the street. The pedestrian entrances are accessed via a raised walkway, the
walkway is served by a wide, central stair that leads directly from the public sidewalk to the
sidewalk accessing the entrances. Each pedestrian entrance is clearly visible from the street with
73
commercial, entry doors, sidelight windows, awnings to provide pedestrian coverage from sun
and rain, and lighting that all enhance the sense of entry to the tenant spaces.
d. Building entrances shall be located within 20 feet of the public right of way to which they are
required to be oriented. Exceptions may be granted for topographic constraints, lot configuration,
designs where a greater setback results in improved access or for sites with multiple buildings,
such as shopping centers, where other buildings meet this standard.
Finding:
The building entrances of Service Building #6 are oriented towards the public right-of-way and
located within 20-feet of the sidewalk. The proposal seeks an exception to reduce the required
landscape buffer along the frontage of the property adjacent to the public street to location the
entry closer than 20-feet of the right-of-way. This reduced landscape buffer allows for improved
large vehicle access to the loading/unloading areas, parking areas and vehicle maneuvering
areas. The proposed reduced buffer allows for a wider than the standard 22-feet of backup area
to allow better turning movements for the large vehicles that presently utilize the IPCO site and
will be utilizing the proposed service buildings.
In the Employment Zone, it is critical for the site grades to allow easy access for delivery vehicles,
forklifts, pallet movers, etc., cross accessing the internal spaces and the IPCO, properties
retention of slight cross-grade, a single finished floor area within the structures, the existing
grades of the developed portions of the site dictated the grade of the building site area.
Based on civil drawings from the 2015 Site Review there were more than 6 ½ feet to nearly 8½
feet of grade change from the back of the sidewalk to the pad area. This grade change at the back
of the sidewalk and the need for the site to have a relatively consistent grade from this tax lot to
the other tax lots in the IPCO Service Center complex are the reasons this building is raised above
the sidewalk with a retaining wall along the frontage. To provide a clear, distinct, pedestrian
entrance to the site, the retaining wall has a central stair that provides access to the covered
pedestrian entrances. Sidewalk connecting for the public street leads to the Service Building #5
providing pedestrian access. This building is orientatedto the internal sidewalk system.
e. Where a building is located on a corner lot, its entrance shall be oriented toward the higher order
street or to the lot corner at the intersection of the streets. The building shall be located as close to
the intersection corner as practicable.
Finding:
The subject property is not a corner lot.
74
f. Public sidewalks shall be provided adjacent to a public street along the street frontage.
Finding:
New public sidewalks and street trees were recently installed along the street frontage of
Independent Way.
g. The standards in a-d, above, may be waived if the building is not accessed by pedestrians, such
as warehouse and industrial buildings without attached offices, and automotive service stations.
Finding:
Not applicable.
2. Streetscape. One street tree chosen from the street tree list shall be placed for each 30 feet of frontage
for that portion of the development fronting the street pursuant to subsection 18.4.4.030.E.
Finding:
No modifications to the newly installed streetscape are proposed.
3. Landscaping.
a. Landscape areas at least ten feet in width shall buffer buildings adjacent to streets, except the buffer is
not required in the Detail Site Review, Historic District, and Pedestrian Place overlays.
Finding:
The proposal does not include a ten-footlandscape buffer adjacent to the street. The property is not
within the Detail Site Review zone or the Pedestrian Place overlay. The signed purchase agreement when
the city of Ashland purchased the property from the IPCO group, included understood conditions of the
purchase. One of the terms was that with planning approval, the required landscape buffer would
instead be the landscape park row. The park row was installed at seven feet leaving three feetof
landscape. The proposal seeks an exception to eliminate three additional feet of landscape buffer.
b. Landscaping and recycle/refuse disposal areas shall be provided pursuant to chapter 18.4.4.
Finding:
A five-foot-wide landscape buffer is proposed with ground covers other shrubberies that is not
on the city's prohibited plant list. Parking lot shade trees are proposed. The size, species, and
75
planting specific landscape and irrigation plan will be provided to the city as required by code
and provided with the building permit.
The refuse containers are to be located within the buildings. This is consistent with how the
majority of the tenants of the property operate per their lease agreements. On garbage day, the
tenant places their refuse container outside of their unit. This is the method that has worked for
the property owner and trash collection service provider, Recology.
4. Designated Creek Protection. Where a project is proposed adjacent to a designated creek protection
area, the project shall incorporate the creek into the design while maintaining required setbacks and
buffering, and complying with water quality protection standards. The developer shall plant native riparian
plants in and adjacent to the creek protection zone.
Finding:
See the findings above regarding overlay zones. Silt fencing will be provided to prevent erosion into the
Water Resource Protection Zone before site disturbance.
5. Noise and Glare. Artificial lighting shall meet the requirements of section 18.4.4.050. Compliance
with AMC 9.08.170.c and AMC 9.08.175 related to noise is required.
Finding:
The exterior lights are proposed LED dusk to dawn lights recessed under the awning and cast light
downward. Noises generated by the site will be comparable to noises to be expected in an employment
zone that allows for production, manufacturing, and repair.
D. City Facilities. The proposal complies with the applicable standards in section 18.4.6 Public Facilities,
and that adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, electricity, urban storm drainage, paved
access to and throughout the property, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to the subject
property.
Finding:
Adequate City facilities (utilities) exist toserve the proposed development. New underground
infrastructure was extended from Tolman Creek Road to Independent Way. Also, there areprivate utility
easements extended through the property.
The civil engineering firm that proposed and designed Independent Way is the Civil Engineers of record
on this project. The installation of adequate facilities was contemplated through the development of
Independent Way.
76
E. Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards. The approval authority may approve
exceptions to the Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4 if the circumstances in either
subsection 1 or 2, below, are found to exist.
1. There is a demonstrable difficulty meeting the specific requirements of the Site Development
and Design Standards due to a unique or unusual aspect of an existing structure or the proposed
use of a site, and approval of the exception will not substantially negatively impact adjacent
properties; and approval of the exception is consistent with the stated purpose of the Site
Development and Design; and the exception requested is the minimum which would alleviate the
difficulty;
Finding:
Not applicable
2. There is no demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements, but granting the
exception will result in a design that equally or better achieves the stated purpose of the Site
Development and Design Standards; or
Finding:
The City of Ashland purchased the property to install the new street from the current property
owners. As part of the 2012 purchase agreement, the agreement stipulated that the required
landscape buffer would be accommodated within the park row. The park row was installed at
seven feet, leaving three feet of landscape buffer width required. The proposal is not providing
the landscape buffer along the frontage of the property. The reason for this is that the proposed
design has a direct pedestrian connection to the public sidewalk. There are numerous issues with
transients camping and loitering on the property and increased landscape areas encourage
loitering.
Though not along the entire frontage of the property, there is a landscape buffer at the west side
of the structure and between the western driveway access. Additionally, due to the riparian
buffer zone, there is an abundant landscaped area provided on the property, substantially more
than a typical Employment zoned property.
Not providing a landscape buffer in the zone where no setbacks are required, does not reduce
public health or safety. The wall adjacent to the sidewalk will not harm the livability of the
adjacent employment zoned lands as there is no residential zoning. The proposed building will
make a positive contribution to the streetscape and the area is not a highly traveled arterial street
and is a manufacturing and industrial area where the standards can be flexed to achieve the
77
purpose of the zone which is functional, employment zoned land that has access and parking
area for large vehicles and business traffic.
When the street connection application was made, minor concessions associated with the street
design were made to provide a major, city of Ashland TSP driven connectivity project. The
reduced buffer is minor when considering the substantial compliance with other standards of the
Site Design and Use Standards, the Water Resource and Riparian protection zone buffer, grading
of existing site determining the finished grade of proposed site development and the large
investment into flexible, space for large or small warehouse, storage, distribution, production
facilities. The parking lot layout and the number of spaces provided on-site allow for
intensification of the site uses in close proximity to the Ashland Street Commercial corridor and
the I-5 exit 14.
The building entrances of Service Building #6 are oriented towards the public right-of-way and
located within 20-feet of the sidewalk. The proposal seeks an exception to reduce the required
landscape buffer along the frontage of the property adjacent to the public street to location the
entry closer than 20-feet of the right-of-way. This reduced landscape buffer allows for improved
large vehicle access to the loading/unloading areas, parking areas and vehicle maneuvering
areas. The proposed reduced buffer allows for a wider than the standard 22-feet of backup area
to allow better turning movements for the large vehicles that presently utilize the IPCO site and
will be utilizing the proposed service buildings.
In the Employment Zone, it is critical for the site grades to allow easy access for delivery vehicles,
forklifts, pallet movers, etc., cross accessing the internal spaces and the IPCO, properties
retention of slight cross-grade, a single finished floor area within the structures, the existing
grades of the developed portions of the site dictated the grade of the building site area.
Based on civil drawings from the 2015 Site Review there was more than 6 ½ feet to nearly 8 ½
feet of grade change from the back of the sidewalk to the building pad area. This grade change
at the back of the sidewalk and the need for the site to have a relatively consistent grade from
this tax lot to the other tax lots in the IPCO Service Center complex are the reasons this building
is raised above the sidewalk with a retaining wall along the frontage.
There is no on-street parking on this side of the street and the Employment zoned and the
business that presently occupy the majority of the IPCO Service Center are not pedestrian
oriented businesses but rely heavily upon delivery traffic.
Even so, a clear, distinct, pedestrian entrance via the stairs directly from the sidewalk to the
Service Building #6 is provided and clear pedestrian access to the parking area and Service
Building #5 are provided with the proposed layout.
78
3. There is no demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements for a cottage housing
development, but granting the exception will result in a design that equally or better achieves the
stated purpose of section 18.2.3.090. (Ord. 3147 § 9, amended, 11/21/2017)
Finding:
Not applicable
18.4.3.080 Vehicle Area Design
B. Parking Area Design. Required parking areas shall be designed in accordance with the following
standards and dimensions as illustrated in 18.4.3.080.B. See also, accessible parking space requirements
in section 18.4.3.050 and parking lot and screening standards in subsection 18.4.4.030.F.
Finding:
The proposed building Service Building #5 is 17,858.5 square feet in area which requires 18 parking
spaces. Service Building #6 is 10,919 square feet and requires 11 parking spaces. There are eight spaces
for IPCO Service Building #1 on the west property line that are shown on the site plans as part of this
development because the driveways are connected. A 40-vehicle parking area is proposed. This accounts
for one parking space per 1,000 square feet of floor area and the +one space for a company vehicle.
Three ADA accessible spaces with required off-loading zone are also included. The parking lot layout
demonstrates that adequate turn around is provided on-site to allow vehicles to exit the parking area in
a forward manner. The parking spaces are proposed to be 9 feet by 18 feet. Eight are proposed as
compact.
The parking area has potential for expansion through the striping of additional parking spaces if
necessary, in the parking area parallel to the creek that is presently shown as large vehicle parking area.
In the event a user with higher intensity parking demands requests tenant improvement or business
license from the city, these parking spaces can be re-striped as head-in automobile parking and not have
a negative impact on the other uses, vehicle access and maneuvering, nor does the change in type of
parking space require additional site review as large vehicle parking is not a required standard but is
proposed in this case due to the known user types of the IPCO Service Center.
The proposed parking lot is designed to minimize adverse environmental impacts through the use of a
bioswale filtration as required by the Rogue Valley Stormwater Design Manual. See the Civil Engineering
plan.
The existing parking areas to the west and south are pre-existing, non-conforming, and does not comply
with this standard. The proposal does not increase the non-conformity. The proposed building is not
accessed by pedestrians as it is an industrial building or warehouse.
79
18.4.5.030.C. Tree Protection Measures Required.
Finding:
Six-foot tall, chain link fencing is proposed at the driplines of the trees as indicated on the plan. The
fencing will be flush with grade. An inspection by City staff will be requested for the installation of the
signs. No construction activity will occur within the tree protection zones. No building supplies, soil,
waste, equipment, vehicle parking will be allowed in the tree protection zones. No chemically injurious
materials or liquids, including construction debris, run-off, or concrete excess waste. There is no
excavation proposed within the root zones.
Attachments:
2012 Purchase Agreement
Conceptual Renderings: G2.0
Site Plan: A0.1
Floor Plan (Service Building 5): A1.1
Elevation (Service Building 5): A2.1 and A2.2
Floor Plan (Service Building 6): A1.1
Elevation (Service Building 6): A2.1
Landscape and Tree Protection Plan: L1
Grading, Drainage, Erosion Control Plans
80
81
82
83
Project Location:
CLIENT:
IPCO DEVELOPMENT
#
NO
ITAUNTNOCROF20ATEEH
I . SEESENLHCTAM
I
XREFS: IPCO_GRC_Title Block | IPCO-JB STEEL (2020-3-24)_JB Edited 04 08 20 | IPCO PH3_GRC Title Block
File Name: W:\\Design Projects\\00-CURRENT PROJECTS\\IPCO\\PHASE 2\\IPCO_PH2, A0.1 Site Plan, Scheme D.dwg
Plot Date: Thursday, December 24, 2020 10:30:54 AM
Login Name: Jennyk
Nbq!'!Uby!Mpu$;!4:!F2!25!CB-!711
799!Upmnbo!Dsffl!Se/-!Btimboe-!PS!:8631
652.775.8166
Dfousbm!Qpjou-!Ps!:8613
Hsffo!Nfbepx!Xbz-!Btimboe-!PS!:86312536!!
JQDP!EFWFMPQNFOU!DPSQPSBUJPO
3::5!Xfmmt!Gbshp!Se
Mboetdbqf!Eftjho!'!Dpotvmubujpo
Nbebsb!Eftjho!Jod
JQDP!EFWFMPQNFOU
S!SFWJFX!boe!EJTDVTTJPO!QVSQPTFT!POMZQSFMJNJOBSZ!.!OPU!GPS!DPOTUSVDUJPO!.!GP
JQDPJQDPJQDPJQDPJQDPJQDPJQDP
JQDP
93
94
95
96
97
COMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACT
COMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACT
COMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACT
COMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACT
98
COMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACT
COMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACT
COMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACT
COMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACT
99
COMPACT
COMPACTCOMPACT
100
101
102
103
104