Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutGranite_440_PA-T2-2023-00039CITY OF ASHLAND April 12, 2023 Notice of Final Decision The Ashland Planning Commission has approved the request for the following: Planning Action: PA -T2-2023-00039 Subject Property: 440 Granite Street Applicant: Jordan Willing/Rogue Development Services Description: A request for planning approval to construct a new single family Dome on a non- conforming lot. The planning action requires both a Water Resource Protection Zone (WRPZ) Reduction and a Variance to exceed seven -percent lot coverage. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: WR; ZONING: Woodland Residential; MAP: 39 -1E -I6 -BB; TAX LOT: 1300. The Planning Commission's decision becomes final and effective ten days after this Notice of Final Decision is mailed. Approval is valid for a period of 18 months and all conditions of approval identified on the attached Findings are required to be met prior to project completion. The application, all associated documents and evidence submitted, and the applicable criteria are available for review at the Ashland Community Development Department, located at 51 Winburn Way. Copies of file documents can be requested and are charged based on the City of Ashland copy fee schedule. This decision may be appealed to the Ashland. City Council if a Notice of Appeal is filed prior to the effective date of the decision and with the required fee ($325), in accordance with section 18.5.1.060.1 of the Ashland Municipal Code, which is also attached. The appeal may not be made directly to the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals. If you have any questions regarding this decision, please contact Aaron Anderson in the Community Development Department at (541) 488-5305. cc: Jordan Willing Parties of record COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel: 541-488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800435-2900 . Avn"v.ashland.or.us SECTION 18.5.1.060.1 1. Appeal of Type 11 Decision. The City Council may call up a Type 11 decision pursuant to section 18.5.1.060.7. A Type II decision may also be appealed to the Council as follows. 1. Who May Appeal. Appeals may only be filed by parties to the planning action. "Parties" shall be defined as the following. a. The applicant. b. Persons who participated in the public hearing, either orally or in writing. Failure to participate in the public hearing, either orally or in writing, precludes the right of appeal to the Council. c. Persons who were entitled to receive notice of the action but did not receive notice due to error. 2. Appeal Filing Procedure. a. Notice of Appeal. Any person with standing to appeal, as provided in subsection 18.5.1.060.1.1, above, may appeal a Type 11 decision by filing a notice of appeal and paying the appeal fee according to the procedures of this subsection. b. Time for Filing. The notice of appeal shall be filed with the City Administrator within ten days of the date the notice of decision is mailed. c. Content of Notice of Appeal. The notice shall include the appellant's name, address, a reference to the decision sought to be reviewed, a statement as to how the appellant qualifies as a party, the date of the decision being appealed, and a clear and distinct identification of the specific grounds for which the decision should be reversed or modified, based on identified applicable criteria or procedural irregularity. d. The appeal requirements of this section must be fully met or the appeal will be considered by the City as a jurisdictional defect and will not be heard or considered. 3. Mailed Notice. The City shall mail the notice of appeal together with a notice of the date, time, and place to consider the appeal by the City Council to the parties, as provided in subsection 18.5.1.060.H.1, at least 20 days prior to the meeting. 4. Scope of Appeal. a. Except upon the election to reopen the record as set forth in subsection 18.5.1.060.I.4.b, below, the review of a decision of the Planning Commission by the City Council shall be confined to the record of the proceeding before the Commission. The record shall consist of the application and all materials submitted with it; documentary evidence, exhibits, and materials submitted during the hearing or at other times when the record before the Commission was open; recorded testimony; (including DVDs when available), the executed decision of the Commission, including the findings and conclusions. In addition, for purposes of Council review, the notice of appeal and the written arguments submitted by the parties to the appeal, and the oral arguments, if any, shall become part of the record of the appeal proceeding. b. Reopening the Record. The City Council may reopen the record and consider new evidence on a limited basis, if such a request to reopen the record is made to the City Administrator together with the filing of the notice of appeal and the City Administrator determines prior to the Council appeal hearing that the requesting party has demonstrated one or more of the following. i. That the Planning Commission committed a procedural error, through no fault of the COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel: 541488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 wmv.ashland.ur.us requesting party, that prejudiced the requesting party's substantial rights and that reopening the record before the Council is the only means of correcting the error. ii. That a factual error occurred before the Commission through no fault of the requesting party which is relevant to an approval criterion and material to the decision. iii. That new evidence material to the decision on appeal exists which was unavailable, through no fault of the requesting party, when the record of the proceeding was open, and during the period when the requesting party could have requested reconsideration. A requesting party may only qualify for this exception if he or she demonstrates that the new evidence is relevant to an approval criterion and material to the decision. This exception shall be strictly construed by the Council in order to ensure that only relevant evidence and testimony is submitted to the hearing body. iv. Re -opening the record for purposes of this section means the submission of additional written testimony and evidence, not oral testimony or presentation of evidence before the Council. 5. Appeal Hearing Procedure. The decision of the City Council is the final decision of the City on an appeal of a Type 11 decision, unless the decision is remanded to the Planning Commission. a. Oral Argument. Oral argument on the appeal shall be permitted before the Council. Oral argument shall be limited to ten minutes for the applicant, ten for the appellant, if different, and three minutes for any other party who participated below. A party shall not be permitted oral argument if written arguments have not been timely submitted. Written arguments shall be submitted no less than ten days prior to the Council consideration of the appeal. Written and oral arguments on the appeal shall be limited to those issues clearly and distinctly set forth in the notice of appeal; similarly, oral argument shall be confined to the substance of the written argument. b. Scope of Appeal Deliberations. Upon review, and except when limited reopening of the record is allowed, the Council shall not re-examine issues of fact and shall limit its review to determining whether there is substantial evidence to support the findings of the Planning Commission, or to determining if errors in law were committed by the Commission. Review shall in any event be limited to those issues clearly and distinctly set forth in the notice of appeal. No issue may be raised on appeal to the Council that was not raised before the Commission with sufficient specificity to enable the Commission and the parties to respond. c, Council Decision, The Council may affirm, reverse, modify, or remand the decision and may approve or deny the request, or grant approval with conditions. The Council shall make findings and conclusions, and mare a decision based on the record before it as justification for its action. The Council shall cause copies of a final order to be sent to all parties participating in the appeal. Upon recommendation of the Administrator, the Council may elect to summarily remand the matter to the Planning Commission. If the Council elects to remand a decision to the Commission, either summarily or otherwise, the Commission decision shall be the final decision of the City, unless the Council calls the matter up pursuant to subsection 18.5.1.060.J. 6. Record of the Public Hearing. For purposes of City Council review, the notice of appeal and the written arguments submitted by the parties to the appeal, and the oral arguments, if any, shall become pail of the record of the appeal proceeding. The public hearing record shall include the following information, a. The notice of appeal and the written arguments submitted by the parties to the appeal. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel: 541488-5305 51 Wiriburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us b. Copies of all notices given as required by this chapter, and correspondence regarding the application that the City mailed or received. c. All materials considered by the hearings body including the application and all materials submitted with it. d. Documentary evidence, exhibits and materials submitted during the hearing or at other times when the record before the Planning Commission was open. e. Recorded testimony (including DVDs when available). f. All materials submitted by the Staff Advisor to the hearings body regarding the application; g. The minutes of the hearing. g. The final written decision of the Commission including findings and conclusions. Effective Date and Appeals to State Land Use Board of Appeals. City Council decisions an Type 11 applications are final the date the City mails the notice of decision. Appeals of Council decisions on Type II applications must be filed with the State Land Use Board of Appeals, pursuant to ORS 197.805 - 197.860. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel: 541-488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 . mvw.asliland.or.us BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION April 11, 2023 IN THE MATTER OF PLANNING ACTION PA -T2-2023-00039 A REQUEST FOR WATER RESOURCE PROTECTION ZONE (WRPZ) REDUCTION AND A VARIANCE TO LOT -COVERAGE TO ALLOW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE-FAMILY HOME OWNER JORDON WILLING APPLICANT: ROGUE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES RECITALS: FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND ORDERS. 1) Tax lot #1300 of Assessor's Map 39 -1E -16 -BB has an address of 440 Granite Street and is zoned WR. 2) The applicant is requesting approval of a variance to lot coverage, and Water Resources Protection Zone (WRPZ) reduction to construct a single-family home. 3) The WR zone has a minimum lot size of 2 acres, whereas the subject property is 0.87 acres in size. 4) The property is located in the Special Flood Hazard Area (zone A), but subsequently received a Letter of Map Amendment (LOMA) removing much of the property from the regulated flood zone and established an elevation for the base flood. 5) Ashland Creek has a regulated Water Resource Protection Zone (WRPZ) that extends 50' from the top of the bank. 6) The property was previously developed with a two-story single-family residence constructed in 1915. A demolition permit was applied for in 2009 to remove the home and was removed in 2011. Two existing accessory buildings, extensive improved pathways, retaining walls, and established landscaping remain on the property. The building envelope of the primary home that was removed is composed of compacted decomposed granite (DG). 7) The Definition of `Lot Coverage' states that it includes anything that "will not allow natural water infiltration to the soil." In practice the `natural water infiltration test,' has been applied in a strict manner. This includes gravel parking areas, compacted DG and anything that is not landscaping. At present the current existing lot coverage of 33% the property exceeds the 7% lot coverage allowed for the zone. 8) The Planning Commission, following proper public notice, held a public hearing on March PA -T2-2023-00039 April 11, 2023 Page 1 2. The variance is the minimum necessary to address the special or unique physical circumstances related to the subject site. 3. The proposal's benefits will be greater than any negative impacts on the development of the adjacent uses and will further the purpose and intent of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan of the City. 4. The need for the variance is not self-imposed by the applicant or property owner. For example, the variance request does not arise as result of a property line adjustment or land division approval previously granted to the applicant. 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, and Miscellaneous Exhibits lettered with an "M" SECTION 2. CONCLUSORY FINDINGS 2.1 The Planning Commission finds that AMC Title 18 Land Use regulates the development pattern envisioned by the Comprehensive Plan and to encourage efficient use of land resources among other goals. When considering the decision to approve or deny an application the Planning Commission considers the application materials against the relevant approval criteria in the AMC. 2.2 The Planning Commission finds that it has received all information necessary to render a decision based on the application itself, the Staff Report, the public hearing testimony, and the exhibits received. 2.3 The Planning Commission notes that the application was deemed complete on January 27, 2023, and fiwther finds that the notice for the public hearing was both posted at the frontage of the subject property and mailed to all property owners within 200 -feet of the subject property on February 27, 2023. 2.4 The Planning Commission notes that there is a fifty -foot Water Resource Protection Zone (WRPZ) as measured from the bank of Ashland Creek. The Planning Commission notes that 60% of the lot is covered by the WRPZ and further notes that all the proposed encroachments are in areas that had previously been developed, and the existing manicured landscaping is largely absent of riparian resources including native vegetation and habitat. PA -T2-2023-00039 April 11, 2023 Page 3 2.5.0 The Planning Commission notes that there are four elements to the approval criteria set out above. First, that the code did "not account for special or unique" circumstance. Second that "the variance is the minimum necessary." Third that the "benefits will be greater than any negative impacts adjacent uses." And fourth that the need for the variance is "not self-imposed" 2.5.1 The Planning Commission notes that the subject property is located in the WR zone, which imposes a maximum lot coverage of 7%, additionally the property is significantly below the normal lot minimum size for the zone. The Planning Commission finds that the combination of the lot size, limited lot coverage allowance, and existing conditions make it impossible to develop the property within the 7% lot coverage limit. The applicant has shown that strict compliance with the code provision would result in undue hardship due to these circumstances. The Planning Commission finds that these circumstances create a unique situation for which the Land Use Ordinance had not accounted. 2.5.2 The Planning Commission notes that the proposal has a net reduction in total lot - coverage when compared to the currently existing condition of the site. The Planning Commission notes that the final lot coverage proposed to be 29.3 -percent as opposed to the present 33.3% coverage. The Planning Commission notes that over 11,500 of the existing lot coverage is extant decomposed granite from the previous building area and pathways. The Planning Commission finds that the requested variance to lot coverage is the minimum necessary to address the unique physical circumstances of the subject site. 2.5.3 The Planning Commission notes that the proposal's benefits will be greater than any negative impacts on the development of the adjacent uses and will further the purpose and intent of the ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan of the City. The proposed development will include a single-family home, which is consistent with the surrounding residential neighborhood. The development plan includes extensive landscaping and other measures to minimize impacts on the adjacent properties and the natural environment. The Planning Commission find that the approval criterion is met. 2.5.4 The Planning Commission finds that because the existing lot coverage constraints, lot size, and onsite improvements have been in existence prior to the applicant's ownership of the property, that the need for the variance is not self-imposed by the applicant. 2.6 The Planning Commission notes that the application includes a request to remove two trees. The Planning Commission notes that due to the presence of the existing studio and accessory building, the property is not considered vacant, therefore only trees that qualified as `significant' require permits and that both of these trees are smaller than required to meet that threshold. 2.7 The Planning Commission finds that there is substantial evidence in the record to make findings that each of the criteria have been met, as was presented in the applicant's submittal, as well as the Staff Report, and by each of their reference are hereby incorporated herein as if set out in full. PA -12-2423-00039 April 11, 2023 Page 5 7) That all measures installed for the purposes of long-term erosion control, including but not limited to vegetative cover, rock walls, retaining walls and landscaping shall be maintained in perpetuity on all areas in accordance with AMC 183.10.090.133. 8) That a final `General Fuel Modification Area' fuel reduction plan addressing the requirements in AMC 18.3, 10. 1 OO.B shall be provided for the review and approval of the Fire Department prior to bringing combustible materials onto the property, and any new landscaping proposed shall comply with the wildfire overlay zone standards and shall not include plants listed on the Prohibited Flammable Plant List per Resolution 2015-028. 9) That the building permit submittals shall 'include the following: a) Identification of all easements, including but not limited to any public and private utility easements, mutual access easements, and fire apparatus access easements. b) Solar setback calculations demonstrating that all new construction complies with Solar Setback Standard A in the formula [(Height —6)1(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, decomposed granite pathways, and circulation areas. Lot coverage shall be limited to no more than that described in the current Variance request. 41112 3 Planng Commission Approval Date PA -T2-2023-00039 April 11, 2023 Page 7 PA -T2-2023-00039 391E1613131300 WILLING JORDAN MICHAEL 621 MORTON ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 440 Granite St NOD 04/12/23 3 PAogaJ Of aapanas Op u11e aJrupey 21 E)@,] Asea assUAPE!,p sa41anL PA -T2-2023-00039 ROGUE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT 1314-B CENTER DR, PMB#457 MEDFORD, OR 97501 PA -T2-2023-00039 TERRAIN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE 310 OAK ST, #3 ASHLAND, OR 97520 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF OREGON County of Jackson The undersigned being first duly sworn states that: 1. I am employed by the City of Ashland, 20 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon 97520, in the Community Development Department. 2. On 04/12/23 1 caused to be mailed, by regular mail, in a sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid, a copy of the attached planning action notice to each person listed on the attached mailing list at such addresses as set forth on this list under each person's name for Planning Action #PA -T2-2023-00039, 440 Granite Street. MchaeBuffiyan Signature of Employee G:lcomm-devlplanninglPlann€ng ActionslPAs by SUeeI GlGran fe\Granite_4401PA T2-2023-000391No5cinglNODnanfle_440_PA T2-2923-00039_NOD _Affidavit of Mai€ing.docx 4/1212023 Planning Commission Speaker Request Form 1) Complete this form and return it to the Secretary prior to the discussion of the item you wish to speak about. 2) Speak to the Planning Commission from the table podium microphone. 3) State your name and address for the record. 4) Limit your comments to the amount of time given to you by the Chair, usually 5 minutes. 5) If you present written materials, please give a copy to the Secretary for the record. 6) You may give written comments to the Secretary for the record if you do not wish to speak. 7) Speakers are solely responsible for the content of their public statement. Name (please print) Address (no P.O. Box) CepAr .fir PM 3 ed Phone54//-95/-AZO Email ing Date Agenda item number_ OR Regular Meeting Topic for public forum (non agenda item) Land Use Public Hearing For: Against- Challenge for Conflict of Interest or Bias If you are challenging a member (planning commissioner) with a conflict of interest or bias, please write your allegation complete with supporting facts on this form and deliver it to the clerk immediately. The Chair will address the written challenge with the member. Please be respectful of the proceeding and do not interrupt. You may also provide testimony about the challenge when you testify during the normal order of proceedings. Written Comments/Challenge: The Public Meeting Law requires that all city meetings are open to the public. Oregon law does not always require that the public be permitted to speak. The Ashland Planning Commission generally invites the public to speak on agenda items and duringpubiie forum on non -agenda items unless time constraints lim.itpublic testimony. Noperson has an absolute right to speak orparticipate in every phase of a proceeding. Please respect the order of proceedings for public hearings and strictly follow the directions of the presiding officer. Behavior or actions which are unreasonably loud or disruptive are disrespectful, and may constitute disorderly conduct. Offenders will be requested to leave the room. Comments and statements by speakers do not represent the opinion of the City Council, City Officers or employees or the City of Ashland. 'APPir(''j T fir crSc� Planning Commission Speaker Request Form 1) Complete this form and return it to the Secretary prior to the discussion of the item you wish to speak about. 2) Speak to the Planning Commission from the table podium microphone. 3) State your name and address for the record. 4) Limit your comments to the amount of time given to you by the Chair, usually 5 minutes. 5) If you present written materials, please give a copy to the Secretary for the record. 6) You may give written comments to the Secretary for the record if you do not wish to speak. 7) Speakers are solely responsible for the content of their public statement. Regular Meeting Agenda item number V OR Topic for public forum (non agenda item) Land Use Public Hearing For: Against: Challenge for Conflict of Interest or Sias If you are challenging a member (planning commissioner) with a conflict of interest or bias, please write your allegation complete with supporting facts on this form and deliver it to the clerk immediately. The Chair will address the written challenge with the member. Please be respectful of the proceeding and do not interrupt. You may also provide testimony about the challenge when you testify during the normal order of proceedings. Written Comments/Challenge: The Public Meeting Law requires that all city meetings are open to the public. Oregon law does not always require that the public be permitted to speak. The Ashland Planning Commission generally invites the public to speak on agenda items and during public forum on non -agenda items unless tune constraints hinit public testimony. No person has an absolute right to speak or participate in every phase of a proceeding. Please respect the order of proceedings for public hearings and strictly follow the directions of the presiding officer. Behavior or actions which are unreasonably loud or disruptive are disrespectful, and may constitute disorderly conduct. Offenders will be requested to leave the room. Comments and statements by speakers do not represent the opinion of the City Council, City Officers or employees or the City of Ashland. CITY ®IF 4"HLAND NOTICE OF APPLICATION PLANNING ACTION: PA -T2-2023-00039 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 440 Granite St. OWNERIAPPLICANT: Jordan Willing/Rogue Development Services DESCRIPTION: A request for planning approval to construct a new single family home on a non -conforming lot. The planning action requires both a Water Resource Protection Zone (WRPZ) Reduction and a Variance to exceed seven -percent lot coverage. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: WR, ZONING: Woodland Residential; MAP: 39-1 E -16 -BB; TAX LOT: 1300. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: Tuesday, March 74, 2023 at 7:00 PM, Ashland Civic Center, 1775 East Bain Street COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 51 Winburn Way Tel: 541.488.5305 Ashland, Oregon 97520 Fax: 541.552.2050 ashland.or.us TTY: 800.735.2900 JD 1f -r n i a 1: Uthi-a Plod, �• , e S } y atS Creek 1 `tikJ fn 3 e F > gg y J g Lithia N4 x ' .� `^ I COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 51 Winburn Way Tel: 541.488.5305 Ashland, Oregon 97520 Fax: 541.552.2050 ashland.or.us TTY: 800.735.2900 CIITY OF H L A N" D mr Notice is hereby given that a PUBLIC HEARING on the following request with respect to the ASHLAND LAND USE ORDINANCE will be held before the ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION on meeting date shown above. The meeting will be at the ASHLAND CIVIC CENTER, 1175 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon. A copy of the application, including all documents, evidence and applicable criteria are available online at "What's Happening in my City" at https:llgis.ash land .or,us/develop mentproposaIsl. Copies of application materials will be provided at reasonable cost, if requested. 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 plan ningCa)ashland, or. us. The ordinance criteria applicable to this application are attached to this notice. Oregon law states that failure to raise an objection concerning this application, either in person or by letter, or failure to provide sufficient specificity to afford the decision maker an opportunity to respond to the issue, precludes your right of appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) on that issue. Failure to specify which ordinance criterion the objection is based on also precludes your right of appeal to LUBA on that criterion. Failure of the applicant to raise constitutional or other issues relating to proposed conditions of approval with sufficient specificity to allow this Commission to respond to the issue precludes an action for damages in circuit court. During the Public Hearing, the Chair shall allow testimony from the applicant and those in attendance concerning this request. The Chair shall have the right to limit the length of testimony and require that comments be restricted to the applicable criteria. Unless there is a continuance, if a participant so requests before the conclusion of the hearing, the record shall remain open for at least seven days after the hearing. If you have questions or comments concerning this request, please feel free to contact Aaron Anderson at 541-552-2052 1 Aaron.Anderson(d?ashland. or. us In compliance with the American with Disabilities Act, it you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Administrator's office at 541-488-6002 (TTY phone number 1-800-735-2900). Notification 72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting. (28 GFR 35.102.-35.104 ADA Title I). WATER RESOURCE PROTECTION ZONE REDUCTIONS 18.3.11.070 A Water Resource Protection zone may be reduced by up to 25 percent through a Type I procedure in 1851,050, and by greater than 25 percent and up to 50 percent through a Type II procedure in section 18,5.1,060 if the proposal meets all of the following criteria, A. The proposed use or activity is designed to avoid intrusion into the Water Resource Protection zone through the use of up to a 50 percent reduction of any dimensional standards (e,g„ required front, side and rear yard setbacks; required distance between buildings) to permit development as far outside or upland of the Water Resource Protection zone as possible. Such adjustment to any applicable dimensional standards shall be reviewed as part of the requested reduction, and shall not be subject to a separate Variance application under chapter 18.5.5 Variances. Reductions to dimensional standards may not be used to reduce required Solar Access setbacks without evidence of agreement by the effected property owner(s) to the north through a concurrent Solar Access Variance application as described in chapter 18.4.8 Solar Access. B. The alteration of the Water Resource Protection Zone is the minimum necessary to efficiently perform the proposed activity andlor use. The proposed development shall minimize disturbance to the Water Resource Protection Zone by utilizing the following design options to minimize or reduce impacts of development. 1. Multi -story construction shall be considered. 2. Parking spaces shall be minimized to no more than that required as a minimum for the use. & Pavement shall be minimized, and all pavement used shall be installed and maintained in a porous solid surface paving material, 4. Engineering solutions shall be used to minimize additional grading and/or fill, C. The application demonstrates that equal or better protection for identified resources will be ensured through restoration, enhancement, and mitigation measures, The structures, functions, and values of the Water Resource will be restored through the implementation of a restoration and enhancement strategy set forth in a mitigation plan prepared in accordance with the standards and requirements described in section 18.3.11.110 Mitigation Requirements. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 51 Winburn Way Tel: 541.488.5305 Ashland, Oregon 97520 Fax: 541,552.2050 irtal ashland.or.us TTY: 800,735,2800 f C 1 T Y O F H L A 1 N T Ir." & D. Long term conservation, management, and maintenance of the Water Resource Protection Zone shall be ensured through preparation and recordation of a management plan as described in subsection 18.3.11.110.C, except a management plan is not required for residentially zoned lots occupied only by a single-family dwelling and accessory structures. VARIANCE 18.5.5.050 1. The variance is necessary because the subject code provision does not account for special or unique physical circumstances of the subject site, such as topography, natural features, adjacent development, or similar circumstances. A legal lot determination may be sufficient evidence of a hardship for purposes of approving a variance. 2. The variance is the minimum necessary to address the special or unique physical circumstances related to the subject site. 3. The proposal's benefits will be greater than any negative impacts on the development of the adjacent uses and will further the purpose and intent of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan of the City. 4. The need for the variance is not self-imposed by the applicant or property owner. For example, the variance request does not arise as result of a property line adjustment or land division approval previously granted to the applicant. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 51 Winburn Way Tel: 541.488.5305 Ashland, Oregon 97520 Fax: 541.552.2050 oshlond.or.us TTY: 800.735.2900 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF OREGON } County of Jackson ) The undersigned being first duly sworn states that: 1. I am employed by the City of Ashland, 20 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon 97520, in the Community Development Department. 2. On 3111231 caused to be mailed, by regular mail, in a sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid, a copy of the attached planning action notice to each person listed on the attached mailing list at such addresses as set forth on this list under each person's name for Planning Action #PA -T2-2023-00039, 440 Granite. getz" Signature of Employee G5canm-de%Ap1anningWWning ActionsWs by StreehGlGraniteiGrardte_940PAT2-2023.00030ogcinglGranite440_PA T2-2023-00113g_NGC-4ffldaW of Maiiing.dcm WNW PA -T2-2023-00039 391 E17AA600 GIRT RICHARD AITONIA M 445 GRANITE ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA -T2-2023-00039 391 E17AA500 LEMANNE DAWN TRUSTEE ET AL 435 GRANITE ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA -T2-2023-00039 ROGUE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT 1314-B CENTER DR, PMB#457 MEDFORD, OR 97501 PA -T2-2023-00039 391E17AA1104 GIROUX MONIQUE L ET AL 514 GRANITE ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA -T2-2023-00039 399 E17AA1100 STAUNTON JOIN MARSHALL TRUSTE 510 GRANITE ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA -T2-2023-00039 391E17AA400 IRVIN BARBARA L 433 GRANITE ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA -T2-2023-00039 391 E16BB1300 WILLING JORDAN MICHAEL 621 MORTON ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA -T2-2023-00039 4.40 Granite TERRAIN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE NOC 8 310 OAK ST, #3 311123 ASHLAND, OR 97520 OR, —Sure a o' Lc id hr.an!1 .4':reran. z a. E OR, —Sure a o' Lc id hr.an!1 .4':reran. �04 0Planning Division 51 Winburn Way, Ashland OR 97520 CITY o F ,ASHLAND 541-488-5305 Fax 541-488-6006 ZONING PERMIT APPLICATION FILE # PA -T2-2023-00039 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT Conditional Use Permit for Non-Coninrming situations, Water Resource Protection Zone Reduction, Variance to Lot Coverage DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Pursuing LEEDO Certification? ❑ YES © NO Street Address 440 Granite Street Assessor's Map No. 391E 16 B B Tax Lot(s) 1300 Zoning WR Camp Plan Designation Woodland Resource APPLICANT Name Rogue Planning & Development Services Phone 541-951-40202 E -Mail amygunter.planning@gmaii.com Address 1314-B Center Dr., PMB#457 city Medford Zip 97501 PROPERTY OWNER Name Jordan M. Willing Phone 805-637-8353 E -Mail Jordan@thinkbluemarble.com Address 521 Morton Street City Ashland Zip 97520 SURVEYOR, ENGINEER, ARCHITECT, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, OTHER Title Landscape Architect Name Terrain Landscape Architecture Phone 541-500-4776 E -Mail info@terrainarch.com Address 310 Oak St. Unit #3 city Ashland Zip 97520 Title Name Phone E -Mail Address City Zip 1 hereby certify that the statements and information contained in this application, including the enclosed drawings and the required findings of fact, are in all respects, true and correct 1 understand that all property pins must be shown on the drawings and visible upon the site inspection. In the event the pins are not shown or their location found to be incorrect the owner assumes full responsibility. 1 further understand that if this request is subsequently contested, the burden will be on me to establish: 1) that 1 produced sufficient factual evidence at the hearing to support this request; 2) that the findings of fact furnished justifies the granting of the request - 3) that the findings of fact furnished by me are adequate; and further 4) that all structures or improvements are properly located on the ground, Failure in this regard will result most likely in not only the request being set aside, but also possibly in my structures being built in reliance thereon being required to be removed of my expense. If 1 have any doubts, I am advised to seek competent professional advice and assistance. 4!- V4"&4- 1.16.2023 Applicant's SignaturW V Date As owner of the property involved in this request, l have read and understood the complete application and its consequences to me as a property owner. Property Owner's Signature (required) Date rro 6e completed by City Staff] Date Received 1.25.2023 Zoning Permit Type Type II Filing Fee $ OVER H G.kom devlpinnning\Forms&HandovtslZoning Permit Application.doe ZONING PERMIT SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS lu APPLICATION FORM must be completed and signed by both applicant and property owner. u PLANNING FEES FORM must be completed and signed by both applicant and property owner. o FINDINGS OF FACT — Respond to the appropriate zoning requirements in the form of factual statements or findings of fact and supported by evidence. List the findings criteria and the evidence that supports it. Include information necessary to address all issues detailed in the Pre -Application Comment document. o TRUE SCALE PDF DRAWINGS — Standard scale and formatted to print no larger than 11x17 inches. Include site plan, building elevations, parking and landscape details. o FEE (Check, Charge or Cash) ❑ LEED® CERTIFICATION (optional) --Applicant's wishing to receive priority planning action processing shall provide the following documentation with the application demonstrating the completion of the following steps; • Hiring and retaining a LEED® Accredited Professional as part of the project team throughout design and construction of the project; and • The LEED® checklist indicating the credits that will be pursued. NOTE: • Applications are accepted on a first come, first served basis, • Applications will not be accepted without a complete application form signed by the applicant(s) AND property owner(s), all required materials and full payment. • All applications received are reviewed for completeness by staff within 30 days from application date in accordance with ORS 227.178, • The first fifteen COMPLETE applications submitted are processed at the next available Planning Commission meeting. (Planning Commission meetings include the Hearings Board, which meets at 1:30 pm, or the full Planning Commission, which meets at 7:00 pm on the second Tuesday of each month. Meetings are held at the City Council Chambers at 1175 East Main St). • A notice of the project request will be sent to neighboring properties for their comments or concerns. • If applicable, the application will also be reviewed by the Tree and/or Historic Commissions. GAwmm-devlplwmingWomis & liwidaulslZoniug Pensut Applicaiin�dnn Willing Family Residence 440 Granite Street Water Resource Protection Zone Reduction of less than 25 percent Conditional Use Permit for Non -Conforming Situations Variance to Lot Coverage ift ROGUE PLANNING 9 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC Subiect Property Address: 440 Granite Street Map & Tax Lot: 39 1E 16BB; 1300 Parcel Area: .87 acres -- 37,902 square feet in area Comprehensive Plan Designation: Woodland Residential (WR) Zoning: Woodland Residential (WR) Adjacent Zones: Single Family Residential (R-1-10) Rural Residential (RR -.5) Woodland Residential (WR) Overlay Zones: Water Resource Protection Zone for Ashland Creek Wildfire Lands overlay Property Owner: Jordan M. Willing 621 Morton Street Ashland, OR 97520 Landscape Architecture: Terrain Landscape Architecture 310 Oak Street, Unit #3 Ashland, OR 97520 Planning Consultation: Rogue Planning & Development Services 1314-B Center Dr., PMB#457 Medford, OR 97501 Request: A request to allow for the construction of a single residence on the non -conforming Woodland Residential parcel located at 440 Granite Street. A conditional use permit is required to alter the existing non -conforming development. A Water Resource Protection Zone, Limited Activities Permit is requested for encroachment into the Water Resource Protection Zone. The requested development seeks a variance to reduce the existing coverage which exceeds the maximum allowed seven percent lot coverage. oft RUGUE PLANNING 9 NEVELNPMENT SERVICES, LLC Page 1 flf 21) Property Description: The subject property is 39 1E 161313, Tax Lot 1300 located at 440 Granite Street. The property is on the east side of Granite Street. The property is adjacent to Ashland Creek on the southern and eastern property boundaries. Parcels owned by the city of Ashland and part of Lithia Park border the property on the south, east and north sides. The subject property of land is described in Instrument No. 90-16576 of the Official Records of Jackson County, Oregon. The property consists of a portion of the Missouri E. Allen tract recorded on August 9, 1923, in Vol. 145, Pg. 465. The subject property appears on the first platted maps of Ashland and was the J. Dennis Tract. The parcel is a legal, non -conforming, lot of record. The parcel is 37,902 square feet in area (.87 acre), The minimum lot area in the Woodland Residential (WR) zone is 87,120 square feet in area (two (2) acres). The parcels area is 56.5 percent smaller than the minimum required lot area. According to the Jackson County Assessors' records of the property, and the previously approved demolition permit (BD -2009-01474), the property was occupied by a 3,734 square foot, two story residence with attached, 400 square foot garage. The 4,134 square foot residence was constructed in 1915 with additions in the 1950s and 1960s. The structure had a 2,366 square foot footprint, including a 400 square foot garage, 716 square feet of porch and deck area, and 400 square foot concrete patio. An 850 square foot driveway and walkway to the front entry were also present. This 4,732 square foot area was scraped from the site beginning in early 2011 and concluding later that year. There are accessory structures on the property that remained following the removal of the single-family residence. These include a 221 square foot studio structure on the north side of the property, and a 458 square foot historical mill house which was reconstructed a little over four years ago after being damaged by a fallen tree. There is a 109 square foot area of concrete bench and seating area and a 196 square foot below -grade utility vault. In addition to the 984 square foot area of the structures on the property, there are existing extensive decomposed granite walkways and gravel parking area. These areas of decomposed granite walkway, driveway/parking area, and gravel pad area accounts for 11,649 square feet of lot coverage. The existing site coverage as calculated by the current standards accounts for more than 12,633 square feet, 33.3 percent of the lot area. The existing site coverage is non -conforming development because maximum coverage in the WR zone is seven percent (2,653.3 square feet). Note: The demolition permit documents do not account for all of the surfaces that are now considered coverage, specifically, the previous driveway, the previous deck areas, the existing gravel surface ROGUE PLANNING 9 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC Page 7 of 711 N i '3 f� 1 1 i MllGM11tEE 51 - - - ----.-.- ... �- -; According to the Jackson County Assessors' records of the property, and the previously approved demolition permit (BD -2009-01474), the property was occupied by a 3,734 square foot, two story residence with attached, 400 square foot garage. The 4,134 square foot residence was constructed in 1915 with additions in the 1950s and 1960s. The structure had a 2,366 square foot footprint, including a 400 square foot garage, 716 square feet of porch and deck area, and 400 square foot concrete patio. An 850 square foot driveway and walkway to the front entry were also present. This 4,732 square foot area was scraped from the site beginning in early 2011 and concluding later that year. There are accessory structures on the property that remained following the removal of the single-family residence. These include a 221 square foot studio structure on the north side of the property, and a 458 square foot historical mill house which was reconstructed a little over four years ago after being damaged by a fallen tree. There is a 109 square foot area of concrete bench and seating area and a 196 square foot below -grade utility vault. In addition to the 984 square foot area of the structures on the property, there are existing extensive decomposed granite walkways and gravel parking area. These areas of decomposed granite walkway, driveway/parking area, and gravel pad area accounts for 11,649 square feet of lot coverage. The existing site coverage as calculated by the current standards accounts for more than 12,633 square feet, 33.3 percent of the lot area. The existing site coverage is non -conforming development because maximum coverage in the WR zone is seven percent (2,653.3 square feet). Note: The demolition permit documents do not account for all of the surfaces that are now considered coverage, specifically, the previous driveway, the previous deck areas, the existing gravel surface ROGUE PLANNING 9 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC Page 7 of 711 walkways, sand set patios, etc., were not included in the calculations, thus a lower coverage calculation provided on the forms. Again in 2017 with the preapplication conference for site redevelopment, the same or similar numbers of coverage were provided by the property owners agents. The current property owner purchased the property late 2019 with the intention of redeveloping the site to similar intensity of single-family home development as what was on site, what is existing on site as coverage and what is existing in the vicinity. A large, manicured landscape yard area is present between the structure area landscaped a variety of large boulders rock outcroppings, rock walls, a pond, and a man-made diversion ditch for irrigation which bisects the property and connects to Lithia Park. This diversion ditch irrigates mature landscape trees and vegetation to the north of the property within the park. The property is bordered on the east and south property lines by Ashland Creek. Ashland Creek is a local stream that has FEMA floodplain and a 50 -foot from top of bank riparian buffer zone, also known as the Water Resource Protection Zone (WRPZ). The WRPZ extends substantially into the property and encompasses the existing structures, decks, footbridges, the landscape retaining walls, the outdoor seating area, the extensive landscaped planter areas and the lawn area. The WRPZ area of the property is 23,052 square feet. The WRPZ area covers 60 percent of the property area. The property had a FEMA Letter of Map Amendment (LOMA) approved in the early 2000s which largely removed the property from the FEMA 100 -year floodplain. No development is proposed within the floodplain area. There are numerous trees on the property. There are conifer trees such as Redwood, Pine and Fir trees on the north side of the property and near Granite Street. There are birch trees along the ditch, another conifer stand, and numerous alder and maple trees on the south and east sides of the property nearer the creek. Aft RME PLANNINR 9 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC Page 3 of 2O Proposal: The proposal is to construct a replacement residence on the partially vacant, legal, non -conforming property with a new residence and outdoor area that has similar lot coverage, and areas of disturbance in the Water Resource Protection Zone. The residence and be a great addition in the residential neighborhood, replacing the use of the property as a primary residence for a local, business owning family. The proposed construction alters the existing, non -conforming development on the non -conforming lot which requires a Conditional Use Permit and approval of building permits. The existing coverage is 12,633 square feet. The proposed 11,112 square feet of coverage is an overall reduction. The proposed coverage exceeds the allowed 2,653.3 square feet of coverage, requiring a variance to lot coverage. The proposed redevelopment of the site encroaches into the 23,052 square foot of WRPZ portion of the property. Between the existing encroachments, and proposed encroachments, there is 15.32 percent of the WRPZ affected by the proposed site development. The areas of `new' encroachment include areas of existing encroachments from removed decks, graded areas, lawn areas, pathways and seating areas. The two existing structures on the site, the millhouse and the studio are both within the WRPZ. With the proposal, the manicured lawn and maintenance intense landscape areas are to be reduced in area and replaced with more native vegetation. An arbor structure is proposed for a swing which is a new feature. The goal of the proposal is to encroach only into the areas of previous encroachments and to overall reduce the area that requires intensive maintenance such as lawns and manicured flower beds from the WRPZ. For example, the large green lawn areas nearer the creek is proposed to be reduced in area and the proposed pool and patio area adjacent to the residence encroachment is within the previous deck and landscape area near the residence. This property has a well-defined landscaped yard area that extended from the rear of the previous house and the large decks with gravel paths connecting yard area to the mill house, the irrigation ditch and pond to the creek, outdoor seating area and the studio structure. Along the creek there is a rock wall that defined the boundary between the landscaped edge of the 'back yard' and the banks of Ashland Creek. The yard area has large diameter cedars, pines and redwoods. Along the north side of the property, north of the studio and continuing east along the creek, wrapping around the southern portion of the property and around the mill house structure, is a clearly defined riparian area adjacent to the creek. The vegetation in this area includes large diameter maples and alders. The ground covers include viburnum, blackberry, snowberry, and sword ferns. There is a stand of conifer trees near Granite Street and north of the building area that are outside of the WRPZ. An 18 -inch DBH Douglas Fir tree and a 9 -inch DBH Redwood tree are proposed for removal to accommodate the driveway. The removal of these trees exempt because the property is not vacant IZ1]GIJE PLANNING 6 DEVEMMENT SERVICES, LLC Page 4 of 2N of structures and the trees are outside of the regulated areas. The remaining trees are to be protected and a tree protection plan has been provided. Additionally, that plan incorporates an erosion control plan to address any erosion concerns towards the creek. When the property was created and originally developed more than 100 years ago, a residence was built and a large landscaped areas and a backyard leading right to the creek was constructed. There were additions, modifications and intensification of use of the beautiful, secluded, creekside property. The areas of encroachment occur within the footprint of the historical, site developments. The proposed site development results in less coverage than existing. The existing and proposed encroachments in the Water Resource Protection Zone are similar to the improvements within Lithia Park, the Calle Guanajuato, and Bluebird Park. The proposed residential development and the limited, new encroachment area provides for improvement and enhancement to the Water Resource Protection Zone area with new plant materials that are appropriate for the area. There is no loss in riparian area plant material or trees. The proposal is similar is size, scale, mass and coverage as the other conforming and non -conforming properties in the vicinity of the site. The approval of this request allows for the redevelopment of a non- conforming property with a beautiful, architecturally pleasing and neighbrohood compatible home. On the following pages are findings addressing Non -conforming Situations, Conditional Use Permit, Variance to Lot Coverage, and Water Resource Protection Zone Reduction criteria for the requested development of the replacement single family residence. Thank you for your consideration. Amy Gunter Rogue Planning & Development Services ROGUE PLANNING 6 DEVELOPMENT SERVIGES, LLC Page 5 of 20 Findings Addressing the Criteria from Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) AMC 18.1.4. - Non -Conforming Situations Chapter 18.1.4 contains standards and procedures for the continuation of uses, structures, developments and lots that are lawfully established but do not comply with current ordinance standards ("nonconforming situations"). The chapter is intended to protect public health, safety, and general welfare, while allowing reasonable use of private property. Nonconforming situations are not necessarily considered a negative influence on a neighborhood; rather the benefits of continuing a nonconformity should be weighed against impacts to the neighborhood. The chapter contains four sections as follows: A. Nonconforming uses (e.g., commercial use in a residential zone) are subject to section 18.1.4.020; Finding: Not applicable. The allowed use is residential. B. Nonconforming structures (e.g., structure does not meet setback standards) are subject to section 18.1.4.030; Finding: Not applicable. C. Nonconforming developments (e.g., site does not meet landscaping standards) are subject to section 18.1.4.040; Finding: The existing site development includes structures, the utility vault, the other lot coverages created by the graveled areas that remained on the property following the removal of the residence and associated residential development components, the existing structures, the utility vault lid and the decomposed granite walkways, the rock lined irrigation channel, the benches, sand set patios, and other site improvements that are considered lot coverage under the definition of the Ashland Municipal Code 18.6.1.030 for "Lot Coverage" exist onsite exceed the maximum lot coverage in the WR Zone. According to 18.6.1.030. Coverage, Lot or Site is the total area of a lot covered by buildings, parking areas, driveways, and other solid surfaces that will not allow natural water infiltration to the soil. Landscaping, including living plants, vegetative ground cover, and mulch, which allows natural soil characteristics and water infiltration, and retention is not considered lot or site coverage. Jft ROGUE PLANNING G DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. LLC Page G of 20 18.1.4.040 Nonconforming Developments A. Exempt Alterations. Repair and maintenance of a nonconforming development (e.g., paved area, parking area, landscaping) are allowed subject to approval of required building permits if the development is not enlarged or altered in a way that brings the nonconforming site less in conformity with this ordinance. See also, section 18.3.11.050 related to nonconforming uses in Water Resource Protection zones. Finding The existing lot coverage of 33.3 percent is nonconforming development of the WR zoned property which allows for only seven percent coverage. The proposed new construction of a residence and the other associated improvements such as driveway, pathways, decl<s, patios, etc., do not meet the exempt alterations criteria. See B below. B. Planning Approval Required. A nonconforming development may be enlarged or altered subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit under chapter 18.5.4 and approval of required building permits, except that a planning action is not required for exempt alterations described in subsection 18.1.4.040.A, above, and for non-residential development subject to subsection 18.4.2.040.B.6. Finding; The proposal includes findings addressing the Conditional Use Permit criteria under chapter 185.4 to alter the non -conforming site development (lot coverage), ultimately reducing the non- conforming coverage areas. C. Roadway Access. The owner of a nonconforming driveway approach or access to a public street or highway, upon receiving land use or development approval, may be required as a condition of approval to bring the nonconforming access into conformance with the standards of the approval authority. Finding: Not applicable. D. Destruction. A legal nonconforming development that is damaged by means beyond the owner's control, such as fire, flood, earthquake, or similar catastrophe, to an extent of 50 percent or more of its replacement cost, may be restored or reconstructed within the original three- dimensional building envelope (i.e., relative to coverage, height, setbacks, and other dimensions of the developed area) provided the nonconformity shall not increase. ROGUE PLANNING 9 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC Page 7 of 20 Finding: Not applicable. D. Nonconforming lots (e.g,, lot smaller than minimum area standard) are subject to section 18.1.4.050 Finding: The property is a legal, non -conforming lot. The parcel area (37,902 square feet) is less than 50 percent of the required minimum lot area (87,120 square feet) in the WR Zone. The previous site development and the existing lot coverage predate the present WR zoning and the WR zoning restrictions. 18.1.4.050 Nonconforming Lots If a lot or the aggregate of contiguous lots or land parcels held in single ownership, and recorded in the office of the County Clerk at the time of passage of the ordinance codified herein, a legal lot or lot of record, as provided by chapter 18.1.3, with an area or dimensions that do not meet the standards of the zoning district in which the property is located, may be occupied by a use permitted in the zone subject to other requirements of the ordinance. Finding: The property is a legal, non -conforming property. The parcel area (37,902 square feet) is less than 50 percent of the required minimum lot area (87,220 square feet) in the WR Zone. The parcel and its previous development predate the present zoning and the zoning restrictions. The parcel of land is described in Instrument No. 90-16576 of the Official Records of Jackson County, Oregon. The property consists of a portion of the Missouri E. Allen tract recorded on August 9, 1923, in Vol. 145, Pg. 465. The subject property appears on the first platted maps of Ashland approved by the Board of Commissioners in December 1883, as the J. Dennis Tract. A monument survey was conducted in 2009 that confirmed the properties boundaries and the accuracy of the deed. The assessor's documents dated between 1983 — 2012 note the property was occupied by a residential dwelling and associated site improvements. The assessor's documents also note the zoning of the property as Rural Residential (RR) -.5, then RR -,S -P. There is not a reference in the assessor's documents to WR zoning until after 2012. After substantial research to determine why the discrepancy between the county records and the city records it was found that on September 28, 1981, the area of the subject property was rezoned to a new zoning designation Woodland Residential. According to City Council meeting minutes, the new Woodland Residential District was to control slope development and was to be applied sparingly to properties with very steep slopes. "Woodland Residential is a new zone to RDGUE PLANNING G DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC Page 8 of 2l7 be applied to forested areas to ensure that these areas are protected from incompatible development on slopes and forests with erosion control and scenic values as the prime purpose of the zone." The council reviewed the slope criteria with the council regarding the minimum lot sizes (two acres) is based on the slope percentages. (Minutes of the Adjourned Meeting, Ashland City Council, September 28, 1982, pg. 4., are attached). The subject property is not only substantially smaller (56.5 percent smaller) than the minimum lot area in the WR zone, but the property is also not steep, and does not have erosion issues based on the extensive area of pre -established yard area, landscaping, pathways, gravel, structures, etc. Most of the site improvements existed in 1982 when the zone was changed from RR -.5 to WR. The zone changes from RR -.5 to WR substantially decreased the allowed lot coverage of the site below the development that was present at the time of the 1982 rezoning. Additionally, based on how lot coverage is calculated the site remains non -conforming even without the primary use of the site (single family residential) present. The proposal seeks to reduce the existing coverage areas of the non -conforming lot, but the resulting coverage is still more than allowed in the WR zone thus a variance is requested. 18.5.4.050 Conditional Use Permit Approval Criteria A. Approval Criteria. A Conditional Use Permit shall be granted if the approval authority finds that the application meets all of the following criteria, or can be made to conform through the imposition of conditions. Finding: The proposal includes findings addressing the Conditional Use Permit criteria under chapter 18.5.4 to alter the non -conforming site development lot coverage (AMC 18.1.4.040), ultimately reducing the non- conforming coverage areas. The non -conforming situation is exacerbated bythe non -conforming lot area in the highly restricted WR zone (AMC 18.1.4.050). 1. That the use would be in conformance with all standards within the zoning district in which the use is proposed to be located, and in conformance with relevant Comprehensive plan policies that are not implemented by any City, State, or Federal law or program. Finding: The use of the property as residential use is in conformance with purpose and intent of the residential zones. The proposal seeks a Conditional Use Permit to address the non -conforming situations on the property both non -conforming lot area and coverage for the WR zone. The use conforms to the standards of the zoning district and in conformance with the relevant Comprehensive plan policies for residential zones. Aft ROGUE PLANNING G DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC Page 9 of 20 2. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, electricity, urban storm drainage, paved access to and throughout the development, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to the subject property. Finding: There is adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, electricity, urban storm drainage and paved access to and throughout the development, and adequate transportation exist to the site for the existing uses and from the previous residence. 3. That the conditional use will have no greater adverse material effect on the livability of the impact area when compared to the development of the subject lot with the target use of the zone, pursuant with subsection 18.5.4.050.A.5, below. When evaluating the effect of the proposed use on the impact area, the following factors of livability of the impact area shall be considered in relation to the target use of the zone. Finding: The proposed residential use of the property and the proposed residential structure are the target use in the zone. The impact area includes 11 parcels. Four of those are Lithia Park properties that are immediately adjacent to the north, east and south, and vacant. There are seven residential parcels. Of those there are three that are zoned R-1-10 (Single family residential, 10,000 SF minimum lot area and maximum coverage of 40 percent). These are development with residential homes and associated improvements. There are four WR zoned properties. Two of these are vacant of structures. These parcels are generally very steep with slopes of over 35 percent. These properties are smaller than the minimum lot area in the zone but include the steep slopes envisioned on WR zoned lots. a. Similarity in scale, bulk, and coverage. Finding: The scale and bulk is similar to the properties in the vicinity that are developed with residential uses. The two tables on the following pages demonstrate that the request is similar in both scale, bulk and coverage as the properties that are immediately adjacent to the subject property. Not included in the tables are the adjacent R-1-7.5 zoned property but it should be noted that the R-1-7.5 zoned property allows for a 45 percent coverage. i10GLE PLANNING G 0EVE10PMENT SERVICES, LLC Page 10 of 70 Scale and Bulk: Address Zoning Lot Area Area of Structure(s) Ratio Notes: 433 Granite R-1-10 25,264.8 2,200 8.7 percent 10,105.9 435 Granite R-1-10 11,761.2 2,111 17.9 percent 4,704.5 440 Granite WR 37,902 6,250 16.4 percent Proposed 445 Granite R-1-10 18,295.2 2,743 14.9 percent 7,318.08 514 Granite WR 25,264.8 2,662 10.5 percent Re -Zoned in `82 510 Granite WR 22,215.6 3,456 15.5 percent Re -zoned in `82 Built in `19 Coverage: - Coverage estimated due to driveway area and pathway areas unknown Address Zoning Lot Area Lot Coverage Ratio Allowed: 433 Granite R-1-10 25,264.8 -4,475 -17.4 10,105.9 435 Granite R-1-10 11,761.2 -2,611 -22.1 4,704.5 440 Granite WR 37,902 11,112 -29.3 2,653 445 Granite R-1-10 18,295.2 -3,344 -18.2 7,318.08 514 Granite WR 25,264.8 -3,609 -14.3 1,768.5 510 Granite WR 22,215.6 2,983 -13.4 1,555 r R-1-7.5 ROGUE PLANNING G DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC Page It of 211 b. Generation of traffic and effects on surrounding streets. Increases in pedestrian, bicycle, and mass transit use are considered beneficial regardless of capacity of facilities. Finding: The generation of traffic and the effects of the traffic from the residence on the surrounding street will be the same as a typical residential use. c. Architectural compatibility with the impact area. Finding: The proposed residence is a two-story structure with a basement. The residence reflects American Arts and Crafts style architecture. The structure proposes to use wood beams and natural wood siding with a flag stone base and wall treatment. The materials used in the construction will be compliant with the Wildfire Hazards Ordinance standards. The garage is below grade and not facing the public street with back up and turn around on the site to allow forward exiting of the property. The proposed residence is architecturally compatible with the residences in the impact area. d. Air quality, including the generation of dust, odors, or other environmental pollutants. Finding: The air quality will not be negatively impacted by the development of the property with a residential use. e. Generation of noise, light, and glare. Finding: The proposed residential structure will generate similar noise, light and glare as a typical residential use. f. The development of adjacent properties as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan. Finding: The adjacent properties are zoned residential. The development of this residential property with a residential use does not affect the development of the adjacent properties as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan. ROGUE PLANNING G DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC Page 12 of 2O g. Other factors found to be relevant by the approval authority for review of the proposed use. Finding: Unknown what other factors are relevant. 4. A conditional use permit shall not allow a use that is prohibited or one that is not permitted pursuant to this ordinance. Finding: The use of the property as a residential use is permitted. 5. For the purposes of reviewing conditional use permit applications for conformity with the approval criteria of this subsection, the target uses of each zone are as follows. a. WR and RR. Residential use complying with all ordinance requirements, developed at the density permitted by chapter 18.2.5 Standards for Residential Zones. Finding: The target use of the zone is residential. The conditional use permit allows for the development of a residential development which is the target use in the zone. The density of the property is one residential unit. The conditional use permit seeks to acknowledge the non -conforming lot area and the non- conforming site development and allow development with similar coverage. The existing coverage exceeds coverage amounts allowed by code and the proposal seeks a variance to reduce the total lot coverage while exceeding the maximum coverage allowed in the zone. Lot Coverage Variance: AMC 18.5.030. 1. The variance is necessary because the subject code provision does not account for special or unique physical circumstances of the subject site, such as topography, natural features, adjacent development, or similar circumstances. A legal lot determination may be sufficient evidence of a hardship for purposes of approving a variance. Finding: The subject property is substantially smaller in area than the required minimum lot area in the zone. The undersized lot area is a unique physical circumstance of the subject property that necessitates the variance request. ROGUE PLANNING R OEVELGPMENT SERVICES, ILC Page 13 of 20 There is substantially more coverage area afforded to a property when it is two acres vs. the subject property which is .87 of an acre or 56 percent of the minimum lot area. A two -acre parcel that has seven percent coverage is allowed 6,098 square feet of impervious surface. Allowed lot coverage of the .87 -acre (37,902 square feet) parcel when it was zoned RR -.5 would have been 7,541 + (200 porous surface) square feet in area. There are accessory structures on the property that remained following the removal of the single- family residence and its 4,732 square feet of impervious surfaces. These include a 221 square foot studio structure on the north side of the property, and a 458 square foot historical mill house which was reconstructed a little over four years ago after being damaged by a fallen tree. There is a 109 square foot area of concrete bench and seating area and a 196 square foot below -grade utility vault. The total areas of the site development excluding the walkways and paths included 5,716 square feet of coverage thus compliant with the previous zoning and prior ownership. Presently on the property with the way lot coverage is calculated by the city in 2023 there is substantially more coverage on the site. This is because in addition to the 984 square foot area of the structures on the property, there are existing extensive decomposed granite walkways and gravel parking area. These areas of decomposed granite walkway, driveway/parking area, and gravel pad area accounts for 11,649 square feet of lot coverage. The existing site coverage as calculated by the current standards accounts for more than 12,633 square feet, 33.3 percent of the lot area. The existing site coverage is non -conforming development because maximum coverage in the WR zone is seven percent (2,653.3 square feet). The property is a legal, non -conforming property, The parcel area (37,902 square feet) is less than 50 percent of the required minimum lot area (87,120 square feet) in the WR Zone. The parcel and its previous and existing development predate the present zoning and the zoning restrictions. The subject property is not only substantially smaller (56.5 percent smaller) than the minimum lot area in the WR zone, but the property is also not steep, and does not have erosion issues based on the extensive area of pre -established yard area, landscaping, pathways, gravel, structures, etc. Most of the site improvements existed in 1982 when the zone was changed from RR -.5 to WR. The zone changes from RR -.5 to WR substantially decreased the allowed lot coverage of the site below the development that was present at the time of the 1982 rezoning. Additionally, based on how lot coverage is calculated the site remains non -conforming even without the primary use of the site (single family residential) present. The zone and the limited lot coverage was applied after the previous structure occupied the site and the reasons for the zone, to protect steep, forested slopes are not present upon the subject Aft ROGUE PLANNING 6 OEVELUMENT SERVICES, ILC Page 14 of 20 parcel and the WR zone appears to have been inappropriately applied to this lot because of the directive that the zone be applied sparingly to land with very steep slopes. 2. The variance is the minimum necessary to address the special or unique physical circumstances related to the subject site. Finding: The variance requests seek to allow for coverage area of 11,112 square feet. This is the minimum necessary to retain the existing structures, pathways and walkways, and to allow for the construction a new residence, the necessary parking and vehicle maneuvering areas, a permeable patio area, and natural pool area. The existing site coverage as calculated by the current standards accounts for more than 12,633 square feet, 33.3. The proposed site development accounts for 29.3 percent coverage, an overall reduction of the site coverage by four percent. 3. The proposal's benefits will be greater than any negative impacts on the development of the adjacent uses and will further the purpose and intent of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan of the City. ROGUE PLANKING 9 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC Page 15 of 70 EXISTING LOT COVERAGE 4� EMTING LOT COVERAGEAREA LOT ure a�,vo2 sa n -- OKCRWTKM .k E)f3511NG S RUCNRES 2.696 EE - 1 LXWMI G 14AR76GAPE l SURFACES 11,60 30.7R ILIAL pt111lH6 LbT CaYW��t- „� JY 2. The variance is the minimum necessary to address the special or unique physical circumstances related to the subject site. Finding: The variance requests seek to allow for coverage area of 11,112 square feet. This is the minimum necessary to retain the existing structures, pathways and walkways, and to allow for the construction a new residence, the necessary parking and vehicle maneuvering areas, a permeable patio area, and natural pool area. The existing site coverage as calculated by the current standards accounts for more than 12,633 square feet, 33.3. The proposed site development accounts for 29.3 percent coverage, an overall reduction of the site coverage by four percent. 3. The proposal's benefits will be greater than any negative impacts on the development of the adjacent uses and will further the purpose and intent of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan of the City. ROGUE PLANKING 9 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC Page 15 of 70 Finding: The proposals benefit of development of a single family residentially zoned property as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan with a single-family residential home for a young, growing family does not cause any negative impacts on adjacent uses or properties. The proposals benefits are that the overall coverage of the property is reduced by four percent. The property will have a home on it again nearly 110 years after the first residence was constructed on the property. 4. The need for the variance is not self-imposed by the applicant or property owner. For example, the variance request does not arise as a result of a property line adjustment or land division approval previously granted to the applicant. Finding: The variance request is due to the lot area being more than 50 percent smallerthan the minimum lot area in the zone. The request is to reduce the existing site coverage by four percent and to develop the property with a single-family residence as envisioned in the comprehensive plan. The proposal seeks for lot coverage of the site that is similar to the coverage of the site by the previous site improvements and is less than the existing coverage on the property. The non- conforming lot area was not created by the property owners. The non -conforming lot area was created when the zone was changed from RR -.5 (which the lot complied with both in area and coverage) to WR in 1982 which immediately created a substantially non -conforming parcel. The existing coverages on the site were in existence prior to the property owners purchase of the lot in late 2019. 18.3.11.070 Water Resource Protection Zone Reduction: A Water Resource Protection Zone may be reduced by up to 25 percent through a Type I procedure in 18.5.1.050 and by greater than 25 percent and up to 50 percent through a Type II procedure in section 18.5.1.060 if the proposal meets all of the following criteria. Finding: The proposed redevelopment of the site encroaches into the Water Resource Protection Zone by less than 25 percent. The property area is 37,902 square feet in area and the water resource protection zone encompasses 60 percent of the total lot area. The proposal seeks to provide a covered backyard patio area, a swimming pool and an outdoor swing structure within the WRPZ. The proposed area of encroachment is within the Jft lqwp ROHE PLANNING 6 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC Page 16 of 20 existing areas of encroachment and are not impacting the riparian soils or vegetation. The `new' encroachment areas are 1,129 square feet, five percent of the total 23,052 square foot WRPZ. The context of the properties landscaping, trees, historical yard areas, patio areas, structure locations and overall site improvements are important to consider when discussing the impacts to the water resource protection zone. The existing use and improvements are separated from the creek banks the water resource by a rock wall. There is 8,262 square feet of the WRPZ in the natural areas along the retaining wall areas. Remaining area of 14,790 square feet of the WRPZ is the area of the property that includes the existing area previous disturbance associated with the residential use of the property that formerly included a wood deck, walkways, stairs, stacked rock walls, a pond, and the man-made irrigation ditch. There is an extensive lawn area and landscape planter beds. These site improvements can be maintained as exempt activities, but this proposal seeks to change the property and the type of encroachments that are within the WRPZ. The proposal seeks to provide a covered backyard patio area, a swimming pool and an outdoor swing structure within the WRPZ. The proposed area of encroachment is within the existing areas of encroachment and are not impacting the riparian soils or vegetation. The 'new' encroachment areas are 1,129 square feet, five percent of the total 23,052 square foot WRPZ. The manicured lawn area is reduced by 10 percent to off -set the impacts of the new encroachment. It can be found that the minor area of encroachment is minimal when considering the percentage of the property covered by the water resource protection zone and the amount of the WRPZ that is already developed as yard area and structures. WRPZ PROPOSED CHANGES IN DISTURBED AREA WATER RESOURCE - — --A PROTECTION ZONE - EXTENT OF DISTURBANCE IN WRPZ --� (WRPII GRANITE STREET LOT SO$37,9025q FT - TOTAL WRPI: 23.052 54 FT 16058 OF LOT- TOTALEXL5RNGWRPICOVERAGE: 4,390SO FYI 1496- VESC4IPRON AREA (SOFT) %OF WQF2 i RWARIA14 AREA IN WRPZ IAREAIPJ AMORE NATURAL 5TATEI DISTUREM AREA PATH PROPOSED 7.124 5� CIIAHM IN WRPZ PATIO IW FROM WALL( POOLmmI 437 FROM WALL} 40, ,; SWINGS OVER DECK SWING CONCEPT RENDERING I10'FROMWALL) Aft ROGUE PLANNING 9 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLE EnMNG WALL SEPARATING WATER FROM YARD Page 17 of 20 1--R—AREA PN WRPZ --� (HISTORICALLY DEVELOPM IL 14.790 6458 LANWCAPa] AREA) DISTUREM AREA PATH PROPOSED 7.124 5� CIIAHM IN WRPZ PATIO IW FROM WALL( POOLmmI 437 FROM WALL} 40, ,; SWINGS OVER DECK SWING CONCEPT RENDERING I10'FROMWALL) Aft ROGUE PLANNING 9 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLE EnMNG WALL SEPARATING WATER FROM YARD Page 17 of 20 A. The proposed use or activity is designed to avoid intrusion into the Water Resource Protection Zone through the use of up to a 50 percent reduction of any dimensional standards (e.g., required front, side and rear yard setbacks; required distance between buildings) to permit development as far outside or upland of the Water Resource Protection Zone as possible. Such adjustment to any applicable dimensional standards shall be reviewed as part of the requested reduction and shall not be subject to a separate Variance application under chapter 18.5.5 Variances. Reductions to dimensional standards may not be used to reduce required Solar Access setbacks without evidence of agreement by the effected property owner(s) to the north through a concurrent Solar Access Variance application as described in chapter 18.4.8 Solar Access. Finding: The proposed use of the Water Resource Protection Zone encroachments is to allow for the construction of rear yard amenities for the new residence that is proposed at 440 Granite Street. The new areas of encroachment include a proposed outdoor patio, a portion of the pool, the covered walkway and a family swing. These are in the upland areas of the WRPZ. The use of the rear yard area of the property as a beneficial use to the home is designed to avoid intrusion into the Water Resource Protection Zone. The patio and pool area are proposed in the location shown because it is an area that was previously deck, steps and walkway areas and has already been encroached upon with deck and patio area and would previously have been permitted encroachments. The front yard setback of the residence is at the minimum required front yard setback. The residence will be 15 -feet from the curb. The setback is not decreased to shift the structure away from the WRPZ because there is not additional right-of-way buffering the residence from the on -street parking of upper Granite Street. The buildable area is constrained by the narrowness of the lot between the street and the creek. Additionally, the setbacks are proposed at the minimum and utilize the existing driveway apron location and grade to provide for a below grade garage. The setback adjacent to Granite Street is not proposed to be reduced because of the amount of vehicle, pedestrian and bicycle traffic on the street, there is a lot of public interaction across the frontage of the property and a reduced setback reduces privacy for the property owners and a reduced setback imposes a structure upon the street and reduces the natural areas and feeling of still being in Lithia Park. One of the primary reasons for the location of the structure and the associated encroachments is due to the presence of large boulders, the historic irrigation ditch location and the presence of large stature trees to the north, east and south of the existing buildable area prevents the structure from shifting. B. The alteration of the Water Resource Protection Zone is the minimum necessary to efficiently perform the proposed activity and/or use. The proposed development shall minimize disturbance to the Water Resource Protection Zone by utilizing the following design options to minimize or reduce impacts of development. ROGUE PLANNING 6 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLE Page 18 of 20 1. Multi -stony construction shall be considered. 2. Parking spaces shall be minimized to no more than that required as a minimum for the use. 3. Pavement shall be minimized, and all pavement used shall be installed and maintained in a porous solid surface paving material. 4. Engineering solutions shall be used to minimize additional grading and/or fill. Finding: The proposed residential structure is outside of the WRPZ. The structure is two story with a basement to reduce the footprint. The parking area, driveway and front yard areas are outside of the WRPZ. The proposed encroachments include porous patio areas, a small area of covered walkway, a pool area, a pergola structure for a swing, and a reduced, reconfiguration of the existing manicured lawn area. The areas of the proposed encroachments is within the area of the existing site improvements and encroachments into the WRPZ. The area of encroachment of the patio area is proposed to be a porous solid surface pavement material and not a solid concrete. The proposed pool area is only partially encroaching into the Water Resource Protection Zone. The pool location is largely dictated by the existence of large boulders that are present between the front property line and the existing studio structure and the existing patio area. These boulders push the functional areas of the property for use to the south portions of the site. The encroachments are the minimum necessary to allow for the site development. Less than five percent of the total WRPZ area is proposed to be encroached upon. This is a minimal encroachment when considering the WRPZ area encompasses 23,052 square feet of the property. C. The application demonstrates that equal or better protection for identified resources will be ensured through restoration, enhancement, and mitigation measures. The structures, functions, and values of the Water Resource will be restored through the implementation of a restoration and enhancement strategy set forth in a mitigation plan prepared in accordance with the standards and requirements described in section 18.3.11.110 Mitigation Requirements, Finding: Though the plan requests encroachments into the WRPZ, the reduced area of manicured lawn, and any new vegetation per posed would be from the approved water resource protection zone plant list, provides equal protection for the vegetation within the WRPZ. In this case, the majority of the WRPZ is within the improved yard area of the property. The area of proposed disturbance has always been part of a formal landscaped area. The proposal changes the improvements from a wood deck structure and planter area to a porous patio and a portion of a swimming pool area. The area of encroachment does not have a negative impact on the structure of the water resource because there is a substantial physical distance from the patio area and the portion of the pool where encroachment occurs. The water resource is physically separated from the yard area by a retaining wall. This retaining wall provides a clear distinction division between the vegetation and soil types associated ROGUE PLANNING G DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC Page 10 of 20 with a streambank and a riparian preservation area. The retaining wall is a historic feature of the property that was recently maintained. The vegetation on the stream side of the wall consists of maples and alders, trees typical to a riparian area. There is also limited ground cover underthe tree canopy and the soil is a sandy, gravel, rocky mix, more typical of a riparian are soil types. On the west side of the wall within the historically developed yard area the trees are redwood, fir, oak and pine. These trees are typical in upland areas and provide shading functions and habitat areas, adding value to the water resource protection zone and the riparian area, but there is not a riparian type of landscaping and includes planter areas, existing pathways, and a manicured lawn area. The proposal does not remove any trees within the water resource protection zone, retains the trees and reduces the lawn area. The proposed patio and partial pool area is within areas that have previously been manipulated as part of the developed area of the property. The proposed development area replaces previous wood decking, existing pathways, rockery, stairs, and landscape planter areas with a porous surface patio area and only a portion of the of the pool encroaches. The primary area for the reduction to the water resource protection zone is at the upper extent of the protected area. D. Long term conservation, management, and maintenance of the Water Resource Protection Zone shall be ensured through preparation and recordation of a management plan as described in subsection 18.3.11.110.0, except a management plan is not required for residentially zoned lots occupied only by a single-family dwelling and accessory structures. Finding: Not applicable. The property is occupied by a single-family dwelling and accessory structures. Attachments: Application Exhibits (Pages 1— 24) Tree Protection and Erosion Control Plan Map of Ashland Deed 1923-901856 1981 Minutes Rezoning area to WR Jackson County Appraisal Records (1984-2012 - Sampling to show historical context of improvements) 2009 Demolition Permit (partial forms excluding the construction evaluations) ift ROGUE PLANNING 6 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, llG Page 20 of 20 WILLING RESIDENCE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT VARIANCE TO LOT COVERAGE WATER RESOURCE PROTECTION ZONE REDUCTION SITE LOCATION :RE) CRITERIA FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ✓ Proposed use would conform with all standards within the zoning district & comprehensive plan ✓ There is adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, electricity, urban storm drainage, paved access and transportation ✓ Proposed use is the same as existing use and will have no greater adverse effect on the livability of the impact area compared to the target use (residential) - with regard to scale, bulk and coverage, generation of traffic, architectural compatibility, air quality or adjacent properties ✓ Proposed use is not prohibited 3 01011 I ALlIonLai 2'110 ll D>■ INAPPROPRIATELY APPLIED WR ZONING WR ZONING DESCRIPTION MATCHES ZONING 440 GRANITE ST ACTUAL CONDITIONS DESCRIPTION? 2 ACRE MINIMUM LOT SIZE NO 0.87 ACRE (43% OF MIN) GREATER THAN 40T SLOPE NO TERRACED WITH ±10% AVG SLOPE HISTORICALLY DEVELOPED WITH A HOUSE, TWO HEAVILY FORESTED NO ACCESSORY BUILDINGS AND MANICURED LANDSCAPE MORE THAN 300 FT FROM THE CLOSEST CITY NO CITY SERVICES ARE PROVIDED SERVICES LITTLE OPPORTUNITY FOR DEVELOPMENT NO HISTORICALLY DEVELOPED; PREVIOUS HOUSE WAS BUILT IN 1915 NOT AVAILABLE FOR URBANIZATION; RETAINED FOR FOREST, ENVIRONMENTAL WATER QUALITY, NO HISTORICALLY DEVELOPED; NOT IN A NATURAL STATE EROSION CONTROL AND SCENIC VALUE STEEP SLOPES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD Av r r C�fy;of A " ap )PES 807 5 � 1 nr PRO- ✓`r,:-5 'F:?.« w M. y'..=, m�: p':. w �r_....�;�,'�w;- ...,, rr '�,�%' �(d"'M'-. �-M:"�L '� .. �. .year-:..-, .Fa=^�'""�,�w _. �s,_,�: �: ^:vim-;�x?"..r�' yam m:v..trrac?�✓r: ''_'; �^^'""i"'^d R >».�®`^".,^'"»,rt' :�;>' .. ...: :.... -. 'STEEP SLOPES F APPROX 50% Av r r C�fy;of A " ap )PES 807 r ,(rrr nr PRO- ✓`r,:-5 'F:?.« w M. y'..=, m�: p':. w �r_....�;�,'�w;- ...,, rr '�,�%' �(d"'M'-. �-M:"�L '� .. �. .year-:..-, .Fa=^�'""�,�w _. �s,_,�: �: ^:vim-;�x?"..r�' yam m:v..trrac?�✓r: ''_'; �^^'""i"'^d R >».�®`^".,^'"»,rt' :�;>' .. ...: :.... -. .:. .. :,:: ;d:;: d �:::::.,,,,.w.:..�.,.:._.,,�r"'.�%.; .� � E, r�.r:.�.,arv..-.:e,..o.� ..::.ve,:�..:... .�:�,yr ��"D��., �','.,+. .-F.,✓.., x.r''�.,x Av r r C�fy;of A " ap )PES 807 -4.1mr-Aw I fl866m tra oafs W,PW ILP LOL ayns'W-r a yZb a�n YtallVlle 9u51 siy Z Swo: -0 ddV-add L&lz!� lag w &155; 1ady5 OZSLB Ho'PURIWSV - 'laeAS ellusio 07n. wa re«ls OsUOPlsOld 6UIIIIM y.Vd OU1111I.M uepiog aW I.." sn•ya ,v'NN4�8as5-iWIK R""o:* dR1H' >9RI aLSIG klO'WR14Rv LG•IY:afl faal�d vnasl laay9 IOl e{ms'laely a yZb - OZGL6 10 'P -m -H aliue�4j Otrb ON wa49 a e.tilf aj k4l,R;a6i, s`p eauepIsew r3uflllm sull m ueplor -N mw io .Oft 6-A ME Z -2e f a 4 J T ri ' • III■ !°�' � E � io .Oft 6-A ME Z -2e f a 4 J T egyaaM ... I B866-LGS-L4S (2= aO'W-luse 1 0L ayns'yearys eSb a,nin t 14s a' fo6i. p} l Kao 4�P mSueomwaa ddli-3yd 1&17:eN ralo+d arKs�;esus OZ9L8'dO 'PuelysV - 'laang aliueJO OG4 Laa s aauap€say 6unlIM 4'tld 6gIM uoplof oN .qs sn-rfallMav x�rus18 sus Lm m9WL0:.m doff-� ld OESLB UO'P--M Eo4 aP. •wars a 9L6 Ltrtz:M P*ld arrssl laa+ls OZSL6 NO 'puel4sv =+"F ... b. ' L_I,.� eoueplsa216u11[€M ld Bulumuepiof g. Vd a W4S I .rrw�r,✓ � aim � ''"�'' r-� JI{F F-77111 �€ .. .. . . .. . Y I o W w n a u JI ✓ I ca cujv r i z O cc a p cc z C3 U p El i I U D❑ y I - o ca w a) W W a. NIp I -� �I- NI O M } T Q [N Q Cf O N F N J N J Z }- N i N �! U N m�laHM�e•Mu�u I egfi- BS m OZGL6 HO V. -Me �a� amps •yaam a sxr aanj-11.4... 1.6. HJYffI J zris�Jw a�a ddV-3Zid Lo- IL:.N P.Pm —1 P-49 0Z9L5 210 'Pue14sv - WAS e11ueJO 004 P'd Pte{$ sousplsa2l 6u1111AA 9'Vd Buillm uepiof oN wys f `Ia aaoa Hit I Vne M16 2!0 'pug]USN 6-z z 0 a: J J �aa�lS al(uet� bb h g LEQL:-ON 1U3fO7ld ddVy� 3�U AdVOS(IN Iy� O' HEJIs3a DIIVWIHJ$ Iuedoed 6uali!M -g J W W 44 W F Q ig IM O, se �3 w0 V J >w >U 0 UCie pa ao� o;� 0 °' Q r � a c� On 1 ♦_ a U C n � 0 O O til ;0� �1mAo u O U -0 c U 'p o ., vo I '� " GL t iL Il w w w iL LL LL l3. '� ✓1 N O to M � T n N m V1 7,m U] Vf V Vi 'o N In '7 6 11 W W 44 W F Q ig IM O, se �3 w0 V J >w >U 0 UCie pa ao� o;� 0 °' Q r � O O N r O a c� On 1 ♦_ t w n � 0 :� ;0� O O N r O F Cl On 1 ♦_ t �1mAo } o ., vo I '� " GL t O O N r O ZONING IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE IN NEIGHBORING ZONES DESCRIPTION ZONING MAX. LOT COVERAGE () MAX. LOT COVERAGE FOR 37,902 SQ FT LOT SQ FT) EXISTING ZONING AT 440 GRANITE ST WR 77o 2,653 PREVIOUS ZONING AT 440 GRANITE ST RR -.5 20 7,550 ACROSS GRANITE STREET R-1-10 40 15,160 ADJACENT LITHIA PARK R-1-7.5 45 17,055 EXISTING LOT COVERAGE AT 440 GRANITE ST = 12,633 SQ FT PROPOSED LOT COVERAGE AT 440 GRANITE ST = 10, 206 SQ FT IF ZONED R-1-10 LIKE THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY ACROSS GRANITE STREET, MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE ALLOWED WOULD BE 40c7 = 15,160 SQ FT EXISTING LOT COVERAGE EXISTING LOT COVERAGE "LOT 5. 1 .37,902 SQ FF AR I%or.Lcff DESCRIMON I Ien,&" 0'7 PREVIOUS RESIDENCE E T G� A� N f �T E , y ' •`F -r --f 1--------;-"'--..�... ii1— I f--S� t—ri :LTi S 4 P) EVI,OUS HOUSE } � i ,\PRO OSED House t' �i �� 1 ki RaG Fa'M k %• / -444++aaarl �A 1 5 CP>•rB — PREVIOUS RESIDENCE E T G� A� N f �T E , y ' •`F -r --f 1--------;-"'--..�... ii1— I f--S� t—ri :LTi S 4 P) EVI,OUS HOUSE } � i ,\PRO OSED House t' �i �� 1 ki RaG Fa'M k %• / -444++aaarl �A - '�` ��` � :. / `�� 4 S Vis- � -� Iu ,' �'� -r� •'i � mss` .�~ - -1-' — — — — — i � � � y - JJxors JJrACJJArJarwJ _ _ — _ JardSEn JJJfirlffiY y ~ t�Ll) � ��� �. "... � 3'a+•� ~� � � Fro` � 1 - � pplJl}�pYauA CnYBBPAf/N JmYBAJI NAiB✓C _ -_ 1 �, 1 tiyBrm.TBlKtLiBLVGWPq]C �''�1J1EE�OFF.-_ L' _Y2.1~ A ABBA ne�srJB:J®rJo..JmJrweroAJiYJarc raxr _ _ _ _ A[iR•lRiIX .�.} who ,ta S9 Jc a7 µ roe eos - � - _ � - � � `�L � � � _ _ Win► � ui�` �i re`un c� ir,�v�viirr TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY mcA—r 440 CMAA=STREET ASRLANVD, OREGON LSatlamVwYtlW �� NORIHbESTQ[45NLER CYSEC77pY16 AN6RnE4$7 PUAR IFA Qrsacnox l7 70WAWUP-VS0Ur4A4vWJA451; WZL4 UnHMBAWLW -- on•arm.,><A:.,,,uarsnxcvaxrroxBrJOJ+ .ran FstherPhelps 400�-R.sb� Affib.d, 0.9- ® bull YhY[OMM1tlOJMr.P9PB�m nuuJrJNawxun®vr � naHaJJaunwnm+r HOfA00hRYiLti J�JJB �— etm®xnxtauJ.eAatvBc dNRi(J\lA1NIJP@ BAMrMY6eWA[tYB aJ,ouzxJn+s r� a..-s.a warnarnmmvaw.uc ..�� mvnxmaBls a WASIDV�! WAM YAN •�n� LWIJlYLWANr dam= JBBB3Ar,on,m,J,BaJ pq Iii SANlLlAY�4R.VAMNLB r'�i Q4l AILSIIA GIYJ6C89lAL MBAIlURr sem. uarrxJrmJSBrc>9r IB?ATJQAVP '��+PEGZWAPUSTirJT NChSCPPm f -„s' vJJueR rB�AJ: J>ar� f� / � � BI ItOLYO/VOTlRIM i � O LlbriBErliJiAlrA� w.]C�URK]C WAiRI[HANNII -i f Y � NLlYfbfAIH / � r.,rt�sBocaoFx J - f snRvr)mn �n,a.: A -- iJRVEYEU BY; 7 IS L4NO SURVEYING LLC P.O. BOX 459 ASHLAND, OREGON 97520 (541) 492-"5009 DATE: MARCH2J3. 2009 PROJECT NO. 505-08 DEMOLISHED PREVIOUS HOUSE, GARAGE., COVERED PORCH & DECK: 3,482 SQ FT FOOTPRINT PROPOSED HOUSE, GARAGE & COVERED PORCH: 3,354 SQ FT FOOTPRINT ito] 1 •i�Ju�. 'w%�i• y j. �=�io��fi• / � � ®� nr _ � .:..a - '�` ��` � :. / `�� 4 S Vis- � -� Iu ,' �'� -r� •'i � mss` .�~ - -1-' — — — — — i � � � y - JJxors JJrACJJArJarwJ _ _ — _ JardSEn JJJfirlffiY y ~ t�Ll) � ��� �. "... � 3'a+•� ~� � � Fro` � 1 - � pplJl}�pYauA CnYBBPAf/N JmYBAJI NAiB✓C _ -_ 1 �, 1 tiyBrm.TBlKtLiBLVGWPq]C �''�1J1EE�OFF.-_ L' _Y2.1~ A ABBA ne�srJB:J®rJo..JmJrweroAJiYJarc raxr _ _ _ _ A[iR•lRiIX .�.} who ,ta S9 Jc a7 µ roe eos - � - _ � - � � `�L � � � _ _ Win► � ui�` �i re`un c� ir,�v�viirr TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY mcA—r 440 CMAA=STREET ASRLANVD, OREGON LSatlamVwYtlW �� NORIHbESTQ[45NLER CYSEC77pY16 AN6RnE4$7 PUAR IFA Qrsacnox l7 70WAWUP-VS0Ur4A4vWJA451; WZL4 UnHMBAWLW -- on•arm.,><A:.,,,uarsnxcvaxrroxBrJOJ+ .ran FstherPhelps 400�-R.sb� Affib.d, 0.9- ® bull YhY[OMM1tlOJMr.P9PB�m nuuJrJNawxun®vr � naHaJJaunwnm+r HOfA00hRYiLti J�JJB �— etm®xnxtauJ.eAatvBc dNRi(J\lA1NIJP@ BAMrMY6eWA[tYB aJ,ouzxJn+s r� a..-s.a warnarnmmvaw.uc ..�� mvnxmaBls a WASIDV�! WAM YAN •�n� LWIJlYLWANr dam= JBBB3Ar,on,m,J,BaJ pq Iii SANlLlAY�4R.VAMNLB r'�i Q4l AILSIIA GIYJ6C89lAL MBAIlURr sem. uarrxJrmJSBrc>9r IB?ATJQAVP '��+PEGZWAPUSTirJT NChSCPPm f -„s' vJJueR rB�AJ: J>ar� f� / � � BI ItOLYO/VOTlRIM i � O LlbriBErliJiAlrA� w.]C�URK]C WAiRI[HANNII -i f Y � NLlYfbfAIH / � r.,rt�sBocaoFx J - f snRvr)mn �n,a.: A -- iJRVEYEU BY; 7 IS L4NO SURVEYING LLC P.O. BOX 459 ASHLAND, OREGON 97520 (541) 492-"5009 DATE: MARCH2J3. 2009 PROJECT NO. 505-08 DEMOLISHED PREVIOUS HOUSE, GARAGE., COVERED PORCH & DECK: 3,482 SQ FT FOOTPRINT PROPOSED HOUSE, GARAGE & COVERED PORCH: 3,354 SQ FT FOOTPRINT ito] •] 1 kl a gol4w 0 �'w �-r �_.� ``a tea"- ;� s�-� r£`�L � � �-•� � �r �� ti�� '� �T '- _ �. efa4 ! OW - � ,C S `kms �}� c � iy ro t ✓mix-�4 �'�C°` _.'3s. � � 1'.,,A� .,,: � t� �l K„ L ,�, � � R h x, �, ��'' 4A TV 4� ky yt rx - J1, s t w s !R- S g e'er cru 0 �'w �-r �_.� ``a tea"- ;� s�-� r£`�L � � �-•� � �r �� ti�� '� �T '- _ �. efa4 ! OW - � ,C S `kms �}� c � iy ro t ✓mix-�4 �'�C°` _.'3s. � � 1'.,,A� .,,: � t� �l K„ L ,�, � � R h x, �, ��'' EXISTING STREET FRONTAGE APPROVAL WOULD SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AT THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY AND RESULT IN IMPROVED CURB APPEAL ALONG GRANITE STREET 12 PROPOSED RESIDENCE RENDERING OF PROPOSED RESIDENCE 13 47o REDUCTION IN LOT COVERAGE EXISTING LOT COVERAGE LOT SIZE 37,902 50 FT DESCRIPTION AREA (SQ % OF LOT BUSTING STRUCTURES 984 Z6% EXISTING HARDSCAPE I SURFACES 11.649 30.71 TOTAL EXlSnNG LOT COVERAGE: 12AW 33.3% PROPOSED LOT COVERAGE LOT SIZE: 37,902 SO FT DESCRIPTION AREA % Of LOT (SQ FF) EXISTING STRUCTURES TO REMAIN 984 26% PROPOSED ADDITIONAL STRUCTURE 13,354 (RESIDENCE) EXISTINGHARDSCAPE/ SURFACES TO REMAIN OR BE REPLACED TOTAL HARDSCAPE ARM 6,774 1 - TOTAL PROPOSED LOT COVERAGE 11,112 21.3% tj All 0"A EXISAING WALL SEPARATING WATER FROM YARD 14 REQUEST FOR WATER RESOURCE PROTECTION ZONE REDUCTION 15 •l a I :1 MITI ;j ' �'� :.,- �.. ! ,r : w � �_ y5 f� s � :��=,r,��'i : dr^T' � y'�Y � r4�:• � -r � S RN r zx wAir - - L �,,�m l c.. - - _ r w : a +' - 3—�' ngo w 10. lot E .t`�t '_'ir,Aioxevoir� r■r 61\ 1111119 .� m ; « oilM-L r:. — ws .. . " ?` ,Yx : 41 , WO .. . s-: .. .< �.. .:.. ..... :: ." , -... .:....-. -.. .'€^ B. -...... .» .... s ....., ... .. _.1," .. c e -x'. .. ... .. ... :..... _ .gin,. .. :. ,... w.i :.::a ., ... ...,: .. .s..... ,.. ';,x>.. <..... .. n., ....., :.Y .. .... .. ,.::,, -^.. -, ..:. ....' sN-.w=•Y_'»..a:.s. •ar'. ". r:£:,.wP ^:.. a a �. ,..."MON W MWw .. :�. - ::.r;-• . _ ::;'. _ ... .. .... ,. _._... ,y - .__.. >....... .. ,...... .`.,.. .. ,,,,:. .. ..: ..... _.-x-� -.>.. ., '.,',.:. .:. =.:� .._ mss':>:. .. .x .• w .. _:.. ._. :,, ':..� ..:,;'". -: �ti y..�., ,. a ... ... ...,»�.,.... __ .<. "x._., z.7- ...�.;.;, .. .o,. ,,• ,. s-. - '�., ... _. _.. ,... _.... sem. 'w.n -a '�x r-�� j or _MF re •+.. ^: x✓ -:: , Sm!.� . - �" ._ ,... -..-. ..c. -..: .. .:: u -11 max�:..--- -��.;,:. -..-.. 's. .: ...... -_ -:. a .w.. ._ n IR w 1 Why i-4 its - '�"a.. .. ._kin", � & >. ..-.:...- .. _. 5 _..... . .. - , . x.�:. .. "_, ..:«....... ., ..< i.0 -.«_ ...... •s w' .. - :... .,, _.. ... -:..' :.. :.. y^y �Ck :� . F. E Via.:. .. ,,,.. ..:. 1.. r :-ru . �" �.. :�yy♦, 3 .-�. vim,: �p �q .. .. .. a.. > ,.::. .. „-- ... _. ..'mss-,. N.'� :. L-.✓,. .98 w,_p2,. "r'„ ,. ^c ". "...x ... '. v _ ... ._ W..^._., a. ,... ^-.-, ... � .. Y .... Y �e �T e. y z -::=•r.' � ..: __ � � �''4 yr. ., i 711, TY,f ::=>w•'��:r f �n . .�;i` »,� 1:{, , a f . •+'.... -:. •._ �`' - � �. ` �'Y,&, ' '.. k ='� 3S�TY �.. � '��' f ' ..i �, � .�, rF „mss R „ � y.. - n �. .i . ": .s4 i � •' k � �t��4 J � �'� 1%'i'a i^ '� F 3.; M Via.. r'•[° F 71j Pt -� - - � t .. n :p 4'.',•. ;'... - 4 g,1 � `:1 ! 4 A " "�• .. , _.P.-� '� v �. fir^ . .,a, x• v / .. �..1A,'--. ..'. •`! '""bar. ':"'bu ^:> VOW ,.,. t .. d'�; t" o, .f is m. _ N - IV � ;i' V,- w .YA ,. -.�r :3 a� '::.. F -� � '�'�iY'r�5�� :; •r -i i � x �`� 'fir ,� '�`�'��- �i I :q:�.: �;,...=F�h "`'�.�., �? .: .; ,! '. ^.. ., .;. � � .. _�-.-.._. �, .,,T, i ,' ��;;.' ;r L•,_;:..?�� ":'� "tea '�'.' '�;..m ,: 'i5 :e 5 �,. .;- -, :... f" ✓ :, fia- ,,� zy �� � - ,_„,-`.�sa� ?^ "'4.s :�'�'- _ � ad's' , �'s;.:, �°,' s V � �",. �:: :.� ."'.: ;y _ e... � & `...t ii :. 9:;�.: �.JJ__.� "may ,cy �i Ry _ •�.�: �C �� _- :3 "I "./` r A « xn ✓^'""„x„' " 4.� ycr' �' � �`•" .tea£ * s. -_ _ ' : s ,�4 , r.' I Shy WRPZ EXISTING DISTURBED AREA EXTENT OF DISTURBANCE IN WRPZ LOT SIZE. 37,902 SO Fr TOTAL 'WRPZ. 23,05 Fr / OF LOT TOTAL EXISTING FZt` VERA E. 4, M SQ FT 119% 'I�F..cR�PTIIF RIPARL N AREA. IN WRPZ (AREA IN A MORE NATURAL STATE) 8,2+ DISTURBED AREA IN WRPZ (HISTORICALLY DEVELOPED 14.790 LANDSCAPED AREA) m Z 01. SEPARATING WATER FROM YARD Wel WRPZ PROPOSED CHANGES IN DISTURBED AREA EXTENT T OF DISTURBANCE IN W PZ. LOT SIZE: 37,90Z SQ FT TOTAL U" RPR: 23,052 SQ FT / 60% OF LOT TOTAL EXIST] QRZ OVER"A E: 4.390 SQ FT / 199 a SWING CONCEPT RENDERING PATIO (2U FROM WALL) POOL (32` FROM WALL) SWINGS OVEI (I U FROM WALL) 20 PROPOSED COVERAGE IN THE WRPZ PROPOSED WRPZ COVERAGE LOT SIZE: 37,90 SQ 'FT TOTAL EXIS G WRPZ COVERAGE'. 4 390 SQ FT] 1 DESCRIPTION AREA Of P PZ TOTAL WATER RESOURCE PROTE 11 ON ZONE (WRPZ1062 OF LOT EXtSTING STRUCTURES TO REAAA1N IN 16 WRPZ PROPOSED STRUCTURE IN WRPZ (COVERED PA-nO) . �� TOTALSTRUCTURE AREA IN WRPZ: I US I 3.77z I EXUNG HARDSCAPE I SURFACES TO I �7 M REMA[N OR BE REPLACED IN WRPZ PROPOSED ADDMONAL H.ARDSCAPE 1 953 SURFACES IN WRPZ 70TAL HAI CAPE AREA IN WRFL 3,747 16.3 TOTAL PROPOSED COVERAGE IN WRPZ: 4A H6riAPE T BE �HAOYED DEMOLJ HED GRANITE STREET - EXISTING WALL SEPARATING WATER FROM YARD 21 NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT IN THE WRPZ CALLE GUANAJUATO AND UPLAND DEVELOPMENT SEPARATED FROM ASHLAND CREEK BY WALLS RECENT CONSTRUCTION AT CALLE GUANAJ UATO PLAYGROUND AT THE NORTH END OF LITHIA PARK 22 540 r:,,i f + �5� `��•u s � i` ^ l � IN s LyLre �� • ? - � ti Y "�` � „- - � , l� ��� i a f��D+r t d rfAt r.+w - r+ Nw a' w ... I� � i svX lPr MED k r =, u Y SSSS y � 5 � z Of =, �. SSSS SUMMARY -THE WR ZONING DESIGNATION WAS INAPPROPRIATELY APPLIED TO THE PROPERTY, RESULTING IN A NON -CONFORMING LOT FROM THE START. -THE PROPERTY IS SEPARATED FROM THE WATER RESOURCE BY A STONE WALL SO THE PROPOSED WORK INSIDE THE WRPZ WILL NOT NEGATIVELY IMPACT THE GOALS OF THE WATER RESOURCE PROTECTION ZONE. -APPROVAL OF THESE REQUESTS WOULD RESULT IN IMPROVED CURB APPEAL AS A PARK NEIGHBOR, AND REDUCED IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AT THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY. t -APPROVAL OF THESE REQUESTS WOULD RESULT IN A REDUCTION TO TOTAL LOT COVERAGE. 24 F"All H,iih PAF tEiEi` FAZ4F:"t.1lEEI'�t- k ', Et()' f'I'.I:i+! 'F"1PI"c � 11".IrPr'„Pr'F.ar.aCDFJs; ... l - tilt. � TTA (:f ',ice" E 1 AIIA itu I' F t 1-,','',E? 13 4 .1 SIDEVIEW Ai tf. IF , ✓ 1 AHF; - SIDE VIEW TYPICAL TREE PROTECTION AND REMOVAL NOTES EWE Ir: GF1r IF kj: 0 "A W.11" J kIni"MiT 1I.' G=:'z11.4E7 h:luc, alt:}- C0=f5JPl'C E16r! AL'FA'PILS OU FILE STIP, IHF:.f' IFE AE I-01 RA CH -'F. SHl.tl 1-1JI1Li Cl TiH 1; i H11CA;F 1Fi HFI I TGIF 'P 'S F: i 1 A rEC Ai ii LI._ IHE3 iT !'I EI VJII t III IF Ifs I I F 1P IFII{t_I 4[:f] f II.AE,Alk2l WIFE Ill Y)P I JA I I -ill i! WIWI !t F l ICE- NIT Il ID, I.F VFf.HI;hi5V 11 HE II TFFDk, I3TE L3F1-ill TFI tF ^r•€I:r"c P 11 l SII' 11. 11111 IL -,EI C� If "F sr 11 -iilll LFgllkl IFF- ,Al lr.".1 ,HE OIt z} UIHt II f I ITIATC IIFFI'._FI 11 115 4`:W1111 E. 1€1 I I E- E51'.:PI_ D �f!.=_Il.r, L' Il h1 TFFI,II_AWE F•FJr4A} I IN e!fl,l L111 E W. F F;).ECT Il f 01,,FLI TEED. I ri::�I-.111.51 h; }'RE DTiFF',rrcT TRrIS i,-, Tl fPES RI -EP ASSIIQ-.`1! I III 1,F,c FA!,.1 f f'il:l if-IFiI [{F t: 51I IFI,POF F.'F�H 111: IT: i. 1r:11f E51'45IA.... 5'JHH lhEI1.F r:fil11li'.CiH)r;S I!),lil rN"(IS l,PFA INTEGP. A ICD, Itil FEI ICSNA LI BE Ir ISI•'.ILE] StI PEAT li L:C?E5 I;C'I AU%:H,! fi<iSr.Gt Ui- I' LUL'itFV rii "Etw off VEHH:iES INVc:rU,.H H E-QLI EI. A SE k F E He FEC lofI'not I-F!CIE 1, EE =7}• 7HVIIII n, IllFEF. FEr,=:ES Akt FORt7,`ilIU1HIt A0 SFEVICIFE 145 PFFH L=I V.iEIEit'l THAI nY�F.f?•HF f:tl rli'.43EO:'ir �F%.1]}'}F4 `A P.HitIH 31.l FFFhHSCI'_.IE-_}I}'1. 1�r1,..1:1?�IFi:HIIE._I :1 C',-HiI H:I �:I I'��I: rF.\!_[FS-IPF.�FS�.SIIL':IO43�C�C4'?Eh�t hN�sl 'nit.IZC1 ��1:I lI:IE 1Er,CEEl fFft'F'Fi''TC:=H_+!€Zp!IES AI :-IL Tir,1F_. SEE DT'ize t[TFEF nF. EiFFl•A,sE^Il Fi r;{,.il ft7F ,P DIYH!J'I.AI AFCIIf Y-F!.li+13S .1. AL,FR[�A�SCD Ei[;Eltf:iF=I;IT;O:II3: Ei EFi A!:E)D{.FI'i C=F 11W_;ell•.)II!klks iFIAU HE kO:iEEi.O9I11UE Itil l'!'CA1,Cii 1lGriett Jll SEAirSi lF,\+u'rEeSliuerkuii+:'Kr:I 4.iFi T"IfSH - Ll PE Ilii Ei IE'1f'J7 tlV'i"F'I' H! I`F� LI It TYEi Fc•��Ci !17111 Elf€', LAN0K;11PL 4F'GEFLC 1 LV`I.tEDII TELL a 1,.1-. ii;' ) IL " I J_A1i! (.'ea; IFI.}:) VE. 'I 111 ES , E. o uFF.-mEni -i !;Qki%lFll4 .VEPFIrifl,Slip E32 lYWFr::C SkA5HOu1 IV -TE}. t,ld': RE DEC,-,fEQ, :-:OFFE)_ C? }'A!'I:EO ME10 Y HIT I RFF I'Y �H'` T1.J!::1 I!H IFEHI'.H1 4FHAl- E. ,,nTlff THL L�I;Irs-%F'EI.Q,,.PlEc=iP MET FAI;rtEiG l s FCIl1REo top C.CI:IF!PI;C. IE"to C1E'4 FA,,4Ca F ll:ali'= r S:'IO,L-1 C' CCCv.'F i;F Al. li-E!- 1�IEFIil, El. f ;l 11 HUS„% -PF YC,HPE:'1 111 IIS7EF1'. 1, 11 La1.lA(;( i'+•'ILEG B'r i:7JllFi F11,:II=,,3 TS) LAS II!I , ISF:S 51"1 Pf (.::"v.laEliS nTE r: l +� Ar HiT, LSF; i'1GI'E'= F l:ii, FFII,Fr_ Ti 17 PP"=rl,['F v:I!L 9E N r%A,I FSIt J G$;;H LD: Jt t'A A I FF- 1: IC- I PC -1, .JI, Fi Ilii Fi Sh,\li T[) L I niV If l; llf ST..: 1 D A 31:S. ]ICA'iV/EP PGk1.7p3 Of E11 FIN+F HIA I. Vill0D P I I'. Il LL Op Ma dC.IH w, i'.wol E.IECI✓E aF LS;'A`A,EF III4 f:ECt'lh3.EEl.;rr`.D I!, Ii,c"t I " I t?. A IJUiT4+21:7(5:11ITA E FIT r/,111TH£'TJHY:C.E^�Ic4Tl•: I .c Er.A F CA'; 1 W W. i i.'! H14J CH IW.' ,WII SCI'111481 El h- tit' Ii ICkk!Si'), I: OUT F,%11,1rI 1'A�AI;E,:Hc IFlABEFl. I:O 1i 'A 5'7 A I EF, FA, Ell I`lT.Q.'I/CrIIHl,l 1,-P(111, IHE:fe Ui l'J I= -C A'I :A+I'/CSF II'I:F:AEElI r,C:HF;I'P.;215. iHS01.141T� 50[1 E! LESS OF FLGII t1z Vi M[Pi!!,i'aHA� II�,F 6L Al ;0 TF PA U11CI.'NTh FIN i FEET OF PIF I u'r H FHFIA.l SHAE I I:nf RF FLLGI'i Ei) x- FO .l OFD?AHI Tn:YARi lTHE:Elull:. C SV I, l I,Ikitll EHIIi11A'ff ltE'Elii 5YiILT:S. Uli I fc7F' I PEES ITT"T'1 EA Ri OF n. i EJLOFI/.tell F Pn)E-,: i T"Al l,L€Si PE 1'f Aici E9 i0IIil ilYt J Fit, so F0,11 L D31Fi'7C: THE CCIIIFSE C! COT:. IF'.IIC TEG: E Ill HI= A)i[Ci 1311-: Ir Flul.I I E NTSI tiECD- I, tcC,Sl,]r:CCI,l}nL CFVl:.t_S!ICrn_y.IFtp;u,1ci.. Urtlolr P,1. Su;S, t Hi) Ive, I, CAICP.ili.ril Sl FiIi:Tl SH.iH Al IMI LEI] Crll ENC lP411L Yi--f GI THE 1£(C FGCI r C i L"f'F 7^IIE. !n FSi DITSI" Illll A11,1O=f.=Er lF1'l•}l5'ITeI'1I THE IP,EC Fcr)lEiil=•l1 i�=; IE TYPICAL EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTES 1 Sl"ERG' A! V.n E]i)II i 1T1 - 4iAll 1 V hl iE F Irl .nit ia- f Z `-I4�I LE 4l LtClktlirCH/P-AS 1+,<7ALI LIlJ AI'1 A3.€L,1 ,1 F`4F F..'€�:i '�['17lFGt41 L•:.I# 15F t. SK).i '_::IEE i I i E I' - :L F Rc, itfL €3 xf L !'I, it GE! 4 ihl' E Li rzi A AilEC. 3. SftUC'fi'P!Vi' VU71Ill E]'I lEBCi,1KljI_CFI!F:'IL C- I: SI ("b C)• 4`111(F:E' =u11-ITTl 1.11 hull LGi4EH1F A, - IIID. .r PC, FEC 1T 1111. I'll I P I L111 GHT3 EF L711111£ l 41 II111 rt co 115111 IT:•1 AffF 3( Ihif lfl.t l'S SI .IIAS. F,VEIBALs fF3D.. 5 I 'k'!t111 SFDI tFll1 I lT l E A it it Ft Rt 9l'1 AI E C Ill h YI 1 ll rl-• 7P.ILl! I -'J IOi I }SS llifWII 1 _I.:: H-1, Ilk?'CI C l 6 IEE!'T ! i i is K-kCr7 ilf TIE) C .115JHi Ir uLLI.II He t,iu-F: T. lF•ll:lfkFl-?`fA'LD 11r IEF[liE UP"'lith 1' _ E'Ht SFk.L _C11,1lESH't� y - 1Jf } ✓ 14 •.. of I.. .:I .1.,1 .I n..A A �f E,F;,.,Fv :111'1 IJ - F' r:ri�l. I:J:er .•'n'�_'Icfc 12 � � d ,'r 1'X35 IN-' !'IF HD FEE- l � I4t IDw l:ini:Jf 1Y JPE \ I At FI C r, tta »- F Il,._C• EU_'.:t I C:F'.; F1�Ji'-Fn,f Cl:P11EF' !AF tV/ A!CHL'i nn�f: ��` irJ hicl,�p . _:Ii+S:i FE[,IH: l5 IF\PI i.0 SFC7gNVIEPf PI-A.rJ VIEW RETAIL• TREE PROTECTION PENCE(?) h1 SCHEMATIC 0ETAEL- SILT PENCE Scab: 178"- 141 .1.... _„ Y L 1 SCA1e 1111 141T TREE PROTECTiON 1 EROSION CONTROL LEGEND S+oleo: uF;csE='rIT.: tl :FECI P Arl' � `f aEr:C L.Ialr lkin r --a: uvF'LS'!{ !i: 6t1"4 L 15FIF-V1C=-Pe it I APAtlr;;I,CSF:EYC.At•FTF"N Ir'ill TEL Fr:t::1n1 II::'IFF, 1`011 C- AIS F F FF I I l/ L �, P C I XI3 �. !1 fE lYll it THE SPLCoiO i U. Eh?r1l•^'lE 514x_Ii 01 P) I F IAJl 1 F((F 1 '. i 111C 11H. IREE FF 1 lI. 1 ' LIE1 .3 I Jl AT B :1::iS CtFANI,.-li! [1 UF{1EE IMAF1 111 "rI1H 1I5131;H1 jFAlr PE l,l Frill AI I Fi rill / T - \ l -t till :f El- ..n tt}EII F "Ill; 1`I,IFI'11C 11111E KIIG1. !iAW 11111WI EtcE l vilrH SHn. F'1'h •IJli (]P I: FHFF IFkrl'TVFU GD FFI-1911 C1_F Y:lkl ll. 11, At il H.O'S i)AW OFD DIIFJNIr gFl,Ufik,OP:".6NEIRfIGEY_)li S'SAit 6E Ltcilskr. ice. Ill A'EF1t Il IF AT 1 -. f)(GE IF, 1 ! T )1, it FUlJI MItIF FLAI:i Iif. .MP Sc, F I, E,llfIL t. rt c,_qs IOAL,f E,IIS LLJl LI: JG It if E'tliIIfTC, 11HLFH GF•4DE Yt ITIAE I giD,Utj 'IF i_:3iS NHIl MA DL 1,' FIH.EI'l K1,19 l Al, ESFU VIS MSI✓A.5 14E4 THIr F ' -`I ll _FF [PTO T`y PL IH,i ._U l .U,V3 t1 1111 e -!i 1'Il NQS 1), Wlr_.. Mill, h ,IF r,.k l•lli SIIALl BE 1;EE•li.Ll I:)I'=�". I,l.1 THF .:tI ;IF PS:AD?=lE.IATF:IALSHaE!Hi.Vf.r'',F.ril+EIEC)pS +ICCL55.4P-.lo l.1,fiit AI.1 4 r%,l 1. 41lit"t F)Ft-111 Il, ST,JIL H+c�H1. IYD:C;IIE-;, FA.SaAi;+Tl,(1C' nHdEA'F%..hYhIF_?:315>i All rlL i! HE f•i.A'=.FD 1 Nihil IHC IYrt HF,TECfl,t1201IC fHHF-F.' TEASP'F4#li• OE I fF1.1•,.Il.;Il,. '. d. T'r-BIL-;} 111 F5'3Fi E]EtiPL Fi:fs I, II ITE Pl A,]fD iA 0H1!:i NL TREE ll !EC{rJtI Z'.i: J?. I,l Ai "ILII DIME L-1 -, W8AGS HIAY BE iiI.I.Vil Ci✓ PUf kl'i 1'tP IIF•11rIF I,STE P:'OSEI-!f;irl :r Ml 15 IJA IIlI SP.I IF`ll-il(F AIF Ailr!F II f T;:_ E'; .i F L F- 10' .. NQ IL Ft,I.S. F.'lilHH: KlFIlll:(S CR fIAC•' IFFO I: It I, :IEA r,Il'LCH CS'PEES fA QG 111 NI �ILE IIfE 50A iIri, D lE,ITHV r FNE DFL' J,IfS Tt; A,"HKV(1-0,11N%E Q'A IrIAC:.F E:• _EF F FG the i C H C'F'A UfS PITT. 511 i%N ALIS A;il': upb!-. 1>11)1,f IEll i k 011•45. Efi CII F. I ;4 ll 1110 I'Clk FCC! T C3 k?' IFI 11; G G1 A DE it A I. P R Cr,' I: I A I F I;' I SLOPE 1' FElICVF. IHC FC•O1l,,A3:fC}-','A:;H1wI C I HA T IA II,uIW. 4 EEL' C,r I I HF f A H A5 Ntl.!G 14 1rf:Ll`I14=IIF',T;i TF -FE IFCF FFi)ICCFIGII SNE,'PlI %TUE Ilsl O'}L'r 8E C,L IIFED I:1 I ?:1F!ol-Nk:0 i1r":1PAiT APICES t:Y,li l'if. THEN A PFF C` 11.1 I F C'Vf THE t)i'40J CAFI'. rli H 124:•711' In F EO A ' I , SYGFr. CDbII.1 LT IC I31' 1. 1'+. A:i/}P.ti=t'_I€VPI,ItAFutt EI1l.r;t IFtlPEIE FOR t::]tl)iPIICil,llt Nti'AI-' 5. ""D ECT'. IVEt E'rE 10CGrSIF.HC;6:it, III IU` VIED TVUE FE1014 t1 [Til IIIE IILAFI S1{ALL FF:-FIJE AN APFLI :AIF:7t: IN !hl'�ViFrl'i !.! t l,0pE-3FE SGLLFiLE PER 1.T.11I31 ACIHPEFS I' I.iiF PC 11')1355 1l!I+l.4\I:O-RHI•AiFCLIE?IICI 1515N0, Ely JC] PllAtH,TF1: TIATIf P•\) 7:]::-TBH;SFI'.:I.:!AII`V5'rtl'�FI i.IEHA!IC(S THC AtSI-Js. PlI/E F'1PFi.:(APL OF THE I7FA< F'oc-TSlSILIAS 1:H5 PFFlIADIPS A;:I.iI:tPFi"fe�tf;!S19ENi h!1fl1V AfET: 11F14rf C4P4.Yf1HIC5 C,F 7H=, VF:d01':H:CT FY)r]T 5:€L':,iHFf. tT11 PkPtlT E,51'i(-SIS PFT: Ft•FEia'i n'Inik: THEAp Prii PCO4_>C:r:flrf PETaT;iEU hEti -x3GLy CL'6f.L5 al SOltnicl:F ree ipl QEHl"r,LAJE[.4 hlk El'.tif),I(11.A'"EL•�Yr 5011 SJFE4CtFIoV11ITFIIF;C'i lf2 GAUQ!IAi i.r.C'ii TITAN pF"'FII:.1 Tk'i'E IGl:ll TEE .4t:11:'E. FUCF?ORES will, !.4;1L)icFYE tI'c.%fH Eti.l HCESE`iI I.I:IC=F F'N', b I Aj-. .P. Ef5rv.l l.tI C,( "Pill hi' _-' II IN PIC; 1-H-iE fy -ATI EXISTING TREE INVENTORY k ', Et()' f'I'.I:i+! t. FEET 'LJL_11`7E:,rI FEUl l)L7 it l - tilt. 'A'Nt7`iG4p J.: I'f6 AkUf✓ ! I' F t 1-,','',E? 13 /-A 3,l F° .1 ' -P7. iE Ai i '1 01,F „!(r'yo _E; Tii: - LFr,IC,: 171 35 1I,IAF'LE a 75 flDvE.W10 id I If H014 ! I,.File I}- 1St 2Fl,1.')YE7:1 =',EDIvJC•T) I, A1,,F.Fii '='EGIY'E-'l:D IU IS'.- e Ira •l, 'fUSVe,Q 11 ,'3hL[�,l l;� FJ, sl `F-FDWFIAJ I, p s-trl i'Lt .r o'A'A EIL I1 8 !,1,11-1 •I_ 25 ES 4i.iF F 1� tl,w ',F E' 'C IFtl .I' G I,IAFLE EN B7F II 15 h ItDcp I�r 13 kf+ s loll r [ I 2 W PIF.. n Alec ' 1E FEDrY J'!Q S; 13 wMu ;3 '.iJ PLE1'N N',n ) 13 NIAPI 74 ;1 r.lhett It rl,;'LE 15 ':E '11.IAf'EE - 11 h1AfIC I.SAf, J iLI:':F . ia1AP .f,8 1-,"h,n;, v 6 1LPCF S !.lArIF .i:i li) ri AFEf su .-5.=?tle.F Il'T ti IEE D..!h t FArllr[)ti'.i .I FC . !'-CE PPCC1011 IF; .E. P A1. tC II') l h Ul4t ?iJ.Il,:A ri'::_ I.SFE pfTAf 1. E'i1:5HN1 fc?. Sir l Ft -I FlAtifl I Tf2ll IS DIic..Ah11.R l IC TERRAIN LATTI)SCAPE I rnPlns.. ✓.v[.. ^b Y Lo Z w0 LW F- ca.. V) LLJ w t= IL ci Q Z Vz V) Q REVISIONS F DATE DESCRIPTION PLANNING REVIEW TREE PROTECTION & EROSION CONTROL PLAT) L0.6 PROJECT NO. 2032 Wil TEAM-. Fl iW. EG The comments of this pre -app are preliminary in nature and subject to change based upon the submittal of additional or different information. The Planning Commission or City Council are the final decision making authority a f the City, and are not bound by the coininents made by the Staff as part of this pre -application. ASHLAND PLANNING DIVISON SITE: 440 Granite Street PRE -APPLICATION CONFERENCE APPLICANT: Rouge COMMENT SHEET October 4, 2022 Planning 1 Jordon Willing REQUEST: New SFR Type II Variance to lot coverage and reduction of the WRPZ PLANNING DIVISION COMMENTS This pre -application conference is intended to highlight significant issues before the applicant prepares and submits a formal application. Summary: Typically, the development of a single-family residence on a residentially -zoned property does not require land use approval if it does not involve work in flood plain corridors, water resource protection zones or hillside lands and does not require variances to any applicable standards. Lot Coverage: Within the Woodland Residential (WR) zone, lots are limited to no more than seven percent lot coverage. Lot coverage is defined as, "The total area of a lot covered by buildings, parking areas, driveways, and other solid surfaces that will not allow natural water infiltration to the soil. Landscaping, including living plants, vegetative ground covey, and mulch, which allows natural soil characteristics and water infiltration and retention is not considered lot or site coverage." There are several different values provided for `lot coverage' in the pre -app materials. Presuming 8,476 is correct {when 2,653 is allowed) then the request is for a 219% increase. A type 1 variance for lot coverage is allowed up to a 10% increase (e.g. 2,653 x 1.1 = 2,918), therefore a TYPE H Variance will be necessary. This will require a hearing before the Planning Commission. The final application should discuss the present amount of impervious and be specific with what increases exactly is proposed. Physical & Environmental (P&E) Constraints: Ashland's P&E Ordinance regulates the development of floodplain corridor. Because this property has a valid LOMA the subject area of the property has been removed frorn the SFHA. Therefore a P&E permit will not be necessary. Water Resources Protection Zones (WRPZ): Ashland Creek is considered a Riparian Stream and has a Water Resource Protection Zone extending 50 feet upland of the top of bank. Work within the WRPZ is heavily regulated and if allowed would require either a protection zone reduction or a limited use/activity permit. Dace to the proposed encroachment into the WRPZ an application for a reduction will be necessary Basement: It appears that the finished floor elevation of the proposed basement is above the BFF froze. the LOMA study the applicant should consider the attached items to ensure that it remains `reasonably safe from flooding' 440 Granite Street October 4, 2022/aha Page 1 System Development Charges: The building permit issued in 2009 —which was never completed - included the payment of some System Development Charges and some credits for the house which had previously been demolished. SDC's ran with the property, and the applicants should be sure to inquire when applying for a new building permit about having these credits transferred to avoid new charges. (A total area up to 200 square feet or five percent of the permitted lot coverage, whichever is less, niay be developed in an approved, porous solid surface that allows storm water infiltration, and is exempt from the lot coverage maximum; the orous solid sur ace exenz tion does not gp ply..to. drivewa s andarkin areas.) 37902 x 0.07 = 2653 x 0.05 = 132.65 OTHER ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS AMC 18.2.5.030.13 Woodland Residential Zone details the applicable standards for the Woodland Residential (WR) zone as follows: Table 18.2.5.030.B.- Standards for Woodland Residential (W.R) Zone . (Except as.modified under:: chapter.;: 18.5.5 Variances or chapter 18.3.9 Performance Standards .Option.) Minimum Lot Area and Maximum Density 510 a Min. Lot Size DU/Acre Less than 40% 2.0 .5 Limits on density transfer. All developments, 40 to 50% 2.5 .4 with the exception of partitioning, must be developed under the Performance Standards 50 to 60% 5.0 .2 Over 60% 10.0 .1 Option, chapter 18.3.9. Not more than 25% of Outside UGS 20.0 .05 the density allowed in a WR zone may be transferred to a higher density zone in a Performance Standard Options development. Lot Coverage — Maximum' (% of lot area) 7% 'A total area up to 200 sf or 5% of the permitted lot coverage, whichever is less, may be developed in an approved, porous solid surface that allows storm water infiltration, and is exempt from the lot coverage maximum; the porous solid surface exemption does not apply to driveways and parking areas_ Lot Width - Minimum (feet) 100 ft Lot Depth - Minimum and Maximum (feet) 150 ft Standard Yards — Minimum2 (feet) - Front — Standard 20 ft - Side — Standard, except: 6 ft - Side — Corner-Street/Alley Side loft - Rear — Single -Story Building loft - Rear — Multi -Story Building 10 ft per Bldg Story 2See sections 18.2.4.050 and 182.5.060 for yard exceptions, and 18.2.5.040 for accessory structure setback exceptions; additional setbacks may be required to avoid easement encroachments, and to comply with Solar Access requirements in chapter 18.4.8. Maximum Building Height 135 ft or 2'/ stories, whichever is less. 440 Granite Street October 4, 2022/aha Page 3 Application Requirements. 1. Application Form and Fee. Applications for Type I review shall be made on forms provided by the Staff Advisor (see http://www.ashland.or.us/Files/Zoninq%20Permit%2OApplication.pdf). One or more property owners of the property for which the planning action is requested, and their authorized agent, as applicable, must sign the application. The application shall not be considered complete unless the appropriate application fee accompanies it. 2. Submittal Information. The application shall include all of the following information. a. The information requested on the application form. b. Plans and exhibits required for the specific approvals sought. C. A written statement or letter explaining how the application satisfies each and all of the relevant criteria and standards in sufficient detail. d. Information demonstrating compliance with all prior decision(s) and conditions of approval for the subject site, as applicable. e. The required fee (see the end of this document, and further detail at: http://www.ashland.or.us/SIB/files/Comm%2ODev/Forms°/a2C%2OBrochures%2 C%20Handouts/2019-07-01�Planning Fees.pdf. . The Ashland Land Use Ordinance in its entirety may be accessed on-line at: h s://ashland.munici al.codes/LandUse . PLAN & EXHIBIT REQUIREMENTS: Two (2) copies of the plans below on paper no larger than 11 "x 17 ". Note: These copies inay be usedfor the Planning Commission packets and for the notices mailed to neighbors -please submit clear, readable, reproducible copies. o Two (2) Copies of the materials required for a Site Design Review approval as detailed in chapter 18.5.2.040. o Two (2) Copies of the materials required for a Variance as detailed in chapter 18.5.5.040. (if applicable to the final proposal). o Two (2) Copies of a Tree Protection Plan as required chapter 18.4.5.030. a Two (2) Copies of the plans required for a Tree Removal Permit as required in chapter 18.5.7.030 (if tree removal is proposed). RELEVANT CRITERIA AND STANDARDS: Applicants are advised that in addition to required plans, written findings addressing how the ordinance criteria are satisfied in narrative format are required. The applicable criteria are included below. o Two (2) Copies of written findings addressing the following criteria for Site Design Review approval detailed in chapter 18.5.2.050. a Two (2) copies of written findings addressing the following criteria for a Variance from chapter 18.5.5.050 (if applicable to the final proposal). a Two (2) copies of written findings addressing the following criteria for an Exception to Street Standards from chapter 18.4.6.020.8.1 (if applicable to the final proposal). 440 Granite Street October 4, 2022/aha Page 5 Public Works Conditions of Approval 1. Engineered Plans - Where public improvements are required or proposed, the applicant's engineer shall submit design plans for approval of all public improvements identified on the approved plan or as specified in conditions of approval. One set of these civil plans MUST be submitted DIRECTLY to the Public Works/Engineering Department. All design plans must meet the City of Ashland Public Works Standards. Engineered construction plans and specifications shall be reviewed and signed by the Public Works Director, prior to construction. All public facilities within the development will be designed to the City of Ashland Engineering Design Standards for Public Improvements. The engineered plans shall also conform to the following: • If drawings are submitted to the City of Ashland digitally, they shall be true scale PDF drawings. If AutoCAD drawings are also submitted, they shall be compatible with the AutoCAD release being used by the City at that time and shall be located and oriented within the Oregon State Plain Coordinate System (NAD83-89). • Drawings sizes shall comply with ANSI -defined standards for page width and height. Review drawings may be submitted in B size (I 1x17). Bidding and construction documents may also be printed at B size; however, all final as -constructed drawings must be submitted to scale on D -size (24x36) Mylar. Digital files of the as -constructed drawings shall also be submitted. Drawings shall be drawn such that reduction of plans from full size (D sized) to half size (B sized) can be done to maintain a true scale on the half -sized plans. 2. Street Improvement — No additional street improvements, beyond those necessary to comply with City Street Standards, will be required at this time. 3. Right of Way — No additional right of way dedication, beyond that necessary to comply with City Street Standards, will be required at this time. 4. Sanitary Sewer - The property is currently served by a 6 -in sanitary sewer main in Granite Street. The applicant proposed improvements must be reviewed, approved and permitted by the City of Ashland Engineering Department. 5. Water - The property is currently served by a 8 -in water main in Granite Street. City of Ashland Water Department shall tap existing water main and install any new water services and water meter boxes that are proposed by development. City of Ashland Water Department must be contacted for availability, placement and costs associated with the installation of the new water service. Service & Connection Fees will also be required for any new water services installed as part of this project. 6. Storm Drainage - The property is not currently served by a storm sewer main in Granite Street. City of Ashland Engineering Department must review an engineered storm drainage plan. Storm Water Facility Design Requirements All development or redevelopment that will create or replace 2,500 square feet or more of impervious surface (buildings, roads, parking lots, etc.) area that discharges to an MS4 (municipal separate storm sewer systems), must comply with the requirements of the DEQ MS4 General Permit phase 2. Applicant MUST follow the guidance and requirements set forth in the current Rogue Valley Stormwater Quality Design Manual which can be found at the following website: 440 Granite Street October 4, 2022/aha Page 7 Reviewed By: Sartain, Ralph; Kleinberg Tech, Admin Date Completed: 09/15/2022 LD File #: PreApp-2022-00352 Date Scheduled: Applicant: Rogue Planning & Development Services, LLC Site Name: Residence LD Description: Replacement Home - 2 story Location: 440 Granite Street Approved with Yes Conditions Noted Below: Fire department comments are based upon the 2019 Oregon Fire Code as adopted by the Ashland Municipal Code, and Ashland Land Use Laws: Conditions Comments Code Set Code Reference Addressing Requirements - Agency OFC 505.1 Defined Code Fire Apparatus Access Requirements Agency AF&R 20 Defined Code Fire Apparatus Access Approach Requirements Agency OFC 503.2.8 Defined Code A home fire sprinkler system is required for this residence due to steep road Agency OFC D103.2; 503.2.7; grades (>10%) into this area. Defined Code D108 Firefighter Access Pathway Requirements - Agency AF&R 3 Defined Code - Gate Requirements Agency OFC 503.5; 503.5.1; Defined Code 503.5; D103.5 F'uel.Break Requirements Agency AF&R .14 Defined Code Construction Requirements Vegetation Requirements Conditions Description Agency Defined Code Agency Defined Code R327.4 AF&R 16 Code Reference Description _._..._._...___-.......... _- OFC Addressing - New and existing buildings shall have approved address numbers, building numbers or approved 505.1 building identification placed in a.position that is plainly legible and visble.from the street or road. Fronting the property. These numbers shall contrast with their background. Where required by the fire code official, address numbers shalt be provided in additional approved locations to facilitate emergency response. Address numbers shall be Arabic numbers or alphabetical.letters. Numbers shall be a minimum. of.4 inches (101.6 mm) high with a minimum stroke width of 0.5,inch (127 mm). Where access is by means of.a private road and the building cannot be viewed From. the public .w. ay, a monument, pole, or other sign or means shall be used to identify the structure. Address numbers shall be maintained. CITY OF Planning Division -ASHLAND 51 Winburn Way, Ashland, OR 97520 PRE -APPLICATION CONFERENCE APPLICATION DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT Project Description Water Resource Protection Zone Reduction and Variance to Lot Coverage APPLICANT Name Rogue Planning & Development Services, LLC Phone 541-951-4020 f` -Mail amygunter.planning@gmali.com Address 1314-B Center Dr. PMB#457 city Medford Zip 97501 PROPERTY OWNER Name Jordan Willing Day Time Phone 805-637-8353 Address 621 Morton Street City Ashland Zip 97520 DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY street Address 440 Granite Street Assessor's Map No. 391E 1 7A Tax Lot(s) 1200 SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS To request a pre -application conference, submit this form with true scale PDF drawings to Plannin ashiand.onus. The application will need to include plans addressing the application submission requirements including site and landscaping plans drawn to a standard scale and formatted to print to scale on paper no larger than 11 -inches by 17 -inches. 1. Completed Application. 2. Narrative - Provide a written description of proposal and request. (If in Historic District, provide pictures of existing structures, elevations of proposed structures and details of planned exterior design features and materials) & Site Plan - The site plan should contain all applicable elements in the Site Plan Checklist (see page 2) plus any other information pertinent to this proposal. The site plan will be checked to insure all applicable information is included at the time the pre -application date is set. 4. Additional information - Provide in the narrative or with the site plan: 1) Number of acres in development 2) Total gross square footage of all structures 3) Number of stories on each structure 4) Indicate number of and square footage of: a) Dwelling Units (include the units by the number of bedrooms in each unit - e.g. 10 1 -bedroom, 25 2 -bedroom, etc) b) Office Spaces c) Retail Units d) Other Spaces 5) Percentage of lot coverage by: a) Structures e) Landscaping b) Streets & Roads f) Number of parking spaces c) Parking Areas/Driveways g) Total square footage of landscaped areas. d) Recreation Areas h) Other pertinent information of the proposed development 5. LEEDO Certification -Indicate whether project will be pursuing LEED® certification. 6. Submittal Fee Pg.2 of 5 HOLIE PLANNING S DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLE September 8, 2022 PRI: -APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUBMITTAL Replacement residence construction for 440 Granite Street water resource protection zone reduction and variance to lot coverage Subject Pronert Property Owner: Jordan Willing Address: 621 Morton Street Map & Tax Lot: 39 1E 17AA; 1200 Comprehensive Plan Designation: Woodland Residential Zoning: WR Adjacent Zones: WR and RR -.5 Water Resource Protection Zone for Ashland Creek FEMA Floodplain Wildfire Lands overlay Lot Area: .87 acres — 37,902 square feet in area Request: A request to allow for the construction of a replacement residence on a non -conforming Woodland Residential parcel, The requested development seeks a variance to the seven percent lot coverage. A Water Resource Protection Zone, Limited Activities Permit is requested for encroachments into the Water Resource Protection Zone. Property Description: The subject property is at 440 Granite Street, on the west side of Granite Street. The property is adjacent to Ashland Creek and Lithia Park boarders the property on the south, west and north sides. The subject tract of land is described in Instrument No. 90-16576 of the Official Records of Jackson County, Oregon also, the being a portion of the Missouri E. Allen tract recorded on August 9, 1923. The subject property appears on the first platted maps of Ashland and was the J. Dennis Tract. The property is non -conforming in area. The lot is irregularly shaped and is 37,902 square feet in area (.87 acre). The minimum lot area in the zone is 87,120 square feet in area (two acres). Ashland Creek runs along the parcel's southern and eastern boundaries. In addition to Ashland Creek, there are a variety of large boulders rock outcroppings, rockwalis, a pond, and a man-made diversion ditch for irrigation which bisects the property and connects to Lithia Park, irrigating mature landscape trees and vegetation to the north of the property within the park. According to the county assessors' records, aerial photographs, and the previously approved demolition permit (2009-01474) , the 3,502 square foot, two story residence was constructed in 1915 with additions in the 1950s and 1960s. Prior to the demolition of the previously existing site improvements the property was occupied by the residence which had a 2,366 square foot footprint, including a 400 square foot garage. There were 84 square 1 ja ROGUE PLANNING 9 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC feet of covered porch, 632 square feet of deck, and 400 square foot concrete patio. The driveway accessing the garage was approximately and 850 square feet in area. Remaining on the property following demolition of the residence is a 196 square foot utility vault. A 221 square foot studio structure and a 400 square foot historical mill house which was reconstructed a little over two years ago after being damaged by a falling tree. Lastly, there is a 109 square foot area of concrete bench and seating area, The existing and previously removed site improvements accounted for 5,358 square feet of coverage area, approximately 14 percent. The demolition permit does not appear to have accounted for all of the surfaces that are now considered coverage. These include the deck area, patio areas, pathways, etc. The assessor's documents between 1983 — 2012 note the zoning as RR -,5, then RR -.5-13 vs. WR. The property is bordered on the east and south property lines by Ashland Creek. Ashland Creek is a riparian preservation stream that has FEMA floodplain and a 50 -foot from top of bank riparian buffer zone, the Water Resource Protection Zone (WRPZ). The WRPZ extends substantiality into the property and encompasses the retaining walls, landscaped planter areas and the lawn area of the rear yard. The WRPZ area of the property is 23,052 square feet. The property had a FEMA Letter of Map Amendment (LOMA) approved in the early 2000s which largely removed the property from the FEMA 100 -year floodplain. Proposal: The proposal is to construct a replacement residence on the property, parking area, pool and patio/deck. The proposed residence has a footprint area of 2,443 square feet. Th eway hicle maneuvering area is 1,769 square feet. The proposed patio, deck and other hardsc a areas is 1,447 s re feet in area and a 1,428 square foot pool area. The total area of new coverage propo d is 7,087 square fe There is an additional 926 square feet of existing impervious surfaces (mill house, studi seating area and un rground vault lid). The total ROGUE PLANNING 5 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC lot coverage of the site is 8,467 square feet for all existing and proposed surface areas including areas of permeable surfaces, and pond area. Thus, requiring a variance. The proposed redevelopment of the site encroaches into the 23,052 square foot of WRPZ portion of the property. Between the existing and proposed encroachments, there is 15.32 percent of the WRPZ affected by the proposed site development. The previously existing lot coverage significantly exceeded the maximum lot coverage in the zone. The proposal is to construct a structure with a similar area footprint with minimum front yard setbacks to reduce the areas of encroachment from improvements at the rear of the resid encroa mens includes areas of manicured lawn and landscape areas that are to be reduced in area and replacement of encroachment (for example, formal landscape area converted to a pool patio area near the residence and reduction of the lawn areas nearer the stream. Thank you for your consideration. On the following pages are findings addressing the Water Resource Protection Zone Reduction criteria for the requested encroachments and findings addressing the variance to lot coverage criteria. ROGUE PLANNING 9 GEVELGPMENT SERVIEES, LLC Findings Addressing the Criteria AMC 18.3.11.070 Water Resource Protection Zone Reduction: A Water Resource Protection Zone may be reduced by up to 25 percent through a Type I procedure in 18.5.1.050 and by greater than 25 percent and up to 50 percent through a Type I1 procedure in section 18.5.1.060 if the proposal meets all of the following criteria. Finding: The proposed redevelopment of the site encroaches into the water resource protection zone by less than 25 percent. The property area is 37,902 square feet in area and the water resource protection zone encompasses 60 percent of the total lot area. The context of the properties landscaping, trees, historical yard areas, patio areas, structure locations and overall site improvements are important to consider when discussing the impacts to the water resource protection zone. The existing use and improvements are separated from the actual water resource by a rock wall. The vegetation consists of upland conifer species and a manicured lawn and landscape areas. Also, the area of proposed patio and pool area are within an existing area previous disturbance associated with the residential use of the property that formerly included a wood deck, walkways, stairs, stacked rock walls and the man- made irrigation ditch. These site improvements can be maintained as exempt activities, but this proposal seeks to change the property and the use of the rear yard area. The proposal seeks to provide an outdoor, private backyard patio area and have a private swimming pool (note, pool only partially encroaches). The proposal seeks to reduce the manicured lawn area by 10 percent to off -set the impacts of the new encroachment. It can be found that the minor area of encroachment is minimal when considering the percentage of the property covered by the water resource protection zone. The proposal seeks a reduction of the water resource protection zone by 15.53 percent. A. The proposed use or activity is designed to avoid intrusion into the Water Resource Protection Zone through the use of up to a 50 percent reduction of any dimensional standards (e.g., required front, side and rear yard setbacks; required distance between buildings) to permit development as far outside or upland of the Water Resource Protection Zone as possible. Such adjustment to any applicable dimensional standards shall be reviewed as part of the requested reduction and shall not be subject to a separate Variance application under chapter 18.5.5 Variances. Reductions to dimensional standards may not be used to reduce required Solar Access setbacks without evidence of agreement by the effected property owner(s) to the north through a concurrent Solar Access Variance application as described in chapter 18.4.8 Solar Access. Finding: The proposed use of the Water Resource Protection Zone encroachments is to allow for the construction of rear yard amenities for the new residence that is proposed at 440 Granite Street. The new areas of encroachment include a proposed outdoor patio and walking paths, a portion of a pool area, and reconfiguration of the existing lawn area that fully encroaches. The lawn area is proposed to be reduced. 4 ROGUE PLANNING G DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC The use of the rear yard area of the property as a beneficial use to the home is designed to avoid intrusion into the Water Resource Protection Zone. The patio and pool area are proposed in the location shown because it is an area that was previously deck, steps and walkway areas and has already been encroached upon and would previously been permitted. Additionally, the setbacks are proposed at their minimum and utilize the existing driveway apron The setback adjaeent.to.Granite Street is not proposed to be reduced because of the amount of vehicle,''pedestdan and bicycle traffic on the"street, there is a lot of public interaction across the frontage of the property and a reduced setback reduces privacy for the property owners and a reduced setback imposes a structure upon the street and reduces the natural areas and feeling of still being in Lithia Park. B. The alteration of the Water Resource Protection Zone is the minimum necessary to efficiently perform the proposed activity and/or use. The proposed development shall minimize disturbance to the Water Resource Protection Zone by utilizing the following design options to minimize or reduce impacts of development. 1. Multi -story construction shall be considered. 2. Parl,,ing spaces shall be minimized to no more than that required as a minimum for the use. 3. Pavement shall be minimized, and all pavement used shall be installed and maintained in a porous solid surface paving material. 4. Engineering solutions shall be used to minimize additional grading and/or fill. Finding: The proposed encroachments include porous patio areas, a natural pool area and a reduced, reconfigured existing manicured lawn area. The proposed structure outside of the Water Resource Protection Zone. The encroachments are from yard area improvements. The area of encroachment of the patio area is proposed to be a porous solid surface pavement material and not a solid concrete. The proposed pool area is only partially encroaching into the Water Resource Protection Zone. The pool location is largely dictated by the existence of large boulders that are present between the front property line and the existing studio structure and the existing patio area. These boulders push the functional areas of the property for use to the south portions of the site. C. The application demonstrates that equal or better protection for identified resources will be ensured through restoration, enhancement, and mitigation measures. The structures, functions, and values of the Water Resource will be restored through the implementation of a restoration and enhancement strategy set forth in a mitigation plan prepared in accordance with the standards and requirements described in section 18.3.11.110 Mitigation Requirements. Finding: Though the plan requests encroachments into the water resource protection zone, the reduced area of manicured lawn, and any new vegetation per posed would be from the approved water resource protection zone plant list, provides equal protection for the vegetation within the water resource protection zone. In this case, the entirety of the water resource protection zone is within the improved ROGUE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC yard area of the property, The area of proposed disturbance has always been part of a formal landscaped area. The proposal changes the improvements from a wood deck structure and planter area to a porous patio and a portion of a swimming pool area. The area of encroachment does not have a negative impact on the structure of the water resource because there is a substantial physical distance from the patio area and the portion of the pool where encroachment occurs. The water resource is physically separated from the yard area by a retaining wall. This retaining wall provides a clear distinction division between the vegetation and soil types associated with a streambank and a riparian preservation area. The retaining wall is a historic feature of the property that was recently maintained. The vegetation on the stream side of the wall consists of maples and alders, trees typical to a riparian area. There is also limited ground cover under the tree canopy and the soil is a sandy, gravel, rocky mix, more typical of a riparian are soil types. On the west side of the wall within the historically developed yard area the trees are redwood, fir, oak and pine. These trees are typical in upland areas and provide shading functions and habitat areas, adding value to the water resource protection zone and the riparian area, but there is not a riparian type of landscaping and includes planter areas, existing pathways, and a manicured lawn area. The proposal does not remove any trees within the water resource protection zone, retains the trees and reduces the lawn area. The proposed patio and partial pool area is within areas that have previously been manipulated as part of the developed area of the property. The proposed development area replaces previous wood decking, existing pathways, rockery, stairs, and landscape planter areas with a porous surface patio area and only a portion of the of the pool encroaches. The primary area for the reduction to the water resource protection zone is at the upper extent of the protected area. D. Long term conservation, management, and maintenance of the Water Resource protection Zone shall be ensured through preparation and recordation of a management plan as described in subsection 18.3..11.114.0, except a management plan is not required for residentially zoned lots occupied only by a single-family dwelling and accessory structures. Finding: Not applicable. The property is occupied by a single-family dwelling and accessory structures. Lot Coverage Variance: AMC 18.5.030. 1. The variance is necessary because the subject code provision does not account for special or unique physical circumstances of the subject site, such as topography, natural features, adjacent development, or similar circumstances. A legal lot determination may be sufficient evidence of a hardship for purposes of approving a variance. Finding; The subject property is substantially smaller in area than the required minimum lot area in the zone. ROGUE PLANNING l DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC The minimum lot area in the WR zone is two acres when the average slope of the property is less than 40 percent slopes. The small lot area when considering seven percent of two acres vs. the .87 -acre site is a unique physical circumstance of the subject site which substantially hinders the development of the residential parcel. A two -acre parcel that has seven percent coverage is allowed 6,098 square feet of impervious surface. Allowed lot coverage of a .87 acre (37902 square feet) parcel when the previous development of the site was approved, the allowed coverage area would have been 7,541 + (200 porous surface) square feet in area. The subject property is a legal lot of record that appears in part on the earliest Ashland maps from 1888. The subject property is part of the Missouri Tracts from 1923 (V145 P465). The subject property was created via journal voucher (68-01529, 1968). Based on the County Assessors records, the residence that previously occupied the property was originally constructed in 1915. That structure had a footprint area of 1,966 square feet, included a 400 square foot garage, 400 square feet of concrete, 632 square foot deck, an 84 square foot porch, and a 238 square foot art studio. There was 3,720 square feet of impervious surfaces on the property prior to the 2011 removal of the structure. According to the Jackson County Assessor, the property was zoned RR -.5P in 1984 and again on the 1994 assessment. It is unclear when Ashland changed the zoning map to WR, it appears to have occurred in 1982 with the adoption of the comprehensive plan. The new WR zoning layer was added. During the meetings adopting the WR zone section, concerns were raised on how it would impact the developed properties and development of properties. Below is the quote of the planning director from the minutes. Per the 9/28/82 minutes adopting the WR zoning in the area (in response to testimony from Mark Cooper formerly 538 Granite Street), former Planning Director, Fregonese explained the WR zoning is that "Woodland designation calls for low density and was applied sparingly with the very steep slopes". The subject property as a single-family parcel is low density and definitely not "very steep". The WR district was a new zone to be applied to forested areas to ensure that these areas are protected from incompatible development on slopes and forests with erosion control and scenic values as the prime purpose of the zone. (Ashland City Council, Regular Meeting Minutes, 09/28/1982, Pg.4). The zone and the limited lot coverage was applied after the previous structure occupied the site and the reasons for the zone, to protect steep, forested slopes are not present upon the subject parcel and the WR zone appears to have been inappropriately applied to this lot because of the directive that the zone be applied sparingly to land with very steep slopes. 7 ROGUE PLANNING E DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC 2, The variance is the minimum necessary to address the special or unique physical circumstances related to the subject site. Finding: The variance requests seek to allow for coverage area of 8,467 square feet. This is the minimum necessary to retain the existing utility vault, the historic mill house, existing patio and existing studio structures, and to allow for the construction a new residence, the necessary parking and vehicle maneuvering areas, a permeable patio area, and natural pool area. This is the site has several physical constraints such as being substantially smaller than the minimum lot area in the zone, a water resource protection zone that reduces developable area of the property, large boulders on the north and northwest portion of the property that push development area to the south, closer to the water resource protection zone, these factors were all accounted for with the proposed redevelopment. The property is constrained with the existence of large boulders, a historic drainage ditch, the floodplain and the Water Resource Protection Zone for Ashland Creek limiting the area of developable area. 3. The proposal's benefits will be greater than any negative impacts on the development of the adjacent uses and will further the purpose and intent of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan of the City. Finding: The proposals benefit of development of a single family residentially zoned property as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan with a single-family residential home for a young, growing family and a minor increase in lot coverage does not cause any negative impacts on adjacent uses or properties. 4. The need for the variance is not self-imposed by the applicant or property owner, For example, the variance request does not arise as a result of a property Ihie adjustment or land division approval previously granted to the applicant. Finding: The variance request is due to the lot area being more than 50 percent smaller than the minimum lot area in the zone. The proposal seeks for lot coverage of the site that is similar to the coverage of the site by the previous site improvements, The non -conforming lot area was not created by the property owners. The non -conforming lot area was created when the zone was changed from RR -.5 (which the lot complied with both in area and coverage) to WR which immediately created a substantially non -conforming parcel. ROGUE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC Figure 1: Clip of map of Ashland approved by Board of Trustees December 17, 1883 and adopted by Jackson County January 1892 Figure 2: Clip of Survey #4056, August 11, 1969 S.... ai b.. lqw ROGUE PLANNING O OEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC Figure 3: Clip of Survey #20145 �v'r .d8 /a rJ'GWwJ ftll,nl o ,.ryx .� TO 'J'• „JrJrnJ•a JeJ.a� — q. ,.x a�' � �.,1,. rxJ�wet ��fJ0.`JSJ. ' " AL �.� �o au. rn aes Y �`�,•`• •+ 'r � q Y/- o 111 x11• a ( `yeti -4� w r .� SIN __ _ T � F 4rr e0.�p. Q- - / �'�♦ 1! ' I f4 Vn�•�. �'s �GyN$q'�f k A 1' h 1a'f) � rea . a 10 cn�plly.rr"I vuwms'lre o'�tu ao'wcp�c lat '>aa�l%e 9tb sin i lii 141 111 61 [ah' zutlm:�eu ddV-32{d LalZ:4l mymg ansqtaa45 ozgL6 8o 'pusl4sv - ,lesilg 8{NBJo 07b latl laagg eweplsay 6uIIIIM Vd Suillm uepior oN laa d � � s ' � a � .. a — aT" E F � 1 , ra s r 'w f c 110 -p-llllsv M4 i P buillm UL-Pi0f. oklaays :e•�ay�,e•w,wl&s55-Ls6-t:s i aS1110-we0 ddYJ9Nd azgm 40'Wel4sa LtrLL:WJ Mad anss�laaVS 10L a@re'WaM a gSb Alm m � a N AS ) I !A,".”.j USH V s,n 11-11 ye q:,51,E �.-,I eaue2i AI IIIIM !°1�tns'WSNe K„a i M .l a Vd "y 4I1 O !— fi1iMu ePaof wu 255' n Alm m � a N AS ) I !A,".”.j USH V yNl ul�(r, !°1�tns'WSNe i { Ann "y 4I1 O !— IRS Aa7: 1!Lu-yym� t"'. Cyto �`� F �• 4L � � "` fo���KYu�w b � •g�"' ¢ ,-{� � � a 5z•r "dn � �wL! �` �rL, � � � mid c � U ���� o w � �q�Yz�mw 3� � 9 � I �1� rL b .Ih Z a > $ tL 7zuo wA z�u'morto m�I ON S 'at �° M M¢ u�rcoz ZWng Z 1g 9 H4 H 1610'jSjj� IJun�d LJ¢EIL G Z z z0z, s uw�,! Nh $ 8 ° somgao��IS! `f till / 255'