The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2020-05-12 Planning PACKET Note: Anyone wishing to speak at any Planning Commission meeting is encouraged to do so. If you wish to speak, please fill out a Speaker Request Form and place it in the Speaker Request Box by staff. You will then be allowed to speak. Please note that the public testimony may be limited by the Chair and normally is not allowed after the Public Hearing is closed. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING May 12, 2020 AGENDA Held Electronically; View on Channel 9 or Channels 180 and 181 (for Charter Communications customers) or live stream via rvtv.sou.edu select RVTV Prime. Note: As the May 12th Planning Commission meeting will be held electronically, written testimony will be accepted via email to PC-public-testimony@ashland.or.us both general public forum items and agenda items as long as they are submitted with the subject line: May 12th Planning Commission Meeting Testimony before Monday, May 11 at 3:30 p.m. Written testimonies submitted by the deadline will be available to the Planning Commission before the meeting and will be included in the meetings minutes. I. CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 PM, Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 E. Main Street II. ANNOUNCEMENTS III. AD-HOC COMMITTEE UPDATES IV.CONSENT AGENDA A. Approval of Minutes 1. April 28, 2020 Special Meeting V. PUBLIC FORUM VI.TYPE II PUBLIC HEARINGS A. PLANNING ACTION: #PA-T2-2020-00017 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 210 Alicia Street OWNER/APPLICANT: David Scott Construction, LLC DESCRIPTION: A request for Outline Plan subdivision and Site Design Review approvals for a 12- unit, 13-lot Cottage Housing Development for the property located at 210 Alicia Street. The application also requests a Tree Removal Permit to remove two trees including one 36-inch diameter multi-trunked Willow tree proposed to be removed as a hazard, and a 20-inch Plumtree proposed to be removed to accommodate driveway installation. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single-Family Residential; ZONING: R-1- LOT #: 1700. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the Community Development office at 541-488-5305 (TTY phone is 1-800-735-2900). Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title 1). Note: Anyone wishing to speak at any Planning Commission meeting is encouraged to do so. If you wish to speak, please fill out a Speaker Request Form and place it in the Speaker Request Box by staff. You will then be allowed to speak. Please note that the public testimony may be limited by the Chair and normally is not allowed after the Public Hearing is closed. VII. TYPE III PUBLIC HEARINGS A. PLANNING ACTION: #PA-T3-2019-00001 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 1511 Hwy 99 N OWNER/AGENTS/APPLICANT: Linda Zare/Casita Developments, LLC & Kendrick Enterprise, LLC/ Rogue Planning & Development Services, LLC DESCRIPTION: A request for Annexation of a 16.87-acre parcel and Zone Change from County RR- 5 Rural Residential) to City R-2 (Low Density, Multi-Family Residential) for the properties located at 1511 Highway 99 North. The annexation is to include adjacent railroad property and state highway right-of-way. The application includes conceptual details for the future phased development of 196 apartments (1- and 2-Bedrooms, ranging from 480-701 square feet) in 14 two- story buildings; Outline Plan subdivision and Site Design Review development approvals are not requested here, and would be applied for subsequent to annexation. The application also requests an Exception to Street Standards to deviate from city standard parkrow and sidewalk improvements to respond to constraints of right-of-way width and existing encroachments. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Multi-Family Residential; ZONING: Existing County RR- 5, Proposed City R-2; VIII. OTHER BUSINESS A. Election of Officers. IX.ADJOURNMENT In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the Community Development office at 541-488-5305 (TTY phone is 1-800-735-2900). Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title 1). ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES - Draft April 28, 2020 I. CALL TO ORDER: Chair Roger Pearce called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street. Commissioners Present: Staff Present: Troy Brown, Jr. Bill Molnar, Community Development Director Michael Dawkins Maria Harris, Planning Manager Alan Harper Dana Smith, Executive Assistant Kerry KenCairn Haywood Norton Roger Pearce Lynn Thompson Absent Members: Council Liaison: Stefani Seffinger, absent II. ANNOUNCEMENTS Community Development Director Bill Molnar ast meeting. He noted Commission. He would be missed. Mr. Molnar announced the election of officers would occur in May. He explained the meeting May 12, 2020 would be televised. The meeting would adopt the rules the City Council was using requiring written testimony only. There would be an evidentiary hearing on the 1511 Highway 99 annexation that night. III. CONSENT AGENDA A.Approval of Minutes 1. March 10, 2020 Regular Meeting Chair Pearce called for a vote to approve the minutes of March 10, 2020. Commissioner Brown and KenCairn abstained. Voice Vote: ALL AYES. Motion passed 5-0. IV. PUBLIC FORUM V. LEGISLATIVE PUBLIC HEARING A. PLANNING ACTION: PA-L-2020-00008 APPLICANT: City of Ashland DESCRIPTION: A public hearing on ordinance amendments to the Ashland Land Use Ordinance to update and clarify the open space requirements and design standards for multifamily and single-family housing developments, and to correct terminology related to open space and other minor wording edits. The proposed amendments include two ordinances: 1) An ordinance amending Chapters 18.2.5 Standards for Residential Zones, 18.3.9 Performance Standards Option and PSO Overlay, 18.4.2 Building Placement, Orientation, and Design, 18.4.4 Landscaping, Lighting, and Screening, and 18.6 Definitions of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance to amend the open space requirements and design standards, and 2) an ordinance amending chapters 18.2.2 Base Zones and Allowed Uses, 18.2.3 Special Use Standards, 18.2.5 Standards for Residential Zones, 18.3.2 Croman Mill District, 18.3.4 Normal Neighborhood District, 18.3.5 Ashland Planning Commission April 28, 2020 Page 1 of 2 North Mountain Neighborhood District, 18.3.9 Performance Standards Option and PSO Overlay, 18.3.10 Physical and Environmental Constraints Overlay, 18.3.11 Water Resources Protection Zones (Overlays), 18.3.14 Transit Triangle Overlay, 18.4.2 Building Placement, Orientation, and Design, 18.4.2 Parking, Access, and Circulation, 18.4.4 Landscaping, Lighting, and Screening, 18.4.5. Tree Preservation and Protection, 18.4.6. Public Facilities, 18.5.2 Site Design Review, 18.5.3 Land Divisions and Property Line Adjustments, and 18.5.7 Tree Removal Permits of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance for consistency in terminology related to open space and other minor wording edits. Planning Manager Maria Harris provided a presentation (see attached): Why Amend the Open Space Standards? When is Open Space Required? Examples of Open Space What Stays the Same? Commissioner Dawkins confirmed common open space would include gardens. Commissioner Thompson questioned whether there was enough specificity regarding ground covers if designed so residents can move through and interact with op The Commission discussed modifying the language in 18.4.4070 Open Space (5)(a) Surfacing. Ms. Harris noted 5. Improvements provided a list of acceptable uses. She would look into revising the language in (5)(a). Proposed Amendments Ms. Harris clarified the way the ordinance was constructed did not apply to cottage housing standards which were considered a use. Ideally, it would be good to have all the open space requirements in one place. Proposed Amendments for Common Open Space with graphics and examples Commissioner KenCairn suggested adding a 20-foot dimension to the graphic showing the space with the path going through it was 20-feet wide. Proposed Amendments for Private Open Space with graphics and examples Miscellaneous Proposed Amendments Open Space Terminology Next Steps Questions of Staff The Commission discussed including language from the old standard requiring 50% being suitable for human use in 18.4.4.070 Open Space (5)(a) Surfacing. Ms. Harris would combine the language and revise the overall statement. Deliberation Chair Pearce explained issues he had with Table 18.4.4.070.A Required Open Space Area by Type of Review Procedure. He wanted the preferred requirement to be in each section where it was required and have 18.4.4.070 be the standards. Ms. Harris would add specific code references to 18.4.4.020 Applicability (E) and add a footnote to the table. The Commission approved the revisions. The Commission agreed with the major recreational facility recommendation. VIII. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned 8:19 p.m. Submitted by, Dana Smith, Executive Assistant Ashland Planning Commission April 28, 2020 Page 2 of 2 TYPE II PUBLIC HEARING _________________________________ PA-T2-2020-00017 210 Alicia Street Cottages at 210 Alicia ArequestforOutlinePlansubdivisionandSiteDesign PA-T2-2020-00017– Reviewapprovalsfora12-unit,13-lotCottageHousingDevelopmentforthe propertylocatedat210AliciaStreet.TheapplicationalsorequestsaTree RemovalPermittoremovetwotreesincludingone36-inchdiametermulti- trunkedWillowtreeproposedtoberemovedasahazard,anda20-inch Plumtreeproposedtoberemovedtoaccommodatedrivewayinstallation. Proposal Details Proposal 12cottagesrangingissizefrom800to999squarefeetareproposedtobeconstructedaroundthe perimeteroftheproperty.ThedrivewayfromAliciaAvenueisproposedtoserve14parking spacesinaconsolidatedcentralparkingarea.Parkingspaceswouldbeintwocarportstructures withsolarpanels,andtheprojectisproposedtobeazeronetenergydevelopment. Site Description Thesubjectpropertyisa54,722squarefoot,generallyrectangularparcelzonedSingleFamily Residential(R-1-5-P)whichtakesaccessfromAliciaAvenue.Thereiscurrentlya1,183squarefoot manufacturedhomewitha340squarefootattachedgaragethatwasbuiltaround2003,aswell asasmallshedandsmallbarn.Thesestructureswouldberemovedwithredevelopmentofthe property.Theapplicanthasidentifiedasmallpossiblewetlandonthepropertyandisinthe processofhavingitassessedanddelineatedbyawetlandbiologist.Thepossiblewetlandandits surroundingbufferhavebeenincorporatedintotheproject’sopenspace. Landscaping & Trees Therearesixtreesontheproperty:a20-inchPlumwhichisproposedtoberemovedduetoits locationrelativetonecessarydrivewayimprovements;a14-inchunspecifieddeciduoustree;a10- inchWalnut;aneight-inchWillow;aten-inchWillow;anda36-inchmulti-trunkedWillow.The multi-trunked36-inchWillowisproposedtoberemovedasahazardtree,andtheprojectarborist explainsthatitexhibitsevidenceofpreviouslargelimbfailure,extensiverotandfungalgrowth, multiplestructuraldefectsincludingcracks,andoverallpoorhealth.Thearboristrecommends thattheWillowisnotsuitableforanurbansettingandwouldposeahazardforpeopleonthe property,allthemoresowithfurtherdevelopment.HerecommendsthatthisWillowberemoved andreplacedwithasuitabletree.Atotalof23treesnewtreesareidentifiedintheLandscape 1 Planprovided. Cottages at 210 Alicia PA-T2-2020-00017– ArequestforOutlinePlansubdivisionandSite DesignReviewapprovalsfora12-unit,13-lotCottageHousingDevelopment forthepropertylocatedat210AliciaStreet.Theapplicationalsorequestsa TreeRemovalPermittoremovetwotreesincludingone36-inchdiameter multi-trunkedWillowtreeproposedtoberemovedasahazard,anda20- inchPlumtreeproposedtoberemovedtoaccommodatedriveway installation. Key Issues Parking Cottagehousingunitslessthan800squarefeetrequireoneoff-streetparkingspacebeprovided perunit,whilecottagehousingunitsgreaterthan800squarefeetbutlessthan1,000squarefeet require1.5spaces.Asproposed,nineoftheunitsare800squarefeetandthreeare999square feet.Theapplicantproposestoprovide14off-streetparkingspacesforthe12cottagesproposed herewhichsatisfiestheoff-streetparkingrequirement. Streets & Traffic AliciaAvenueisaresidentialneighborhoodstreet,hasa47-footright-of-waywidth,andispaved to20feet.Therearenosidewalks,curbsorguttersinplaceoneithersideofthestreet,andright- of-waybeyondthepavementissurfacedingravelandaccommodatespedestriancirculationand on-streetparking.AresidentialdevelopmentofthissizedoesnotrequireaTrafficImpact Analysis,howevertheexistingstreetisestimatedtobewellbelowthedesignedcapacityfora neighborhoodstreet.NostreetdedicationsareidentifiedintheStreetDedicationMap,and cottagehousingdevelopmentstypicallydonotrequiretodedicateorconstructstreet improvementsiftheproposalisfoundtomeetconnectivityandblocklengthstandards. Demolition Theexistingmanufacturedhome,attachedgarage,smallbarnandshedwillbedemolishedprior toredevelopmentoftheproperty,andwillrequireaDemolition/RelocationReviewPermit throughtheBuildingDivisionbeforeanydemolitionworkbeginsonsite. Staff Recommendation Staffrecommendsthattheapplicationbeapprovedwiththeconditionsdetailedinthedraft findingsincludedinthePlanningCommission’sMay2020meetingpacket. 2 BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION June 9, 2020 IN THE MATTER OF PLANNING ACTION #PA-T2-2020-00017, A REQUEST FOR ) OUTLINE PLAN SUBDIVISION AND SITE DESIGN REVIEW APPROVALS FOR A ) 12-UNIT/13-LOT COTTAGE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT 210 ALICIA ) AVENUE. THE APPLICANTION ALSO REQUESTS A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT ) TO REMOVE TWO TREES INCLUDING ONE 36-INCH DIAMETER MULTI- ) TRUNKED WILLOW TREE PROPOSED TO BE REMOVED AS A HAZARD, AND A ) FINDINGS, 20-INCH PLUM TREE PROPOSED TO BE REMOVED TO ACCOMMODATE DRIVE- ) CONCLUSIONS & WAY INSTALLATION. ) ORDERS ) OWNER/APPLICANT: DAVID SCOTT CONSTRUCTION, LLC/ ) ROGUE PLANNING ) & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC ) ) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- RECITALS: 1) Tax lot #1700 of Map 39 1E 04DB is located at 210 Alicia Avenue and is zoned Single Family Residential (R-1-5). 2) The applicant is requesting Outline Plan subdivision and Site Design Review approvals for a 12- unit, 13-lot Cottage Housing Development for the property located at 210 Alicia Street. The application also requests a Tree Removal Permit to remove two trees including one 36-inch diameter multi-trunked Willow tree proposed to be removed as a hazard, and a 20-inch Plum tree proposed to be removed to accommodate driveway installation. The proposal is outlined in plans on file at the Department of Community Development. AMC 18.3.9.040.A.3 3) The criteria for Outline Plan approval are described in as follows: a. The development meets all applicable ordinance requirements of the City. b. Adequate key City facilities can be provided including water, sewer, paved access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, police and fire protection, and adequate transportation; and that the development will not cause a City facility to operate beyond capacity. c. The existing and natural features of the land; such as wetlands, floodplain corridors, ponds, large trees, rock outcroppings, etc., have been identified in the plan of the development and significant features have been included in the open space, common areas, and unbuildable areas. d. The development of the land will not prevent adjacent land from being developed for the uses shown in the Comprehensive Plan. e. There are adequate provisions for the maintenance of open space and common areas, if required or provided, and that if developments are done in phases that the early phases have the same or higher ratio of amenities as proposed in the entire project. f. The proposed density meets the base and bonus density standards established under this chapter. PA-T2-2020-00017 June 9, 2020 Page 1 g. The development complies with the Street Standards. AMC 18.5.2.050 4) The criteria for Site Design Review approval are detailed in as follows: A. Underlying Zone: The proposal complies with all of the applicable provisions of the underlying zone (part 18.2), including but not limited to: building and yard setbacks, lot area and dimensions, density and floor area, lot coverage, building height, building orientation, architecture, and other applicable standards. B. Overlay Zones: The proposal complies with applicable overlay zone requirements (part 18.3). C. Site Development and Design Standards: The proposal complies with the applicable Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4, except as provided by subsection E, below. D. City Facilities: The proposal complies with the applicable standards in section 18.4.6 Public Facilities and that adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, electricity, urban storm drainage, paved access to and throughout the property and adequate transportation can and will be provided to the subject property. E. Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards. The approval authority may approve exceptions to the Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4 if the circumstances in either subsection 1 or 2, below, are found to exist. 1. There is a demonstrable difficulty meeting the specific requirements of the Site Development and Design Standards due to a unique or unusual aspect of an existing structure or the proposed use of a site; and approval of the exception will not substantially negatively impact adjacent properties; and approval of the exception is consistent with the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design; and the exception requested is the minimum which would alleviate the difficulty.; or 2. There is no demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements, but granting the exception will result in a design that equally or better achieves the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design Standards. AMC 18.2.3.090 5) The development standards for Cottage Housing Development are detailed in as follows: C. Development Standards. Cottage housing developments shall meet all of the following requirements. 1.Cottage Housing Density. The permitted number of units and minimum lot areas shall be as follows: Table 18.2.3.090.C.1 Cottage Housing Development Density PA-T2-2020-00017 June 9, 2020 Page 2 Minimum Maximum Minimum lot Maximum number of number of size Maximum Floor cottages per cottages per (accommodates Zones Cottage Area cottage cottage minimum Density Ratio housing housing number of (FAR) development development cottages) 1 cottage R-1-5, dwelling unit NN-1-5 per 2,500 3 12 7,500 sq.ft. 0.35 NM-R-1-5 square feet of lot area 1 cottage dwelling unit R-1-7.5 per 3,750 3 12 11,250 sq.ft. 0.35 NM-R-1-7.5 square feet of lot area 2. Building and Site Design. a. Maximum Floor Area Ratio: The combined gross floor area of all cottages and garages shall not exceed a 0.35 floor area ratio (FAR). Structures such as parking carports, green houses, and common accessory structures are exempt from the maximum floor area calculation. b. Maximum Floor Area. The maximum gross habitable floor area for 75 percent or more of the cottages, within developments of four units or greater, shall be 800 square feet or less per unit. At least two of the cottages within three unit cottage housing developments shall have a gross habitable floor area of 800 square feet or less. The gross habitable floor area for any individual cottage unit shall not exceed 1000 square feet. c. Height. Building height of all structures shall not exceed 18 feet. The ridge of a pitched roof may extend up to 25 feet above grade. d. Lot Coverage. Lot coverage shall meet the requirements of the underlying zone outlined in Table 18.2.5.030.A. e. Building Separation. A cottage development may include two-unit attached, as well as detached, cottages. With the exception of attached units, a minimum separation of six feet measured from the nearest point of the exterior walls is required between cottage housing units. Accessory buildings (e.g., carport, garage, shed, multipurpose room) shall comply with building code requirements for separation from non-residential structures. PA-T2-2020-00017 June 9, 2020 Page 3 f. Fences. Notwithstanding the provisions of section 18.4.4.060, fence height is limited to four feet on interior areas adjacent to open space except as allowed for deer fencing in subsection 18.4.4.060.B.6. Fences in the front and side yards abutting a public street, and on the perimeter of the development shall meet the fence standards of section 18.4.4.060. 3.Access, Circulation, and Off-Street Parking Requirements. Notwithstanding the provisions of chapter 18.3.9 Performance Standards Option and 18.4 Site Development and Site Design Standards, cottage housing developments are subject to the following requirements: a.Public Street Dedications. Except for those street connections identified on the Street Dedication Map, the Commission may reduce or waive the requirement to dedicate and construct a public street as required in 18.4.6.040 upon finding that the cottage housing development meets connectivity and block length standards by providing public access for pedestrians and bicyclists with an alley, shared street, or multi-use path connecting the public street to adjoining properties. b.Driveways and parking areas. Driveway and parking areas shall meet the vehicle area design standards of section 18.4.3. i. Parking shall meet the minimum parking ratios per 18.4.3.040. ii. Parking shall be consolidated to minimize the number of parking areas, and shall be located on the cottage housing development property. iii. Off-street parking can be located within an accessory structure such as a multi-auto carport or garage, but such multi-auto structures shall not be attached to individual cottages. Single-car garages and carports may be attached to individual cottages. Uncovered parking is also permitted provided that off street parking is screened in accordance with the applicable landscape and screening standards of chapter 18.4.4. 4. Open Space. Open space shall meet all of the following standards. a. A minimum of 20 percent of the total lot area is required as open space. b. Open space(s) shall have no dimension that is less than 20 feet unless otherwise granted an exception by the hearing authority. Connections between separated open spaces, not meeting this dimensional requirement, shall not contribute toward meeting the minimum open space area. c. Shall consist of a central space, or series of interconnected spaces. d. Physically constrained areas such as wetlands or steep slopes cannot be counted towards the open space requirement. PA-T2-2020-00017 June 9, 2020 Page 4 e. At least 50 percent of the cottage units shall abut an open space. f. The open space shall be distinguished from the private outdoor areas with a walkway, fencing, landscaping, berm, or similar method to provide a visual boundary around the perimeter of the common area. g. Parking areas and driveways do not qualify as open space. Figure 18.2.3.090 Cottage Housing Conceptual Site Plans 5. Private Outdoor Area. Each residential unit in a cottage housing development shall have a private outdoor area. Private outdoor areas shall be separate from the open space to create a sense of separate ownership. a. Each cottage unit shall be provided with a minimum of 200 square feet of usable private outdoor area. Private outdoor areas may include gardening areas, patios, or porches. b. No dimension of the private outdoor area shall be less than 8 feet. 6. Common Buildings, Existing Nonconforming Structures and Accessory Residential Units. a. Common Buildings. Up to 25 percent of the required common open space, but no greater than 1,500 square feet, may be utilized as a community building for the sole use of the cottage housing residents. Common buildings shall not be attached to cottages. b. Carports and garage structures. Consolidated carports or garage structures, provided per 18.2.3.090.C.3.b, are not subject to the area limitations for common PA-T2-2020-00017 June 9, 2020 Page 5 buildings. c. Nonconforming Dwelling Units. An existing single-family residential structure built prior to the effective date of this ordinance (date), which may be nonconforming with respect to the standards of this chapter, shall be permitted to remain. Existing nonconforming dwelling units shall be included in the maximum permitted cottage density. 1,000 square feet of the habitable floor area of such nonconforming dwellings shall be included in the maximum floor area permitted per 18.2.3.090C.2.a. Existing garages, other existing non-habitable floor area, and the not be included in the maximum floor area ratio. d. Accessory Residential Units. New accessory residential units (ARUs) are not permitted in cottage housing developments, except that an existing ARU that is accessory to an existing nonconforming single-family structure may be counted as a cottage unit if the property is developed subject to the provisions of this chapter. 7. Storm Water and Low-Impact Development. a. Developments shall include open space and landscaped features as a component filtration and on-site infiltration of storm water. b. Low impact development techniques for storm water management shall be used wherever possible. Such techniques may include the use of porous solid surfaces in parking areas and walkways, directing roof drains and parking lot runoff to landscape beds, green or living roofs, and rain barrels. c. Cottages shall be located to maximize the infiltration of storm water run-off. In this zone, cottages shall be grouped and parking areas shall be located to preserve as much contiguous, permanently undeveloped open space and native vegetation as reasonably possible when considering all standards in this chapter. 8. Restrictions. a. The size of a cottage dwelling may not be increased beyond the maximum floor area in subsection 18.2.3.090.C.2.a. A deed restriction shall be placed on the property notifying future property owners of the size restriction. AMC 18.5.7.040.B 6) The criteria for a Tree Removal Permit are described in as follows: 1.Hazard Tree. A Hazard Tree Removal 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. PA-T2-2020-00017 June 9, 2020 Page 6 a.The applicant must demonstrate that the condition or location of the tree presents a clear public safety hazard (i.e., likely to fall and injure persons or property) or a foreseeable danger of property damage to an existing structure or facility, and such hazard or danger cannot reasonably be alleviated by treatment, relocation, or pruning. See definition of hazard tree in part 18.6. b. The City may require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each hazard tree pursuant to section 18.5.7.050. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit. 2. Tree That is Not a Hazard. A Tree Removal Permit for a tree that is not a hazard 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. a. The tree is proposed for removal in order to permit the application to be consistent with other applicable Land Use Ordinance requirements and standards, including but not limited to applicable Site Development and Design Standards in part 18.4 and Physical and Environmental Constraints in part 18.10. b. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks. c. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes, canopies, and species diversity within 200 feet of the subject property. The City shall grant an exception to this criterion when alternatives to the tree removal have been considered and no reasonable alternative exists to allow the property to be used as permitted in the zone. d. Nothing in this section shall require that the residential density to be reduced below the permitted density allowed by the zone. In making this determination, the City may consider alternative site plans or placement of structures of alternate landscaping designs that would lessen the impact on trees, so long as the alternatives continue to comply with the other provisions of this ordinance. e. The City shall require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each tree granted approval pursuant to section 18.5.7.050. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit. 7) On April 15, 2020 Governor Kate Brown issued Executive Order #20-16 Keep Government Working: Ordering Necessary Measures to Ensure Safe Public Meetings and Continued Operations by Local Government During Coronavirus (COVID-19) Outbreak public bodies hold public meetings by telephone, video, or through some other electronic or virtual means, whenever possible; that the public body make available a method by which the public can listen to or virtually attend the public meeting or hearing at the time it occurs; that the public body does not have to provide a physical space for the public to attend the meeting or hearing; that requirements that oral public testimony be taken during hearings be suspended, and that public bodies instead provide a means for PA-T2-2020-00017 June 9, 2020 Page 7 submitting written testimony by e-mail or other electronic methods that the public body can consider in a timely manner 8) The Planning Commission, following proper public notice, held an electronic public hearing on May 12, 2020. In keeping with Executive Order #20-16, this meeting was broadcast live on local television channel 9 and on Charter Communications channels 180 & 181, and was live-streamed over the internet on RVTV Prime at http://www.rvtv.sou.edu. A copy of the application, including all documents, evidence and applicable criteria relied upon by the applicant, and a copy of the staff report were made available on- line at http://www.ashland.or.us/Page.asp?NavID=17902 seven days prior to the hearing. The applicant was required to submit any presentation materials for consideration at the hearing by 3:30 p.m. on Friday, th May 8, and these materials were made available on-line and e-mailed to Commissioners. Those wishing toprovide testimony were invited to submit written comments via e-mail to PC-public- testimony@ashland.or.us with the subject line by 3:30 p.m. on Monday, May 11, 2020, and these comments were made available on-line and e-mailed to Commissioners. The applicant was invited to provide written rebuttal to these public comments by 3:30 p.m. on Tuesday, May th 12 and these arguments were posted on-line and e-mailed to Commissioners in advance of the electronic public hearing. All written testimony received by the deadlines was made available for Commissioners to review before the hearing and has been included in the meeting minutes. As provided in the Executive Order #20-16, no oral public testimony was taken during the hearing. Prior to the closing of the hearing, participants requested that the hearing or record remain open pursuant to ORS 197.763(6) to present additional evidence or argument via e-mail to PC-public- testimony@ashland.or.us he Planning Commission closed the hearing, but left the record open to the submittal of new evidence until 4:30 p.m. on May 19, 2020; to the submittal of responses to the new submittals until 4:30 p.m. on May 26, 2020; and to the submittal of written arguments, but no new evidence, by the applicant only until 4:30 p.m. on June 2, . 2020 The meeting was continued for Planning Commission deliberations until 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday, June 9, 2020 at which time the meeting was reconvened electronically and the Planning Commission, after consideration of the materials received, approved the application subject to conditions pertaining to the appropriate development of the site. Now, therefore, the Planning Commission of the City of Ashland finds, concludes and recommends as follows: SECTION 1. EXHIBITS For the purposes of reference to these Findings, the attached index of exhibits, data, and testimony will be used. Staff Exhibits lettered with an "S" Proponent's Exhibits, lettered with a "P" PA-T2-2020-00017 June 9, 2020 Page 8 Opponent's Exhibits, lettered with an "O" Hearing Minutes, Notices, Miscellaneous Exhibits lettered with an "M" SECTION 2. FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS 2.1 The Planning Commission finds that it has received all information necessary to make a decision based on the staff report, written public testimony and the exhibits received. 2.2 The Planning Commission finds that the proposal for Outline Plan approval, Site Design Review approval, Cottage Housing, and Tree Removal Permit meets all applicable criteria for Outline Plan approval described in AMC 18.3.9.040.A.3; for Site Design Review described in AMC 18.5.2.050; for a Cottage Housing Development described in AMC 18.2.3.090; and for a Tree Removal Permit as described in AMC 18.5.7.040.B. 2.3 The Planning Commission concludes that the proposal satisfies all applicable criteria for Outline Plan approval. The first approval criterion for Outline Plan approval is that, ordinance requirements of the Cityhe Commission finds that the proposal meets all applicable ordinance requirements, is requesting no Variances or Exceptions, and that this criterion has been satisfied. Adequate key City facilities can be provided including water, sewer, paved access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, police and fire protection, and adequate transportation; and that the development will not cause a City facility to operate b The Planning Commission notes that the application materials assert that adequate key City facilities can be provided to serve the development, and that based on consultations with representatives of the various City departments (i.e. water, sewer, streets and electric) the proposed small cottage housing units will not cause a City facility to operate beyond capacity. Water, Sewer, Electricity and Urban Storm Drainage Water The application explains, and Public Works has confirmed, that there is a six-inch water main in Sylvia Street, a four-inch water main in Alicia Street, and a fire hydrant is in place directly across from the driveway on Alicia Street. The applicant further asserts that there is adequate water pressure available to provide water service to the proposed new units. Sanitary Sewer PA-T2-2020-00017 June 9, 2020 Page 9 The application explains, and Public Works has confirmed, that there is a six-inch sanitary sewer line within the right-of-way for Alicia Street and Sylvia Street. The applicant further notes that in discussions with the sanitary sewer department, there are no reported capacity issues in the vicinity. The application concludes that the 12 proposed small, water-efficient units should not cause the system to operate beyond its current capacity. Public Works staff have indicated they see no issues for sanitary sewer capacity, and note that the development drains into a sewer trunk line east of Sylvia Street, and on into the Oak Street line north of Nevada Street where there are no known capacity issues. Electricity The application indicates that electrical infrastructure is available in the immediate vicinity, and that the applicant has worked with the electrical department to design the provided electrical service plan, and is seeking to address desired solar panel installation and net-metering while existing electrical infrastructure. Urban Storm Drainage The application notes, and Public Works has confirmed, that there is a ten-inch storm sewer line within the Sylvia Street right-of-way. The applicant explains that the project is required to employ ment Standards as well as under the Rogue Valley Sewer Services (RVSS) Standards for Storm Water Management, and the low impact development measures proposed including the use of pervious walkways and rain-barrel catchment of roof drainage to reduce the amount of storm water generated. The applicant proposes to capture, detain, treat and regenerate all storm drainage on the property through the use of a StormTech system which will detain and treat storm water before releasing it into the existing irrigation ditch adjacent to the parking lot. The applicant asserts that this should result in no added impacts to the Sylvia Street storm drain facilities. Police & Fire Protection An existing fire hydrant is in place directly across Alicia Avenue from the driveway entrance. As is typical, the Fire Marshal will review the final civil drawings and building permit submittals for compliance with fire codes relative to water supply and fire apparatus access, and conditions have been included below to require that the applicants address the requirements of the Fire Department including but not limited to approved addressing, fire apparatus access, fire hydrant distance and fire flow, as part of the Final Plan application submittal. STAFF DISCUSSION: Adequate Transportation Alicia Avenue is a residential neighborhood street, as are nearby Sylvia Street, Oak Lawn Avenue, and Sleepy Hollow Drive which form the street system for the neighborhood off of Oak Street here. The Alicia Avenue right-of-way is 47 feet in width, and is paved to a width of approximately 20 feet. There are no sidewalks, curbs or gutters in place on either side of the street, and right-of-way beyond the pavement is largely surfaced in gravel and accommodates pedestrian circulation and intermittent on-street parking. The street standards are discussed further in this section. PA-T2-2020-00017 June 9, 2020 Page 10 20-feet in width with a five-foot- connecting from Alicia Avenue to the internal pedestrian circulation connecting to each unit and continuing through to the proposed open space. The application asserts that the scale of the proposed development does not trigger a Traffic Impact Analysis or other transportation assessment. Staff would note that in considering a similarly sized cottage housing development at 476 North Laurel Street recently, a 12-unit cottage housing development was found to generate approximately 88 average daily trips (ADT) with eight p.m. peak hour trips and six a.m. peak hour trips. The trigger point for a Traffic Impact Analysis is 50 peak hour trips. Staff have contacted the City Engineering Division to determine if trip counts were available in the neighborhood, and it was noted that while no trip counts were available for Alicia Avenue, Engineering staff would estimate that trips were around 100 ADT. A residential neighborhood street is assumed to be able to accommodate up to 1,500 ADT. Staff believe a finding can reasonably be made that the street has adequate transportation capacity to serve the 12 proposed small homes. The application includes preliminary Grading, Utility and Erosion Control Plans prepared by Registered Professional Engineer Scott D. Pingle of KAS & Associates, Inc. which identify existing facilities available in the adjacent rights-of-way along with proposed connections; meter and transformer placement; and storm water control, detention and treatment systems. The Planning and through the subject property from public utility easements and street right-of-way adjacent to the site, and that based on the conceptual plans and details from the various service providers, adequate key city facilities are available within the adjacent rights-of-way and will be extended by the applicant to serve the proposed development. Conditions have been included below to require that final electric service, utility and civil plans be provided for the review and approval of the Staff Advisor and city departments in conjunction with the Final Plan submittal, and that civil infrastructure be installed by the applicants, inspected and approved prior to the signature of the final survey plat. The existing and natural features of the land; such as wetlands, floodplain corridors, ponds, large trees, rock outcroppings, etc., have been identified in the plan of the development and significant features have been included in the open space, STAFF DISCUSSION: Significant Natural Features Trees The application identifies six trees on the subject property including: a 20-inch Plum which is proposed to be removed due to its location relative to necessary driveway improvements; a 14-inch unspecified deciduous tree; a 10-inch Walnut; an eight-inch Willow; a ten-inch Willow; and a 36- inch multi-trunked Willow which is proposed to be removed as a hazard tree. The application also notes that there is a 14-inch Pine on the adjacent property near the west property line. The application includes an assessment of the trees by Christopher John, a certified arborist with Canopy, LLC. John notes that the large Willow has three trunks (21½-inches, 24-inches and 30- PA-T2-2020-00017 June 9, 2020 Page 11 inches) in close proximity to one another, and that all three exhibit evidence of previous large limb failure, extensive rot and fungal growth, and multiple structural defects including cracks, and overall poor health. His assessment is that this Willow is not suitable for an urban setting and would pose a hazard for people on the property, all the more so with further development. He recommends that this Willow be removed and replaced with a suitable tree. With regard to the 20-inch Plum located near the northern entrance to the property, John explains that the tree is quite large for its species, and as the species is prone to do it has been losing limbs. He goes on to emphasize that Plums require maintenance that this tree has not received and as a result it has a poor form and limb failure. He concludes that this combined with the location relative to the driveway and parking lead him to recommend removal and replacement of the tree. For the remaining trees to be preserved and protected, John recommends installation of tree protePreservation & Protection Ordinance (AMC 18.4.5), avoiding compaction within the tree protection zones, root protection during work within tree protection zones, and periodic watering during the months of June through September. Potential Wetland The application explains that a possible wetland ( Inventory) has been identified on the subject property, further detailing that the applicant believes it was formed bcanal passes through the property and continues on to the property immediately to the east. The application explains that the potential wetland area has been preliminarily assessed by a wetland biologist with Northwest Biological Consultants. A provided indicates the wetland is a small area affected by irrigation water overflow from an open ditch and disconnected pipe which has since been repaired, and notes that the presence of upland soils and weak indicators of soils, plants, and hydrology suggest the presence of a small, marginal wetland. The letter goes on to note that with the pipe repaired and the artificial water source eliminated, new data will be collected this spring to determine whether removal of the artificial water source has eliminated the source of artificial hydrology for the potential wetland. The wetland biologist indicates that they believe this will be the case and that as such, the area will be determined not to be a jurisdictional wetland upon review by the Oregon Department of State Lands (DSL). The arborist concludes that pending that review by DSL, no ground disturbing activities are to take place. If found to be a jurisdictional wetland, this possible wetland and an area extending 20 foot beyond its upland edge would be protected in a Water Resource Protection Zone (WRPZ) as provided in AMC 18.3.11. extent with its protection zone, there is an area identified for protection with silt fencing within the vicinity of cattails and reeds observed growing on-site. natural features including a possible wetland and six trees and proposed to preserve and protect all but two of the trees. One, a large Willow, has been found by a PA-T2-2020-00017 June 9, 2020 Page 12 certified arborist to pose a hazard due to overall poor health including large limb failures, extensive rot, fungal growth and multiple structural defects. The other, a large Plum, has not been properly cared for resulting in poor form, and limb failure and it is proposed for removal as well. The remaining trees are to be preserved and protected. Similarly, the applicant has enlisted the services of a wetland biologist to assess a possible wetland on the property been repaired, further assessment and formal delineation of the wetland is underway, the site plan incorporates an open space configuration to preserve and protect the possible wetland, and no further ground dIf determined to be jurisdictional through a formal delineation, the full extent of the wetland and associated buffer zone will need to be clearly detailed in the Final Plan materials and protected from require that for the wetland, a delineation be prepared, submitted for review and concurrence obtained from DSL, and the results incorporated into the Final Plan drawings including protection of the WRPZ. For the trees, conditions have been recommended to include tree protection fencing into a revised Tree Protection Plan for inclusion with the Final Plan submittal. The fourth criterion for approval of an Outline Plan is that, The Planning Commission finds that the development will not prevent adjacent land from being developed with the uses envisioned by the Comprehensive Plan. Adjacent properties to the north, south and west are largely developed with single family residences as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan. The property immediately to the east is separated from the subject property by slopes ranging from 15 percent to more than 35 percent, and as such any future development would need to take access from Clinton Street. The fifth approval criterion is that, and common areas, if required or provided, and that if developments are done in phases that the early The Planning Commission finds that at the time the Final Plan application is submitted, s and surveyor for provide adequate assurances relative to open space maintenance. The Commission further finds that if the project is to be completed in phases, the open space shall be completed no later than submittal have been included below. Based on the foregoing, the Commission concludes that the proposal complies with the fifth approval criterion. The proposed density meets the base and bonus density standards established under this chapter permissible number of cottages for a cottage housing development in the R-1-5 zoning district providing that one cottage per 2,500 square feet of lot area is allowed, with a maximum number of 12 cottages. The Planning Commission finds that the 54,722 square foot property here will accommodate 12 cottages PA-T2-2020-00017 June 9, 2020 Page 13 (54,722/2,500 = 21.89) and 12 are proposed which complies with the allowed Cottage Housing Development Density. Based on the foregoing, the Commission concludes that the proposal complies with the sixth approval criterion. The development complies with the Street Standards. The subject property fronts on Alicia Avenue for a width of approximately 35 feet at the intersection with Sylvia Street. Alicia Avenue is a residential neighborhood street, as are nearby Sylvia Street, Oak Lawn m off of Oak Street here. The Alicia Avenue right-of-way is 47 feet in width, and is paved to a width of approximately 20 feet. There are no sidewalks, curbs or gutters in place on either side of the street, and right-of-way beyond the pavement is largely surfaced in gravel and used both for pedestrian travel and scattered on-street parking. For residential neighborhood streets, City street standards envision five-foot sidewalks, seven-foot parkrow planting strips, a six-inch curb and seven-foot parking bays on each side, with an 11- to 14-foot queuing travel lane. The city standard cross-section includes a 25- to 28-foot curb-to-curb paved width in a 50- to 55-foot right-of-way. STAFF DISCUSSION: Street Standards The applicant explains that the existing street frontage is only 34-feet 4-inches in width, and the proposed driveway is to take up 30-feet of that width. With the limited frontage taken up virtually in its entirely with required driveway improvements, there is no additional width for sidewalk installation. As such, staff have recommended a condition below to instead require that the applicant sign-in favor of a Local Improvement District (LID) for the future improvement of Alicia Avenue, and of Oak Lawn Avenues which provides a connection out to Oak Street and its sidewalk system. The Cottage Housing Development Standards (AMC 18.2.3.090.C.3.a) generally provide that except - 1), the Planning Commission may reduce or waive requirement to dedicate and construct a public street according to the Street Design Standards in AMC 18.4.6.040 upon a finding that the Cottage Housing Development meets connectivity and block length standards by providing public access for pedestrians and bicyclists with an alley, shared street, or multi-use path connecting the public street to adjoining properties. The existing street system within the immediate neighborhood meets the block length standards existing block lengths are 165-175 feet where the block length standards call for a maximum length of 300-400 feet and i street system, while not fully improved to City street design standards, functions comparably to a shared streetand provides adequate connectivity through the neighborhood and out to Oak Street. City park driveway through the site, across a neighboring private property, to the park property would be approximately 450 feet and traverse severely constrained slopes. The park property is less than 500 feet from the driveway entrance traveling due north on Sylvia Street, and as such staff do not believe that an east-west public access easement dedication is merited. PA-T2-2020-00017 June 9, 2020 Page 14 The Planning Commission concludes that as detailed above and with the conditions discussed, the proposal complies with the requirements for Outline Plan subdivision approval under the Performance Standards Options chapter. 2.4 The Planning Commission concludes that the proposal satisfies all applicable criteria for Site Design Review approval. The first approval criterion addresses the requirements of the underlying zone, requiring that, The proposal complies with all of the applicable provisions of the underlying zone (part 18.2), including but not limited to: building and yard setbacks, lot area and dimensions, density and floor area, lot coverage, building height, building orientation, architecture, and other applicable The Planning Commission finds that the building and yard setbacks and other applicable standards have been evaluated to ensure consistency with the applicable provisions of part 18.2, and all regulations of the underlying R- 1-5 zoning will be satisfied. The second approval criterion deals with overlay zones, and requires that,The proposal complies with The Planning Commission finds that the property is within the Performance Standards Option (PSO) overlay zone, which requires that all developments other than partitions or individual dwelling units be processed under Chapter 18.3.9., and that the proposal involves a 12-unit cottage housing development and 13-lot subdivision for which the applicant has requested Outline Plan approval under the PSO-Overlay chapter 18.3.9. The Planning Commission further finds that the subject property is located within the Wildfire Lands Overlay, and as such a Fire Prevention and Control Plan addressing the General Fuel Modification Area requirements in AMC 18.3.10.100.A.2 will need to be provided for the review of the Fire Marshal prior to bringing combustible materials onto the property. New landscaping proposed will need to comply with these standards and shall not include plants listed on the Prohibited Flammable Plant List per Resolution 2018-028. Conditions to this effect have been included below. The Commission finds that while no wetlands are identified on the subject property in the Local Wetlands Inventory, the applicant has identified a possible wetland on the property, a wetland biologist has been retained to assess the possible wetland, the possible wetland and a 20-foot buffer has been incorporated into the proposed open space, the applicant has proposed to limit ground disturbance until a delineation has been reviewed by the Oregon Department of State Lands and the applicant has planned all site improvements outside of the possible wetland and its buffer zone. The applicant further proposes to include a conservation area with restrictions stipulates that the uses and activities within the Water Resource Protection Zone shall be consistent with the provisions of AMC 18.3.11. Based on the foregoing, the Planning Commission finds that this criterion is satisfied. The proposal complies with the applicable Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4, except as provided by The Planning Commission finds that the proposal complies with the applicable Site Development and Design and that the various plans have been prepared based on these standards and PA-T2-2020-00017 June 9, 2020 Page 15 the recently adopted Cottage Housing ordinance. With regard to the parking requirements in AMC 18.4.3, cottage housing units less than 800 square feet require one off-street parking space be provided per unit, while units greater than 800 square feet and less than 1,000 square feet require 1½ spaces. Here, nine of the 12 units are 800 square feet while three are 999 square feet, and a total of 14 spaces are required \[(9 x 1) + (3 x 1.5) = 13.5\]. The applicant proposes to provide 14 off-street parking spaces to satisfy the requirements for the 12 units proposed units here. Carports are considered by code to be garages, and separate bicycle parking facilities are not required where a garage is available. The Planning Commission finds that all required off-street parking has been provided on site, and concludes that the third criterion has been satisfied. The fourth approval criterion addresses city facilities, specifically requiring that, The proposal complies with the applicable standards in section 18.4.6 Public Facilities and that adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, electricity, urban storm drainage, paved access to and throughout the property and adequate transportation can and will be provided to the subject propertyThe Planning Commission finds that adequate capacity of city facilities, paved access to and throughout the property, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to the subject property, and that these items are addressed in detail in the Outline Plan discussion in section 2.3 above. The Commission concludes that this criterion has been satisfied. The Planning Commission finds that the applicant has not requested any Exceptions to the Site Development and Design Standards, and as such this criterion does not apply. The Planning Commission concludes that as detailed above and with the conditions discussed, the proposal complies with the requirements for Site Design Review approval. 2.5 The Planning Commission finds that the proposal satisfies all applicable standards specific to Cottage Housing Development. The Planning Commission finds the proposal complies with the allowed development density, floor area ratio, height and lot coverage standards, with 12 cottages proposed for a 54,722 square foot parcel and a combined floor area ratio of 0.18. 75 percent of the proposed cottages are 800 square feet in gross habitable floor area, all of the cottages are proposed with roof peaks less than 25 feet from grade, exhibits have been provided to demonstrate that cottages within the development will not cast a shadow upon the roof of another cottage, and cottages along the north property line are noted as being design to comply with Solar Setback Standard A. Lot coverage is proposed at 42 percent and is within the allowed standards for the R-1-5 zoning district. The Commission further finds that building separations are equal or greater than the six-foot minimum for cottages. With the exception of the attached units all cottages are separated by at least nine feet. The Commission finds that any fencing will comply with the limitations of the fence code and will not exceed four feet on interior areas adjacent to open space except as allowed for deer fencing, and a condition the fencing limitations. PA-T2-2020-00017 June 9, 2020 Page 16 The Planning Commission finds that the existing driveways separation between the subject property and 732 Sylvia Street to the north is non-conforming, and will not be made more non-conforming with the proposed development here. The Commission finds that the driveway and parking area proposed meet the vehicle area design standards in AMC 18.4.3. All spaces are to be standard nine-foot by 18-foot spaces with a 24-foot back-up area provided. The Commission further finds that the proposal meets the off-street parking requirements of AMC 18.4.3.040, providing 14 spaces for the 12 cottages in a single, consolidated parking area. Parking is to be provided in carports on each side of the drive aisle, and the carports will include solar panels as for the project. The driveway is proposed to be improved to 20-feet in width which complies with the minimum driveway width for access to a parking area for 14-parking spaces. The driveway has been designed to accommodate a fire truck turn-around, and will be designated as such on-site, as required by the Ashland Fire Department. The property has frontage along Alicia Avenue. There are no street connections identified in the vicinity Street Dedication Map, and adjacent development, natural features and topography pose difficulties for future street extension. The applicant has proposed a walkway along the east side of the driveway extending from the street into and around the development for the use of residents and guests of the proposed cottage housing development. The Planning Commission finds that 14,701 square feet, or 26.86 percent of the site, is proposed in open space, where a minimum of 20 percent is required. The proposed common area open spaces consist of turf areas with pathways for easy access to and from the covered parking spaces to the cottage units. To the east of the parking area, a large landscape common area with decomposed granite paths at the edges of the estimated wetland buffer zone is proposed. This common area is connected to the formal walkways and a 20-foot turf strip to a community garden area that is along the west property line. A total area of 14,701 square feet of the lot area is dedicated to open spaces, which include 12,028 square feet of open space plus the possible wetland and its buffer which total 2,673 square feet in area. The Commission finds that the open spaces have no dimensions of less than 20 feet, and are connected with five-foot walkways. The open space is generally centrally located, and all units abut common open spaces that are 20-feet in width or greater. The cottages are arranged around the edges of the property with the primary common open space generally centered on the site. Eight of the units abut this open space. Additionally, along the north and south sides of the parking area, a 20-foot landscaped area with common walkway is proposed, and Lot #6 abuts the community garden open space. Of the 12 units proposed, seven directly abut the larger open spaces and all abut an at least 20-foot wide common open space. The Commission further finds that the common open space is separated from the private outdoor areas. Private outdoor areas are proposed adjacent to the units with pathways that connect the entrances of the units to and through the open space with a walkway leading to the parking areas and public street beyond. Each cottage unit has a private, useable outdoor area of at least 200 square feet which includes garden areas, and porches or patios. These private areas do not have any dimensions less than eight feet. Low PA-T2-2020-00017 June 9, 2020 Page 17 fencing and landscaping will provide visual boundaries around the perimeter of the common areas and between the private yards. The Commission finds that the development proposes on-site infiltration through an on-site catchment system that is a part of the projects low impact development storm water measures detailed in the civil and landscape drawings. Landscape garden bed filtration systems, permeable walkways and rain barrels are to be provided to allow for natural filtration and on-site filtration, and site drainage has been engineered to be filtered per regional (RVSS) standards with a StormTech system which, based on percolation rate of the soils and the storm water event studies, will retain and regenerate all storm water on-site. Based on the foregoing, The Planning Commission concludes that, as detailed above and with the conditions discussed, the proposal is consistent with the Cottage Housing Development Standards. 2.6 The Planning Commission notes that there are six trees on the subject property including: a 20- inch Plum which is proposed to be removed due to its location relative to necessary driveway improvements; a 14-inch unidentified deciduous tree; a 10-inch Walnut; an eight-inch Willow; a ten-inch Willow; and a 36-inch multi-trunked Willow which is proposed to be removed as a hazard tree. The application also notes that there is a 14-inch Pine on the adjacent property near the west property line. The Commission also notes that the application includes an assessment of the trees by Christopher John, a certified arborist with Canopy, LLC. The project arborist notes that the large Willow has three trunks (21½-inches, 24-inches and 30-inches) in close proximity to one another, and that all three exhibit evidence of previous large limb failure, extensive rot and fungal growth, and multiple structural defects including cracks, and overall poor health. His assessment is that this Willow is not suitable for an urban setting and poses a hazard for people on the property, all the more so with further development of the site. He recommends that this Willow be removed as a hazard and replaced with a suitable tree. This tree is located within the buffer zone of the possible wetland identified, however hazard tree removal is exempt from regulation under the Water Resources Protection Zones (WRPZ) Ordinance in AMC 18.3.11. The Commission further notes that with regard to the 20-inch Plum located near the northern entrance to the property, the arborist indicates that the tree is quite large for its species, and as the species is prone to do it has been losing limbs. He goes on to emphasize that Plums require maintenance that this tree has not received and as a result it has a poor form and has experienced limb failure. He concludes that this combined with the location relative to the driveway and parking lead him to recommend removal and replacement of the tree. The applicant notes that removal of this tree allows the site to develop in a manner consistent with applicable Site Design standards, and that the removal will not have any impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees, windbreaks, or tree densities. The Commission finds that 23 new trees are identified in the Landscape Plan provided (Sheet L-101), which more than satisfies the one-for-one mitigation requirement. The Commission further notes that the Ashland Tree Commission was unable to convene its regular the Coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak, which suspended advisory commission meetings. As such there is no Tree Commission recommendation. As provided in AMC 2.25.040, the failure of the Tree PA-T2-2020-00017 June 9, 2020 Page 18 Commission to make a recommendation on any individual planning action shall not invalidate that action. The Commission finds that the remaining trees which are to be preserved are proposed to be protected with six-foot tall chain link fencing as recommended by the arborist and Preservation & Protection Ordinance (AMC 18.4.5). In addition, the arborist has recommended that the applicant avoid soil compaction within the tree protection zones, provide for root protection during any work within tree protection zones, and periodically water preserved trees from during the warmer months (June through September). Conditions have been included to require tree protection fencing a revised Tree Protection Plan for inclusion with the Final Plan submittal. The Planning Commission concludes that as detailed above and with the conditions discussed, the proposal complies with the requirements for Tree Protection and for Tree Removal Permits to remove two trees. SECTION 3. DECISION 3.1 Based on the record of the Public Hearing on this matter, the Planning Commission concludes that the proposal for Outline Plan subdivision and Site Design Review approvals for a 12-unit/13-lot Cottage Housing development, and Tree Removal Permit to remove two trees is supported by evidence contained within the whole record. The project is intended to as a zero net energy development with solar panels installed on the two carport buildings, and will include 12 modestly sized units developed around a generous central open space which the type of development envisioned with the adoption of the Cottage Housing ordinance. The Commission believes that the development merits approval with the conditions detailed below. Therefore, based on our overall conclusions, and upon the proposal being subject to each of the following conditions, we approve Planning Action #PA-T2-2020-00017. Further, if any one or more of the conditions below are found to be invalid, for any reason whatsoever, then Planning Action #2020-00017 is denied. The following are the conditions and they are attached to the approval: 1. That all proposals of the applicant shall be conditions of approval unless otherwise modified herein, including that no ground-disturbing activities are to take place within the potential wetland area or its associated buffer until it has been determined whether the potential wetland is jurisdictional and concurrence has been obtained from the Oregon Department of State Lands (DSL). 2. That any new addresses shall be assigned by City of Ashland Engineering Department. Street and subdivision names shall be subject to City of Ashland Engineering Department review for compliance with applicable naming policies. 3. That permits shall be obtained from the Ashland Public Works Department prior to any work in the public right of way, including but not limited to permits for new driveway approaches or any necessary encroachments. PA-T2-2020-00017 June 9, 2020 Page 19 4.That a Tree Verification Permit shall be applied for and approved by the Ashland Planning Division prior to any site work including excavation, staging or storage of materials, or excavation permit issuance. The Tree Verification Permit is to inspect the identification of the two trees to be removed and the installation of tree protection fencing for trees to be protected on adjacent properties. Standard tree protection consists of chain link fencing six feet tall and installed in accordance with the requirements of AMC 18.4.5.030.B. No construction shall occur within the tree protection zone including dumping or storage of materials such as building supplies, soil, waste, equipment, or parked vehicles. 5.That the applicant shall obtain approval of Demolition/Relocation Review Permits through the City of Ashland Building Division prior to demolition of existing structures on the subject property if found to be necessary by the Building Official. 6.That a Fire Prevention and Control Plan addressing the General Fuel Modification Area requirements in AMC 18.3.10.100.A.2 of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance shall be provided prior to bringing combustible materials onto the property, and any new landscaping proposed shall comply with these standards and shall not include plants listed on the Prohibited Flammable Plant List per Resolution 2018-028. 7.That the Final Plan submittal shall include: a.That draft CC&Rs for the Homeowner's Association shall be provided for review and approval of the Staff Advisor with the Final P responsibility for the maintenance of all common use-improvements including driveways, parking areas, carports, landscaping/open space, and storm water facilities. The cottage housing fencing limitations, floor a b.The approved Tree Protection Plan and accompanying standards for compliance shall be noted in the CC&Rs. The CC&Rs must state that deviations from the plan shall be considered a violation of the Planning Application approval and therefore subject to penalties described in the Ashland Municipal Code. c.A wetland delineation with concurrence from the Oregon Department of State Lands (DSL). If the delineation identifies a jurisdictional wetland, the wetland and its protection zone shall be clearly identified in the Final Plan drawings. d.A phasing plan for the completion of the development. e.Final site lighting details. f.Final lot coverage calculations demonstrating how lot coverage is to comply with the applicable coverage allowances of the zoning district. Lot coverage includes all building footprints, driveways, parking areas and other circulation areas, and any other areas other than natural landscaping. g.All easements including but not limited to public and private utilities, irrigation, mutual access and circulation, and fire apparatus access shall be indicated on the Final Plan submittal for review by the Planning, Engineering, Building and Fire Departments. h.Final electric service, utility and civil engineering plans including. All civil infrastructure shall be installed by the applicants, inspected and approved prior to the submittal of the final survey plat for review and signature. PA-T2-2020-00017 June 9, 2020 Page 20 i.The utility plan shall include the location of connections to all public facilities including the locations of water lines and meter sizes, fire hydrants, sanitary sewer mains and services, manholes and clean-outs, and storm drainage pipes and catch basins, along with any backflow prevention measures required by the Water Department because there is a non-potable water source (irrigation) on the property. Any required private or public utility easements shall be delineated on the civil plans. ii.The final electric design and distribution plan shall include load calculations and locations of all primary and secondary services including transformers, cabinets and all other necessary equipment with the Final Plan application. This plan must be reviewed and approved by the Electric Department prior to the signature of the final survey plat. Transformers and cabinets shall be located in areas least visible from streets and outside of vision clearance areas, while considering the access needs of the Electric Department. Electric services shall be installed underground to serve all lots within the applicable phase prior to submittal of the final survey plat for review and signature. At the discretion of the Staff Advisor, a bond may be posted for the full amount of underground service installation (with necessary permits and connection fees paid) as an alternative to installation of service prior to signature of the final survey plat. In either case, the electric service plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Ashland Electric Department and Ashland Engineering Division prior to installation. iii.The storm drainage plan shall detail the location and final engineering for all storm drainage improvements associated with the project, and shall be submitted for review and approval by the Departments of Public Works, Planning and Building Divisions. The storm drainage plan shall demonstrate that post-development peak flows are less than or equal to the pre-development peak flow for the site as a whole, and that storm water quality mitigation has been addressed through the final design. i.A final grading and erosion control plan. j.A final Tree Protection Plan addressing the trees on the property to be preserved and trees on adjacent properties within 15 feet of the property line. The plan shall identify the location and placement of fencing around the drip lines of trees identified for preservation as required in AMC 18.4.5.030.B.1. The amount of fill and grading within the drip line shall be minimized. Cuts within the drip line shall be noted on the tree protection plan, and shall be executed by handsaw and kept to a minimum. No fill shall be placed around the trunk/crown root. The recommendations of the project arborist in terms of soil compaction, root protection and periodic water shall be incorporated into this plan. k.A final size- and species-specific landscaping plan including irrigation details satisfying the Water Conserving Landscaping Guideline in AMC 18.4.4.030.I. New landscaping shall comply with the General Fuel Modification Area requirements and shall not include plants listed on the Prohibited Flammable Plant List adopted by Resolution #2018-028. All landscaping shall be installed according to the approved plan, and tied into the existing irrigation system, inspected and approved prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. PA-T2-2020-00017 June 9, 2020 Page 21 l.That the requirements of the Ashland Fire Department relating to fire hydrant distance, spacing and clearance; fire flow; fire apparatus access, approach, turn-around, and firefighter access pathway; approved addressing; fire sprinkler and extinguishers as applicable; limits on fencing and gates which would impair access; and wildfire hazard area requirements shall be satisfactorily addressed in the Final Plan submittals. Fire Department requirements shall be included in the civil drawings, and a Fire Prevention and Control Plan addressing the General Fuel Modification Area requirements of AMC 18.3.10.100.A.2. shall be included with the Final Plan submittal. 8.A final survey plat shall be submitted for the review and approval of the Staff Advisor within 12 months and approved by the City of Ashland within 18 months of this approval. Prior to submittal of the final subdivision survey plat for review and signature: a.The final survey plat shall include a deed restriction notifying future property owners that the size of a cottage dwelling may not be increased beyond the maximum floor area in subsection 18.2.3.090.C.2.a. This size limitation shall also be addressed in the b.All easements including but not limited to public and private utilities, mutual access, and fire apparatus access shall be indicated on the final survey plat as required by the Ashland Engineering Division. c.The driveway approach shall be installed under permit from the Public Works Department and in accordance with the approved plan, inspected and approved prior to the submittal of the final survey plat for signature. d.Subdivision infrastructure improvements including but not limited to utility installations shall be completed according to approved plans prior to submittal of the final survey plat for review and signature. e.The driveway shall be paved to 20-foot width, a vertical clearance of 13-feet, 6-inches and be able to withstand 44,000 lbs. The flag drive shall be constructed so as to prevent surface drainage from flowing over the private property lines and/or the public way. f.Electric services shall be installed underground to serve all lots, inspected and approved. The electric service plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Ashland Electric, Building, Planning and Engineering Divisions prior to installation. g.Sanitary sewer laterals and water services including connection with meters at the street shall be installed to serve all lots, inspected and approved. h.The property owner shall sign in favor of Local Improvement Districts (LIDs) for the future street improvements, including but not limited to paving, sidewalks, parkrow with irrigated street trees, curb, gutter, storm drainage and undergrounding of utilities, for Alicia and Oak Lawn Avenues. This LID agreement shall be signed and recorded concurrently with the final survey plat. Nothing in this condition is intended to prohibit an owner/developer, their successors or assigns from exercising their rights to freedom of speech and expression by orally objecting or participating in the LID hearing or to take advantage of any protection afforded any party by City ordinances and resolutions. 9.That the building permit submittals shall include: PA-T2-2020-00017 June 9, 2020 Page 22 a.Final permit drawings addressing all requirements of the Building Division, including but not limited to that the attached units or any units where exterior walls are less than three feet from a property line shall address fire separation requirements, and fire-rated assemblies for attached units shall include a sound transmission class rating of 45 for air- borne sound. b.Identification of all easements, including public and private utility easements, mutual access easements and fire apparatus access easements. c.Solar setback calculations demonstrating that the northern units comply with Solar Setback Standard A in the formula \[(Height 6)/(0.445 + Slope) = Required Solar Setback\] and elevations or cross section drawings clearly identifying the highest shadow producing point(s) and the height(s) from natural grade. Other cottage housing units shall provide demonstration of compliance with the Cottage Housing Development Standards requiring that the not cast a shadow on the roof area of another cottage. d.That storm water from all new impervious surfaces and runoff associated with peak rainfalls must be collected on site and channeled to the City storm water collection system through the curb or gutter at a public street, a public storm pipe, an approved public drainage way, or through an approved alternative in accordance with Ashland Building Division policy BD-PP-0029. On-site collection systems shall be detailed on the building permit submittals. June 9, 2020 Planning Commission Approval Date PA-T2-2020-00017 June 9, 2020 Page 23 210 Alicia Street The Cottages at Alicia David Scott Construction Received 4.20.2020 March 6, 2020 Twelve Unit, Thirteen Lot, Performance Standards Subdivision for the development of a Cottage Housing community. Subject Property Address: 210 Alicia Street Map & Tax Lot: 39 1E 04 BD; Tax Lot 1700 Comprehensive Plan Designation: Single Family Residential Zoning: R-1-5 Adjacent Zones: R-1-5 Overlays: Physical and Environmental Constraints Water Resource Protection Zone (potential wetland) Wildfire Overlay Development Property Owner: David Scott Construction 876 Clay Street Ashland, OR 97520 Site Layout and Design: RLA Design LLC 176 Harrison Street Ashland, OR 97520 Engineering Services: KAS and Associates 304 S Holly Street Medford, OR 97501 Applicant: Rogue Planning & Development Services, LLC Amy Gunter 33 N Central Avenue; Suite 213 Medford, OR 97501 Received 4.20.2020 Request: The request is for approval of a twelve-unit, thirteen-lot, Performance Standards Subdivision for the development of a cottage housing subdivision on a partially vacant property. Property Description: The subject property is on the south side of Alicia Street where Alicia Street turns into Sylvia Street. The property is to the east of Oak Street and south of the Oak Court Subdivision. The property is zoned single family residential, R-1-5. All surrounding properties are zoned Single Family Residential, and R-1-5, Performance Standards Overlay. The adjacent properties are generally improved with single family residences of various sizes and out-buildings. The property has 40-feet of frontage on Alicia Street, extends approximately 200-feet to the south, where the property widens to 280-feet of width, east / west. The property area is 1.26 acres (54,722 square feet) in area. There is a 1,183 square foot, single-story, residence with a 340 square foot attached garage. The manufactured home was constructed in 2003 per the building permit dataon the property. There is a small shed and a small barn structure on the site. These structures will be removed from the property. The east property line is to the west of the break in the slope where the steep slopes downhill towards Riverwalk and the Mace Property, a new City of Ashland park that will extend the Riverwalk Park to the north are present. There are six-trees that are more than six-inches DBH on the subject property. There is one larger stature Pine tree on the adjacent property to the west. There is a 20-inch deciduous near the west property line. Another 14-inch deciduous tree is present further west. A 14-inch pine tree is near the west property line on the adjacent property to the west. On the west side of the property there is a 10-inch walnut, and three willows, eight-inch, ten-inch and a 36-inch DBH willow tree. Received 4.20.2020 A possible wetland has been preliminarily assessed by a wetland biologist, Northwest Biological Consulting. The “wetland” area has formed primarily due to the conditions of the Million Irrigation ditch which passes through the property and continues downhill to the end users pond on the adjacent property to the east. See the attached letter which discusses the wetland studies which have been conducted and the next steps for the wetlands delineation. The lot is accessed from the south side of Alicia Street via a gravel driveway. Alicia Street and Sylvia Street are classified as neighborhood streets according to the Transportation System Plan. The streets are improved with asphalt pavement, but lack curb, gutter, sidewalks and street trees. There is a 6-inch water main in Sylvia and a 4-inch water main in Alicia Street. There is a fire hydrant across Alicia Street from the driveway entrance. There is a 6-inch sanitary sewer main in Sylvia Street. There is a 10-inch storm sewer line in Sylvia Street. Avista gas, and Ashland Fiber Network are also available to serve the property. Electric service is underground from primary services on Oak Street. The infrastructure is proposed to be extended underground to the site. Received 4.20.2020 Proposal: The request is for approval of a twelve-unit, thirteen-lot, cottage housing subdivision and a simultaneous Outline Plan for a Performance Standards Subdivision in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) 18.2.3.090 and 18.3.9. Design Considerations: The proposed development utilizes the Performance Standards Option which allows for the development of Cottage Housing developments. The proposal is for 12, two-bedroom cottage units. There are three cottage designs within the subdivision. Lots #1, #6 and #12 are proposed as 999 square foot, two-bedroom, two bath structures. There are four, duplex units. They are proposed as two- bedroom, one bath, 800 square foot units. The other five units are proposed as detached, two-bedroom, two bath 800 square foot units. Each unit is proposed to have a recessed, covered entry. The units are proposed with an open floor plan. The larger units are intended to have interior design to allow for ADA accessibility. All units are proposed to include many of the Lifelong Housing Certification features and will works towards Lifelong Housing Certification in the final house design. Conceptual elevations for cottage residences have been provided with the proposal. The units are proposed to be single story with a low pitched, shed roofs. The units feature elements of mid-century modern, and pacific northwest inspired architecture. The proposed development has been designed as an extremely energy efficient, zero net energy with remote metering. The covered carports are proposed to have over 150 photovoltaic panels to provide all the energy the units need plus the ability to provide back to the grid. The electrical engineering is considering the installation of a car charging station. The site layout and structures comply with the purpose and intent of the Cottage Housing ordinance, and furthers the goals of the Comprehensive Plan of the City that seeks to provide additional, small, energy efficient, community oriented housing within the compact urban form that is bound by the City of Ashland Urban Growth Boundary. The common open space areas will be distinguished from the cottage unit private areas with fencing that is not more than four-feet in solid panel fencing. For the purposes of solar setbacks, the property has an approximately four -percent slope downhill to the north. The proposed structures are single story with vaulted ceilings are limited in height and demonstrate compliance with the required solar setback standards that prevent shading of an adjacent cottage roof line. The north units comply with solar setbacks along the north property line. None of the structures will exceed the maximum building height of 18-feet nor the maximum peak height of 25-feet. Received 4.20.2020 Tree Removal and Tree Preservation: There are six-trees that are more than six-inches DBH on the subject property. There is one larger stature Pine tree on the adjacent property to the west. There is a 20-inch deciduous near the west property line. Another 14-inch deciduous tree is present further west. A 14-inch pine tree is near the west property line on the adjacent property to the west. On the west side of the property there is a 10-inch walnut, and three willows, eight-inch, ten-inch and a 36-inch DBH willow tree. The 36-inch willow tree has been evaluated by an arborist who has determined that the tree is in a hazardous condition and must be removed. The tree is within the possible wetland buffer zone. The removal of hazardous trees is exempt from the regulated activities within the Water Resource Protection Zone. The 20-inch deciduous tree near the west property line is proposed for removal due to the installation of the driveway. Tree protection fencing in the form of six-foot tall chain link fences, set in accordance with the proposed protection plan provided with the application will provide adequate protection to the sites remaining trees. Open Space Development: Due to the conditions of the Million Irrigation ditch which passes through the property and continues downhill to the end users pond on the adjacent property to the east, a possible wetland type of area has formed. A wetlands biologist has been retained who has done some preliminary fieldwork and indicated the edge of the dripline of the large willow tree, two smaller willows and a small walnut tree is the approximate edge of the future 20-foot buffer of any potential wetland. Further studies are being conducted this winter/spring and a hydrology report and final wetlands delineation will be made. As noted, the proposed layout provides adequate spacing (wetland buffer area) from the areas of disturbance for the proposed cottage house, open space and parking area construction. The cottages are arranged in a horseshoe around the edges of the property. The main common open space generally centered on the site There are eight units that abut the common open space. Additionally, along the north and south sides of the parking area a 20-foot landscape area with common walkway is proposed. Lot #6 abut the community garden open space. Of the 12 units proposed, seven directly abut large, open spaces and all units abut an at least 20-foot wide common open space. The proposal accounts for a total of more than the required common open space areas by providing 14,701 square feet of open space. There is a dispersed common area for garden plots north or Lot #6. All common areas and the units abutting are connected with five-foot wide walkways. The large common open space area does not have any dimension of less than 20-feet, common open spaces of 20-feet are present along the north and south side of the carport structures as well. Received 4.20.2020 The site plan demonstrates that each unit also has 200 square feet of private open space areas, no dimensions of the useable, private open space are less than eight feet in area. Parking, Access, Circulation: The proposed development requires 14 parking spaces. One space for each unit that is 800-square feet and 3.5 spaces for the units for a total of 14 parkingspaces. The parking area is consolidated in the center of the parcel. The proposed parking will be covered with carport structures. The structures are proposed to have solar panels. The proposal does not involve the creation or improvement to a public street and the Cottage Housing section of the code allows for four or more units accessed via a shared driveway. The driveway and the parking area are proposed to be improved to the applicable standards for a parking area as per AMC 18.4.3. Public right of way improvements: The proposal to provide the driveway with an asphalt connection to the existing edge of street, a five- foot wide sidewalk is proposed along the east side of the access driveway is proposed to terminate into the existing street asphalt. There are not sidewalks, parkrows, curb or gutter proposed in the public right- of-way as the existing streets have no improvements, and the frontage width of the property is 34’-4” with 30-feet of hardscape proposed. On the following pages are the written findings addressing the applicable criteria from the Ashland Municipal Code, the code is in font. The applicant’s findings are in Calibri font. Times New Roman Received 4.20.2020 Findings of Fact addressing the criteria from the Ashland Land Use Ordinance 18.2.2.030 Allowed Uses A. Uses Allowed in Base Zones. Allowed uses include those that are permitted, permitted subject to special use standards, and allowed subject to approval of a conditional use permit. A Cottage Housing development is a Special Permitted Use in the R-1-5 zone. 18.2.3.090 – Cottage Housing Finding: The subject property proposed for development of the twelve-unit, thirteen lot cottage housing development. The layout is compatible with the adjacent neighborhood development pattern. Large setbacks that provide more than 15-foot setback along the north property line, there are six foot, or greater setbacks on the east and west sides and a ten-foot, rear yard setback from the south property line. The proposed units are aesthetically pleasing, are proposed to exceed building code energy efficiency standards and to provide age-in-place housing. The common open spaces exceed the area and dimensions and provide large, common outdoor spaces. The open spaces, common areas and utilities will have access, maintenance and other necessary protections through the establishment of the Homeowner’s Associate and the Covenants, Conditions and Regulations. A local land use attorney has begun drafting the easements and the HOA and CC&R documents. The proposed cottage housing development adds a necessary housing inventory to the city of Ashland limited supply of small, single family residential units that provide ownership opportunities. According to the standards, the development of cottage housing also requires a Site Design Review under chapter 18.5.2. B. Exceptions and Variances. Requests to depart from the requirements of this chapter are subject to , Exception to the Site Development and Design the approval criteria under subsection18.5.2.050.E Standards. Finding: No exceptions or variances are requested. C.Development Standards. Cottage housing developments shall meet all of the following requirements: 1. Cottage Housing Density. The permitted number of units and minimum lot areas shall be as follows: Received 4.20.2020 Zone: R-1-5; 1 cottage dwelling unit per 2,500 square feet of lot area; Minimum number of units: 3; Maximum number of units: 12; Minimum lot size: 7,500; Maximum FAR: .35 Finding: The 54,722 square foot property is zoned single family residential. The density of the property cannot exceed 12 cottage units. The proposal complies with the standards. Cottage Housing Details: Lot area: 54,722 square feet Density: 12: maximum number of units Floor Area Ratio (.35 FAR): 54722 X .35 = 19,152 square feet Proposed: 10,197 square feet Common Area (20%): 10,944.40 square feet Proposed: 14,701 square feet Private outdoor area: 200 square feet with no dimension of less than 8’ 2,400 square feet total Lot Coverage (50%): 27,361 square feet Proposed: 22,905 square feet 2. Building and Site Design. a. Maximum Floor Area Ratio. The combined gross floor area of all cottages is not to exceed a 0.35 floor area ratio (FAR). Finding: The combined gross floor area of all the cottages does not exceed .35 floor area ratio (FAR). The maximum floor area ratio (FAR) is 19,152 square feet. The proposed FAR is 10,197 square feet square feet in area. b. Maximum Floor Area. The maximum gross habitable floor area for 75 percent or more of the cottages, within developments of four units or greater, shall be 800 square feet or less per unit. At least two of the cottages within three-unit cottage housing developments shall have a gross habitable floor area of 800 square feet or less. The gross habitable floor area for any individual cottage unit shall not exceed 1,000 square feet. Finding: Received 4.20.2020 Three of the proposed cottages have 999 square feet. Nine cottages are 800 square feet square feet in area. This is 75 percent of the total number of units. The proposed gross habitable floor area complies with the standards. c. Height. Building height of all structures shall not exceed 18 feet. The ridge ofa pitched roof may extend up to 25 feet above grade. Finding: The proposed 999 square foot buildings are an average of 14-feet, 7-inches in average height. The ridge of the roof is 21-feet, 11-inches. The detached, 800 square foot structures are proposed to be an average height of 12-feet and a peak of less than 18-feet. The proposed structures comply with the solar setback standards within the development and will not cast a shadow upon the roof of another cottage within the development. The proposed structures on the north property line also are proposed to comply with the solar setback standard A along the north property line in accordance with AMC 18.4.8. d. Lot Coverage. Lot coverage shall meet the requirements of the underlying zone outlined in Table 18.2.5.030.A. Finding: The proposed lot coverage following the site development is 22,905 square feet in area. This complies with the maximum lot coverage allowed in the zone of 27,361 square feet. e. Building Separation. Finding: The proposed separation between the buildings exceeds the minimum separation of six feet. Excepting the four attached units, the other cottages are more than nine feet separated. f. Fences. Finding: The fences that will separate the private yard areas from the open spaces and common areas will not exceed the four feet on interior areas adjacent to open space except as allowed for deer fencing. Received 4.20.2020 3. Access, Circulation, and Off-Street Parking Requirements. Notwithstanding the provisions of chapter 18.3.9, Performance Standards Option and PSO Overlay, and part 18.4, Site Development and Design Standards, cottage housing developments are subject to the following requirements: a. Public Street Dedications. Except for those street connections identified on the Street Dedication Map, the Commission may reduce or waive the requirement to dedicate and construct a public street as required in section 18.4.6.040 upon finding that the cottage housing development meets connectivity and block length standards by providing public access for pedestrians and bicyclists with an alley, shared street, or multi-use path connecting the public street to adjoining properties. Finding: The property has frontage along Alicia Street. There is not an east / west street connection proposed on the city of Ashland Street Dedication Maps on or adjacent to the subject property due to the presence of adjacent development and topographical and natural feature constraints that would prevent cross connections via public streets. A sidewalk along the east side of the driveway extends from the public street, to and around and development is proposed. The pathway does not provide a connection to the adjacent properties of the subject property because the adjacent properties are privately owned and developed in a manner that prevent connectivity. The pathway is not proposed as a public walkway system but is available for the use of the residents and guests of the proposed cottage housing development. b. Driveways and Parking Areas. Driveway and parking areas shall meet the vehicle area design standards of chapter 18.4.3. Finding: The existing driveways areexisting, non-conforming setback from the property to the northeast. The non-conforming driveway will not be made more non-conforming through the proposed development. The driveway is proposed to be improved to 20-feet in width. This width complies with the minimum driveway width for access to a parking area for 14-parking spaces. The driveway is proposed to accommodate a fire truck turn around. The turnaround area will be signed or marked pavement as required by the Ashland Fire Department. i. Parking shall meet the minimum parking ratios per section 18.4.3.040. Finding: There are nine cottages that are 800 square feet in area, each requires one parking space. There are three cottages that are 999 square feet in area. These units require 1.5 parking spaces each. There is 13.5 parking spaces required, 14 are provided. This complies with the standards. Received 4.20.2020 ii. Parking shall be consolidated to minimize the number of parking areas, and shall be located on the cottage housing development property. Finding: The parking area required for the cottage housing development is consolidated into one, parking area. The parking area is proposed to be located in the center of the property and be covered. iii.Off-street parking can be located within an accessory structure such as a multi-auto carport or garage, but such multi-auto structures shall not be attached to individual cottages. Single-car garages and carports may be attached to individual cottages. Uncovered parking is also permitted provided that off-street parking is screened in accordance with the applicable landscape and screening standards of chapter 18.4.4. Finding: A multi-vehicle carport structure is proposed for the 14-parking spaces. The carports are not attached to the cottages. 4. Open Space. Open space shall meet all of the following standards: a. A minimum of 20 percent of the total lot area is required as open space. Finding: The proposed common open spaces areas provided exceed the required 10,944 square feet in area. The common area open spaces consist of turf areas with pathways for easy access to and from the covered parking spaces to the cottage units. This turf area and the walkways for ease provides ample area for residents to interact on a daily basis. The trash enclosure and the bicycle parking structure are accessed from the open space area and the parking area. To the west of the parking area, a large landscape common area with decomposed granite paths at the edges of the estimated wetland buffer zone is proposed. This common area is connected to the formal walkways and the 20-foot turf strip to the community garden area that is along the east property line. There is a total area of 14,701 square feet of the lot area preserved as open spaces. The common open space area is 12,028 square feet and the estimated wetland and wetland buffer is 2,673 square feet in area. Received 4.20.2020 b. Open space(s) shall have no dimension that is less than 20 feet unless otherwise granted an exception by the hearing authority. Connections between separated open spaces, not meeting this dimensional requirement, shall not contribute toward meeting theminimum open space area. Finding: The open spaces have no dimensions of less than 20-feet. They are connected via five-foot walkways. The common area open spaces consist of turf areas with pathways for easy access to and from the covered parking spaces to the cottage units. This turf area and the walkways for ease provides ample area for residents to interact on a daily basis. The trash enclosure and the bicycle parking structure are accessed from the open space area and the parking area. To the west of the parking area, a large landscape common area with decomposed granite paths at the edges of the estimated wetland buffer zone is proposed. This common area is connected to the formal walkways and the 20-foot turf strip to the community garden area that is along the east property line. There is a total area of 14,701 square feet of the lot area preserved as open spaces. The common open space area is 12,028 square feet. The common open space protects the estimated wetland and wetland buffer which is approximatly 2,673 square feet in area. c. Shall consist of a central space, or series of interconnected spaces. Finding: The open space location is centrally located. All units abut common open spaces that are 20-feet in width or greater. d. Physically constrainedareas such as wetlands or steep slopes cannot be counted towards the open space requirement. Finding: The open space area required is 10,292 square feet. There is a total area of 14,701 square feet of the lot area preserved as open spaces. The common open space area that is not physically constrained, is 12,028 square feet. The common open space protects the estimated wetland area, and the 20-foot wetland buffer, which is approximatly 2,673 square feet in area. e. At least 50 percent of the cottage units shall abut an open space. Finding: Received 4.20.2020 The cottages are arranged in a horseshoe around the edges of the property. The main common open space generally centered on the site There are eight units that abut the common open space. Additionally, along the north and south sides of the parking area a 20-foot landscape area with common walkway is proposed. Lot #6 abut the community garden open space. Of the 12 units proposed, seven directly abut large, open spaces and all units abut an at least 20-foot wide common open space. f. The open space shall be distinguished from the private outdoor areas with a walkway, fencing, landscaping, berm, or similar method to provide a visual boundary around the perimeter of the common area. Finding: The open space is separate from the private outdoor areas. Private outdoor areas are proposed adjacent to the units with pathways that connect the entrances of the units to and through the open space with a walkway leading to the parking areas and public street beyond. Low fencing and landscaping will provide visual boundaries around the perimeter of the common areas and between the private yards. g. Parking areas and driveways do not qualify as open space. Finding: The parking areas and driveway are not included in the open space area calculations. 5. Private Outdoor Area. Each residential unit in a cottage housing development shall have a private outdoor area. Private outdoor areas shall be separate from the open space to create a sense of separate ownership. a. Each cottage unit shall be provided with a minimum of 200 square feet of usable private outdoor area. Private outdoor areas may include gardening areas, patios, or porches. Finding: Each cottage unit has a 200-square foot (or more) area of useable private outdoor area. These areas will include garden areas, and porches or patios. b. No dimension of the private outdoor area shall be less than eight feet. Finding: All 200-square foot private outdoor areas do not have any dimension of less than eight feet. Received 4.20.2020 6. Common Buildings, Existing Nonconforming Structures and Accessory Residential Units. a. Common Buildings. Up to 25 percent of the required common open space, but no greater than 1,500 square feet, may be utilized as a community building for the sole use of the cottage housing residents. Common buildings shall not be attached to cottages. Finding: Not applicable. b. Carports and Garage Structures. Consolidated carports or garage structures, provided per subsection 18.2.3.090.C.3.b, are not subject to the area limitations for common buildings. Finding: Two carports that will have solar panels that allow this project to provide a consolidated solar generating station to achieve zero net energy and according to the solar installer, this will be one of the most efficient, residential solar generating facilities in the Rogue Valley. 7. Storm Water and Low-Impact Development. a. Developments shall include open space and landscaped features as a component of the project’s storm water low-impact development techniques including natural filtration and on-site infiltration of storm water. Finding: On-site infiltration has been proposed through an on-site catchment system that is a part of the projects storm water, low-impact development techniquesthat will be provided for thorough the Civil Engineering and Landscape design. Landscape planters and rain barrels where allowed will be provided to allow for natural filtration and on-site filtration. As designed by the Civil Engineer, the drainage is proposed to be filtered per the RVSS standards through a storm tech system and percolation rate of the soils and the storm water event studies, it has been designed that all storm water be retained and regenerated on-site. b. Low-impact development techniques for storm water management shall be used wherever possible. Such techniques may include the use of porous solid surfaces in parking areas and walkways, directing roof drains and parking lot runoff to landscape beds, green or living roofs, and rain barrels. Finding: Received 4.20.2020 Landscape garden bed filtration systems, rain barrels and permeable surfaces for the walkways will be developed for the units where possible for low impact development compliance. As designed by the Civil Engineer, the drainage is proposed to be filtered per the RVSS standards and be captured, treated, detained and regenerated the property. This is the preferred method of storm water development and low tech technique to allow for infiltration. c. Cottages shall be located to maximize the infiltration of storm water runoff. In this zone, cottages shall be grouped and parking areas shall be located to preserve as much contiguous, permanently undeveloped open space and native vegetation as reasonably possible when considering all standards in this chapter. Finding: The cottages are grouped in a manner that preserves a substantial amount of connected open space. There are four connected units, the remaining units are spaced a larger distance that required, but the parking is consolidated thus demonstrating compliance with the standards. More than 2,600 square feet in area is preserved under the guidance of the wetlands professional as potential wetland and wetland buffer preserving a larger area of undeveloped open space and native vegetation. 18.3.9.030 Performance Standards Overlay: The subject property is within of the PSO Overlay. The character of the proposed development preserves a large hillside that overlooks the Bear Creek Valley with the development of small cottage units preserving a large area of potential wetland and buffer area within a large, common open space. The new units are energy efficient, architecturally creative, and use low impact development innovations in their design and construction. The layout takes advantage of the natural features of the landscape to their greatest advantage by providing a large area of multi-functional open space. As allowed by the code, the project has been designed to take advantage of the Performance Standards concept. The property owner, David Scott Construction will be financing the project using private lending. The property is in David Scott Construction LLC ownership. A Homeowner’s Association will be created to maintain the common areas. The HOA and CC & R’s will have necessary access easement, utility easements, and maintenance agreements provided prior to recording of the plat. The development is proposed as a tax lot layout. Blanket easement for utilities, access, maintenance, utilities, etc. is proposed instead of individual easements. Following the approval of this application, the property owner will begin working with the project designer, engineer and contractors to create final utility installation engineered plans (4 – 6 months). Following utility installation, building permits for construction of the residence will be obtained (within one year). The surveyor will provide the post monument surveys (within 1 ½ - 2 years). Received 4.20.2020 18.3.9.040. A.3. Outline Plan Approval Criteria The Planning Commission shall approve the outline plan when it finds all of the following criteria have been met. a. The development meets all applicable ordinance requirements of the City. Finding: The applicant finds that all applicable ordinance requirements of the City have been met. As detailed in the written summary above, the findings on the subsequent pages and the attached site plans, exhibits and attached documents, full compliance with city standards for a cottage house development is met. b. Adequate key City facilities can be provided including water, sewer, paved access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, police and fire protection, and adequate transportation; and that the development will not cause a City facility to operate beyond capacity. Finding: Adequate key City facilities can be provided to serve the development. In consultation with representatives of the various City of Ashland Departments (i.e. Water, Sewer, Streets and Electric Division) the proposed small cottage housing units will not cause a City facility to operate beyond capacity. The six-inch sewer line within Alicia Street and Sylvia Street right-of-way. In discussions with the sanitary sewer department, there are no reported capascity issues in the immediate vicinities. Based on the Wastewater Master Plan, eight-inch sewer lines in public rights-of-way are required in the future of new facilities. The majority of Ashland does not have eight-inch lines. The sewer lines in Oak Street are identified in the system as having present flows that are in excess of the capascity. At the wastewater treatment plant there are choke points and potential overflow points. Regardless, the proposed twelve, water efficient, small units should not cause the system in the vicinity to operate beyond its current capacities. There is a six-inch water main within Sylvia Street and a four-inch main in Alicia Street. A hydrant is present across Alicia Street from the driveway. There is adequate water pressure to provide water service to new units. There is a 10-inch storm drainage line within Sylvia Street. The project is required to employ both low impact development standards from the Cottage Housing Standards as well as the RVSS Standards for Storm Water Managements. The low impact development measures proposed such as the use of pervious walkways, rain-barrel catchment of roof drainage, the amount of storm water generated from Received 4.20.2020 the property is reduced. The proposal is to capture, detain, treat and regenerate all storm drainage on the property through the use of storm tech systems. This will allow for no impacts to the Sylvia Street storm drain facilities. Electric infrastructure is available in the vicinity. At this time, discussions regarding the capacity concerns of the property owner and the city’s system are being undertaken. With the solar panel installation, reverse metering and 1960/1970s electrical infrastructure, considerations need to be made. The property owner is the project contractor and has been in discussions with the Ashland Electric Department. An electric distribution plan has been provided. The driveway leading to the parking area is proposed to be 20-feet in width with a five-foot-wide sidewalk along the east side of the driveway. This is adequate area including back up and turn around for 14-parking spaces. The sidewalk adjacent the driveway is connected to the internal pedestrian pathway which accesses each unit and continues through the open space. c. The existing and natural features of the land; such as wetlands, floodplain corridors, ponds, large trees, rock outcroppings, etc., have been identified in the plan of the development and significant features have been included in the open space, common areas, and unbuildable areas. Finding: The proposal the preserves the natural features of the site. Large trees, potential wetlands are open spaces are proposed for preservation in the common open spaces. d. The development of the land will not prevent adjacent land from being developed for the uses shown in the Comprehensive Plan. Finding: The properties to the north, south and west are developed with single family residences as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan. The property due east is privately owned and physically constrained. The next adjacent property is city of Ashland park land. The development of the subject property will not prevent the adjacent properties from being developed as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan. e. There are adequate provisions for the maintenance of open space and common areas, if required or provided, and that if developmentsare done in phases that the early phases have the same or higher ratio of amenities as proposed in the entire project. Finding: Received 4.20.2020 The proposal is for the development of tax lots with the common areas dedicated as common area. The common areas will have access easement, utility and maintenance agreements and easements. The common area landscaping and driveway maintenance will be provided for in the Homeowners Association and CC & R’s of the subdivision. These documents will be prepared by a land development attorney and Oregon Licensed Surveyor familiar with small lot subdivision development. The CC & R’s will be provided for review by the City of Ashland in conjunction with the preliminary survey plat. f. The proposed density meets the base and bonus density standards established under this chapter. Finding: The proposed density of the property is the maximum number of cottages house units allowed in the zone per the Cottage Housing Standards of the Ashland Municipal Code AMC 18.2.3.090. g. The development complies with the Street Standards. Finding: The proposed development is accessed via a private driveway that extends from the south corner of Sylvia Street and Alicia Street. These streets are not improved to city standards will only an asphalt travel lane and no curb, gutter, sidewalk or parkrow. Though the driveway separation is not met with the existing driveway curb cuts, the proposal does not alter the driveway nor place them closer together than allowed by code. Cottage housing developments are not required to provide a public street dedication when pedestrian connectivity through the site to adjacent properties is provided and adequate vehicular access is provided. The street standards also do not require interconnected streets when physical features such as topographical constraints or other natural features such as mature trees, drainage swales, wetlands, and floodplains can alter the required connection to adjacent properties (18.4.6.E.1). It can be found that the that the site’s constraints, (wetlands, and the adjacent properties wetlands and steep slopes, the city’s access management standards, and the performance standards criteria encourage using the natural features of the landscape to their greatest advantage and protects the environment from degradation. The private drive will be aesthetically pleasing and provides for more efficient land use, retaining the neighborhood character. 18.5.2.080 - Site Design Review Criteria: A.Underlying Zone. The proposal complies with all of the applicable provisions of the underlying zone (part 18.2), including but not limited to: building and yard setbacks, lot area and dimensions, density and floor area, lot coverage, building height, building orientation, architecture, and other applicable standards. Received 4.20.2020 Finding: The subject property proposed for development of the twelve-unit, thirteen lot cottage housing development. The layout, is compatible with the adjacent neighborhood development pattern, provides more open space than typical single family lots would provide. The open space is protected with HOA and CC & R regulations. The proposed cottage housing development adds a necessary housing inventory to the city of Ashland limited supply of small, single family residential units that provide ownership opportunities. The proposed development complies with the cottage housing standards and standards for the underlying zones lot coverage, setback, and density as provided in the cottage housing standards. B.Overlay Zones. The proposal complies with applicable overlay zone requirements (part 18.3). Finding: The proposal demonstrates compliance with the Performance standards overlay. The property has an area of potential wetland on-site. It is not on the State or Local Wetlands Inventory. A wetlands biologist has been retained (see attached letter), the area of potential wetland and the potential 20-foot buffer area has been provided on the site plan with large circles around the trees near the east property line. The proposed development and all site improvements are outside of any future protected wetland and/or wetland buffer zone. The Water Resource Protection Zone chapter seeks for an on-site assessment, the assessment was completed, and the identified “resource” is below the thresholds for state jurisdiction (less than one half acre and not part of a system). We believe it can be found that the standards of 18.3.11 have been met through the protection of the potential wetland area with buffer of substantial area of open space and not providing any development within the wetland or the buffer zone. A Conservation Area will be provided with a development restriction, which stipulates that the use or activity within the Water Resource Protection Zone shall be consistent with the provisions of this chapter. The proposed landscape and irrigation planting plan demonstrate compliance with the Wildfire Overlay zone standards. C.Site Development and Design Standards. The proposal complies with the applicable Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4, except as provided by subsection E, below. Finding: The proposal demonstrates compliance with the applicable Site Development Standards from 18.4 that are required with cottage housing development. Received 4.20.2020 D.City Facilities. The proposal complies with the applicable standards in section 18.4.6 Public Facilities, and that adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, electricity, urban storm drainage, paved access to and throughout the property, andadequate transportation can and will be provided to the subject property. Finding: See findings on preceding pages addressing adequate public facilities. As for transportation, there is a paved street, sidewalk from street along driveway onto the site, and connected walkways through the property. The proposed development does not require a Traffic Impact Analysis or other Transportation assessment. E.Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards. The approval authority may approve exceptions to the Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4 if the circumstances in either subsection 1, 2, or 3, below, are found to exist. Finding: None requested. 18.5.3.020Land Divisions: A. Applicability. The requirements for partitions and subdivisions apply, as follows. 1. Subdivisions are the creation of four or more lots from one parent lot, parcel, or tract, within one calendar year. The request is for a twelve unit, thirteen lot, Performance Standards Option, Cottage Housing Development with access via a private drive as permitted in AMC 18.2.3.090, 18.3.9 and 18.5.3.020.A.2. 2. Partitions are the creation of three or fewer lots from one parent lot, parcel, or tract, each having frontage on a public street, within one calendar year. (Note: Partitions of three lots with access via a private drive are allowed under chapter 18.3.9 Performance Standards Option.) The request is for a Performance Standards Option subdivision with access via a private drive. 18.5.3.E. Future Re-Division Plan. When subdividing or partitioning tracts into large lots (i.e., greater than two times or 200 percent the minimum lot size allowed by the underlying land use district), the lots shall be of such size, shape, and orientation as to facilitate future re-division and extension of streets and utilities. The approval authority may require a development plan indicating how further division of oversized lots and extension of planned public facilities to adjacent parcels can occur in the future. If the Planning Commission determines that an area or tract of land has been or is in the process of being divided into four or more lots, the Commission can require full compliance with all subdivision regulations. Received 4.20.2020 Not applicable. 18.5.3.050 Preliminary Partition Plat Criteria A. The future use for urban purposes of the remainder of the tract will not be impeded. Finding: The proposal utilizes the entire property and there are no ‘remnant’ portions of the tract. B. The development of the remainder of any adjoining land or access thereto will not be impeded. Finding: The properties to the south and west are developed with single family residences as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposal does not impact the development of the adjacent properties. C. The partition plan conforms to applicable City-adopted neighborhood or district plans, if any, and any previous land use approvals for the subject area. Finding: To the applicant’s knowledge there are no neighborhood or district plans. There are no previous land use approvals that imposed stipulations on the subject property. D. The tract of land has not been partitioned for 12 months. Finding: The propertyhas not been partitioned for 12 months. E. Proposed lots conform to the requirements of the underlying zone, per part 18.2, any applicable overlay zone requirements, per part 18.3, and any applicable development standards, per part 18.4 (e.g., parking and access, tree preservation, solar access and orientation). Finding: The proposal complies with the standards of the underlying zone, the development standards for Cottage Housing Development from 18.2.3.090,and the development standards from 18.3. The proposal complies with all applicable development standards found in 18.4. Received 4.20.2020 F. Accesses to individual lots conform to the standards in section 18.4.3.080 Vehicle Area Design. See also, 18.5.3.060 Additional Preliminary Flag Lot Partition Plat Criteria. Finding: The private access driveway is proposed to be 20-feet wide with a five-foot wide sidewalk along the east side and a seven foot landscape buffer along the west side, and a fire truck turn around area. The driveway accesses the 14-vehicle parking area. The layout complies with the vehicle area design. The driveway will have a 13.5-foot vertical clearance and the driveway grade is less than 15 percent. No parking is proposed in the front yard or between the building and the street. The existing driveway does not comply with driveway separation standards. This is an existing condition that will not be made more non-conforming through the proposal. The traffic generated from the proposed development will exit in a forward manner which will improve the visibility when existing the site. The site is not accessed by an alley or other shared access. G. The proposed streets, utilities, and surface water drainage facilities conform to the street design standards and other requirements in part 18.4, and allow for transitions to existing and potential future development on adjacent lands. The preliminary plat shall identify all proposed public improvements and dedications. Finding: No transitions for future development on adjacent lands is proposed. The cottage housing ordinance does not require compliance with the street design standards. H. Unpaved Streets. Finding: Both Alicia and Sylvia Street are paved. I. Where an alley exists adjacent to the partition, access may be required to be provided from the alley and prohibited from the street. Finding: There is not an alley adjacent to the property. Received 4.20.2020 J. Required State and Federal permits, as applicable, have been obtained or can reasonably be obtained prior to development. Finding: There are no State or Federal permits necessary for the development of the property. The State of Oregon will be consulted through the wetland delineation on the site as directed by the project wetlands biologist. K. A partition plat containing one or more flag lots shall additionally meet the criteria in section 18.5.3.060. Driveways greater than 50-feet in length are required to demonstrate compliance with the width and design requirements of section 18.5.3.060 (AMC 18.4.3.080.D.1). A “flag lot” is not proposed, but development is proposed as part of a performance standards option development, therefore not all of the criteria for flag lot partitions is addressed. TREE REMOVAL 18.5.7.030. B. Tree Removal Permit. There are six-trees that are more than six-inches DBH on the subject property. There is one larger stature Pine tree on the adjacent property to the west. There is a 20-inch deciduous near the west property line. Another 14-inch deciduous tree is present further west. A 14-inch pine tree is near the west property line on the adjacent property to the west. On the west side of the property there is a 10-inch walnut, and three willows, eight-inch, ten-inch and a 36-inch DBH willow tree. The 36-inch willow tree has been evaluated by an arborist who has determined that the tree is in a hazardous condition and must be removed. The tree is within the possible wetland buffer zone. The removal of hazardous trees is exempt from the regulated activities within the Water Resource Protection Zone. The 20-inch deciduous tree near the west property line is proposed for removal due to the installation of the driveway. Tree protection fencing in the form of six-foot tall chain link fences, set in accordance with the proposed protection plan provided with the application will provide adequate protection to the sites remaining trees. Tree protection fencing in the form of six-foot tall chain link fences, set in accordance with the proposed protection plan provided with the application will provide adequate protection to the sites remaining trees. The project arborist will provide guidance. Received 4.20.2020 1.Hazard Tree. A Hazard Tree Removal 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. a.The applicant must demonstrate that the condition or location of the tree presents a clear public safety hazard (i.e., likely to fall and injure persons or property) or a foreseeable danger of property damage to an existing structure or facility, and such hazard or danger cannot reasonably be alleviated by treatment, relocation, or pruning. See definition of hazard tree in part 18.6. Finding: The project arborist has determined the 30inch will tree to be a hazard. See attached report. b.The City may require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each hazard tree pursuant to section 18.5.7.050. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit. Finding: Mitigation trees will be planted with the landscape plan installation and open space development. 2. Tree that is Not a Hazard. a. The tree is proposed for removal in order to permit the application to be consistent with other applicable Land Use Ordinance requirements and standards, including but not limited to applicable Site Development and Design Standards in part 18.4 and Physical and Environmental Constraints in part 18.3.10. Finding: Tree #1 is a deciduous tree along the west property line. It is located in the path of the driveway access to the parking area for the cottage house development. The removal of the tree allow for the site to development consistent with the standards for Site Design Review and provisions of parking areas. b. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks. Finding: The removal of the tree will not have any impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters or protection of adjacent trees. This tree is not part of a windbreak. Received 4.20.2020 c. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes, canopies, and species diversity within 200 feet of the subject property. The City shall grant an exception to this criterion when alternatives to the tree removal have been considered and no reasonable alternative exists to allow the property to be used as permitted in the zone. Finding: The removal of a single deciduous tree, none of which are rare or specimen / heritage trees, will not have any impacts on the tree densities. The adjacent neighborhood has a significant number, density, tree canopy and species diversity. d. Nothing in this section shall require that the residential density to be reduced below the permitted density allowed by the zone. In making this determination, the City may consider alternative site plans or placement of structures of alternate landscaping designs that would lessen the impact on trees, so long as the alternatives continue to comply with the other provisions of this ordinance. Finding: The residential density is not impacted by the removal of the tree. e. The City shall require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each tree granted approval pursuant to section 18.5.7.050. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit. See below. 18.5.7.050 Mitigation Required One or more of the following shall satisfy the mitigation requirement. A.Replanting On-Site. The applicant shall plant either a minimum 1 ½-inch caliper healthy and well- branched deciduous tree or a five to six-foot tall evergreen tree for each tree removed. Finding: Many, healthy deciduous trees will be planted on site following the construction of the twelve, single family cottages. The trees are placed throughout the property. The landscape plan includes conifer trees as well. Attachments: NORTHWEST BIOLOGICAL SURVEY LETTER CANOPY TREE CARE REPORT TITLE REPORT TOPOGRAPHICAL SURVEY PROJECT SITE PLAN Received 4.20.2020 SMALL COTTAGE ELEVATIONS AND FLOOR PLAN LARGE COTTAGE ELEVATIONS AND FLOOR PLAN DUPLEX COTTAGE ELEVATION AND FLOOR PLANS CARPORT ELEVATIONS SOLAR SETBACK EVAULATIONS GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN UTILITY PLAN EROSION CONTROL PLAN LANDSCAPE PLANS Received 4.20.2020 ESJWFXBZ TJEFXBML Nbebsb!Eftjho!Jod Mboetdbqf!Bsdijufduvsf-! Eftjho!'!Dpotvmubujpo 3::5!Xfmmt!Gbshp!Se Dfousbm!Qpjou-!Ps!:8613 652.775.8166 nbebsbeftjhoAzbipp/dpn TYPE III PUBLIC HEARING _________________________________ PA-2019-00001 1511 HWY 99 N Memo DATE: May 12, 2020 TO: Ashland Planning Commission FROM: Derek Severson, Senior Planner RE: Grand Terrace Annexation hearing for the Grand Terrace annexation proposal back in November, a number of issues were identified by the Planning Commission as needing to be further addressed by the applicant. The Planning Commission continued the matter, and asked that the applicant work with the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) and Rogue Valley Transportation District (RVTD) to address some outstanding transportation items and then take the proposal back to the Transportation Commission for a recommendation before returning to the Planning Commission. The item was scheduled to be heard by the Transportation Commission in March, however with the COVID-19 pandemic and associated emergency declarations by the city and state, the March Transportation Commission meeting was canceled and subsequent advisory commission meetings have been suspended indefinitely. Staff believed it was prudent at this point to bring the matter back to the Planning Commission for an evidentiary hearing to consider how each of the identified issues has been addressed, and identify where Commissioners believe more attention is still needed that a decision be made at the meeting tonight, but rather that Commissioners have a chance to refamiliarize themselves with the proposal and the issues as they currently stand after six months, to provide any feedback, and to schedule the matter for a later meeting if Commissioners believe it is appropriate to do so at this stage. The issues identified by the Planning Commission are summarized below, along with a summary of the sponse for each to date and any staff comments: CONTIGUITY & THE RAILROAD PROPERTY During the initial public hearing it was noted that the property was separated from the city by railroad property which is not considered to be right-of-way and as such the property cannot be found to be "currently contiguous" to the city as required in AMC 18.5.8.050.C. There was some discussion of the possibility of extending a of Highway 99 right-of-way from the existing city limits to connect the property to the city limits. Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us Applicant Response In a January 28, 2020 letter responding to the outstanding issues, the applicant notes that railroads have historically been a quasi-public entity and that railroad right-of-way intersecting streets or highway has never prevented annexations as the railroad was built for public use similar to highway right-of-way, rather than as private land for development purposes. This letter and its associated exhibits also speak to the history of donation land claims in the vicinity. The applicant has also indicated that they are attempting to communicate with the railroad to obtain consent to annexation. Staff Comments The surveying unit from the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) has provided deed records indicating that the Highway 99 corridor under the railroad overpass crosses the railroad property via easement and as such, ODOT granting a "cherry stem" connection of their right-of-way along the property frontage is not an option to resolve the issue. In considering this issue, staff notes that AMC 18.5.8.060 provides that "When an annexation is initiated by a private individual, the Staff Advisor may include other parcels of property in the proposed annexation to make a boundary extension more logical and to avoid parcels of land which are not incorporated but are partially or wholly surrounded by the City. The Staff Advisor, in a report to the Planning Commission and City Council, shall justify the inclusion of any parcels other than the parcel for which the petition is filed. The purpose of this section is to permit the Commission and Council to make annexations extending the boundaries more logical and orderly." Staff would further note that ORS 222.170 discusses "Annexation by consent before public hearing or order for election" in subsection 4, noting that "Real property... or railroad... shall not be considered when determining the number of owners, the area of land or the assessed valuation required to grant consent to annexation under this section unless the owner of such property files a statement consenting to or opposing annexation with the legislative body of the city on or before a day described in subsection (1) of this section." Based on the above, the current hearing was re-noticed as including both the state highway right- of-way and the railroad property abutting the property. This notice was sent to representatives of the railroad. Subsequent to mailing of the hearing notice, representatives of the railroad contacted staff via e-mail (see attached April 29, 2020 e-mail from CORP Railroad representative Chad Mullarkey) Without having more information to go off of the railroad does not intend to allow its property to be annexed and does not approve of any developments that include railroad property at this time.-mailed and left voicemail with an explanation of the situation seeking further discussion and are awaiting a response. At this point, this issue has not been resolved. AFFORDABILITY Several of the Planning Commissioners noted that the affordability requirement for annexations in AMC 18.5.8.050.G does not provide for the exclusion of unbuildable areas from the base density used in calculating the required number of affordable units. Commissioners asked that the applicant address the affordability requirements based on the language in the Land Use Ordinance. Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us Applicant Response The applicant asserts that while the Municipal Code requires that the number of affordable housing units be determined by the base density of the property, where substantial areas of the property are undevelopable it should exclude those areas. The applicant further emphasizes that the Oregon Revised Statutes in ORS 660-008-005 defines buildable land to mean residentially designed land within the urban growth boundary, including both vacant and developed land likely to be redeveloped that is suitable, available and necessary for residential Land is generally considered suitable and available unless it: a) Is severely constrained by natural hazards as determined under Statewide Planning Goal 7; b) Is subject to natural resource protection measures determined under Statewide Planning Goals 5,6,15,16,17 or 18; c) Has slopes of 25 percent or greater; d) Is within the 100-year flood plan; or e) Cannot be provided with public facilities. The applicant emphasizes that buildable land is considered in preparing the Buildable Lands Inventory (BLI), that the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan notes that density should decrease with an increase in slope to avoid excessive erosion and hillside cuts (Policy 17), and minimum density standards in AMC 18.2.5.080.B and 18.5.8.050.F provide for reductions in minimum densities for significant natural features. The applicant argues that physically constrained areas are not considered to be buildable lands and as such should not be considered as part of the area for development for purposes of calculating density. Here, a substantial area of the property has slopes of more than 35 percent, riparian drainages and wetlands that will prevent the extension of infrastructure and construction of dwellings and should be excluded from density calculations. Staff Comments , the issue for the Commission in November was not whether unbuildable lands were to be excluded from base density and minimum density calculations. AMC 18.5.8.050.F will ultimately occur at a minimum density of 90 percent of the base density for the zone, unless reductions in the total number of units is necessary to accommodate significant natural features, topography, access limitations, or similar physical constraints. The issue raised by Commissioners back in November The total number of affordable units provided to qualifying buyers, or to qualifying renters, shall be equal to or exceed 25 percent of the base density as calculated using the unit equival There is no clear provision for a reduction in the base density when calculating the number of required affordable units for annexations as there is in calculating the minimum density requirement. Staff would note that City regulations require that constrained lands (hillsides, water resource protection zones for streams and wetlands, and lands with significant natural features) be excluded from development andhistorically these lands have been excluded from the affordability calculations as well as from the minimum density. TRANSPORTATION ISSUES Existing Easement Planning Commissioners asked that the applicant provide evidence that the existing 30-foot wide mutual access easement in place near the veterinary hospital will support the eventual access proposed in the conceptual development plan in terms of its width, location, any restrictions in easement language and ability to accommodate accessible improvements. Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us Applicant Response The applicant has indicated that access to the property is provided by a 30-foot wide ingress access easement and notes that there are no reservations or limits noted upon the easement. The applicant further explains that there is a 25-foot wide right of access to the highway from the easement restrictions. The applicant has included a survey noting the easement area along with the easement language. Staff Comments Multi-family zoned property is not required to provide dedicated public streets with development. City standards in AMC 18.4.3.080.D.3 Parking areas of more than seven parking spaces shall be served by a driveway 20 feet in width and constructed to: facilitate the flow of traffic on or off the site, with due regard to pedestrian and vehicle safety; be clearly and permanently marked and defined; and provide adequate aisles or turn-around areas so that all vehicles may enter the street in a forward manner. that areas for vehicle maneuvering, parking and loading have a five-foot wide landscaped screening strip where abutting a property line. A 30-foot width would accommodate a 20-foot driveway with five feet of landscaping on each side. Street Lighting The Planning Commissioners requested that the application include details for street-lighting to increase pedestrian safety along the corridor, with particular focus on the driveway locations. Planning staff have also suggested that the applicant consider how they might more clearly delineate the northern driveway entrance at the street for drivers in conjunction with proposed frontage improvements. Applicants Response The applicants January 28, 2020 response letter indicates that an ODOT-standard cobra style street light or City-standard pedestrian-scaled streetlight will be placed near the improved driveway apron. In addition, Exhibits C.3 and C.4 illustrate a total of five additional lights to be installed along the property frontage. Staff Comments The applicant has provided details of lighting placement along the frontage. Southbound RVTD Bus Stop Planning Commissioners asked that the applicant work with RVTD and ODOT to provide design need to include a pull-out, shelter with lighting, sidewalk, accessible loading pad and accessible route to the site, any necessary retaining, and a merge lane for the bus to re-enter the travel lane at an appropriate speed. Applicant The applicant notes that the project team has met with RVTD and its Bus Stop Committee, and a new, southbound bus pull-out lane, bus stop pad and future electric conduit to provide low voltage power is proposed to be provided south of the main driveway entrance to the site. Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us Staff Comments The applicants Exhibit C.4 illustrates the proposed bus pull-out lane, shelter and street light placement, and a proposed walkway connecting from the shelter onto the project site. It appears that this issue has been addressed. Bicycle & Pedestrian Connectivity to Northbound RVTD Stop/s The Planning Commissioners asked that the applicant address safe bicycle and pedestrian to include an enhanced crossing from the flag stop across Highway 99N, and also asked that the -wide shared use path generally from the enhanced crossing to the southern driveway on site. (The approval criteria for annexation include that, Likely pedestrian destinations from the project site shall be determined and the safe and accessible pedestrian facilities serving those destinations shall be indicated (AMC 18.5.8.050.E.3) Applicant Response In the January 28, 2020 letter, the applicant notes that there are two northbound RVTD stops within 1,800 to 2,00 feet of the property. The first is near the intersection of North Main Street and Highway 99N, and the applicant emphasizes that it is a legal pedestrian crossing. The applicant indicates that in conversation with ODOT traffic engineers, while they support that the intersection is a pedestrian crossing, it cannot be marked with new striping, rapid flash beacons , volume of pedestrians, volume of vehicle traffic and vehicle speeds to rise to the threshold for allowing a marked crossing. The applicant further indicates that ODOT does support a median refuge at the intersection of North Main and Highway 99N along w that the median in this area that would have provided a pedestrian refuge was recently removed to better enable vehicles crossing at this intersection. A smaller median is in place south of the intersection, but improvements would be necessary to create an adequate pedestrian refuge. The other northbound stop is near the intersection of Valley View Road and Highway 99N. This is a signaled intersection with a painted crosswalk in place on three of the four legs of the crossing. The applicant emphasizes that the subject property and its proximity to both northbound stops and the new proposed southbound stop are within Transit Supportive Areas in the RVTD 2040 Transit Master Plan as the property is within the consists of areas that are within a typical five-minute walk at a normal walking pace. The applicant concludes that like most areas in the community, there is not a northbound and southbound bus stop along the property frontage and this does not prevent commuters from crossing Highway 99N (or Siskiyou Boulevard or Highway 66) to access transit stops where they are not directly connected via a crosswalk or signalized intersection. Staff Comments In conversations with ODOT staff, they have indicated that they do not believe any new pedestrian crossings of Highway 99 are appropriate given the speeds, traffic volumes, sight and stopping distances when weighed against the anticipated number of pedestrians. Staff have not seen designs drawings for any potential improvements to the existing median at the intersection of North Main Street and Highway 99N to provide pedestrian refuge and signage. Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us Exception to Street Standards/Curbside Sidewalks At least one Planning Commissioner has questioned whether Exceptions to the Street Design Standards are merited, and others have inquired whether a curbside sidewalk is appropriate adjacent to a 45 MPH travel lane. Staff have recommended that the applicant more clearly articulate the basis for the requested Exceptions to not provide standard parkrow in terms of the on-site conditions in specific sections of the roadway (i.e. based on available right-of-way, topography, existing constraints, etc.). Applicant Response In the January 28, 2020 response letter, the applicant speaks to frontage improvements, explaining that along the entire frontage of the subject property a standard sidewalk and parkrow configuration is proposed except where the installation of the bus pull-out lane and bus shelter instead necessitate an eight-foot curbside sidewalk. The applicant discusses specific sidewalk sections in terms of the station numbers on the civil drawings. Stations 1-16 (North of Land of Paws): An 8-foot curbside sidewalk is proposed. The applicant explains that there is a large roadside ditch and private property belonging to Anderson Autobody which prevent parkrow installation, and this curbside sidewalk will connect to existing curbside sidewalk to the north. Stations 16-23: A 3-foot bike buffer, 6-foot bike lane, 7-½ foot parkrow, and 6-foot sidewalk are proposed along this section of the property frontage. Stations 23-27: A bus pull-out lane, bus stop and 8-foot curbside sidewalk are proposed along this section of the property frontage. Parkrow here has been replaced by the bus pull-out lane. Station 27-34: A 3-foot bike buffer, 6-foot bike lane, and 8-foot curbside sidewalk are proposed. The applicant explains that this section is physically constrained by a steep roadside embankment and by the railroad trestle. Station 34 Schofield/North Main: A 6-foot bike lane, 7½ -foot parkrow and 6-foot sidewalk are proposed in this section. Staff Comments The applicant here has explained the improvements proposed and where/why exceptions to city standards are needed. Speed reduction Based on the Planning Commission discussion, staff have also suggested that it may be in the ighway 99 North corridor from Valley View Road south into Ashland as one means of addressing pedestrian safety and the ability of the RVTD buses to merge back into traffic from a stop. Applicant The applicant notes that ODOT is the authority on highway markings for pedestrian crossings and for highway speed limits, and at this time there is not enough justification for speeds to be lower. The applicant indicates that with a change in roadside culture through annexation and development, driving habits can change. They suggest that after improvements are made, a formal speed study to seek a reduction in highway speeds can be undertaken and eventually, if speeds are reduced and pedestrian volumes increase, potential marked crossings could be approved by ODOT. Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us Staff Comments Speed reduction would ultimately require an application to ODOT after which they would conduct a zonal analysis and a decision would ultimately come from the state traffic engineer. Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) ODOT had previously provided comment (October 25, 2019) on the Grand Terrace TIA, noting among other things that they had observed queuing significantly greater than that noted in the TIA for both the OR99 & Valley View and the Main & Maple intersections. Applicant Response Thhas submitted a technical memorandum in . In the January 28, 2020 letter from the applicant responding to outstanding issues, the applicant notes that ODOT has provided preliminary review comments on the technical memorandum to the applicant team with minor suggestions, but that generally there were no major issues or concerns to require additional TIA data or off-site intersection improvements. The applicant has provided a February 24, 2020 e-mail from Wei (Michael) Wang, P.E. & M.S., the Region 3 Interim Access Management Engineer with ODOT which indicates that ODOT had reviewed the technical memorandum and had no further review comments at this time. Staff Comments In speaking with ODOT staff, they have indicated that at this point, ODOT has given their final sign- off to the TIA with the addition of the technical memorandum. Formal written comments to this effect from ODOT have not been provided, however ODOT has been notified of the upcoming thth electronic meeting on May 12, and may provide additional written comments prior to May 12. Next Steps Staff believes that at this stage, it would be helpful for the Planning Commissioners to weigh in on the above issues. From there, the Commission might either continue discussions and deliberation to a date certain, or identify the outstanding areas where they believe further information from the applicant is needed. Supporting Information: Packet Materials Provided for May 12 Meeting 2020-0504 E-mail from Amy Gunter re: ODOT TIA comments 2020-0504 Written Submittal from Sydnee Dryer for neighbor Scott Knox 2020-0429 E-Mail and Attachment from CORP Railroad Representative Chad Mullarkey 2020-0428 E-Mail from Anderson Autobody 2020-0228 Severson e-mail re: ODOT update 2020-0203 Applicantl Memo 2020-0128 Applicants Letter Responding to PC Issues 2020-0107 ODOT Survey Unit Materials re: Railroad Right-of-Way 2020-0106 E-mail from Barbara Allen 2019-1112 Exhibits Submitted during November PC Hearing Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us http://www.ashland.or.us/files/2019-10- Link to the October 2019 Planning Commission Packet: 08_PC_Packet-web.pdf NOTE: This hearing distributed via the link above. http://www.ashland.or.us/files/2019-11- Link to the November 2019 Planning Commission Packet: 12_PC_Packet_web.pdf Link to the November 2019 Planning Commission Video: https://videoplayer.telvue.com/player/w9sPsSE7vna3XTN_39bs1rEXjVWF0kfP/media/525050?fullscree n=false&showtabssearch=true&autostart=true&jwsource=cl Link to the March 2020 Transportation Commission Packet: https://www.ashland.or.us/files/TC_Packet_3.19.20.pdf NOTE: This hearing was canceled to the COVID-19 emergency declaration, but packet material was distributed via the link above. The packet includes new transportation-related Information provided by the applicant since the initial Planning Commission hearing including: Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us EXHIBIT B EXHIBIT B EXHIBIT B EXHIBIT B EXHIBIT B EXHIBIT B EXHIBIT C ROGUE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC Contiguous Property: ROGUE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC Access Easement: Traffic Impact Analysis: ROGUE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC Frontage Improvements: ROGUE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC Public Transit: ROGUE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC Residential Density: hƩĻŭƚƓ wĻǝźƭĻķ {ƷğƷǒƷĻƭ Λhw{ ЏЏЉΏЉЉБΏЉЉЎΜʹ .ǒźƌķğĬƌĻ \[ğƓķ ƒĻğƓƭ ƩĻƭźķĻƓƷźğƌƌǤ ķĻƭźŭƓğƷĻķ ƌğƓķ ǞźƷŷźƓ ƷŷĻ ǒƩĬğƓ ŭƩƚǞƷŷ ĬƚǒƓķğƩǤͲ źƓĭƌǒķźƓŭ ĬƚƷŷ ǝğĭğƓƷ ğƓķ ķĻǝĻƌƚƦĻķ ƌğƓķ ƌźƉĻƌǤ Ʒƚ ĬĻ ƩĻķĻǝĻƌƚƦĻķͲ ƷŷğƷ źƭ ƭǒźƷğĬƌĻͲ ğǝğźƌğĬƌĻ ğƓķ ƓĻĭĻƭƭğƩǤ ŅƚƩ ƩĻƭźķĻƓƷźğƌ ǒƭĻƭ͵ tǒĬƌźĭƌǤ ƚǞƓĻķ ƌğƓķ źƭ ŭĻƓĻƩğƌƌǤ ƓƚƷ ĭƚƓƭźķĻƩĻķ ğǝğźƌğĬƌĻ ŅƚƩ ƩĻƭźķĻƓƷźğƌ ǒƭĻƭ͵ \[ğƓķ źƭ ŭĻƓĻƩğƌƌǤ ĭƚƓƭźķĻƩĻķ ƭǒźƷğĬƌĻ ğƓķ ğǝğźƌğĬƌĻ ǒƓƌĻƭƭ źƷʹ ΛğΜ Lƭ ƭĻǝĻƩĻƌǤ ĭƚƓƭƷƩğźƓĻķ ĬǤ ƓğƷǒƩğƌ ŷğǩğƩķƭ ğƭ ķĻƷĻƩƒźƓĻķ ǒƓķĻƩ {ƷğƷĻǞźķĻ tƌğƓƓźƓŭ Dƚğƌ Аͳ ΛĬΜ Lƭ ƭǒĬƆĻĭƷ Ʒƚ ƓğƷǒƩğƌ ƩĻƭƚǒƩĭĻ ƦƩƚƷĻĭƷźƚƓ ƒĻğƭǒƩĻƭ ķĻƷĻƩƒźƓĻķ ǒƓķĻƩ {ƷğƷĻǞźķĻ tƌğƓƓźƓŭ Dƚğƌƭ ЎͲ ЏͲ ЊЎͲ ЊЏͲ ЊА ƚƩ ЊБͳ ΛĭΜ Iğƭ ƭƌƚƦĻƭ ƚŅ ЋЎ ƦĻƩĭĻƓƷ ƚƩ ŭƩĻğƷĻƩͳ ΛķΜ Lƭ ǞźƷŷźƓ ƷŷĻ ЊЉЉΏǤĻğƩ Ņƌƚƚķ ƦƌğźƓͳ ƚƩ ΛĻΜ /ğƓƓƚƷ ĬĻ ƦƩƚǝźķĻķ ǞźƷŷ ƦǒĬƌźĭ ŅğĭźƌźƷźĻƭ͵ ROGUE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC ROGUE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC Conclusion: Amy ROGUE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC Zoning Map This is to certify that this is the Official Zoning Map referred to in Section 18.12.030 of Title 18.12 of the Ashland Municipal Code. Adopted as Ordinance No. 2951 Signed: Mayor __________________________________________ Date ____________________ City Recorder _____________________________________ Date ____________________ EXHIBIT D EXHIBIT D EXHIBIT E EXHIBIT F EXHIBIT G EXHIBIT G EXHIBIT G EXHIBIT G EXHIBIT G EXHIBIT G SANDOWENGINEERING 160 MADISON STREET, SUITE A EUGENE, OREGON 97402 541.513.3376 TECH MEMO TO: Michael Wang PE Oregon Departments of Transportation FROM: Kelly Sandow P.E. Sandow Engineering DATE: February 3, 2020 RE: Grand Terrace Residential Development TIA-Response to ODOT Comments The following provides a response to the October 25, 2019 ODOT comments provided as part of the review of the Grand Terrace TIA. /ƚƒƒĻƓƷ ϔЊ: ODOT private approach permit and access reservation indenture applications will be required for the proposed easterly access. Please contact ODOT permit specialist for these applications. wĻƭƦƚƓƭĻ Ʒƚ /ƚƒƒĻƓƷ ϔЊʹ The applicant will provide applications for the approach permits as required by ODOT once the development proposal has been approved. /ƚƒƒĻƓƷ ϔЋʹ ODOT reviewed the sight distance in the field and measured a distance of 307 feet. Therefore, the recommendation was a restricted access to right in, right out, left-in movements. wĻƭƦƚƓƭĻ Ʒƚ /ƚƒƒĻƓƷ ϔЋʹ ODOT revised the sight distance measurement based on a more accurate location of the site access onto Highway 99. With the revision then found that the sight distance is met and that the access can be a full movement. /ƚƒƒĻƓƷ ϔЌʹ ODOT staff observed existing queuing issue at OR 99 & Valley View intersection at least 700 feet and the queuing issue at the Main & Maple intersection of over 3500 feet. The TIA th only shows 95 percentile queuing of 250 feet at the OR 99 & Valley View and 350 feet at the Main & Maple. wĻƭƦƚƓƭĻ Ʒƚ /ƚƒƒĻƓƷ ϔЌʹ The Synchro and Simtraffic models were built according to ODOT standards as per the Analysis Procedures Manual. The input variables are as follows: 1)Saturation Flow Rate: 1750 as per ODOT standards for this area 2)Peak Hour Factor: Taken from the traffic counts Tech Memo From: Kelly Sandow PE Sandow Engineering RE: Response to Comments Date: 2.3.2020 Page 2 3)Traffic Counts: taken by Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering as part of the road diet project and the additional as needed for this project. The counts were performed to standard methodologies 4)Signal timing parameters: According to the Analysis Procedures Manual. The Synchro model was completed following all standards and methodology typically required for this type of project. As Sandow Engineering understands it, the road diet has created an unstable traffic flow. What this means is that the traffic flow can be moving as normal and something within the system will cause a delay in travel that will cause backups for the remainder of the peak travel time. This delay is commonly caused by buses stopping to pick up/drop off riders, garbage trucks stopping, vehicles stopping for pedestrians not crossing at signalized intersections, and other factors within the roadway. Unfortunately, this type of instability within the system is not able to be modeled within Synchro. Synchro does not model a bus or garbage truck stopping within the roadway midblock. The only way to model the levels of queuing that ODOT is referencing is to make modifications to the input parameters at the intersections. The modifications made were: 1)Increase pedestrian calls to provide more delay on the main line 2)Reduce the peak hour factor to 0.50 for all movements at all intersections 3)Reduce the signal cycle length 4)Reduce the green time to the major movements at the traffic signals 5)Reduced the saturation flow rate from 1750 to 1600. The queueing results from the modifications to the Synchro model are illustrated in Table 1. The outputs are included as an attachment. SANDOW ENGINEERINGSANDOW Tech Memo From: Kelly Sandow PE Sandow Engineering RE: Response to Comments Date: 2.3.2020 Page 3 TABLE 1: INTERSECTION QUEUING: PM PEAK HOUR 2021 No-Build 2021 Build 2034 No-Build2034 Build Available 95th 95th 95th 95th Movement Avg Avg Avg Avg Storage Percentile Percentile Percentile Percentile S. Valley View at Rogue Valley Highway (S Jackson/Valley View & 99) SEB Left-Highway 225 25 75 25 50 25 5075225 SEB Thru >500 100 200 100 200 100 200 250 600 SEB Thru- Right>500 50 125 50 150 50 150 200 550 NWB Left-Highway 475 25 50 25 50 25 502550 NWB-Thru >500 75 100 75 125 75 125 75125 NWB-Thru >500 75 125 75 125 75 150 100 175 NWB-Right 100 75 125 50 125 50 125 75150 NB-Left-Thru- 75 25 50 25 50 25 502575 NB-Right 100 25 50 25 50 25 502550 SB-LTR-Valley View >500 600 1000 925 1475 700 1425 1100 2325 Jackson Road at Rogue Valley Highway (99 & Jackson) SEB Left 100 25 50 25 75 25 5025100 NWB Left 100 25 25 25 25 25 252525 NEB Left-Thru-Right 100 50 150 75 175 75 225 150 300 SWB Left-Thru- 200 100 225 125 275 150 300 175 350 Jackson Road at Main Street SW Left- Right 175 25 25 25 25 25 25 25100 SB Left 50 25 25 25 25 25 25 2550 Maple Street at Main Street EB Left-Thru-Right 400 75 150 75 150 75 175 150 300 WB Left-Thru-Right 175 25 50 25 50 25 502550 NB Left 150 225 600 250 600 250 600 275 625 NB Thru >500 1000 1300 100 1275 1050 1275 1025 1300 NB Right 160 50 200 50 200 25 150 50200 SB Left 75 25 100 25 125 50 125 25100 SB Thru >500 1150 2750 1475 3250 1775 3550 2075 4275 SB Right 195 150 400 175 400 225 425 175 400 As illustrated, the queuing is shown to be more in line with what ODOT observed in the field. The queuing lengths along Highway 99 are a result of the recent reduction in through lanes as part of ƷŷĻ /źƷǤ ƚŅ !ƭŷƌğƓķ͸ƭ Ʃƚğķ ķźĻƷ͵ ŷĻƩĻ źƭ Ɠƚ ƩĻĭƚƒƒĻƓķĻķ ƒźƷźŭğƷźƚƓ ŅƚƩ ƩĻķǒĭźƓŭ ƷŷĻ ƨǒĻǒĻ ƌĻƓŭƷŷƭ͵ Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or need any additional information 541.513.3376 SANDOW ENGINEERINGSANDOW Queuing and Blocking Report 02/05/2020 2019 PM Existing Intersection: 3: Main Street & Jackson Road, Interval #1 MovementSBSW Directions ServedLLR Maximum Queue (ft)1611 Average Queue (ft)42 95th Queue (ft)2012 Link Distance (ft)303 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)50 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 3: Main Street & Jackson Road, Interval #2 MovementSBSW Directions ServedLLR Maximum Queue (ft)2324 Average Queue (ft)14 95th Queue (ft)1020 Link Distance (ft)303 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)50 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 3: Main Street & Jackson Road, All Intervals MovementSBSW Directions ServedLLR Maximum Queue (ft)2829 Average Queue (ft)23 95th Queue (ft)1319 Link Distance (ft)303 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)50 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Casita Subdivision - Ashland, OregonSimTraffic Report Page 1 Queuing and Blocking Report 02/05/2020 2019 PM Existing Intersection: 4: 99 & Jackson Rd., Interval #1 MovementSENWNESW Directions ServedLLLTRLTR Maximum Queue (ft)27115644 Average Queue (ft)822417 95th Queue (ft)31156043 Link Distance (ft)219234 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)100100 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 4: 99 & Jackson Rd., Interval #2 MovementSENWNESW Directions ServedLLLTRLTR Maximum Queue (ft)34297486 Average Queue (ft)942437 95th Queue (ft)31195780 Link Distance (ft)219234 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)100100 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Intersection: 4: 99 & Jackson Rd., All Intervals MovementSENWNESW Directions ServedLLLTRLTR Maximum Queue (ft)38307886 Average Queue (ft)942432 95th Queue (ft)31195874 Link Distance (ft)219234 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)100100 Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Casita Subdivision - Ashland, OregonSimTraffic Report Page 2 Queuing and Blocking Report 02/05/2020 2019 PM Existing Intersection: 7: S Jackson/Valley View & 99, Interval #1 MovementNBNBSBSESESENWNWNWNW Directions ServedLTRLTRLTTRLTTR Maximum Queue (ft)2429339431082735909698 Average Queue (ft)7112071657810575542 95th Queue (ft)2733372441122734969998 Link Distance (ft)2282142895895696696 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)65225475100 Storage Blk Time (%)10 Queuing Penalty (veh)60 Intersection: 7: S Jackson/Valley View & 99, Interval #2 MovementNBNBSBSESESENWNWNWNW Directions ServedLTRLTRLTTRLTTR Maximum Queue (ft)4729696611507242103144119 Average Queue (ft)121236617751511575945 95th Queue (ft)403571948129493210011398 Link Distance (ft)2282142895895696696 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)65225475100 Storage Blk Time (%)001 Queuing Penalty (veh)031 Intersection: 7: S Jackson/Valley View & 99, All Intervals MovementNBNBSBSESESENWNWNWNW Directions ServedLTRLTRLTTRLTTR Maximum Queue (ft)4729696611547251103144122 Average Queue (ft)101232817711310575845 95th Queue (ft)37356654712644329911098 Link Distance (ft)2282142895895696696 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)65225475100 Storage Blk Time (%)010 Queuing Penalty (veh)031 Casita Subdivision - Ashland, OregonSimTraffic Report Page 3 Queuing and Blocking Report 02/05/2020 2019 PM Existing Intersection: 9: Main St/Main Street & Maple St, Interval #1 MovementEBWBNBNBNBSBSBSB Directions ServedLTRLTRLTRLTR Maximum Queue (ft)71222895601155026689 Average Queue (ft)39959304171215023 95th Queue (ft)752725665211754267102 Link Distance (ft)136323510803264 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft)15016070195 Storage Blk Time (%)1819 Queuing Penalty (veh)811 Intersection: 9: Main St/Main Street & Maple St, Interval #2 MovementEBWBNBNBNBSBSBSB Directions ServedLTRLTRLTRLTR Maximum Queue (ft)114324501039260123494295 Average Queue (ft)528235700291624678 95th Queue (ft)9927588112015683503267 Link Distance (ft)136323510803264 Upstream Blk Time (%)0 Queuing Penalty (veh)3 Storage Bay Dist (ft)15016070195 Storage Blk Time (%)4129 Queuing Penalty (veh)2726 Intersection: 9: Main St/Main Street & Maple St, All Intervals MovementEBWBNBNBNBSBSBSB Directions ServedLTRLTRLTRLTR Maximum Queue (ft)114324501039260123494295 Average Queue (ft)498192605261522265 95th Queue (ft)9427538109614877464238 Link Distance (ft)136323510803264 Upstream Blk Time (%)0 Queuing Penalty (veh)3 Storage Bay Dist (ft)15016070195 Storage Blk Time (%)3527 Queuing Penalty (veh)2222 Casita Subdivision - Ashland, OregonSimTraffic Report Page 4 Queuing and Blocking Report 2021 PM background 1301603131 Intersection: 3: Main Street & Jackson Road, Interval #1 NpwfnfouTCTX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMMS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*2835 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*47 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*2836 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*414 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*61 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Intersection: 3: Main Street & Jackson Road, Interval #2 NpwfnfouTCTCTX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUMS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*392535 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*325 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*272332 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*447414 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*61 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*1 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*1 Intersection: 3: Main Street & Jackson Road, All Intervals NpwfnfouTCTCTX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUMS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*3:2541 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*416 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*272133 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*447414 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*61 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*1 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*1 Dbtjub!Tvcejwjtjpo!.!Btimboe-!PsfhpoTjnUsbggjd!Sfqpsu Qbhf!2 Queuing and Blocking Report 2021 PM background 1301603131 Intersection: 4: 99 & Jackson Rd., Interval #1 NpwfnfouTFOXOFTX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMMMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*3:43265354 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*23::5257 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*4644285373 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*32:345 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*126 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*11 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*211211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Intersection: 4: 99 & Jackson Rd., Interval #2 NpwfnfouTFOXOFTX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMMMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*4539267351 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*:44467 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*4228213281 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*32:345 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*6 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*1 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*211211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Intersection: 4: 99 & Jackson Rd., All Intervals NpwfnfouTFOXOFTX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMMMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*454427735: Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*2155989 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*4333242319 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*32:345 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*18 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*11 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*211211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Dbtjub!Tvcejwjtjpo!.!Btimboe-!PsfhpoTjnUsbggjd!Sfqpsu Qbhf!3 Queuing and Blocking Report 2021 PM background 1301603131 Intersection: 7: S Jackson/Valley View & 99, Interval #1 NpwfnfouOCOCTCTFTFTFOXOXOXOX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUUSMUUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*61487957534431752221263225 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*2:3355847268:127738975 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*64578::7636232756217265231 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*33932539:69:67:77:7 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*76336586211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*11232 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*112356 Intersection: 7: S Jackson/Valley View & 99, Interval #2 NpwfnfouOCOCTCTFTFTFOXOXOXOX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUUSMUUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*583:973632375448214229227 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*::7392766825686357 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*44422118542183945:6:6:8 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*33932539:69:67:77:7 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*76336586211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*111 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*131 Intersection: 7: S Jackson/Valley View & 99, All Intervals NpwfnfouOCOCTCTFTFTFOXOXOXOX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUUSMUUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*66499737834431757223273228 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*2323695329138256:6961 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*4:47:896328722548:9225215 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*33932539:69:67:77:7 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*76336586211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*11121 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*11183 Dbtjub!Tvcejwjtjpo!.!Btimboe-!PsfhpoTjnUsbggjd!Sfqpsu Qbhf!4 Queuing and Blocking Report 2021 PM background 1301603131 Intersection: 9: Main St/Main Street & Maple St, Interval #1 NpwfnfouFCXCOCOCOCTCTCTC Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*2::4455:21:4273:335213:6 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*23323358216:453522242:2 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*32:4672123242792173464523 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*247434621914375 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*22 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*332 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*261271812:6 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*6563 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*86:8 Intersection: 9: Main St/Main Street & Maple St, Interval #2 NpwfnfouFCXCOCOCOCTCTCTC Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*2454755:21:8371234399:3:6 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*529327:374:292245243 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*:439678237929::1396746: Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*247434621914375 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*4 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*32 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*261271812:6 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*51146 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*29133 Intersection: 9: Main St/Main Street & Maple St, All Intervals NpwfnfouFCXCOCOCOCTCTCTC Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*3235356121:9371234399:3:6 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*72:335:694931223:257 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*25941689238:295:53859486 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*247434621914375 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*6 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*82 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*261271812:6 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*5414: Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*43151 Dbtjub!Tvcejwjtjpo!.!Btimboe-!PsfhpoTjnUsbggjd!Sfqpsu Qbhf!5 Queuing and Blocking Report 2034 PM background 1301603131 Intersection: 3: Main Street & Jackson Road, Interval #1 NpwfnfouTCTCTX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUMS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*294735 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*516 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*2:133 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*447414 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*61 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*2 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*1 Intersection: 3: Main Street & Jackson Road, Interval #2 NpwfnfouTCTCC2TX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUUMS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*3:217533: Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*32655 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*242395:31 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*447575414 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*2 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*8 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*61 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*14 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*11 Intersection: 3: Main Street & Jackson Road, All Intervals NpwfnfouTCTCC2TX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUUMS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*41217533: Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*32345 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*262215331 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*447575414 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*2 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*6 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*61 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*14 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*11 Dbtjub!Tvcejwjtjpo!.!Btimboe-!PsfhpoTjnUsbggjd!Sfqpsu Qbhf!2 Queuing and Blocking Report 2034 PM background 1301603131 Intersection: 4: 99 & Jackson Rd., Interval #1 NpwfnfouTFOXOFTX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMMMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*614429935: Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*376225283 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*683631941: Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*32:345 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*255 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*11 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*211211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Intersection: 4: 99 & Jackson Rd., Interval #2 NpwfnfouTFOXOFTX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMMMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*654129135: Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*3464788 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*613223332: Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*32:345 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*226 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*11 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*211211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Intersection: 4: 99 & Jackson Rd., All Intervals NpwfnfouTFOXOFTX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMMMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*66442:635: Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*35666211 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*633326:367 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*32:345 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*234 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*11 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*211211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Dbtjub!Tvcejwjtjpo!.!Btimboe-!PsfhpoTjnUsbggjd!Sfqpsu Qbhf!3 Queuing and Blocking Report 2034 PM background 1301603131 Intersection: 7: S Jackson/Valley View & 99, Interval #1 NpwfnfouOCOCTCTFTFTFOXOXOXOX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUUSMUUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*493::456935232747228239229 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*3129713442742212586857: :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*585221117138135549242261242 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*33932539:69:67:77:7 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*76336586211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*1333 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*1237: Intersection: 7: S Jackson/Valley View & 99, Interval #2 NpwfnfouOCOCTCTFTFTFOXOXOXOX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUUSMUUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*453:23356123:645622221:224 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*::::6246:2126636152 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*424225:5482234949:1:6:5 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*33932539:69:67:77:7 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*76336586211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*111 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*122 Intersection: 7: S Jackson/Valley View & 99, All Intervals NpwfnfouOCOCTCTFTFTFOXOXOXOX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUUSMUUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*543:23356935232761235256234 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*2222:1129954526686759 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*474525635829624549214224217 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*33932539:69:67:77:7 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*76336586211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*1222 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*1194 Dbtjub!Tvcejwjtjpo!.!Btimboe-!PsfhpoTjnUsbggjd!Sfqpsu Qbhf!4 Queuing and Blocking Report 2034 PM background 1301603131 Intersection: 9: Main St/Main Street & Maple St, Interval #1 NpwfnfouFCXCOCOCOCTCTCTC Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*2814755:21:327321136753:6 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*21427374217651322274289 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*2814:7282311299:93738511 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*247434621914375 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*23 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*349 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*261271812:6 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*6562 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*86:: Intersection: 9: Main St/Main Street & Maple St, Interval #2 NpwfnfouFCXCOCOCOCTCTCTC Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*21:3556121:637123841493:6 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*559347:724636266727: :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*:236699237128821844:44:7 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*247434621914375 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*51 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*391 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*261271812:6 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*5452 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*3138 Intersection: 9: Main St/Main Street & Maple St, All Intervals NpwfnfouFCXCOCOCOCTCTCTC Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*2824756121:637123841493:6 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*6921353:9747352572282 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*2363:6:6237629121643484:8 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*247434621914375 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*71 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*921 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*261271812:6 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*5655 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*4456 Dbtjub!Tvcejwjtjpo!.!Btimboe-!PsfhpoTjnUsbggjd!Sfqpsu Qbhf!5 Queuing and Blocking Report 2034 PM background 1301603131 Intersection: 3: Main Street & Jackson Road, Interval #1 NpwfnfouTCTCC2TX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUUMS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*282119539 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*52238 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*312332:3: Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*447575414 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*4 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*64 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*61 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*5 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*1 Intersection: 3: Main Street & Jackson Road, Interval #2 NpwfnfouTCTCC2C37C3TX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUUUUMS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*534613382543841 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*478583445 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*334113933164131 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*4475756622548414 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*963 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*664424 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*61 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*22 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*1 Intersection: 3: Main Street & Jackson Road, All Intervals NpwfnfouTCTCC2C37C3TX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUUUUMS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*544613382543845 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*464472836 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*333783552883733 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*4475756622548414 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*852 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*663621 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*61 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*: Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*1 Dbtjub!Tvcejwjtjpo!.!Btimboe-!PsfhpoTjnUsbggjd!Sfqpsu Qbhf!2 Queuing and Blocking Report 2034 PM background 1301603131 Intersection: 4: 99 & Jackson Rd., Interval #1 NpwfnfouTFOXOFTX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMMMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*3:3332435: Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*2482312:7 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*4638343425 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*32:345 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*2468 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*11 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*211211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Intersection: 4: 99 & Jackson Rd., Interval #2 NpwfnfouTFOXOFTX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMMMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*453432235: Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*22566222 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*443128:387 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*32:345 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*:39 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*11 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*211211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Intersection: 4: 99 & Jackson Rd., All Intervals NpwfnfouTFOXOFTX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMMMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*453432935: Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*22682242 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*45333123:9 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*32:345 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*2146 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*11 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*211211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Dbtjub!Tvcejwjtjpo!.!Btimboe-!PsfhpoTjnUsbggjd!Sfqpsu Qbhf!3 Queuing and Blocking Report 2034 PM background 1301603131 Intersection: 7: S Jackson/Valley View & 99, Interval #1 NpwfnfouOCOCTCTFTFTFOXOXOXOX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUUSMUUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*67579356:36533842231241214 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*2:336563828921127797:65 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*6563:257136733848229262221 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*33932539:69:67:77:7 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*76336586211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*21322 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*112335 Intersection: 7: S Jackson/Valley View & 99, Interval #2 NpwfnfouOCOCTCTFTFTFOXOXOXOX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUUSMUUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*494521935727921561215267234 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*:8849267324266:6:57 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*44392628512296651::22721: Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*33932539:69:67:77:7 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*76336586211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*11122 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*11142 Intersection: 7: S Jackson/Valley View & 99, All Intervals NpwfnfouOCOCTCTFTFTFOXOXOXOX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUUSMUUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*6761219:713653386123828:235 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*22227:229:14526737259 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*4:482518582:423:4:215237221 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*33932539:69:67:77:7 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*76336586211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*11122 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*11193 Dbtjub!Tvcejwjtjpo!.!Btimboe-!PsfhpoTjnUsbggjd!Sfqpsu Qbhf!4 Queuing and Blocking Report 2034 PM background 1301603131 Intersection: 9: Main St/Main Street & Maple St, Interval #1 NpwfnfouFCXCOCOCOCTCTCTC Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*3415255:21:432525:3:563:6 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*24829435219651492556297 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*3485376121:729924:4184517 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*247434621914375 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*231 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*3:22 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*261271812:6 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*6664 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*9:227 Intersection: 9: Main St/Main Street & Maple St, Interval #2 NpwfnfouFCXCOCOCOCTCTCTC Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*2434356121:527923443693:6 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*558326213826352964315 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*:5376782384215214476552: Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*247434621914375 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*51 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*452 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*261271812:6 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*5252 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*3341 Intersection: 9: Main St/Main Street & Maple St, All Intervals NpwfnfouFCXCOCOCOCTCTCTC Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*3435256121:637126143693:6 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*7721352215232382865311 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*26:426:7236:23:224464:527 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*247434621914375 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*71 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*:92 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*261271812:6 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*5555 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*4:63 Dbtjub!Tvcejwjtjpo!.!Btimboe-!PsfhpoTjnUsbggjd!Sfqpsu Qbhf!5 Queuing and Blocking Report 2034 PM Build 1301603131 Intersection: 3: Main Street & Jackson Road, Interval #1 NpwfnfouTCTX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMMS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*2729 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*45 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*2831 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*414 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*61 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Intersection: 3: Main Street & Jackson Road, Interval #2 NpwfnfouTCTCC2C37C3TX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUUUUMS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*83547662751254983 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*:34:3973::69737 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*646748278:72812214 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*4475756622548414 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*6661564 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*22:721:4:9967 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*61 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*167 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*17 Intersection: 3: Main Street & Jackson Road, All Intervals NpwfnfouTCTCC2C37C3TX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUUUUMS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*83547662751254983 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*929332833855632 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*5862275381:2611:1 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*4475756622548414 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*5248453 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*9:893185253 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*61 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*153 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*15 Dbtjub!Tvcejwjtjpo!.!Btimboe-!PsfhpoTjnUsbggjd!Sfqpsu Qbhf!2 Queuing and Blocking Report 2034 PM Build 1301603131 Intersection: 4: 99 & Jackson Rd., Interval #1 NpwfnfouTFOXOFTX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMMMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*39225958 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*843437 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*38286665 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*32:345 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*211211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Intersection: 4: 99 & Jackson Rd., Interval #2 NpwfnfouTFTFC9C9OXOFTX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSUMMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*2355418478413934535: Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*3924:3272636281325 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*:85678627373339842: Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*4587:77:732:345 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*412136389 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*7722173411 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*211211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*43 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*22 Intersection: 4: 99 & Jackson Rd., All Intervals NpwfnfouTFTFC9C9OXOFTX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSUMMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*2355418478413934535: Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*34216275226624627: :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*974:976565332392442 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*4587:77:732:345 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*34834:69 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*5:78:2911 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*211211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*35 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*: Dbtjub!Tvcejwjtjpo!.!Btimboe-!PsfhpoTjnUsbggjd!Sfqpsu Qbhf!3 Queuing and Blocking Report 2034 PM Build 1301603131 Intersection: 7: S Jackson/Valley View & 99, Interval #1 NpwfnfouOCOCTCTFTFTFOXOXOXOX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUUSMUUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*283:525462286135:4223225 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*52239124762821696659 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*32455864:2286339211228226 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*33932539:69:67:77:7 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&* Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi* Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*76336586211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*21 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*81 Intersection: 7: S Jackson/Valley View & 99, Interval #2 NpwfnfouOCOCTCTFTFTFOXOXOXOX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUUSMUUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*766532:954588:86965255327236 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*3632244:733:63652:899779 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*6:5:356:35:76571557238276245 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*33932539:69:67:77:7 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*3142 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*53811 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*76336586211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*213842 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*112:517 Intersection: 7: S Jackson/Valley View & 99, All Intervals NpwfnfouOCOCTCTFTFTFOXOXOXOX Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUUSMUUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*766532:954588:86965256327236 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*312:2194613512:828848974 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*665734273286:465654234268242 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*33932539:69:67:77:7 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*2632 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*43111 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*76336586211 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*213132 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*1125435 Dbtjub!Tvcejwjtjpo!.!Btimboe-!PsfhpoTjnUsbggjd!Sfqpsu Qbhf!4 Queuing and Blocking Report 2034 PM Build 1301603131 Intersection: 9: Main St/Main Street & Maple St, Interval #1 NpwfnfouFCXCOCOCOCTCTCTC Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*:43555:2159322535482:3 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*579338877512137977 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*9:37693219229:6266134: Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*247434621914375 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*2 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*7 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*261271812:6 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*5644 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*3536 Intersection: 9: Main St/Main Street & Maple St, Interval #2 NpwfnfouFCXCOCOCOCTCTCTC Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*4545:56121:837123843753:6 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*2682:388218649343742316 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*4165574222912932175394527 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*247434621914375 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*252 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*45336 Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*261271812:6 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*6867 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*:3236 Intersection: 9: Main St/Main Street & Maple St, All Intervals NpwfnfouFCXCOCOCOCTCTCTC Ejsfdujpot!TfswfeMUSMUSMUSMUS Nbyjnvn!Rvfvf!)gu*4545:56121:837123843753:6 Bwfsbhf!Rvfvf!)gu*24127376211249313172282 :6ui!Rvfvf!)gu*393527322394295:653794:7 Mjol!Ejtubodf!)gu*247434621914375 Vqtusfbn!Cml!Ujnf!)&*222 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*3692: Tupsbhf!Cbz!Ejtu!)gu*261271812:6 Tupsbhf!Cml!Ujnf!)&*6561 Rvfvjoh!Qfobmuz!)wfi*86211 Dbtjub!Tvcejwjtjpo!.!Btimboe-!PsfhpoTjnUsbggjd!Sfqpsu Qbhf!5 DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED INTO THE RECORD ROGUE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC May 12, 2020 RE: 2020-00017 12-unit Cottage House Development at 210 Alicia Street Dear Planning Commissioners and Planning Division Staff, This letter is intended as a rebuttal to the public comments received for the Planning Commission May 12 Public Hearing. The proposed development complies with the standards for development of a single-family residential cottage house development in the single-family residential zone. Zoning: The subject property and the adjacent properties are zoned R-1-5. The adjacent property to the south has a conservation easement, but the zoning district, R-1-5, remains the same. Density: The proposal complies with the density standards allowed for Cottage Housing Development in the Single-Family Residential Zone. In the R-1-5 zone, the lot area is divided by 2500 to determine the number of cottage housing units. In this case the lot area is 54,722 square feet / 2500 = 21. The maximum number of cottages is 12. The proposal complies. Access Management and Driveway Construction: Adequate transportation can be provided to the nearest public street Alicia Street. Alicia Street, Sylvia Street, Oak Lawn and Sleepy Hollow are all public streets that are designated as neighborhood streets. Though not improved with curb, gutter and sidewalk there is adequate driving surface for vehicular access to the property including adequate width for emergency vehicles to get to the site. Though there are narrow driveways, in most instances when people park “on-street” they are actually parked on the gravel shoulder. The proposed driveway with 20-feet of driving width complies with the standards for access to a parking lot that has more than seven parking spaces. The driveway is wide enough to allow for two-way vehicular traffic. Additionally, the driveway is proposed as a fire apparatus access and a firetruck turn around that complies with the standards has been proposed. In the event of an emergency evacuation, the length of the driveway and the width of the driveway will not prevent residents from exiting the property. There are four public right-of-way that lead into the neighborhood and exit onto Oak Street. 1 ROGUE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC Traffic Impact Analysis: The proposed 12-unit, single-family residential development in the single-family residential zone does not require a Traffic Impact Analysis. According to the Public Works Department, the streets in the area generate approximately 100 vehicle trips per day. These trips are generated by 20+ single family homes that have two or more bedrooms. The impacts of the 12, smaller units willnot have a substantial negative impact on the traffic in the area. Parking: The proposed parking complies with the City Standards for number of spaces and parking lot layout and design for 12 cottages that are less than 800 SF and two units greater than 800 SF. Sanitary Sewer: The proposal was reviewed by the City of Ashland Public Works Division Staff for pre-application conference proposal and again following the application. In discussion with the Sanitary Sewer Department, by the property owner, there is not a record of complaints regarding failure of the city’s sanitary sewer main that the project proposes connection. If there were in fact documented concerns that there is not adequate capascity, those should have been raised by the Sewer Department upon inquiry by the property owner. Excavation: There has been excavation for the purposes of installation of a garden. The trenching referenced in one of the letters is to install Mole Wire and the garden perimeter fence. Broken irrigation lines transect the property. Those lines were repaired to allow for the piped irrigation water to be delivered to the end user, the adjacent property to the east. There has not been excavation occurring for the garden development in the area identified by the wetland’s biologist as possible wetland area or within the buffer area. Tree Removal: Though the large Willow tree and the large plum tree look healthy to non-arborists like me, based on the Arborist Assessment provided by Chris John, Canopy Tree Care, the Willow tree is hazardous. Mr. John said the tree should be removed immediately. Since there is a land use review on the site, the property owner has not proceeded with the emergency tree removal process. The Plum tree is nearing the end of its lifespan, the tree would also be negatively impacted by the proposed driveway construction. Thank you, Amy Amy Gunter Rogue Planning & Development Services, LLC Amygunter.planning@gmail.com 2 ROGUE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC May 12, 2020 RE: 2020-00017 12-unit Cottage House Development at 210 Alicia Street Dear Planning Commissioners and Planning Division Staff, This letter is intended as a rebuttal to the public comments received for the Planning Commission May 12 Public Hearing. The proposed development complies with the standards for development of a single-family residential cottage house development in the single-family residential zone. Zoning: The subject property and the adjacent properties are zoned R-1-5. The adjacent property to the south has a conservation easement, but the zoning district, R-1-5, remains the same. Density: The proposal complies with the density standards allowed for Cottage Housing Development in the Single-Family Residential Zone. In the R-1-5 zone, the lot area is divided by 2500 to determine the number of cottage housing units. In this case the lot area is 54,722 square feet / 2500 = 21. The maximum number of cottages is 12. The proposal complies. Access Management and Driveway Construction: Adequate transportation can be provided to the nearest public street Alicia Street. Alicia Street, Sylvia Street, Oak Lawn and Sleepy Hollow are all public streets that are designated as neighborhood streets. Though not improved with curb, gutter and sidewalk there is adequate driving surface for vehicular access to the property including adequate width for emergency vehicles to get to the site. Though there are narrow driveways, in most instances when people park “on-street” they are actually parked on the gravel shoulder. The proposed driveway with 20-feet of driving width complies with the standards for access to a parking lot that has more than seven parking spaces. The driveway is wide enough to allow for two-way vehicular traffic. Additionally, the driveway is proposed as a fire apparatus access and a firetruck turn around that complies with the standards has been proposed. In the event of an emergency evacuation, the length of the driveway and the width of the driveway will not prevent residents from exiting the property. There are four public right-of-way that lead into the neighborhood and exit onto Oak Street. 1 ROGUE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC Traffic Impact Analysis: The proposed 12-unit, single-family residential development in the single-family residential zone does not require a Traffic Impact Analysis. According to the Public Works Department, the streets in the area generate approximately 100 vehicle trips per day. These trips are generated by 20+ single family homes that have two or more bedrooms. The impacts of the 12, smaller units willnot have a substantial negative impact on the traffic in the area. Parking: The proposed parking complies with the City Standards for number of spaces and parking lot layout and design for 12 cottages that are less than 800 SF and two units greater than 800 SF. Sanitary Sewer: The proposal was reviewed by the City of Ashland Public Works Division Staff for pre-application conference proposal and again following the application. In discussion with the Sanitary Sewer Department, by the property owner, there is not a record of complaints regarding failure of the city’s sanitary sewer main that the project proposes connection. If there were in fact documented concerns that there is not adequate capascity, those should have been raised by the Sewer Department upon inquiry by the property owner. Excavation: There has been excavation for the purposes of installation of a garden. The trenching referenced in one of the letters is to install Mole Wire and the garden perimeter fence. Broken irrigation lines transect the property. Those lines were repaired to allow for the piped irrigation water to be delivered to the end user, the adjacent property to the east. There has not been excavation occurring for the garden development in the area identified by the wetland’s biologist as possible wetland area or within the buffer area. Tree Removal: Though the large Willow tree and the large plum tree look healthy to non-arborists like me, based on the Arborist Assessment provided by Chris John, Canopy Tree Care, the Willow tree is hazardous. Mr. John said the tree should be removed immediately. Since there is a land use review on the site, the property owner has not proceeded with the emergency tree removal process. The Plum tree is nearing the end of its lifespan, the tree would also be negatively impacted by the proposed driveway construction. Thank you, Amy Amy Gunter Rogue Planning & Development Services, LLC Amygunter.planning@gmail.com 2 on-street