Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2026-03-04 Historic PACKET
Historic Preservation Advisory Commission Meeting Agenda ASHLAND HISTORIC PRESERVATION ADVISORY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Wednesday, March 4, 2026 Siskiyou Room, 51 Winburn Way 4:00 pm Note: Anyone wishing to speak at any Historic Preservation Advisory Committee meeting is encouraged to do so. If you wish to speak, please rise and, after you have been recognized by the Chair, give your name and City you live for the record. You will then be allowed to speak. Please note the public testimony may be limited by the Chair. I.CALL TO ORDER 1.Land Acknowledgement** 2.Join Zoom Meeting: https://zoom.us/j/99489743323?pwd=piCzAM8ykM9umgR5IosDLWzNThoIbg.1 II.APPROVAL OF AGENDA III.APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1.Approval of Minutes of February 2, 2026 IV.PUBLIC FORUM V.LIAISON REPORTS 1.Council Liaison -Derek Sherrell Staff Liaison -Derek Severson and Nick Schubert VI.DISCUSSION ITEMS 1.Wayfinding Project Update-Deputy City Manager Jordan Rooklyn 2. Preservation Week 2026 — Preservation month celebrates America's 250th anniversary with an "All People Are Created Equal" theme Tombstone Tales Wednesday, May 20th Preservation Awards Thursday, May 21st, 12-1 -Potential nominees 3.Election of Officers -Chair & Co-Chair 4. Review Board Assignments — March & April 2026 VII.LAND USE ITEMS 1.PLANNING ACTION: PA-T1 2025-00284 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 246 A Street OWNER / APPLICANT: Parts & Service, LLC/Rafael Gonzales PLANNER: Matt Brinkley (Greentop Planning, Development & Research) ARCHITECT: Peter Burns Grossman (PBG Architecture) DESCRIPTION: A request for Site Design Review approval to renovate an existing auto shop building, add a new 822 square foot satellite food service building and reconfigure the site at 246 A Street for restaurant use. The application includes a request for a Tree Removal Permit to remove two trees. Page 1 of 2 Historic Preservation Advisory Commission Meeting Agenda COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Employment; ZONING: E-1; MAP: 39 1E 09 BA; TAX LOT: 1200 VIII.ADJOURNMENT 1.Committee Contact information If you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact Derek Severson at planning@ashlandoregon.gov or 541.488.5305 (TTY phone number Notification at least three business days before the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Page 2 of 2 Historic Preservation Advisory Commission Meeting Agenda 1.Committee Contact information If you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact Derek Severson at planning@ashlandoregon.gov or 541.488.5305 (TTY phone number 1.800.735.2900). Notification at least three business days before the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. !"# ' %& ' HPACCommittee Minutes DRAFT Note: Anyone who wishesto speak at any HPACmeeting is encouraged to do so. If you wish to speak, please rise and, after you have been recognized by the Chair, give your name and complete address for the record. You will then be allowed to speak. Please note the public testimony may be limited by the Chairʾ ˤ˹˽˵̃ ˾˿̄˵˴ ˶˿̂ ˵˱˳˸ ˹̄˵˽ ˱̂˵ ˱̀̀̂˿̈˹˽˱̄˵Ѕ February4,2026 Minutes CALLTOORDER:Severson called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. Committee members Sam Whitford, Bill Emery, Katy Repp and Jed Prest were present, along with Planning Division staff liaison Derek Seversonand Planning Commission liaison Lisa Verner, along with Associate Planner Nick Schubert. Committee members Scharen and DeLaunay and Council liaison Derek Sherrell were absent. READINGOFLANDACKNOWLEDGEMENT Severson read the land acknowledgement. APPROVALOFAGENDA No changes were made to the agenda. APPROVALOFMINUTES Whitford/Reppm/stoapprovetheminutesofJanuary7,2026,aspresented.Voicevote:Whitford, Emery,ReppandPrest,YES.Motionpassed. PUBLICFORUM Peter Finkle of Walk Ashland1) Encouraged removal of the Ailanthus(Tree of Heaven) at 431 North Main ˣ̄̂˵˵̄ˋ ˂ʹ ˞˿̄˵˴ ̄˸˱̄ ʳˉ ̅˾˴˵̂ ˘ˠˑ˓Ͻ̃ ̂˵̃̀˿˾̃˹˲˹˼˹̄˹˵̃ ˹˾ ˑ˝˓ ˂ʾˁ˃ʾˀˁˀʾ˒ ˹̃ Ͽ Assisting in promoting public ̃̅̀̀˿̂̄ ˶˿̂ ̄˸˵ ̀̂˵̃˵̂̆˱̄˹˿˾ ˱˾˴ ̂˵˳˿˷˾˹̄˹˿˾ ˿˶ ˑ̃˸˼˱˾˴Ͻ̃ ˸˹̃̄˿̂˹˳ ̀˱̃̄ʾЀ ˖˹˾˻˼˵ ̃̅˷˷˵̃̄˵˴ ˱̃ ̄˸˵ ˓˿˽˽˹̄̄˵˵Ͻ̃ ̂˿˼˵ ˹˾ ̂˵̆˹˵̇˹˾˷ ˼˱˾˴ ̅̃˵ ˱˳̄˹˿˾̃ ˴˵˳̂eases with changes on state law, HPAC might do ̇˵˼˼ ̄˿ ̂˵˶˿˳̅̃ ˿˾ ̇˱̉̃ ̄˿ ̀̂˿˽˿̄˵ ̀̂˵̃˵̂̆˱̄˹˿˾ ˱˾˴ ˑ̃˸˼˱˾˴Ͻ̃ ˸˹̃̄˿̂˹˳ ̀˱̃̄ʾ LIASONREPORTS CouncilLiaisonDerek Sherrell was absent. CommunityDevelopmentStaffLiaisonSeversonprovided a brief staff update, noting thata letter to ˓˿̅˾˳˹˼ ̀̂˵̀˱̂˵˴ ˲̉ ˢ˵̀̀ ̃̅˽˽˱̂˹̊˹˾˷ ˼˱̃̄ ˽˿˾̄˸Ͻs discussion of the Siskiyou Boulevard item. Members expressed their general support for havingScharen sign this letter. Severson noted that he had looked into the issue of whether HPAC could charge fees for Preservation Week events such as Tombstone Tales. He indicated that there was no mechanism to do so, and that if fees were charged any money collected would need to go into the general fund and could not be directed to support HPACor preservation. He noted that it might be possible for HPAC to co-sponsor an event sponsored by a nonprofit organization with the nonprofit to charge fees. Repp reminded Severson that he needed to look into the possibility of placing a banner across East Main Street to promote the event. Page 1 of 6 HPACCommittee Minutes DRAFT PRESERVATIONWEEK2026 Peter Finkle suggested the possibility of granting an award to Madeline Hill who developed Mountain Meadows, which while not a historic district yet hã ˾˿˾˵̄˸˵˼˵̃̃ ˸˱˴ ˱ ˼˱̂˷˵ ˹˽̀˱˳̄ ˿˾ ˑ̃˸˼˱˾˴Ͻ̃ ˽˿̂˵ recent history. Members seemed generally agreeable to granting Hill an individual award, and Finkle noted that he had written a number of articles recently that might help. thrd There was discussion of events for the week of May 17 to May 23noting that the awards ceremony st would likely be Thursday, May 21from 12-1, and that Tombstone Tales might benefit from a second event focused for kids. It was noted that there would again be self-guided tours of the mausoleum. ELECTIONOFOFFICERS Those present agreed to postpone the election of officers until the March meeting in hopes that everyone would be in attendance. REVIEWBOARDASSIGNMENTS Members present volunteered for Review Board assignments for Februaryand March. February5,2026Ϻ˧˸˹̄˶˿̂˴ʼ ˢ˵̀̀ ʶ ˠ̂˵̃̄ February19,2026ϺScharen, Emery & Prest March5,2026Ϻˢ˵̀̀ʼ ˧˸˹̄˶˿̂˴ ʶ ˕˽˵̂̉(+/-) March19,2026ϺEmery(+/-) REVIEWBOARDITEMSDISCUSSION 581 East Main Street/Dezin Fine HomesPre-Application Comments ˤ˸˵ ̃̅˲˺˵˳̄ ̀̂˿̀˵̂̄̉ ˹̃ ̄˸˵ Ͽ˘̅˲˲˱̂˴ʽ˘˱̂˴̉ ˘˿̅̃˵Ѐʼ an historic contributing resource within the Ashland Railroad Addition Historic District constructed in about 1889. The historic survey document notes specifically the wrap-around front porch as a prominent feature and indicates that the shed dormer on the west elevation is incompatible, but that otherwise the home retains high integrity and effectively relates its historic period of development. HPAC Review Board had previously reviewed the proposal in December 2025 with the following comments: ˘ˠˑ˓ ˽˵˽˲˵̂̃Ͻ ̀̂˵˶˵̂˵˾˳˵ ̇˿̅˼˴ ˲˵ ̄˿ ̂˵̄˱˹˾ ̄˸˵ ˸˿˽˵Ͻ̃ ˵̈˹̃̄˹˾˷ ˶̂˿˾̄ ̀˿̂˳˸ʿ˶˱͖˱˴˵ ˱˾˴ ̄˸̅̃ its existing historic character. ʸˑ˝˓ ˁˈʾ˄ʾ˂ʾˀ˅ˀʾ˓ʾ˂ʾ˲ Ͽ˟̂˹˷˹˾˱˼ ˱̂˳˸˹̄˵˳̄̅̂˱˼ ˶˵˱̄̅̂˵̃ ̃˸˱˼˼ ˲˵ ̂˵̃̄˿̂˵˴ ˱̃ ˽̅˳˸ ˱̃ ̀˿̃̃˹˲˼˵ʼ ̇˸˵˾ ̄˸˿̃˵ ˶˵˱̄̅̂˵̃ ˳˱˾ ˲˵ ˴˿˳̅˽˵˾̄˵˴ʾЀʹ There was, however, recognition of the practical reasoning behind the proposal. Committee members indicated that if the proposal were ultimately approved, it would be crucial that trim, siding and windows, and overall proportions be carefully selected to maintain the historic character. And that new landscaping be incorporated to soften the proposed exterior changes. In reviewing the pre-application materials, HPAC Review Board reiterated the above comments, with the following additional notes: Page 2of 6 HPACCommittee Minutes DRAFT HPAC members found it notable that the front entry is at grade, which is not typical. They ̃̅˷˷˵̃̄˵˴ ̄˸˱̄ ̄˸˵ ̀̂˿̀˿̃˱˼ ̃˵˵˽̃ ̄˿ ̇˿̂˻ ˱˾˴ ˹̃ Ͽ̂˵˱̃˿˾˱˲˼̉ ̂˵̆˵̂̃˹˲˼˵ʾЀ HPAC members noted that new upper windows should match the existing, rather than increasing in size. ʸˑ˝˓ ˁˈʾ˄ʾ˂ʾˀ˅ˀʾ˓ʾ˂ʾ˷ Ͽ Replacement windows in historic buildings shall match the original windows. Windows in new additions shall be compatible in proportion, shape and size, but not replicate original windows in the historic building ʾЀʹ HPAC members were split on whether the change to the ground floor rear window (from narrow single to double) was appropriate. ʸˑ˝˓ ˁˈʾ˄ʾ˂ʾˀ˅ˀʾ˓ʾ˂ʾ˷ Ͽ Replacement windows in historic buildings shall match the original windows. Windows in new additions shall be compatible in proportion, shape and size, but not replicate original windows in the historic building ʾЀʹ 624 A StreetPre-Application Comments The subject property is identified in the Ashland Railroad Addition Historic District survey document as the Ashland Depot Hotel, South Wing and was constructed in about 1887. The property is considered to be a historic contributing resource in the district and is individually listed on the National Register of Historic Places. In reviewing the pre-application materials, the HPAC Review Board recommended that the proposed new window be shifted to the left to be adjacent to the door for symmetry with the window on the opposite side of the door; that the window be of a type to match the existing; and that trim boards be adjusted to match the existing. 161 B Street/Dezin Fine HomesPre-Application Comments The subject property is identified in the Ashland Railroad Addition Historic District survey document as the Steve H. Royle Rentals, constructed in about 1979. The property is considered to be non- historic/non-contributing. The two buildings on-site arenoted for being generally compatible with the multiple-uses and dense development of the Railroad District. HPAC Review Board had previously reviewed the proposal in December 2025 with the following comments: HPAC members urged that historic proportions be retained through the proposed replacement windows and lap siding, suggesting a five-inch exposure was appropriate. In reviewing thenew pre-application materials, HPAC Review Board reiterated the above comments with no additional notes. It was noted that the rear building has limited exposure to B Street. Planning Commission Chair Verner exited to avoid potential ex parte contact on an item that would be th before the Planning Commission on February 10 . Page 3 of 6 HPACCommittee Minutes DRAFT LANDUSEITEMS PLANNINGACTION:PA-T2-2025-00065 SUBJECTPROPERTY:431 North Main Street APPLICANT:Rogue Planning and Development OWNER:Rogue Holdings LLC DESCRIPTION:Arequest for concurrent Outline and Final Plan approval for a Performance Standards Option (PSO) subdivision. The parent parcel at 431 N Main Street is proposed to be subdivided into four new lots, each with a single-family dwelling. The existing structureis proposed for demolition. The application also includes a request for four Conditional Use Permits to exceed the Maximum Permitted Floor Area (MPFA) in a Historic District on each new home, a request to remove a significant ̄̂˵˵ ˃˃Ѐ ˔˒˘ ˹˾ ̃˹̊˵ ʸˑ˹˼˱˾̄˸̅̃ ˱˼̄˹̃̃˹˽˱ʼ ˤ̂˵˵ ˿˶ ˘˵˱̆˵˾ʹ ˱˾˴ ˱ ̂˵́̅˵̃̄ ˶˿̂ ˱˾ ˵̈˳˵̀̄˹˿˾ ̄˿ ̃̄̂˵˵̄ standards to not install standard street improvements due to the existing sidewalk and site constraints. COMPREHENSIVEPLANDESIGNATION:Multi-Family Residential; ZONING:R-2; MAP:39-1E-05-DA; TAXLOT: 7300 Severson gave a brief staff report, explaining that the discussion tonight was to review revisions provided in response to previous recommendations and to provide updated recommendations to the applicant and Planning Commission. Amy Gunter of Rogue Planning briefly explained the revisions provided. In reviewing the revisions, HPAC members indicated that they could not find that the revised designs were in keeping with the Historic District Development Standards. HPAC members had the following additional design recommendations to bring the proposed buildings more in line with the Historic District Development Standards. With these recommendations fully incorporated into conditionsof approval to be included inthe final building permit drawings and reviewed by the HPAC Review Board, HPAC would support the requests for Conditional Use Permits to exceed the maximum permitted floor area (MPFA). o ThreeSingleFamilyResidences(SFRs)(Lots#1,#2and#3) HPAC members had previously recommended that the design of one of thesethree SFRs should be flipped so that it was a mirror image of the others (i.e. a garage and driveway in opposite relation to the rest of the house), rather than having all three identically configured, and that this could be done most readily to Lot #3 adjacent to the SRO while satisfying driveway separation requirements and providing a massing that stepped from the single-story SRO building to a single-story garage element to the two-story mass of the remainder of the SFR. This recommendation was fully incorporated into the revisions, and HPAC had no further recommendations with regard to the SFR designs. o Single-roomoccupancy(SRO)structureproposedonthecornerlot(Lot#4): ˘ˠˑ˓Ͻ̃ ˿̂˹˷˹˾˱˼˼̉ ̂˵˳˿˽˽˵˾˴˱̄˹˿˾̃ ̂˵̃̀˿˾˴˵˴ ̄˿ ˳˿ncerns that the initial designswere not in keeping with the Historic District Development Standards in terms of scale, massing, roof, form Page 4of 6 HPACCommittee Minutes DRAFT and entrances. HPAC had previously suggested segmenting the building to bring a central element forward to provide articulation in the street-facing façade(s) and adding a corresponding secondary gable element, with a more substantial pitch, to the roof and potentially hipping the roof to provide greater articulation to the roofform and better fit with the surrounding historic neighborhood; adjusting the exterior treatment in terms of the porchand railings, doors, accesspointsand coverings. HPAC generally indicated that this design needed more work to break the mass into separate forms with greater articulation in the roof and street- facing façadesrather than presenting a monotonous, box-like form on this prominent corner at the gateway to the historic district. thth In considering the January 12 and January 28revisions, HPACmembersexpressedsome disappointmentthatthereviseddesignshadnotsegmentedthebuildingtobringforwarda centralelementtoprovidesomebetterarticulationinthestreet-facingfacadesaswas previouslyrecommended. However,HPACexpr˵̃̃˵˴˷˵˾˵̂˱˼˱̀̀̂˵˳˹˱̄˹˿˾˶˿̂̄˸˵˱̀̀˼˹˳˱˾̄̃Ͻ effortsinmakingotherrevisionsinresponsetotheearlierrecommendations. HPACindicated thatevenwiththerevisionstherewerestillconcernswithhowthelargegablefacingNursery StreetpresentedtothoseapproachingfromthenorthviaNorthMainStreet.The recommendationsbelowwerelargelyfocused,intermsoftheHistoric District Development Standards, on how to mitigate the impact of this gable with regard to scale, massing, roof, and formthrough design modifications, andto better address the stair entrances: ¤Combine stairs to a single stair entry on N. Main ̃˹˴˵ʼ ˱̄ ˼˵˱̃̄ ˅ʽˆϽ ̇ide. Similar on Nursery ̃˹˴˵ʼ ̇˹̄˸ ˱ ˽˹˾˹˽̅˽ ˄ʽ˅Ͻ ̇˱˼˻̇˱̉ʾ ¤HPAC generally preferred gables that aligned with porch eaves as depicted in January 12 submittals. ¤Enlarge dormer on west side; both dormers should be the same size. No windows in the dormers; there shouldbe vent louvers. (See illustration.) ¤Column placement should be re-worked to better align with gables above. Column bases should be brick. ¤Add shingles on all gables/dormers. Should be ˘˱̂˴˹˵ʽˠ˼˱˾˻ ̝ ̃̄̂˱˹˷˸̄ ̃˸˹˾˷˼˵̃ ʸ˹ʾ˵ʾ ˾˿̄ Ͽ˶˹̃˸ ̃˳˱˼˵Ѐʹʾ ¤NurseryStreet side hipped portion should be enlarged as gable steps back to reduce gable mass as it presents to the North when approaching on North Main from the north, andthe gable stepped back 2-3 trusses (at ˼˵˱̃̄ ˄ˈЀʹ ˶̂˿˽ ̄˸˵ ̇˱˼˼ ˶˱˳˵ ʸ˱̀̀̂˿̈ʾ ˉϽ ˶̂˿˽ ˶̂˿˾̄ ˿˶ porch). Could do a similar treatment on East side but not necessary. (See illustration.) Page 5of 6 HPACCommittee Minutes DRAFT thth HPAC reviewed the January 12and January 28revisions and made these additional recommendations they believed to be necessary to support a finding that the proposal was in keeping with the Historic District Development Standardsand merited approval of a Conditional Use Permit to exceed the MPFA. In reaching these additional recommendations, HPAC specifically noted that they believed their recommendations were detailed enough that they could be conditioned and would not require additional review by HPAC prior to their ˢ˵̆˹˵̇ ˒˿˱̂˴Ͻ̃ ˳˿˾̃˹˴˵̂˱̄˹˿˾ ˿˶˶˹˾˱˼ ˲̅˹˼˴˹˾˷ ̀˵̂˽˹̄ drawings. The rough sketch above was prepared during the meeting to be included with the recommendations to the applicants and Planning Commission for clarity. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 6:04 p.m. Page 6 of 6 Memo DATE:March 4, 2026 TO:Historic Preservation Advisory Committee FROM:Derek Severson, Planning Supervisor RE:Pedestrian WayfindingSignage Design Project Update ˤ˸˵˓˹̄̉˝˱˾˱˷˵̂Ͻ̃˟˶˶˹˳˵˸˱̃˲˵˵˾̇˿̂˻˹˾˷̇˹̄˸ˤ˵̂̂˱˹˾ˑ̂˳˸˹̄˵˳̄̅̂˵̄˿˴˵̃˹˷˾̀˵˴˵̃̄̂˹˱˾̇˱̉˶˹˾˴˹˾˷ ̃˹˷˾˱˷˵˶˿̂̃˿˽˵̄˹˽˵ʾ ˑ˾˱˴̆˹̃˿̂̉˳˿˽˽˹̄̄˵˵˸˱̃˲˵˵˾̀̂˿̆˹˴˹˾˷˶˵˵˴˲˱˳˻ʼ˱˾˴̄˸˵˓˹̄̉˝˱˾˱˷˵̂Ͻ̃ Officehasalsobeenreachingouttospecificgroups,includingthosewithanartisticeyeandthose whoareinvolvedindesignreview. ChairShelbyScharenandJedPresthavepreviouslyofferedto ̀̂˿̆˹˴˵˶˵˵˴˲˱˳˻˿˾˲˵˸˱˼˶˿˶˘ˠˑ˓ʼ˱˾˴̄˸˵˓˹̄̉˝˱˾˱˷˵̂Ͻ̃˟˶˶˹˳˵˸˱̃˵̈̀̂˵̃̃˵˴̄˸˵˹̂˱̀̀̂˵˳˹˱̄˹˿˾ʾ Attachedisareportthatsummarizestheprojectandprocesstodate.Atitslastmeeting,theadvisory ˳˿˽˽˹̄̄˵˵̂˵˳˿˽˽˵˾˴˵˴̄˸˱̄ˤ˵̂̂˱˹˾ˑ̂˳˸˹̄˵˳̄̅̂˵˳˿˾̄˹˾̅˵˴˵̆˵˼˿̀˹˾˷Ͽ˓˿˾˳˵̀̄˂ˑЀʸ̃˾˱̀̃˸˿̄ below)withthefollowingconsiderations: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTDEPARTMENT 51 Winburn WayTel:541.488.5305 Ashland, Oregon 97520Fax:541.552.2050 ashland.or.us TTY: 800.735.2900 Adjustthescalesothatitbetterblendswithsurroundings ˝˱˻˵˹̄˼˵̃̃Ͽ˲̅̃̉Ѐʸ˟˾˼̉˿˾˵˳˿˼˿̂˵˼˵˽˵˾̄ˏ˔˿˹˾˷˳̅̄ʽ˿̅̄̃ʼ̂˱̄˸˵̂̄˸˱˾˱̄̄˱˳˸˽˵˾̄̃ˏʹ ˤ˸˵˓˹̄̉˝˱˾˱˷˵̂Ͻ̃˟˶˶˹˳˵̇˱˾̄˵˴̄˿̀̂˿̆˹˴˵˱˾̅̀˴˱̄˵̄˿˘ˠˑ˓ʼ˱˾˴˱˾̄˹˳˹̀˱̄˵̃̀̂˵̃˵˾̄˹˾˷̄˸˵˾˵̈̄ iterationofConcept2AtoHPACattheMarchmeeting. REFERENCES & ATTACHMENTS Attachment #1:Pedestrian WayfindingSignage DesignPresentation COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTDEPARTMENT 51 Winburn WayTel:541.488.5305 Ashland, Oregon 97520Fax:541.552.2050 ashland.or.us TTY: 800.735.2900 February 19, 2026 City of Ashland PAGE 2 8 . . . .4 . . . .29 . . . . . . .7 . . . . . . . . . . .6 . . . . . . . . . . . .5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Project Goals Sign Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Steps and Timeline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Examples Using Potential Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22Option 2A: Mt A + Metal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Option 2B: Metal with Curved Top and Artisinal Element . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31Examples Using Potential Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32 Project Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3Designs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 !! ! Contents CITY OF ASHLAND WAYFINDING SIGNAGE DESIGN PAGE 3 | TERRAIN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE & PAM KUHN CREATIVE | 02/19/26 !! ! City of Ashland Pedestrian Wayfinding Signage Design Project CITY OF ASHLAND WAYFINDING SIGNAGE DESIGN PAGE 4 Control Devices)normal weathering, vandalism, and age Welcome to Ashland Є˙˾˳˿̂̀˿̂˱̄˵ ˑ̃˸˼˱˾˴Ͻ̃ ˲̂˱˾˴˹˾˷Є˥˾˹́̅˵ ˼˿˿˻ ̄˸˱̄ ̂˵̀̂˵̃˵˾̄̃ ˑ̃˸˼˱˾˴Є˓˼˱̃̃˹˳ ˱˵̃̄˸˵̄˹˳ ̄˸˱̄ ̇˹˼˼ ̇˿̂˻ ˶˿̂ ˽˱˾̉ ̉˵˱̂̃Є˓̂˵˱̄˵ ̃˵˾̃˵ ˿˶ ˹˴˵˾̄˹̄̉ ˱˾˴ ˱̂̂˹̆˱˼Clear, Legible and User-Friendly Є˟̀̄˹˽˹̊˵ ̆˹̃˹̄˿̂ ˵˾˺˿̉˽˵˾̄Є˦˹̃̅˱˼˼̉ ˳˿˸˵̃˹̆˵Єˑ̆˿˹˴ ̃˹˷˾ ˳˼̅̄̄˵̂ ̇˸˵̂˵ ̀˿̃̃˹˲˼˵Є˕˽˲̂˱˳˵ ˥˾˹̆˵̂̃˱˼ ˔˵̃˹˷˾ ̀̂˹˾˳˹̀˼˵̃Є˓˿˾̃˹˴˵̂ ˱˳˳˵̃̃˹˲˹˼˹̄̉ ˾˵˵˴̃Єˠ̂˿˶˵̃̃˹˿˾˱˼ˊ ̃˵̄ ̄˿˾˵ ˿˶ ̂˵̃̀˵˳̄ Є˔˹̂˵˳̄ ̀˱̄˸ ˿˶ ̄̂˱̆˵˼Є˟̀̄˹˽˹̊˵ ̃˱˶˵̄̉Є˓˿˽̀˼˹˱˾˳˵ ̇˹̄˸ ̂˵˼˵̆˱˾̄ ̀˼˱˾̃ʼ ̀˿˼˹˳˹˵̃ʼ ̂˵˷̃ Materials Єˢ˵˱˴˹˼̉ ˱̆˱˹˼˱˲˼˵Є˔̅̂˱˲˼˵ˊ ˳˱˾ ˲˵ ˽˱˹˾̄˱˹˾˵˴ ˿̆˵̂ ̄˹˽˵ ̄˸̂˿̅˷˸ ЄЄ˓˿˽̀˼̉ ̇˹̄˸ ̂˵˼˵̆˱˾̄ ̂˵˷̅˼˱̄˹˿˾̃ ʸ˹ʾ˵ʾ Asheville, North Carolina to and from dzdmjtut and Map Kiosk in Marin County Open Space District Preserves | TERRAIN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE & PAM KUHN CREATIVE | 02/19/26 !! ejsfdujoh!qfeftusjbot Worcester, Massachusetts Downtown District Marker in Project Goals The plan focuses on our downtown core to other commercial attractions in our community, CITY OF ASHLAND WAYFINDING SIGNAGE DESIGN PAGE 5 Exploration of Sign Designs (3 sign types, 2 sets of revisions)Cost estimates for the various types of signs from a sign fabricatorTwo sets of architectural drawings of each sign types (color hard copy and digital) Deliverables Є Є Є Є ˠ̂˿˺˵˳̄ ˴˿˵̃ ˾˿̄ ˹˾˳˼̅˴˵ ̃˵˼˵˳̄˹˾˷ ̄˸˵ ̃˹˷˾ ˼˿˳˱̄˹˿˾̃ ˿̂ ˴˵̆˵˼˿̀˹˾˷ ̄˸˵ ̃˹˷˾ ˳˿˾̄˵˾̄ Xbzgjoejoh Uzqf!4/!Cjlf! Ifsjubhf Poppins Xbzgjoejoh | TERRAIN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE & PAM KUHN CREATIVE | 02/19/26 Uzqf!3/!Qfeftusjbo!! !! ! xjui!Nbq Uzqf!2/!Ljptl! Sign Types CITY OF ASHLAND WAYFINDING SIGNAGE DESIGN PAGE 6 Railroad District University District Downtown District Watershed Trails | TERRAIN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE & PAM KUHN CREATIVE | 02/19/26 !! ! CITY OF ASHLAND WAYFINDING SIGNAGE DESIGN PAGE 7 SIGN INSTALLATION SIGN FABRICATION Future Phases program over many years. PLAN COMPLETE TRANSPORTATION FINAL March 31 DELIVERABLES s n g DESIGNS DEVELOP SIGN AND SCHEMATIC | TERRAIN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE & PAM KUHN CREATIVE | 02/19/26 !! REVIEW COMMITTEE Jan 22 - March 5 March 5: Present Final Desi Anticipated Schedule:Є˚˱˾ ˂˂ˊ ˜˹̃̄˵˾˹˾˷ ̃˵̃̃˹˿˾ ̇˹̄˸ ˳˿˽˽˹̄̄˵˵Є˖˵˲ ˅ˊ ˠ̂˵̃˵˾̄ ˓˿˾˳˵̀̄ ˔˵̃˹˷˾ ˔̂˱˶̄̃ЄЄЄ˝˱̂˳˸ ˅ˊ ˠ̂˵̃˵˾̄ ˖˹˾˱˼ ˔˵̃˹˷˾̃ЄЄ˝˱̂˳˸ ˁˇˊ ˠ̂˵̃˵˾̄ ̄˿ ˓˹̄̉ ˓˿̅˾˳˹˼ CURRENT INVENTORY CONDITIONS Steps and Timeline CITY OF ASHLAND WAYFINDING SIGNAGE DESIGN Jan 9, 2026Jan 9 - 22 KICKOFF PROJECT PAGE 8 | TERRAIN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE & PAM KUHN CREATIVE | 02/19/26 !! ! City of Ashland Pedestrian Wayfinding Signage Design Project CITY OF ASHLAND WAYFINDING SIGNAGE DESIGN PAGE 9 (location TBD) Proposed Kiosk on SOU campus 6666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666 2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222 /////////////2//////////////////////// 9/29/2999/9/299/99/299/29999999/99/9/9/99/9/29/9/29/29/9/99/29/29/29/29/299/29/29/29/29/29/29/299/9/29/29/29/29/999/29/29/29/29/9/29/29/29/29/29/29/29/9/9/29/9/9/2 11111111111 ////////1////1/1/1/1//1/1/////// 2/12222222222222/12/2222222/2/22222/2/2/2222/2222/12/2222/12/2/12/12/2/22/12/12/12/2/12/12/12/1222/12/12/12/2/2/2/12/122/12/12/2/2/2/2/12/2/12/2/2/2/12/12/12/1 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 |||||||||||||||||||||| EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE VEVEVVVVVVVVVVEVVVVVEVEVVVVVVVEVEVVVVVVVVVVEVEVVVVVVVEVVVVVEVVVVVVVVVVVVEVEVVVVVVVVVEVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVEVVVVVVVVVEVVE IVEIIIIIIIIIIVEIVEIVEIVEIIVEIIIVEIVEIIVEIVEIVEIVEIIIVEIVIVIVIIIVIVEIIVEIVEIVEIVE TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT ATATAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAATAAAAAAAAAAATATAAAAATAAAATAAAAATATATATAAAAAAAAAATATAAAAAAAAAAATATAT EATEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEATEEEEEEEAEEEEEAEAEATEEEATEEEATEEEEATEEATEEEEATEATEATEEEEEAEEATEATEATEEEEAEAEATEATEATETEEATEEATEEATEAT RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR CRCCCCCCRCRCCRCRCRCCRCCRCCRCRCCCRCCCRCRCCCCRCRCRCRCCCRCRCCCRCRCCCRCCRCCCRCCCCCCCCCRCRCCCRCCRCCCRCCRCCCCRCRCRCCRC NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN HNHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHNHHHHNHHHHHHHHNHHNHHNHNHNHHNHNHNHHHHHHHHHHHHNHNHNHHHNHN UHNUUUUUUUHUUHNUHUUHUHUHUHUHUHUHUHUHNUHUHUHUUUHNUUUHNUHUUUUUUHUHUHNUUUUHUUHNUHNUUUUUUUHUUHNUHNUHNUHNUHNUHUUHUUUUHUHUHUHNUHNUHNUUHNUHNUHNUHUHUUUHNUHNUHNUUUUHNUUHUHUUUHUHNUUHNU KKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK K MKMMM M MMMM KMMM KM KMM KMMMM M KM KMMMMMMKMM MMM MMMMKMMMMKMM KMMMMMKM KM KMMKMKM KMMMMMKMMKMKMKMMMMMMMKMKMKMMMMKMKMKMMKMKM KM KMMMKMK AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA PAPPPPPPPPPPPPPPAPPPPPPPPPAPPPPPPPPAPPPPAPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPAPPPPPPPAPAPPPAPPPPAPAPPPPPAPAPPPPPPPAPAPPAPAPPPAPAPAPAPAP &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& & & & & EE EEEEE&E&EE&E&E&EEEE&E&EE&E&E&E&E&EEE&E&EEEE&EEEEEE&E&EEEEE&E&E&E&E&E RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR UUUURURURUUUUUUURUUURUUUUUUUUUUURUUUUUUURURURUURURUUUUURUURUURUUUUR TTUTUTTUTUTUTUTTUTTTUTUTTTTUTTTTUTUTTTT CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC at 4th & A EECEECEEECECECECECECEEECEEEEECEEEEEEEECEEEEECEEEEECEEEECECEEEEEEEEE TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTETETTTTTTET IIIIIIIIIIIIIII Proposed Kiosk HHHHHHHHHIHHHHHHHHHHHHHIHIHIHIHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHI CCCCCCCCCHCHCHCCHCCCCCCCCCCCHCCCHCHCHCCCCCHCCCHCCHCHCCHCHCCCHCCHCCCHCHCHCCCCCCHCHCHCHCCCCCHCHCHCHCHCHCCHCCHCHC RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR (Ashland Yoga Center) ARAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARAAAAAARARARARAAAAAAAAARARARARAAARARAARAAARARAAAARARARARARARAAAAARARARAAARAAAARARAARARARARARAARARARAAARAA EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE PEPPPPPPPEPPPPEPEPEPEPEPEPEPPPEPE AAAAAAAPAAAAAAPAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPAPAAAPAA CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC SSSCSCSCSSSSCSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSCSCSCSSSCSCSCSCSCSSCS DSCDDSDDSDSDSDSDDSCDSDDSCDSCDSDDSCDSCDDDDSCDSDDDDDSDSCDSCDSCDSCDSCDSCDDDSCDDDDSCDSCDSCDSCDSCDSDDSDDDSCDSDSDSCDSDDSCDDSCDDDDSCDSCDSCDSCDSCDSCDSDSDDSDDDDSDSCDSCDDSCD NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN ANAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANAAAAAAAAAANANANAAAAANAAANAANANANANANANANANAN LALLALLLLALLLLANLALANLANLANLALANLANLANLANLANLANLANLANLANLANLLLANLANLANLANLALANLANLAN NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN INIIIIIIIIIIINIIIINININIIINININININININ AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA RARRRRRARRRRRRRRRRRRRARRRARARRARARRRRRARARRRRARARARRRARRRRRARARRARARARRRRRARARARARRARARRARARARRRA RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE TETTTTTTTTTTETTETETTETETTTTTTTTTTTTTETTTTTTTETETTTTTTTETTTTTTTTETTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTETETTTTETTTTTETTTTETETE || || ||||||| |||||||||| | TERRAIN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE & PAM KUHN CREATIVE | 02/19/26 !! NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGNGGGGGGGGNGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGNGGGGGGNGNGNGGGGGNGNGNGGGGGGNGGNGNGNGGGGGGGNGGN IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII SSSSSSSSSSSSISSSSSSSISSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSISSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSISSSISSSSSS EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEESEEEESEEEESESEEEEESESESEEEEESESESESEEEEESESESESESEE DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD D EEEDEDEEEDEEDEDEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEDEEEEEEEEEEEEEEDEDEEDEEEEEEEEEEEEEEDEDEDEDEEEEEEDEDEDEDEDEEE GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG AGAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGAGAAAGAAAAAGAGAGAAAGAGAGAGAGAAAAAGAGAGAGAGAAGAGAGAGAAAAGAGAAGAAAAGAGAGAAAGAGAGAGAGAGAGA NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNANNANANNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG IGIIIIIIIIIGIIIIIIIGIG SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSISISIS GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNGNNGNNGNGNNNGNNNGNNGNGNGNGNNGNGNNGNGNGNGNGNGNGNNNNGNGNGNGNGNGNNN IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDIDIDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDIDDDDDDDDD NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNDNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNDNNNNNNNNNNNNDNNNNNNDNNNNNNNNNNNNNDNDNNNDNNNDNDNDNNNDNNNNNDNN IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFI YFYFIYYYYYYYYYYYYYYFIYYYYYYYYYYYFIYYYYYYYYYYYFYFYYYYYYYYYYYYYFIYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYFYYYYYYYYYYYYFYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYFIYYYYYYYFYYYYYFYFYYYYYFYFYYYY AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA WWWWWWWWWWWAWWAWWWWWWWWWWWWAWAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWAWAWWWWWWWWWWAWWWWWWWWWWWAWWWWWAWWWWAWAWAWWWWAWAWWWWWWAWWWWWAWAWAWAWWWWWWWWWWWWA DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD (Black Swan) at 15 S. Pioneer NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNDNDNNNN Proposed Kiosk AAAAAAAAAAAAANAAANANAAAAAANAAAAAAAAAAAAANAAANAAAAAANAAANANANAAANAANAA LLLLLLLLLL Proposed Kiosk HHHHHLHHHLHHHHHHHLHLHHHLHHLHLHHHLHHLHHHLHLHHLHHLH at Lithia Park Cabin SHLSSSHSHSSSSHLSHLSHSHSSHLSHLSHSHSSHSSSHSHSHLSSHLSHLSHSHLSHLSHLSHLSSSHLSHSHLSHLSHSHLSHLSHLSHLSHLSHLSHLSSHSHLSHSHLSHLS AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA FAFF FFF AFAFAF AFAFF AFFFFAFFFFFFFFFFAFAFAFF AFFAFFFAFAFAF AFAFFAFAFAFFAFAFAFAF AFAFAFAFFFA OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO O YOYYYY OYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY OYYYYYYYOY OYYYYYY OYYYOYYOYOYYYOYYYYYYOYOYOYOYYYYOYOYOYOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYOYYYYYYYYYYOYOYOY OY OYOYYYOYYYYYYYYY TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT ITIIIIIIITITIITITIITITIIIIT CITY OF ASHLAND WAYFINDING SIGNAGE DESIGNCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCITCCCCCITCCCCCITCICCCCITCCITCITCITCITCCCITCICCITCCICITCITCCCC PAGE 10 Shape (adds expense) | TERRAIN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE & PAM KUHN CREATIVE | 02/19/26 !! One color CITY OF ASHLAND WAYFINDING SIGNAGE DESIGN PAGE 11 | TERRAIN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE & PAM KUHN CREATIVE | 02/19/26 !! CITY OF ASHLAND WAYFINDING SIGNAGE DESIGN PAGE 12 clear and logical, universal and usable for validate cycling as transportation option; quick comprehension, navigate without frequent quickly understood and recognized expand use and awareness of bicycle facilitiesstoppingwidest possible demographicLegibility and size combine with placement to permit adequate response timeSize, shape, color, composition, contrast, regulatory and warning signs. Core Guiding Principles!!Dpoofdu!qmbdft;!!!Qspnpuf!bdujwf!usbwfm;!!Nbjoubjo!npujpo;!!Cf!qsfejdubcmf;!!!Lffq!jogpsnbujpo!tjnqmf;!!Pqujnj{f!tbgfuz Materials Є ˢ˵˱˴˹˼̉ ˱̆˱˹˼˱˲˼˵Є Є Є Є ˞˿ ˽˿̂˵ ̄˸˱˾ ˃ ˴˵̃̄˹˾˱̄˹˿˾̃ˋ ̃̄̂˱˹˷˸̄ ˱˸˵˱˴ ˹˾ ̄˿̀ ̃˼˿̄Є ˜˿̄̃ ˽˿̂˵ʾʾʾ˿̆˵̂ ˁʼˀˀˀ ̀˱˷˵̃ʾʾʾЄ | TERRAIN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE & PAM KUHN CREATIVE | 02/19/26 !! ! City of Ashland Pedestrian Wayfinding Signage Design Project CITY OF ASHLAND WAYFINDING SIGNAGE DESIGN on any street, highway, bikeway, or private road open to public travel. directed light beam back to its source, and from a much wider angle and safety at night and in lowlight conditions. PAGE 13 Tfqufncfs!3123 8.2 9.2 Gjhvsf Z X ! E P P X Z B N ES!MBJS PNFN! OBJEOJ! EBFE E S ! O P T X P S D C O ! 6 ! F U B U T S F U SO J E ! M M P O L ! L B P S M E !Z Q !LX SD!T FOJQ!OJXU! F OO F P PS T UD O ! F U H C VO J T S Q TC T ! 6 ! C41 F U B U T S F U O J C35 U T!OPUH OJITBX E O B M I T B ! G G PBW !! CO TP TS !F SE!T5G MMJI!F2FG !K U J Y F E S ! L FE F S ! S DF ! P Z LU SF S E !FM X FB JU W ! HT U J P M J QN ES! LFFSD! OBNMPU C36 UO TM ! ! WB!X FJWMMF C FB OE UT!OZ MFVR BK BB S J US3 E ! S M M E SB D P D EN ! N E S S ! V I P D U T!ZBMD EO UB T!ZBMD B C33 S Q C39 N C48 P Q WB!FO BK!ZS BNS E WB!F! MBEOFMH X F J W U WB!B EOJM T F S WB!I UJBG D UT! LSBQ O M M C! ! Z V M P G Z J O WB!MBLZX NSPO!LDJ XTFC P T 6 J C37 H T B ¨§© SE! XFJWMM OJIS M!ZBS W ES!TFSD B!EOBMITE BB ! Z W US2 ZXP !UJMWB E!SFWPE B K ! S TOM !ZOPN! SBI FZ F N I P Z X!OFESBD H I B F U C49 Q T ! O J WB!SFL MBX B N !C3: US F T U !! U O T P F H S F D S F PZ O J XQ S! EL ! C23 D E B UT! OBNUIS HJXO BOBJEOJ UT!C42 CU ! B C22 F O O MJ FM ES T F C T P JN J PU F S UT!F DZESPGUT!BUT!FPS JOSPGJMBOPN D EXX !C8 O UT!ZSF WB P UT!ESB TOPFM O V UT!EMF JGSBH N U T UT! OMPDOJ M! UT !BDPS B WB!NM BQ X Z P XJ !UT!S FEBLM LF S B M UT!SF EBLMF X P E WB B!OJBUO VPN!T F N O M U T!LDJSF NFU! WB! OJBUOV PN!O T Z SE!EPP !XOFMH C46 W Z ZJ U S W C: T X ! BO !WB!FTS !PN BF TO E IUT!IDB LFC P B T BUT!BEJ MB W N P F ! B C44 OJE S S !! JU MQ UUT!ZUSP TFCJM FT!P BMM !I! JUE G OO F B OWM FI XT T P 9 B UT! OPUS UPN U T !C O I JU Y UJ T M T D! E !S ZF UJO M S F FUT!BU TOPTJSSB IX ! T US5 D S F C24 S UT! OBNS IFIT E ! O !!M FS MM F FX UL Fyjtujoh!boe!Qmboofe!Cjlfxbz!Ofuxpsl U T! C8 B JFU T WOT M! Z! I TFU M S !VZ SP U GM B T D! M Z D!O UT! LB PJX P !P SJ B T J O I BI T UV US4 J F C25 M F M K C32 D E UT!N BITFSH Z S ! X !UT!FJSIU QVH S UF E XO C28 B T XUT!FUT! C45 EBFNZFOUS VPD C2: U T ! S W SF F B !O EU C4 TP !J F! Q O! BBO H U N EMT O! F S F BIF U UUS !E SB NTX TF XJ !!W O MPF UT!LSPGM BH P BUT! MFSVBJ C31 M!O E C27 I U C51!T BL S PP G W! X F U UW O T ! !B T ! C5 O !J TB X F C4:TN C7 !U FO HT ! O E !U JIT ! F O DU SJ O B SB C WS V H N U TI ! B Z IX D! O S DHV LFOU!TUJC O J X I C29 | TERRAIN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE & PAM KUHN CREATIVE | 02/19/26 Bjsqpsu S SjwfstQbsltXfumboetDjuz!Mjnjut E !TdippmTPV!Dbnqvt U L TF ! F ES D !!! O E UT!O UOBP TOBB WM N! I T M SE!DJOFDTB B C3 UT!LDU PSS ET ! ! O BU H U P M V SE!DJOFD T O C6 C6 M U B T ! E WBS! F!BUMB I D U J E M Q B N U S TE ! U ! T F E SS D! SU ZUJ LI T F N J X U T ! E E S S ! O B P UT! TEPP XU TFX L I D B D K ! XUT!NJSQS P PIU !OPUOS ZX U UT!FQBQ T ! Y P G UT!SFIU BSQ Nfe!Qsjpsjuz Fyjtujoh!Cjlf!MbofFyjtujoh!Tipvmefs!MbofIjhi!QsjpsjuzMpx!Qsjpsjuz Fyjtujoh!Po.Tusffu!Cjlfxbzt Cjlfxbz!Qsjpsjuz!Qspkfdut E E S S ! ! OF L E M J F ! T F L L F S E DF J SD S ! !D S M O U M JBS Q I P ! I L O B S G 1 1 5 515 E S ! O P Z O 6 1 B 5 D ! F J \[ O Qmboofe!Cjlf!MbofQmboofe!Cvggfsfe!Cjlf!MbofQmboofe!Cjdzdmf!Cpvmfwbse Fyjtujoh!Cjlf!Qbui0HsffoxbzQmboofe!Cjlf!Qbui0Hsffoxbz F L D N Pgg.Tusffu!Usbjmt Qmboofe!Po.Tusffu!Cjlfxbzt Context: 2012 Transportation Plan Bicycle Routes CITY OF ASHLAND WAYFINDING SIGNAGE DESIGN Djuz!pg!Btimboe!Usbotqpsubujpo!Tztufn!Qmbo!Vqebuf H;\]21.167!Btimboe!UTQ\]NYE PAGE 14 CITY OF Btimboe Chrsqhbs SN Q`hkqn`c Ad`q BqddjFqddmv`xBdmsq`k AhjdO`sg /-6 LH-3 LHM-/-1 LH-0 LHM-TmhudqrhsxChrsqhbs 2-0 LH-07 LHM- | TERRAIN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE & PAM KUHN CREATIVE | 02/19/26 !! ! Ashland Wayfinding Sign Project Bike WayfindingApproach 1: MUTCD (like Portland)02/19/26 CITY OF ASHLAND WAYFINDING SIGNAGE DESIGN Questions:Should bike routes be confined to just the historic districts that are part of this project or should they encompass all potential routes (i.e. to Bear Creek Greenway, wineries, etc)?Does Ashland use bike route names or numbers?MUTCD templates are to be used unless engineering judgement determines that other signs are appropriate. All bike wayfinding signs should be reviewed by the City of Ashland for compliance with applicable regulations, guidelines, and policies. Consult the 2023 Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, 11th Edition adopted by Oregon effective January 1, 2026. Applicable sections include: Pb`qflk /A+22 @ljjrkfqv T^vcfkafkd Pfdkp M^oq 67 Qo^ccf` @lkqoli clo ?f`v`ib C^`fiqfbpNote that MUTCD Figure 9D-1 Guidance states: .6 Qo^sbi qfjbp pelria klq _b rpba lk ?f`v`ib Abpqfk^qflk pfdkp+Prmmloq7 /- Qo^sbi qfjbp `^k s^ov dob^qiv clo _f`v`ifpqp _^pba lk ^ s^ofbqv lc c^`qlop fk`irafkd fkafsfar^i pmbba) _f`v`ib qvmb) ^ka qvmb lc c^`fifqv+ PAGE 15 O`sg Bdmsq`k Ahjd Chrsqhbs SN Q`hkqn`c ASHLAND Ad`q BqddjFqddmv`xBdmsq`k AhjdO`sg /-6 LH-3 LHM-/-1 LH-0 LHM-TmhudqrhsxChrsqhbs 2-0 LH-07 LHM- | TERRAIN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE & PAM KUHN CREATIVE | 02/19/26 !! ! Ashland Wayfinding Sign Project Bike WayfindingApproach 2: MUTCD green + MUTCD font + Topper 02/19/26 Using MUTCD green provides for a standard retroreflective color. Using MUTCD font follows the standards for safety and legibility.MUTCD templates are to be used unless engineering judgement determines that other signs are appropriate. All bike wayfinding signs should be reviewed by the City of Ashland for compliance with applicable regulations, guidelines, and policies. Consult the 2023 Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, 11th Edition adopted by Oregon effective January 1, 2026. Applicable sections include: Pb`qflk /A+22 @ljjrkfqv T^vcfkafkd Pfdkp M^oq 67 Qo^ccf` @lkqoli clo ?f`v`ib C^`fiqfbpNote that MUTCD Figure 9D-1 Guidance states: .6 Qo^sbi qfjbp pelria klq _b rpba lk ?f`v`ib Abpqfk^qflk pfdkp+Prmmloq7 /- Qo^sbi qfjbp `^k s^ov dob^qiv clo _f`v`ifpqp _^pba lk ^ s^ofbqv lc c^`qlop fk`irafkd fkafsfar^i pmbba) _f`v`ib qvmb) ^ka qvmb lc c^`fifqv+CITY OF ASHLAND WAYFINDING SIGNAGE DESIGN PAGE 16 Path Central Bike District TO Railroad BIKE ROUTE ASHLAND Bear CreekGreenwayCentral BikePath /-6 LH-3 LHM-/-1 LH-0 LHM-UniversityDistrict 2-0 LH-07 LHM- | TERRAIN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE & PAM KUHN CREATIVE | 02/19/26 !! ! CITY OF ASHLAND WAYFINDING SIGNAGE DESIGN Ashland Wayfinding Sign Project Bike WayfindingApproach 3: One non-MUTCD color + Poppins Font + Topper 02/19/26 MUTCD templates are to be used unless engineering judgement determines that other signs are appropriate. All bike wayfinding signs should be reviewed by the City of Ashland for compliance with applicable regulations, guidelines, and policies. Consult the 2023 Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, 11th Edition adopted by Oregon effective January 1, 2026. Applicable sections include: Pb`qflk /A+22 @ljjrkfqv T^vcfkafkd Pfdkp M^oq 67 Qo^ccf` @lkqoli clo ?f`v`ib C^`fiqfbpNote that MUTCD Figure 9D-1 Guidance states: .6 Qo^sbi qfjbp pelria klq _b rpba lk ?f`v`ib Abpqfk^qflk pfdkp+Prmmloq7 /- Qo^sbi qfjbp `^k s^ov dob^qiv clo _f`v`ifpqp _^pba lk ^ s^ofbqv lc c^`qlop fk`irafkd fkafsfar^i pmbba) _f`v`ib qvmb) ^ka qvmb lc c^`fifqv+ PAGE 17 District TO University Trails TO Watershed District TO Railroad District TO Downtown BIKE ROUTE ASHLAND DowntownDistrictWatershedTrails 0.7 MI.4 MIN.0.2 MI.1 MIN.3.1 MI.18 MIN. RailroadDistrict | TERRAIN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE & PAM KUHN CREATIVE | 02/19/26 !! ! CITY OF ASHLAND WAYFINDING SIGNAGE DESIGN Ashland Wayfinding Sign Project Bike WayfindingApproach 4: Color Coding + Poppins Font + Topper 02/19/26 MUTCD templates are to be used unless engineering judgement determines that other signs are appropriate. All bike wayfinding signs should be reviewed by the City of Ashland for compliance with applicable regulations, guidelines, and policies. Consult the 2023 Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, 11th Edition adopted by Oregon effective January 1, 2026. Applicable sections include: Pb`qflk /A+22 @ljjrkfqv T^vcfkafkd Pfdkp M^oq 67 Qo^ccf` @lkqoli clo ?f`v`ib C^`fiqfbpNote that MUTCD Figure 9D-1 Guidance states: .6 Qo^sbi qfjbp pelria klq _b rpba lk ?f`v`ib Abpqfk^qflk pfdkp+Prmmloq7 /- Qo^sbi qfjbp `^k s^ov dob^qiv clo _f`v`ifpqp _^pba lk ^ s^ofbqv lc c^`qlop fk`irafkd fkafsfar^i pmbba) _f`v`ib qvmb) ^ka qvmb lc c^`fifqv+ PAGE 18 DOWNTOWN DISTRICT ˱˾˴ ˳̅̄˿̅̄̃ ˹˾ ̄˸˵ Ͽ˕˼˵̆˱̄˹˿˾Ѐ ˽˵̄˱˼ Є ˑ˴˴ ˳˿˼˿̂ ̄˿ ˽˵̄˱˼ ̃˹˷˾Є Drafts - Version 1 from 02/05/26 BTIMBOE movement Є ˑ˴˴ ̃˿˽˵ ̃˸˱̀˵Є | TERRAIN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE & PAM KUHN CREATIVE | 02/19/26 !! ! City of Ashland Pedestrian Wayfinding Signage Design Project Є ˝˵̄˱˼ ̃˹˷˾̃ ̄˸˱̄ ̄˹˵ ̄˿ ̄˿̇˾ ˵˾̄̂̉ ̃˹˷˾̃ Select Feb 5 Committee Feedback Examples:Є Є ˓˹̄̉ ˿˶ ˑ̃˸˼˱˾˴ ˼˿˷˿ ˳˱˾ ˲˵ ˼˵̃̃ ̀̂˿˽˹˾˵˾̄Є Є Є Є CITY OF ASHLAND WAYFINDING SIGNAGE DESIGN PAGE 19 Provides a unique sense of place | TERRAIN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE & PAM KUHN CREATIVE | 02/19/26 !! ! CITY OF ASHLAND WAYFINDING SIGNAGE DESIGN 1. Shakespeare Vibes PAGE 20 XBUFSTIFE EJTUSJDU Revised EJTUSJDU BTIMBOE | TERRAIN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE & PAM KUHN CREATIVE | 02/19/26 !! ! Original BTIMBOE CITY OF ASHLAND WAYFINDING SIGNAGE DESIGN Option 1: Shakespeare Vibes Є ˑ˴˴ ̃˿˽˵ ̃˸˱̀˵Є PAGE 21 BTIMBOE Ejtusjdu UP!Vojwfstjuz BTIMBOE Usbjmt UP!Xbufstife BTIMBOE Ejtusjdu UP!Sbjmspbe Bike Wayfinding BTIMBOE Ejtusjdu UP!Epxoupxo BTIMBOE CJLF!SPVUF BTIMBOE EpxoupxoEjtusjduXbufstifeUsbjmt CJLF!SPVUF 1/8!NJ/5!NJO/1/3!NJ/2!NJO/4/2!NJ/29!NJO/ SbjmspbeEjtusjdu | TERRAIN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE & PAM KUHN CREATIVE | 02/19/26 !! ! Sbjmspbe!QbslQvcmjd!SftusppnVojwfstjuz!EjtusjduXbufstife!Usbjmt SBJMSPBE!EJTUSJDU Qmb{bQvcmjd!SftusppnDbmmf!HvbobkvbupSbjmspbe!EjtusjduXbufstife!Usbjmt Pedestrian Wayfinding EPXOUPXO!EJTUSJDU CITY OF ASHLAND WAYFINDING SIGNAGE DESIGN PAGE 22 and concrete base. aluminum or steel frame | TERRAIN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE & PAM KUHN CREATIVE | 02/19/26 !! ! Examples Using Potential Materials 3form Chroma Outdoor (often referred to as Chroma XT) resistance, and excellent light transmission. BTIMBOE CITY OF ASHLAND WAYFINDING SIGNAGE DESIGN PAGE 23 Kiosk Mockup: Daylight at Black Swan PAGE 24 Externally lit Kiosk Mockup: Night at Black Swan PAGE 25 Kiosk Mockup: Daylight in the Railroad District PAGE 26 Kiosk Mockup: Daylight in the University District PAGE 27 Kiosk Mockup: Daylight in Lithia Park PAGE 28 Ties existing signs into the system | TERRAIN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE & PAM KUHN CREATIVE | 02/19/26 !! ! CITY OF ASHLAND WAYFINDING SIGNAGE DESIGN 2. Mt A + Metal arts PAGE 29 WATERSHED TRAILS UNIVERSITY DISTRICT RAILROAD DISTRICT DOWNTOWN DISTRICT Ashland is the ancestral homeland of the Shasta and Takelma. A band of one hundred Shasta Indians lived in a permanent vilalge at the present location of Ashland Plaza. In 1852, a lumber mill was built on Ashland Creek followed by a flour mill and a woolen mll, ˱˼˼ ̀˿̇˵̂˵˴ ˲̉ ˑ̃˸˼˱˾˴ ˓̂˵˵˻Ͻ̃ ̇˱̄˵̂̃ʾ ˙˾ ˁˉˀˈʼ ̄˸˵ ˧˿˽˵˾Ͻ̃ ˓˹̆˹˳ ˙˽̀̂˿̆˵˽˵˾̄ ˓˼̅˲ asked the city council to preserve the natural beauty of Ashland Creek by creating Lithia Park, which was designed in part by John McLaren, the creator of Golden Gate Park in San Francisco. | TERRAIN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE & PAM KUHN CREATIVE | 02/19/26 !! DOWNTOWN DISTRICT CITY OF ASHLAND WAYFINDING SIGNAGE DESIGN Option 2A: Mt A + Metal Єˑ˴˴ ˳˿˼˿̂ ̄˿ ˽˵̄˱˼ ̃˹˷˾Є OriginalFrontBack DOWNTOWN DISTRICT PAGE 30 ASHLAND District TO University ASHLAND Trails TO Watershed ASHLAND District TO Railroad Bike Wayfinding ASHLAND District TO Downtown ASHLAND BIKE ROUTE ASHLAND DowntownDistrictWatershedTrails 0.7 MI.4 MIN.0.2 MI.1 MIN.3.1 MI.18 MIN. RailroadDistrict | TERRAIN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE & PAM KUHN CREATIVE | 02/19/26 !! ! Southern OregonUniversityDowntown DistrictWatershed TrailsLithia ParkPublic RestroomReservoirTrailheadsRailroad ParkPublic RestroomRailroad DistrictWatershed Trails UNIVERSITY DISTRICTWATERSHED TRAILSRAILROAD DISTRICT PlazaPublic RestroomCalle GuanajuatoRailroad DistrictWatershed Trails Pedestrian Wayfinding DOWNTOWN DISTRICT CITY OF ASHLAND WAYFINDING SIGNAGE DESIGN PAGE 31 WATERSHED TRAILS UNIVERSITY DISTRICT RAILROAD DISTRICT DOWNTOWN DISTRICT Ashland is the ancestral homeland of the Shasta and Takelma. A band of one hundred Shasta Indians lived in a permanent vilalge at the present location of Ashland Plaza. In 1852, a lumber mill was built on Ashland Creek followed by a flour mill and a woolen mll, ˱˼˼ ̀˿̇˵̂˵˴ ˲̉ ˑ̃˸˼˱˾˴ ˓̂˵˵˻Ͻ̃ ̇˱̄˵̂̃ʾ ˙˾ ˁˉˀˈʼ ̄˸˵ ˧˿˽˵˾Ͻ̃ ˓˹̆˹˳ ˙˽̀̂˿̆˵˽˵˾̄ ˓˼̅˲ asked the city council to preserve the natural beauty of Ashland Creek by creating Lithia Park, which was designed in part by John McLaren, the creator of Golden Gate Park in San Francisco. | TERRAIN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE & PAM KUHN CREATIVE | 02/19/26 !! DOWNTOWN DISTRICT CITY OF ASHLAND WAYFINDING SIGNAGE DESIGN Option 2B: Metal with Curved Top and Artisinal Element Єˑ˴˴ ˳˿˼˿̂ ̄˿ ˽˵̄˱˼ ̃˹˷˾Є OriginalFrontBack DOWNTOWN DISTRICT PAGE 32 | TERRAIN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE & PAM KUHN CREATIVE | 02/19/26 !! Examples Using Potential Materials 2 layered Corten weathering steel sign bases with cutoutsPorcelain enamel symbols and Ashland logoPowdercoated colored postConcrete base CITY OF ASHLAND WAYFINDING SIGNAGE DESIGN DOWNTOWN DISTRICT PAGE 33 Kiosk Mockup: Daylight at Black Swan PAGE 34 Kiosk Mockup: Daylight in the Railroad District PAGE 35 Kiosk Mockup: Daylight in the University District PAGE 36 Kiosk Mockup: Daylight in Lithia Park EPXOUPXO!EJTUSJDU BTIMBOE Qmb{b 461!gffu3!NJO/ CJLF!SPVUF Qvcmjd!Sftusppn 611!gffu5!NJO/Epxoupxo Ejtusjdu Dbmmf!Hvbobkvbup 1/8!NJ/5!NJO/ 1/36!NJ/7!NJO/ BTIMBOEBTIMBOEBTIMBOEBTIMBOEBTIMBOE Xbufstife Sbjmspbe!EjtusjduUsbjmt 1/3!NJ/2!NJO/ 2/6!NJ/26!NJO/ Sbjmspbe UP!EpxoupxoUP!SbjmspbeUP!XbufstifeUP!Vojwfstjuz Xbufstife!Usbjmt Ejtusjdu CJLF!SPVUF EjtusjduEjtusjduUsbjmtEjtusjdu 2/6!NJ/26!NJO/4/2!NJ/29!NJO/ XBUFSTIFE BTIMBOE EJTUSJDUEJTUSJDU SBJMSPBE!EJTUSJDU Sbjmspbe!Qbsl 461!gffu3!NJO/ Qvcmjd!Sftusppn 611!gffu5!NJO/ Vojwfstjuz!Ejtusjdu 5!NJ/36!NJO/ Xbufstife!Usbjmt 2/6!NJ/26!NJO/ Option 2A: Mt A + Metal Plaza 350 feet2 MIN. Public Restroom ASHLAND 500 feet4 MIN. Downtown Calle Guanajuato District Southern Oregon 0.25 MI.6 MIN. University 0.7 MI.4 MIN. 350 feet2 MIN. Watershed Downtown District Railroad District 1.5 MI.15 MIN. Trails 1.5 MI.15 MIN. 0.2 MI.1 MIN. Watershed Trails ASHLAND 1.5 MI.15 MIN.ASHLAND Railroad Watershed Trails UNIVERSITY DISTRICT TO Downtown 1.5 MI.15 MIN.District BIKE ROUTE DOWNTOWN DISTRICT District 3.1 MI.18 MIN. Lithia Park 350 feet2 MIN. Public Restroom 500 feet4 MIN. Reservoir 1.35 MI.20 MIN. Trailheads 1.5 MI.30 MIN. WATERSHED TRAILS Railroad Park 350 feet2 MIN. Public Restroom 500 feet4 MIN. Railroad District 1.5 MI.15 MIN. Watershed Trails 1.5 MI.15 MIN. RAILROAD DISTRICT WATERSHED TRAILS RAILROAD DISTRICT UNIVERSITY DISTRICT DOWNTOWN DISTRICT Option 2B: Metal with Curved Top Ashland is the ancestral homeland of the Shasta and Takelma. A band of one hundred Shasta Indians lived in a permanent vilalge at the present location of Ashland Plaza. In 1852, a lumber mill was built on Ashland Creek followed by a flour mill and a woolen mll, ˱˼˼ ̀˿̇˵̂˵˴ ˲̉ ˑ̃˸˼˱˾˴ ˓̂˵˵˻Ͻ̃ ̇˱̄˵̂̃ʾ ˙˾ ˁˉˀˈʼ ̄˸˵ ˧˿˽˵˾Ͻ̃ ˓˹̆˹˳ ˙˽̀̂˿̆˵˽˵˾̄ ˓˼̅˲ asked the city council to preserve the natural beauty of Ashland Creek by creating Lithia Park, which was designed in part by John McLaren, the creator of Golden Gate Park in San Francisco. WATERSHED TRAILS RAILROAD DISTRICT UNIVERSITY DISTRICT DOWNTOWN DISTRICTDOWNTOWN DISTRICT FtBk Memo DATE:March 4, 2026 TO:Historic Preservation Advisory Committee FROM:Derek Severson, Planning Supervisor RE:Preservation Week 2026 BANNER In looking into the possibility of a banner, it would requireobtaining and paying for permits from the Oregon Department of Transportation(ODOT)to place a banner across their East Main Street right-of-way, and having a banner professionally made toODOT standards, ˹˾̃̄˱˼˼˵˴ ˱˾˴ ̂˵˽˿̆˵˴ʾ ˘ˠˑ˓Ͻ̃ ̄˿̄˱˼ ˱˾˾̅˱˼ ˲̅˴˷˵̄ is limited to $300, and the cost of a banner and required permitting would exceed available funds. VENUE Pioneer Hall rental rates for a weekday are $125 for the first hour and $25/hour for additional hours. (The Community Center is likely to be used for city offices while City Hall is closed and will not be available.) The Lithia Park Bandshell rental rate is now $250 for eight hours provided there are less than 200 people. The Railroad Park Gazebo used previously is not currently listed as available for rental. Staff will discuss options with the Parks Department and bring an update to the meeting. TOMBSTONETALES The subcommittee has had an initial meeting and proposes to hold the Tombstone Tales th event on Wednesday, May 20. Subcommittee members can provide further detail at the meeting. PRESERVATIONAWARDS At the February meeting, members were in general agreement that Madeline Hill should receive an individual award at the event. Peter Finkle has written a number of articles about COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTDEPARTMENT 51 Winburn WayTel:541.488.5305 Ashland, Oregon 97520Fax:541.552.2050 ashland.or.us TTY: 800.735.2900 Madeline Hill and Mountain Meadowswhich may assist in preparing a write-up. Those will be forwarded via e-mail in conjunction with the packet distribution. A list of permitted projects in the historic districts is attached. Staff will have a presentation with photos of completed projects to assistin review and selection of awardees at the meeting. WALKINGTOUR If a walking tour is to be part of the event, it would be beneficial to narrow down a date and time to aid in promotion. CALENDARSOFAR: It would also be beneficial tofinalize any other details in the calendar to assist in promotion. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTDEPARTMENT 51 Winburn WayTel:541.488.5305 Ashland, Oregon 97520Fax:541.552.2050 ashland.or.us TTY: 800.735.2900 POSSIBLE PIGGY-BACK WITH STRATEGIC PLANNING ˤ˸˵˓˹̄̉ ˓˿̅˾˳˹˼Ͻ̃ ˣ̄̂˱̄˵˷˹˳ ˠ˼˱˾˾˹˾˷ ˵˶˶˿̂̄ ˹̃ ˻˹˳˻˹˾˷ ˿˶˶˱˾˴ ̄˸˵ ˓˹̄̉ ˝˱˾˱˷˵̂Ͻ̃ ˟˶˶˹˳˵ ˽˱̉ request to have a tableat this eventas part of the public engagement effort. REFERENCES & ATTACHMENTS Attachment #1:List of permitted projects in the historic districts over the last year COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTDEPARTMENT 51 Winburn WayTel:541.488.5305 Ashland, Oregon 97520Fax:541.552.2050 ashland.or.us TTY: 800.735.2900 HPW THEME: All People Are Created Equal Appvl AssignState Permit #AddressScope of workApplicant/OwnerContractor SECOND DWELLINGS Garage conversion to ARU with BD-R-2024- 01103addition 53 Pine FINALHollandsworthBy Owner BD-R-2025- 01261 126 Strawberry LaneDetached ARU FINALEisenbergTaylored Elements BD-R-2025- 01396 239 Third ARU with loftISSUERansomConcious Construction ARU on 2nd floor of main BD-R-2025- 01400residence at 113 Pine 115 Pine READYSuncrest HomesBy Owner ADDITIONS BD-2017-02323 & BD-R-2018-Addition, interior remodel, 00064restoration of roof and porch 263 N Second ISSUEBentonBy Owner Addition of multi-purpose living BD-R-2024- 01132 space/shop use 108 Seventh ISSUEClaytonBy Owner 978 SF residential addition & 95 BD-R-2024- 01190 SF deck 80 Coolidge FINALEricksonBy Owner large interior reno with small BD-R-2024- 01160garage addition 18 Hillcrest FINALChirgwinJovick Construction Small addition of laundry and BD-R-2024- 01131mud-room 486 Siskiyou ISSUEMontesDAK Construction Large addition and renovation BD-R-2024- 01126 of home 209 Almond ISSUEBekolayPacific Earthworks Remodel and addition at rear of BD-R-2025- 01356 home 147 Van Ness ISSUEDrydenJosh Barnes Addition of bedroom and BD-R-2025- 01358 bathroom/New 370 SF patio 237 Almond ISSUETeitelbaumHamlett Construction BD-R-2024- 01224 77 FifthSmall addition to main house FINALPettingerAsher Homes Heated art studio space with BD-R-2025- 01296 bathroom and sauna 104 S First FINALHayesSpacemen LLC Small addition (bump out) of bedroom on deck area/Add BD-R-2024- 01172 sliding door 70 Granite FINALMastainCascade Pro Build SFR'S BD-R-2024-114 BushNew SFR 01108 FINALStokesBy Owner BD-R-2025- 01399 113 PineNew SFR with garage READYSuncrest HomesBy Owner AlTERATIONS AND STRUCTURALS BD-R-2025- 01285 80 HargadineRoof Deck FINALCopeDevry Construction BD-R-2025- 01353 152 ManzanitaShed replacement with porch FINALEnnisRichards Construction Kitchen remodel and sunroom BD-R-2025- 01378replacement 63 Nutley ISSUEDonnerRick Hanson Garage conversion to living BD-R-2025- 01352 space 165 Gresham ISSUECorlerAshland Builders COMMERCIAL BD-NR-2024- 27 N MainTI Lumina Café 00306 FINALCircielloBy Tenant BD-NR-2024- 500 A StreetTenant Improvement (B occ) ISSUEKaplanTravis Curtis 00309 site improvements at existing Construction building. See PA-T1-2025- 00259 BD-NR-2025- 142 E MainCoffee Kiosk in front of 00366 Paddington Station ISSUEHammondTaylored Elements BD-NR-2025- 201 S MountainSeismic Retrofit of science ISSUEASDOutlier 00321, BD-NR- building at AHS & quad 2025-00322 improvements STRUCT-2025- 340 A StreetAdd 9 new windows to the rear FINALComstockBy Owner/John Fields 00270 of Commercial building MULTI FAMILY FINALDeBoerBy Owner BD-R-2024- 01082, BD-R- 2024-01199, BD- Gresham/Holly Street 292 R-2024-01197, Gresham, 290 Gresham, 427 BD-R-2024- 01198 Holly, 423 Holly Multi family development Interior and exterior remodel for ISSUEMastainHome Builders R2 occ(8 apts with 5 exterior Construction BD-R-2024- 01235 decks) 40 Granite IDEAS FOR CIVIC OR INDIVIDUAL? Butler-Perozzi Fountain APRIL2026 HPACReviewBoard Meetat3:00pm-LithiaRoom Everyotherweek **Stafftoemailifthereisanythingtoreviewontheoffweeks** DATECOMMITTEEMEMBERSATTENDING April9th April23rd *Call541-488-5305toverifythereareitemsontheagendatoreview March2026 HPACReviewBoard Meetat3:00pm-LithiaRoom Everyotherweek **Stafftoemailifthereisanythingtoreviewontheoffweeks** DATECOMMITTEEMEMBERSATTENDING March5thKatySamBill (+/-) March19thBill (+/-) *Call541-488-5305toverifythereareitemsontheagendatoreview Memo DATE:March 4, 2026 TO:Historic Preservation Advisory Committee FROM:Derek Severson, Planning Supervisor RE:Land Use Application Review: 246 A Street BACKGROUND The subject propertyat 246 A Street is addressed in the Railroad Addition historic district survey document as follows: The separate, associated dwelling described at280 First Street was demolished in about 2016. In previously reviewing theproposal at the pre-application level, HPAC had generally indicated that the proposal seemed well-suited to the setting and complementary to the Ashland Food Co-Op across the street. PROPOSAL The current application is a request for Site Design Reviewapproval to renovate the existing auto shop building, add a new 822 square footsatellite food service building and reconfigure the site at 246 A Street for restaurant useto include both indoor and outdoor seating. The application also includes a request for a Tree Removal Permit to remove two trees. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTDEPARTMENT 51 Winburn WayTel:541.488.5305 Ashland, Oregon 97520Fax:541.552.2050 ashland.or.us TTY: 800.735.2900 ˤ˸˵ ˱̀̀˼˹˳˱˾̄Ͻ̃ ̇̂˹̄̄˵˾ ̃̅˲˽˹̄̄˱˼̃ ˱˾˴˴̂˱̇˹˾˷̃ ˱̂˵ ˹˾˳˼̅˴˵˴ ˹˾ ̄˸˵ ̀˱˳˻˵̄ ˽˱̄˵̂˹˱˼̃ʾ Pages ˇʽˁ˂ ˿˶ ̄˸˵ ˱̀̀˼˹˳˱˾̄Ͻ̃ ˃ˇʽ̀˱˷˵̇̂˹̄̄˵˾ ˶˹˾˴˹˾˷̃ ˴˿˳̅˽˵˾̄ ̂˵̃̀˿˾˴ ˴˹̂˵˳̄˼̉ ̄˿ ̄˸˵ ˘˹̃̄˿̂˹˳ District Development Standards. RECOMMENDATION HPAC is askedto make a recommendation on this item to the Staff Advisorin the Planning Division to consider in making a final decision on the Site Design Review application. Staff are specifically hoping for any input with regard to the proposal as it relates specifically to the Historic District Development Standards or more generally in terms of compatibility with the immediate neighborhood and surrounding district. REFERENCES & ATTACHMENTS Attachment #1:Written Findings Submitted for Review Attachment #2:Drawings Submittedfor Review COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTDEPARTMENT 51 Winburn WayTel:541.488.5305 Ashland, Oregon 97520Fax:541.552.2050 ashland.or.us TTY: 800.735.2900 BEFORE CITY OF ASHLAND FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR SITE DESIGN REVIEW FOR A PROPOSED RESTAURANT AT 246 A STREET, TAX LOT 391E09BA1200, COVERING APPROXIMATELY 0.28 ACRES, ZONED E-1 EMPLOYMENT. Application Type: Type I Site Design Review Property Description Site Location: 246 A Street, 39 1E 09BA 1200 Site Area: 0.28 acre (12,200 ft2) Base Zone: Employment (E-1) Overlays: Residential, Railroad Historic District, Detail Site Review Action: Type 1 Commercial Site Design Review for redevelopment of auto service shop to restaurant Concurrent: Fence permit, Tree protection plan / removal permit, Sign permit Owner Parts and Service LLC Contact Rafael Gonzales (541) 631-1600 rmk.gonzales@gmail.com Architect Peter Grossman Civil Engineer Charles Kroning Landscape Architect Shelby Scharen Building Code Consultant Pat DeBenedetti Land Use Planning Matt Brinkley Î Green Top Planning Surrounding Zoning Surrounding Land Use Current Occupant/User North: E-1 Commercial/Retail Ashland Hardware South: R-2 Residence East: E-1 Commercial/Retail Ashland Recycled Furniture West: E-1 Commercial/Retail Ashland Food Co-Op Comprehensive Plan Designation Employment Existing Improvements 2,040 ft2 one story, concrete block walls, wooden roof, Type III construction, non-sprinklered; 513 ft2 modular spray booth, with wooden-frame, metal-clad walls and roof, Type V construction, non-sprinklered, attached to the main building. Total floor area = 2,553 ft2. There are extensive areas of asphalt paving (~2,700 ft2) and compacted gravel (~3,700 ft2). The site is fully enclosed by chain-link fencing (~320 lf). EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE Utilities: The site is served by water, electricity, gas, sanitary sewer, storm sewer. Electrical infrastructure is aerial and feeds the site from the alley abutting the south boundary of the site. All other utilities are underground. A fire hydrant sits at the siteÓs northwest corner (A St & First St). 1 of 37 Transportation: Access is multi-modal. The subject site is a corner lot bounded on 3 sides by public 1 rights of way: A Street (neighborhood collector) along the north property line; First Street (neighborhood street) along the west property line; and an alley along the south property line. An 8-ft- wide public sidewalk abuts the siteÓs A Street frontage, and a 6-ft-wide public sidewalk and 14-ft-wide planter strip abuts the siteÓs First Street frontage. Surrounding public streets provide curbside parking. The site is accessible via local/regional public bus service within a short walk (mile). The site is also accessible by bicycle. Neighborhood streets accommodate bikes. ADA Parking: One ADA parking space, available for nonexclusive public use, abuts the site on First St. Project Summary The existing use is classified by the Ashland Land Use Ordinance as, ÐMotor Vehicle Repair Garage,Ñ and by the Oregon Structural Specialty Code (OSSC) as, ÐModerate-Hazard Factory Industrial, Group F-1.Ñ The existing use, which includes an extensive area of vehicle parking, is permitted in the E-1 zone; the location within 200 feet of a residential zone is nonconforming. Applicant proposes to redevelop the Subject as a quality restaurant, which is a permitted commercial use in the E-1 Zone. The existing structure, comprised of a 2,040 ft2, one-story, concrete-block bldg, c. 1973, and an attached 513 ft2 spray booth covered by a 600 ft2 roof, c.1987, are utilitarian and lack any historical features or portions to preserve. The existing main building would be renovated for practical function, energy efficiency, and architectural compatibility with the neighborhood. The attached spray booth and cover would be replaced by an 822 ft2 addition to the main building. A primary goal of this project is to create a gathering place that focuses at least as much on the outdoor environment as the indoor. Toward that goal, the asphalt area, presently used for vehicle parking, would be redeveloped as a plaza. Replacing asphalt with landscaping, hardscaping, sitting areas, and partial shelter from wind, rain, and sun, would provide for all-season outdoor socialization and dining, and would integrate indoor and outdoor spaces and activities. Prominent and clearly identifiable entrances to the building and outdoor dining area would be constructed on the First Street and A Street, which is the higher-order street of the corner lot. ***** 1 Functional classification of streets per Ashland Transportation System Plan (2012). https://www.ashlandoregon.gov/DocumentCenter/View/2038/2012-Transportation-System-Plan-pdf?bidId= 2 of 37 Compliance with Standards of Review The following demonstrates how the application complies with the standards, or criteria, used by the City of Ashland to review this application. All applicable criteria can be found by the City of Ashland to conform with these standards. Only criteria relevant to this particular application are considered in these findings. Text reproduced and/or excerpted from the Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) and other regulatory documents that are reproduced verbatim appear in italicized Times New Roman font; ApplicantÓs findings of fact and conclusions of law appear in plain Arial font. 18.5.2 Site Design Review 18.5.2.010 Purpose https://ashland.municipal.codes/LandUse/18.5.2.010 The purpose and intent of this chapter is to regulate the manner in which land in the City is used and developed, to reduce adverse effects on surrounding property owners and the general public, to create a business environment that is safe and comfortable, to further energy conservation efforts within the City, to enhance the environment for walking, cycling, and mass transit use, and to ensure that high quality development is maintained throughout the City. Findings of Fac t: The proposed redevelopment beneficially repurposes an existing autocentric use that with one that is more compatible with neighboring specialty retail and hospitality uses. The existing buildingÓs appearance will be greatly enhanced with thoughtful architectural features and landscape elements. 18.5.2.020 Applicability https://ashland.municipal.codes/LandUse/18.5.2.020 Site Design Review is required for the following types of project proposals. A. Commercial, Industrial, Non-Residential, and Mixed Uses. Site Design Review applies to the following types of non-residential uses and project proposals, including proposals for commercial, industrial, and mixed-use projects, pursuant to section 18.5.2.030, Review Procedures. 1. New structures, additions, or expansions in C-1, E-1, HC, CM, and M-1 zones. Findings of Fact: The proposed redevelopment is located in the E-1 zone, and would include new structures and an addition to an existing structure. Conclusions of Law: It can be concluded that Site Design Review is required. 18.5.2.030 Review Procedures https://ashland.municipal.codes/LandUse/18.5.2.030 A. Type I Review. Except as provided by 18.5.2.030, subsections B - G, below, applications for Site Design Review are subject to the Type I procedure, pursuant to section 18.5.1.050. B. C-1, E-1, HC, and M-1 Zones. In the C-1, E-1, HC, and M-1 zones, but not within the Downtown Design Standards or Detail Site Review overlays, new structures or additions greater than 15,000 3 of 37 square feet in gross floor area, or greater than 50 percent of an existing buildingÓs gross floor area are subject to Type II review. C. Downtown Design Standards Overlay. N/A D. Detail Site Review Overlay. In the Detail Site Review overlay, new structures or additions greater than 10,000 square feet in gross floor area, or longer than 100 feet in length or width are subject to Type II review. Findings of Facts: The Subject is located within the Detail Site Review Overlay. The existing building has a gross floor area of 2,040 square feet; the proposed addition is 822 square feet, creating a total gross floor area of 2,862 square feet. The longest dimension of the enclosed building space is nearly 90 feet. Conclusions of Law: The proposed redevelopment does not include any new structures or additions greater than 10,000 square feet or longer than 100 feet. It can be concluded that this Application is subject to a Type I review as provided in 18.5.2.030.A. 18.5.2.040 APPLICATION SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS 18.5.2.040 Application Submission Requirements https://ashland.municipal.codes/LandUse/18.5.2.040 The following information is required for site design review application submittal, except where the Staff Advisor determines that some information is not pertinent and therefore is not required: A. General Submission Requirements. Information required for Type I or Type II review, as applicable (see sections 18.5.1.050 and 18.5.1.060), including but not limited to a written statement or letter explaining how the application satisfies each and all of the relevant criteria and standards. B. Site Design Review Information. In addition to the general information required for site design review, the applicant shall provide the following information: 1. Basic Plan Information. 2. Site Analysis Map. 3. Proposed Site Plan. 4. Architectural Drawings. 5. Preliminary Grading and Drainage Plan. 6. Erosion Control Plan. 7. Landscape and Irrigation Plans. 8. Narrative. Letter or narrative report documenting compliance with the applicable approval criteria contained in section 18.5.2.050. Specifically, the narrative shall contain the following: a. For commercial and industrial developments: i. The square footage contained in the area proposed to be developed. Findings of Fact 4 of 37 Redevelopment would affect 9,243 ft2 or 76% of the site. ii. The percentage of the lot covered by structures. Findings of Fact Existing and proposed enclosed structures with measurable floor area would comprise 3,270 ft2, covering 27% of the site. iii. The percentage of the lot covered by other impervious surfaces. Findings of Fact Other impervious surfaces would comprise 6,315 ft2, covering 52% of the site. The total area of impervious surfaces would cover 9,585 ft or 79% of the site. iv. The total number of parking spaces. Findings of Fact Existing onsite parking would be removed from the site. v. The total square footage of all landscaped areas. Findings of Fact Landscaped areas would be comprised of 1,655 ft2 of traditional plantings and 438 ft2 of stormwater planters for a total area of 2,093 ft2 or 17% of the site. The total area of pervious surfaces would cover 2,615 ft2 or 21% of the site. The submittal is comprised of plans and narrative descriptions of the proposed redevelopment which apply and evaluate compliance with relevant standards and approval criteria. The plans address Site Design Review items B.1 through B.7. The narrative (item B.8) analyzes the proposed redevelopment for compliance with the Ashland Land-Use Ordinance also referenced as the Ashland Municipal Code (AMC). Selected topics are discussed in detail in this narrative to document background and reasoning. Selected topics include ADA parking, stormwater management, and signs. Conclusions of Law: It can be concluded that the ApplicantÓs submittal satisfies the requirements of 18.5.2.030. 5 of 37 18.5.2.050.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. Findings of Fact: Per AMC 18.2.2.030, a restaurant is a permitted use, subject to E-1 and overlay development standards. Conclusions of Law: It can be concluded that the proposed use satisfies the criterion in 18.5.2.050.A. 18.2.6.030 Unified Standards for Non-Residential Zones https://ashland.municipal.codes/LandUse/18.2.6.030 There is no minimum lot area, width or depth, or maximum lot coverage; or minimum front, side or rear yard, except as required to comply with the special district and overlay zone provisions of part 18.3 or the site development and design standards of part 18.4. There is no minimum front, side, or rear yard required, except where buildings on the subject site abut a residential zone, in which case a side yard of not less than 10 ft and a rear yard of not less than 10 ft per story is required. Standard Proposed Criterion Lot area 12,200 ft2 no minimum Lot width 100 ft no minimum Lot depth 120 ft no minimum Lot coverage 79% impervious no maximum Front yard 5 ft min 5 ft, max 20 ft Side yard 2 ft no minimum Rear yard 6ft 10 ft minimum Bldg height 20.5 ft 40 ft maximum Solar setback (SSB) exempt 16 ft maximum Landscape area 17% 15% minimum Floor : Area (FAR) 0.69 0.50 minimum Findings of Fact: Table 18.2.6.030. Standards for Non-Residential Zones establishes a minimum rear yard setback of ten (10) feet per story when an E-1 property abuts a residential zone, as is the case for the subject property. The existing structure is only one story, and proposed accessory structures (outdoor service and storage buildings) are only one story as well. All buildings (existing and proposed) would be at least twelve (12) feet from the rear yard setback. Solar setback requirements limit shade over the north property line to 16 feet at noon on December 21. Exemptions are provided by 18.4.8.020.B.1 (architectural projections) and B.4 (existing shade conditions). A rooftop mechanical equipment screen, with maximum height of 4 feet, would be placed on the existing building. The shadow cast across the north property line by these features are exempt from solar setback requirements. Per the definition of Northern Lot Line, ÐIf the northern lot line adjoins any unbuildable area (e.g., street, alley, public right-of-way, parking lot, or common area) other than a required yard area, the northern lot line is that portion of the northerly edge of the unbuildable area which is due north from the actual northern edge of the applicant's property.Ñ The northern lot line adjoins a public street. Section 18.4.2.040.C.1.a requires a minimum floor/area ratio (FAR) of 0.50. FAR is calculated by dividing the sum of the floor area of buildings, plazas, and pedestrian areas on a lot by the total lot area. 6 of 37 In this case, buildings and other contributing site features (accessory structures, outdoor dining area, etc.) cover 8,420 square feet achieving an FAR of 0.69 over the 12,000 square foot lot. Conclusions of Law: The project as proposed complies with all yard setbacks as defined in Table 18.2.6.030. Per existing conditions, exemptions, & definition, the solar setback requirement is met. I can be concluded, therefore, that the project complies with AMC 18.2.6.030. 18.5.2.050.B Overlay Zones. The proposal complies with applicable overlay zone requirements (part 18.3). The proposed redevelopment is subject to the following overlays: Detail Site Review, Residential, and Railroad Historic District. Compliance with the standards of review for each is provided in the following. 18.3.12.030 Detail Site Review Overlay See below: 18.4.2.040.C Detail Site Review Standards 18.3.13.010 Residential Overlay Regulations https://ashland.municipal.codes/LandUse/18.3.13.010 A. Purpose. The Residential overlay is intended to encourage a concentration and mix of businesses and housing that provide a variety of housing types, support resource and energy conservation, and promote walking, bicycling, and transit use. B. Applicability. The Residential overlay applies to all property where ÒResidential OverlayÓ (R) is indicated on the Zoning map. C. Requirements. The Residential overlay requirements are as follows: 1. Mixed-Use Developments. If there is one building on a site, ground floor residential uses shall occupy not more than 35 percent of the gross floor area of the ground floor. Where more than one building is located on a site, not more than 50 percent of the total lot area shall be designated for residential uses. At least 65 percent of the gross floor area of the ground floor shall be designated for permitted uses and uses permitted with special use standards, not including residential uses. 2. No maximum residential densities shall apply. 3. Residential uses shall be subject to the same setback, landscaping, and design standards as for permitted uses in the E-1 District. Findings of Fact: Requirements of the residential overlay are not more restrictive than those of E-1 zone. The proposed project, as a neighborhood gathering place, would meet the purpose of the residential overlay. The proposed restaurant and design would Ðsupport resource and energy conservation, and promote walking, bicycling, and transit use.Ñ Conclusions of Law: Based on the findings above, the land-use governing authority can find the proposed redevelopment complies with the requirements of AMC §18.3.13.010 - Residential Overlay. 18.3.12.050 Historic District Overlay https://ashland.municipal.codes/LandUse/18.3.12.050 7 of 37 A. The Historic District Overlay, also referred to as the Historic Interest Area, is that area defined in the Historic Districts map. B. Development in the Historic District Overlay is subject to section 18.4.2.050 Historic District Standards in addition to all other applicable sections of this ordinance. (Ord. 3263 § 6, amended, 06/03/2025) 18.4.2.050 Historic \[Railroad\] District Standards https://ashland.municipal.codes/LandUse/18.4.2.050 1. Transitional Area: Findings of Fact: As discussed below, proposed height, scale, mass, and materials, as described in the submitted plans, are consistent with existing buildings throughout the ÐTransitional Area.Ñ 2. Height: Findings of Fact: No change to height from the existing building is proposed, except for screening roof- top mechanical equipment. The screening, which is required by code, only increases building height by four feet, resulting in an overall building height that is consistent with existing, surrounding buildings that are one and two stories. 3. Scale: Findings of Fact: The building footprint of the existing structure is a similar width relative to surrounding buildings. The building addition would only increase that width from 30 to 36 feet. An open porch on the east side of the building would add several more feet, but the remainder of the site is left open for an outdoor seating area. The building would remain one story. 4. Massing: Findings of Fact: An addition, which is the same width as the existing building footprint, is proposed to be constructed at the north end of the existing building. This will ÐbringÑ the building closer to A Street, making it more similar to the building orientation and massing of surrounding historic buildings. The addition of the porch roof adds architectural variation to the existing building, which is a rather plain rectangular building with flat roof and few architectural features to break up or vary its north and east st elevations that are visible from A and 1 Streets. The proposed porch roof would break up the existing box with a historically common feature which provides shade and shelter and supports socialization and neighborhood-scale commerce. The addition would also add two large windows and a second door to the buildingÓs north faade, adding visual interest and breaking up what is currently a blank, corrugated metal wall. 5. Setback: Findings of Fact: The building addition and front porch would bring the building to the back of the A Street sidewalk, in line with the building at 258 A Street. 6. Roof: 8 of 37 Findings of Fact: The building addition and the porches would be roofed with standing-seam metal, which is preferred to corrugated metal for the following reasons: Contemplated future installation of photovoltaic and thermal solar panels would attach directly to the standing seams with readily available hardware, and without compromising the waterproofing integrity of the roof. Attachment hardware for corrugated metal is available, but is more vulnerable to leaks. Corrugated metal is vulnerable to damage from maintenance and service footsteps, while standing- seam is not. Corrugated imitates historically used materials; standing-seam reflects the practical basis of historical design (form evolves from function). The sloping roofline of the building addition and porches add visual interest to what is currently a flat roof. While other buildings in the general vicinity have flat rooves, pitched rooves are a common or even prevalent architectural feature. 7. Rhythm of Openings: Findings of Fact: Other nearby buildings vary greatly in the placement and amount of fenestration that is visible from the street. The proposed building addition and renovated east façade would add a significant number of windows and doors to a building that currently has very few. The north façade of the building that faces A Street, has no doors or windows, and the east façade only has one door, one window, and three roll up doors. As proposed, the north façade would have two large windows and two doors, placed at regular intervals. The east façade would have five doors, a window, and two roll doors with glazing. 8. Base or Platforms: Findings of Fact: The existing building is monolithic, completely lacking any vertical division on its north or east façades. The addition of a porch, pitched roof, additional fenestration, and (on the north façade) retaining wall below the porch on the north side of the building, will create a recognizable vertical division. 9. Form. Findings of Fact: The existing building lacks architectural features that are characteristic of surrounding historic and newer buildings that have been designed to be compatible with historic buildings (e.g. Ace Hardware across the street from the subject property). The addition of a covered porch would give the existing building a more historically compatible appearance. Covered porches in public and private spaces foster(ed) socialization, during the historically relevant time period, and today. 10. Entrance: Findings of Fact: Per submitted plans, the primary entrance is proposed to be clearly defined by a prominent entryway, connected directly to the porch that is proposed to wrap around the north and east facades of the building. This covered portico invites pedestrians into a landscaped plaza / outdoor dining area. 11. Imitation of Historic Features: Findings of Fact: Although the proposed building addition and remodeling of the existing building recall or acknowledge the architectural vernacular of historical commercial and industrial buildings, proposed architectural features do not replicate the appearance of such buildings. For example, both 201 and 9 of 37 195 Oak Street are historic buildings that feature exposed metal structural components, roofing materials, and cladding. The subject property proposes to use similar materials without reproducing any particular architectural detail found at these or other historic buildings in the vicinity. The proposed design acknowledges the architectural heritage of nearby historic buildings but does not attempt to disguise itself as one of them. 12. Additions: Findings of Fact: An existing, semi-open paint booth, clad on its street-facing north side with painted corrugated metal, would be replaced with a framed structure comprised of the materials listed below, which would improve practical function and historical character. Porch & Addition Roof: Standing-seam metal Siding: Wood & steel Covered Porch: Oversized wooden posts and glue-laminated beams The placement of the addition, moreover, would greatly improve the existing buildingÓs connection with the public sidewalk, making it much more like adjacent historic buildings. 13. Garage Placement: Findings of Fact: Not applicable. Other - National Listing: Findings of Fact: There is no known historic listing of the subject building. Conclusions of Law: Based on the findings above, it can be concluded that the proposed redevelopment complies with the requirements of AMC 18.3.12.050 - Historic District Overlay and §18.4.2.050 - Historic \[Railroad\] District Standard. 18.4.2.050.C Rehabilitation Standards for Existing Buildings and Additions . a. Historic architectural styles and associated features shall not be replicated in new additions or associated buildings. Findings of Fact: The shed roof structure proposed to replace the spray booth addition would reflect a historically ubiquitous feature without imitating historical details. b. hƩźŭźƓğƌ ğƩĭŷźƷĻĭƷǒƩğƌ ŅĻğƷǒƩĻƭ ƭŷğƌƌ ĬĻ ƩĻƭƷƚƩĻķ ğƭ ƒǒĭŷ ğƭ ƦƚƭƭźĬƌĻͲ ǞŷĻƓ ƷŷƚƭĻ ŅĻğƷǒƩĻƭ ĭğƓ ĬĻ ķƚĭǒƒĻƓƷĻķ͵ Findings of Fact: N/A. The existing structure is a 1973 non-historic noncontributing building. The subject structure is comprised of a CMU building (c.1973), with an attached wood-framed paint booth (c.1987). These Ðarchitectural featuresÑ are not worthy of restoration. c. Replacement finishes on exterior walls of historic buildings shall match the original finish. Exterior finishes on new additions to historic buildings shall be compatible with, but not replicate, the finish of the historic building. 10 of 37 Findings of Fact: The existing structure is a 1973 non-historic noncontributing CMU-block, painted structure. The CMU block would be repainted. The other building materials, wood and metal, would be compatible with other historic buildings. d. Diagonal and vertical siding shall be avoided on new additions or on historic buildings except in those instances where it was used as the original siding. Findings of Fact: The existing structure is a 1973 non-historic noncontributing building. Any new siding would be horizontal wood, or metal. e. Exterior wall colors on new additions shall match those of the historic building. Findings of Fact: Not applicable: the existing structure is a 1973 non-historic noncontributing building. f. Imitative materials including but not limited to asphalt siding, wood textured aluminum siding, and artificial stone shall be avoided. Findings of Fact: The new building materials would be real wood and steel, as represented in the plans. g. Replacement windows in historic buildings shall match the original windows. Windows in new additions shall be compatible in proportion, shape and size, but not replicate original windows in the historic building. Findings of Fact: Not applicable: the existing structure is a 1973 non-historic noncontributing building. The existing window would be replaced with a clear anodized aluminum or black aluminum window in compliance with the energy efficiency code. Two of the three garage doors would be replaced with clear anodized aluminum or black aluminum-window roll up loading doors. The third garage door would be replaced with matching metal-framed windows and personnel door. h. Reconstructed roofs on historic buildings shall match the pitch and form of the original roof. Roofs on new additions shall match the pitch and form of the historic building, and shall be attached at a different height so the addition can be clearly differentiated from the historic building. Shed roofs are acceptable for one-story rear additions. Findings of Fact: Not applicable: the existing structure is a 1973 non-historic noncontributing building. The main building roof (approx. 2% slope) would be structurally reinforced,but not altered in pitch or form. The paint booth currently has a shed roof which would be replaced with a new shed roof. Added porch roofs would be single-slope (shed) roofs. i. Asphalt or composition shingle roofs are preferred. Asphalt shingles which match the original roof material in color and texture are acceptable. Wood shake, wood shingle, tile, and metal roofs shall be avoided. Findings of Fact: Not applicable: the existing structure is a 1973 non-historic noncontributing building. The main building roof (2% slope) would be maintained by replacement of the waterproofing membrane. This roof surface is not visible from ground level. The paint booth currently has a shed roof. It would be replaced with a new standing-seam metal roof. The porch and awning roofs would 11 of 37 be standing-seam metal. Standing-seam metal roofs are abundant on A street, thus reflecting surrounding neighborhood aesthetics. j. New porches or entries shall be compatible with, but not replicate, the historic character of the building. Findings of Fact: Not applicable: the existing structure is a 1973 non-historic noncontributing building. The proposed porches would be compatible with other buildings in the neighborhood. k. New detached buildings shall be compatible with the associated historic building and shall conform to the above standards. Findings of Fact: Not applicable: the existing structure is a 1973 non-historic noncontributing building. A storage shed and a satellite service counter (both non-conditioned), and a covered, open- wall seating area are proposed. Roof slopes and materials would be compatible with the porch roof added to the main building. l. The latest version of the Secretary of the Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings shall be used in clarifying and determining whether the above standards are met. Findings of Fact: Not applicable: the existing structure is a 1973 non-historic noncontributing building. Conclusions of Law: Based on the findings above, it can be concluded that the proposed redevelopment complies with the requirements of AMC §18.4.2.050.C - Rehabilitation Standards for Existing Buildings and Additions. 18.5.2.050.C APPROVAL CRITERIA / SITE DEVELOPMENT AND DESIGN STANDARDS 18.4 Site Development and Design Standards https://ashland.municipal.codes/LandUse/18.4 ¤ 18.4.2 Building Placement, Orientation, and Design ¤ 18.4.3 Parking, Access, and Circulation ¤ 18.4.4 Landscaping, Lighting, and Screening ¤ 18.4.5 Tree Preservation and Protection ¤ 18.4.6 Public Facilities ¤ 18.4.7 Signs 18.4.2 Building Placement, Orientation, and Design 18.4.2.040.B Basic Site Review Standards https://ashland.municipal.codes/LandUse/18.4.2.040 Except as otherwise required by an overlay zone or plan district, the following requirements apply to commercial, industrial, non-residential and mixed-use development pursuant to section 18.5.2.020. 12 of 37 1. Orientation and Scale. a. Buildings shall have their primary orientation toward the street and not a parking area. Automobile circulation or off-street parking is not allowed between the building and the street. Parking areas shall be located behind buildings, or to one side. b. A building faade or multiple building faades shall occupy a large majority of a projectÓs street frontage as illustrated in Figure 18.4.2.040.B.6, and avoid site design that incorporates extensive gaps between building frontages created through a combination of driveway aprons, parking areas, or vehicle aisles. This can be addressed by, but not limited to, positioning the wider side of the building rather than the narrow side of the building toward the street. In the case of a corner lot, this standard applies to both street frontages. Spaces between buildings shall consist of landscaping and hard durable surface materials to highlight pedestrian areas͵ Findings of Fact The primary entrance would be oriented toward A Street, with a second significant public entrance on First Street. Additional discussion of the primary entrance is provided below. There would be no vehicle parking onsite. Accordingly, there can be no off-street parking between the building and the streets. The existing building footprint is approximately 30 feet wide and 60 feet deep. The building addition and porch roof will expand this footprint to approximately 46 feet wide by 88 feet deep, occupying nearly st half of the A Street frontage, and most of the 1 Street frontage. With a large uninterrupted landscaped st outdoor dining and gathering area between the building and 1 Street, the development will be one cohesive unit without Ðextensive gaps between buildings frontages \[È\]Ñ. Conclusions of Law It can be concluded that the site plan as proposed complies with AMC 18.4.2.040.B.1.a and b. c. Building entrances shall be oriented toward the street and shall be accessed from a public sidewalk. The entrance shall be designed to be clearly visible, functional, and shall be open to the public during all business hours. See Figure 18.4.2.040.B.1. d. Building entrances shall be located within 20 feet of the public right-of-way to which they are required to be oriented. Exceptions may be granted for topographic constraints, lot configuration, designs where a greater setback results in an improved access or for sites with multiple buildings, such as shopping centers, where other buildings meet this standard. Findings of Fact AMC 18.4.2.040.B.1.c requires that ÐBuilding entrances shall be oriented toward the street and shall be accessed from a public sidewalk. The entrance shall be designed to be clearly visible, functional, and shall be open to the public during all business hours.Ñ ÐBuilding entranceÑ is not expressly defined, neither as separate words nor as a phrase in AMC 18.6.1.030 Definitions. However, ÐbuildingÑ and ÐentranceÑ can be defined in relevant context with unambiguous meaning. The Americans with Disabilities Act, for example, defines ÐentranceÑ as Any access point to a building or portion of a building or facility used for the purpose of entering. An entrance includes the approach walk, the vertical access leading to the entrance platform, the entrance platform itself, vestibule if provided, the entry door or gate, and the hardware of the entry 2 door or gate. Emphasis added 2 ADA 2010 Standards, Titles II and III Definitions, emphasis added 13 of 37 Figure 1: Renderings of the primary entrance on A Street show the connected relationship between the roof of the primary building and the entryway, inviting guests into the site and guiding them to indoor or outdoor dining areas. Applicant proposes that the A Street entrance be considered as the entrance to the building and site. From this primary entrance, two entrances into the primary building are located within approximately 60 feet of travel, accessible by stairs and an ADA ramping system. The outdoor dining area is also accessible from these facilities. The ADA ramping system is relatively extensive due to an nearly three and a half foot change in elevation between the sidewalk and current (and proposed) finished floor elevation (FFE) of the primary building. The gate which leads to the ADA ramp and stairs are located in the best, and arguably only, location that connects the sidewalk with entrances into the primary building and outdoor seating area in the most direct and convenient manner possible. One of these building entrances is proposed to be located on the north end of the building, adjacent to and visible from the sidewalk. This entrance is within six feet of the back of sidewalk, meeting the literal application of AMC 18.4.2.040.B.1.d. This entrance will provide access for staff to the back of house (office, storage, food preparation areas); another entrance on the west side of the building leads directly to a host station and indoor dining area. This building entrance is visible directly from the First Street gate. Landscaping planters and the configuration of ramps, stairs, and landings will lead guests directly to these service areas from the public sidewalk on both A and First Streets. 14 of 37 The primary entrance (the gate portico) will be open during business hours, providing public access to the restaurant. There would be no vehicles between the building entrance and the sidewalk. Conclusions of Law Recognizing that designation of the gate and portico as the primary building entrance for the purposes of determining compliance with AMC 18.4.2.040.B.1.c and d may require the application of some discretion in reaching that conclusion, Applicant believes that AMC 18.5.2.050.E(1) can be applied and that the Ðapproving authorityÑ can reasonably conclude that a Ðdemonstratable difficultyÑ exists in \[È\] 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 \[È\] As demonstrated above, application of an Exception in this case is necessary to address the difference in grades between the sidewalk and the FFE of the existing building and outdoor dining and gathering area. The location of required ADA ramping and stairs provides the most direct access to these site features. The approving authority can reasonably conclude, therefore, that the Ðexception requested is the minimum which would alleviate the difficulty \[È\]Ñ. There is no conceivable way that allowing the A Street gate to be considered as the Ðprimary building entranceÑ would in any way Ðsubstantially negatively impact adjacent properties \[È\]Ñ. The gate would be constructed as the primary access to the site, regardless of granting of the Exception. Furthermore, in the absence of the beneficial repurposing of this property, negative impacts issuing forth from the existing use can reasonably be expected to persist. The current use of the property is as an automobile service garage, an autocentric use in the midst of an otherwise highly walkable built environment dominated by small retail stores and restaurants that benefit from pedestrian traffic. In the absence of a specific definition to the contrary, it can also reasonably be concluded based on the findings above that the primary building entrance proposed in the site plan is consistent with the Ðstated purpose of the Site Development and DesignÑ standards in AMC 18.4.2.040.B.1.c and d. Application of these standards in this manner is consistent with the legislative intent of AMC 18.4.2.040 and planning best practices to which this section of the Ashland Municipal Code would seem to aspire. This section of the AshlandÓs development code seems to be primarily concerned with the development of urban form that emphasizes attractive, walkable, urban streetscapes by discouraging, and even prohibits the placement of parking areas between buildings and public sidewalks and streets. AMC 18.4.2.040.A Purpose and Intent explains that One area in which AshlandÓs commercial differs from that seen in many other cities is the relationship between the street, buildings, parking areas, and landscaping. The most common form of modern commercial development is the placement of a small buffer of landscaping between the street and the parking area, with the building behind the parking area at the rear of the parcel with loading areas behind the building. This may be desirable for the commercial use because it gives the appearance of ample parking for customers. However, the effect on the streetscape is less than desirable because the result is a vast hot, open parking area which is not only unsightly but results in a development form which the City discourages \[È\] The alternative desired in Ashland is to design the site so that it makes a positive contribution to the streetscape and enhances pedestrian and bicycle traffic. AMC 18.4.2.040.B.1.a further clarifies that in order to realize this intent, Ðbuildings shall have their primary orientation toward the street and not a parking area.Ñ In this context, AMC 18.4.2.040.B.1.c and d would seem to be concerned not simply with ÐorientationÑ of any and all accessways into a building or site, but rather with architectural and site design features that meaningfully make Ða positive contribution to the streetscape and enhances pedestrian and bicycle traffic.Ñ 15 of 37 Current best practices that support the stated policy goals of AMC 18.4.2.040.B.1.c and d also support application of the Exception. The Department of Land Conservation and Development recently 3 published guidance for Ðwalkable design standards.Ñ This guidance seeks to Ðensure convenient access for pedestrians, promote buildings close to the sidewalk that reinforce pedestrian orientation, and support a visually interesting experience for pedestrians \[È\].Ñ Consistent with the legislative intent stated in AshlandÓs own code, the guidance prohibits vehicle Ðparking or circulationÑ between the building and Ðstreet lot lineÑ (in this case, the public sidewalk on A Street). The guidance further explains several ways a buildingÓs ÐmainÑ entrance can be designed to achieve 4 the policy goals shared by the guidance document and the AMC. A main entry could, for example, Ðopen onto a covered porch that must be at least 25 square feet in areaÑ or Ðface a courtyard \[no less than 15 feet in width\] that abuts the street.Ñ As documented above, the two entrances into the primary building open onto a covered patio area that wraps around the entire north and west elevations of the building. A ÐcourtyardÑ, used in this case for outdoor dining and gathering, occupies half of the site st between the primary building and 1 Street to the west. While the Applicant recognizes that this guidance is not legally binding, it is consistent with the legislative intent stated in AMC 18.4.2.040.A and provides greater clarity where the AMC may be ambiguous. Therefore, based on the Findings of Fact and reasoning presented heretofore, the approving authority can conclude that an Exception to these standards is appropriate in this case, and that the site plan as proposed complies with AMC 18.4.2.040.B.1.c and d with application of this Exception. ***** ͯ ϶9ňijŎêƂđЎ\[ŵijđŏċňƢ϶êŏċ϶EŴƇijƂêăňđ϶9ŗŎŎƇŏijƂijđŹ϶Ëêňńêăňđ϶?đŹijĩŏ϶¨ƂêŏċêŵċŹ϶\]ƇijċđăŗŗńϽ϶ŵđĩŗŏ϶?đŲêŵƂŎđŏƂ϶ŗĨ϶xêŏċ϶ 9ŗŏŹđŵƚêƂijŗŏ϶êŏċ϶?đƚđňŗŲŎđŏƂϽ϶ͮͬͮͱ϶ Ͱ ϶°İđ϶ĩƇijċêŏąđ϶ċđĨijŏđŹ϶êϼŎêijŏϼđŏƂŵêŏąđϼêŹϼЭƂİđϼđŏƂŵêŏąđϼƂŗϼêϼăƇijňċijŏĩϼƂİêƂϼijŹϼċđŹijĩŏđċϼƂŗϼĨêąijňijƂêƂđϼijŏĩŵđŹŹϼêŏċϼ đĩŵđŹŹϼĨŗŵϼƂİđϼİijĩİđŹƂϼƚŗňƇŎđϼŗĨϼăƇijňċijŏĩϼƇŹđŵŹЂЮ 16 of 37 Figure 2:Site features and circulation.Two pedestrian pathways, shown in broken blue line, provide ADA compliant connections between the primary entrance on A Street and a second public entrance on First Street. e.Where a building is located on a corner lot, its entrance shall be oriented toward the higher order street or to the lot corner at the intersection of the streets. The building shall be located as close to the intersection corner as practicable. 17of 37 Findings of Fact The subject site is a corner lot. The primary entrance is proposed to be oriented toward A Street, which is the higher-order street. The building is existing. Between the existing building and the intersection of A Street and First Street, a large outdoor dining area is proposed. Several new accessory structures are proposed along the perimeter of this area, including a Ðsatellite food serviceÑ building. The proposed configuration of the outdoor dining area, with the accessory food service building located approximately 75 feet north of the corner, is a function of the operational needs of the restaurant and the availability of space for the accessory building. Locating the accessory building at the corner (immediately behind the retaining wall at the intersection of A and First Streets), would reduce the functional effectiveness and benefit of the accessory building. The location where the accessory building would provide operational benefit is toward the rear (south side) of the site, where it can better service more customers in the outdoor dining and gathering area. Locating the accessory building somewhere between the corner and its proposed location would split the outdoor dining and gathering area, making it less appealing for patrons, while interfering with staffÓs ability to observe the outdoor dining and ensure a high level of service. It would also obstruct access to the First Street entry gate, creating unnecessary out-of-direction travel for guests with disabilities who use the ADA parking space on First Street. In addition, the southwest corner of the site that abuts the intersection is highly constrained by the presence of site and building access facilities (ADA ramps, stairs, and surrounding landscaping planters which collect stormwater and must be at the lowest elevation of the site). As proposed, the area between st the west (1 Street) property line and the ADA ramp landing and landscaping planters is roughly 14-15 feet wide; the proposed accessory building would be more than 10 feet wide. The remaining clear area would provide less than optimal access to the building for both staff and patrons. Conclusions of Law It can be concluded that the proposed location of the accessory building is as close to the corner as is Ðpracticable.Ñ There is no definition of ÐpracticableÑ in the Ashland Land Development Ordinance, but the word is commonly used synonymously with the word Ðfeasible.Ñ In order to achieve a site configuration in this particular case that most ÐfeasiblyÑ or practicably meets the legislative intent of AMC 18.4.2.040.A and current best practices for walkability, the accessory building should be located as proposed. It can also be concluded that the location of the accessory building meets the requirements for an exception under AMC 18.5.2.050.E. The location of the accessory building is the result of site conditions (grade in particular) that necessitate a significant ADA ramping system. The approval of this Exception would not negatively impact any adjacent. Given the operational requirements of the outdoor dining area, this is the minimum Exception needed. f. Public sidewalks shall be provided adjacent to a public street along the street frontage. Finding The existing driveway apron is proposed to remain in the sidewalk, for access by emergency response vehicles, and by service and maintenance equipment during non-business hours. The street space presently used as part of an access driveway is proposed to be available for use by the general public for time-restricted parking (15 minutes is suggested), which would primarily support commercial activity of the neighborhood while providing limited access for servicing the subject site during off hours. 2. Streetscape. Finding Landscape plan and elevations compliant with 18.4.4.030.E accompany this submittal. 18 of 37 3. Landscaping. a. Landscape areas at least ten feet in width shall buffer buildings adjacent to streets, except the buffer is not required in the Detail Site Review, Historic District, and Pedestrian Place overlays͵ Finding Site is subject to Detail Site Review. Buffer not required. b. Landscaping and recycle/refuse disposal areas shall be provided pursuant to chapter 18.4.4. Finding Landscaping and recycle/refuse disposal areas are provided per the proposed site plan and landscape plan. 5. Noise and Glare. Finding Per submitted plans, outdoor lighting will 100% cutoff, designed to eliminate glare as required by §18.4.4.050. Hours of operation would be within 7:00 AM Î 11:00 PM, which would assure compliance with AMC §9.08.170.C & D.12.a, limiting unnecessary noise. Conclusions of Law Based on the findings above, it can be concluded that the proposed redevelopment complies with the requirements of AMC §18.4.2.040.B - Basic Site Review Standards. 18.4.2.040.C Detail Site Review Standards https://ashland.municipal.codes/LandUse/18.4.2.040.C Development that is within the Detail Site Review overlay shall, in addition to complying with the standards for Basic Site Review in subsection 18.4.2.040.B, above, conform to the following standards: 1. Orientation and Scale: a. Developments shall have a minimum FAR of 0.50. Finding The site area is approximately 12,200 square feet. The floor area of buildings, covered porches, and plaza would comprise a commercial-use area of approximately 8,420 square feet, resulting in a Floor- to-Area Ratio (FAR) of approximately 69%. b. Building frontages greater than 100 feet in length shall have offsets, jogs, or have other distinctive changes in the building façade. Finding The longest side of a building is 90 feet and includes distinctive changes in the building façade. The longest building frontage is less than 100 ft. 19 of 37 c. Any wall that is within 30 feet of the street, plaza, or other public or common open space shall contain at least 20 percent of the wall area facing the street in display areas, windows, or doorways. Windows must allow view into working areas, lobbies, pedestrian entrances, or display areas. Blank walls with in 30 feet of the street are prohibited. Up to 40 percent of the length of the building perimeter can be exempted for this standard if oriented toward loading or service areas. Finding Fronting A Street is a wall located within 30Ó of the sidewalk. The existing wall is comprised of a modular steel automotive paint booth, which would be removed and replaced by contemporary materials (steel and wood). The replacement wall would be broken up by windows, trellised plants, wood, and metal to bring beauty to the public pedestrian environment. Window area would be at least 20% of wall area. The buildingÓs wall facing First St (and the siteÓs plaza) would include glazed sectional roll-up loading doors in two of the existing three large openings (formerly used for vehicle access to repair bays). The third large opening would be glazed with a storefront assembly. Glazed fenestration (325 ft2) would connect indoor/outdoor views and flow of people through the CMU wall (952 ft2). 34% of this wall would be glazed. d. Buildings shall incorporate lighting and changes in mass, surface or finish to give emphasis to entrances. Finding The primary entrance would be emphasized by a distinctive framed gateway as an extension of the building, and would incorporate changes in materials, geometry, color, and lighting. e. Infill of buildings, adjacent to public sidewalks, in existing parking lots is encouraged and desirable. Finding The asphalt and compacted gravel of the current parking and storage areas would be removed. The existing parking areas would be redeveloped as a hardscaped and landscaped patio for dining, entertainment, and gathering. Materials would include pavers, concrete, trees, shrubs, planters, and arbors. f. Buildings shall incorporate arcades, roofs, alcoves, porticoes, and awnings that protect pedestrians from the rain and sun. Finding A large covered porch attached to the main building, and an independent, open-sided roofed structure would provide guests with cover from rain, and shade from sun. 2. Streetscape. a. Hardscape (paving material) shall be utilized to designate areas. Sample materials could be unit masonry, scored and colored concrete, grasscrete, or combinations of the above. Finding Except for the trash area, all asphalt would be removed from the site and replaced by landscaping, hardscaping as depicted in the accompanying landscaping plan. The project emphasizes the outdoor 20 of 37 space; the incorporation of hardscaping and landscaping are integral to the plan. A mix of pavers, concrete, trees, shrubs, planters, and arbors would be a part of this project. b. A building shall be set back not more than five feet from a public sidewalk unless the area is used for pedestrian activities such as plazas or outside eating areas, or for a required public utility easement. This standard shall apply to both street frontages on corner lots. If more than one structure is proposed for a site, at least 65 percent of the aggregate building frontage shall be within five feet of the sidewalk. Finding The building addition is currently set back approximately nine (9) feet from the property line. The proposed rebuilt addition would be within five (5) feet of the property line. The building is set back approximately 68Ó from First Street. The space between First Street and the building is outdoor dining area with additional accommodations, including bike parking. An open- sided covered structure is proposed to be constructed in the area between the building and First Street, with approximately 2-ft setback from First Street. 3. Buffering and Screening. ğ͵ Landscape buffers and screening shall be located between incompatible uses on an adjacent lot. Those buffers can consist of either plant material or building materials and must be compatible with proposed buildings. Finding The building and use are compatible with adjacent uses and improvements which consist of specialty retail and dining. b. Parking lots shall be buffered from the main street, cross streets, and screened from residentially zoned land. Finding The existing parking areas and use would be removed and replaced with outdoor dining space and bike parking, with hardscaping and landscaping incorporated throughout. 4. Building Materials. a. Buildings shall include changes in relief such as cornices, bases, fenestration, and fluted masonry, for at least 15 percent of the exterior wall area. Finding A deep covered porch would extend the length of the building facing First Street. Sectional roll-up loading doors and storefront fenestration would replace sheet metal loading doors. The buildingÓs boxy characteristics would be interrupted by these design features. Materials would include standing- seam metal on the porch roofs; oversized wooded posts, glue-laminated beams, wood, and metal throughout the outdoor space. Fenestration and other features will exceed 15% of exterior wall area. b. Bright or neon paint colors used extensively to attract attention to the building or use are prohibited. Buildings may not incorporate glass as a majority of the building skin. Finding 21 of 37 Subdued paint colors are proposed. Glass would not comprise the majority of the exterior surface of the building. Conclusions of Law Based on the findings above, it can be concluded that the proposed redevelopment complies with the requirements of AMC §18.4.2.040.C - Detail Site Review Standards. 18.4.3 Parking, Access, and Circulation https://ashland.municipal.codes/LandUse/18.4.3 ¤ 18.4.3.040 Vehicle and Bicycle Quantity Standards. ¤ 18.4.3.050 Accessible Parking Spaces. ¤ 18.4.3.070 Bicycle Parking Standards. ¤ 18.4.3.090 Pedestrian Access and Circulation. 18.4.3.040 Vehicle and Bicycle Quantity Standards https://ashland.municipal.codes/LandUse/18.4.3.040 Finding The would be no onsite vehicle parking. There is no requirement to provide onsite parking, except for ADA accessible parking. Onsite bicycle parking is required to accommodate a minimum of one bike per 20 seats or one per 500 square feet of gross floor area, whichever is less. 2,922 ft2 of gross floor area is proposed for the restaurant use. 2,922 ft2 / 500 ft2/bike space = 6 bike parking spaces. 2 bikes / rack x 6 racks = 12 bikes could be secured in the bike shelter. 12 spaces proposed to be provided > 6 spaces minimum required. Conclusions of Law Based on the findings above, the land-use governing authority can find the proposed redevelopment complies with the requirements of AMC §18.4.3.040 Vehicle and Bicycle Quantity Standards. 18.4.3.070.B Bicycle Parking Standards https://ashland.municipal.codes/LandUse/18.4.3.070 1. Bicycle parking shall be located so that it is visible to and conveniently accessed by cyclists, and promotes security from theft and damage. 2. Bicycle parking requirements, pursuant to this section, can be met in any of the following ways: a. Providing bicycle racks or lockers outside the main building, underneath an awning or marquee, or in an accessory parking structure. b. Providing a bicycle storage room, bicycle lockers, or racks inside the building. c. Providing bicycle racks on the public right-of-way, subject to review and approval by the Staff Advisor. 3. All required exterior bicycle parking shall be located on-site and within 50 feet of a regularly used building entrance and not farther from the entrance than the closest motor vehicle parking space. Bicycle parking shall have direct access to both the public right-of-way and to the main entrance of the principal use. For facilities with multiple buildings, building entrances or parking 22 of 37 lots (such as a college), exterior bicycle parking shall be located in areas of greatest use and convenience for bicyclists. 4. Required bicycle parking spaces located outdoors shall be visible enough to provide security. Lighting shall be provided in a bicycle parking area so that all facilities are thoroughly illuminated, well-lit, and visible from adjacent walkways or motor vehicle parking lots during all hours of use. Finding Bike parking is proposed in close proximity to and readily visible from the A Street and First Street entrances in the northeast corner of the site. 5. Paving and Surfacing. Outdoor bicycle parking facilities shall be surfaced in the same manner as the automobile parking area or with a minimum of two-inch thickness of hard surfacing (i.e., asphalt, concrete, pavers, or similar material) and shall be relatively level. This surface will be maintained in a smooth, durable, and well-drained condition. Finding The bike parking area will be surfaced with concrete (see Civil Engineering Sheet C 1.0, Landscape Layout Sheet L1.1). 6. Bicycle parking located outside the building shall provide and maintain an aisle for bicycle maneuvering between each row of bicycle parking. Bicycle parking including rack installations shall conform to the minimum clearance standards as illustrated in Figure 18.4.3.070.B.6. a. Bicycle parking must be installed in a manner to allow space for the bicycle to be maneuvered to a position where it may be secured without conflicts from other parked bicycles, walls, or other obstructions. b. Bicycle parking should include sufficient bicycle parking spaces to accommodate large bicycles, including family and cargo bicycles. 8. Each required bicycle parking space shall be accessible without moving another bicycle. Findings of Fact Bicycle parking was designed in conformance with spatial requirements for maneuvering as illustrated in 18.4.070.8.6. 9. Areas set aside for required bicycle parking shall be clearly marked and reserved for bicycle parking only. Findings of Fact Bicycle parking is clearly indicated by hardware as well as signage. 10. Sheltered parking shall mean protected from all precipitation and must include the minimum protection coverages as illustrated in Figure 18.4.3.070.B.10.a Findings of Fact Bicycle parking was designed in conformance with spatial requirements of 18.4.3.070.10.a. 23 of 37 11. Bicycle parking shall be located to minimize the possibility of accidental damage to either bicycles or racks. Where needed, barriers shall be installed. 12. Bicycle parking shall not impede or create a hazard to pedestrians. They shall not be located so as to violate the vision clearance standards of section 18.2.4.040. Bicycle parking facilities should be harmonious with their environment both in color and design. Facilities should be incorporated whenever possible into building design or street furniture. Findings of Fact Bicycle parking is proposed in an area dedicated to bicycle parking. No vehicle parking is located nearby. The location does not conflict with pedestrian travel either. Conclusions of Law Based on the Findings of Facts above, the land-use governing authority can find the proposed redevelopment complies with the requirements of AMC §18.4.3.070. 18.4.3.050 Accessible \[Vehicle\] Parking Spaces https://ashland.municipal.codes/LandUse/18.4.3.050 Where off-street vehicle parking is voluntarily provided, it must include the required number of accessible vehicle parking spaces as specified by the state building code and federal standards. Such parking spaces must be sized, signed, and marked as required by these regulations and in compliance with ORS chapter 447. In cases where no parking spaces are voluntarily proposed, outside of the C-1-D zone, for commercial, industrial, public use, mixed-use, and multifamily developments with three or more dwelling units, it is mandatory to provide at least one accessible parking space. Accessible parking shall be provided consistent with the requirements of the building code, including but not limited to the minimum number of spaces for automobiles, van-accessible spaces, location of spaces relative to building entrances, accessible routes between parking areas and building entrances, identification signs, lighting, and other design and construction requirements. Accessible parking shall be included and identified on the planning application submittals. (Ord. 3229 § 1, amended, 12/19/2023) Findings of Fact There exists an accessible parking space adjacent to and appurtenant to the subject site - 246 A Street, which was constructed around 2011 within the right of way of First Street for nonexclusive public use. At that time, this accessible parking space was established as appurtenant to the subject site in anticipation of redevelopment. Archived correspondence of 2011 between the then owner of the subject site and the City of Ashland was reviewed by Senior Planner and Building Official. The review resulted in confirmation that the on- street parking space would satisfy the requirement of 18.4.3.050 to provide the siteÓs accessible parking 24 of 37 space, subject to compliance with applicable sections of the building code, including provision of an accessible route to the building. The existing improvements of the ADA parking space, applicable regulations, including the Land Use Ordinance and the Building Code, are reviewed below. State Building Code: Oregon Structural Specialty Code (OSSC) (2022, rev. 10/23); https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/ORSSC2022P2 Federal ADA Regulations: ICC A117.1 (2017, rev 5/24); https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/ICCA117.12017P7 Standards for Accessible Parking Places, Oregon Transportation Commission (OTC) (2023); https://www.oregon.gov/odot/ada/technical/ADA_Standards-Accessible-Parking.pdf Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS), section 447.233. https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/ors/ors447.html OSSC Chapter 11 Accessibility, Section 1102 Compliance OSSC 1102.1 Design. Buildings and facilities shall be designed and constructed to be accessible in accordance with this code and ICC A117.1, as detailed in this chapter. OSSC 202 Definitions: FACILITY. All or any portion of buildings, structures, site improvements, elements and pedestrian or vehicular routes located on a site. 1102.1.2.7 Parking spaces ICC A117.1 Sections 502.5, 502.6, 502.10 and 502.11 are adopted. The remaining provisions of ICC A117.1 Section 502 are deleted. Accessible parking spaces, dimensions, markings and signs shall be designed in compliance with the Standards for Accessible Parking Places set forth by the Oregon Transportation Commission. See ORS 447.233. Please see the analysis below for each applicable section of ICC A117.1. 502.5 Floor surfaces. Parking spaces and access aisles shall comply with Section 302 and have surface slopes not steeper than 1:48. Access aisles shall be at the same level as the parking spaces they serve. Findings of Fact Longitudinal slope and cross slope are compliant. The access aisle surface and parking space surface are faired to a common gutter, with no abrupt vertical change. 302.1 General.Floor surfaces shall be stable, firm, and slip resistant. Findings of Fact Floor surfaces are comprised of asphalt and concrete with a non-slip broom finish. 25 of 37 303.2 Vertical.Changes in level of 1/4 inch maximum in height shall be permitted to be vertical. 303.3 Beveled.Changes in level greater than 1/4 inch in height and not more than 1/2 inch maximum in height shall be beveled with a slope not steeper than 1:2. Findings of Fact The upper edge of the existing perpendicular curb ramp, which connects the access aisle to the public sidewalk, is approximately ďÑ to đÑ out of vertical alignment with the surface of the sidewalk. The vertical difference would be ground fair. 502.6 Vertical clearance.A vertical clearance of 98 inches minimum shall be provided at the following locations:¤ Parking spaces for vans¤ The access aisles serving parking spaces for vans.¤ The vehicular routes serving parking spaces for vans. Findings of Fact There are no encroachments into the areas of prescribed vertical clearance. STANDARDS FOR ACCESSIBLE PARKING PLACES, OREGON TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (2023) 1.0 Î Parking Lot Layouts An accessible parking space shall be at least 9Ó wide with an adjacent access aisle at least 6Ó wide. The access aisle shall be at least 8Ó wide for an accessible parking space designated as Ðvan-accessible.Ñ Per ORS 447.233(2)(b), "A van accessible parking space shall be at least nine feet wide and shall have an adjacent access aisle that is at least eight feet wide." Findings of Fact The state building code (OSSC 1102.1) defers to ICC A117.1. The geometry of the existing access aisle is compliant with ICC ANSI A117.1 Standard for Accessible and Usable Buildings and Facilities (rev. May 2024): 502.9.1 Wide sidewalks. Where the width of the adjacent sidewalk or available right-of-way exceeds 14 feet, an access aisle 60 inches wide minimum shall be provided at street level the full length of the parking space and shall connect to a pedestrian access route. The access aisle shall comply with Section 502.4 and shall not encroach on vehicular travel lanes. 502.4 Access aisle. Car and van parking spaces shall have an adjacent access aisle complying with Section 502.4. 502.4.1 Location. Access aisles shall adjoin an accessible route. 26 of 37 502.4.2 Width. Access aisles serving car and van parking spaces shall be 60 inches minimum in width. 502.4.3 Length. Access aisles shall extend the full length of the parking spaces they serve. 502.4.4 Marking. Access aisles shall be marked so as to discourage parking in them. Where access aisles are marked with lines, the width measurements of access aisles and adjacent parking spaces shall be made from the centerline of the markings. Findings of Fact Proposed pavement markings would delineate the existing seven (7) foot wide access aisle and an adjacent nine (9) by 20 foot van-accessible parking space. Pavement markings would be as specified per 2.0 below, and would discourage parking in the access aisle. 2.0 Î Pavement Markings Each accessible parking space shall have a pavement marking stencil \[International Symbol of Accessibility\]. Pavement markings and stencils are required to be white and should be retroreflective. The use of blue curb and blue background on pavement marking stencils is optional. The symbol for the pavement marking stencil is the international symbol of access as shown in the Standard Highway Signs book published by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Pavement marking stencil for facilities not on the state highway right of way shall be of the following dimensions. 28Ñ height 24Ñ width 3Ñ stripe width Each access aisle shall have a ÐNo ParkingÑ pavement marking with 12Ñ-high letters. Findings of Fact The access aisle and parking space would be cleaned and painted per the above specifications. 3.0 Î Sign Design Each accessible parking space shall have the appropriate sign(s) as required below. All signs are required to be retroreflective. Sign No. R7-8 Î This is the standard sign used to designate accessible parking spaces. All accessible parking spaces shall have this sign. 27 of 37 Sign No. R7-8P Î The ÐVAN ACCESSIBLEÑ sign is used with R7-8 sign to designate those accessible parking spaces that have a minimum 8Ó wide access aisle. Any vehicle with a DMV disabled permit can use van-accessible spaces. Sign No. OR7-9 Î The ÐACCESS AISLE NO PARKINGÑ sign is installed in areas where the ÐNo ParkingÑ pavement marking stencil may not be visible regularly due to snow or sand. Findings of Fact Sign #R7-8 is properly installed on a post. Sign #R7-8P would be added, per the specification below. 4.0 Î Sign Mounting Post-mounted signs shall be installed with a vertical clearance of 7Ó (°3Ñ) between the bottom of the sign to the ground line. If more than one sign is required for an accessible parking space, all signs shall be mounted on a single post except for the ÐACCESS AISLE NO PARKINGÑ and arrow signs. Findings of Fact The existing signpost has a vertical clearance of 89Ñ to the bottom of R7-8. An adjustment of the existing sign would accommodate the addition of a 9Ñ tall (R7-8P) sign while maintaining compliant clearance (84Ñ °3Ñ) - above the ground. OSSC 1104 ACCESSIBLE ROUTE 1104.1 Site arrival points.At least one accessible route within the site shall be provided from public transportation stops, accessible parking, accessible passenger loading zones, and public streets or sidewalks to the accessible building entrance served. 1104.2 Within a site.At least one accessible route shall connect accessible buildings, accessible facilities, accessible elements and accessible spaces that are on the same site. 1104.3 Connected spaces.Where a building or portion of a building is required to be accessible, at least one accessible route shall be provided to each portion of the building, to accessible building entrances connecting accessible pedestrian walkways and to the public way. Findings of Fact The proposed site plan provides two accessible routes from entry points on both A Street and First Street (see Figure 2 above). Access from A Street is accomplished through a ramping system to over an approximately 3 foot grade difference between the A Street sidewalk and the finished floor elevation of the building and outdoor dining area. Access from the First Street entrance to outdoor dining area and main building entrance is more direct, because the grade change between the First Street sidewalk at the entry is much less steep. An ADA compliant parking space on First Street is located approximately 50 feet from the First Street public entrance. Once inside the site, all areas, with the exception of the storage building and stage at the south end of the site, are accessible. 28 of 37 OSSC 1106 PARKING AND PASSENGER LOADING FACILITIES 1106.1 General.Parking shall comply with ORS 447.233 and Sections 1106.2 through 1106.9. Passenger loading zones shall comply with Section 1106.10.1106.7 Location. Accessible parking spaces shall be located on the shortest practical accessible route of travel from adjacent parking to an accessible building entrance. Findings of Fact A curb ramp six (6) feet wide and seven feet long will connect the ADA parking space on First Street and access aisle to the public sidewalk. From that point, a guest would travel approximately 50 feet to reach the public entrance on First Street. Given site constraints (primarily grades and the location of the existing building), this is route constitutes the shortest accessible route practical. 1106.8 Surfaces and identification of parking spaces. Findings of Fact First Street is surfaced with asphalt; existing sidewalks and new/retrofitted sidewalks and landings will be concrete. Internal circulation routes will be concrete or closefitting pavers. 1106.8.1 General.Accessible car and van parking spaces shall comply with the surface requirements of ICC ANSI A117.1, Section 502.5. Accessible parking spaces, dimensions, markings and signs shall be designed in compliance with the Standards for Accessible Parking Places set forth by the Oregon Transportation Commission. Please see discussion above per relevant sections of ICC A117.1 and Standards for Accessible Parking Places, Oregon Transportation Commission. Conclusions of Law Based on the findings above, it can be concluded that the proposed redevelopment complies with AMC §18.4.3.050, which requires the provision of at least one accessible parking space, subject to the following conditions applicable to the existing ADA parking space on First St: 1. Grind fair the existing 2. Clean and repaint in compliance with specification Ð2.0 Pavement MarkingsÑ per ÐStandards for Accessible Parling Places,Ñ Oregon Transportation Commission (2023); and 3. Install sign #R7-8P on existing post, with above-ground clearance of 84Ñ °3Ñ. 18.4.3.090 Pedestrian Access and Circulation https://ashland.municipal.codes/LandUse/18.4.3.090 B. Standards. Development subject to this chapter, except single-family dwellings on individual lots, accessory residential units, duplexes, and associated accessory structures, shall conform to the following standards for pedestrian access and circulation: 1. Continuous Walkway System. Extend the walkway system throughout the development site and connect to all future phases of development, and to existing or planned off-site adjacent 29 of 37 sidewalks, trails, parks, and common open space areas to the greatest extent practicable. The developer may also be required to connect or stub walkway(s) to adjacent streets and to private property for this purpose. 2. Safe, Direct, and Convenient. Provide safe, reasonably direct, and convenient walkway connections between primary building entrances and all adjacent streets. For the purposes of this section, the following definitions apply: a. Reasonably Direct. A route that does not deviate unnecessarily from a straight line or a route that does not involve a significant amount of out-of-direction travel for likely users. b. Safe and Convenient. Reasonably free from hazards and provides a reasonably direct means of walking between destinations. c. Primary Entrance. For a non-residential building, the main public entrance to the building. In the case where no public entrance exists, street connections shall be provided to the main employee entrance. d. Primary Entrance. For a residential building, the front door (i.e., facing the street). For multifamily buildings and mixed-use buildings where not all dwelling units have an individual exterior entrance, the Ðprimary entranceÑ may be a lobby, courtyard, or breezeway serving as a common entrance for more than one dwelling. 3. Connections within Development. Walkways within developments shall provide connections meeting all of the following requirements as illustrated in Figures 18.4.3.090.B.3.a and 18.4.3.090.B.3.b: a. Connect all building entrances to one another to the extent practicable. b. Connect on-site parking areas, common and public open spaces, and common areas, and connect off-site adjacent uses to the site to the extent practicable. Topographic or existing development constraints may be cause for not making certain walkway connections. 4. Walkway Design and Construction. Walkways shall conform to all of the following standards as illustrated in Figures 18.4.3.090.B.3.a and 18.4.3.090.B.3.b. For transportation improvement requirements, refer to chapter 18.4.6, Public Facilities. c. Walkway Surface and Width. Walkway surfaces shall be concrete, asphalt, brick/masonry pavers, or other durable surface, and at least five feet wide. Multi-use paths (i.e., for bicycles and pedestrians) shall be concrete or asphalt, and at least ten feet wide, in accordance with section 18.4.6.040, Street Design Standards. d. Accessible Routes. Walkways shall comply with applicable Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and State of Oregon requirements. The ends of all raised walkways, where the walkway intersects a driveway or street, shall provide ramps that are ADA accessible, and walkways shall provide direct routes to primary building entrances. e. Lighting. Lighting shall comply with section 18.4.4.050. Findings of Fact As discussed above regarding accessibility, the site provides a continuous Ðwalkway systemÑ throughout its entirety, connecting the main building with outdoor dining areas and amenities (see Figure 2). The internal pedestrian circulation system is connected directly to public sidewalks on First and A Streets by architecturally prominent entryways. The A Street entrance is proposed to be the Ðprimary entranceÑ to the site (see discussion above regarding exception to AMC 18.4.2.040.B.1.c). 30 of 37 With the exception of the stage and surrounding seating, storage building, and trash enclosure at the extreme south end of the site, all outdoor dining and indoor dining spaces are proposed to be accessible. Conclusions of Law Based on the findings above, it can be concluded that the proposed redevelopment complies with the requirements of AMC §18.4.3.090 Pedestrian Access and Circulation. 18.4.4.030 LANDSCAPING, LIGHTING, AND SCREENING https://ashland.municipal.codes/LandUse/18.4.4 AMC 18.4.4.030.B establishes minimum landscaping standards for development depending on applicable zone. According to Table 18.2.6.030, 15% of a development in the E-1 zone must be landscaped. Figure 3: Site areas by surface types. Reproduced from ÐCity of Ashland Hydraulic Calculations On-Site Stormwater FacilitiesÑ, dated February 18, 2026, Figure 1. Findings of Fact Different surface area types are depicted in Figure 3. Landscaping, shown in bright green, will consist of raised planting beds and other landscaping elements. Stormwater facilities are also planting beds, but designed and engineered to manage stormwater runoff. As shown in the following table, a minimum 31 of 37 of 1,830 square feet of landscape area is required for a development site with a total area of 12,200 square feet; 2,654 square feet is proposed, exceeding the minimum by 40%. Area Percent of Coverage Total Site Area Type Area Description (Square Area Feet) Landscaping Planting beds 1,535 13% Pervious Hardscape Pervious paver 561 5% Stormwater Facilities Planting beds 468 4% Misc. 65 1% Buildings, Existing Impervious to structural Remain features, pavements 2,841 23% Buildings & new New & Replaced pavements, Impervious structural features 6,730 55% Totals 12,200 100% Minimum Code Required Landscaped Area 1,830 Proposed 2,564 Difference 734 % Difference 40% Table 1: Site Areas by Surface Types Conclusions of Law Based on the findings above, it can be concluded that the proposed redevelopment complies with the requirements of AMC §18.4.4.030.B. E. Street Trees. The purpose of street trees is to form a deciduous canopy over the street. The same effect is also desired in parking lots and internal circulation streets; rows of street trees should be included in these areas where feasible. All development fronting on public or private streets shall be required to plant street trees in accordance with the following standards and chosen from the recommended list of street trees. 1. Location of Street Trees. Street trees shall be located in the designated planting strip or street tree wells between the curb and sidewalk, or behind the sidewalk in cases where a planting strip or tree wells are or will not be in place. Street trees shall include irrigation, root barriers, and generally conform to the standards established by the Community Development Department. 2. Spacing and Placement of Street Trees. All street tree spacing may be made subject to special site conditions that may, for reasons such as safety, affect the decision. Any such proposed special condition shall be subject to the Staff AdvisorÓs review and approval. The placement, spacing, and pruning of street trees shall meet all of the following requirements: 32 of 37 a. Street trees shall be placed at the rate of one tree for every 30 feet of street frontage. Trees shall be evenly spaced, with variations to the spacing permitted for specific site limitations, such as driveway approaches. b. Street trees shall not be planted closer than 25 feet from the curb line of intersections of streets or alleys, and not closer than ten feet from private driveways (measured at the back edge of the sidewalk), fire hydrants, or utility poles. c. Street trees shall not be planted closer than 20 feet to light standards. Except for public safety, no new light standard location shall be positioned closer than ten feet to any existing street tree, and preferably such locations will be at least 20 feet distant. d. Street trees shall not be planted closer than two and one-half feet from the face of the curb. Street trees shall not be planted within two feet of any permanent hard surface paving or walkway. Sidewalk cuts in concrete for trees, or tree wells, shall be at least 25 square feet; however, larger cuts are encouraged because they allow additional air and water into the root system and add to the health of the tree. Tree wells shall be covered by tree grates in accordance with City specifications. e. Street trees planted under or near power lines shall be selected so as to not conflict with power lines at maturity. f. Existing trees may be used as street trees if there will be no damage from the development which will kill or weaken the tree. Sidewalks of variable width and elevation, where approved pursuant to section 18.4.6.040, Street Design Standards, may be utilized to save existing street trees, subject to approval by the Staff Advisor. Findings of Fact There are four existing street trees along First Street, planted at intervals of 20 and 50 feet. The trees are proposed to be retained, and are identified for protection during construction on landscaping sheet L0.2. There are currently no street trees planted along A Street. Several larger bushes (photinia and a laurel) are proposed to be removed at the northeast and northwest corners of the site, along with a box elder that is in poor condition. Given the existing condition (the relatively narrow sidewalk) and location of the building addition and retaining walls, Applicant proposes to three (3) paperbark maples to be planted on site, behind the A Street sidewalk, at the northwest and northeast corners of the site. Proposed spacing of the first two trees will exceed the 30 foot standard; the third will not. Given the proposed design of the building addition and site and building access, which are required by other parts of the AMC, the proposed locations are optimal. Conclusions of Law It can be concluded that given existing conditions and the necessary placement of proposed site improvements, the proposed site plan meets the requirements of AMC 18.4.4.030.E. G. Other Screening Requirements. Screening is required for refuse and recycle containers, outdoor storage areas, loading and service corridors, mechanical equipment, and the City may require screening in other situations, pursuant with the requirements of this ordinance. 33 of 37 1. Recycle and Refuse Container Screen. Recycle and refuse containers or disposal areas shall be screened by placement of a solid wood fence or masonry wall five to eight feet in height to limit the view from adjacent properties or public rights-of-way. All recycle and refuse materials shall be contained within the screened area. Findings of Fact As depicted on Sheet 7 of the Architectural Plan accompanying this Application, the refuse area, which is internal to the site, is screened by a metal framed sliding gate with wooden slats. Conclusions of Law It can be concluded that the proposed site plan meets the requirements of AMC 18.4.4.030.G.1. 4. Mechanical Equipment. Mechanical equipment shall be screened by placement of features at least equal in height to the equipment to limit view from public rights-of-way, except alleys, and adjacent residentially zoned property. Mechanical equipment meeting the requirements of this section satisfy the screening requirements in subsection 18.5.2.020.C.4. a. Roof-Mounted Equipment. Screening for roof-mounted equipment shall be constructed of materials used in the buildingÓs exterior construction and include features such as a parapet, wall, or other sight-blocking features. Roof- mounted solar collection devices are exempt from this requirement pursuant to subsection 18.5.2.020.C.4. Findings of Fact As depicted on Sheet 5 of the Architectural Plan accompanying this Application, rooftop mechanical equipment will be screened by an approximately four foot tall, Ðweathered metalÑ screen. Conclusions of Law It can be concluded that the proposed site plan meets the requirements of AMC 18.4.4.030.G.4.a. H. Irrigation. Irrigation systems shall be installed to ensure landscape success. If a landscape area is proposed without irrigation, a landscape professional shall certify the area can be maintained and survive without artificial irrigation. Irrigation plans are reviewed through a ministerial process at the time of building permit submittals. I. Water Conserving Landscaping. Water has always been a scarce, valuable resource in the Western United States. In the Rogue Valley, winter rains give way to a dry season spanning five to seven months. Lack of water during the dry summer season was a major problem facing early settlers. Their creative solutions greatly altered the development of this region. Talent Irrigation DistrictÓs and other districtÓs reservoirs and many miles of reticulating canals are an engineering marvel. Findings of Fact Landscaping is proposed to be irrigated (see Landscaping Plan sheet L3.1). A planting schedule is provided with the Landscaping Plan (see sheet L2.1). Aside from restoration of existing lawn on the edge of the west side of the site, no additional turfgrass areas are proposed. Proposed plantings include various grasses, shrubs, and ornamental and shade trees. General notes are provided for bed preparation. Plantings were selected in part to comply with the standards of this section of the AMC. 34 of 37 Conclusions of Law It can be concluded that the proposed site plan meets the requirements of AMC 18.4.4.030.H and I. 18.4.4.050 Outdoor Lighting This section of the AMC establishes standards for outdoor lighting for development proposals subject to all levels of review, including Type I. Findings of Fact A site specific lighting plan was not included with this Application. Conclusions of Law It can be concluded that the proposed site plan can be made to comply with the requirements of AMC 18.4.4.050 with a condition of approval requiring submittal and staff approval of a lighting prior to issuance of permits for vertical construction. 18.4.4.060 FENCES https://ashland.municipal.codes/LandUse/18.4.4.060 Findings of Fact Existing chain-link fencing would be removed. Alley fencing would be replaced as described above in section 18.4.2.040.C.3.a. Perimeter fencing would be replaced by an artisan-crafted durable metal fence (Architectural Plans, sheet A303, detail 2). The fence will have an average total height of 7Ó 9Ñ from average grade along First Street, which slopes downward from south to north. Steel wire, forming a 4Ñ X 4Ñ grid, will fill space between tubular steel posts and framing. The upper +/- 20% of the vertical space will be open except for two vertical posts that divide the space into thirds. The entire vertical plane is open except for frame and wire grid infill elements, allowing complete visibility of the interior outdoor dining area from First Street. This allows for the outdoor area to be secured during off business hours, enables patron access management during business hours, and activates the First Street frontage. Fencing on A Street will continue this design, but is mounted atop a 3Ó 8Ñ concrete retaining wall that is necessary to address the grade difference between the finished floor elevation of the building and outdoor dining area and the existing grade of top of sidewalk on A Street. The fence itself will be 3Ó 11Ñ from the top of the concrete retaining wall to the top of the frame. Like the First Street fence, the space inside the frame will be filled with steel wire on a 4Ñ X 4Ñ grid pattern, enable nearly 100% transparency. The concrete retaining wall, it should be further noted, has been designed to create a 15Ó foot clear vision triangle at the corner of First and A Streets. This will provide northbound drivers on First Street with improved ability to see westbound pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicles on A Street. Conclusions of Law It can be found that the proposed development complies with the standards of AMC 18.4.4.060. 18.4.5 TREE PRESERVATION AND PROTECTION https://ashland.municipal.codes/LandUse/18.4.5 Findings of Fact 35 of 37 Existing trees will be protected, as shown on Landscaping Sheet L0.2, except for two trees: Tree #4318, a box elder, would be removed due to disease and resulting damage, subject to ÐTree Removal PermitÑ per Type 1 review. Tree #5005, another box elder, would be removed due to improper location (suppression of vigor from shady location, ladder fuel hazard due to flammability of species and proximity to subject building and neighboring building, and potential damage to foundations), subject to ÐTree Removal PermitÑ per Type 1 review. Conclusions of Law Based on the findings above, it can be concluded that the proposed redevelopment complies with the requirements of AMC §18.4.5 Tree Preservation and Protection. 18.4.6.070 Sanitary and Water Service Improvements https://ashland.municipal.codes/LandUse/18.4.6.070 Findings of Fact Existing public water distribution facilities and public sanitary sewer collection facilities are adequate to serve the proposed redevelopment. Existing and proposed water and sanitary sewer connection locations and sizes are detailed in the civil plans (Civil Engineering sheet C2.0). Conclusions of Law With City approval of final construction engineering design, it can be concluded that the proposed redevelopment complies with the requirements of AMC £18.4.6.070 Î Sanitary Sewer and Water Service Improvements. 18.4.6.080 Storm Drainage and Surface Water Management Facilities A. Storm Drainage Plan Approval. Development permits for storm drainage and surface water management plans must be approved by the City Engineer and Building Official. https://ashland.municipal.codes/LandUse/18.4.6.080 Findings of Fact A complete ÐCity of Ashland Hydraulic Calculations, On-Site Stormwater FacilitiesÑ report and draft Stormwater Faciliteis Operation and Maintenance Manual has been submitted with this Application for review by the City of Ashland. The report finds that Ðthe project will develop/redevelop less than 10,000 sf of impervious surface, with no increase in runoff as compared to existing conditions.Ñ It continues, ÐPer the Rogue Valley Stormwater Quality Design Manual (2025 revisions), the project is required to 5 provide stormwater treatment with no additional retention or detention requirements.Ñ Treatment of stormwater runoff is addressed with two stormwater treatment planters located at the north (downgradient) end of the property. The planters also provide landscaping for the site. Conclusions of Law 5 Ibid., p. 1 36 of 37 With City approval of final construction engineering design, it can be concluded that the proposed redevelopment complies with the requirements of AMC §18.4.6.080. 18.4.7 SIGNS https://ashland.municipal.codes/LandUse/18.4.7 Findings of Fact No final design for signage has been submitted with this Application. Conclusions of Law Applicant will apply separately for sign permits. ***** 37 of 37 Ashland, Oregon 97520 246 A Street ScharenDesignStudio 246 A Street Restaurant 25-074 L0.1 340 a street 541-215-4464 EXISTINGSURVEY ashland, oregon bldg 1 // suite 301 FEBRUARY 18, 2026 www.scharendesignstudio.com No.DescriptionDate landscape architecture & planning Project NumberIssuanceDateRevisionsDrawing TitleSheet No. Ashland, Oregon 97520 246 A Street ScharenDesignStudio 246 A Street Restaurant 25-074 L0.2 340 a street 541-215-4464 ashland, oregon bldg 1 // suite 301 FEBRUARY 18, 2026 TREE PROTECTION PLAN & LANDSCAPEDEMOLITION www.scharendesignstudio.com No.DescriptionDate landscape architecture & planning Project NumberIssuanceDateRevisionsDrawing TitleSheet No. CHAINLINK FENCINGSTEEL POST TEMPORARY TREE PROTECTION FENCING EXISTING TREE TO REMAINEXISTING TREE/SHRUB TO REMOVEEXISTING TREE NUMBER OR AS SHOWN ON PLANS CRITICAL ROOT ZONE (CRZ). FENCE LOCATION AT EDGES OF PLACED PRIOR TO START OF WORK ANDMAINTAINED THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION,PER CITY OF ASHLAND CODE. 1.TREE PROTECTION FENCING SHALL BE 10' MAX. LEGENDNOTESEXISTING TREES SCALE: 1" = 4' TREE PROTECTION FENCING 6' 2 TO REMAINGATE TO BE EX ASPHALTEX HINGEDREMOVED 10'20' 4 5'30' 0 H T R O N AUTO SHOP BUILDING FORMER BE REMOVED STONE WALL TO REMAIN GATE TO EX SLIDING REMOVED EX ASPHALT REMOVE REMAIN REMAIN SURFACING TO BE EX GRAPE TO CURB CUT TO EX GRAPE TO REMOVEDREMOVED REMOVED GATE TO BE EX WHEELED EX WALL TO BE WEEDS & DEBRIS GRUB & CLEAR EX EX POSTS TO BE TO REMOVE EX HOSE BIB REMOVE TO REMOVE ALLEY PERGOLA TO CONCRETE SLAB A STREET BE REMOVED REMAIN, STONE WALL TO EX FENCE TO BE REMOVED EX PRIVATE SIGN FRAMING TO MODIFY PANELS 1st STREET SCALE: 1" = 10' LANDSCAPE DEMOLITION & TREE PROTECTION PLAN REMOVED ACCESSIBLE BE REMOVED PARKING AND 1 EX FENCE TO BE STONE STEPS TORAMP TO REMAIN Ashland, Oregon 97520 246 A Street ScharenDesignStudio 246 A Street Restaurant 25-074 L1.1 340 a street 541-215-4464 LANDSCAPELAYOUT ashland, oregon bldg 1 // suite 301 FEBRUARY 18, 2026 www.scharendesignstudio.com No.DescriptionDate landscape architecture & planning Project NumberIssuanceDateRevisionsDrawing TitleSheet No. TREE TIESWOOD STAKESPREVAILING WIND TREE TIES, PER SPECSTWO (2) WOOD TREE STAKES,THAN 2" AWAY FROM THE EDGE PER SPECS. INSTALL NO LESSOF THE ROOT BALL. STAKELOCATION SHALL NOTINTERFERE WITH PERMANENTBRANCHES.ROOT FLARE TO BESOIL LEVELROOT BALL 1-1/2" ABOVE FINISH REMOVE NURSERY STAKE PLAN VIEW 3X WIDEST POINT OF ROOT BALL ASPHALT GRANITE BOULDERSWALKWAY PAVINGSTORMWATER PLANTINGSSHADE TREEORNAMENTAL TREE EXISTING TREE TO REMAINPROPERTY LINEFENCE, RE: ARCHHANDRAILRETAINING WALLBICYCLE RACKPAVER PATIOPAVER WALKWAY PATTERNPLANTED AREA (SHRUBS & PERENNIALS) 8'16' 4' SCALE: 1/2" = 1' TREE PLANTING 6'-0"2'-0" TOPSOIL INFORMATION. RESTS ON ROOT BALL 0 2.REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL FOR EXTERIOR LIGHTING INFORMATION.RECOMPACTED 1.REFER TO CIVIL DRAWINGS FOR GRADING AND ELEVATION 2 H ROOT BALL.T 3" LAYER OF SOIL.BE REMOVED FROM THE CROWN OFTHE TREE, NOT COVERING ANY PARTOF THE TRUNK.LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. HOLE PRIOR TO PLACING MODIFIED R MODIFIED SOIL O 2.ALL MULCH AND WOOD CHIPS SHALL3.PRUNE ONLY AFTER REVIEW WITH NOTE:1.SCARIFY THE SIDES OF THE PLANTING N MULCH; NO MORE THAN 1" LAYER OF MULCH ON TOP OF 4 TRASHANDAREA RECYCLE A 246 STREET 6' HT SWING GATE 6' HT SOLID METAL FENCE 6' HT SLIDING GATE STORAGE BLDG RAMP ROOF ABOVE FENCE 11'-10" TRENCH DRAIN, RE:CIVIL BARSEATING 5'-1" 6'HT WOOD ON CONC. CURB STEPS 5' 5'-9" 11' RAMP SLIDING GATE (E) GRAPE VINE (E) VEHICULAR RE: CIVILSTEPS HANDRAIL STEPS 5' LANDING 5' 5'5' STAGE FIREPIT GATE PLANTER BENCH 5% MAX DOUBLE-SWINGBICYCLE PARKING 5% MAX STORMWATER EDGE LANDINGTRELLIS 5' BOULDER OVERHEAD STEPS OUTDOOR PATIO PLANTER SATELLITESTRUCTURE (E) FENCE STORMWATER ALLEY A STREET CIVIL ENTRANCE ACCESSIBLE ROOF ABOVE SIDEWALK, RE: NEW LANDING & SYSTEM 1st STREET BACKFLOW IRRIGATION PREVENTER WATER METER CONNECTION & FOR IRRIGATION SCALE: 1" = 8' LANDSCAPE LAYOUT 1 PARKING STRIPING RE: ARCH WITH NEW SIGNAGE ACCESSIBLE NEW FENCE AT TOP OF WALL, Ashland, Oregon 97520 246 A Street ScharenDesignStudio 246 A Street Restaurant 25-074 L2.1 340 a street 541-215-4464 PLANTINGPLAN ashland, oregon bldg 1 // suite 301 FEBRUARY 18, 2026 www.scharendesignstudio.com No.DescriptionDate landscape architecture & planning Project NumberIssuanceDateRevisionsDrawing TitleSheet No. SIZE SHRUBVINEARCTOSTAPHYLOS PERENNIALORNAMENTAL GRASS 8'16' EXISTING TREE TOREMAINSHADE TREESMALL TREE 4' BOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAME BOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMEBOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMEBOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMEBOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAME 0 COMPOST PER 1,000 SF PLANTED AREA. PROVIDE MYCORRHIZAESOIL AMENDMENT PER MANUFACTURER'S DIRECTIONS.SHREDDED HEMLOCK OR FIR BARK.WASHED, ROUND ROCK.CONSTRUCTION. 2.PLANTED AREAS TO RECEIVE 3" DEPTH OF UNSETTLED ORGANIC3.STORMWATER PLANTERS TO RECEIVE 3" DEPTH 1/4" TO 3/4" CLEAN,4.RE-SEED LAWN AT 1ST STREET WHERE DAMAGED DURING 1.AMEND EXISTING SOIL WITH MATURE COMPOST AT A RATE OF 3 CY H AGAcer griseum Paperbark Maple2" caliperAUArctostaphylos uva-ursiKinnickinnick1 gal. LILagerstroemia indica 'Natchez' Natchez Crape Myrtle 15 gal. multi-stemQDQuercus douglasii Blue Oak 2" caliperCDCaryopteris clandonensis 'Dark Knight'Bluebeard3 gal.GEGarrya ellipticaGarrya10 gal.MRMahonia repens 'Dark Star'Purple Creeping Oregon Grape1 gal.OEOlea europaea 'Little Ollie' Dwarf Olive5 gal.RCRhamnus californica 'Mound San Bruno' California Coffeeberry 5 gal.SASymphoricarpos albusSnowberry1 gal.AFAquilegia formosaWestern Columbine1 gal.CQCamassia quamashCamas1 gal.GLGaura lindheimeri 'Beleza White'White Wand Flower1 gal.SESedum 'Sunsparkler' Stonecrop4" potSOSalvia officinalis 'Purpurascens'Purple Culinary Sage4" potCO Carex obnuptaSlough Sedge1 gal.JCJuncus patensCalifornia Rush1 gal. EPEchinacea purpurea 'Kismet White'Coneflower1 gal.NFNepeta x faassenii 'Junior Walker'Catmint1 gal.BGBouteloua gracilis 'Blonde Ambition'Blue Grama Grass1 gal.DCDianella hybrid 'Clarity Blue'Flax Lily1 gal.PVPanicum virgatum 'Northwind'Switchgrass1 gal.WSWisteria sinensisWisteria2 gal.T CRCampsis radicansYellow Trumpet Vine2 gal. KEY KEYKEYKEY KEY R VINES TREES O SHRUBSORNAMENTAL GRASSES PERENNIALS N 4 AG A 246 STREET LI AU PV CDOE AUNF PV SEGL SODC NF EPBG QD EX GRAPE RC AG JC CO OE EP PVGL JC CR CO AGAU OECD A STREET PV OE AU RC ALLEY RC PVGE SA NFPV MR AU RC WSMR QD MR QD 1st STREET SCALE: 1" = 8' PLANTING PLAN 1 Ashland, Oregon 97520 246 A Street ScharenDesignStudio 246 A Street Restaurant 25-074 L3.1 340 a street 541-215-4464 PLAN IRRIGATION ashland, oregon bldg 1 // suite 301 FEBRUARY 18, 2026 www.scharendesignstudio.com No.DescriptionDate landscape architecture & planning Project NumberIssuanceDateRevisionsDrawing TitleSheet No. PRO-SPRAY PRS30 --.2545RZWS-18-25-- AREA OF POINT-SOURCE DRIP IRRIGATION CONTROL VALVE: HUNTER ICV-101GQUICK COUPLING VALVE, HUNTER-44-RCSLEEVE: SCH 40, MIN. SIZE 2x DIA. OFTREE TRUNK8'16' DRIP VALVE ASSEMBLY: HUNTER ICZ-101-40DOUBLE CHECK VALVEMAIN LINE: SCH 40 PVC (2")LATERAL LINE: SCH 40 PVC (1")PASSING PIPEPOINT OF DRIP SOURCE IRRIGATIONDOULBLE CHECK VALVE ASSEMBLYHUNTER PRO-C CONTROLLER ZONE ID VALVE SIZE APPLICATION GPM -- 8-1590.1730MP1000-90PRO-SPRAY PRS308-151800.330MP1000-180 4' RADIUSARCGPMPSINOZZLESPRAY HEAD # 1" C POC 0 SYMBOL ASHLAND CODE.A COMMON TRENCH WHENEVER POSSIBLE. ADJUST LINES IN THE FIELDAS NEEDED TO AVOID CONFLICTS.4.PROVIDE 12" POP-UP SPRINKLER HEADS FOR ALL SHRUB BEDS.ACHIEVE SPECIFIED PSI RATINGS.VALVE ASSEMBLY. 2.PROVIDE THE INSTALLATION OF SUFFICIENTLY SIZED SLEEVES FORCONTROL WIRES AND NON-PRESSURE LATERAL LINE PIPING UNDERPAVED AREAS AND SITE WALLS, IN ADDITION TO CONTROL WIRES ANDLATERAL LINE PIPING.3.THE PIPING LAYOUT IS DIAGRAMMATIC. PLACE PIPES TOGETHER IN5.INSTALL PRESSURE REGULATOR ON MAIN LINE AS REQUIRED TO6.INSTALL IN-LINE CHECK VALVES AS REQUIRED TO PREVENT LOWHEAD DRAINAGE.7.ALL VALVES SHALL BE PLACED IN VALVE BOXES IN A MANNER WHICHSHRUB BEDS WHENEVER POSSIBLE.8.INSTALL DRAIN VALVES AT LOW POINTS ON MAIN AND LATERALLINES.9.RESTORE AREAS DAMAGED BY IRRIGATION WORK TO ORIGINALCONDITION.BOXES. INCLUDE 12" LENGTH OF COILED SLACK AT SPLICES. 1.INSTALL IRRIGATION SYSTEM IN COMPLIANCE WITH CITY OFFACILITATES ACCESS FOR MAINTENANCE. LOCATE VALVE BOXES IN10.MAIN LINES TO BE BURIED 18" DEEP; LATERAL LINES TO BE BURIED12" DEEP.11.INSTALL DRAIN ROCK IN VALVE BOX TO WITHIN 2" OF BOTTOM OF12.WIRE SPLICES TO BE MOISTURE PROOF AND MADE ONLY IN VALVE H T R O N 4 C A 246 STREET A STREET POC 1st STREET SCALE: 1" = 8' IRRIGATION PLAN 1 TREES 3.05.35SPRAYDRIP .96 2 3 11"1"1" b e W - t l s i i a L M C - p i E A prest@bakerbarrios.com kaylynnrepp@gmail.combill@ashlandhome.netshelby@scharendesignstudio.com j deborah.delaunay@gmail.comskwhippet@charter.net lisaverner815@icloud.comDerek.Sherrell@council.ashland.or.usDerek.Severson@ ashland.or.usnick.schubert@ashland.or.usregan.trapp@ashland.or.us h P 666787 s 222222 H r 000000 e 222222 ////// 111111 m b 333333 r ////// e 222222 T1111 m e r i n a o ) M h s 7 i c t a i ) a L 3 ) e t n s 8 e ( ao i t e m s 1y 1 a s ) )s ) 9 a e 1 i (e 2 4 n& Nts tt n ( tm 6n u a r r n e a l a t o ea l erso d mo r l e s ert s ep s n ap r oe e sin ( s r n o a r (p o r ( h fep b o ia D C o e tei p ev a i cts su yu s L si r i n rh ss pg he SS h l h ir T t i a a e SS eai en i c ye i rrc n L W n n L R m i kk S n V bP m on a ff a l ee yff E k n u m c brr m m te g a d l aa c l a o o eee i as d i hae altt e i CKBSJDSVDCDSNSRA LP