HomeMy WebLinkAbout2026-03-10_Planning PACKET
Planning Commission Meeting Agenda
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
Tuesday, March 10, 2026
Note: Anyone wishing to speak at any Planning Commission 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
complete address 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
7:00 p.m., Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 E. Main Street
II.ANNOUNCEMENTS
1. Staff Announcements
2. Advisory Committee Liaison Reports
III.CONSENT AGENDA
Approval of Minutes
1. February 24, 2026 Special Meeting Minutes
IV.PUBLIC FORUM
Note: To speak to an agenda item in person you must fill out a speaker request form at the meeting
and will then be recognized by the Chair to provide your public testimony. Written testimony can be
submitted in advance or in person at the meeting. If you wish to discuss an agenda item
electronically, please contact PC-public-testimony@ashland.or.us by 10:00 a.m. on March 10,
2026 to register to participate via Zoom. If you are interested in watching the meeting via Zoom,
please utilize the following link: https://zoom.us/j/98953674106
V.TYPE II PUBLIC HEARINGS
PLANNING ACTION: PA-T2-2026-00066
SUBJECT PROPERTY: a portion of Tax lot 8600 of map 39-1E-04-AD
APPLICANT: Rogue Planning & Development Services, LLC
OWNER: CT Properties, LLC
DESCRIPTION: A request for concurrent outline plan and final plan approval for a
Performance Standards Option (PSO) Subdivision to divide ‘Area 7’ into four new lots. The
application also includes a request for residential Site Design Review approval, and the removal of a
single non-hazard tree. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: North Mountain Plan; ZONING:
NM-MF; MAP: 39-1E-04-AD; TAX LOT: 8600
VI.OPEN DISCUSSION
VII.ADJOURNMENT
Next Meeting Date: March 24, 2026
Next Meeting Date:
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 1 of 1
Total Page Number: 1
Total Page Number: 2
Planning CommissionMinutes
Note: Anyone wishing to speak at any PlanningCommission 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 complete address for the record. You will then be allowed to speak. Please note the
public testimony may be limited by the Chair.
February 24, 2026
SPECIALMEETING
DRAFT Minutes
I.CALL TO ORDER:
Chair Vernercalled the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.at theCivic Center Council Chambers, 1175 E.
Main Street.
Commissioners Present: Staff Present:
Lisa Verner Brandon Goldman, CommunityDevelopment Director
Eric Herron Derek Severson, Planning Supervisor
Kerry KenCairn Michael Sullivan, Executive Assistant
Russell Phillips
John Maher
Jay Lininger
Absent Members: Council Liaison:
Susan MacCracken Jain Jeff Dahle
II.ANNOUNCEMENTS
1.Staff Announcements – None
2.Advisory Committee Liaison Reports – None
III.CONSENT AGENDA
Approval of Minutes
1. February 10, 2026 Regular Meeting Minutes
Commissioners Maher/Liningerm/s to approve the consent agenda as presented. Commissioner
th
KenCairn abstainedfrom votingdue to her absence from the February 10meeting.Voice Vote: All
AYES. Motion Passed 5-0.
IV.PUBLIC FORUM – None
Page 1 of 3
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, pleaseemail
planning@ashland.or.us. Notification 72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to
ensure accessibility to the meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title 1).
Total Page Number: 3
Planning CommissionMinutes
IV.UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Approval for Findings for PA-T2-2025-00065, 431 North Main Street
Chair Verner noted that staff had sent out revised findings for approval (see attachment #1).
Ex Parte Contact
No ex parte contact wasdisclosed.
Decision
Commissioners Phillips/Herron m/s to approve the findings as presented and amended by staff.
th
Commissioner KenCairn abstainedfrom votingdue to her absence from the February 10
meeting. Roll Call Vote: Commissioners Phillips, Maher, Herron, Lininger, Verner: AYE. Motion
passed 5-0.
V.DISCUSSION ITEMS
Oregon Legislative Updates Discussion
Community Development Director Brandon Goldman briefly outlined recent state legislation,
specifically Senate Bill 974 and House Bill 2138, and the impacts these bills would have on Ashland Land
Use(see attachment #2). Mr. Goldman detailed how Senate Bill 974changes how certain residential
application and engineering plans are reviewed, requiring administrative decisions first, with hearings
before the Planning Commission only in the event of an appeal. House Bill 2138 expands and clarifies
middle housing, land divisions, and single-room occupancy housing, with several future code
compliance deadlines.
Planning Supervisor Derek Severson detailed the OregonHousing Needs Analysis(OHNA)as a
statewide methodology for estimating regional housing needs, establishing local housing production
targets, and how these targets will impact future housing development in the City(see attachment
#3).
The Commission discussed howSenate Bill 974 andHouseBill 2138will impact land use, as well as City
staff and the Commission’s role inproject review. Mr. Goldman stated that staff will bring specific code
amendments to the Commission for public hearings in the near future.
VI.OTHER BUSINESS
Election of Planning Commission Officers
Commissioners KenCairn/Lininger m/s to maintain CommissionerVerner as Chair and
Commissioner KenCairn as Vice-Chair.
Page 2 of 3
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, pleaseemail
planning@ashland.or.us. Notification 72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to
ensure accessibility to the meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title 1).
Total Page Number: 4
Planning CommissionMinutes
Discussion:Commissioner Maher stated his intention of nominating Commissioner Phillips as Vice-
Chair.
Commissioner KenCairn withdrew hermotion.
Commissioners Maher/Herron m/s to maintainCommissioner Verner as Chair and to nominate
Commissioner Phillips as Vice-Chair. Voice Vote: CommissionersMaher, Phillips, Herron,
KenCairn, Lininger, and Verner: AYE. Motion passed 6-0.
VII.OPEN DISCUSSION – None
VIII.ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 7:56p.m.
Submitted by,
Michael Sullivan, Executive Assistant
Page 3 of 3
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, pleaseemail
planning@ashland.or.us. Notification 72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to
ensure accessibility to the meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title 1).
Total Page Number: 5
Total Page Number: 6
_________________________________
Total Page Number: 7
Total Page Number: 8
_________________________________
Total Page Number: 9
Total Page Number: 10
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
PLANNING ACTION:PA-T2-2026-00066
SUBJECT PROPERTY:a portion of Tax lot 8600 of map 39-1E-04-AD
APPLICANT: Rogue Planning & Development Services, LLC
OWNER: CT Properties, LLC
DESCRIPTION: A request for concurrent outline plan and final plan approval for a Performance Standards Option
(PSO) Subdivision to divide ‘Area 7’ into four new lots. The application also includes a request for residential Site Design
Review approval, and the removal of a single non-hazard tree.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION:North Mountain Plan; ZONING: NM-MF;
MAP:39-1E-04-AD; TAX LOT:8600
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: Tuesday March 10, 2026at 7:00 PM, Ashland Civic Center,
1175 East Main Street
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTDEPARTMENT
51 Winburn WayTel: 541.488.5305
Ashland, Oregon 97520Fax: 541.552.2050
ashland.or.usTTY: 800.735.2900
Total Page Number: 11
Notice is hereby given that a PUBLIC HEARING on the following request with respect to the ASHLAND LAND USE
ORDINANCE will be held before the ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION on meeting date shown above. The meeting will be
at the ASHLAND CIVIC CENTER, 1175 EastMain Street, Ashland, Oregon.
A copy of the application, including all documents, evidence and applicable criteria are available online at “What’s Happening
in my City” at https://gis.ashland.or.us/developmentproposals/. Copies of application materials will be provided at reasonable
cost, if requested. Application materials may be requested to be reviewed in-person at the Ashland Community Development
& Engineering Services Building, 51 Winburn Way, via a pre-arranged appointment by calling (541) 488-5305 or emailing
planning@ashland.or.us.
The ordinance criteria applicable to this application are attached to this notice. Oregon law states that failure to raise an
objection concerning this application, either in person or by letter, or failure to provide sufficient specificity to afford the decision
maker an opportunity to respond to the issue, precludes your right of appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) on that
issue. Failure to specify which ordinance criterion the objection is based on also precludes your right of appeal to LUBA on
that criterion. Failure of the applicant to raise constitutional or other issues relating to proposed conditions of approval with
sufficient specificity to allow this Commission to respond to the issue precludes an action for damages in circuit court.
During the Public Hearing, the Chair shall allow testimony from the applicant and those in attendance concerning this request.
The Chair shall have the right to limit the length of testimony and require that comments be restricted to the applicable criteria.
Unless there is a continuance, if a participant so requests before the conclusion of the hearing, the record shall remain open
for at least seven days after the hearing.
If you have questions or comments concerning this request, please feel free to contact Aaron Andersonat 541-488-5305 or
planning@ashland.or.us.
In compliance with the American with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City
Administrator’s office at 541-488-6002 (TTY phone number 1-800-735-2900). Notification 72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City
to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting. (28 CFR 35.102.-35.104 ADA Title I).
OUTLINE PLAN SUBDIVISION APPROVAL (AMC 18.3.9.040.A.3)
Approval Criteria for Outline Plan.The Planning Commission shall approve the outline plan when it finds all of the following criteria have
been met.
a.The development meets all applicable ordinance requirements of the City.
b.Adequate key City facilities can be provided including water, sewer, paved access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage,
police and fire protection, and adequate transportation; and that the development will not cause a City facility to operate beyond capacity.
c. The existing and natural features of the land; such as wetlands, floodplain corridors, ponds, large trees, rock outcroppings,etc., have been identified
in the plan of the development and significant features have been included in the open space, common areas, and unbuildable areas.
d.The development of the land will not prevent adjacent land from being developed for the uses shown in the Comprehensive Plan.
e.There are adequate provisions for the maintenance of open space and common areas, if required or provided, and that if developments are done in
phases that the early phases have the same or higher ratio of amenities as proposed in the entire project.
f.The proposed density meets the base and bonus density standards established under this chapter.
g.The development complies with the Street Standards.
h.The proposed development meets the common open space standards established under section18.4.4.070. Common open space requirements may
be satisfied by public open space in accordance with section18.4.4.070if approved by the City of Ashland.
APPROVAL CRITERIA FOR FINAL PLAN
18.3.9.040.B.5
Final Plan approval shall be granted upon finding of substantial conformance with the Outline Plan. This substantial conformance provision is intended solely
to facilitate the minor modifications from one planning step to another. Substantial conformance shall exist when comparison of the
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTDEPARTMENT
51 Winburn WayTel: 541.488.5305
Ashland, Oregon 97520Fax: 541.552.2050
ashland.or.usTTY: 800.735.2900
Total Page Number: 12
outline plan with the final plan meets all of the following criteria.
a.The number of dwelling units vary no more than ten percent of those shown on the approved outline plan, but in no case shall the number of units exceed
those permitted in the outline plan.
b.The yard depths and distances between main buildings vary no more than ten percent of those shown on the approved outline plan, but in no case shall
these distances be reduced below the minimum established within this Ordinance.
c. The open spaces vary no more than ten percent of that provided on the outline plan.
d.The building size does not exceed the building size shown on the outline plan by more than ten percent.
e.The building elevations and exterior materials are in conformance with the purpose and intent of this ordinance and the approved outline plan.
f.That the additional standards which resulted in the awarding of bonus points in the outline plan approval have been included in the final plan with
substantial detail to ensure that the performance level committed to in the outline plan will be achieved.
g.The development complies with the Street Standards.
h.Nothing in this section shall limit reduction in the number of dwelling units or increased open space provided that, if this is done for one phase, the
number of dwelling units shall not be transferred to another phase, nor the open space reduced below that permitted in the outline plan.
SITE DESIGN AND USE STANDARDS
18.5.2.050
The following criteria shall be used to approve or deny an application:
A. Underlying Zone:The proposal complies with all of the applicable provisions of the underlying zone (part 18.2), including but not limited to:building and
yard setbacks, lot area and dimensions, density and floor area, lot coverage, building height, building orientation, architecture, and other applicable
standards.
B. Overlay Zones:The proposal complies with applicable overlay zone requirements (part 18.3).
C. Site Development and Design Standards:The proposal complies with the applicable Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4, except as
provided by subsection E, below.
D. City Facilities:The proposal complies with the applicable standards in section 18.4.6 Public Facilities and that adequate capacity of City facilities for water,
sewer, electricity, urban storm drainage, paved access to and throughout the property and adequate transportation can and will be provided to the subject
property.
E.Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards:The approval authority may approve exceptions to the Site Development and Design
Standards of part 18.4 if the circumstances in either subsection 1 or 2, below, are found to exist.
1.There is a demonstrable difficulty meeting the specific requirements of the Site Development and Design Standards due to a unique or unusual aspect
of an existing structure or the proposed use of a site; and approval of the exception will not substantially negatively impact adjacent properties; and
approval of the exception is consistent with the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design; and the exception requested is the minimum
which would alleviate the difficulty.; or
2.There is no demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements, but granting the exception will result in a design that equally or better achieves
the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design Standards.
TREE REMOVAL PERMIT (AMC 18.5.7.040.B)
Tree That is Not a Hazard.A Tree Removal Permit for a tree that is not a hazard shall be granted if the approval authority finds that the application
meets all of the following criteria, or can be made to conform through the imposition of conditions.
a. The tree is proposed for removal in order to permit the application to be consistent with other applicable Land Use Ordinancerequirements
and standards, including but not limited to applicable Site Development and Design Standards in part 18.4 and Physical and Environmental
Constraints in part 18.10.
b. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees,
or existing windbreaks.
c. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes, canopies, and species diversitywithin 200 feet of
the subject property. The City shall grant an exception to this criterion when alternatives to the tree removal have been considered and no
reasonable alternative exists to allow the property to be used as permitted in the zone.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTDEPARTMENT
51 Winburn WayTel: 541.488.5305
Ashland, Oregon 97520Fax: 541.552.2050
ashland.or.usTTY: 800.735.2900
Total Page Number: 13
d. Nothing in this section shall require that the residential density to be reduced below the permitted density allowed by the zone. In making
this determination, the City may consider alternative site plans or placement of structures of alternate landscaping designs that would lessen
the impact on trees, so long as the alternatives continue to comply with the other provisions of this ordinance.
e. The City shall require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each tree granted approval pursuant to section 18.5.7.050. Such mitigation
requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit.
NORTH MOUNTAIN NEIGHBORHOOD
SECTION 18.3.5.030 Site Plan & Architectural Review Procedure
C.Supplemental Approval Criteria.In addition to the criteria for approval required by other sections of this ordinance, applications within the NM district shall
also meet all of the following criteria.
1.The application demonstrates conformity to the general design requirements of the North Mountain Neighborhood Plan, including density,
transportation, building design, and building orientation.
2.The application complies with the specific design requirements as provided in the North Mountain Neighborhood Design Standards.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTDEPARTMENT
51 Winburn WayTel: 541.488.5305
Ashland, Oregon 97520Fax: 541.552.2050
ashland.or.usTTY: 800.735.2900
Total Page Number: 14
_________________________________
Total Page Number: 15
Total Page Number: 16
ASHLAND PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
Before the Planning Commission – March 10, 2026
PLANNING ACTION: PA-T2-2026-00066
OWNER: CT Properties LLC
APPLICANT: Rogue Planning & Development Services, LLC
LOCATION: a portion of Tax Lot 8600 assessor map 39-1E-04-AD
ZONE DESIGNATION: North Mountain Multi-Family (NM-MF)
COMP. PLAN DESIGNATION: North Mountain
ORDINANCE REFERENCES: 18.2.4 General Regulations for Base Zones
18.2.5 Standards for Residential Zones
18.3.5 North Mountain Neighborhood District
18.3.9 Performance Standards Overlay
18.4 Site Development & Design Standards
18.5.1 General Review Procedures
18.5.2 Site Design Review
18.5.3 Land Divisions & Property Line Adjustments
18.6.1 Definitions
APPLICATION DATE: January 26, 2026
PUBLIC NOTICE: February 16, 2026 **22 days prior to hearing**
MEETING DATE: March 10, 2026
PROPOSAL: A request for concurrent Outline and Final Plan approval for a four-lot
Performance Standards Option (PSO) subdivision and a request for residential Site Design
Review approval to construct three triplex buildings. The fourth building, a duplex, is not
subject to Site Design Review. The application also includes a request to remove a single non-
hazard tree.
The property was created as lot 31 of Kestrel Park Phase II and was reserved for this final phase
of the Kestrel Park Subdivision. The property is zoned “North Mountain-Multi Family” (NM-
MF) and is regulated by the North Mountain Neighborhood Plan (NMNP). The NMNP is
codified at Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) 18.3.5 and applies to all properties within the North
Mountain Neighborhood Plan area (adopted by City Ordinance 2800 in April 1997).
I. Introduction and Background
This is the final component of the third phase of the Kestrel Park Subdivision. This phase is the
culmination of the entire Kestrel Park Subdivision which began in 2018 and we do not attempt to
provide a complete background and roadmap to all the previous approvals and appeals of the
prior phases. The staff report prepared for the original outline approval for Phase 3 plan (see PA
#T2-2024-00054) has an extensive planning history of all previous phases.
Planning Action: PA-T2-2026-00066 Ashland Planning Department – Staff Report
Owner: CT Properties LLC Page 1 of 14
Total Page Number: 17
1)Background
The subject property is a portion of Lot 31 (of Phase 2) and was reserved for this final phase. The
previously approved Phase 3 of the subdivision (presently under construction) connects both
Nandina Street and Patton Lane / Mountain Meadows Drive to create four blocks that have been
identified previously as areas four, five, six and seven (shown below).
The Residential development for areas four, five, and six as well as the related public
improvements have all been approved, however the plat has not been recorded yet as the
construction of those improvements is ongoing.
As relevant to this application, during the original Outline Plan approval for Phase 3, Area 7’ was
removed from consideration at the last minute. The design for area seven has been modified and
now proposed to subdivide ‘Area 7’ into four new lots, with one lot proposed to be developed
with a duplex and the remaining three lots proposed to be developed with triplexes.
The reason to refer to this application as ‘Area 7 of Phase 3’ is that, while the subdivision of
‘Area 7’ is being addressed individually, it is still the applicant’s intent to file a final plat for all
of Phase 3 together.
2)Site Description
The subject property is Tax lot #8600 of Assessor Map 39-1E-04-AD; it does not presently have
an assigned street address. The application also includes three tax lots owned by the City of
Ashland; tax lot 4700 a 0.05-acre strip of land along the north, as well as tax lots 7800 & 4900
which are both ‘street plugs’ to be vacatedfor street R-O-W. The property was created as lot-31
of Kestrel Park Phase II and was reserved for this final phase of the Kestrel Park Subdivision.
Planning Action: PA-T2-2026-00066Ashland Planning Department – Staff Report
Owner: CT PropertiesLLCPage 2 of 14
Total Page Number: 18
The property is 2.27 acres in size and slopes from east to west at approximately 15% and is
zoned North Mountain Multi-Family (NM-MF).
3)Proposal
The AMCrequires that all applications involving the creation of three or more lots in the NMNP
to be processed in accordance withAMC 18.3.9 the ‘Performance Standards Option and PSO
Overlay’ chapter(see: AMC 18.3.5.040.K). The proposed PSO subdivision includes a total of 4-
lots for residential development. The application includes a request for Site Design Review
approval for threemultifamily triplexes, with the fourth lot proposed with a duplex. This
provides a total of 11-dwelling units for all of ‘Area 7’.
II.Project Proposal – Outline Plan Subdivision and Residential Site Design Review.
1)Performance Standards Option (PSO) Subdivision – Outline Plan Approval
The preliminary final plat for all of Phase 3 of the Kestrel Subdivision is shown below. As
mentioned above, construction of civil improvements is underway, and the present application
*
only relates to the subdivision of Area 7 - highlighted in red dashed line below.
The approval criteria for Outline Plan include eight items which are summarized as follows:
1)The development meets all applicable ordinance requirements of the city.
2)Adequate key City facilities can be provided including water, sewer, paved access.
*
Condition of Approval #2 from PA -T2-2025-00059: “All proposed public improvements including sidewalks,
curbs, gutters, park rows with irrigated street trees and the alley shall be installed, including surrounding Area 7,
prior to the recording of final plat.\[emphasis added\]
Planning Action: PA-T2-2026-00066Ashland Planning Department – Staff Report
Owner: CT PropertiesLLCPage 3 of 14
Total Page Number: 19
3) The natural features, such as wetlands and large trees, are included in unbuildable areas.
4) The development of the land will not prevent adjacent land from being developed.
5) There are adequate provisions for the maintenance of common open space.
6) The proposed density meets the base and bonus density standards.
7) The development complies with the street standards.
8) The proposed development meets the common open space standards.
The application includes detailed written responses to each of the approval criteria and design
standards, and by their reference they are incorporated herein as if set out in full. Next, we
briefly address each of the approval criteria, and any needed conditions of approval to
demonstrate compliance with the applicable standards.
The first approval criterion is that “the development meets all applicable ordinance requirements
of the city.” This first approval criterion is all-encompassing allowing the Planning Commission
to address all city standards, even outside of Chapter 18 of the AMC. The application materials
explain that the proposal utilizes the Performance Standards Option Chapter 18.3.9, and that the
development demonstrates compliance with the standards from AMC 18.3.9.050 – 18.3.9.080.
The application materials emphasize that as a Performance Standards Options proposal, the
application is not required to meet the minimum lot size, lot width, lot depth or setback standards
of part 18.2. With the application materials fully considered staff concluded that findings can be
made that all applicable ordinance requirements will be met.
The second approval criterion is that “adequate key City facilities can be provided including
water, sewer, paved access.” Staff reiterates that this is a portion of the third phase of the Kestrel
Park Subdivision and that all city facilities were sized with the capacity for this phase in mind.
Staff note that all relevant public improvements were approved with the original phase 3 outline
plan and that they are currently under construction. Planning staff have consulted with the
Engineering Department in Public Works regarding the civil plans and have confirmed that the
proposed infrastructure will meet all city standards, and that there is sufficient capacity for the
proposed development. Staff conclude that findings can be made that this approval criterion is
met.
The third approval criterion is that “the natural features, such as wetlands and large trees, are
included in unbuildable areas.” The previous phases of the subdivision have addressed
floodplain and wetland areas. For this phase the subject property has no identified natural
features or wetlands to consider with the exception of the single multi branched tree that is
proposed for removal and is discussed further below. Staff believe findings can be made thatthis
approval criterion is met.
The fourth approval criterion is that “the development of the land will not prevent adjacent land
from being developed.” The subject property is surrounded by land that has already fully
developed, and a finding can be made that this approval criterion is met.
The fifth approval criterion is that “there are adequate provisions for the maintenance of
common open space.” Staff restate what was set out in the previous phase 3 approval: That the
existing HOA’s were formed for the earlier phases of the Kestrel Park. “The three phases are
Planning Action: PA-T2-2026-00066 Ashland Planning Department – Staff Report
Owner: CT Properties LLC Page 4 of 14
Total Page Number: 20
also tied together through monetary commitments (HOA Dues) for the maintenance of common
areas and improvements such as the site’s wetlands, common spaces, park benches, park row
vegetation and irrigation and street trees.” Staff conclude that the HOA provides sufficient
evidence of the provisions for the ongoing maintenance for the common open space and that
findings can be made that this approval criterion is met.
The sixth approval criterion is that “the proposed density meets the base and bonus density
standards.” The ultimate density of the Kestrel Park subdivision has been a significant point of
emphasis of previous phases. This is because the subdivision spans multiple zones of different
density, and that in addition to maximum density the NMNP also has a requirement for a
minimum density of between 75% and 110% of each zone’s base density. In previous phases
there has been a table detailing the number of units in each phase, acreage and required densities.
The remaining number of units required was summarized in the Planning Commission’s outline
plan phase 3 findings as follows: “The Planning Commission concludes that Area 7 will need to
develop with at least two but not more than eighteen units, and a condition of approval to that effect
has been included below.” (PA-T2-2024-00054 section 2.4.6 at p.7). Staff would note that the 11
proposed dwelling units are greater than two, and less than 18. Staff conclude that findings can
be made that this approval criterion will be met.
The seventh approval criterion is that “the development complies with the street standards.” As
mentioned previously all of the associated civil improvements have been previously approved
during the original Phase 3 outline and final plan approval. Additionally, as was stated in the
previous land use approval, all properties were required to sign in favor of and agree to
participate in a Local Improvement District (LID) for the future construction of a bridge across
Bear Creek to connect Nevada Street to Oak Street. As such, a condition was included to require
that all properties within the Kestrel Park Subdivision sign a similar agreement prior to signature
of the final survey plat. The subject properties here are within the subdivision and are subject to
that original condition which has been included below. Staff conclude that with the condition of
approval findings can be made that this approval criterion will be met.
The eighth and final approval criterion is that “the proposed development meets the common
open space standards.” Here we restate what was set out in the original phase 3 outline plan
approval:
“The application notes the following: “The Kestrel Park Subdivision is 13.48 acres in size
of which 5.13 acres was dedicated as open space (Bear Creek Riparian Area) and another
.7 acres was platted as private open space for the subdivision’s on-site wetlands and a
couple of smaller landscape areas - located at various street corners as common
neighborhood landscaping, for a total of 5.82 acres or roughly 43% of the subdivision’s
acreage of which only 8% is required with Performance Standard Subdivisions and an
additional 4% for Site Review applications. Additionally, each of the proposed multi-
family units do include an additional 8% recreational space (porches/patios).”
Staff conclude that findings can be made that this approval criterion will be met.
Staff conclude, based on the above, that findings can be made that the Outline Plan Approval
Criteria criterion will be met.
Planning Action: PA-T2-2026-00066 Ashland Planning Department – Staff Report
Owner: CT Properties LLC Page 5 of 14
Total Page Number: 21
2) Final Plan Approval
The approval criteria for Final Plan are intended to ensure substantial conformance between
Outline Plan approval and Final Plan approval when the two are requested as separate procedural
steps. When both Outline and Final plan are filed concurrently, as is the case here, there is no
procedural separation between the two, and the concurrent Final Plan proposal is identical to the
Outline Plan in terms of number of dwelling units, yard depths, distances between buildings,
common open spaces, building sizes, building elevations and exterior materials, standards
resulting in density bonuses, and street standards. Based on the above Staff conclude that
findings can be made that the final plan approval criteria are met.
3) NMNP Supplemental Design Standards
The NMNP also included Supplemental Approval Criteria that require that there is conformity
with both the “general design requirements of the North Mountain Neighborhood Plan, including
density, transportation, building design, and building orientation” as well as the “specific design
requirements as provided in the North Mountain Neighborhood Design Standards.” The NMNP
includes detailed Design standards for both roads and architectural design. The application states
that the NMNP design standards are fully met and include detailed dimensions on the site plan
showing that porches meet the correct sizes. Additionally, there are standards for garage
setbacks, however in this application there are no proposed garages as all parking is off the
proposed alley. The remainder of the architectural standards are discussed below under the Site
Design Review approval criteria. Staff conclude that findings can be made that the Supplemental
Approval Criteria criterion will be met.
4) Residential Site Design Review
The applicability section of Site design review is provided at AMC 18.5.2.020.B and requires
Site Design Review for “Three or more dwelling units on a lot” as is proposed on three of the
lots in this application.
The first criterion of approval for Site Design Review is that “The proposal complies with all of
the applicable provisions of the underlying zone (part 18.2), including but not limited to:
building and yard setbacks, lot area and dimensions, density and floor area, lot coverage,
building height, building orientation, architecture, and other applicable standards.” PSO
subdivisions are not required to meet the minimum lot size, lot width, lot depth, and setback
standards of part 18.2, and other standards as specifically provided by AMC 18.3.9. By virtue of
being a PSO development this approval criterion is effectively not applicable. Staff conclude that
findings can be made that this approval criterion will be met.
The second criterion of approval for Site Design Review is that “The proposal complies with
applicable overlay zone requirements (part 18.3).” The only applicable overlay zone is the North
Mountain Neighborhood District at AMC 18.3.5 which governs all development in the NMNP
area. Included in the NMNP standards are the Site Development and Design Standards at AMC
18.3.5.100. When printed these standards occupy 30 pages, so we do not address each item
individually. That said the building elevations and renderings make clear that the architectural
design requirements are clearly met as the proposed buildings features include covered porches,
eaves, and building offsets. The site plans have dimensions shown that the three single family
Planning Action: PA-T2-2026-00066 Ashland Planning Department – Staff Report
Owner: CT Properties LLC Page 6 of 14
Total Page Number: 22
common wall buildings each include the required setback and offset for the garages as illustrated
in AMC 18.3.5.100.A.4.a. Staff conclude that findings can be made that this approval criterion
will be met.
The third criterion of approval for Site Design Review is that “The proposal complies with the
applicable Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4, except as provided below.”
Because the development is regulated by the NMNP many of the regulations in 18.4 are not in
effect. AMC 18.3.5.020 provides in part that “where the provisions of this chapter conflict with
comparable standards described in any other ordinance, resolution or regulation, the provisions
of the North Mountain Neighborhood district shall govern.” That said, the site plan clearly
demonstrates that the driveway spacing meets or exceeds the 24’ requirement as well as details
on recycling and refuse area. The application materials include a detailed landscaping plan
showing that all portions of a lot not otherwise developed are to be landscaped.
The buildings are proposed to be separated to respond to the character of the neighborhood,
rather than developed as a single apartment building on one tax lot. The application proposes to
comply with building separation requirements of the Performance Standards Options chapter,
and to apply a “Mill Pond” standard for solar access to allow shading five-feet up the wall of the
first story’s living space. The lower level is considered a basement here, not a story.
The “Mill Pond” solar access standard is not codified, but was first allowed with the Mill Pond
subdivision, a Performance Standards Options subdivision in the 1980’s, where the flexibility of
the Performance Standards meant that there were not always standard setbacks between
buildings. The “Mill Pond” standard allowed a shadow to be cast to the bottom windowsill of
the first story living space on the property to the north as functionally equivalent to “Standard A”
Solar Access. This standard has been allowed for a number of subdivisions over the last 40
years, and in staff’s assessment, the Planning Commission can reasonably make a finding that
the shading proposed is functionally equivalent to Standard A. A condition is recommended
below to require that the building permit submittals demonstrate compliance with the “Mill
Pond” shading described in the application, and with that staff conclude that findings can be
made that this approval criterion will be met.
The fourth criterion of approval for Site Design Review is that “The proposal complies with the
applicable standards in section 18.4.6 Public Facilities, and that adequate capacity of City
facilities for water, sewer, electricity, urban storm drainage, paved access to and throughout the
property, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to the subject property.” As
discussed above the proposed street network and proposed City facilities have been sized
specifically for the proposed density. The application includes detailed civil plans and staff are
confident that findings can be made that this approval criterion has been met.
The last criterion of approval for Site Design Review is that “The approval authority may
approve exceptions to the Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4 if the
circumstances in either subsections below, are found to exist…” There are no exceptions
requested to the above standards and staff is confident that findings can be made that this
criterion of approval has been met.
Planning Action: PA-T2-2026-00066 Ashland Planning Department – Staff Report
Owner: CT Properties LLC Page 7 of 14
Total Page Number: 23
5) Tree removal
The application includes a request to remove what is described as a ‘multi stem’ cherry tree
which is located in the proposed building envelope of the multi family housing. Staff have
doubts about whether the proposed tree is regulated based on the photos and site visits. Based on
the trees form it presents more like a shrub rather than a dominate trunk that then splits. The Tree
Management Advisory Committee (MAC) reviewed the application also questioned if the
proposed tree removal was in fact a regulated tree, while also unanimously recommending
approval of the proposed removal. Based on the location the proposed removal meets the criteria
of approval for removal as it is located within the building envelope.
6) Public Input
Notice was posted at the property frontage and mailed to all properties within 200’ on February
th
13, 2026. At present no public comment has been received.
III. Procedural – Approval Criteria
1) Outline Plan Approval Criteria
AMC 18.3.9.040.A.3 provides the approval criteria and standards for Outline Plan approval:
A.3 Approval criteria for Outline Plan. The planning commission shall approve the
Outline Plan when it finds all of the following criteria have been met:
A. the development meets all applicable ordinance requirements of the city.
B. adequate key city facilities can be provided including water, sewer, paved
access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, police
and fire protection, and adequate transportation; and that the development will
not cause a city facility to operate beyond capacity.
C. the existing and natural features of the land; such as wetlands, floodplain
corridors, ponds, large trees, rock outcroppings, etc., have been identified in the
plan of the development and significant features have been included in the
common open space, common areas, and unbuildable areas.
D. the development of the land will not prevent adjacent land from being
developed for the uses shown in the comprehensive plan.
E. there are adequate provisions for the maintenance of common open space
and common areas, if required or provided, and that if developments are done in
phases that the early phases have the same or higher ratio of amenities as
proposed in the entire project.
F. the proposed density meets the base and bonus density standards
established under this chapter.
G. the development complies with the street standards.
H. the proposed development meets the common open space standards
established under section 18.4.4.070. Common open space requirements may
be satisfied by public open space in accordance with section 18.4.4.070 if
approved by the city of Ashland.
Planning Action: PA-T2-2026-00066 Ashland Planning Department – Staff Report
Owner: CT Properties LLC Page 8 of 14
Total Page Number: 24
2) Final Plan Approval Criteria
AMC 18.3.9.040.B.5 provides the approval criteria and standards for Final Plan approval:
5. Approval Criteria for Final Plan. Final plan approval shall be granted upon finding of
substantial conformance with the outline plan. This substantial conformance provision is
intended solely to facilitate the minor modifications from one planning step to another.
Substantial conformance shall exist when comparison of the outline plan with the final
plan meets all of the following criteria:
a. The number of dwelling units vary no more than ten percent of those shown
on the approved outline plan, but in no case shall the number of units exceed
those permitted in the outline plan.
b. The yard depths and distances between main buildings vary no more than ten
percent of those shown on the approved outline plan, but in no case shall these
distances be reduced below the minimum established within this ordinance.
c. The common open spaces vary no more than ten percent of that provided on
the outline plan.
d. The building size does not exceed the building size shown on the outline plan
by more than ten percent.
e. The building elevations and exterior materials are in conformance with the
purpose and intent of this ordinance and the approved outline plan.
f. That the additional standards which resulted in the awarding of bonus points in
the outline plan approval have been included in the final plan with substantial
detail to ensure that the performance level committed to in the outline plan will be
achieved.
g. The development complies with the street standards.
h. Nothing in this section shall limit reduction in the number of dwelling units or
increased open space; provided, that if this is done for one phase, the number of
dwelling units shall not be transferred to another phase, nor the common open
space reduced below that permitted in the outline plan.
3) Supplemental Approval Criteria
AMC 18.3.5.030.C provides the approval criteria and standards for development in the NMNP.
C.Supplemental Approval Criteria. In addition to the criteria for approval required by
other sections of this ordinance, applications within the NM district shall also meet all of
the following criteria.
1. The application demonstrates conformity to the general design requirements
of the North Mountain Neighborhood Plan, including density, transportation,
building design, and building orientation.
2. The application complies with the specific design requirements as provided in
the North Mountain Neighborhood Design Standards.
4) Site Design Review Approval Criteria
AMC 18.5.2.050 provides the approval criteria and standards for Site Design Review:
Planning Action: PA-T2-2026-00066 Ashland Planning Department – Staff Report
Owner: CT Properties LLC Page 9 of 14
Total Page Number: 25
An application for Site Design Review shall be approved if the proposal meets the
criteria in subsections A, B, C, and D below. The approval authority may, in approving
the application, impose conditions of approval, consistent with the applicable criteria.
A. Underlying Zone. The proposal complies with all of the applicable provisions
of the underlying zone (part 18.2), including but not limited to: building and yard
setbacks, lot area and dimensions, density and floor area, lot coverage, building
height, building orientation, architecture, and other applicable standards.
B. Overlay Zones. The proposal complies with applicable overlay zone
requirements (part 18.3).
C. Site Development and Design Standards. The proposal complies with the
applicable Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4, except as
provided by subsection E, below.
D. City Facilities. The proposal complies with the applicable standards in section
18.4.6 Public Facilities, and that adequate capacity of City facilities for water,
sewer, electricity, urban storm drainage, paved access to and throughout the
property, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to the subject
property.
E. Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards. The approval
authority may approve exceptions to the Site Development and Design
Standards of part 18.4 if the circumstances in either subsection 1, 2, or 3, below,
are found to exist.
1. There is a demonstrable difficulty meeting the specific requirements of
the Site Development and Design Standards due to a unique or unusual
aspect of an existing structure or the proposed use of a site; and approval
of the exception will not substantially negatively impact adjacent
properties; and approval of the exception is consistent with the stated
purpose of the Site Development and Design; and the exception
requested is the minimum which would alleviate the difficulty;
2. There is no demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific
requirements, but granting the exception will result in a design that
equally or better achieves the stated purpose of the Site Development
and Design Standards; or
3. There is no demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific
requirements for a cottage housing development, but granting the
exception will result in a design that equally or better achieves the stated
purpose of section 18.2.3.090.
5) Tree Removal Approval Criteria
AMC 18.5.7.040 provides the approval criteria and standards for tree removal.
2. Tree That is Not a Hazard. A Tree Removal Permit for a tree that is not a hazard shall
be granted if the approval authority finds that the application meets all of the following
criteria, or can be made to conform through the imposition of conditions.
a. The tree is proposed for removal in order to permit the application to be
consistent with other applicable Land Use Ordinance requirements and
standards, including but not limited to applicable Site Development and Design
Planning Action: PA-T2-2026-00066 Ashland Planning Department – Staff Report
Owner: CT Properties LLC Page 10 of 14
Total Page Number: 26
Standards in part 18.4 and Physical and Environmental Constraints in part
18.3.10.
b. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil
stability, flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing
windbreaks.
c. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on the tree
densities, sizes, canopies, and species diversity within 200 feet of the subject
property. The City shall grant an exception to this criterion when alternatives to
the tree removal have been considered and no reasonable alternative exists to
allow the property to be used as permitted in the zone.
d. Nothing in this section shall require that the residential density to be reduced
below the permitted density allowed by the zone. In making this determination,
the City may consider alternative site plans or placement of structures of
alternate landscaping designs that would lessen the impact on trees, so long as
the alternatives continue to comply with the other provisions of this ordinance.
e. The City shall require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each tree
granted approval pursuant to section 18.5.7.050. Such mitigation requirements
shall be a condition of approval of the permit.
IV.Conclusion and Recommendations
Staff recommend that the Planning Commission approve concurrent Outline Plan and Final Plan
for the PSO subdivision and the requested tree removal. Staff also recommend that the Planning
Commission approve Site Design Review for the three proposed triplex buildings.
If the Planning Commission approves the application, staff recommends including the following
conditions of approval below:
1) That all proposals of the applicant shall be conditions of approval unless otherwise
specifically modified herein.
2) That all new addresses shall be assigned by City of Ashland Planning Department.
3) That permits shall be obtained from the Ashland Public Works Department prior to any
work in the public right of way, including but not limited to permits for driveway
approaches, street improvements, utilities or any necessary encroachments.
4) That the properties within the project sign in favor and agree to participate in a local
improvement district (LID) for future construction of the Nevada Street bridge across
Bear Creek. The agreement shall be prepared by the City of Ashland and signed by the
property owner prior to signature of the final survey plat. Nothing in this condition is
intended to prohibit an owner/developer, their successors or assigns from exercising their
rights to freedom of speech and expression by orally objecting or participating in the LID
hearing or to take advantage of any protection afforded any party by City ordinances and
resolutions.
5) That a final Fire Prevention and Control Plan addressing the General Fuel Modification
Area requirements in AMC 18.3.10.100.A.2 of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance shall be
provided prior to bringing combustible materials onto the property, and any new
Planning Action: PA-T2-2026-00066 Ashland Planning Department – Staff Report
Owner: CT Properties LLC Page 11 of 14
Total Page Number: 27
landscaping proposed shall comply with these standards and shall not include plants
listed on the Prohibited Flammable Plant List per Resolution 2018-028.
6) That the building permit submittals shall demonstrate compliance with the Millpond
Standard for solar access described in the application materials, with shading not to extend
above the lowest windowsill (five feet) of the first story living space.
7) That a final survey plat shall be submitted within 18 months of Final Plan approval. Prior
to submittal of the final subdivision survey plat for signature:
a. Final electric service, utility and civil plans including but not limited to the water,
sewer, storm drainage, electric, street and driveway improvements shall be
submitted for the review and approval of the Planning, Building, Electric, and
Public Works/Engineering Departments with the Final Plan submittal. The street
system plan shall include full street designs with cross-sections consistent with
the City’s Street Design Standards for the proposed residential neighborhood
streets and alleys, as approved. Street lights shall be included in keeping with city
street light standards. The utility plan shall include the location of connections to
all public facilities including the locations of water lines and meter sizes; fire
hydrant; sanitary sewer lines, manholes and clean-out’s; storm drain lines and
catch basins; and locations of all primary and secondary electric services
including line locations, transformers (to scale), cabinets, meters and all other
necessary equipment. Transformers, cabinets and vaults shall be located in areas
least visible from streets, while considering the access needs of the utility
departments. Any required private or public utility easements shall be delineated
on the civil plans. All civil infrastructure shall be installed by the applicants,
inspected and approved prior to the signature of the final survey plat.
b. That the applicant shall submit a final electric design and distribution plan
including load calculations and locations of all primary and secondary services
including transformers, cabinets, street lights and all other necessary equipment.
This plan must be reviewed and approved by the Electric Department prior to the
signature of the final survey plat. Transformers and cabinets shall be located in
areas least visible from streets and outside of the sidewalk corridor and vision
clearance areas, while considering the access needs of the Electric Department.
Electric services shall be installed underground to serve all lots within the
applicable phase prior to signature of the final survey plat. At the discretion of the
Staff Advisor, a bond may be posted for the full amount of underground service
installation (with necessary permits and connection fees paid) as an alternative to
installation of service prior to signature of the final survey plat. In either case, the
electric service plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Electric, Engineering,
Building and Planning Departments prior to installation of facilities.
c. A final storm drainage plan detailing the location and final engineering for all
storm drainage improvements associated with the project shall be submitted for
review and approval by the Departments of Public Works, Planning and Building
Divisions. The storm drainage plan shall demonstrate that post-development peak
flows are less than or equal to the pre-development peak flow for the site as a
Planning Action: PA-T2-2026-00066 Ashland Planning Department – Staff Report
Owner: CT Properties LLC Page 12 of 14
Total Page Number: 28
whole, and that storm water quality mitigation has been addressed through the
final design.
d. A final grading and erosion control plan shall be submitted for the review and
approval of the Building, Planning and Engineering divisions.
e. That a parking lot tree canopy plan shall be prepared by a licensed landscape
architect or International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) certified arborist and
provided for review. This plan shall include written certification from the
landscape architect/arborist that the final plan as prepared is consistent with ANSI
A300 standards.
f. That the requirements of the Ashland Fire Department relating to approved
addressing; fire apparatus access, fire apparatus access approach, aerial ladder
access, firefighter access pathways, and fire apparatus turn-around; fire hydrant
distance, spacing and clearance; fire department work area; fire sprinklers;
limitations on gates, fences or other access obstructions; and addressing standards
for wildfire hazard areas including vegetation standards and limits on work during
fire season shall be satisfactorily addressed in the final submittals. Fire
Department requirements shall be included in the civil drawings.
g. That draft CC&Rs for the Homeowner's Association shall be provided for review
and approval of the Staff Advisor with the Final Plan submittal. The CC&R’s
shall describe responsibility for the maintenance of all common use-
improvements including driveway, open space, landscaping including trees and
street trees, utilities, and stormwater detention and drainage system, and shall
include an operations and maintenance plan for the stormwater detention and
drainage system.
h. A fencing plan which demonstrates that all fencing shall be consistent with the
provisions of the “Fences and Walls” requirements in AMC 18.4.4.060, and that
fencing around common open space, except for deer fencing, shall not exceed
four feet in height. Fencing limitations shall be noted in the subdivision CC&R’s.
The location and height of fencing shall be identified at the time of building
permit submittals, and fence permits shall be obtained prior to installation.
8. Prior to the signature of the final plat:
a. All easements including but not limited to public and private utilities, public
pedestrian and public bicycle access, drainage, irrigation and fire apparatus access
shall be indicated on the final subdivision plat submittal for review by the
Planning, Engineering, Building and Fire Departments.
b. The final survey plat shall include the dedication of right-of-way necessary to
accommodate the proposed street system.
c. Subdivision infrastructure improvements including but not limited to utilities,
driveways, streets and common area improvements shall be completed according
to approved plans, inspected and approved.
d. Irrigated street trees selected from the Recommended Street Tree Guide and
planted according to city planting and spaces standards shall be planted along all
Planning Action: PA-T2-2026-00066 Ashland Planning Department – Staff Report
Owner: CT Properties LLC Page 13 of 14
Total Page Number: 29
street frontages pursuant to the proposed landscape plan, inspected and approved
by the Staff Advisor.
e. Electric services shall be installed underground to serve all lots, inspected and
approved. The final electric service plan shall be reviewed and approved by the
Ashland Electric, Building, Planning and Engineering Divisions prior to
installation.
f.That the sanitary sewer laterals and water services including connection with
meters at the street shall be installed to serve all lots within the applicable phase,
inspected and approved.
Planning Action: PA-T2-2026-00066 Ashland Planning Department – Staff Report
Owner: CT Properties LLC Page 14 of 14
Total Page Number: 30
_________________________________
Total Page Number: 31
Total Page Number: 32
ROGUE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC
Kestrel Park, Phase 3–Area 7
A PERFORMANCE STANDARDS SUBDIVISION BY TAYLORED ELEMENTS
Total Page Number: 33
REQUEST FOR OUTLINE AND FINAL PLAN APPLICATION OF A
FOUR LOT PERFORMANCE STANDARDS SUBDIVISION
INCLUDING A REQUEST FOR
SITE DESIGN REVIEW FOR THREE, ATTACHED TRIPLEX DWELLINGS
Map & Tax Lot: 391E04AD - 8600
Property Owner: CT Properties LLC
1679 Jackson Road
Ashland, OR 97520
Surveyor: Pacific Crest Surveying
340 A Street #209
Ashland, OR 97520
Building Design: DeZine Fine Homes
190 Harrison Street
Ashland, OR 97520
Landscape Design: Terrain Landscape Architecture
310 Oak Street, Suite 3
Ashland, OR 97520
Planning Consultant: Rogue Planning & Development Services
1314-B Center Dr., PMB #457
Medford, OR 97501
Page 1 of 19
Total Page Number: 34
Property Details:
The property is zoned North Mountain NM-MF
(multi-family) and is part of the Kestrel Park
Subdivision, referenced as area 7 on the
subdivision plans. It was established as lot-31 of
Kestrel Park Phase II.
The parent parcel spans 2.27 acres, while the
specific lot encompasses approximately 18,019
square feet. The future streets are presently
being developed. When complete, this lot will
have street frontage along Patton Lane on the
west side. The north will be bound by Nandina
Street, and the east side of the development
area bound by Mariposa Lane.
Historically, the North Mountain neighborhood has been planned since 1995, with the North Mountain
Neighborhood Plan adopted in 1997 to guide growth over 30 years. Developments include a mix of
single-family homes, cottage-style residences, and multi-family units, with extensive approvals in 2019
and 2020 for phased subdivisions.
In 2019, an Outline and Final Plan (PA-T1-2019-00075) was approved for six larger lot areas with
additional multi-family units and single-family residences. This phase consisted of single-family detached
homes which are predominantly completed and outlined the area of future developments.
In 2020, the Planning Commission approved a Final Plan proposal for a 15-unit, 16-lot subdivision for
Area 3 of the Kestrel Park Subdivision, including a remainder parcel which included identified future
phasing Areas #4 - #7 (PA-T1-2020-00113). This area or phase of the master plan consists of attached
and detached cottage homes which have been completed.
In 2025, the Planning Commission approved an Outline Plan approval for a 15 lot Performance Standards
Subdivision, including a Site Design Review for 16 multi-family apartments, and Variancewas approved
(PA-T2-2024-00054). Following the Outline Plan application, the area of the subject development, Area
7, was eliminated from the proposal and deferred for future developmentproposal. This received
approval in 2025. Grading, drainage, street, and utility plans were included in these previoussubmittal.
Theplans werecoordinated and designed in concert with various service agencies and City staff. Those
infrastructure improvements and utility installationwithin the larger subdivision area are currently
under construction.
Page 2 of 19
Total Page Number: 35
Request:
Request for approval of an Outline and Final Plan for Performance Standards Subdivision (PSO) to create
four residential lots. Each lot is proposed to be developed with attached residential. Two lots are
proposed with duplex units and two lots are proposed with a three-unit, triplex building as shown in the
submitted architectural plans and solar analysis. Site Design Review approval is requested for the two
triplex developments.
The lot numbering is in sequence with the Lot numbering within Kestrel Park Phase 3.
Units Proposed: 11
Lot 13 – Building 2: Triplex (3 units)
Lot Size: 3,469 sq. ft.
Building size: 1,350.2 sq. ft.
Total coverage: 4,373.4 sq. ft.
Lot 14 – Building 1: Duplex (2 units)
Lot Size: 2,954 sq. ft.
Building size: 1,089.9 sq. ft.
Total coverage: 1,565.9 sq. ft.
Lot 15 – Building 4: Triplex (3 units)
Lot Size: 5,636 sq. ft.
Building size: 1,448.94 sq. ft.
Total coverage: 4,022.94 sq. ft.
Lot 16 – Building 3: Triplex (3 units)
Lot Size: 3,588 sq. ft.
Building size: 1,616 sq. ft.
Total coverage: 2,266 sq. ft.
The proposed number of units remains within the allowed density range for Kestrel Park Phase III Areas
4–7 (23.66–43.56 units total).
The proposed buildings provide strong street-facing entries and articulated façades consistent with
North Mountain Neighborhood Design Standards.
The development site slopes downhill toward the west and south. To work with the existing terrain,
each building is designed with a daylight-basement foundation that steps up with the hillside. This
design approach reduces the need for tall retaining walls, helps maintain a comfortable, pedestrian
friendly building height and mass, and provides an organic transition between structures and the
natural topography.
Page 3 of 19
Total Page Number: 36
The proposed project complies with Ashland’s solar access performance standard requirements that
have been applied within the North Mountain Neighborhood. Solar diagrams and corresponding
illustrations have been provided within the Solar Analysis sheets to demonstrate compliance with the
City’s Solar Performance standards. These graphics show how each building’s height, placement, and
relationship to surrounding lots meet standard A solar access criteria without encroaching on
neighboring properties passive solar and solar generating capabilities. The proposal for Buildings 2 and
4 includes the use of a modified solar setback to allow limited shadowing of Buildings 1 and 3 to the
north, consistent with the “Millpond Standard” or North Mountain Standard, which permits shadow to
encroach up the south wall of the structure to the north by up to five feet above the finished floor
elevation. Supporting drawings have been included to illustrate how this standard is satisfied.
There is adequate parking for the development provided through on-street parking bays located along
the frontages of Patton Lane and head-in parking accessed from the public alley to the east. These bays
are incorporated into the street design to serve residents and visitors while maintaining an efficient
and walkable neighborhood environment.
On the following pages, findings of fact addressing the City of Ashland’s Performance Options Subdivision
Criteria for an Outline Plan Subdivision (Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) 18.3.9.040 A.3), Final Plan
Subdivision (AMC 18.3.9.040 B.5.), and Site Review Criteria (AMC 18.5.2.050) and Tree Removal (AMC
18.5.5.040) are provided. For clarity, the criteria are in Times New Roman font and the applicant’s
responses are in Calibri font.
Thank you for your consideration,
Amy Gunter
Rogue Planning & Development Services, LLC
541-951-4020
Amygunter@rogueplanning.com
Page 4 of 19
Total Page Number: 37
Findings of Fact
Ashland Municipal Code (AMC)
AMC 18.3.9.040 A.3. Outline Plan Approval Criteria
a. The development meets all applicable ordinance requirements of the City.
Finding:
The proposed subdivision meets all applicable ordinance requirements of the City of Ashland. As
permitted under the Performance Standards Option, the design provides a more flexible and innovative
development pattern than conventional zoning standards allow, while maintaining full compliance with
all mandatory criteria. Within the Kestrel Park Subdivision there is a mixture of housing types with a
planned range of densities. The project reflects the intent of the PSO by emphasizing energy-efficient
construction, architectural variety, and site design that works with existing topography rather than
against it. Buildings are stepped with the hillside to reduce cut and fill, maintain an appropriate scale,
and integrate smoothly with surrounding development.
The subdivision also upholds the PSO requirement to provide a quality of life equal to or greater than
that achievable under standard zoning. The proposal continues the established development pattern of
the North Mountain Neighborhood and Kestrel Park by incorporating pedestrian-oriented building
fronts, and connected streets. These elements reinforce the character of nearby neighborhoods such as
North Mountain, Ashland Village, Clay Creek Gardens, and Beach Creek—other successful PSO
developments that prioritize porches, walkability, and visually engaging streetscapes.
Finally, the design reduces the impact of development on the natural and built environment. Although
this portion of Phase III contains fewer natural features than earlier phases of Kestrel Park, the project
responds sensitively to the site’s east-to-west slope and avoids unnecessary grading by incorporating
daylight-basement building designs. Street and pedestrian connections align with the existing
neighborhood framework, limiting disruption and ensuring compatibility with the surrounding
residential pattern.
b. Adequate key City facilities can be provided including water, sewer, paved access to and through the
development, electricity, urban storm drainage, police and fire protection, and adequate transportation;
and that the development will not cause a City facility to operate beyond capacity.
Finding:
All of the site’s necessary utilities extend to the subject property from the various public utility
easements and street rights-of-way surrounding the site. Existing public utilities with capacity to service
the proposed housing units have been designed and installed during the construction of the abutting
streets and alleys.
Page 5 of 19
Total Page Number: 38
The attached preliminary Civil Plans illustrate the various utilities and their extension to the proposed
units. The project’s Civil Engineer has communicated with City staff to ensure the subject infrastructure
needs meet City standards and address all capacity requirements. At the time of the Final Plan submittal,
as well as the Engineering Departments final sign-off of the street construction drawings, the plans will
be further refined and formalized.
c. The existing and natural features of the land; such as wetlands, floodplain corridors, ponds, large trees,
rock outcroppings, etc., have been identified in the plan of the development and significant features have
been included in the common open space, common areas, and unbuildable areas.
Finding:
The applicants have evaluated the site for existing natural features, including wetlands, floodplain
corridors, mature trees, ponds, and other significant environmental elements. This portion of Phase III
contains no identified wetlands, riparian corridors, notable tree stands, rock outcroppings, or other
significant natural features.
d. The development of the land will not prevent adjacent land from being developed for the uses shown
in the Comprehensive Plan.
Finding:
The subject property is surrounded on all sides by urbanized lands in compliance with the City’s
Comprehensive Plan, including existing residential subdivisions to the north, east and west. As such, the
development of the subject property will not prevent adjacent land from being developed for the uses
shown in the Comprehensive Plan.
e.There are adequate provisions for the maintenance of common open space and common areas, if
required or provided, and that if developments are done in phases that the early phases have the same or
higher ratio of amenities as proposed in the entire project.
Finding:
Most of the Kestrel Park Subdivision’s open space areas have been incorporated within the initial Phase
I and Phase II areas. No open space areas are proposed in Phase III, but common areas do exist in Areas
#6 for shared driveways, common landscaping and irrigation as it relates to the individual parcels
occupied with multi-family housing.
f. The proposed density meets the base and bonus density standards established under this chapter.
Finding:
The proposed subdivision complies with the base density standards established for the North Mountain
Multi-Family (NM-MF) zoning district and the density requirements allocated to Kestrel Park Phase III
Page 6 of 19
Total Page Number: 39
(Areas 4–7). The development includes 11 dwelling units, which falls fully within the approved density
range of 23.66 to 43.56 units for the combined Phase III areas. The Planning Commission decision in 2025
notes the required density of Area 7 requiring between 1.44 – 18.92 dwelling units (PA-T2-2024-00054,
Findings of Fact, Section 2.4.6; Pg. 7). No bonus density is requested or required to achieve this total.
Kestrel Park Density Allocation Table
NM Zone NM-G NM-R-1-7.5 NM-MF
Acres 5.99 ac 2.76 ac 4.74 ac
Dwelling Units Per Acre - 3.6 12
75% to 110% Base Density - 7.42–11.02 42.66 – 62.56 ((56.88 -
Requirement base))
Approved Density (Phase I –-11 4
Areas 1 & 2)
Approved Density (Phase II – - - 15
Area 3)
Permitted Density (Phase III – - 23.66* – 43.56**
Areas 4 - 7)
g. The development complies with the street standards.
Finding:
The proposed streets comply with the Planning Commission’s previously approved findings of fact as
noted below from the original Kestrel Park Subdivision’s 2019 approval (PA-T1-2019-00075).
h. The proposed development meets the common open space standards established under section
18.4.4.070. Common open space requirements may be satisfied by public open space in accordance with
section 18.4.4.070 if approved by the City of Ashland.
Finding:
The Kestrel Park Subdivision is 13.48 acres in size of which 5.13 acres was dedicated as open space (Bear
Creek Riparian Area) and another .7 acres was platted as private open space for the subdivision’s on-site
wetlands and a couple of smaller landscape areas - located at various street corners as common
neighborhood landscaping, for a total of 5.82 acres or roughly 43% of the subdivision’s acreage of which
only 8% is required with Performance Standard Subdivisions and an additional 4% for Site Review
applications. Overall, the proposal complies with the open space provisions noted in Chapter 18.4.4.070.
Proximity to a public park also warrants an exception to common open space requirements if the above
were to be not found sufficient.
AMC 18.3.9.040 B.5. Final Plan Approval Criteria
Page 7 of 19
Total Page Number: 40
a.The number of dwelling units vary no more than ten percent of those shown on the approved outline
plan, but in no case shall the number of units exceed those permitted in the outline plan.
Finding:
The number of dwelling units remains the same as originally proposed and adopted with the Outline
Plan.
b. The yard depths and distances between main buildings vary no more than ten percent of those shown
on the approved outline plan, but in no case shall these distances be reduced below the minimum
established within this ordinance.
Finding:
This standard is met.
c.The common open spaces vary no more than ten percent of that provided on the outline plan.
Finding:
This standard is met.
d. The building size does not exceed the building size shown on the outline plan by more than ten percent.
Finding:
This standard is met.
e.The building elevations and exterior materials are in conformance with the purpose and intent of this
ordinance and the approved outline plan.
Finding:
This standard is met.
f. That the additional standards which resulted in the awarding of bonus points in the outline plan approval
have been included in the final plan with substantial detail to ensure that the performance level committed
to in the outline plan will be achieved.
Finding:
No density bonus points are being requested.
g. The development complies with the street standards.
Page 8 of 19
Total Page Number: 41
Finding:
This standard is met.
h. Nothing in this section shall limit reduction in the number of dwelling units or increased open space;
provided, that if this is done for one phase, the number of dwelling units shall not be transferred to another
phase, nor the common open space reduced below that permitted in the outline plan.
Finding:
The proposed plan has not been changed as it relates to density allocations.
SITE DESIGN REVIEW
Chapter 18.5.2
18.5.2.050 Approval Criteria
An application for Site Design Review shall be approved if the proposal meets the criteria in subsections
A, B, C, and D below. The approval authority may, in approving the application, impose conditions of
approval, consistent with the applicable criteria.
A. Underlying Zone. The proposal complies with all of the applicable provisions of the underlying zone
(part 18.2), including but not limited to: building and yard setbacks, lot area and dimensions, density and
floor area, lot coverage, building height, building orientation, architecture, and other applicable standards.
Finding:
The subject application complies with all of the applicable provisions of the NM-R-1-5 zone, including
building and yard setbacks from the parent parcel, density, lot coverage, building height, building
orientation, architecture, solar access and all other applicable standards.
B. Overlay Zones. The proposal complies with applicable overlay zone requirements (part 18.3).
Finding:
The subject property is located within the North Mountain Neighborhood District and is therefore
subject to the applicable standards of AMC 18.3.5. The proposal complies with all relevant provisions of
the district, including dimensional requirements, building orientation standards, parking provisions, and
the minimum and maximum density criteria. In addition, the supplemental approval criteria for Site
Design and Architectural Review contained in AMC 18.3.5.030(C) are addressed in the following findings.
North Mountain Neighborhood:
18.3.5.030 Site Plan and Architectural Review Procedure
Page 9 of 19
Total Page Number: 42
C. Supplemental Approval Criteria. In addition to the criteria for approval required by other
sections of this ordinance, applications within the NM district shall also meet all of the following
criteria.
1. The application demonstrates conformity to the general design requirements of the
North Mountain Neighborhood Plan, including density, transportation, building design,
and building orientation.
2. The application complies with the specific design requirements as provided in the North
Mountain Neighborhood Design Standards.
Finding:
The proposal complies with the specific design requirements of the North Mountain
Neighborhood Design Standards. These standards address permitted building types,
façade design, pedestrian orientation, solar access, open space relationships, and
dimensional requirements within the NM district.
The submitted architectural plans, elevations, and solar analysis demonstrate compliance
with these standards. Buildings provide appropriately scaled façades and pedestrian-
oriented elements consistent with required design guidelines. Solar compliance is
demonstrated through the submitted solar access diagrams showing Class A compliance
and, where applicable, the modified solar standard permitted within the North Mountain
district. Building placement and massing respect required setbacks, height limitations,
and orientation requirements.
Furthermore, the subdivision layout and building configuration maintain the intended
neighborhood structure by placing buildings close to streets, reinforcing a strong
pedestrian environment, and incorporating architectural styles compatible with existing
development in Kestrel Park. All dimensional and design requirements applicable to the
NM district have been met or exceeded.
C. Site Development and Design Standards. The proposal complies with the applicable Site Development
and Design Standards of part 18.4, except as provided by subsection E, below.
Finding:
The proposed application complies with all applicable Site Development and Design Standards of
Chapter 18.4, where applicable. Additional Findings have been included below
Chapter 18.4.2
BUILDING PLACEMENT, ORIENTATION, AND DESIGN
18.4.2.030
Residential Development
Page 10 of 19
Total Page Number: 43
C. Building Orientation. Residential buildings that are subject to the provisions of this chapter
shall conform to all of the following standards. See also solar orientation standards in section
18.4.8.050.
1. Building Orientation to Street. Dwelling units shall have their primary orientation
toward a street. Where residential buildings are located within 20 feet of a street, they shall
have a primary entrance opening toward the street and connected to the right-of-way via
an approved walkway.
2. Limitation on Parking Between Primary Entrance and Street. Automobile circulation or
off-street parking is not allowed between the building and the street. Parking areas shall be
located behind buildings, or on one or both sides.
3. Build-to Line. Where a new building is proposed in a zone that requires a build-to line or
maximum front setback yard, except as otherwise required for clear vision at intersections, the
building shall comply with the build-to line standard.
Finding:
All dwelling units have been oriented toward the adjacent street or internal pedestrian
circulation routes to maintain a strong relationship between building entries and the public
realm. Where buildings front a public street, primary entrances face the street and are connected
to the right-of-way through clearly defined walkways that promote pedestrian access and
visibility.
No off-street parking is located between the buildings and the street.
The project also complies with the applicable build-to line standard, placing building façades
within the required front yard range to establish a continuous and cohesive street edge.
D. Garages. The following standards apply to garages, carports, canopies, and other permanent
and temporary structures used for parking or storing vehicles, including those parking and vehicle
storage structures accessory to detached single-family dwellings. The standards are intended to
balance residents’ desire for a convenient, safe, and private vehicle access to their homes with the
public interest in maintaining safe and aesthetically pleasing streetscapes. The standards therefore
promote pedestrian safety and visibility of public ways, while addressing aesthetic concerns
associated with street-facing garages. For the purpose of this subsection, a garage opening is
considered to be facing a street where the opening is parallel to or within 45 degrees of the street
right-of-way line.
Finding:
No garages are proposed.
Page 11 of 19
Total Page Number: 44
E. Building Materials. Building materials and paint colors should be compatible with the
surrounding area. Very bright primary or neon-type paint colors, which attract attention to the
building or use, are unacceptable.
Finding:
The proposed building material includes Cementous lap siding with multi-groove Hardie board
panel elements to enhance entry areas and patio areas. There is composite shingle roofing and
standing seam metal roofing over covered patio areas (flat roofs sections). Neutral, natural paint
colors compatible with the surround area provide for a cohesive building design that fits within
the North Mountain Neighborhood.
F. Streetscape. One street tree chosen from the street tree list shall be placed for each 30 feet of
frontage for that portion of the development fronting the street pursuant to subsection 18.4.4.030.E.
Finding:
Street tree planting plan compliant with the street tree spacing standards are provided on the
project Landscape Plans (L. 1.0).
G. Landscaping and Recycle/Refuse Disposal Areas. Landscaping and recycle/refuse disposal
areas shall be provided pursuant to chapter 18.4.4.
Finding:
See findings addressing this criteria further below.
H. Open Space. Common and/or private open space is required to be provided pursuant to section
18.4.4.070.
Finding:
Adequate open space includes common area, subdivision park area and private open space. See
more details in the open space section below.
Chapter 18.4.3
PARKING, ACCESS, AND CIRCULATION
18.4.3.040 -Vehicle and Bicycle Quantity Standards
Finding:
There are 12 off-street parking spaces provided via the alley. Additional on-street parking is
provided via parking bays on Patton Lane. The multi-family design standards allow for a maximum
Page 12 of 19
Total Page Number: 45
of two vehicle parking spaces per unit. The proposal provides less than one vehicle parking space
per dwelling.
These parking spaces are near the dwelling units with the required landscape and distance
separation to buffer the parking spaces from the dwellings.
18.4.3.050
Accessible Parking Spaces
Finding:
There is one, Van Accessible ADA parking space within the parking area accessed from the alley.
The accessible parking space will be signed and comply with required dimensional and slope
criteria and is adjacent to pedestrian access to the buildings.
18.4.3.070
Bicycle Parking Standards
Finding:
A total of 16 bicycle parking spaces provided which meets the requirement for three triplex
buildings, with two-bedroom units. The bicycle parking spaces are covered shelters with U racks.
There are six bike parking spaces for Lot 14 on Lot 14, in the northwest corner of the property
near the north most unit adjacent to the stairs. The other bike parking spaces are located in
adjacent to the parking area. These bike parking spaces are accessible via the public right of ways
and internal pathways. All bicycle parking spaces are designed to comply with the standards from
18.4.3.070 including spacing, coverage, lighting and are placed in locations that provide
maximum visibility from the units and in various locations based on the need of the tenants.
18.4.3.080
Vehicle Area Design
Finding:
There are 12 parking spaces on site provided as head-in parking spaces, accessed from the public
alley. Additional parking is provided via the on-street parking bays on the right-of-way of Patton
Lane.
The proposed parking area complies with the parking area design standards. There are landscape
bays to provide shade trees. The vehicle parking spaces comply with minimum dimensional
standards of 9’X18’ for standard spaces and 8’X16’ for compact spaces. The spaces are designed
Page 13 of 19
Total Page Number: 46
to mitigate environmental impacts through the use of increased shade from the large stature
tree canopy to provide more than 50% of the parking area with shade. There are no conflicts with
overhead utilities and the trees.
Stormwater will be removed from the parking areas via catch basins at the low points in the
paving. The required 40 percent of the parking spaces will be EV ready.
18.4.3.090
Pedestrian Access and Circulation
Finding:
All walkways within the development are continuous and designed to get pedestrians safely to
their front doors, the bike parking shelters, and/or the trach enclosure. The walkways comply
with minimum width standards.
Chapter 18.4.4
LANDSCAPING, LIGHTING, AND SCREENING
Finding:
A landscape plan is provided demonstrating compliance with all required planting standards,
including coverage, species selection, street trees, lighting, trash, and irrigation provisions.
With respect to the open space requirements, the proposed Phase III development continues the
established pattern of the Kestrel Park Subdivision, which has already dedicated and provided
substantial open space areas as part of the approved Phase I and Phase II improvements.
The Kestrel Park Subdivision encompasses 13.48 acres, of which 5.13 acres were dedicated as
public open space (Bear Creek Riparian Area) and an additional 0.7 acres were platted as private
open space for the subdivision’s on-site wetlands and smaller landscaped common areas
dispersed throughout the neighborhood. In total, 5.82 acres, or approximately 43 percent of the
entire subdivision acreage, has been set aside as functional open space, significantly exceeding
the 8 percent required for Performance Standard Subdivisions and the additional 4 percent
required for Site Review applications. These areas were intentionally planned to serve the
recreational, environmental, and aesthetic needs of the subdivision’s residents and surrounding
community, providing opportunities for walking, passive recreation, riparian access, bird
watching, and future connectivity to the Bear Creek Greenway extension.
Phase III is eligible for an exemption from additional on-site open space because the
development is located immediately adjacent to and integrated with this established network of
Page 14 of 19
Total Page Number: 47
open space and with the large public park facilities serving the North Mountain and Kestrel Park
neighborhoods. The neighborhood’s public park resources are directly accessible to the residents
of Phase III and provide more than adequate recreational amenities to satisfy the open space
needs that would otherwise be required within the project boundary itself. These existing public
and private open space resources function as extensions of the Phase III development and are
readily accessible through internal sidewalks, shared accessways, and pedestrian linkages.
While no new subdivisional open space areas are proposed within Phase III, the design
incorporates shared common areas, as well as outdoor private amenities. Every building within
Phase III includes its own private patio space, ensuring dedicated outdoor living areas in addition
to the extensive common and public open space surrounding the subdivision. These private
patios complement the broader open space system and contribute to residents’ access to
functional outdoor environments for daily use.
Chapter 18.4.5
TREE PRESERVATION AND PROTECTION
Finding:
A non-hazard, multi-stem, 10” DBH Cherry Tree that was approved for removal in the Outline
Plan Approval was not removed due to the removal of Area 7 from the Plan. The tree appears to
be a shrub-like in nature likely due to repeated mowing preventing a single stem with a branching
structure typical of a Cherry tree.
This tree is located within the area of site disturbance for the construction of parking and
dwellings within Area 7. Per PA-T202024-00054, staff and the Tree Management Advisory
Committee ( MAC) previously reviewed tree, its location and condition and questioned if the
proposed tree removal was in fact a regulated tree, while also unanimously recommending
approval of the proposed removal. Based on the location the proposed removal meets the
criteria of approval for removal as it is located within the building envelope.
The tree removal will not cause a significant decline in tree canopy coverage of fruit trees in the
vicinity. The tree is not part of any windbreak, and its removal will not cause erosion. The
proposed tree planting plan mitigates the loss of the Cherry tree and replaces the canopy of this
multi-stemmed Cherry tree.
Chapter 18.4.6
PUBLIC FACILITIES
Page 15 of 19
Total Page Number: 48
Finding:
Public facilities necessary to serve the subject property, including street improvements, storm
drainage and surface water management, sanitary sewer, potable water service, and other
utilities, are provided in accordance with design standards. The street layout and improvements
proposed as part of this subdivision align with the planned extensions of Patton Lane, Nandina
Street, and the alley and are consistent with the City’s street design expectations, including
connectivity, and circulation.
Chapter 18.4.7
SIGNS
Finding:
No signs are proposed.
Chapter 18.4.8
SOLAR ACCESS
Finding:
The proposal complies with the solar access requirements of AMC 18.4.8. A complete Solar
Analysis has been submitted illustrating how building height, placement, and site slope
demonstrate the City’s solar access performancestandards. The project also utilizes the modified
solar setback provisions allowed within the North Mountain Neighborhood (Millpond/North
Mountain Standard), which permit limited shadowing on the south wall of adjacent buildings up
to five feet above finished floor elevation of the upper floor level.
The application seeks flexibility to allow for the shadow of the adjacent buildings on the lots to
shade the structure to the north more than a six-foot fence would. Each building is not designed
but the request would be to allow a five-foot shadow up the adjacent south wall of the structure
to the north. Separation between the buildings is preferred to large spans of attached wall
housing and the introduction of property lines which necessitates the Solar Performance
Standard.
The submitted diagrams demonstrate that the buildings conform to these standards, and
therefore the application satisfies AMC 18.4.8 – Solar Access.
D. City Facilities. The proposal complies with the applicable standards in section 18.4.6 Public Facilities,
and that adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, electricity, urban storm drainage, paved
access to and throughout the property, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to the subject
property.
Page 16 of 19
Total Page Number: 49
Finding:
All of the site’s necessary utilities extend to the subject property from the various public utility
easements and street rights-of-way surrounding the site. Existing public utilities with capacity to service
the proposed housing units have been designed and installed during the construction of the abutting
streets and alleys.
The attached Civil Plans illustrate the various utilities and their extension to the proposed units. The
The project's Civil Engineer has communicated with City staff to ensure the subject infrastructure needs
meet City standards and address all capacity requirements. At the time of the Final Engineering Plan
submittal, final sign-off of the street construction drawings, the plans will be further refined but remain
consistent with the drawing included herein.
Water: The property is currently served by eight-inch water mains that will be able to connect into the
proposed layout. The existing water lines extend to and through Nandina Street and Patton Lane.
Sewer: The property is currently served by an eight-inch sanitary sewer main extending from Nandina
Street and Patton Lane.
Electricity: The applicants have met with the Electric Department and discussed the backbone
installation of a three-phase system to serve the development. The Electric Department has suggested
that the applicant carefully consider the needs for later phases of the development, including such
details as accessory units and chargers for electric vehicles, will be provided, up front as addressing these
in the initial infrastructure design will be more efficient and less costly than adding them after the fact
in a later phase. The applicants indicate that a final electrical distribution will be provided for review with
the Final Engineering Plan details.
Urban Storm Drainage: As with the various utilities, 12” storm drain facilities exist within the adjacent
rights-of-way abutting the property which collects urban run-off and transfers it down to a 12” main in
Kestrel Parkway and out to the subdivision’s storm water collection basin within the recently constructed
Bear Creek open space area.
Overall, the applicants contend adequate key City facilities can be provided including water, sewer,
paved access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, police and fire
protection, and adequate transportation. The development will not cause a City facility to operate
beyond capacity. Easements will be provided for public and private utilities that cross property lines.
E. Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards. The approval authority may approve
exceptions to the Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4 if the circumstances in either
subsection 1, 2, or 3, below, are found to exist.
Page 17 of 19
Total Page Number: 50
Finding:
Not applicable. The applicants are not requesting any exceptions to the Site Development and Design
Standards.
Page 18 of 19
Total Page Number: 51
Total Page Number: 52
53
Number:
Page
Total
Total Page Number: 54
55
Number:
Page
Total
56
Number:
Page
Total
57
Number:
Page
Total
58
Number:
Page
Total
59
Number:
Page
Total
60
Number:
Page
Total
61
Number:
Page
Total
62
Number:
Page
Total
63
Number:
Page
Total
64
Number:
Page
Total
65
Number:
Page
Total
66
Number:
Page
Total
67
Number:
Page
Total
68
Number:
Page
Total
69
Number:
Page
Total
70
Number:
Page
Total
Total Page Number: 89
Total Page Number: 90
91
Number:
Page
Total
92
Number:
Page
Total
93
Number:
Page
Total
Total Page Number: 94
Total Page Number: 95
Total Page Number: 96
97
Number:
Page
Total
EFDFNCFS!2:-!3136