The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1996-0806 SS MINBEFORE THE ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL AUGUST 6, 1996 IN THE MATTER OF PLANNING ACTION #96-047, REQUEST FOR OUTLINE AND FINAL PLAN APPROVAL OF SIX-LOT SUBDIVISION UNDER THE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OPTION LOCATED AT 1452 OREGON STREET. APPLICANT: EVAN ARCHERD FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND ORDERS RECITALS: 1) Tax lot 6600 of 391E 15BA is located at 1452 Oregon Street and is zoned R-1-7.5; Single Family Residential. 2) The applicant is proposing a six-lot subdivision under the Performance Standards Options. Site improvements are outlined on the site plan on file at the Community Development Department. 3) The criteria for Outline Plan approval are as follows: a) That the development meets a~ applicable ordinance requirements of the City of Ashland. b) That 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) That 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) That the development of the land will not prevent adjacent land from being developed for the uses shown in the Comprehensive Plan. e) That 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) That the proposed density meets the base and bonus density standards established under this Chapter. 4) The Planning Commission, following proper public notice, held a Public Hearing on May 14, 1996, at which time testimony was received and exhibits were presented. The Planning Commission approved the application subject to conditions pertaining to the appropriate development of the site. 5) The action was properly appealed to the Ashland City Council by surrounding neighbors and property owners in a timely manner. 6) The Ashland City Council, following proper public notice, held a Public Hearing on August 6, 1996, at which time testimony was received and exhibits were presented. The City Council denied the application for failure to meet the density bonus requirements for open space. Now, therefore, the Ashland City Council finds, concludes and recommends as follows: SECTION 1. EXHIBITS For the purposes of reference to these Findings, the attached index of exhibits, data, and testimony will be used. Staff Exhibits lettered with an "S" Proponent's Exhibits, lettered with a "P" Opponent's Exhibits, lettered with an "O" Hearing Minutes, Notices, Miscellaneous Exhibits lettered with an "M" SECTION 2. CONCLUSORY FINDINGS 2.1 The Ashland City Council finds that it has received all information necessary to make a decision based on the Staff Report, public hearing testimony and the exhibits received. 2.2 The City Council finds that the proposal for a six-lot subdivision does not meet all applicable criteria for approval under the Performance Standards Options chapter 18.88. Specifically, the Council finds that the applicant has failed to demonstrate that the open space proposed for a density bonus under 18.88.040. B.3.b meets the purpose as stated in 18.88.040.B.3.b.1. 2.3 Specifically, the Council makes the following findings in relation to the criteria for approval: a) That the development meets all applicable ordinance requirements of the City of Ashland. Setback requirements along the perimeter of the project will be identical to those found in the R-1-7.5 zoning district. A rear yard setback of 10 feet per story is required, with a minimum front yard setback of 15 feet, excluding garages and porches. Condition #17 requires that the building envelopes be modified to comply with the above setback requirements. Compliance with the City's solar setback standard will be evaluated at the time of individual building permit submission. All lots with a slope of less than 15 percent in the northerly direction will be required to comply with solar setback standard "A". As indicated on the Outline Plan, the two private flag drives serving the four interior lots will be paved to the widths described under 18.88.050. Neither driveway will exceed a maximum slope of 15 percent. b) That 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. Paved access to the project is provided via Oregon and Windsor Streets which are paved, with curb and gutter. City sewer, water, electric and storm drain facilities are located within the public rights-of-way of Oregon and Windsor Streets. Also, a 15 inch storm drain runs down the west side of the property. A concrete walkway will be installed through the project, providing pedestrian and bicycle access between Oregon and Windsor Streets. c) That 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, An inventory has been compiled of the existing trees on the property. A site visit was conducted by Planning Staff and Don Todt of the Ashland Parks Department to better ascertain the potential impacts on the trees from the development. The project incorporates as many existing trees into the project design as possible, given the underlying zoning. As stated in the applicant's findings, only five out of 58 trees will be removed to accommodate improvements associated with the project. Other than trees, no other significant natural features have been identified on the property. d) That the development of the land will not prevent adjacent land from being developed for the uses shown in the Comprehensive Plan. The adjacent properties west of the project have been developed consistent with the permitted uses of the zoning district. Each property has existing, legal access onto an abutting city street that will not be impeded by the proposal. The two properties east of the project site have legal access on Oregon and Windsor Streets. No evidence has been presented which would infer that the proposal would prevent the adjacent parcels from being developed in accordance with the zoning district. e) That 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. Common areas and mutual access driveways will be maintained through the Homeowner's Association. A copy of the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for the development, outlining maintenance responsibilities, will be submitted for approval prior to signature of the final survey plat. f) That the proposed density meets the base and bonus density standards established under this Chapter. The Council finds that the applicant's request fails to meet the burden of proof regarding the density calculations related to the granting of a density bonus for open space. Density calculations, as proposed by the applicant and modified by the planning staff, are as follows: Base Density = 1.398 acres x 3.6 du/acre = 5.03 units Conservation = 15% x 5.03 = .754 units Bonus Open Space = (7.4% - 2%) x 5.03 = (4554 sq. ft.) Total = .271 units 6.05 units Utilizing the open space density bonus option, the applicant applied for a 0.271 unit increase in the base density. The City Council finds that the open space, as designed and presented by the applicant for this project, fails to provide a "significant amenity to project residents", and that the applicant failed to prove that '~3roject residents will realistically interact with the open space on a day-to-day basis." Therefore, the Council denies the density bonus for open space, reducing the project density by 0.271 units. This reduces the total number of units to less that six. The project total, as requested by the applicant, is six lots. The proposed density for the project then fails to meet the "base and bonus density standards established under this Chapter." Further, the Council finds that the open space, as configured, does not constitute an area that could "be sold as individual lots" and therefore fails to meet the purpose requirement of section 18.88.030.B.3.b.1. The proposed open space constitutes an area smaller than the average lot size of the project. Therefore, the Council denies the credit for an open space density bonus. SECTION 3. DECISION 3.1 Based on the record of the Public Hearing on this matter, the Ashland City Council concludes that the six-lot subdivision under the Performance Standards Options, as proposed by the applicant, fails to meet the criteria for approval. Therefore, based on our overall conclusions, we deny Planning Action #96-047. Mayor Attest - City Recorder Date