HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-04-07 Historic PacketCiTY OF
SHLAND
HISTORIC COMMISSION
Agenda
April 7, 2004
II.
III.
IV.
Vi
VI.
VII.
CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 p.m. - SISKIYOU ROOM in Community Development/Engineering Services
Building (51 Winburn Way)
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: March 3, 2003
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
PLANNING ACTION 2004-026 is a request for Site Review approval for the construction of a two-story,
mixed-use (Commercial & Residential) commercial building, located at 81 Central Avenue between
Helman and Water Streets. Comprehensive Plan Designation: Employment; Zoning: E-l; Assessor's
Map #: 39 1E 04 CC; Tax Lot: 7200 and 5400.
APPLICANT: Wes and Lucinda Vail
PLANNING ACTION 2004-018 is a request for Site Review to construct a two-story, 1800 square foot
addition to the existing commercial building located at the corner of Pioneer and "A" Streets at 322
Pioneer Street. The building addition is located on the east side of the existing Gathering Glass Studio
(and associated manufacturing area) and consists of 1,050 square feet of commercial space and a 750
square foot one-bedroom apartment. Comprehensive Plan Designation: Employment; Zoning: E-l;
Assessor's Map #: 39 1E 09 BA; Tax Lot: 13900.
APPLICANT: Al Carlson and Sandra
OLD BUSINESS:
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
Review Board ~ appointments/volunteers
Project Assignments for Planning Actions
Articles for City Source
National Historic Preservation Week - New Frontiers in Preservation - May 3-.9, 2004
Possible National Register Nomination for Lithia Springs Property
Final Carnegie Library Restoration Work
NEW BUSINESS
COMMISSION ITEMS NOT ON AGENDA
ANNOUNCEMENTS:
A.
Bo
The next Historic Commission meeting will be on May 5, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. in the Siskiyou
Room.
The Oregon Heritage Conference is May 5-8, 2004 in Ashland.
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the
Community Development office at 541-488-5305 (TTY phone number is 1-800-735-2900). Notification 72 hours pdor to the meeting
will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title1).
Historical Open Houses
in Jackson County
April 2004
Kent-Holt House
J.W. Merritt Store and House
Peerless Rooms
John M. Easterling Building
11 Corning Street April 3 1:00 to 5:00
Medford
117 East Pine Street
Central Point
April 9 11:00 to 4:00
243 Fourth Street April 12 1:00 to 5:00
Ashland
552 "A" Street April 24 10:00 to 5:00
Ashland
NOTE:
The monthly open house list for the State of Oregon is available on the Heritage Conservation website. To
look up other open house sites in the state, go to ~w.shpo.state.or. us, click on State Historic
Preservation Office, then click on the Open House'"'Sc'hedule on your right.
CITY OF
kSHLAND
Draft ASHLAND HISTORIC COMMISSION
Minutes
March 3, 2004
Community Development/Engineering Services Building- 51 Winburn Way- Siskiyou Room
Historic Commissioners Present: Chair Dale Shostrom, Keith Swink, Tom Giordano, Alex Krach, Joanne
Krippaehne, Jay Leighton, Rob Saladoff, Terry Skibby and Sam Whitford.
Absent Members: None
Council Liaison: John Morrison (absent)
High School Liaison: None
SOU Liaison: None
Staff Present: Associate Planner Mark Knox and Secretary Sonja Akerman
NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION WEEK DISCUSSION
The Historic Commission met at 5:00 in order to discuss and vote on the nominations for awards that will be
presented during National Historic Preservation Week, which is May 3-9 this year. Also ,discussed was the
schedule of events. Since the Oregon Hedtage Commission will be having its annual conference dudng this time
period (May 6-8) in Ashland, the Commission talked about coordinating some of the events in order to get
participation from the people that will be attending. Knox stated he will be talking with Kyle Jansson (Oregon
Heritage Commission) next week about this. He also encouraged the Commissioners to attend as many
sessions as possible. Among the walking tours that were suggested included the Skidmore-Academy District,
the Railroad District, Brad Roupp's property on Oak Street, the new fire station, and the seismic
upgrading/restoration projects at Paddington Station and the Lithia Spdngs Hotel. Awards will be presented at
noon on Friday, May 7 at the new fire station.
Awards will be presented as follows: Civic- 455 Siskiyou Boulevard (new fire station); Commercial Restoration
- 138 North Main Street; Historically Compatible New Commercial Construction - 322 Pioneer Street (new glass
blowing building); Individual(s) - Hank Henry (posthumously) and Carol Barrett; Historically Compatible New
Residential Construction - 385 Vista Street (Reitinger house); Residential Restoration - 117 Almond Street and
123 W. Hersey Street; Historically Compatible Residential Addition - 115 Nob Hill and 658 Siskiyou Boulevard;
and Historically Compatible Accessory Building - 8 Beach Avenue and 180 Meade Street.
Skibby volunteered to conduct a walking tour of the Skidmore-Academy Distdct on May 3rd and 4th, at 10:00 and
2:00 respectively. Krach suggested inviting people who will be attending the Oregon Heritage Commission to
attend the next Historic Commission meeting on May 5th if they arrive the day before.
CALL TO ORDER
At 6:50 p.m., Chairperson Dale Shostrom called the meeting to order.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Kdppaehne moved to approve the February 4, 2004 minutes as submitted. With a second by Krach, the motion
was approved with all voting aye except Leighton and Whitford, who abstained because tlley were absent at
the February meeting.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
None.
Ashland Historic Commission Minutes
March 3, 2004
ITEMS NOT ON AGENDA
CITY OF
YkSHLAND
Wes and Cindy Vail presented plans for a proposed building on the old railroad spur between VanNess and
Central Avenues and Helman and Water Streets. The Review Board had met with them earlier and after
receiving input, the Vails had made some modifications. They wanted to come before the full Commission to
get further direction prior to submitting their application for Planning Commission approval. Knox stated the
building will be similar to the one they recently built at 200 Helman Street.
Because the Review Board wanted more differences between the two buildings, the Vails are now proposing
to use random hardi..shingles for siding. They explained the brackets were removed because the design no
longer resembles the Italianate style that was used for the Helman Street building. They also incorporated an
entrance off Central Avenue. The Vails passed around pictures of buildings they would like to emulate with
brown shingles and (lark trim.
Discussion of hardi-plank lap siding v. shingled siding ensued. Most members preferred hardi-plank plank siding
to the hardi-shingle. If shingles are used on the proposed building, wood would be preferable. Since no windows
will be integrated into the west elevation, all members concurred it should at least have texture built in. They also
agreed the footprint and location are fine, as is the new entry.
OLD BUSINESS
Review Board - Following is the March schedule for the Review Board, which meets every Thursday from 3:00
to at least 3:30 p.m. in the Planning Department:
March 4th
March 11th
March 18th
March 25th
April! 1st
Skibby, Swink and Krippaehne
Skibby, Whitford and Shostrom
Skibby, Giordano and Saladoff
Skibby, Krach and Whitford
Skibby, Leighton and Swink
Proiect Assiqnments for Planninq Actions
PA #2000-120
PA #2002-100
PA #2002-125
PA #2003-0O5
PA #2003-035
PA #2003-045/110/122
PA #2003-090
PA #2003-094
PA #2003-108
PA #2003-092
PA #2003-152
PA #20O4-017
485 "A" Street (Steve Hoxmeier)
142 East Main Street (Earthly Goods)
44-N~JI'LI I Ex
oeco,,u Street -- '
35 S. Second Street (Winchester Inn)
230_/232 VanNess Ay,. ' '
-hompson~
45-Wimer Street-(Paut' Crafft)
Shostrom
Leighton
Krippaehne
-Shestm,m-,
-WhiCer~
';~lumfl-S~ee~ancy ~d and Ti,,mPBond)-
124 Alida Street (Kirt Meyer and Vadim Agakhanov) Krippaehne
44-N~.~th Second "' ....' '~ ~ '
364 Hargadine Street (Ken Kolar) Krach
Carneqie Library Restoration - There was nothing new to report.
Possible National Reqister Nomination for Lithia Springs Property- Shostrom reported he, Krippaehne and
Leighton had attended the February 23rd Parks Commission meeting and offered input on the historic site. The
Gun Club is requesting a lease extension in order to get a grant to build more buildings and berms. Shostrom
said he and Kdppaehne read prepared statements (these were included in the packet, along with the 1987 report
entitled "An Inventory, Historic Documentation, and Assessment of Cultural Resources at Lithia Springs and
Winburn Camp" by Nan Hannon and Clayton G. Lebow for the City of Ashland). He asked the Parks
Commission to address the following: 1) How have the historic features, as documented in the 1987 study, been
Ashland Historic Commission Minutes
March 3, 2004
CITY OF
SHLAND
affected by the Gun Club's stewardship? 2) Target bunkers appear to have been increased from 2 to 10 since
1987. Has this massive redistribution of soils compromised or destroyed the archeological study potential? 3)
What is the impact of lead and debds from gunshot activity?. Is an environmental evaluation needed to determine
the effects on soils and water quality?. The City has some experience in this regard, al[er a cleanup was
performed on the Reeder Pistol Range. 4) If there is an expensive environmental cleanup required, does the
Gun Club have sufficient funds to pay the costs involved? and 5) Are there alternative site. s for the Gun Club
activities which would have less impact on the areas of concern as listed above?
The Parks Commission will be touring the Lithia Springs site in April. Gun Club representatives and the Historic
Commission have also been invited.
Krippaehne stated she would like to let the Parks Commission know that there are others who are interested
in the property also. Questions she would like answered include 1) What are the proposed developments for
the property?. 2) What is used as the baseline for what the property looked like back in 19697 3) Who is
responsible for protecting the site as a resource? 4) What is to prevent further development in the same manner
as the development that has already happened in the past 35 years? 5) Who will be looking at the environmental
impacts? Someone needs to do this. She also declared the Gun Club needs to provide an overlay map of
development that has occurred on the property since 1969 because the lease states at its termination, the Gun
Club would need to surrender the property "in as good order and condition as when receiived..." In addition,
Shostrom stated the Parks Commission should know what the costs would be for clean up of the site. The Gun
Club should be asked to respond to all the above concerns.
It was also noted the City has divided a five-acre parcel from the original site, creating a separate tax lot that is
used for dumping rock and fill.
ADJOURNMENT
It was the unanimous decision of the Commission to adjourn the meeting at 9:10 p.m.
Ashland Historic Commission Minutes
March 3, 2004
The Ashland Planning Department preliminarily approved 'this If a hearing is requested, it will be scheduled for the following
requ,~st on March 24, 2004. This action will be revieWed by the
Ashland Planning Commission Hearings Board at 1:30 p.m. on
April 13, 2004 at the Ashland Civic Center, 1175 East Main
Street, Ashland, Oregon. No public testimony is allowed at this
review.
Any affected property owner or resident has a right to request, AT
NO CHARGE, a public hearing before the Ashland. Planning
Commission on this action.
To exercise this right, a WRITTEN request must be received in the
Planning Department, 51 Winburn Way, prior to 3:00 p.m. on April
5, 2004. The written request for the public hearing must include your
name, address, the file number of the planning action and the specific
grounds for which the decision should be reversed or modified, based on
the applicable criteria. If you do not SPECIFICALLY RECtUEST A
PUBLIC HEARING.by the time and date stated .above, there will be
no public testimony permitted.
If you have questions or comments concerning this request, please feel free to contact
Susan Yates at the Ashland Planning Department, at 541-552-2041.
month. 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 heari.ng.
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. Feilure 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.
A copy of the application, all documents and evidence relied upon by the applicant
and applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost and will be provided at
reasonable cost, if requested. A copy of the Staff Report will be available for
inspection seven days prio~ to the hearing and will be provided at reasonable cost, if
requested. All materials are available at the Ashland Planning Department,
Community Development and Engineering Services, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland,
Oregon 97520.
Our TTY phone number is 1-800-735-2900.
,
NOTE: Public comment concerning the project's landscaping plan will be taken on April 5, 2004 between 2:00
and 4:00p.m. at the Community Development and Engineering building located at 51 Winbu~x~ Way.
NOTE: This Planning Action will also be heard by the Ashland Historic Commission on April 7, 2'.004, 7:00 p.m.
in the Community Development and Engineering Services building (Sisldyou Room), located at 51
Winburn Way. _. ~
PLANNING ACTION 2004-026 is a request for Site Review approval for the construction of a
two-story, mixed-use (Commercial & Residential) commercial building, located at 81 Central
Avenue between Helman and Water Streets. Comprehensive Plan Designation: Employment;
Zoning: E-l; Assessor's Map #: 39 1E 04 CC; Tax Lot: 7200 and 5400.
APPLICANT: Wes and Lucinda Vail
SITE REVIEW
18.72.50
Criteria for ApprOval. The following criteria shall be used to
approve or deny a site plan:
,
A. All applicable City ordinances have been met and will be met
by the proposed development.
B. All requirements of the Site Review Chapter have' been met.
C.
The site design complies with the guidelines adopted by the
City Council for the implementation of thiS'Chapter.
De
That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer,
paved access to and. through the development, electricity,
urban storm drainage, and adequate transportation can and
will be provided to and through the subject property. (Ord.
2655, 1991 )
Finding of Fact
For
Site Review
Subject Property:
81 Central Avenue
Assessor's Map 391E 94cc Tax Lot 7200 & 5400
Submitted to:
City of Ashland Planning Department
W.D. Vail
200 Helman Street
Ashland, Or.97520
3-12-04
81 Central Avenue
Site Review Finding of Fact
3/12/04
Following are the Chapters of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance and sections
of the Design Standards deemed applicable, in whole or in part, to this Site
Review for their development:
Ordinance:
18.40 E- 1 - Employment District
18.61 - Tree Preservation and Protection
18.68 - General Regulations
18.70- Solar Access
18.72- Site Design & Use Standards
18.92 - Off-Street Parking
Page
3
5
6
8
8
11
SITE DESIGN AND USE STANDARDS
Section II- Approval Standards and Policies
A. Ordinance Landscaping Requirements
C. Commercial, Employment, and
Industrial Development
1. Basic Site Review
2. Detail Site Review
D. Parking Lot Landscaping and
Screening Standards
E. Street Tree Standards
Section III- Water Conserving Landscaping
Guidelines and Policies
Section IV- Historic District Development
Section VI- Site Design and Use Standards
--Downtown Design Standards
14
14
14
16
19
22
23
23
25
SITE PLAN VARIANCE
29
Findings of Fact for these ordinances and standards are in the following
pages. Criteria are immediately followed by the 'bulleted' findings and
conclusions to each applicable section.
~AR 1 0 2004
81 Central Avenue
Site Review Finding of Fact
3/12/04
ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE
CHAPTER 18.40
E-1 EMPLOYMENT DISTRICT
SECTIONs:
18.40.010
18.40.020
18.40.030
18.40.040
18.40.050
Purpose.
Permitted Uses.
Special Permitted Uses.
Conditional Uses.
General Regulations.
SECTION 18.40.010 Purpose.
The district is designed to provide for a variety of uses such as office, retail, or
manufacturing in an aesthetic environment and having a minimal impact on surrounding
uses.
SECTION 18.40.020 Permitted Uses.
The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted outright, subject to the
requirements of Chapter 18.72, Site Design and Use Standards:
A. Professional, financial, and business and medical offices, and personal service
establishments.
B. Stores, shops and offices supplying commodities or performing services, except
that retail uses shall be limited to no greater than 20,000 sq. fi. of gross leasable floor
space per lot.
C. Restaurants. (Ord 2812, S4 1998)
D. Electrical, furniture, plumbing shop, printing, publishing, lithography or
upholstery.
E. Light manufacturing, assembly, fabricating, or packaging of products from
previously prepared materials, such as cloth, plastic, wood (not including saw,
planing, or lumber mills or molding plants), paper, cotton, precious or semi-:precious
metals or stone.
F. Manufacture of electric, electronic, or optical instruments and devices.
G. Administrative or research establishments.
H. Motion picture, television, or radio broadcasting studios operating at an
established or fixed location.
I. Mortuaries and crematoriums.
J. Building material sales yards, but not including concrete or asphalt batch or
mixing plants.
K. Kennels and veterinary clinics, with all animals housed within structures.
L. Bakeries
M.Public and quasi-public utility and service buildings and yards, structures, and
public parking lots, but excluding electrical substations.
1 0 2004
81 Central Avenue
Site Review Finding of Fact
3/12/04
N. ManUfacture of pharmaceutical and similar items.
· Proposed 1844 sq. ft. office an allowed use under section A.
SECTION 18.40.030 Special Permitted Uses.
The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted outright subject to the
requirements of this section, including all requirements of 18.72, Site Design and Use
Standards.
A. Bottling; plants, cleaning and. dyeing establishments, laundries and creameries.
B. Wholesale storage and distribution establishments.
C. Recycling depots, provided the use is not located within 200' of a residential district.
D. Kennels'. and veterinary clinics where animals are housed outside, provided the use is
not located within 200' of a residential district.
E. Residential uses.
1. At least 65% of the total gross floor area of the ground floor, or at least 50% of the
total lot area if there are multiple buildings shall be designated for permitted or special
permitted uses, excluding residential.
c~ Complies: first floor of proposed building is 100% commercial office space.
No residential use in ground floor.
2. Residential densities shall not exceed 15 dwelling units per acre.
· One dwelling unit is proposed.
3. Residential uses shall be subject to the same setback, landscaping, and design
standards as for permitted uses in the E-1 District.
~ Complies.
4. Residential uses shall only be located in those areas indicated as R-Overlay within the
E-1 District, and shown on the official zoning map.
c~ Complies.
5. If the nmnber of residential units exceed 10, then at least 10% of the residential units
shall be affbrdable for moderate income persons in accord with the standards established
by resolution of the Ashland City Council through procedures contained in the resolution.
The number of units required to be affordable shall be rounded down to the nearest whole
unit.
c~ Not applicable.
F. Cabinet,. carpentry, machine, and heating shops, if such uses are located greater than
200' from 'the nearest residential district.
G. Manufacture of food products, but not including the rendering of fats or oils. For any
manufacture of food products with 200' of a residential district.
H. Cold Storage Plants, if such uses are located greater than 200' from the nearest
residential district.
I. Automobile and truck repair facilities, excluding auto body repair and paint shops.
~ Not applicable - none of the uses are proposed
SECTION 18.40.040 Conditional Uses.
~ Not applicable - no conditional uses are proposed.
4 MAR 1 0 2004
81 Central Avenue
Site Review Finding of Fact
3/12/04
SECTION 18.40.050 General Regulations.
A. There shall be no area or width requirement except as may be required for
conditional uses.
B. There shall be no yard requirement except when a lot or parcel adjoins a residential
district, in which case a side and rear yard of at least ten feet per story shall be required,
and except as required in the Site Review and Solar Access chapters.
· Areas of the proposed use that are contiguous with residential uses are not
occupied by any structures.
C. No structure shall be greater than 40 feet in height.
· Proposed structure is designed to be 24 feet high.
D. There shall be no manufacturing, retailing, or other activity on the site which is not
entirely conducted within a building, except as specifically permitted in Section
18.40.040." (Ord. 2688-1992)
~ Not applicable. All uses are offices or residential in nature.
CHAPTER 18.61
TREE PRESERVATION AND PROTECTION
SECTIONs:
18.61.030
18.61.035
Regulated Activities.
Exempt Tree Removal Activities
SECTION 18.61.030 Regulated Activities.
A. All tree removal and tree topping activities, unless exempted below, shall be carried
out in accordance with the requirements of this chapter.
c~ tUomplies: No trees on site. However, one tree in the alley needs to be
removed for access.
B. No person who is required to install or maintain tree protection measures pursuant this
chapter shall do any development activities including, but not limited to clearing.,
grading, excavation or demolition work on a property or site which requires a planning
action without approved tree protection measures properly installed and maintained
pursuant to this Chapter.
(Ord 2883, Added, 06/04/2002)
c~ Complies: no trees on site. Howerever, one tree in alley needs rob e removed
for access.
SECTION 18.61.035 Exempt Tree Removal Activities
The following activities are exempt from the requirement for tree removal permits:
A. Those activities associated with the establishment or alteration of any public park
under the Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission. However, the Ashland Parks and
Recreation Department shall provide an annual plan in January to the Tree Commission
outlining proposed tree removal and topping activities, and reporting on tree rernoval and
topping activities that were carded out in the previous year.
~ Not applicable
I IAR 1 0 2004
81 Central Avenue
Site Review Finding of Fact
3/12/04
D. Removal of trees less than 6" DBH in any zone, excluding those trees located within
the public :right of way or required as conditions of approval with landscape
improvements for planning actions.
ca Complies: no trees on site. One tree needs to be removed from alley for
access.
E. Remowal of trees less than 18" DBH on any public school lands, Southern Oregon
University,. and other public land; but excluding Heritage trees and street trees within the
public right of way.
a Not applicable. Property is not on any public school land.
F. Remowd of trees within the Wildfire Lands area of the City, as defined on adopted
maps, for tlhe purposes of wildfire fuel management, and in accord with the requirements
of the Physical and Environmental Constraints Chapter- 18.62.
ca Not applicable. Property is not within the Wildfire Lands area of the City.
G. Remowal of dead trees.
H. Those activities associated with tree trimming for safety reasons, as mandated by the
Oregon Public Utilities Commission, by the City's Electric and Telecommunication
Utility. However, the Utility shall provide an annual plan to the Tree Commission
outlining tree trimming activities and reporting on tree trimming activities that were
carried out in the previous year. Tree trimming shall be done, at a minimum, by a
Joumeymma Tree Trimmer, as defined by the Utility, and will be done in conformance
and to comply with OPUC regulations.
(2883, Added, 06/04/2002)
ca Not applicable.
CHAPTER 18.68
GENERAL, REGULATIONS
SECTIONs:
18.68.010
18.68.020
18.68.030
18.68.050
18.68.140
18.68.160
Fences.
Vision Clearance Area.
Access.
Special Setback Requirements.
Accessory Buildings and Structures.
Driveway Grades.
SECTION 18.68.010 Fences.
Fences, walls, hedges and screen planting shall be subject to the following standards:
A. In any required front yard, provided they do not exceed three and one-half (3 ½) feet
in height.
ca Complies: Parking lot screen planting has been provided. The proposed
planting will not exceed 42" in height.
B. In any rear or side yard, provided they do not exceed six and one-half (6 ½) feet in
height.
C. The height of fences or walls in rear or sideyard setback areas abutting a public street
shall be forty-eight (48) inches or less if said fences or walls are within ten (10) feet of
any public street except an alley.
MAR 1 0 2004
81 Central Avenue
Site Review Finding of Fact
3/12/04
D. The framework for newly constructed fences and walls shall face toward the builder's
property, except where fences are jointly constructed.
~ Not applicable. No fences are proposed and no hedges are proposed in the
rear of side yard setback areas.
SECTION 18.68.020 Vision Clearance Area.
Vision clearance areas shall be provided with the following distances establishing the size
of the vision clearance area:
A. In any R district, the minimum distance shall be twenty-five (25) feet or, at
intersections including an alley, ten (10) feet.
~ Not applicable. Property is not within any R district.
B. In all other districts except the C-1 and E-1 districts, the minimum distance shall be
fifteen (15) feet or, at intersections, including an alley, ten (10) feet. When the angle of
intersection between streets, other than an alley, is less than thirty (30) degrees, the
distance shall be twenty-five (25) feet.
c~ Not applicable. Property is located in the E-1 district.
C. The vision clearance area shall contain no plantings, fences, walls, structures, or
temporary or permanent obstructions exceeding two and one-half (2 ½) feet in height,
measured from the top of the curb, except that street trees exceeding this height may be
located in this area, provided all branches and foliage are removed to a height of eight (8)
feet above the grade.
~ Complies.
SECTION 18.68.030 Access.
Each lot shall abut a minimum width of forty (40) feet upon a public street (other than an
alley). This requirement may be decreased to twenty-five (25) feet on a cul-de-sac
vehicle turn-around area. Except with an approved flag partition, no lot shall abut upon a
street for a width of less than twenty-five (25) feet.
~ Complies: Existing lot has 52.3' of street frontage along Central Avenue and
exceeds the 40' minimum.
SECTION 18.68.050 Special Setback Requirements.
To permit or afford better light, air and vision on more heavily traveled streets and on
streets of substandard width, to protect arterial streets, and to permit the eventual
widening of hereinafter named streets, every yard abutting a street, or portion thereof,
shall be measured from the special base line setbacks listed below instead of the lot line
separating the lot from the street. Street Setback
East Main street, between City
limits and Lithia Way 35 feet
Ashland Street (Highway 66) between
City limits and Siskiyou Boulevard 65 feet
Also, front yards for properties abutting all arterial streets shall be no less than twenty
(20) feet, with the exception of the C-1-D district.
7 I/IAR 1 0 2004
81 Central Avenue
Site Review Finding of Fact
3/12/04
SECTION' 18.68.140 Accessory Buildings and Structures.
c~ Not applicable. No accessory buildings or structures are proposed.
SECTION' 18.68.160 Driveway Grades.
Grades fox' new driveways in all zones shall not exceed a grade of 20% for any portion of
the driveway. All driveways shall be designed in accord with the criteria of the Ashland
Public Works Department and approves prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for
new construction. If required by the City, the developer or owner shall provide
certification of driveway grade by a licensed land surveyor. All vision clearance
standards associated with driveway entrances onto public streets shall not be subject to
the Variance section of this title. (Ord.2604 S2, 1990; Ord. 2663 S3, 1992).
c~ Complies: Proposed driveway apron repaving is to have a 12% maximum
slope and will be installed according to the standards of the Public
Works Department.
CHAPTER 18.70 - SOLAR ACCESS
c~ Ex,empt. Solar access is not required in the Downtown Overlay district per
18.32.050 'D' Downtown Overlay District item C.
CHAPTER 18.72
SITE DESIGN AND USE STANDARDS
SECTIONs:
18.72.050
18.72.070
18.72.115
18.72.120
18.72.140
18.72.160
Detail Site Review Zone
Criteria for Approval
Recycling Requirements
Controlled access.
Light and Glare Performance Standards
Landscaping Maintenance
SECTION 18.72.050 Detail Site Review Zone
A. The Detail Site Review Zone is that area defined in the Site Design Standards adopted
pursuant to Section 18.72.080.
B. Any de'velopment in the Detail Site Review Zone as defined in the Site Review
Standards adopted pursuant to this chapter, which exceeds 10,000 square feet or is longer
than 100 feet in length or width, shall be reviewed according to the Type 2 procedure.
· The proposed development is less than 10,000 square feet and is within the
Detail Site Review Zone, and less than 100 feet in width or length.
SECTION 18.72.070 Criteria for Approval.
The following criteria shall be used to approve or deny an application:
A. All applicable City ordinances have been met or will be met by the proposed
development.
· All applicable City ordinances have been met or will be met for this
development.
B. All requirements of the Site Review Chapter have been met or will be met.
1 0 2004
81 Central Avenue
Site Review Finding of Fact
3/12/04
· All requirements of the Site Review Chapter have been met or will be, met.
C. The development complies with the Site Design Standards adopted by the City
Council for implementation of this Chapter.
[] Complies: The development complies with the applicable Site Design
Standards. See finding for the Sited Design Standards herein.
D. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, paved access to and. through
the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, and adequate transportation can and
will be provided to and through the subject property. All improvements in the street
right-of-way shall comply with the Street Standards in Chapter 18.88, Performance
Standards Options. (Ord. 2655, 1991; Ord 2836 S6, 1999)
c~ Complies: Adequate capacity exists for all facilities.
a) A 2" CIP water line within Central Street extends to the street frontage
of the property. This line has adequate capacity for the proposed
building.
b) A sanitary sewer is under Water Street and has adequate capacity for the
proposed building. A 6" lateral line will be put in Central Street right of
way outside of the paved and sidewalk area.
c) Paved access is via the alley off Helman Street. Said alley to be re. paved
to Public Work Standards.
d) An existing electrical transformer exists adjacent to the property. This
transformer has adequate capacity to serve this building.
e) Roof, site, and parking lot drainage will connect with the existing 15"
storm sewer in Central Avenue. Adequate capacity exists within this
sewer.
f) Adequate transportation exists to this development. The proposed
development is within the downtown core and is conveniently located for
transit, pedestrian, and automobile traffic.
g) All improvements with the street right-of-way will comply with the Street
Standards in Chapter 18.88.
SECTION 18.72.115 - Recycling Requirements.
All commercial and multi-family developments, requiring a site review as indicated in
18.72.040, shall provide an opportunity-to-recycle site for use of the project occupants.
A. Commercial. Commercial developments having a solid waste receptacle shall
provide a site of equal or greater size adjacent to or with access comparable to the
solid waste receptacle to accommodate materials collected by the local solid waste
franchisee under its on-route collection program for purposes of recycling. Both the
opportunity-to-recycle site and the common solid waste receptacle shall be screened
by fencing or landscaping such as to limit the view from adjacent properties or public
rights-of-way.
[] Complies: Trash are and recycling will be located in parking area in an
enclosed masonry structure with wood doors to completely obscure the
contents from the alley and adjacent property.
C. On the South line of Central Street and underground sewer is now active on
site.
D. Multi-family ............ Not applicable
81 Central Avenue
Site Review Finding of Fact
3/12/04
SECTION 18.72.120 Controlled access.
A. Prior to any partitioning of property located in an R-2, R-3, C- 1, E- 1 or M- 1 zone,
controlled access standards shall be applied and, if necessary, cross easements shall be
required so that access to all properties created by the partitioning can be made from one
or more points.
B. Access points shall be limited to the following:
1. Distance between driveways.
On arterial streets - 100 feet;
on collector streets - 75 feet;
on residential streets - 50 feet.
2. Distance from intersections.
On arterial streets - 100 feet;
on collecto.r streets - 50 feet;
on residential streets - 35 feet.
c~ Complies: No vehicular access from Central Avenue.
C. Vision clearance standards.
1. No obstructions greater than two and one half feet high, nor any landscaping which
will grow greater than two and one half feet high, with the exception of trees whose
canopy heights are at all times greater than eight feet, may be placed in a vision clearance
area detemfined as tbllows:
The vision clearance area at the intersection of two streets is the triangle formed by a line
connecting points 25 feet from the intersection of property lines. In the case of an
intersection involving an alley and a street, the triangle is formed by a line connecting
points ten feet along the alley and 25 feet along the street. When the angle of intersection
between the street and the alley is less than 30 degrees, the distance shall be 25 feet. No
structure or portion thereof shall be erected within ten feet of the driveways.
2. State of Oregon Vision Clearance Standards. The following stopping site distances
shall apply to all State Highways within the City with the prescribed speed limits.
Vertical stopping sight distance to be based on distance from three and one half feet
above pavement to a point six feet above the pavement. (Ord.2544 S 1, 1989)
30 mph200 feet
35 mph225 feet
40 mph275 feet
45 mph325 feet
55 mph450 feet
[] Not applicable. The property is an interior lot.
3. The vision clearance standards established by this section are not subject to the
variance section of this title. (Ord. 2605 S2, 1990)
[] Not applicable.
D. Access Requirements for Multi-family Developments.
[] Not applicable.
SECTION 18.72.140 Light and Glare Performance Standards.
There shall be no direct illumination of any residential zone from a lighting standard in
any other residential lot, C-l, E-1 or M-l, SO, or HC lot.
1 0 2004
81 Central Avenue
Site Review Finding of Fact
3/12/04
· Ali illumination of the parking area will comply to standards herein.
SECTION 18.72.160 Landscaping Maintenance.
A. All landscaped areas must be maintained in a weed-free condition.
B. All landscaped areas required by this Chapter must be maintained according to the
approved landscaping plans. (Ord. 2228, 1982)
~ Complies: Applicant agrees to maintain landscape according to this
condition.
CHAPTER 18.92- OFF STREET PARKING
18.92.010
18.92.020
18.92.25
18.92.30
18.92.40
18.92.50
18.92.70
Generally
Automobile Parking Spaces Required
Credit for On-Street Automobile Parking
Disabled Person Parking Places
Bicycle Parking
Compact Car Parking
Automobile Parking Design Requirements
18.92.010 Generally
In all districts, except those specifically exempted, whenever any building is erected,
enlarged, or the use is changed, off-street parking shall be provided as set forth in this
Chapter.
18.92.020 Automobile Parking Spaces Required
~ Complies: -- 7 spaces, 5 parking stalls, one garage stall, one on garage
driveway.
18.92.25 Credit for On-street Automobile Parking
· One Credit Space.
18.92.30 Disabled Person Parking Places
c~ Complies: One (1) Disabled parking space has been provided and has been
located as close to the main entrance as possible. Seven parking spaces have
been provided on the property. This requires one disabled parking space a 1
space / 25 spaces is the requirement.
18.92.40 Bicycle Parking
A. All uses, with the exception of detached single-family residences and uses in the
C-1-D zone, shall provide a minimum of two sheltered bike parking spaces.
· Two bicycle spaces are provided, two covered.
B. Every residential use of two units or more per structure, and not containing a garage,
shall provide bicycle parking spaces as follows:
Multi-Family Residential: One sheltered space per studio and 1-bedroom unit
1.5 sheltered spaces per 2-bedroom unit
2.0 sheltered spaces per 3-bedroom unit
· Use includes only one dwelling unit.
18.92.50 Compact Car Parking
· Two Compact car parking is proposed.
11
MAR 1 0 2004
81 Central Avenue
Site Review Finding of Fact
3/12/04
18.92.70 Automobile Parking Design Requirements
A. Size and Access. All required parking areas shall be designed in accordance with the
parking layout chart at the end of this Chapter. Parking spaces shall be a minimum of 9 x
18 feet, except that 50% of the spaces may be compact spaces in accord with 18.92.050
and shall have a 22 foot back-up space except where parking is angled.
c2 Complies: Parking spaces as designed are 9' X 18' and are angled.
B. Driveways and Turn-Arounds. Driveways and tum-arounds providing access to
parking areas shall conform to the following provisions:
1. A drive'way for a single dwelling shall have a minimum width of nine feet, and a
shared driveway serving two units shall have a width of 12 feet.
2. Parking areas of more than seven parking spaces per lot shall be provided with
adequate aiisles or mm-around areas so that all vehicles may enter the street in a forward
manner.
~ Not applicable. Only 7 parking spaces provided.
3. Parking areas of more than seven parking spaces shall be served by a driveway 20 feet
in width and constructed to facilitate the flow of traffic on or off the site, with due regard
to pedestrian and vehicle safety, and shall be clearly and permanently marked and
defined. Parking areas of seven spaces or less shall be served by a driveway 12 feet in
width.
~ Not applicable; 7 parking spaces are provided. The existing driveway will be
at least 12' wide and will serve seven spaces and therefore meets the 12' min.
width requirement.
4. Shared Use of Driveways and Curb Cuts.
a. Developments subject to a planning action or divisions of property, either by minor
land partition or subdivision, shall minimize the number of driveway intersections with
streets by the use of shared driveways with adjoining lots where feasible. In no case shall
driveways be closer than 24 feet as measured from the bottom of other existing or
proposed apron wings of the driveway approach.
b. Plans for property being partitioned or subdivided or for multi-family developments
shall indicale how driveway intersections with streets have been minimized through the
use of shared driveways and shall indicate all necessary access easements.
c. Developments subject to a planning action shall remove all curb cuts and driveway
approaches not shown to be necessary for existing improvements or the proposed
development. Cuts and approaches shall be replaced with standard curb, gutter or
sidewalk as appropriate. All replacement shall be done under permit of the Engineering
Division.
~ Not applicable.
C. Vertical Clearances. Driveways, aisles, turn-around areas and ramps shall have a
minimum vertical clearance of 13'6" for their entire length and width.
~ Complies: No obstructions occur in the parking area.
D. Vision Clearance. No signs, structures or vegetation in excess of two and one-half
feet in heigl~t shall be placed in the vision clearance area. The vision clearance area is the
triangle formed by a line connecting points ten (10) feet along the alley and 25 feet along
the street. When the angle of intersection between the street and the alley is less than 30
degrees, the', distance shall be 25 feet. No signs, structures or vegetation or portion
12
2004
81 Central Avenue
Site Review Finding of Fact
3/12/04
thereof shall be erected within ten (10) feet of driveways unless the same is less 'than two
and one-half feet in height. The vision clearance standards established by this section are
not subject to the Variance section of this title.
ca Complies.
E. Development and Maintenance. The development and maintenance as provided
below, shall apply in all cases, except single-family dwellings.
1.~ Paving. All required parking areas, aisles, tum-arounds and driveways shall be paved
with concrete, asphaltic or comparable surfacing, constructed to standards of file in the
office of the City Engineer.
ca Complies: Parking area will be paved in asphalt concrete.
2. Drainage. All required parking areas, aisles and tum-arounds shall have provisions
made for the on-site collection of drainage waters to eliminate sheet flow of such waters
onto sidewalks, public rights-of way, and abutting private property.
ca Complies: Parking area is to sheet drain to the south towards Central
Avenue to a drain. See the Site Grading and Utility Plan.
3. Driveway approaches. Approaches shall be paved with concrete surfacing constructed
to standards on file in the office of the City Engineer.
ca Not applicable.
4. Marking. Parking lots of more than seven spaces shall have all spaces permanently
and clearly marked.
ca Complies: Parking spaces will be striped with 3" wide striping.
5. Wheel stops. Wheel stops shall be a minimum of four inches in height and wiidth and
six feet in length. They shall be firmly attached to the ground and so constructed, as to
withstand normal wear. Wheel stops shall be provided where appropriate for all spaces
abutting property lines, buildings, landscaping, and no vehicle shall overhang a public
right-of-way.
· Wheel stops are to be provided.
6. Wall and Hedges.
a. Where parking abuts upon a street, a decorative masonry wall or evergreen hedge
screen of 30-42 inches in height and a minimum of 12" in width shall be established
parallel to and not nearer than two feet from the right-of-way line. Screen planting shall
be of such size and number to provide the required screening within 12 months after
installation. The area between the wall or hedge and street line shall be landscaped. All
vegetation shall be adequately maintained by a permanent irrigation system, and said wall
or hedge shall be maintained in good condition. The required wall or screening shall be
designed to allow for free access to the site and sidewalk by pedestrians.
ca Not applicable.
b. In all zones, except single-family zones, where parking facilities or driveways are
located adjacent to residential or agricultural zones, school yards, or like institutions...
ca Not applicable. Not adjacent to any of these zones or uses.
7. Landscaping. In all zones, all parking facilities shall include landscaping to cover not
less than 7% of the area devoted to outdoor parking facilities, including the landscaping
required in subdivision 6(a) above. Said landscaping shall be uniformly distributed
throughout the parking area, be provided with irrigation facilities and protective curbs or
13
1 0 2004
81 Central Avenue
Site Review Finding of Fact
3/12/04
raised wood headers. It may consist of trees, plus shrubs, ground cover or related
material..A minimum of one tree per seven parking spaces is required.
ca Complies.
8. Lighting of parking areas within 100 feet of property in residential zones shall be
directed intto or on the site and away from property lines such that the light element shall
not be directly visible from abutting residential property.
· Complies.
SITE DESIGN AND USE STANDARDS
SECTION II- APPROVAL STANDARDS & POLICIES
A. ORDINANCE LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS
ca Complies: 10% of this lot is required to be landscaped in the C-1-D district.
This amounts to a 1026 s.f. requirement. Total area of landscape proposed is
1920 s.f.
C. COMMERCIAL, EMPLOYMENT, AND INDUSTRIAL
DEVELOPMENT
II-C-1. BASIC SITE REVIEW STANDARDS
Approval Standard: Development in all commercial and employment zones shall
conform to the following development standards:
II-C-la) Orientation and Scale
1) Buildings shall have their primary orientation toward the street rather than the parking
area. Building entrances shall be functional, and shall be shall be accessed from a public
sidewalk. Public sidewalks shall be provided adjacent to a public street frontage.
· Complies: The primary orientation of this building is to Central Avenue.
The entrance is designed to face Central Avenue with an attractive corner
cut in the first floor business office entrance. Two pillars emphasize the
position of the wide entry door. Access to this entrance is by an eight-foot
curving sidewalk from the Central Ave. sidewalk, and is handicap accessible.
The second floor apartment entrance is also at ground level (because of the
steep sloping street elevation) and faces directly onto Central Avenue. Both
entrances are partially recessed to shelter individuals in stormy weather.
2) Buildings that are within 30 feet of the street shall have an entrance for pedestrians
directly from the street to the building interior. This entrance shall be designed to be
attractive a~ad functional, and shall be open to the public during all business hours.
ca Complies: The main first floor entrance and the entrance to the second floor
vel~fical circulation is oriented to the public sidewalk on Central Avenue.
14
1 0 200
81 Central Avenue
Site Review Finding of Fact
3/12/04
3) These requirements may be waived if the building is not accessed by pedestrians,
such as warehouses and industrial buildings without attached offices, and automotive
service uses such as service stations and tire stores.
ca Not applicable.
II-C-lb) Streetscape
1) 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.
ca Complies: Central Avenue frontage is 52.3 feet. One street tree is required
and one is provided. See Landscape Plans.
· The attached landscape plan provides for one street tree on the Central
Avenue frontage. The specimens chosen will be from the approved City of
Ashland street tree list.
II-C-lc) Landscaping
1) Landscaping shall be designed so that 50% coverage occurs after one year and 90%
coverage occurs after 5 years.
ca Complies: Landscaping has been designed to meet this criteria. See
Landscape plans.
2) Landscaping design shall use a variety of low water deciduous and evergreen trees
and shrubs and flowering plant species.
c2 Complies: Landscaping has been designed to meet this criteria. See
Landscape plans.
3) Buildings adjacent to streets shall be buffered by landscaped areas at least 10 feet in
width, except in the Ashland Historic District. Outdoor storage areas shall be screened
from view from adjacent public rights-of-way, except in M-1 zones. Loading facilities
shall be screened and buffered when adjacent to residentially zoned land.
Exempt: No landscape buffer is required for buildings in the Ashland
Historic District.
~ Complies: Outdoor trash enclosure is screened as stated previously.
ca Exempt: There are no loading facilities proposed and therefore no screening
is required.
4) Irrigation systems shall be installed to assure landscaping success.
ca Complies: Landscape irrigation system has been designed to meet this
criteria. See Landscape plans.
5) Efforts shall be made to save as many existing healthy trees and shrubs on 'the site as
possible.
· No trees on the subject parcel. However one tree in alley needs to be
removed for access.
· Per the attached landscaping plan, the criteria established above will be met
in regards to
1) 50% and 90% coverage requirement
2) type of plant materials
3) buffering residential uses at the north and west line of the subject parcel.
15
81 Central Avenue
Site Review Finding of Fact
3/12/04
All landscaping will be irrigated with an automatic system. The planting will be of
low-water, qrought-resistant plant materials. There are no trees or shrubs on the
site currently.
Il-C-Id) Parking
1) Parking areas shall be located behind buildings or on one or both sides.
~ Complies: Parking area is located at the rear of the building.
2) Parking areas shall be shaded by deciduous trees, buffered from adjacent non-
residential uses and screened from non-residential uses.
cJ Complies: The parking area is buffered to the west, north and south by
landscaping.
· As per the attached plot plan, parking is located at the rear of the parcel.
Vehicular access to the subject parcel is at the rear via an alley that connects
to Itelman Street. The parking area is buffered to the west by landscaping
and several deciduous trees.
II-C-le) Designated Creek Protection
1) Designated creek protection areas shall be considered design elements and
incorporated in the overall design of a given project.
2) Native riparian plant materials shall be planted in and adjacent to the creek to enhance
the creek habitat. Not applicable
Il-C-10 Noise and Glare
1) Special attention to glare (AMC18.72.110) and noise (AMC9.08.170(c) & AMC
9.08.175) shall be considered in the project design to insure compliance with these
standards.
Complies: All lighting shall be chosen and installed so as to minimize glare
on the surrounding areas. Lighting will be directed downward.
· Lighting in the parking areas at the rear of the parcel will be designed not to
face directly towards residential uses in regards to glare.
· The building will be for residential and office uses. Noise levels for offices are
relatively low. The project includes outdoor mechanical equipment to
support the building. The mechanical equipment will be on the roof with all
noise control being designed to meet the requirements of AMC 9.08.170 (c) &
AMC !9.08.175.
II-C-2. DETAIL SITE REVIEW
Developments that are within the Detail Site Review Zone shall, in addition to complying
with the standards for Basic Site Review, conform to the following standards:
16
tVlAR 1 0 2004
81 Central Avenue
Site Review Finding of Fact
3/12/04
II-C-2a) Orientation and Scale
1) Developments shall have a minimum Floor Area Ratio of .35 and shall not exceed a
maximum Floor Area Ratio of .5 for all areas outside the Historic District. Plazas; and
pedestrian areas shall count as floor area for the purposes of meeting the minimum floor
area ratio.
[] Exempt. Development is within the Ashland Historic District.
· The subject site is within the Detail Site Review Zone and in the Downtown
Historic District. The size of the property is 8416 sq. ft. The proposed
building floor area ratio is 43%.
2) Building frontages greater than 100 feet in length shall have offsets, jogs, or have
other distinctive changes in the building faCade.
· Exempt. The building frontage is 38 feet.
· The proposed building is 83 feet long, and has a series of set-backs providing
the building faqade with shadow lines and variety.
3) Any wall which is within 30 feet of the street, plaza or other public open space shall
contain at least 20% of the wall area facing the street in display areas, windows, or
doorways. Windows must allow views into working areas or lobbies, pedestrian
entrances or display areas. Blank walls within 30 feet of the street are prohibited. Up to
40% of the length of the building perimeter can be exempted from this standard if
oriented toward loading or service areas.
c~ Complies: The proposed building has approximately 5200s.L of wall area
Therefore 1040 s.f. of openings is required. The proposed area of openings is
approximately 1100 s.£ and therefore meets this requirement.
· Forty-five percent of the street faqade is window and door space.
4) Buildings shall incorporate lighting and changes in mass, surface or finish to give
emphasis to entrances.
~ Complies: Lights are indicated on the exterior elevations adjacent to
openings for accents. Emphasis is also added to the entrance by color and
pediments over doorways.
· Both 1st and 2na floor entrances are clearly defined by porches and recessed
entries: the 1st floor also by pillars, the second by a special pediment. The
first floor street-front consists of windows and a glass doorway that allow
visibility into the lobby and office area.
5) Infill of buildings, adjacent to public sidewalks, in existing parking lots is encouraged
and desirable.
c~ Not applicable.
· The proposed structure is on the property line of the street frontage of the
subject lot.
6) Buildings shall incorporate arcades, roofs, alcoves, porticoes and awnings that protect
pedestrians from the rain and sun.
c~ Complies: The design incorporates these features through the use of' the
following:
a) A recessed main entry at the center of the building at the ground floor.
17
81 Central Avenue
Site Review' Finding of Fact
3/12/04
b) A second floor recessed deck on the second floor.
· Portals and recessed entrances offer pedestrians protection from the
weather.
II-C-2b) Streetseape
1) Hardscape (paving material) shall be utilized to designate "people" areas. Sample
materials could be unit masonry, scored and colored concrete, grass crete, or
combinations of the above.
~ Complies: The winding walkway and seating area in the proposed public
area adjacent to the main entrance area is to be surfaced in concrete with
changes in texture. A change in texture and will be used at the recessed
entries at the ground floor street entrances to distinguish them from the
concrete sidewalk.
· Building entrances and a small patio (with benches) will be scored.
2) A building shall be setback not more than 20 feet from a public sidewalk unless the
area is used for pedestrian activities such as plazas or outside eating areas. If more than
one structure is proposed for a site, at least 25% of the aggregate building frontage shall
be within 20 feet of the sidewalk.
[] Cmnplies: Building is set back approximately one foot from the front
property line.
· Due to a street design that sets the public sidewalk 16 feet from the subject
property line, a portion of the landscaping for this project is on public right-
of-way. This will include trees, ground cover, shrubs and curving sidewalks
to both first and second floors of the proposed building.
II-C-2c) Parking & On-site Circulation
1) Protected, raised walkways shall be installed through parking areas of 50 or more
spaces or more than 100 feet in average width or depth.
[] Not applicable.
2) Parking lots with 50 spaces or more shall be divided into separate areas and divided
by landscaped areas or walkways at least 10 feet in width, or by a building or group of
buildings.
[] Not applicable.
3) Developments of one acre or more must provide a pedestrian and bicycle circulation
plan for the :site. On-site pedestrian walkways must be lighted to a level where the system
can be used .at night by employees, residents and customers. Pedestrian walkways shall
be directly linked to entrances and the internal circulation of the building.
[] Not applicable.
· Because the site is approximately 8418 square feet in area and the parking lot
consist of five spaces, the proposal is not subject to the standards noted
above. However, the applicant is proposing to install a walkway - extending
from the project's five parking spaces to the front entrance.
18
81 Central Avenue
Site Review Finding of Fact
3/12/04
II-C-2d) Buffering and Screening
1) Landscape buffers and screening shall be located between incompatible uses on an
adjacent lot. Those buffers can consist of either plant material or building materials and
must be compatible with proposed buildings.
ca Complies: see Landscape Plan
2) Parking lots shall be buffered from the main street, cross streets and screened :from
residentially zoned land.
· Parking area is at the rear of the lot.
· A five-foot planting is provided in the East line of the lot. On the West line,
on the portion facing the residential lots, buffering landscaping is provided.
II-C-2e) Lighting
1) Lighting shall include adequate lights that are scaled for pedestrians by including
light standards or placements of no greater than 14 feet in height along pedestrian path
ways.
Complies.
Pedestrian ways from Central Avenue to both 1st and 2na floor entrances
shall have adequate lighting for pedestrian use. Lighting for pedestrians
from the parking spaces will be provided. Such lighting will be shield[ed
from the residential lots.
II-C-2f) Building Materials
1) Buildings shall include changes in relief such as cornices, bases, fenestration, fluted
masonry, for at leas 15% of the exterior wall.
ca Complies: See exterior elevations.
2) Bright or neon paint colors used extensively to attract attention to the building or use
are prohibited. Buildings may not incorporate glass as a majority of the building skin.
ca Complies: No bright or neon paint colors will be used. Colors will be
presented to Staff and the Historic Commission for comment.
D. PARKING LOT LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING
STANDARDS
Approval Standard: All parking lots, which for purposes of this section include areas of
vehicle maneuvering, parking, and loading shall be landscaped and screened as fbllows:
Il-D-l) Screening at Required Yards
1) Parking abutting a required landscaped front or exterior yard shall incorporate a sight
obscuring hedge screen into the required landscaped yard.
2) The screen shall grow to be at least 36 inches higher than the finished grade of the
parking area, except for required vision clearance areas.
19
IAR 1 0 2004
81 Central Avenue
Site Review Finding of Fact
3/12/04
3) The screen height may be achieved by a combination of earth mounding and plant
materials.
4) Elevated parking lots shall screen both the parking and the retaining wall.
c~ Not: applicable. No yards are required in this zone.
· There is no front lot parking on the subject parcel, nor can proposed parking
be viewed from the Central Avenue frontage because of landscaping on the
east front of the proposed building. Screening of adjacent residential
parcels: --see below.
II-D-2)
Screening Abutting Property Lines
1) Parking abutting a property line shall be screened by a 5' landscaped strip. Where a
buffer between zones is required, the screening shall be incorporated into the required
buffer strip,, and will not be an additional requirement.
· Because of narrow lot configuration at the rear of the subject lot, a variance
is requested on providing a 5-foot landscape buffer on the parcel's last line
contiguous to the residential lots. Triangular landscape plots providing each
parking space is provided each with a tree chosen from the lists provided by
the .Ashland Tree Commission.
· Further screening is provided by a 5' drop in elevation at the property line.
II-I)-3)
Landscape Standards:
1) Parking lot landscaping shall consist of a minimum of 7% of the total parking area
plus a ratio of 1 tree for each seven parking spaces to create a canopy effect.
c~ Complies: The parking area is 5000 s.L This necessitates a landscape area
adjacent to the parking of 350 s.f. An area of 910 s.f. of landscaping is
proposed, therefore meets the area requirement. One tree is required to
meet this standard. Four trees have been incorporated.
2) The tree species shall be an appropriate large canopied shade tree and shall be
selected from the street tree list to avoid root damage to pavement and utilities, and
damage from droppings to parked cars and pedestrians.
c2 Complies: Trees have been designated to meet this standard. See Landscape
plan..
3) The tree shall be planted in a landscaped area such that the tree bole is at least 2 feet
from any curb or paved area.
4) The landscaped area shall be planted with shrubs and/or living ground cover to assure
50% coverage within 1 year and 90% within 5 years.
5) Landscaped areas shall be evenly distributed throughout the parking area and parking
perimeter at the required ratio.
6) That portion of a required landscaped yard, buffer strip or screening strip abutting
parking stalls may be counted toward required parking lot landscaping but only for those
stalls abutting landscaping as long as the tree species, living plant material coverage and
placement distribution criteria are also met. From or exterior yard landscaping may not be
substituted fbr the interior parking stalls.
20
81 Central Avenue
Site Review Finding of Fact
3/12/04
n Complies: Landscaping has been designed to meet these criteria. See
Landscape plan and previous applicable statements in these findings.
· The parking stall area consists of approximately 3200 sq. ft. and includes
approximately 8% landscaping. Five parking stalls are provided, and 3
shade trees are provided. All of the site's trees will have tree boles that are at
least 2' from any curb or paved area. All landscaped areas have been
designed to assure 50% coverage within the first year and 90% within five
years. The landscaping is evenly distributed throughout the site.
II-D-4)
Residential Screening
1) Parking areas adjacent to a residential dwelling shall be set back at least 8 feel: from
the building, and shall provide a continuous hedge screen. ~ Complies.
· The parking area is approximately 20 to 30 feet distance, and 5 feet lower
than the nearest residential dwelling. (Evergreen shrubs shall be planted in
landscaped areas adjacent to parking spaces (see below re: variance request).
Fifty percent of screening will be achieved in 2 years and 100°/0 in 4 years.
Ground strip will be installed with 100% coverage in 2 years.
II-D-5)
Hedge Screening
The required hedge screen shall be installed as follows:
1) Evergreen shrubs shall be planted so that 50% of the desired screening is achieved
within 2 years, 100% within 4 years.
2) Living groundcover in the screen strip shall be planted such that 100% coverage is
achieved within 2 years.
· This standard does not apply considering no hedge screening is required as
noted in response to Standard II-D-4 #1 (Residential Screening).
II-D-6)
Other Screening
1) Other screening and buffering shall be provided as follows:
Refuse Container Screen: Refuse containers or disposal areas shall be screened from
view by placement of a solid wood fence or masonry wall from five to eight feet in
height. All refuse materials shall be contained within the refuse area.
Light and Glare Screen: Artificial lighting shall be so arranged and constructed as to
not produce direct glare on adjacent residential properties or streets.
c~ Complies: see Plot Plan.
· The required refuse and recycle disposal area will be screened by a solid
wooden fence 8 feet in height and landscaped with plant materials
compatible to the landscaping of the remainder of the parcel. The lighting
has been designed not to produce direct glare onto adjacent residential
properties.
21
IAR 1 0 2004
81 Central Avenue
Site Review Finding of Fact
3/12/04
E. STREET TREE STANDARDS
APPROVAL STANDARD: All development fronting on public or private streets shall be
required to plant street trees in accordance with the following standards and chosen from
the recormnended list of street trees found in this section.
Location for Street Trees
1) Street limes shall be located behind the sidewalk except in cases where there is a
designated planting strip in the right of-way, or the sidewalk is greater shall include
irrigation, root barriers, and generally conform to the standard established by the
Department of Community Development.
Complies: Trees have been located adjacent to the sidewalk. Irrigation and
root barriers are included in this design. See Landscape plan.
· All street trees and trees within the parking area will have irrigation, root
barriers and will generally conform to the standard established by the
Department of Community Development.
· All street trees and parking lot trees will be chosen from the City's Street
Tree List.
II-E-2)
Spacing, Placement, and Pruning of Street Trees
1) All tree,, spacing may be made subject to special site conditions which may, for
reasons such as safety, affect the decision. Any such proposed special condition shall be
subject to the Staff Advisor's review and approval. The placement, spacing, and pruning
of street trees shall be as follows:
a) Street trees shall be placed the rate of one tree for every 30 feet of street frontage.
Trees shall be evenly spaced, with variations to the spacing permitted for specific site
limitations, such as driveway approaches.
b) Trees shall not be planted closer than 25 feet from the curb line of intersections of
streets or alleys, and not closer than 10 feet from private driveways (measured at the .
back edge of the sidewalk), fire hydrants, or utility poles.
c) Street trees shall not be planted closer than 20 feet to light standards. EXcept for
public safety, no new light standard location shall be positioned closer than 10 feet to
any existing street tree, and preferably such locations will be at least 20 feet distant.
d) Trees shall not be planted closer than 2½ feet from the face of the curb except at
intersections where it shall be 5 feet from the curb, in a curb return area.
e) Where there are overhead power lines, tree species are to be chosen that will not
interfere with those lines.
f) Trees shall not be planted within 2 feet of any permanent hard surface paving or
walkway. Sidewalk cuts in concrete for trees shall be at least 10 square feet, however,
larger cuts are encouraged because they allow additional air and water into the root
system and add to the health of the tree. Space between the tree and such hard surface
may be covered by permeable non-permanent hard surfaces such as grates, bricks on
sand, or paver blocks.
22
MAR 1 0 2004
81 Central Avenue
Site Review Finding of Fact
3/12/04
g) Trees, as they grow, shall be pruned to provide at least 8 feet of clearance, above
sidewalks and 12 feet above street roadway surfaces.
h) Existing trees may be used as street trees if there will be no damage from the
development which will kill or weaken the tree. Sidewalks of variable width and
elevation may be utilized to save existing street trees, subject to approval by 'the Staff
Advisor.
Complies: Street tree has been spaced in front of the building.
One street tree is shown on the 52-foot Central Avenue frontage. It will be
more than 2 ~ feet from curb line. The tree will be pruned to provide at
least 8 feet of clearance above sidewalks.
II-E-3)
Replacement of Street Trees
1) Existing street trees removed by development projects shall be replaced by the
developer with those from the approved street tree list. The replacement trees shall be of
size and species similar to the trees that are approved by the Staff Advisor.
None to replace.
SECTION III- WATER CONSERVING LANDSCAPING
GUIDELINES & POLICIES
~ Complies: Over 70% of the landscape material plants being used on the site
are drought tolerant and/or planted in the shade so as to evapo-
transpiration. The irrigation system will be equipped with an automatic
programmable controller. Sprinklers will be installed for water conservation
and maximum efficiency. See landscape plan.
SECTION IV- HISTORIC DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT
In addition to the standards found in Section II, the following standards will be used by
the Planning and Historic Commissions for new development and renovation of existing
structures within the Historic District:
IV-C-l) Height
1) Construct buildings to a height of existing buildings from the historic period on and
across the street.
[] Complies: The proposed building is two stories in height. The adjacent
building to the west is one story in height and the buildings directly across
the street are three stories. Both these buildings are more contemporary and
do not represent the historic pattern in the downtown core. The downtown
has an historical mix of two and three story buildings. This building has the
appearance from the street of a two story building.
23 1 0 2004
81 Central Avenue
Site Review Finding of Fact
3/12/04
IV-C-2) Scale
Relate the size and proportions of the new structures to the scale of adjacent buildings.
ca Complies: See previous for similar discussion.
IV-C-3) Massing
Break up tminteresting box-like forms into smaller, varied masses which are common on
most buildings from the historic period.
ca Complies: The fal;ade has been broken up into smaller forms by providing
recesses in the faqade.
IV-C-4) Setback
Maintain the historic faCade lines of streetscapes by locating front walls of new buildings
in the same plane as the facades of the adjacent buildings.
c~ Complies: The building to the west is more contemporary. To the east there
is a parking lot. The design honors the historic pattern of building
IV-C-5) Roof Shapes
Relate the new roof forms of the building to those found in the area.
ca Complies: The typical roof form of the buildings in the area is a flat roof.
The proposed building has a flat roof to conform to this historic pattern.
IV-C-6) Rhythms of Openings
Respect the alternation of wall areas with door and window elements in the fagade. Also
consider the width-to-height ratio of bays in the fagade.
c~ Complies: See exterior elevations.
IV-C-7) Platforms
The use of raised platforms is a traditional siting characteristic of most of the older
buildings in Ashland.
ca Complies: A concrete base has been incorporated to the street front elevation
and extends around the corners for a slight distance.
IV-C-8) Directional Expression
Relate the 'vertical, horizontal or non-directional faCade character of new buildings to the
predominant directional expression of nearby buildings.
ca Complies: See exterior elevations.
IV-C-9) Sense of Entry
Articulate the main entrances to the building with covered porches, porticos, and other
pronounced architectural forms.
ca Complies: The main entrance for the ground floor is articulated by recessing
the doors approximately 5'. The door is flanked by pillars. The second floor
entry is articulated by a recessed. This entry is framed by an angled cornice.
24 VIAR 1 0 2004
81 Central Avenue
Site Review Finding of Fact
3/12/04
IV-C-10) Imitations
Utilize accurate restoration of, or visually compatible additions to, existing building. For
new construction, traditional architecture that well represents our own time, yet enhances
the nature and character of the historic district should be used.
c~ Complies: See exterior elevations.
SECTION VI- SITE DESIGN AND USE STANDARDS
Downtown Design Standards
VI-A) Height
1) Building height shall vary from adjacent buildings, using either "stepped" parapets or
slightly dissimilar overall height to maintain the traditional "staggered" street scape
appearance. An exception to this standard would be buildings that have a distinctive
vertical division/facade treatment that "visually" separates it from adjacent buildings.
2) Multi-story development is encouraged in the downtown.
The site is adjacent and opposite to existing Commercial and multi-
residential uses. The recommended standard can be met primarily because
the sloping topography of the area results in the top of the proposed
structure being half the height of the adjacent building to the west, and base
of the proposed building is higher than the roof of the adjacent building to
the east.
VI-B) Setback
1) Except for arcades, alcoves and other recessed features, buildings shall maintain a zero
setback from the sidewalk or property line. Areas having public utility easements or
similar restricting conditions shall be exempt from this standard.
2) Ground level entries are encouraged to be recessed from the public right-of-way to
create a "sense of entry" through design or use of materials.
3) Recessed or projecting balconies, verandas or other useable space above the grouhd
level on existing and new buildings shall not be incorporated in a street facing elevation.
· Zero building setback is maintained on 50% of the building. The remaining
portion is set back from the property line to accommodate the e~isting
topography, and lot shape so as to allow for ease of access to the first floor
offices and access to utility connections. By thin'design, the first floor spacing
creates a sense of entry. This design prOVi~s for beneficial public space
between the sidewalk and the front of the building.
VI-C) Width
1) The width of a building shall extend from side lot line to side lot line. An exception to
this standard would be an area specifically designed as plaza space, courtyard space,
dining space or rear access for pedestrian walkways.
25
81 Central Avenue
Site Review Finding of Fact
3/12/04
2) Lots greater than 80' in width shall respect the traditional width of buildings in the
downtown area by incorporating a rhythmic division of the facade in the building's
design.
The lot configuration, tapering strongly to the rear, necessitates a building
designed to fit the shape. This results in having pedestrian walkways along
the, east line of the proposed building. There is therefore a zero lot line on
the, west side of the building, but a 10 to 12 foot set back on the east, to
accommodate said walkway. Item #2 not applicable in that the lot is 53 feet
wide.
VI-D) Openings
1) Ground. level elevations facing a street shall maintain a consistent proportion of
transparency (i.e., windows) compatible with the pattern found in the downtown area.
2) Scale and proportion of altered or added building elements, such as the size and
relationship of new windows, doors, entrances, columns and other building features shall
be visually compatible with the original architectural character of the building.
3) Upper floor window orientation shall primarily be vertical (height greater than width).
4) Except for transom windows, windows shall not break the front plane of the building.
5) Ground[ level entry doors shall be primarily transparent.
6) Windows and other features of interest to pedestrians such as decorative columns or
decorative corbeling shall be provided adjacent to the sidewalk. Blank walls adjacent to a
public sidewalk is prohibited.
· An exception to Standard VI-D #1 is being requested in compliance with
Section VI-K, Exception to Standards, due to the fact that there is
demonstrable difficulty in meeting this requirement. The exception is
nec,essary because the use of the building is primarily for offices and not
retail. Secondly, the site is on the "fringe" of the Downtown area and is not
directly adjacent to other Downtown commercial buildings. Considering
there is a residential zone to the south of the building and a large "gap" on
the north, the window design attempts to mitigate the two distinct styles
(residential vs. commercial).
· VI-D #2 is not applicable. Ali building elements comply with the above
standards.
VI-E) Horizontal Rhythms
1) Prominent horizontal lines at similar levels along the street's street-front shall be
maintained.
2) A clear visual division shall be maintained between ground level floor and upper
floors.
3) Buildings shall provide a foundation or base, typically from ground to the bottom of
the lower window sills, with changes in volume or material, in order to give the building
a "sense of :strength".
The building design has distinct horizontal lines that continue frOm one side
of the building to the other. This is primarily accomplished by the building's
26
MAR 1 0 2OO
81 Central Avenue
Site Review Finding of Fact
3/12/04
unified fenestration. Division between floors is established by a belt cornice
between the floors, and a cornice at the roof line.
VI-F) Vertical Rhythms
1) New construction or storefront remodels shall reflect a vertical orientation, either
through actual volumes or the use of surface details to divide large walls, so as 'to reflect
the underlying historic property lines.
2) Storefront remodeling or upper-story additions shall reflect the traditional structural
system of the volume by matching the spacing and rhythm of historic openings and
surface detailing.
Horizontal rhythms requested in VI-E1 and 2 obviate somewhat a vertical
thrust to the proposed building. But the vertical window shapes do give the
structure a distinct vertical feel.
VI-G) Roof Forms
1) Sloped or residential style roof forms are discouraged in the downtown area unless
visually screened from the right-of-way by either a parapet or a false front. The false
front shall incorporate a well defined cornice line or "cap" along all primary elevations.
· The building roof is consistent with other commercial buildings found in the
downtown.
VI-H) Materials
1) Exterior building materials shall consist of traditional building materials found in the
downtown area including block, brick, painted wood, smooth stucco, or natural stone.
2) In order to add visual interest, buildings are encouraged to incorporate complex
"paneled" exteriors with columns, framed bays, transoms and windows to create, multiple
surface levels.
· The building materials consist of traditional building materials found in the
Downtown. Exterior window casings, a pediment shape over the apartment
entrance and pillars on the entrance to the office space provide visual interest
to the proposed structure.
VI-I) Awnings, Marquees or Similar Pedestrian Shelters
1) Awnings, marquee or similar pedestrian shelters shall be proportionate to the building
and shall not obscure the building's architectural details. If mezzanine or transom
windows exist, awning placement shall be placed below the mezzanine or' transom
windows where feasible.
2) Except for marquees - similar pedestrian shelters such as awnings shall be placed
between pilasters.
3) Storefronts with prominent horizontal lines at similar levels along the street's
streetfront shall be maintained by their respective sidewalk coverings.
· No,awnings are designed into the subject building.
27
1 0 200
81 Central Avenue
Site Review Finding of Fact
3/12/04
SITE PLAN VARIANCE
SECTION 18.72.090
An administrative variance to the requirements of this chapter may be granted with
respect to the requirements of the Site Design Standards adopted under section 18.72.080
if, on the basis of the application, investigation and evidence submitted, all of the
following circumstances are found to exist:
A. There is a demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements of the Site
Design Standards due to a unique or unusual aspect of the proposed use of a site;
B. Approval of the Variance will not substantially negatively impact adjacent
properties;
C. Approval of the variance is consistent with the stated purpose of the Site Design
and Use Chapter;
· An administrative variance from site design and use standards is requested
in regards to the landscaping requirement on the west side of the parking stall
area. This request is made due to:
a. The narrow dimension of the subject lot makes the required 5 foot
planter strip on the west line of the parking area unable to be met.
b. Said variance would not substantially negatively impact adjacent
properties since the level of the parking stalls is 5 feet lower than the
adjacent property and approximately 10 feet lower than structures on the
adjacent properties. The proposed triangular landscaping designt
provides a substantial visual buffer for said adjacent parcels.
c. Approval of proposed variance, because of change in parcel elevation and
use of triangular landscape devices, substantially meets the goal of Site
Design of buffering residential uses from parking areas.
29 ~AR 1 0 2004
~ ~,~ .J r~
jrT! , - -
~ .'t'~f ..... .4- ....
-~J .............................
1990
PM
PM
' qELMAN STREET
"Ti
March 1 I, 2004
T.J. Bossard, inc.
133 NW D Street
Grants Pass, OR 97526
Phone (541) 479-5774
Fax (541) 471-6084
tjbin~ternetcds,corn
Re: Alley Grading- Proposed Vail Building
81 Central Street- Ashland, OR
Please fred attached a prelirnin~ grading plan and profile for the alley
acce~ to the proposed Vail Building. Mr. Vail asked that I fax this
directly to you for your use in the application for site review of the
proposed building.
Th~mk you,
Joel (~ T.J. Bossard, Inc.
CC: Bob Taylor
MAR 1 5 2004
.
....- .-'"'
/
I I
z I
i
I
I
.....
....
AYMgAit::IG ag~lOdO~d
LU
I
I
I
.I.3gUJ.S N¥1N"I~H :~ ~
..L~aUJ..S NVlN"I~H i~ ~'YhO
MAR 1 5 2'004
Notice is hereby given that a PUBLIC HEARING on the following A copy of the application, all documents and evidence relied upon by the applicant
request with'respect to the ASHLAND LAND USE'ORDINANCE will and applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost and will be provided at
reasonable cost, if requested. A copy of the Staff Report will be available for
be held before the ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION HEARINGS
inspection seven days prior to the hearing and will be provided at reasonable cost, if
BOARD on April 13, 2004 at 1:30 p.m. at the ASHLAND CIVIC requested. All materials are available at the Ashland Planning Department,
CENTER, 1175 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon. Community Development and Engineering Services, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland,
Oregon 97520.
The ordinance criteria applicable to this application are attached to this notice. Oregon
laTM states that failure to raise an objection concerning this application, either in person During the Public Hearing, the Chair shall allow testimony from the applicant and
or by letter, or failure to provide sufficient specificity to afford the decision maker an those in attendance concerning this request. The Chair shall have the right to limit
opportunity to respond to the issue, precludes your right of appeal to the Land Use the length of testimony and require that comments be restricted to the applicable
Board of Appeals (LUBA) on that issue. Failure to specify which ordinanc& criterion the . criteria. Unless there is a continuance, if a participant so requests before the
objection is based on also precludes your right of appeal to LUBA on that criterion, conclusion of the hearing, the record shall remain open for at least seven days after
Failure of the applicant to raise constitutional or other issues relating to proposed the hearing.
conditions of approval with sufficient specificity allow this Commission to respond to
the issue precludes an action for damages in circuit court. If you have questions or comments concerning this request, please feel free to
contact Susan Yates at the Ashland Planning Department, at 541-552-2041. Our
..
TTY phone number is 1-800-735-2900.
~ /
NOLO: This Plazmin§ Action will also be beard by thc Ashland Historic Commission on April 7, 2004, 7:00 p.m.
· in the Community Development and En~'tccrin§ Services buildin§ ($isldyou Room), located at
Winburn Way.
NOTE: This Planning Action will also be heard by the Ashland Tree Commission on April 8, 2004 in the
Community Development and Engineering Services building (Sisldyou Room) located at 51 Winburn
Way at 7:00 p.m.
PLANNING ACTION 2004-018 is a request for Site Review to construct a two-story, 1800 square
foot addition to the existing commercial building located at the corner of Pioneer and "A' Streets
at 322 Pioneer Street. The building addition is lOcated on the east side of the existing Gathering
G~ass Studio (and associated manufacturing area) and consists of 1,050 square feet of
commercial space and a 750 square foot one-bedroom apartment. Comprehensive Plan
'Designation: Employment District with Residential Overlay; Zoning: E-l; Assessor's Map #: 39
1 E 09BA; Tax Lot: 13900
APPLICANT: Al & Sandra Carlson
SITE REVIEW
18.72.5.0
Criteda for Appr°val; The following cdteda shall be used to
approve or deny a site plan:
,
A. All applicable City ordinances have been met and will be met ·
..
by the proposed development.
B. All requirements of the Site Review Chapter have' been met.
C.
The site design complies witl"i the guidelines adopted by the
City Council for the implementation of thiS-Chapter.
D,
That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer,
paved access to and through the development, electricity,
urban storm drainage, and adequate transportation can and
will be provided to and through the sUbject property. (Ord.
2655, 1991)
(541 ) 773-7553
P.O. Box 4460 · MEDFORD, OR 97501 · FAX: (541) 773-5923 · WWW. BATZERINC.COM ° CCB# 132902
1/9/2004 Revised 3/3/04
City of Ashland Planning Department
Attention: Maria Harris
20 East Main Street
Ashland, Oregon 97520
Re: Review Application Submittal
Al Carlson - Commercial/Residential Building Addition
Attached for Application review are12 copies each of the Proposed Site Plan and the
Landscape Plan with Exterior Elevations, plus a check for the application fee.
SCOPE OF PROJECT:
The proposed project shall involve a 1,050 SF, first floor commercial addition with
a 750 SF (approximate size) second floor single bedroom residential unit to be
accessed by an open stairway. The building addition shall be located at the east
side of the existing 2604 SF Gathering Glass Studio.
The massing of the proposed building will mirror the existing building to the west.
The addition shall be constructed of painted CMU with only the canopies
constructed of the same galvanized metal used on the Gathering Glass Studio
building to which the proposed addition shall be attached. Where the proposed
and existing buildings are joined we are proposing a 2' offset to mitigate the
visual tension of the material change.
Four parking spaces are proposed that shall be accessed off of 1st Street,
providing a total of fifteen parking spaces for the entire site. The four onsite
parking spaces will be shielded from view by the construction of 5' high raised
planters. The remainder of the site shall be landscaped with trees, shrubs and an
area of turf stone.
A. The proposed project intends to conform to all applicable City
ordinances.
B. As is stated below in detail, all of the requirements of the Site Review
Chapter have been or will be met.
C. The development complies with the Site design Standards adopted by
the City Council for implementation of this Chapter. ~,~i~/1:::. ~
~1~ 0 4 ~00~
PROACTIVE · COOPERATIVE · RESPECTFUL · ACCOUNTABLE · CONSISTENT · SOLUTION ORIENTED
Landscaping:
The proposed landscape plan conforms to the 15% coverage required for the E-1
zone. The subject parcel is 7992 square feet. The required landscape area is
1198 square feet. The proposed landscape plan shows a total landscape area of
1645 square feet. The proposed landscaping significantly exceeds the 15%
minimum requirement (21%).
Basic Site Review Standards:
Orientation and Scale:
1)
The design of the proposed addition has elongated the building mass to
address "A" street. Access to the building is from the existing sidewalk
along "A" street.
2)
The proposed building will most likely have a retail occupancy and is
located within 30' of "A" Street. Accordingly, the design proposes an
attractive entrance with direct pedestrian access from the street/sidewalk
to the building interior.
Streetscape:
1)
Street trees at 30' on center are existing along the Northerly project
frontage. An additional street tree is proposed along the Easterly frontage.
Landscaping:
1)
The plant materials specified on the proposed landscaping plan have been
selected so that 50% coverage will achieved after one year and that 90%
coverage will occur after 5 years.
2)
The plant materials specified on the proposed landscaping plan include a
pleasing variety of Iow water use trees, shrubs and flowering specimens.
3)
The landscape plan shows the appropriate plant screening between this
development and the residential property to the south. The historic
location within the City allows waiving of the normally required 10' front
yard landscape.
4)
This submission includes a design for a complete, automatic drip irrigation
system that will assure the health of the plant material.
5)
There are no existing trees or significant vegetation on the subject
property.
6) Proposed street trees will have a canopy of 8' minimum.
Parking:
1)
The proposed new parking has been located behind the building, and has
been screened from street view as much as possible through the use of 5'
raised planter/bench construction at the north east corner of the property.
2)
The landscape plan indicates deciduous trees along the south property
line that will serve to both shade the parking area and to serve as a buffer
to the adjacent property.
Designated Creek Protection:
1)
The property is not adjacent to a creek. Consequently the related
standards do not apply.
Noise and Glare:
1)
The proposed building is oriented toward the north which eliminates the
possibility of glare from the storefront windows. The landscape screening
along the south property line will mitigate any glare that might occur in the
parking area.
Expansions of Existing Sites and Buildings:
1)
The proposed development will maximize the development potential of
this site. Conformance to the development standards has been based on
100% development.
Detail Site Review:
Orientation and Scale:
1)
This project is located within a historic district and is not subject to Floor
Area Ratio guidelines.
2)
The combined total length of the building is slightly less than 100 feet. The
design does propose jogs and other distinctive changes in the building
facade.
3)
The elevation along "A" street is composed of 16 lineal feet of solid wall
(broken up into 4 portions) and 30 lineal feet of storefront glass (3 bays)
which will serve as entries and display areas.
4)
5)
The proposed addition utilizes changes in mass and building materials to
help delineate entrances. As well, awnings have been shown which place
emphasis on the entries.
This proposed addition is essentially an "infill" or completion of the
"streetscape" along this property.
6)
The building fa(;;ade at street level has been articulated with three
recessed entry alcoves which are protected by overhead canopies that are
constructed of the same material as the adjacent building.
II Streetscape:
1)
The hardscape along "A" street is existing and will remain. The hardscape
will be augmented at the northeast property corner with a small bench and
paved area. A sidewalk leading from the parking area to the street has
been indicated on the plans.
2)
The proposed addition has been located directly adjacent to the existing
public sidewalk on the north property line.
Parking and On-site Circulation:
1)
The proposed parking area is designed to accommodate only 4 autos. The
pedestrian sidewalks are raised, however.
2)
Requirements for separate parking areas does not apply to this project.
3)
The proposed site is 7992 square feet (substantially less than 1 acre)
consequently the guidelines pertaining to on-site pedestrian and bicycle
circulation do not apply to this project.
Buffering and Screening:
1)
The landscape plan shows a 5' planted buffer strip along the south
property line.
2)
The landscape plan indicates a raised planter with an integral bench as
well as traditional landscaping at the northeast property corner. The
intensity of this development is intended to screen the parking area
beyond as much as possible.
Lighting:
1) The "A" street elevation shows pedestrian scaled wall sconces placed
at approximately 9' above the sidewalk. The lights will provide
adequate light for pedestrian activities as well as subtle highlights on
the building.
Building Materials:
1)
The elevation presented depicts a painted concrete block building. The
base will be split face CMU base. The elevation shows 3 galvanized sheet
metal canopies which related the two buildings without attempting to copy
the existing. The elevation also shows a projected CMU cornice.
2)
The color scheme of the building will be muted, rather than bright or
garish. The glass components of the fa(;ade seem to be appropriately
proportioned
The "Additional Standards for Large Scale Projects" do not apply to this
project and will not be addressed in these findings.
Parking Lot Landscaping and Screening Standards:
Screening at required yards:
The northeast corner of the parking area has been screened with a raised
planter and a sight obscuring hedge.
2)
The screening plant material specified on the Landscape plan will grow to
36" at maturity.
3)
The screen height will be accomplished through a use of plant material
and earth mounding at the drive approach. Elsewhere the plants will be in
a raised (4') planter.
4) The proposed parking area is not designed to be elevated.
Screening abutting property lines:
1) A 5' landscape screen has been shown on the Landscape plan along the
south property line where the parking area abuts the adjacent property.
Landscape Standards:
1)
The landscape plan shows six trees in the area around the parking lot
which far exceeds the required rations.
2)
The specified trees are appropriate large canopy specimens which
conform to the approved street trees.
3)
4)
5)
6)
None of the proposed tree boles are closer than 2 feet from any paved
areas.
The plant materials have been specified to assure 50% coverage withon 1
year and 90% coverage in 5 years.
The proposed parking area is relatively small and precludes even
distribution through out the parking area. However, every effort has been
made to distribute planting along the perimeter.
The required buffer and parking landscaping has been included in the
landscape tabulations.
Residential Screening:
1)
The parking area has been setback well in excess of 8 feet from the
adjacent residence to the south.
Screening:
· The landscape plan proposes hedge screening that is in
accordance with the Site Design Standards.
· The refuse container exists and has been screened in accordance
with the guidelines.
· This project does not call for any service corridors and is exempt
from the related guidelines.
· The proposed lighting fixtures will no produce glare on adjacent
properties.
Historic Design Standards:
The height of the proposed addition is sensitive to the existing building.
The elevation has attempted to match some of the predominant horizontal
lines.
The scale of the proposed addition maintains the character of the adjacent
context.
The massing of the proposed addition has been broken into meaningful
components that embrace the human scale.
The proposed setback of the addition maintains the precedent established
in the neighborhood. The setback coupled with the building mass strives
to engage the pedestrian.
The proposed roof shape is appropriate for the quasi industrial area. The
"A" street elevation has been articulated in a clearly commercial character
and can not be seen from the street. The roof and facade of the proposed
building is purposefully "different" in character to the adjacent building in
an attempt to recognize the historic character of the existing. The
proposed building has, however, borrowed elements of the existing fa(;;ade
to maintain continuity.
The proportions and rhythm of the proposed openings is clearly different
than the adjacent building but is appropriate to the pedestrian character of
the streetscape and in conformance with requirements found elsewhere in
the Site Design Standards.
The "Platform" raises serious accessibility issues and dislocates the
building from the pedestrian in this particular instance. Consequently a
raise platform was not utilized in this design.
The proposal presents a two story fa(;ade to the street which is in keeping
with the character of the neighborhood.
The sense of entry is a primary ingredient in the composition of the
proposed fa(;ade. The design is also sensitive to potential multiple entries
and has made provisions accordingly.
In respect for the historic integrity of the adjacent building and the
neighborhood as whole the proposed design has endeavored not to be an
imitation of any specific buildings or historical styles. The design makes
vague references to the surrounding context and historical precedent but
is essentially original in conception and clearly a product of its own time.
D. The proposed development can be adequately served by the City
infrastructure. All of the various public utilities are already installed and
serving the site.
Parking for the existing and proposed portions of this project has been tabulated
as.follows:
Provided Parking:
Currently 7 diagonal on street spaces exist along "A" Street, and 2 spaces exist along
Pioneer Street. The proposed site plan shows 4 on-site parking spaces. 5 of the on-
street spaces project and all 4 of the on-site can be counted toward this project for a
total of 9 spaces.
Required Parking:
The existing glass studio which is owned and operated by the property owner:
The 517 square foot retail showroom has been calculated at 1 space per 350 square
feet. 517/350 - 1.48 spaces.
The 2114 square feet of manufacturing area has been calculated at 1 space per 700
square feet. 2114/700 = 3.02 spaces.
The proposed 750 square foot second floor 2 bedroom apartment requires 1.5 spaces.
The proposed speculative 1050 retail space requires 1 space per 350 square feet.
1050/350 = 3 spaces.
Summary of tabulation:
517sf retail 1.48
2114 mfg'r 3.02
Apartment 1.50
1050 retail 3.00
Total spaces required
Total spaces provided
9.00
9.00
Sincerely,
BATZER INC
G ~~~perna~/~
Sr. Designer
C:WMy DocumentsWAshland--
e IIWGathering Glass Add
m
m
C:WMy DocumentsW.
1t
i
I
I
.~l~landWPhase IIWGathering Glass Ad(
'RTH
IONEER
EXISTING
BUILDING
-- ,Up I
1050 1st floor
900sf apartment above
AC Paving
n
I compact space H
(8'-6" x 18')
U
S T
EET /
Back-up .
~ 5'h raised plant~r
b~nch and monument
ttheri~
''
~" A STREET STUDIO
W
;Add
,~ .................................................................................. ~ ............................................................................................................................................... ~ ~
Civic 455 Siskiyou Boulevard Owner: City of Ashland Mark
Designer:
Contractor:
Commercial Restoration 138 N. Main Street Owners: Warren Family LTD (Jonathan Warren) Mark
Designer:
Contractor:
"Historically Compatible New 322 Pioneer Street Owners: Joanne
Commercial Designer:
Contractor:
Individuals Carol Barrett Jay
Hank Henry (posthumously)
Residential Restoration 117 Almond Street Owners: Clifford McLean Trust Alex
Designer:
Contractor:
Residential Restoration 123 W. Hersey Street Owners: Jeffrey & Barbara Hamlett Jay
Designer:
Contractor:
Historically Compatible New Residential 385 Vista Street Owners: Mark & Becky Reitinger Keith
Designer: Mark Reitinger
Contractor:
Historically Compatible Residential 115 Nob Hill Owners: Karen DeSantis (& Allen Drescher) Dale
Addition Designer:
Contractor:
Historically Compatible Residential 658 Siskiyou Boulevard Owners: Janis Rosenthal & J.S. Rinkoff Sam
Addition Designer:
Contractor:
Historically Compatible Accessory 8 Beach Avenue (garage) Owners: Archie & Georgi Blake Tom
Building Designer: Rick Vezie
Contractor:
Historically Compatible Accessory 180 Meade Street Owners: William & Jane Street Joanne
Building Designer:
Contractor:
Civic - Fire Station
City of Ashland
Attn: Keith Woodley, Fire Chief
455 Siskiyou Boulevard
Ashland, OR 97520
Peck Smiley Ettlin Architects
4412 SW Corbett
Portland, Oregon 97239
Adroit Construction Co.
Attn: Bob Mayers
P.O. Box 609
Ashland, OR 97520
Commercial Restoration- 138 N. Main St.
Jonathan Warren
1120 Prospect Street
Ashland, OR 97520
Stewart Interior Designs
Attn: Melody Stewart
2950 East Barnett Road
Medford, OR 97504
Historically Compatible New Construction - 322 Pioneer
Allen Carlson
3404 Creekview Drive
Medford, OR 97504
Batzer Inc.
Attn: Gary Capema
190 N. Ross Lane
Medford, OR 97501
Residential Restoration - 117 Almond Street
Even Archerd
120 N. Second Street
Ashland, OR 97520
Brace Roberts
5 North Main
Ashland, OR 97520
Jay Pricer
211 Ohio Street
Ashland, OR 97520
Residential Restoration - 123 West Heresy Street
Jeffrey & Barbara Hamlett
123 West Heresy Street
Ashland, OR 97520
Historically Compatible New Residential
Mark Reitinger
625 "B" Street
Ashland, OR 97520
Historically Compatible Residential Addition
Karen DeSantis
115 Nob Hill
Ashland, OR 97520
Wayne Lee
2247 Martin Drive
Medford, OR 97501
Historically Compatible Residential Addition
Janis Rosenthal
658 Siskiyou Boulevard
Ashland, OR 97520
Mike McKee
360 Pearl Street
Ashland, OR 97520
Pat Elston
1100 Elkader Street
Ashland, OR 97520
Historically Compatible Accessory Building at 8 Beach Avenue
Archie & Georgi Blake
205 S. Nevada Street
Yerington, NV 89447
Rick Vezie
209 Oak Street, Suite 204
Ashland, OR 97520
Historically Compatible Accessory Building at 180 Meade Street
William & Jane Street
180 Meade Street
Ashland, OR 97520
Denton Graham
2817 East Main Street
Ashland, OR 97520
Individual Award
Carrol Barrett
c/o Rogue Valley Manor
1200 Mira Mar Ave.
Medford, Oregon 97504
Nora Henry (Mrs. Hank Henry)
1505 Terrace Dr.
Medford, Or. 97504
Bob Davy
c/o Jefferson Public Radio
1250 Siskiyou Blvd
Ashland, Or. 97520
552-1277
2003 AWARDS ~...~
NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION WEEK
Brad Roupp
This year's Historic Preservation Individual Award goes to Brad Roupp. It is an award for individuals or groups who have shown
tremendous effort and fortitude towards historic preservation in Ashland. The recipient of this award is someone who has incredible
vision and belief that an old building can have value beyond monetary value. In Brad's case, he has stepped up time after time to not
only save a threatened building, but to amaze us with its restoration and final outcome.
Since Brad moved to Ashland in 1991, he has saved and/or restored 12 buildings, 10 within the Railroad District and 2 in the Skidmore-
Academy District. His most recent project, currently under restoration at 291 Oak Street, may be his best effort yet, as the house is one
of the oldest houses in town, and possibly THE oldest. Brad rescued it from eminent demolition and moved it across town.
One of Brad's most notable projects included the moving and restoration of the old Post Office and an older home which used to be on
the Southem Oregon Pacific Railroad property and served as the manager's quarters. Both structures are now sitting at the rear of 287
and 291 Oak Street. In addition, Brad has restored the modest home at 134 North Second Street and the small buildings behind Big
Al's off North Main Street.
Beyond his mastery of restoring old houses, Brad also excels in forging iron and sculpting metal. Brad grew up on a farm in Kansas
and leamed the important values of family and hard work. Brad is marded to Julia and they have two kids - Jaimie & Nate. Brad is a
very caring husband and father. If he's not on the job, he can always be found on the soccer field with his kids.
The Histodc Commission is proud to honor Brad Roupp for the many years of keeping history alive and providing artistry in
preservation for the City of Ashland.
240 Laurel Street
Renovation and Addition to the Beach/Goode House
Rob McGrath and Jim Lewis
Rob McGrath and Jim Lewis acquired the Beach/Goode house at 66 North Second Street from Tdnity Episcopal Church, knowing that
it would have to be moved. The church owns the property and was anxious to clear the site to make way for public space at the comer
of North Second and Lithia Way. In March of 2001, Rob and Jim moved the house to its current location at 240 North Laurel and set to
work.
Built around 1895 by Ashland contractor Baldwin Beach, the house was a one-story wood frame structure of the eclectic Queen Anne
style. It was likely built as an investment property. In 1905, David Good, then Ashland's fire and police chief, and his wife, Nettle,
purchased the house and they lived there through 1911. Until Rob and Jim moved the house, it .was one of the last surviving single
family dwellings in Ashland's downtown.
Since its original construction, the house had been the object of inappropriate additions and remodels and had fallen into disrepair.
The house needed plenty of work to regain its pdor personality. Rob and Jim demolished several inappropriate additions to the rear of
the house. By removing false ceilings that had been dropped to eight feet and reading the "shadows" of former building components,
they were able to identify trim and other elements and restore the integrity of the original building. They made a small addition to the
rear of the house in keeping with its historic style and character. By summer of 2002, Rob and Jim had completed this thoughtful
restoration and salvaged yet another Ashland jewel.
The process of renovating a house bdngs out the cudous in people. In the course of moving and restoring the house, Rob and Jim
heard many stodes from folks who, at one time or another, had lived in the house. Just recently, descendents of the Goode family
returned to visit Ashland with photos of the house dating from around 1905 in hand. Rob, who currently resides in the house, and Jim
are delighted to have a source of early photos and stodes to enhance the living history of the structure. Jim says that, in some ways,
he doesn't own the house but is merely a current caretaker.
The sympathetic approach that Rob and Jim brought to this project is true to their longstanding interest in historic preservation and
restoration. Jim is a former member of Ashland's Historic Commission and received awards in 1989 for restoration of Pioneer Hall on
Winbum Way, in 1992 for restoration of his residence at 640 "A" Street, and in 1998 for his contributions as an individual to further
historic preservation in Ashland. Jim has rescued 5 or 6 vintage Ashland buildings by moving and renovating them.
Accessory Dwelling at 39 Fourth Street
Allen Crutcher (Architect)
Sarah and Shady Challman (owners)
Jean Moseley (Co-Owner)
Jay Pricer, Allegro Construction (Contractor)
Sarah Challman and Jean Moseley are sisters who wished to provide a local home for their mother, Hannah Richards, in order that she
could retum to Ashland and be close to three of her daughters who live here. Hannah had been a long-time Ashland resident who
longed to retum. Sarah and Jean saw an opportunity to create an accessory unit behind Sarah and her husband Shady's residence at
39 Fourth Street in Ashland's historic Railroad District.
Allen Crutcher resourcefully worked with the program and the limited but well-located site to create a small but delightful abode for
Hannah. He met with Ashland's Histodc Commission numerous times to understand its concerns, design a structure scaled to match
other structures in the immediate vicinity, and incorporate design elements prevalent in the histodc district. In order to match the eaves
of the existing home on the property, he reduced the attached garage from a two-car to a single-car facility.
In the course of designing the new structure, Allen also worked with the City to eliminate an encroachment by removing an existing
dilapidated single story accessory residence that extended beyond the property line onto the alley right-of-way. By capitalizing on non-
conforming setbacks of the previously existing structure and by proposing improvements to the non-conforming conditions, Allen
provided a design that improved the livability of the immediate neighborhood by providing greater vision clearance at the intersection of
two adjacent alleys.
The result of Allen's design is a home that is consistent with other accessory buildings scattered throughout the Railroad District alleys,
conforms to target uses of the area, is similar in bulk, scale and coverage to nearby dwellings and is stylistically compatible with other
residential buildings in the immediate vicinity. It is a fine example of an outcome that fits and compliments the neighborhood. Jay
Pricer and Allegro Construction made worthy contributions to the project by respectfully managing the permit process and making
sympathetic and constructive suggestions.
The Histodc Commission is proud to honor those who had a role in this project for their efforts to create compatible design and infill in
our historic districts.
Historically Compatible Civic Construction, 51 Winburn Way
City of Ashland, Owners
Paula Brown, Project Manager
Jack Berry, Amhitect
Andy Turner, Contractor
Not all of today's award winners win an award for "just" their design compatibility or restoration efforts, but they also win for the
intangible elements that support our community's histodc preservation efforts. This year's Civic award goes to the City of
Ashland for the new Community Development & Engineering Services Building located at 51 Winbum Way.
In 1998, the City Council made a conscious effort to keep its expanding government services downtown in order to maintain
its strong commitment and presence in the heart of the community. After much public debate, the City purchased the little
used "Hillah Temple Building" from the local Shdner's fratemal organization for $600,000 and immediately started the planning
and eventual construction of a major remodel and addition costing approximately $2,000,000.
What started out as a 1950's non-descript and under utilized building with surface parking in the front and a limited
streetscape presence, the building is now a compatible, attractive and active participant in Ashland's vibrant downtown. It
houses the Planning, Building, Conservation, Engineering and Public Works Administration offices.
From the beginning, the project was debated by some downtown merchants, nearby residents and a few citizens. Issues
raised included lack of parking, design compatibility, retention of a histodc public walkway, view protection from adjacent
residents and many other concems, including a need for more public restrooms. There was also debate the new offices
should be constructed on property already owned by the City near the fdnge of the city limits.
Innovative solutions to these issues included converting a number of"City" parking spaces to "public" parking spaces and after
a parking analysis, improving the time management of the parking spaces downtown. Other resolutions to issues were also
resolved. Today, the new building boasts a comprehensive design and layout that is compatible in design to other buildings
found downtown, it has improved neighborhood views by eliminating rooftop equipment, the historic Alice Piel Walkway has
been retained, and of course, eight new public restrooms have been added.
The City of Ashland and the Ashland City Council deserve this year's Civic award for their efforts. In an age when projects of
this type are typically built near the city fdnge - fragmenting any potential relationship to downtown businesses and the
community- the City Council stood firm and cleady understood the importance of keeping its vital services in the downtown
area. The decision to not locate on a site outside the downtown area is clear leadership for future developments in the City.
The recipient of this award goes to Paula Brown, City of Ashland Public Works Director, who was the Project Manager.
871 "B" Street
Bill & Laurie Danley, owners
Peter Cipes, designer
Gary Dorris, Contractor
Bill and Laurie Danley's single story wood frame house at 871 "B" Street was built in 1948. The odginal footprint was a simple rectangle
of about 800 square feet with a gable roof, siding and window mullions emphasizing the horizontal lines typical of this pedod. Over the
years, various additions of about 600 square feet were attached to the rear under a Iow sloping shed roof, where some ceilings were as
Iow as five feet. Bill had lived in this run down home for some 20 years, wondering if it was worth remodeling or if he should just sell
and move on. Last year, the commitment to stay and remodel was made.
Bill and Laude worked with designer Peter Cipes and builder Gary Dorris to help realize their dreams of a major remodel project. A new
600 square foot addition replaced the incompatible additions at the rear of the house. The intedor floor plan was marvelously
transformed and updated. The exterior architecture, detailing and materials matched the original construction perfectly.
At the front of the house, an appropriately scaled, covered porch was added to replace a small entry roof so the front yard and "B"
Street could be enjoyed comfortably under cover. Here facing the street where the historical impact is most apparent, the owners,
designer and builder went to great pains and expense to custom build new thermal pane wood windows and an entry door to match the
original horizontal mullion pattems.
The result of this kind of commitment and team effort is a wonderful example of historically compatible design and construction for a
residential addition.
200 Helman Street
Wes & Lucinda Vail, Owners, Designers
Steve Asher, Contractor
This year's Commercial Award goes to Wes & Lucinda Vail for their efforts on the new mixed-use building located on the comer of Van
Ness Avenue and Helman Street.
The design and function of the new building is reminiscent of many histodc buildings found in the Bay Area with commercial space
below and residential space above. The comer building is traditional in appearance with a strong sense of entry, human scale massing,
balanced window pattem and decorative capping. The building has a number of off setting walls that help limit the mass along the
street and provide interest to the building's facade.
Probably the most challenging aspect of this project was the small and irregular shaped lot. The lot is 3,411 square feet and triangular
shaped with Van Ness Avenue and Helman Street on two sides and the railroad tracks on the other side. Compounding the site's
difficulty was a TID easement that traversed through the front half of the parcel. Many creative solutions and adjustments were
necessary in order to make the project work.
In the end, the Vails were able to construct an attractive mixed-use building that will set the tone for the area's surrounding
employment-zoned land. The adjacent sites will also likely be a challenge, but not as much as this building.
The Histodc Commission is grateful to the Vails for their efforts to listen and incorporate the Commission's ideas into the project. The
building is a fine example of commercial infill, mixed-use development and creative thinking between private and public entities.
Z
m
O r-
(D --4 ITl ITl
~ -'
z~=o-~ ;o=-. mm --
~=-, mw~ ~ ~'
rn ~ -r ~
m 0 ~-~'
O "o,<
Z ,-,- 0 0
G'3 z Z
03>
rn o.~-
Z
rn >
· 0
=~-
m~ ~ m~
__ .
<me m~a'x~'u m~
5'0 ~~o
m
~>~=~ ~>~ -
~~c~o z~
m
Z
~o
o~ ~o~=
~o ~
~= _. ~<~ ~= ~ ~e o o
-- ~ >m ~ --=~=<
0~
z>~o~.
o0~o
m ' m m
From: JANSSON Kyle <Kyle.Jansson@state.or.us>
To: IPM Return requested Receipt notification requested <aland@sohs.org>, IPM Return
requested Receipt notification requested <director@sohs.org>, IPM Return requested Receipt notification
requested <knoxm@ashland.or. us>
Date: March 29, 2004 8:16:49 AM
Subject: Governor to speak at Heritage Conference
Hi folks:
I just recieved word that Governor Kulongoski has accepted the invitation to speak at the Heritage
Conference luncheon on Friday, May 7. He will be available for only one hour as he has other events that
day in Ashland. I will keep you posted as planning develops.
This would be the first time that a governor has attended a Heritage Conference, so I am excited about
this opportunity.
Meanwhile, Julie Schablitsky, the Oregon Department of Transportation archaeologist, accepted last
week an invitation to join John Pierce of the Oregon Historical Society as our other keynote speakers that
day. As you may know, Julie led the recent ODOT "dig" in Jacksonville that "uncovered" evidence of the
Chinese inhabitants in the 1850s in Jacksonville.
Kyle
Kyle Jansson
Coordinator
Oregon Heritage Commission
725 Summer St. NE, Suite C
Salem, OR 97301-1271
(503) 986-0673
FAX (503) 986-0793
kyle.jansson@state.or.us
Keep up with the latest developments in Oregon heritage by joining the Oregon Heritage Listserv at
webhost.osl, state, or. us/m ail m an/listinfo/Heritage
CC: IPM Return requested Receipt notification requested
<Karolina@ashlandspringshotel.com>, IPM Return requested Receipt notification requested
<sonja@ashland.org>
1)[llll
Mill Il lllOll? IO Mll? ?ill
l)lllll (OMMllllOl
Al#lAND GIJN ¢l. lJll llll)lllll#TITl¥11
IT Till liT#Il ll)llllGl I)llOI)llll¥
ON TIIIJR~DAY, A~Rll 22ND
AT 4:10 P.M.
0
®®
°[~
~. ~. ~.
·
You are invited to attend the sixth
OREGON HERITAGE CONFERENCE
"Creating and Preserving
the Many Faces, of Heritage"
Medfond Patriotic Parade, 1917 SOHS photo t~910 7
May 6-8, 2004 · Ashland, Oregon
Enjoy more than two dozen workshops, walking tours, seminars, speakers, bus tours, and meet-
ings. Learn about the many ways that individuals and organizations can be involved with and
preserve cultural heritage. You can also sample Jackson County's many cultural offerings.
Anybody with an interest in Oregon's heritage will find the conference informative and inspirational.
Community leaders, staff and volunteers from historical societies, museums, ethnic organizations,
schools and educational institutions, historic preservation commissions, humanities groups, the
tourism industry, economic development, history buffs, and local, tribal, state and federal
governments will benefit from the conference.
You will:
· Learn how diverse community interests and organizations can participate
in heritage programs for the whole community.
· Explore a multi-disciplinary approach to preserving and promoting
Oregon's heritage.
· Take home practical ideas for heritage projects in your community
and how to fund them.
· Interact with people of like interests.
Organized by the Oregon Heritage Commission and the Southern Oregon Historical Society, the
conference is co-sponsored by the Oregon Parks and Recreation Department, the Oregon Museums
Association, the Oregon Heritage Trust, and the City of Ashland.
CONFERENCe
HIghLIGHTS
Workshops
Caring for Your Archival Collections
Fundraising For Success
Combined Sessions
Opening Session
Governor's Address (invited)
Heritage Expression Session
Three Historic Ashland Walking Tours
Historic Jackson County Bus Tour
Also:
Special Exhibits
Statewide Forum
State Commission meetings
Heritage Marketplace
Diverse concurrent sessions
(Note: The conference program is subject to change at any time. All events are scheduled for the Ashland Springs Hotel in Ashland unless otherwise noted.)
Thursday, May 6
9 a.m. Oregon Commission on Historic Cemeteries meeting.
9 a.m. Workshop: Caring For Your Archival Collections
Learn basic skills necessary to care for archival records, including accessioning, proper housing, arrangement
and description of records. Consider how to make curation part of the larger responsibilities of heritage
organizations. Layne Sawyer, Oregon State Archives. (2.5 hours)
9:30 a.m. Tour of Historic Buckhorn Springs Resort
This tour of the Buckhorn Springs national historic district, a century-old mineral springs resort located 20
minutes from Ashland and within the Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument, takes you behind-the-scenes.
10 a.m.- 4:30 p.m.
1 p.m.
1:30 p.m.-2:45
3 p.m.-4:15
4:30- 6 p.m.
Owners Bruce and Leslie Sargent who have been
restoring it since 1989, will talk about getting Buckhorn
a National Register listing, digging a crawl space under
the Lodge, writing grants, and milling wood to match
rotten boards. On the tour Bruce will also show how a
Historic Preservation Fund Development Grant helped
preserve four cabins, and show restoration accomp-
lished with help from Ashland High School interns.
To get there: From Ashland, take highway 66 east toward
Klamath Falls. At the mile 9 marker past Emigrant Lake, turn
right on Buckhorn Road (also signs for the Greensprings Power
Plant). 2 miles down the dirt road you will come to a fork in the
~e 'S°uthem oregon Historical SOciety ~11 be hOsting
two exhibits during theOregon Heritage c°nference! ne
firsi,.: Celebrating Flight:: A Histoq ofAVia tion in Southern
first flight.
The secOnd, "Our Ways: Hist0ry and Culture of Mexicans
~n Oregon, :was developedby,h~ O;egon H~sto ~cal
Soaetys Folkhfe Program: The e~bit ·documents t e
road. Turn to the right and enter at the gate to Buckhorn Springs.MexiCan presence in Oregon; dating back tothe 1600s
Registration ~th the early Spanish exPl0rers~ Theexhibit is Supple-
Oregon Heritage Commission meeting.
Creating The Southern Oregon Digital Archives
CONCURRENT SESSIONS
Protecting Heritage Resources Against Destruction
The Many Faces of Folldife in Oregon Communities
Historic Ashland Walking Tour No. 1:
Ni. :Central Ave., MedfOe& It i~.open 9 a:m.'5 p.m.
Tuesday~Friday.and 10 ia.m:.~4 p~m::. SaturditY.
Friday, May 7
7:30 a.m.-3:15 p.m.
8:30 a.m.
9:45 a.m.
10:30 a.m.-11:45
11:45 a.m.
12:45 p.m.
2:15 -3:30 p.m.
3:45 p.m.-5 p.m.
6:45 p.m.
Saturday, May
8:30 a.m.
10:30 a.m.-2:30 p.m.
Registration
Opening Session
Welcomes: David Ellis, chair, Oregon Heritage
Commission, and John Enders, executive director,
Southern Oregon Historical Society.
Keynote: Dr. John Pierce, executive director, Oregon
Historical Society, "A Year of Observations on
Oregon's Heritage."
Heritage Marketplace
Just like a village marketplace, learn about the activities
of statewide heritage organizations, and see and visit
with others involved in Oregon heritage efforts.
Concurrent Sessions
Carnegie Libraries: Preserving Oregon's Unique
Community Resources
Commemorating the History of Lewis and Clark
In Your Community
Making The Cultural Trust Work for Your
Organization and Your Community
Combining Old Photos with New Technology to
Promote Preservation
Historic Ashland Walking Tour No. 2
Heritage Expression Session Luncheon
Concurrent Sessions
A Road Through the Wilderness: Promoting and
Preserving Cultural Heritage in Forests
Preserving and Interpreting the Asian Oregonian Heritage
Teaching American History Through A
School-Museum Partnership
Fundraising For Success, Part I
Concurrent Sessions
Cultural Resource Management: Views from
Southwestern Oregon
Tourists and Your Local Cemetery
Objects of Desire: Using Material Culture and
Biography to Interpret Historic Sites
Fundraising for Success, Part II
Dinner
Introduction: Michael Carrier, director, Oregon
Parks and Recreation Department, and State
Historic Preservation Officer
Speaker: Governor Ted Kulongoski (invited)
8
CONCURRENT SESSIONS
Historic Ashland Walking Tour No. 3
Oregon Heritage Forum:
Communication and Coordination
Beverage Break
Bus Tours of Historic Jackson County
Board buses with other conference attendees for
behind-the-scenes visits to Historic Jacksonville,
the Hanley living history farm operated by the
Southern Oregon Historical Society, and
downtown Medford. Lunch will be provided.
Ashland Carnegie Library SOHS photo #12479
Hanley tam
SOHS photo #9473
REGISTRATION Form
Please use a .separate for each registrant. Conference registration fee is $140, including meals, sessions and tours described in this
program. Registration forms and payments returned before April 15 will receive a discount.
There are a limited number of hotel rooms with a special conference rate at the Ashland Springs Hotel, where most of the events
are scheduled. To receive this special rate, phone (541) 488-1700 or tollfree at (888) 795-4545 before April 7.
Registration Fee, includes meals and tours: $140
Name:
Address:
E-mail:
Phone:
Organization:
Mail Registration Form To.'
Oregon Heritage Conference, c/o Southern Oregon Historical Society,
106 N. Central Ave, Medford OR 97501.
Early Registration Discount by April 15 ($5)
Discount for OMA and SOHS
members, only one discount permitted
($1o)
Subtotal:
On-site Registration Surcharge $10
Total Amount:
I am making the enclosed payment:
~ Check UI Money Order
(payable to Southern Oregon Historical Society)
Credit Card: Q Visa gl MasterCard ~1 Discover
Number
Exp. Date
ABOUT AShLaND AND JACKSON COUNTY
Jackson County offers a rich array of cultural activities ranging from its music, theater and art communities to its galleries, museums
and historical sites to dance, storytelling, folklore and literature. More information can be obtained from the Ashland Chamber of
Commerce at www. ashlandchamber, com or 110 E. Main St., Ashland OR 97520. For information about Southern Oregon's colorful
history, visit the Southern Oregon Historical Society's website at www. sohs.org
The Oregon Shakespeare Festival is known worldwide for outstanding theatre productions. It will be performing Shakespearean
and non-Shakespearean productions during the Oregon Heritage Conference. For information about the plays and tickets, see
www. osfashland.org
HERITAGE
CONSERVATION
^ olvls~o~ o~ ~H~
cio Heritage Conservation Division
Oregon Parks and Recreation Department
725 Summer Street NE, Suite C
Salem, OR 97301-1271
RETURN SERVICE REQUESTED