HomeMy WebLinkAboutRecord for PA 2004-141
CITY OF
ASHLAND
RECORD FOR PLANNING ACTION 2004-141
SUBJECT PROPERTY: 380 Clay Street
OWNER/APPLICANT: D and A Enterprise
DESCRIPTION: Request for Annexation, Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map
change from Jackson County zoning RR-5 (Rural Residential) to City of Ashland zonin,g R-2
(Low Density Multi-Family Residential) for an approximately 10-acre parcel located at jl80
Clay Street. Comprehensive Plan Design: Low Density Multi-Family (Proposed); Zoning: R-
2 (Proposed); Assessor's Map #391E11C; Tax Lot: 2500.
NOTE: This action was first heard before the Planning CO'mmission on February 8,2005. In May
of 2005, the applicants submitted substantially revised plans. The Planning Commission ml~t on
June 14, 2005 and reviewed the revised plan, ultimately approving Outline Plan and Site Re~view.
Date
1-27-06
1-27-06
12-8-05
7-29-05
6-14-05
5-31-05
6-14-05
6-9-05
6-12-05
6-14-05
6-1 3-05
6-13-05
6-14-05
6-7-05
3-8-05
2-8-05
No date
2-3-05
2-8-05
No date
5-12-05
6-11-05
2-7-05
Public notice & criteria, mailing list, affidavit of mailing, notice of public hearing
(for newspaper) for February 21, 2006 Council meeting, and site map.
Letter from Mark Knox, Urban Development Services, LLC requesting Council
hearing
Memo from Brandon Goldman re: Buildable Lands Inventory
Mailed Findings, Conclusions & Orders adopted July 12, 2005
Planning Commission Minutes for June 14, 2005 Regular Meeting
Public notice & criteria, affidavit of mailing, and notice of public hearing (for
newspaper) for June 14, 2005 Planning Commission meeting 31-35
Planning Department Staff Addendum 36-56
Tree Commission Planning Application Review 57
Request for Extension of Time Um it - ORS 227. 178( 1 ) 58
Letter from Mike Reeder to Andy Cochrane re: 120-day rule 59
Letter to Andy Cochrane from Robert Kortt, RDK Engineering re: Addendum to the
Traffic Impact Study 60-61
Northwest BiolO'gical Consulting - WillowbrO'ok Project, Wetland
Characteristics & Other Notable Points of Interest
Notes from Robert Lobdell, Division of State Lands (DSL), reviewing wetland
Wetland Land Use Notification Form from DSL
Planning Commission Minutes for March 8, 2005 Regular Meeting
Planning Commission Minutes for February 8,2005 Regular Meeting
Letter from Bill Molnar to Tom Giordano re: outstanding issues
Tree Commission Planning Application Review
Planning Department Staff Report dated February 8, 2005
Staff Exhibit - map showing street improvements & Wetland 13 from City of
Ashland Local Wetlands & Riparian CO'rridor Inventory & Assessment (1/04) 96-98
Substantially Revised Project Narrative/Findings for Annexation,Site Review and
Residential Subdivision 99-215
Item
Miscellaneous Letters
Letter from Glen A. Cooper
Letter from Stacy Benjamin, Fishman Environmental Services
Paae #
1-7
8-10
11-13
14-24
25-30
62-65
66
67
68
69-72
73-75
76
77-95
216
217-218
-- ---------."---------.- .__._.,----~-~-~--_..._._----,------
4-16-05
2-3-05
2-4-05
1-25 to
1-27-05
2-9-05
2-25-05
No date
2-16-05
2-28-05
2-26-05
2-24-05
1-19-05
11-30-04
11-30-04
Letter in opposition from Patricia Marden
Letter from Ben Cochran, Certified Arborist re: health of the cottonwoods
Letter from Robert & Allison Wildman re: tree removal
Petition to preserve the cottonwood trees
Letter from Carolyn Brand
Letter from Elizabeth Cross
Tree Evaluation Form from January Jennings, Residential Landscape
Consultant
219
220
221-224
225-227
228
229
230
Applicant's First Submittal - The plan was substantiallv revised and resubmitted in Mav
2005
Public notice & related criteria for March 8,2005 Planning Commission mel~ting
Letter from Doug Irvine requesting a 30 day extension
Request for an extension of the Time Limit
E-mail from Andy Cochrane to Bill Molnar requesting a 30 day extensiO'n of time
Public notice & related criteria for February 8,2005 Planning Commission
Meeting
Project Narrative/Findings submitted by applicant
Application for Annexation, Outline Plan and Site Review
231-235
236
237
238
239-242
243-308
309-310
-,----
~.l'
Planning Department, 51 Winb. Nay, Ashland, Oregon 97520
541-488-5305 Fax: 541-552-2050 www.ashland.or.us TTY: 1-800-735-2900
CITY OF
~\SHLAND
PLANNING ACTION: #2004-141
SUBJECT PROPERTY: 380 Clay Street
OWNER/APPLICANT: D andA Enterprise
DESCRIPTION: Request for Annexation, Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map change from Jackson
County zoning RR-5 (Rural Residential) to City of Ashland zoning R-2 (Low Density Multi-Family
Residential) for an approximately 10-acre parcel located at 380 Clay Street. Comprehensilfe Plan Design:
Low Density Multi-Family (Proposed); Zoning: R-2 (Proposed); Assessor's Map #391E11C; Tax Lot: 2500.
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING: February 21, 2006, 7:00 PM, Ashland Civic Center
~"CT IIItOP_TY I
" I
\, I
\ /
\ i
\ I
\'
m
I
5
A8MLA1ND 8"IItIIIIT
Notice is hereby given that a PUBLIC HEARING on the following request with respect to the ASHLAND LAND USE ORDltolANCE will be held before the
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL on meeting date shown above. The meeting will be at the ASHLAND CIVIC CENTER, 1175 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon.
The ordinance criteria applicable to this application are attached to this notice. Oregon law states that failure to raise an objection concerning this application,
either in person or by letter, or failure to provide sufficient specificity to afford the decision maker an opportunity to respond to the issue, precludes your right of
appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) on that issue. Failure to specify which ordinance criterion the objection is based on also precludes your right
of appeal to LUBA on that criterion. Failure of the applicant to raise constitutional or other issues relating to proposed conditions of approval with sufficient
specificity to allow this Commission to respond to the issue precludes an action for damages in circuit court.
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 prior 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
Winbum Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520.
During the Public Hearing, the Chair shall allow testimony from the applicant and those in attendance concerning this request. The Chair shall have the right
to limit the length of testimony and require that comments be restricted to the applicable criteria. Unless there is a continuance, if a participant so requests
before the conclusion of the hearing, the record shall remain open for at least seven days after the hearing.
In compliance with the American with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contac:t the City Administrator's oIIce
at 541-488-6002 (TTY phone number 1-800-735-2900). Notification 72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make rt~sonable arrangements to
ensure accessibility to the meeting. (28 CFR 35.102.-35.104 ADA Tide I).
If you have questions or comments concerning this request, please feel free to contact the Ashland Planning Department. at 541-488-5305.
I
G:lcomm-devlplanninglNotic.. Mailed\2004-141 2-21-06 C<>unci1 Annex.doc
- T
-~_._~---
ANNEXATIONS - APPROVAL STANDARDS
18.106.030 Approval standards
An annexation may be approved if the proposed request for annexation conforms, or can be made to conform through the iimposition of conditions, with the
following approval criteria:
A. The land is within the City's Urban Growth Boundary.
B. The proposed zoning for the annexed area is in conformance with the designation indicated on the Comprehensive Plan Map, and the project, i
proposed concurrently with the annexation, is an allowed use within the proposed zoning.
C. The land is currently contiguous with the present City limits.
D. Adequate City facilities for the provision of water to the site as determined by the Public Works Department; the transp10rt of sewage from the site to the
waste water treatment plant as determined by the Public Works Department; the provision of electricity to the siRe as determined by the Electric
Department; urban storm drainage as determined by the Public Works Department can and will be provided to and thr4)ugh the subject property. Unless
the City has declared a moratorium based upon a shortage of water, sewer, or electricity, it is recognized that adequate capacity exists system-wide for
these facilities.
E. Adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property. For the purposes of this secjtion "adequate transportation" for
annexations consists of vehicular, bicycle, pedestrian and transit transportation meeting the following standards:
1. For vehicular transportation a 20' wide paved access exists, or can and will be constructed, along the full frontag.~ of the project site to the neares
fully improved collector or arterial street. All streets adjacent to the annexed area shall be improved, at a minimurn, to a half-street standard with a
minimum 20' driving surface. The City may, after assessing the impact of the development, require the full improvement of streets adjacent to the
annexed area. All streets located within annexed areas shall be fully improved to city standards. Where future street dedications are indicated on
the City's Street Dedication Map or required by the City, provisions shall be made for the dedication and improvenlent of these streets and included
with the application for annexation.
2. For bicycle transportation safe and accessible bicycle facilities exist, or can and will be constructed. Should the annexation be adjacent to an
arterial street, bike lanes shall be provided on or adjacent to the arterial street. Likely bicycle destinations from the project site shall be determined
and safe and accessible bicycle facilities serving those destinations shall be indicated.
3. For pedestrian transportation safe and accessible pedestrian facilities exist, or can and will be constructed. Full sidewalk improvements shall be
provided on one side adjacent to the annexation for all streets adjacent to the proposed annexed area. Sidewalks; shall be provided as required by
ordinance on all streets within the annexed area. Where the project site is within a quarter of a mile of an existinlg sidewalk system, the sidewalks
from the project site shall be constructed to extend and connect to the existing system. Likely pedestrian destinations from the project site shall be
determined and the safe and accessible pedestrian facilities serving those destinations shall be indicated.
4. For transit transportation, should transit service be available to the site, or be likely to be extended to the site in the future based on information
from the local public transit provider, provisions shall be made for the construction of adequate transit facilities, such as bus shelters and bus turn-
out lanes. All required transportation improvements shall be constructed and installed prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any new
structures on the annexed property. .
F. For all residential annexations, a plan shall be provided demonstrating that the development of the entire property w'iII ultimately occur at a minimum
density of 900/0 of the base density for the zone, unless reductions in the total number of units is necessary to accommodate significant natural features
topography, access limitations, or similar physical constraints. The owner or owners of the property shall sign an agl/'eement, to be recorded with the
county clerk after approval of the annexation, ensuring that future development will occur in accord with the minimum density indicated in the
development plan. For purposes of computing maximum density, portions of the annexed area containing undevelopable areas such as wetlands
floodplain corridor lands, or slopes greater than 350/0, shall not be included.
G. For all annexations with a density or potential density of four residential units or greater and involving residential zoned lands, or commercial
employment or industrial lands with a Residential Overlay (R-overlay):
1. 350/0 of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 1200/0 of median income; or
2. 250/0 of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below '1000/0 of median income; or
3. 200/0 of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 800/0 of median income; or
4. 150/0 of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 600/0 of median income; or
5. Title to a sufficient amount of buildable land for development is transferred to a non-profit (IRC 501(3)(c)) affordable housing developer or
comparable Development Corporation for the purpose of complying with subsection 2 above. The land shall be located within the project and al
needed public facilities shall be extended to the area or areas proposed for transfer. Ownership of the land shall be transferred to the affordable
housing developer or Development Corporation prior to commencement of the project.
The total number of affordable units described in this section G shall be determined by rounding down fractional answers to the nearest whole unit. A deed
restriction, or similar legal instrument, shall be used to guarantee compliance with affordable criteria for a . period of nOlt less than 60 years. Properties
providing affordable units as part of the annexation process shall qualify for a maximum density bonus of 25 percent.
H.
One or more of the following standards are met:
1. The proposed area for annexation is to be residentially zoned, and there is less than a five-year supply of vacslnt and redevelopable land in the
proposed land use classification within the current city limits. "Redevelopable land" means land zoned for residential use on which development has
already occurred but on which, due to present or expected market forces, there exists the likelihood that existing development will be converted to
more intensive residential uses during the planning period. The five- year supply shall be determined from vacant and redevelopable land
inventories and by the methodology for land need projections from the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Pleln; or
2. The proposed lot or lots will be zoned E-1 or C-1 under the Comprehensive Plan, and that the applicant will obtain Site Review approval for an
outright permitted use, or special permitted use concurrent with the annexation request; or
3. A current or probable public health hazard exists due to lack of full City sanitary sewer or water services; or
4. Existing development in the proposed annexation has inadequate water or sanitary sewer service; or the service ~lill become inadequate within one
year; or
5. The area proposed for annexation has existing City of Ashland water or sanitary sewer service extended, connected, and in use, and a signed
"consent to annexation" agreement has been filed and accepted by the City of Ashland; or
6. The lot or lots proposed for annexation are an "island" completely surrounded by lands within the city limits. (ORD 2792, 1997)
~
G:\comm-dev\planning\Noti4:e5 Mailed\2004-141 2-21-06 Council Annex.doc
PA#2004-141 391EIICC 3000
ADAMS LAUREL
289 GRANITE ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA#2004-141 391EIICC 2900
BANKE THEODORE H/LOIS E
598 LIT WAY
ASHLAND, OR 97520
P~AlL#2994 141 391Ell C 1101
CITY OF ~\SHL~\ND
CITY HALL
A~HLi\ND, OR 97520
PA#2004-141 391EIIC 2500
D R R ASSET MANAGEMENT INC
4100 NEWPORT PL 400
NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660
PA#2004-141 391EIICC 201
GARGUS GREG/SUZANNE
400 CLAY ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA#2004-141 391EIICC 2700
HARTMANN KURT TRUSTEE FBO
2124 BIRCHWOOD LN
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA#2004-141 391EIICC 2300
KENT, ROBERTA B
2148 BIRCHWOOD
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA#2004-141 391EIICC 2000
LONG SHIRLEY
2172 BIRCHWOOD LN
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA#2004-141 391EIICC 1700
MC ALASTER SELMA
2181 BIRCHWOOD LN
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA#2004-141 391EIIC 1002
PREMIERWEST BANK
503 AIRPORT RD
MEDFORD, OR 97501
PA#2004-141 391EIIC 700
ASHLAND FAMILY YMCA
540 YMCA WAY
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA#2004-141 391EIICC 500
BLEIWEISS PETER/MORGAN
1131 HIGHLAND DR
ASHLAND, OR 97520
P flL#2094 141 391EIIC 1201
CITY Of ~\SHL~\ND
CITY HALL
flLSHL~\ND, OR 97520
PA#2004-141 391EI1CB 4212
DUNGAN ANDY T
260 MEADOWS DR
ASHLAND, OR 97520
P~\#2994 141 391BI1CC 200
GARGUS GREGORY B,'SUZ~\NNE F
400 CLAY ST
~AlLSHL~\ND, OR 97520
PA#2004-141 391EIICC 1000
HODGE C JOEL
394 ST ARFLOWER LN
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA#2004-141 391EI1CC 2800
LEVIN PAULINE
15184 YVONNE DR
MORGAN HILL, CA 95037
PA#2004-141 391EIICC 400
LUNDBLAD ALETHA C
2165 BIRCHWOOD LN
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA#2004-141 391EI1CC 1100
MESING RUTH
2514 CHESTER ST
ALAMEDA, CA 94501
PA#2004-141 391EI1CC 100
REDCO DEVELOPMENT CO LLC ET
550 E MAIN ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520
3
PA#2004-14l 391EI1C 1200
ASHLAND INVESTMENT GROUP
1010 RACQlJET CLUB DR 103
AUBURN, C.~ 95603
PA#2004-141 391EIICC 2400
BRAIGER M,ARIL YN TRUSTEE FBO
3021 HILLECrASS AVE
BERKELEY, CA 94705
PA#2004-141 391EIICB 1100
COOPER JOlIN WAYNE
PO BOX 5753
SANTA BARJBARA, CA 93150
PA#2004-141 391EIICC 1200
GANGLOFF ltOLAND A
18534 WHITE: OAK DR
SONOMA, Cj~ 95476
PA#2004-141 391EI1CC 1600
GOLDBERG ~~ENA M TRUSTEE FBO
2173 BIRCINTOOD LANE
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA#2004-141 391EI1CC 2100
HOLSTEIN B()NNIE E
1020 S WABASH 3-F
CHICAGO, IL 60605
PA#2004-141 391EIICC 600
LISOWSKI LC~TTIE TRUSTEE FBO
2149 BIRCHW'OOD LN
ASHLAND, O]~ 97520
PA#2004-141 391EIICC 900
MAHER MAR"Y Z TRUSTEE ET AL
2133 BIRCHWOOD LN
ASHLAND, OIl 97520
PA#2004-141 391EIICB 1200
PAITERSON (iLEN E
301 CLAY ST
ASHLAND, OF~ 97520
PA#2004-141 391EIICB 4210
ROBBINS KM-IDICE J
POBOX529
WINDSOR, CA 95492
(!?Jet-lUi/ AJ l'J f,'e-€. SeiVT / /j,? Jtk
F~(1 ~ I O-r~
PA#2004-141 391EIIC 1007 PA#2004-141 391EIICB 4202 PA#2004-141 391EIICB 1400
RVM ASHLAND HOUSING CORP SAUL RICHARD AlPRISCILLA R SCAIFE RAY J
1200 MIRA MAR 263 MEADOW DR 249 CLAY ST
MEDFORD, OR 97504 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OIl 97520
PA#2004-141 391EIICB 1300 PA#2004-141 391EIICB 4211 PA#2004-141 391EIICC 700
SCAIFE ROY J/LOLA M SHELDON JANE STRONG SUE ANN
295 E CLAY ST 1605 SUNSET DR 2141 BIRCHW'OOD LN
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OIl 97520
PA#2004-141 391EIICA 2900 PA#2004-141 391EIICC 1300 PA#2004-141 391EIICC 202
TOLMANCREEKPARKLLC W AGNER, CATHERINE F WILDMAN RC)BERTIWILDMAN
1983 CRESTVIEW DR 460 CLAY ST 420 CLAY ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, Olt 97520
PA#2004-141 391EIIC 3000 PA# 2004-141 PA# 2004-141
WINGSPREAD LLC GALBRAITH & ASSOCIATES D & A ENTERlPRISE
202 N OREGON ST 318 S. GRAPE ST. 518 WASHING-TON ST.
YREKA, CA 96097 MEDFORD, OR 97501 ASHLAND, OFt 97520
PA# 2004-141 PA# 2004-141 P A#2004-141
SCOTT ENGLISH CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING GLENN COOP:ER
324 TERRACE CONSULTANTS P. O. BOX 948
ASHLAND, OR 97520 304 S. CENTRAL AVE. NOV ATO, CA 94948
MEDFORD, OR 97501
P A#2004-141 P A#2004-141 PA#2004-141
SW ALES COLIN HOLLEY BRY AN COOPER GLE1~
1282 OLD WILLOW LN 324 LffiERTY 3096 CALLE ROSALES
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 SANTA BARBJRA, CA 93105
P A#2004-141 P A#2004-141 P A#2004-141
CROSS ELIZABETH DOUG IRVINE ALBERT PEPPE
PO BOX 3217 495 EMIGRANT CR RD 321 CLAY ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND,OFl97520
P A#2004-141 PA# 2004-141 PA# 2004-141
ALEX FORRESTER URBAN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES GIORDANO TC)M
% FORRESTER & FORRESTER 320 EAST MAIN ST. SUITE 202 2635 TAKELMA WAY
545 A STREET ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OFl97520
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA# 2004-141
L.J. FRIAR & ASSOCIATES
816 W. 8TH ST.
MEDFORD, OR 97501
~
(l-Li ~U ~ /
,V<t1 +, ',- ~ ?c: vv't I
") , ! ~ 1 o~
r({J~ ~t7+2-
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING
STATE OF OREGON
County of Jackson
The undersigned being first duly sworn states that:
1. I am employed by the City of Ashland, 20 East Main Street, Ashland,
Oregon 97520, in the Community Development Department.
2. On ~/41 / a:. I caused to be mailed, by regular mail, in a sealed
envelope with postage fully prepaid, a copy of the attached Public Meeting Notice
to each person listed on the attached mailing list at such addresses as Slst forth on
this list under each person's name for Planning Action #2004-141 (2/21/106).
;::Jc G-?it ~
Signature of
--Ii- .
SIGNED AND SWORN TO before me this ...70 day or::bl}utfrv , 2006.
,
-~-'~. .,~~~
~tL)
Nota Public for State of O'regon
My Commission Expires: ~':1_ ~CJ ~ {)'i~
_OFFICIAL SEAL
CAROLYN SCHWENDENER
NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON
COMMISSION NO. 390825
MY COMMiSSION EXPIRES MAR. 20, 2009
~~ .., <
5
G:\comm-dev\planning\Forms & Handouts\AFFIDAVIT OF MAILlNG.doc
ATTN: MEL (CLASSIFIED)
PUBLISH IN LEGAL ADVERTISING
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HERBY GIVEN that a Public Hearing on the following with respect to th,e Ashland
Land Use Ordinance will be held before the Ashland City Council on February 21, 2006 at 7:00
p.m. at the Ashland Civic Center, 1175 East Main Street, Ashland, OR. At such Public Hearing
any person is entitled to be heard, unless the public hearing portion of the review has been closed
during a previous meeting.
Request for Annexation, Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map change from Jackson County zoning R/~-
5 (Rural Residential) to City of Ashland zoning R-2 (Low Density Mufti-Family Residential) for an
approximately 10-acre parcel located at 380 Clay Street. Comprehensive Plan Design: Low Density
Mufti-Family (Proposed); Zoning: R-2 (Proposed); Assessor's Map #391E11C; Tax Lot: 2500.
Barbara Christensen
City Recorder
Publish: 2/9/06
Date e-mailed: 1/31/06
P. O. # 70289
"
391E11
r' n f 1 ',' 1\ f'
JACKSON COUNlY
GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM
380 Clay - 300 ft.
notice Annexation
Fr~tfWnd
. Hlghli9I*d F.."""
"'_rf'oIy_
. "'_'Targel
D T.. Lot Outline.
City Umils
o .....lJInd
Butwf.llfts
D C_tnlll Po.II
U1g1e "-,,
Good H'"
-
.......
-~
R~Rrv.
Stl<<lyCOW!
T_t
This map is based on 8 digital database.
391 E 14 0 compiled by Jackson County From s vsnoty
of sources. Jackson County cannot accept
responsibily for errors, omissions. or
dll1IIIaIOf positional accuracy. The~ 8~ no
. U -IA!lUl warranties, expressed or Implied.
Map craated on 1r.!712006 11 :58:29 AM using www.smartmap.org
Pi ease recycie w!tn co!ored OffW8 grarle paper
URBAN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC
320 East Main Street, Suite 202 Ashland, Oregon 95720
AE6EfVE&
Ashland City Council
20 E. Main Street
Ashland, OR 97520
J)EC 2 7 ?OG1
Cil\, of Ashland
Subject: Clay Street Annexation, PA-2004-141, Request for City Council Public Hearing
and Project Addendum
The applicants for the Willowbrook Subdivision (PA-2004-141) located off lower Clay Street
would like to request the subject application be put on the next available City Council agenda. On
June 14th, 2005, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to discuss this Subdivision and
Annexation proposal. The Planning Commission approved the Subdivision request and forwarded a
recommendation for approval on the Annexation request to the City Council. However, during the
hearing, two issues were raised regarding the City's Annexation policies. Since the Planning
Commission hearing, the applicants have attempted to address not only these isslles, but also have
taken the opportunity to further refine other components of the plan intended to improve the quality
and sustainability of the project. These issues are as follows:
Issue #1 : Available Lands vs. Consumed Lands (Time of): At what point is inventoried land
considered "consumed" and no longer considered "available" for the purpose of the City's
Buildable Lands Inventory (BLI)?
At the June 14th, 2005 Planning Commission hearing the applicants submitted {:vidence showing
that the City of Ashland had less than a five-year supply of R-2 (Low Density Multi-Family) lands
available within its current City limits. The applicant's findings showed that only Ii one-year supply
ofR-2 lands was available and.that the City was close to having little to no availabtle R-2 lands. The
Planning Commission concurred with the applicants' findings, but raised questions as to how
"available lands" vs. "consumed lands" were calculated. In simple terms, the Planning Commission
was asking: Are available lands "consumed" when they are annexed, subdivided, engineering is
complete, a building permit is issued or a certificate of occupancy permit is issued to move in? At
the time, no one present knew the answer, but it was clear that regardless of 'when lands were
considered consumed, the evidence provided by the applicants clearly showed that less that a 5 year
supply was currently available and the criteria was met.
Since the Planning Commission hearing, research through the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS)
provided little information but it appears to indicate that it is subject to the local jurisdiction's
policy. As such, the City Council with input from the Planning Staff should atternpt to establish a
timeframe for when land in no longer available but consumed. In any event, the applicants are not
proposing to have the answer, but do believe the appropriate/reasonable timefranle would be with
the issuance of a Building Permit. The reason for this time is simple: First, the request is easily
recordable and second, the applicant is "financially" committed to developing the property. For
large projects such as the proposed project, the result would be the land is brought into the City
Limits as available land, but is not "consumed" until issuance of a Building Permit.
Phone: 541-482-3334
<;
Fax: 541-482-3336
Depending upon market demand, the buildout or consumption period of a subc:livision could be
short or very long. In any event, annexation of the subject property provides additional surplus
lands, but it's "consumption" factor would only occur simultaneously with the rLatural rate of the
local housing market.
Issue #2: R-2 Available Lands: One of the approval standards for an Annexation r(~quest is that it be
shown that less than a five year supply of vacant and redevelopable land exist in the proposed land
use classification within current City limits (AMC, Section 18.106.030 H.l.). During the Planning
Commission hearings, the applicants provided findings that showed that based upon the
development of a. number of parcels, the consumption rate since the last Buildablc:~ Lands Inventory
(ELI) 'showed the City had less than a five year supply of R-2 Lands and actually was dangerously
close to not having any.
However, during the Planning Commission meeting, some Commissioners statt~d that R-3 lands
should also be e'valuated because the City's Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan does not
distinguish between R-2 and R-3 lands, but refers to both categories as "multi-farn.ily". As such, the
applicants evaluated the consumption ofR-3 lands and found that from 1999 to De~cember 2005, the
overall consumed acreage of both R-2 and R-3 lands was 23.7 acres or 3.95 acre:s per. In order to
accommodate a 5 year supply as intended under the Annexation Standards, 19.75 acres are
necessary (5 X 3,,95). According to the most recent available data completed in N'ovember of 2005
by the Ashland Planning Staff, the 2005 BLI update shows that currently only 15.21 (R-2 and R-3)
acres is available and that a deficit of 4.54 acres exists.
The applicant's findings and backed by current data generated from the AshlaJl1d Planning staff
demonstrate that not only does less than a five year supply exist independently for either R-2 or R-3
lands, but even when "combined" they show less than a five year supply.
Conclusion: Lastly, the applicants have tried to address, without requesting a density bonus, the
City's most important need: affordable housing. As proposed, the applicants will be placing 17
affordable units into the affordable housing pool without any form of subsidization. Originally it
was planned that the 17 units would all be one bedroom rental units. However, a:ft:er discussing this
issue with the Housing Commission and hearing their desire for more affordable ~~o-bedroom units
as well as more affordable "for sale" units, the applicants have agreed to amend the plans in an
attempt to meet their desire. In doing so, the applicants are proposing 12 of the 17 units be two-
bedroom and 4 units as "for sale" affordable units.
The applicants feel strongly the project as presented meets a number of needs a(ldressed over and
over again by our staff, community and City leaders. Besides meeting the "~need critiera" as
demonstrated above and in other application documents, the applicants have put ~orth a project that
is designed on the principals of "family friendly" housing within a "multi-family" housing style and
density. The applicants have also addressed a number of site constraints such as tree preservation,
wetland preservation, wetland enhancement, neighborhood transportation conneetivity, pedestrian
mobility, public infrastructure improvements, and even view preservation for an acljacent neighbor.
Phone: 541-621-8393 '1
RECEIVED
DEe 2 7 2005
Fax: 541-482-3649
C:ity of Ashland
Overall, the applicants hope the City Council concurs with the positive feedback heard from a
number of the site's neighbors, the Planning Commission, Tree Commission and Housing
Commission. The applicants forward to presenting the application to the COl1ncil at the next
available public hearing.
Sincerely,
~~
(
~
Mark Knox, AICP
Urban Development Services, LLC.
cc: Doug Irvine, Irvine Investments Inc.
RECEIVED
DEe 2 7 2005
City of Ashland
Phone: 541-621-8393
Fax: 541-482-3649
I~
CITY OF
ASHI~AND
MEMO
2005 Buildable Lands Inventory update
Available Multi Family Residential Land
TO: Bill Molnar, Interim Community Development Director
From: Brandon Goldman, Housing Program Specialist
Date: 12/8/2005
Pursuant to our discussion regarding the inventory of buildable land in the R-2 and R3 zones I helve obtained a
listing of all Permits issued between July 1st, 2005 and December 1st, 2005. The 2005 Buildable Lands Inventory
was developed utilizing data from the City GIS system and the EDEN Building Permit database alnd was current
through 6-30-2005.
Given the limited amount of multifamily zoned land (R-2 and R-3) available within the City it is imperative that
decision makers evaluating annexation aJ:ld zone change requests have the most up to date information available.
Further the Ashland Housing Commission has an ongoing desire to evaluate the rate of consumption of residentially
zoned lands as they evaluate strategies to address Ashland's affordable housing needs.
During the five month period (7-1-05 to 12-1-05) three properties within the R-2 zone previously considered vacant
or partially vacant obtained building permits and can now be considered consumed:
391 E15AD300 = 0.52acres (9 new units, of which all nine are to be affordable ownership units issued
7/27/05)
391 E11 CC1 00 = 1.86 acres (32 new units, of which eight are to be affordable rental units - pending
engineered median plan)
391 E09AC3300 = .08 acres (was previously identified as partially vacant, 1 market rate unit added - issued
7/15/05)
Additionally, one parcel in the R-3 zone received a building permit within the last 5 months to create additional units
and thus removing the acreage from the inventory.
391 E1 OBC51 00 = 0.43 acres (4 new units, of which all are market rate dwelling units - issued 9/30/05)
From the Desk of:
Brandon Goldman
Housing Program Specialist
Deparbnent of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305
20 East Main Street Fax: 541-488-5311
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900
www.ashland.or.us
II
,.,
Cumulatively in the MFR zones 2.9 acres was consumed in the last five months. The 2005 ell update recently
released identified a combined total supply of 15.11 acres
z
2005 BLI
Consumed
7 1-05 th 12-01-05
Remaining Buildable
one - ru acreage
R-2 8.29 2.46 5.83
R-3 6.92 0.43 6.49
Totals 15.11 2.89 12.32
Although the above numbers provide a general over view of the amount of land remaining it is valluable also to
consider the availability of both large parcels and small properties. This has relevance in tenns of assessing the
potential for actual development in the coming years.
Potential Dwelling units per
buildable lot
Total number of lots
1 51
2 13
3 4
4 5
5 2
6 1
7 2
10 4
12 ' 1
17 1
Of all the R-2 and R-3 properties with further development potential, over half (6.33 acres) of the net buildable land
is from lots (51) with potential for only one additional dwelling. These lots can be envisioned as at 7000 square foot
(R2) lot that currently contains a single family home, where a second dwelling could be added in 1the rear of the
property. In the table above it is evident that there remain very few lots (11) that could be developed with 5 or
more units. It appears that available supply of large lots necessary to create mid-sized attached rental housing
projects (10-20 units) is limited, and there is no single R-2 or R-3 parcel available, within the City, that can currently
accommodate a development of greater than 20 apartment units.
The Land Use Ordinance approval standards for annexations (18.106.030) establishes a criteria 1that there be less
than a five year supply of vacant and redevelopable land in the proposed classification within the current city limits.
The 1983 Comprehensive Plan's Housing Element provides an estimated that the land need for cl 20 year supply of
multi-family residential land was 54 acres. Utilizing this projection a 5-year supply would be approximately 13.5
acres. Under this methodology it currently appears that Ashlands City Limits contains a 4.56-yeClr supply of multi-
family residential.
From the Desk of:
Brandon Goldman
Housing Program Specialist
Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305
20 East Main Street Fax: 541-488-5311
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900
www.ashland.or.us
l~
r.t. ,
---,---'~-~--~-- ~
The Comprehensive Plan's Housing Element also established a goal (6.11.4.a) that the City establish and maintain
a database system which in part includes a measurement of vacant land and land consumption. This system was
modernized in 1998 to be a Geographic Information System (GIS) based inventory. As part of this process the City
examined the prior land inventory, then current aerial photographs, topography and GIS data, and the current
zoning code to refine the methodology for determining what was considered vacant, partially vac;ant, redevelopable,
and un-developable. The result of this undertaking was an inventory that more accurately assessed development
potential, factoring in environmental constraints as well as careful examination of established nei!~hborhoods where
the zoning of these small lots would permit additional dwellings.
The1998-1999 Buildable Lands Inventory quantified consumption of land from 1990-1998 to assist in projecting
future distribution of housing types, and thus ensure an adequacy of the supply. Between 1990 and 1998 a
combined 35.88 acres of multifamily land was developed. Since the conclusion of the 1998-99 BLI (through
12/01/05) an additional 23.27 acres of multifamily land has been consumed. Thus in a 16 year period ( 1-1-90 to
12-1-05) approximately 59 acres of R-2 and R-3lands were developed. The consumption rate established by these
past development trends is essentially 3.69 acres annually. Using this methodology a 5-year supply of multi-family
lands would be 18.43 acres. Therefore the current 12.32 acre supply translates into an estimated 3.3 year supply.
Therefore by examining the BLI assessment of available property zoned either R-2 or R-3 it appears there is
presently a deficit of appropriately zoned land to satisfy a 5 year supply at this time. Although neiither methodology
examines the distinction between small (1-4 units), medium (5-20), and large (20 or more) development potentials it
is worthy of consideration when assessing the availability of land suitable for the types of developments that would
have an economy of scale to effectively target low and median income renters.
From the Desk of:
Brandon Goldman
Housing Program Specialist
Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305
20 East Main Street Fax: 541488-5311
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900
www.ashland.or.us
1.5
,.,
CITlr OF
ASHL~AND
July 29, 2005
Andy Cochrane
D & A Enterprise
1970 AsWand Street
Ashland, OR 97520
RE: Planning Action #: P A#2004-141
Dear Mr. Cochrane:
At its meeting of , the AsWand Planning Commission approved your request for an Outline Plan., Site Review,
Exception to the Street Standards and a Tree Removal Permit for the property.1ocatedat 380 Clay Street --
Assessor's Map # 39 IE 11 C, Tax Lot 2500.
The Findings, Conclusions and Orders document, adopted at the July 12, 2005 meeting, is enclosed.
Please note the follow.
1.
A fmal map prepared by a registered surveyor must be submitted within one year of the date of
preliminary approval; otherwise, approval becomes invalid.
6J
DJ
~
A final plan must be submitted within 18 months of the date of preliminary approval; otherwise, approval
becomes invalid.
There is a 15-day appeal period that must elapse before a building permit may be issued.
All of the conditions imposed by the Planning Commission must be fully met before an occupancy permit
may be issued.
5.
Planning Commission approval is valid for a period of one year only, after which time a new application
would have to be submitted.
Please feel free to call me at 488-5305 if you have any. questions.
~
I Molnar
Planning Manager
cc: See attached list
DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
20 E. Main Street
Ashland, Oregon 97520
www.ashland.or.us
Tel: 541-488-5305
Fax: 541-552-2050
TTY: 800-735-2900
1+
r~'
P A#2004-141 P A#2004-141 P A#2004-141
BRAND CAROLYN SW ALES COLIN HOLLEY BR"'{ AN
2701 CLAY CREEK WAY 1282 OLD WILLOW LN 324 LIBERTY
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520
P A#2004-141 P A#2004-141 PA#2004-141
COOPER GLEN CROSS ELIZABETH DOUG IRVINE
3096 CALLE ROSALES PO BOX 3217 495 EMIGRMIT CR RD
SANTA BARBRA, CA 93105 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520
P A#2004-141 P A#2004-141 P A#2004-141
TOM GIORDANO ROBERT & ALLISON WILDMAN GREG GARGUS
2635 TAKELMA WY 420 CLA Y ST 400 CLAY ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR~ 97520
PA#2004-141 PA#2004-141 D & A ENTERJlRISES
ROBERT KORTT GLENN COOPER ANDY COCH:RANE
TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER P. O. BOX 948 1970 ASHL~ID STREET
3350 GREEN ACRES DR NOVATO, CA 94948 ASHLAND, OR 97520
CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502
PA#2004-141 P A#2004-141 PA#2004-141
ROBERT & ALLISON WILDMAN ALBERT PEPPE CAROL YN BltAND
420 CLAY ST 321 CLAY ST 2701 CLA Y CJR. WY
A~HLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA#2004-141 PA#2004-141 PA#2004-141
ALEX FORRESTER GLENN COOPER ALAN HARPI~R
% FORRESTER & FORRESTER 3096 CALLE ROSALES 717 MURPHY RD
545 A STREET NOVATO, CA 93105 MEDFORD, OIR 97504
ASHLAND, OR 97520
PA#2004-141 PA#2004-141
ALAN HARPER OSHANA
HORNECKER, COWLING 321 CLAY STREET #26
717 MURPHY RD ASHLAND, OR 97520
Medford, OR 97504
~ud~~b.M
DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
20 E. Main Street
Ashland, Oregon 97520
www.ashland.or.us
Tel: 541-488-5305
Fax: 541-552-2050
TTY: 800-735-2900
,~
~i.'
BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION
June 14, 2005
IN THE MA TIER OF PLANNING ACTION #2004-141, REQUEST FOR OUTLINE ) FINDINGS,
PLAN AND SITE REVIEW FOR A 117-UNIT DEVELOPMENT UNDER THE ) CONCLUSIONS
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OPTION FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED 380 ) AND ORDERS
CLAY STREET. AN EXCEPTION TO CITY OF ASHLAND STREET )
STANDARDS IS REQUESTED TO MEANDER A PROPOSED SInEW ALK )
ALONG CLAY STREET AROUND A CEDAR TREE LOCATED AT THE )
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE PROPERTY. A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT IS )
REQUESTED TO REMOVE FOUR TREES ON THE SITE. )
)
APPLICANT: D and A Enterprise
)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RECITALS:
1) Tax lot 2500 of.391E llC is located at 380 Clay Street. The Comprehensive Plarl designation is Multi-
Family Residential with a proposed zoning ofR-2.
2) The applicant is requesting Outline Plan and Site Review approval for a 117 -unit 4ievelopment under the
Performance Standards Options. The application includes an exception to City of Ashland Local Street
Standards to meander a short section of sidewalk proposed for installation along Clay Street, as well as a
Tree Removal Permit to. remove approximately four trees.
3) The criteria for Outline Plan approval are described in section 18.88.040 A. 4 of the Ashland
Land Use Ordinance. as follows:
The Planning Commission shall approve the outline plan when it finds the following criteria have been
met:
a. That the development meets all applicable ordinance requirements of the Cityof.Ashland.
b. That adequate key City facilities can be provided including water, sewer, paved access to and through
the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, police and fire protection and adlequate
transportation; and that the development will not cause a City facility to operate beyond capacity.
c. That the existing and natural features of the land; such as wetlands, floodplain corridors, ponds, large
trees, rock outcroppings, etc., have been identified in the plan of the development 8lrld significant
features have been included in the open space, common areas, and unbuildable areas.
d. That the development of the land will not prevent adjacent land from being developed for the uses
shown in the Comprehensive Plan.
e. That there are adequate provisions for the maintenance of open space and commc~n areas, if required
or provided, and that if developments are done in phases that the early phases have the same or higher
ratio of amenities as proposed in the entire project.
f. That the proposed density meets the base and bonus density standards established under this Chapter.
g. The development-complies with the Street Standards. (Ord 2836, S2 1999).
J"
The criteria for Site Plan approval are described in section 18.72.070 of the Asll1land Land Use
Ordinance as follows:
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 de\lelopment.
B. 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 C~ouncil for
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. All improvements in the street right-of-way shall ~X)mply with the
Street Standards in Chapter 18.88, Performance Standards Options. (Ord.2655, 1991; Ord 2836 S6,
1999)
The criteria for a Tree Removal Permit are described in section 18.61.080 of tble Ashland Land
Use Ordinance as follows:
An applicant for a Tree Removal-Staff Permit shall demonstrate that the following cnteria are satisfied.
The Staff Advisor .may require an arborist's report to substantiate the criteria for a Plermit.
A. . Hazard Tree:: The Staff Advisor shall issue a tree removal permit for a hazard tree if the applicant
demonstrates that a tree is a hazard and warrants removal.
1. A hazard tree is a tree that is physically damaged to the degree that it is clear tllat it is likely to fall
and injure persons or property. A hazard tree may also include a tree that is located 'within public rights
of way and is causing damage to existing pub~ic or private facilities or services and such facilities or
services cannot be relocated or the damage alleviated. The applicant must demonstrate that the condition
or location of the tree presents a clear public safety hazard or a foreseeable danger of property damage to
an existing structure and such hazard or danger cannot reasonably be alleviated by treatment or pruning.
2. The City may require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each hazard tree pursuant to AMC
18.61.084. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the penmit.
B. Tree that is Not a Hazard: The City shall issue a tree removal permit for a tree that is not a hazard if
the applicant demonstrates all of the following:
1. The tree is proposed for removal in order. to permit the application to be consistent with other
applicable Ashland Land Use Ordinance requirements and ~tandards. (e.g. other apI)licable Site Design
and Use Standards). The Staff Advisor may require t4e building footprint of the de\relopment to be
staked to allow for accurate verification of the permit application; and
2. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soill stability, flow of
1'1
surface waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks; and
3. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes,
canopies, and species diversity within 200 feet of the subject property.
The City shall grant an exception to this criterion when alternatives to the tree remo'val have been
considered and no reasonable alternative exists to allow the property to be used as p,ermitted in the zone.
Nothing in this .section shall require that the residential density be reduced below th(~ permitted density
allowed by the zone. In making this determination, the City may consider alternativ(~ site plans or .
placement of structures or alternate landscaping designs that would lessen the impact on trees, so long as
the alternatives continue to comply with other provisions of the Ashland Land Use ()rdinance.
4. The City shall require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each tree granted approval
pursuant to AMC 18.61.084. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of a]~proval of the
permit.
An exception to the Street Standards is not subject to the Variance requirements of section 18.100
and'may be granted with respect to the Street Standards in 18.88.050 if all of tile following
circumstances are found to exist:
A. There is demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements of this chapter due to a unique
or unusual aspect of the site or proposed use of the site. .
B. The variance will result in equal or superior transportation facilities and connecti'vity;
C. The variance is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty; and
D. The variance is consistent with the stated Purpose and Intent of the Performance Standards Options
Chapter.(Ord 2836, Amended, 02/02/1999)
4) The Planning Commission, following proper public notice, held a Public Hearing on February 8, 2005
and June 14, 2005, at which time testimony was received and exhibits were presented. The Planning
Commission approved the application for Outline Plan, Site Review, Tree Removal and an Exception to City
of Ashland Local Street Standards subject to conditions pertaining to the appropriate d(~velopment of the site.
In addition, the Planning Commission forwarded a recommendation for approval of the Annexation to the
Ashland City Council.
Now, therefore, The Planning Commission of the City of Ashland finds, concludes and recommends as
follows:
SECTION 1. EXHmrrS
F or the purposes of reference to these Findings, the attached index of exhibits, data, and testimony
will be used.
Staff Exhibits lettered with an "s"
I~
Proponent's Exhibits, lettered with a "P"
Opponent's Exhibits, lettered with an "0"
Hearing Minutes, Notices, Miscellaneous Exhibits lettered with an "M"
SECTION 2. CONCLUSORY FINDINGS
2.1 The Planning Commission finds that it has received all information necessary to make a decision
based on the Staff Report, public hearing testimony and the exhibits receive4i.
2.2 The Planning Commission finds that the application complies with the applicable approval
criteria described in 18.88.030 A 4.for Outline Plan approval and 18.72 for ~;ite Review
approval. Clay Street will be upgraded, new streets will be installed and public utilities will be
extended to serve the project. The application identifies the construction of a half street
improvement along the frontage of the property. This includes a pavement overlay, installation of
storm drains, curb and gutter, bicycle lane, planting strips, street trees and a :public sidewalk. In
addition, other sections of Clay Street will be improved, both north and south of the property, in
order to provide safe vehicular, pedestrian and bicycle access to and from the site, as well as to
East Main Street and Ashland Street.
Public water, sewer and storm sewer lines are located in Clay Street and available, or can be
extended, to serve th~ project. Run-off from the site will be ,directed into storm water facilities
constructed within the new streets and distributed to Clay Street and an on-site wetland
/detention system located along the northwesterly portion of the developmeIlt. Multi-use
pathways are proposed for installation throughout the project in order to.pro'vide convenient,
direct routes to and through neighboring properties.
2.3 The Planning Commission finds that the existing and natural features of the land; such as
wetlands and large trees have been identified in the plan of the development and included in the
open space and common areas. While the project design slightly encroaches upon the
preliminarily delineated boundary of the wetland, the revised plan addresses disturbance to the
wetland by providing a mitigation area that is substantially larger than the inlpacted area. The
. applicant's consultant notes that the wetland mitigation area and the creatiorl of wetlands for
storm water detention and treatment will provide better overall water qualit)r in the Bear Creek
Basin, as well as providing wildlife habitat, recreation and aesthetic beauty 1br the site.
The project's neighborhood street design has been substantially modified in order to account for
not only the location of wetland, but also the large cottonwood trees at the s4)uthwest comer of
the site, as well as the existing farmhouse. Although the Poplar species is thought to be
undesirable within developing residential neighborhoods due to the potential for the breaking and
dropping of limbs, the applicant has chosen to retain these large majestic trees within an open
space area. Specifically, the wetland, wetland mitigation area and all three large poplar trees have
been incorporated within a large common areas throughout the project.
t't
2.4 The Commission finds that the application complies with the base densilty requirements of
the underlying zoning (i.e. R-2 zoning district) and will not prevent adjacent: land from being
developed for uses shown in the Comprehensive Plan. The application proposes to construct
approximately 117 housing units on an approximately IO-acre parcel. The h~:>using mix will
include the existing single-family home, 36 duplexes (72 units) and 11 fourplexes (44 units). The
project density conforms to permitted density requirements of the R-2 Zoning District, allowing
for a base density of 13.5 units/acre or approximately 127 units (.6 acres of wetland subtracted
from calculations as per 18.106.030 F.). This does not take into account the possible additional
density bonus permitted due to the provision of affordable housing.
A system of new public streets and multi-use pathways will be constructed to serve and provide
circulation throughout the entire project. The adjoining 5-acre parcel to the Ilorth is located
within Ashland's Urban Growth Boundary and has a Plan designation that alccommodates future
residential uses. The new neighborhood street system integrates two public streets that will
terminate at the north property line, but would eventually extend into the adjoining undeveloped
property. In addition, a new east-we~t oriented street will straddle a portion of the project's
northerly boundary. This street provides a second access to the project from Clay Street, as well
as providing future access to the abutting property to the north. The public alley system has been
designed throughout the project and allows rear as well as side access to individual garages and
surface-parking areas, including connections to existing and planned alley C()nnections north and
south of the development. .
25 The Commission finds that the proposed development plan with attached l~nditions of approval
ensures that existing and proposed public streets are designed and installed consistent with the City
of Ashland's Local Street Standards. New streets are designed with planting strips and public
sidewalks at widths that, in most cases, will provided for additional on-street parking. In order to
retain an existing, I8-inch in diameter cedar- tree, a relatively minor exc'eption to City Street
Standards is requested to permit the installation of a small segment of curb sidle sidewalk along Clay
Street. The Commission finds that the location, size and health of the tree pres1ent a clear difficulty to
complying with City street standards. The design and use of the public sidewalk will not be
compromised, given the relatively small adjustment in sidewalk configuration. Accordingly, the
Commission supports this deviation and believes it complies with the aplproval criteria for an
exception.
2.6 The Commission finds that the site plan and residential unit design colILplies with the
requirements of Ashland's Site Design and Use chapter, as well as with applicable multi-family
design standards. The project's neighborhood street design has been substantially modified in
order to account for the location of wetlands, the large cottonwood trees at tIle southwest corner
of the site, as well as the existing farmhouse.
Each residential structure is oriented toward the public street, with required ]~arking located to the
rear or side of the structure. Public alleys provide access to individual garag(~s and surface
parking areas, thereby leaving the vast majority of newly constructed streets free of driveway
aprons and available for resident and guest parking.
~o
Five percent of the total project area is required to be Included within commonly owned open
space. J\bout 10% of the total project area is included within common areas and open spaces.
This includes a picnic area adjacent to the YMCA soccer fields, a children's active play area and
the passive wetland area. It should be noted that the total lot coverage for thc~ entire project is
approximately 50%. This is considerably lower than the 65% lot coverage standard permitted
within the R-2 Zoning District. Also, street trees will be installed along all s1treet frontages, while
individual yard spaces will be planted with lawn, ground covers and a varie~y of shrubs and trees.
Consequently, the Commission finds that the landscaping plan is consistent 'with the
requirements and standards for Site Review approval.
SECTION 3. DECISION
3.1 Based on the reCQrd of the Public Hearing on this matter, the Planning Commission concludes that the
proposal for Outline Plan and Site Review approval for a 117 -unit development, with a. Tree Removal Permit
and exception to Ashland's'Local.Street Standards is supported by evidence in the v~hole record.
Therefore, based on our overall conclusions, and upon the proposal being subject to each of the following
conditions, we approve Planning Action #2004-141. Further, if anyone or more ofthc~ conditions below are
found to be invalid, for any reason whatsoever, then Planning Action # 2004-141 is (lenied. The following
are the conditions and they are attached to the approval:
1) That all proposals of the applicant are conditions of approval.unless otherwise modified here.
2) That a consent to annexation form be completed, which is non-revocable for a period of one year
from its date.
3) That a boundary description and map be prepared in accordance with ORS 308.225. A registered
land surveyor shall prepare the description and map. The boundaries shall b(~ surveyed and
monuments established as required by statute subsequent to Council approval of the proposed
annexation..
4) That the applicant submit an electric distribution plan including load calculati()ns and locations of all
primary and secondary services including transformers, cabinets and all other necessary equipment.
This plan must be reviewed and approved by the Electric Department prior t<) Final Plan approval.
Transformers and cabinets shall be located in areas least visible from streets, while considering the
access needs of the Electric Department.
5) That a final utility plan for the project shall be reviewed and approved by the Engineering Division
and Building Divisions at the time of Final Plan. The utility plan shall include the location of
connections to all public facilities in and adjacent to the development, incl\lding the locations of
water lines and meter sizes, sewer mains and services, manholes and clean-outs, storm drainage
pipes and catch basins.
~,
6) That the identification, relocation and piping of existing irrigation facilitiesb(~ addressed at the time
of Final Plan. The design, relocation and installation of irrigation system shall be reviewed and
approved by the Talent Irrigation District prior to the. City of Ashland approval of the final
engineered construction documents. The irrigation facilities shall be installe<l as part of the overall
public infrastructure requirements.
7) That the engineered design of all on-site storm water detention systems (i.e. wetland/detention
system) shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department, E~uilding Official and
Staff Advisor prior to Final Plan approval and the commencement of public infrastructure
installation and the issuance of an excavation permit. The design of the wetland! detention shall
incorporate required pollution control systems (if applicable), while the discharge shall be
designed so as not to significantly increase the volume of runoff beyond pre..development
amounts onto the property to the north. The permanent maintenance of on-site storm water
detention systems must be addressed through the project's CC&R's and approved by the Public
Works Department and Building Division.
8) That the engineered construction drawings for Clay Street comply with City of Ashland Street
Local Street Standards. Clay Street shall be improved along the entire frontage of the property.
Improvements to Clay Street shall consist approximately with the following standards: 28-feet of
pavement overlay width (includes two travel lanes and an approximately six-foot bike lane), curb
and gutter, storm drains, 7.5' planting strip and a six-foot wide public sidewalk. The Final Plan
shall include profiles and cross sections, with erosion control and slope stability methodologies
installed consistent with the standards contained in AMC 18.62.080B.
9) That a half street improvement including curb and gutter, storm drain facilities planting strip and
public sidewalk be installed along the street frontage of the neighboring pro]~erty to the north (39
IE lICB, #1100). The design of these improvements shall be consistent with Ashland's Local
Street Standards, allow for a smooth transition to the adjoining sidewalk network and be
provided at the time of Final Plan. Such improvements shall be installed as ])art of the overall
public infrastructure requirements for the subdivision.
10) That an engineered design for a right turn only lane on southbound Clay Str(~t at Ashland Street
shall be provided at the time of Final Plan approval. The engineered design shall include the
widening of pavement width at the intersection; installation of curb and gutter, storm drain
facilities (if applicable) and sidewalks from the Clay Street! Ashland Street iltltersection to and
through the bend (i.e. elbow) in Clay Street to the existing curb and sidewallc on the west side of
Clay Street, adjacent to Wing Spread Park. Such improvements shall be installed as part of the
overall public infrastructure requirements for the subdivision.
11) That the engineered construction drawings for all new public streets within the project shall
comply with City of Ashland Local Street Standards. The minimum street width shall be no less
than 22-feet in width at intersections (unless permitted by the Ashland Fire ])epartment), and a
minimum width of26 to 28-feet when accommodating on-street parking on both sides of the
street. Plans to include profiles and cross sections, with erosion control and slope stability
methodologies installed consistent with the standards contained in AMC 18.62.080B.
~~
12) That a street plug, one foot in width, be dedicated adjacent to public streets ~md alleys that adjoin
the north property boundary. In addition, a street plug shall be dedicated along the eastern
boundary of the project, between the public alley and east property line. .
13) That the engineered construction drawings for the project address the design and installation of
public multi-use pathways and fence gates from the project to the City of Ashland Parks/Ashland
Family YMCA Soccer Fields. The design of the multi-use pathway shall be in accord with City
Local Street Standards, reviewed by the Director of the Ashland Parks Department, and approved
by the Staff Advisor prior to signature of the final survey plat or the installation of improvements
associated with the subdivision. That the development and surfacing (i.e. all weather surface) of
the multi-use pathway at the south boundary of the project be extended through the existing
easement on the adjoining parcel to the south (tax lots #200 & 201). A design for the pathway
shall be submitted at the time of Final Plan approval and installed as part of the subdivision's
public infrastructure.
14) That public easements shall be identified on the final survey plat for all multi-use pathways. The
project CC&R's shall note that the pathways are for public use and shall not be obstructed or
through access to the east restricted unless authorized by the City of Ashlandl and Ashland Parks
Department
15) That the requirements of the Ashland Fire Department, including but not limited to hydrant
placement and flow and apparatus access, shall be clearly identified on the eJrlgineered
construction drawings and reviewed by the Ashland Fire Department at the time of Final Plan
and approved prior to signature of the' final survey plat or the installation of improvements
associated with the subdivision.
16) That all recommendations of the Ashland Tree Commission noted at their Fel)ruary 3 and June 9th,
2005 meetings, and consistent with Ashland's Si~e Design and Use Standards and Tree Preservation
Ordinance, shall be incorporated into a revised Landscaping Plan (if applicable) prior to Final Plan
approval. The recommendations shall be included on a revised landscaping plan and final irrigation
plan at the time of submission of building pennit.
17) That prior to any disturbance occurring on the site or the. issuance of a building pennit, a Tree
Verification Pennit shall be applied for. Required Tree Protection Measures (18.61.200) shall be
instituted prior to any development activities, including, but not limited to clearing, grading,
excavation or demolition work, and shall be removed only after completio1n of all construction
activity, including landscaping and irrigation installation.
18) That a final copy of the CC&R's for the Homeowner's Association shall be provided at the time
of Final Plan and approved.prior to signature of the Final survey plat. CC&R.'s to describe
responsibility for the pruning and continual monitoring of the three poplar tr~~es, 'maintenance of
common area landscaping, private driveways, multi-use pathways and on-sitle storm water
detention facilities. The Homeowner's Association is responsible for contracting with a utility
maintenance company for the maintenance of the storm water wetland/deten1tion facility. All
A-S
parameters for maintenance of the facility, including time lines and enforcetJnent, shall be
reviewed and approved by the City Public Works Department and described in the CC&R's.
19) That the project complies with the Affordable Housing Standards as describled in 18.106.030 G.
Each affordable unit shall be identified and the required term of affordabili~{ agreements (i.e. in
perpetuity) signed prior to signature of the final survey plat, with proof of re1cording submitted to
the City of Ashland Housing Program Coordinator prior to issuance of a cerltificate of occupancy.
20) That the CC&R's identify which units are subject to the City's Affordable Housing requirements
and terms of affordability.
21) That a DemolitionIMove permit be issued for all applicable structures on thc:~ property prior to
signature of the survey plat.
22) That opportunity-to-recycle facilities shall be shall be identified in conjunction with the design of
each building and in accordance with the standards described in section 18.72.115 of the Ashland
Land Use Ordinance prior to issuance of a building permit.
23) That the color, texture, dimensions, shape and building materials for all exterior components of the
project be included at the time of submission of building permit. The information shall be consistent
with the colors, texture, dimensions and shape of materials and building details proposed and
approved as part of the land use application.
24) That required bicycle parking shall be identified on plans submitted at the time of building permit
review. The parking shall be designed and installed consistent with the standards described in
18.92.040
25) That the applicant agrees to construct the project in accordance with the approved plan and City
ordinances and waives the right to file a claim under Oregon Statewide Measure 37. The signed
waiver shall be submitted to the City of Ashland Legal Department for revie'w arid approval prior
to signature of the survey plat or adoption of a resolution or ordinance formally annexing the
property.
26) That prior to Final Plan submittal, the applicant's shall submit a wetland delineation and wetland
mitigation/enhancement plan that has been reviewed and approved by the Oregon Division of
State Lands and Staff Advisor. Such plans shall include civil engineering spc~cifications for any
water detenlion,watettreatment and water distribution.
/ '" ,/' ' ," ' -, "") /l "- ,.:.~)
~._. "-2%1: .;A
rlannin~ CommiSSion Approval
7/2'~OS-
Dat
~'t
CITY OF
ASHLAND
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
JUNE 14, 2005
CALL TO ORDER
Chair John Fields called the Ashland Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. on May 10,2005 at the Civic Center
Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon.
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT:
John Fields, Chair
Mike Morris
Russ Chapman
John Stromberg
Allen Douma
Olena Black
Michael Dawkins
Dave Dotterrer
Kerry KenCaim
Jack Hardesty, present
John McLaughlin, Planning Director
Bill Molnar, Planning Manager
Maria Harris, Senior Planner
Mike Reeder, Assistant City Attorney
Sue Yates, Executive Secretary
ABSENT MEMBERS:
COUNCIL LIAISON:
STAFF PRESENT:
ANNOUNCEMENTS
There will be a study session on June 28, 2005. Staff will provide a presentation on the Riparian Ordinan(~e, the
Conservation Housing Density Bonus as part of the Performance Standards Options based on the Earth Advantage
model, and updates on the Downtown Plan and on the ordinance review process.
Douma mentioned the memo sent by Mike Reeder regarding a number of legal rulings on a variety of issules. He
would like this as a study session agenda item. McLaughlin said since the rulings are specific to a current planning
action, they should be talked about at the hearing for the planning action. Reeder said the memo deals with
interpretation of ordinances but within the context of the Northlight application. The Commissioners asked for an
opportunity to discuss the memo after the Northlight planning action has been through the process.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
At the end of page 1, Roll Call, change "Stromberg voted yes and no" to "Stromberg voted yes." Black/I~ouma m/s
to approve the minutes of the May 10, 2005 Regular Meeting (as amended), the May 24, 2005 Continuation of the
Regular Meeting, and the May 24, 2005 Study Session. Voice Vote: Unanimous.
PUBLIC FORUM - No one came forth to speak.
TYPE II PUBLIC HEARINGS
PLANNING ACTION 2004-141
REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING MAP CHANGE FROM JACKSON COUN'TY ZONING
RR-5 (RURAL RESIDENTIAL) TO CITY OF ASHLAND ZONING R-2 (LOW DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTI~~L) FOR AN
APPROXIMATELY 10-ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT 380 CLAY STREET. THE REQUEST INCLUDES OUTLINE FtLAN AND
SITE REVIEW APPROVAL FOR A 117 -UNIT DEVELOPMENT UNDER THE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OPTIC)NS. AN
EXCEPTION TO THE STREET STANDARDS IS REQUESTED TO MEANDER THE PROPOSED SIDEWALK ON TIHE CLAY
STREET FRONTAGE AROUND A CEDAR TREE LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE PROPERTY. A TREE
REMOVAL PERMIT IS REQUESTED TO REMOVE FOUR TREES ON THE SITE.
APPLICANT: D AND A ENTERPRISE
Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts - Black, Douma, Fields, Dawkins, and Chapman had a site visit.
~s-
Morris had a site visit and a potential conflict. He did some installation work for his brother on a property owned by
Andy Cochrane (applicant). He did not feel this would prejudice his ability to make an unbiased decision.
Dotterrer noted a letter contained in the packet from Carolyn Brand stating that she does not believe Dott(;~rrer should
participate in a hearing involving Andy Cochrane because of their friendship and what she has viewed as his prior
actions promoting Cochrane's interests. Dotterrer stated he did not believe his relationship with Cochrant~ would
prejudice his ability to make an unbiased decision.
STAFF REPORT
Molnar stated this application involves Annexation, Outline and Site Review approval, a Tree Removal re:quest and an
Exception to the City Street Standards. This was last reviewed at the February Planning Commission me(;~ting.
Several issues were raised at that meeting in the Staff Report, through public testimony and by the Commissioners. It
was decided to continue the application.
The application has changed substantially. There is a reduction in the number of units from 130 to 117 units. The
housing mix has changed (see Staff Report). The farmhouse will be retained. The major changes revolve around the
concerns for the potential wetland on the site. In addition, the project has been redesigned to retain the three large
cottonwood trees.
Molnar showed photos of the site. He showed the proposed transportation system for this project connecting with
some of the other developments in the area.
He showed the area of the w,etland (approximately .6 acre) located in the northwest comer of the project. To
compensate for altering the wetlands, the applicant plans to expand the wetland area toward the northeast. It is
thought the underground hydrology feeding the wetlands is possibly connected to the wetlands toward the north that
leads to Bud's Dairy. The other wetland area and large cottonwoods are located in the southwest comer lt~aving a
large buffer between the farmhouse and the new units that are being proposed.
There are two new streets accessing the property that could ultimately be shared with the properties to the north. All
the other accessways are public alleys to provide rear access to the parking associated with the units. There are no
public driveways off the street system thereby providing a lot of on-street parking.
Molnar showed the tentative stOlID water layout. There will be piped systems in Clay Street and in all the new streets.
Some storm water will be collected in piped systems that will deposit onto the wetland area. Ultimately, tJne storm
water will travel to the northeast comer of the property where it will have a metered overflow before continuing onto
the property to the north.
Molnar showed a plan with the existing street improvements and the proposed street improvements. The applicant is
proposing off-site improvements to have a connected sidewalk system from East Main to Ashland Street. Clay Street
will be resurfaced to allow for a six foot wide bike lane, a seven to eight foot parkrow, and a six foot side-vvalk.
Staff has outlined the following areas of concern:
Delineation of the wetlands. ~Not only is there a requirement from the State to get the delineation, but one of the
applicable approval standards for Outline Plan approval is that significant natural features such as wetlands have to be
identified and incorporated into common areas or unbuildable areas in the project. The applicant has done: a
preliminary delineation, yet it has not been submitted to the State. Molnar said in order to make a determination that
the natural features have been accurately identified, a delineation is the standard approach. A specific wetland
planting or enhancement plan has not been submitted. Staff would like a confrrmation on the wetland boundary. If
approved, it would be up to Staff as part of Final Plan approval to determine if the enhancement plan for the area was
appropriate.
Preservation of the cottonwoods~ The arborist has suggested the trees will have to be continually monitored over the
life of the project. Cottonwoods are prone to break limbs.
Traffic at intersections~ Clay Street currently has approximately 900 vehicle trips per day (vtpd). Clay Str~~et is
identified as a collector street and can accommodate between 1500 and 5000 vtpd. The applicant has subrnitted a
short addendum addressing traffic. If the project is approved with the conditions as noted, approximately 75 percent
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
JUNE 14, 2005
MINUTES
2
~"
----,------ - ----- --
of the frontage of Clay Street between East Main and Ashland Street will be brought up to City standard (curb, gutter
and sidewalk on one side).
Dawkins did not believe the available building inventory had been addressed. Molnar said there had been discussion
at the past meeting by Commissioner Briggs. The applicant provided information taken from City Staffw'ho looked at
the available lands inventory and subtracted out what lands had been approved for development over the past six years
and made a determination based on the consumption rate. Staff felt it was a fair approach and one they have used in
the past to determine the five year supply, based on the approval standards for annexation. The approval standards
reference the Buildable Lands Inventory (BLI) as well as the Housing Element. Following the Housing Element, for a
five year supply, thirteen acres of buildable multi-family land is needed within the City Limits at anyone time. When
Staff updated the BLI in 1998-99, they took a more conservative approach and found eight to ten acres for a five year
period were needed.
Douma referred to page 5 of the Staff Report (6-14-05) Policy XII-I, specifically, "The five year supply shall be
determined by the rate of consumption necessitated in the projections made..." Staff and the applicant se,em to be
basing inventory on consumption rates, not on anything referenced in the Comprehensive Plan. Using the
consumption model (18 acres used in the last five years), does that mean in the next five years we need to have
available 18 acres or 3.6 acres per year? If that is the case, it becomes exponential so that every time we do
something, we increase the ability to do even more. The problem with the consumption model is it builds on itself.
Secondly, Policy XII-2, "The City shall incorporate vacant land only after showing that land of similar qualities does
not already exist..." Should we be including both R-2 and R-3 lands? They are of similar quality.
Molnar responded that we don't distinguish between R-2 and R-3 to establish whether or not we have an adequate
multi-family inventory.
Molnar referenced the 1982 :Housing Element because he thought back then it was based on population projection and
determining what percentagt:~ of the population needed a certain housing type. Did we have enough acreage within our
Urban Growth Boundary to accommodate the needed housing types, based on population projections, not
consumption rate over the next 20 years?
McLaughlin said the demand projected in the Housing Element of the Comp Plan is to provide housing for the future
population for a 20 year period. How many acres of land are needed to meet that population demand for nlulti-family
housing? The plan estimated 54 acres in a 20 year period. It was assumed a five year supply would be 13 acres. The
State has outlined methodology for cities to adopt a Buildable Lands Inventory. One is based on a fairly rt~cent period
of consumption. They came up with ten acres is a five year supply. They are both valid approaches and based on
what is happening with population projections and growth rate. The population projections from 1982 are tracking
well even in the updates with the BLI. Either approach can be valid. At all times there should be at a least a five year
supply of land available in the City for development.
Douma suggested we discourage people from using a consumptive model and we do not reinforce saying \ve agree
with a consumptive model.
Molnar said there are some housing policies in the Comp Plan that say the City should continually review 1their land
needs and their inventories and refers to implementing that policy. It is not an adopted ordinance but a continual task
of the Planning Department. The BLI that was done in 1998 was more of a consumptive model that was prescribed by
the State. Staff isn't necessarily endorsing the applicant's consumptive model but we did have a BLI done in 1998-99
that was a consumptive model that our Council endorsed.
Black noted that she would like to see parking along Clay Street. Molnar said they might show parking on Clay at
Final Plan. Staffs preference is trying to keep as much bike lane without curbside parking as possible. Black
referenced the Annexation Criteria E.2. Is there adequate bike transportation? An obvious destination would be to the
middle school.
PUBLIC HEARING
ALAN HARPER, Hornecker, Cowling, 717 Murphy Road, Medford, OR 97504, stated he has been involved with this
project since the redesign. This is a substantially better project. The applicant has redesigned the project to maintain
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
JUNE 14, 2005
MINUTES
~'1
3
---,----------------
the existing house and poplar trees. He confmned that Reeder said the 120 day clock is starting over (frorn May 19,
2005). The applicant can extend the time limit for a total of245 days.
Harper said the connectivity issue has been addressed, the number of units reduced; there are no density bonus issues,
and adequate open space.
The applicant handed out additional materials at the meeting addressing the wetland delineation and street capacity.
They received a preliminary delineation and punch list of a mitigation plan from Scott English, Northwest Biological
Consulting. There is a hand-written letter from Bob Lobdell, Department of State Lands (DSL). They will still have
to get a DSL permit to do the: project. Wetland area 1 is the only jurisdictional wetland on the site. The approximate
wetland boundaries are acceptable to DSL pending their final concurrence of the site conceptual planning and layout.
Lobdell has reviewed the applicant's mitigation plan and agrees with the direction in which they are going. DSL
would like to see an approved conceptual plan in order to move forward. Harper has submitted a proposed condition
that says the applicant is taking the risk that the final delineation from DSL has to comply with the Outlin(~ Plan.
The applicant has agreed to do all the off-site improvements along Clay Street to meet the capacity necessary for this
project (without reimbursement). The Transportation Engineer,. Bob Kortt, projected a total of 2300 vtpd.
Harper would encourage Staif to write their findings based on the Housing Element model, not the consunlptive
model.
TOM GIORDANO, 2635 Takelma Way, asked for questions.
Dawkins said the applicants have provided the required affordable housing. Giordano said the duplexes are a full size
house plus a studio unit. The studios are beyond the requirement and those units should target a lower income
bracket. They are building affordable units into this project. The applicant is not asking for any subsidies. Dawkins
wondered why they would, if they receive approval for their annexation request. Harper said they meet thl~ standard
and they are accomplishing what the City has asked to accomplish.
Dawkins commented that there a lot of units that are being built to be affordable, but the reality is the market forces
are moving toward units being purchased but not owner occupied. Units are purchased for an investment.
Black asked if the applicant could add to their Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) that one of the
duplexes must be the owner of the rental. Harper did not know of a criteria or CC&R provision that would restrict
one to be owner occupied and the other a rental. They have tried to provide a housing mix. Harper added there will
be CC&R's for the condominiums, another set for the townhomes and a master association. The farmhouse will not
be included in the CC&R's.
Douma wanted to make sure the storm sewer will connect with the larger pipe as he didn't see it on the drawing.
Morris asked if any houses w'ere single level or handicap accessible. Giordano said the duplex units and the fourplex
units can have handicap access on the ground floor.
Black hoped the Logtown Rose on the southwest comer of the property (by the mailboxes) will be preservl~d.
ROBERT D. KORTT, Transportation Engineer, RDK Engineering, 3350 Green Acres Drive, Central Point, OR 9'7502, said
2300 vptd are projected by the year 2024, about half the capacity of Clay Street. He explained, in detail, how this
figure was calculated. He submitted a letter for the record dated June 13, 2005 from RDK Engineering.
Stromberg asked how high the traffic volume would have to get on Clay Street before there is too much traffic for the
street. Kortt said Clay Street can handle a lot of traffic. He thoaght the City would rather not exceed the capacity
because they would want to keep the volumes low enough to keep it livable for the residents. Kortt said the
intersections are the controlling points, level of service, and delay at each end. They want to maintain a level of
service "D" at the p.m. peak time.
Black asked about the pedestrian path to the south. Molnar said as part of the Gargus partition, there was a pedestrian
easement dedicated, but no improvements that have been done. The easement would connect to the Birchvlood
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
JUNE 14, 2005
MINUTES
~1
4
easement and would in turn connect to the easement on the proposed development. It would probably be up to the
City when that easement would be activated. Giordano said the applicant will do that.
There will be path to the YMCA. McLaughlin said a gate design will have to be coordinated with Parks. Molnar said
there is a Condition relating to this. Giordano said there is a potential to hook up through the Cooper property with
the path to Bud's Dairy.
Fields read comments from GREG GARGUS, 400 Clay Street opposing the project.
ROBERT WilDMAN, 420 Clay Street, asked, "Where are all the families?" Are there families lined up that need this
development? He would like Staff to provide numbers associated with how many families, consumption rate, what is
forecast, inventory~ etc. They may find it is not best to annex. Additionally, the wetlands are not finalized and not
well understood.
McLaughlin said the single family residential vacancy rate is one percent. Rental housing is less than fow' percent.
There is a demand for houses. There are only a few vacancies. There is not a process for limiting the nunlber of
houses built or the growth that occurs. The number of homes built has remained fairly constant from bet"reen 100 to
150 per year. The amount of developable land is decreasing each year. McLaughlin said Ashland may be the only
city in Oregon that has a requirement of affordable units under the annexation criteria.
ALBERT PEPE, 320 Clay Street, said in Wingspread units can only be owner occupied. His defmition of aftordability is
people living in it can afford to buy it. He is concerned about the amount of development on Clay Street. He is afraid
they will end up with 400 homes that will have to have access onto Clay Street. It seems like too much at one time.
He is concerned about condo conversions.
OSHANA, 321 Clay Street, #26, said she does not like the density. Her primary concern is the traffic. She can only see
it getting more dangerous and inconvenient for others. Where will the water come for the hundreds of people on
Clay?
Staff Response
Chapman asked about the applicant's suggested Condition 26. Molnar said they would want the Staff Advisor to be
part of the review of the wetland. Lobdell, DSL, has gone to the site and Molnar doubts there will be anything too
different once it goes to the State.
Black would rather see a full street improvement at the north boundary. Molnar said a half street has two travel lanes,
is a minimum of 20 to 22 feet wide, curb gutter and sidewalk on one side.
Rebuttal
Halper said infill projects within exiting neighborhoods can almost be harder on existing neighborhoods. 'There is
some economy of scale in all the projects going on at once, especially when you take into consideration thle off-site
improvements the applicant is willing to do. They have no objection to building to the curb on the north side of the
proj ect.
Halper explained a certain number of units will be less than 500 square feet. Coupling the density and affi)rdability, it
drives the project to create a certain product. The product will serve a certain part of our population. The profitability
for developers is in big houses. The small product isn't as profitable but creates the inventory that the City regulations
are driving.
Giordano said this property is surrounded on three sides by City land. It is a logical place to annex proper1ty.
COMMISSIONERS' DISCUSSION AND MOTION
Chapman/Douma m/s to approve PA2004-141 with the added Condition 26 and forward a favorable reconlll1endation
to the Council to annex this property. There was discussion by the Commissioners about whether to approve the
Annexation or the Site Review first. Chapman withdrew his motion.
Site Review
Chapman/Dotterrer 'm/s to approve the Site Review for PA2004-141 with the added Condition 26.
ASHLAND PLANNING C~ISSION
REGULAR MEETING
JUNE 14, 2005
MINUTES
~'1
5
Dawkins is not comfortable with the wetlands issue. Water wants to go where it wants to go. We should be looking at
the whole neighborhood to see where the water has changed with the different uses that have come into play. He
would like to see a more comprehensive plan of the Clay Street area.
Dotterrer is comfortable with approving with the Condition 26 and including the approval of the Staff Advisor. If
there is a problem, the plan will come back. Molnar said it will be part of their Final Plan review and if Staff felt they
did not follow the intent of their bulleted list of wetland enhancements, Final Plan would be scheduled as a hearing
rather than administratively.
Douma/Stromberg m/s to extend the meeting to 10:30 p.m. Voice Vote: Approved.
The Commissioners discussed whether or not they wanted to have this application come back to them for review of
Final Plan as a public hearing before the full commission. It was decided, that they add a Condition that the
application would come back for Final Plan approval only if there is a discrepancy with the wetland, otherwise the full
commission will not see it again.
Molnar suggested wording to Condition!3 that the development and surfacing of the multi-use pathway of the south
boundary of the project (through taxlot to the south) be designed and improved as part of this project.
Amend the applicant's suggested Condition 26 by adding at the end of the frrst sentence, "and approval by the Staff
Advisor."
Roll Call: Unanimous.
Annexation
Dotterrer/Chapman m/s to recommend to the City Council that they approve the request for annexation.
Douma believes there will be issues on Clay Street at the intersections. There might be a couple more annexations
coming to the Commission in the next five years and something needs to be mitigated sooner rather than later. With
regard to the issue of the BLI, it behooves us to have an ongoing calculation on a six month basis so we know what we
are looking at.
Black does not believe the applicant has met the criteria for annexation. The destination for bicycles to tht~ middle
school cannot be addressed by bringing this land into the City.
We are putting a lot of load on streets that we can't complete. The methodology in the Comp Plan is clear that
apartments would be built on R-2 land. She does not feel assured the housing will stay at the affordable rates.
Chapman said there are bike lanes on Ashland Street. Fields and Dotterrer noted it is a requirement of annexation that
the affordable housing is locked in for 60 years. McLaugWin said the affordable units undergo an annual n~view and
are locked into affordability 'with a deed restriction.
Dawkins said he would hope: we start to re-Iook at how we determine whether annexations happen. Fields said if are
going to use planning to stop growth, there is a larger community discussion. Chapman reminded the ConlDlissioners
there was a huge public process that went into establishing our UGB. And, the Commission made a significant vote
when they said they were not going to extend the UGB. We have managed to slow growth by having infilL
Douma/Morris m/s to extend the meeting to 11:00 p.m. Voice Vote: Approved.
Douma asked for clarification of the calculations used to come up with the available land and those calculations be
brought to the Council and presented to them the way we want to do the calculations in any future annexations.
Roll Call: Douma, Chapman, Dotterrer, Fields and Morris voted "yes" and Stromberg, Dawkins and Black voted
"no."
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
JUNE 14, 2005
MINUTES
~o
6
~_.
._~
Planning Department, 51 Win Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520
541-488-5305 Fax: 541-552-2050 www.ashland.or.us TTY: 1-800-735-2900
CITY OF
,l\SHLAND
PLANNING ACTION: #2004-141
SUBJECT PROPERTY: 380 Clay St.
OWNER/APPLICANT: D and A Enterprise
DESCRIPTION: Request for Annexation, Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map change ffl'Jm Jackson
County zoning RR-5 (Rural Residential) to City of Ashland zoning R-2 (Low Density Multi-Family
Residential) for an approximately 10-acre parcel located at 380 Clay Street. The request includes Outline
Plan and Site Review approval for a 117-unit development under the Performance Standards Option. An
Exception to the Street Standards is requested to meander the proposed sidewalk on the Clay Street
frontage around a cedar tree located in the southwest corner of the property. A Tree Removal Permit is
requested to remove four trees on the site. Comprehensive Plan Design: Low Density Multi-Family
(Proposed); Zoning: R-2 (Proposed); Assessor's Map #391E11C; Tax Lot: 2500.
NOTE: This Planning Action will also be heard by the AsWand Tree Commission on June 9, 2005 at 7:00 p.m. in the Community
Development and Engineering Services building (Siskiyou Room) located at 51 Winburn Way.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: June 14, 2005,7:00 PM, Ashland Civic CE!nter
SUIS.-oCT PROPI!RTY
i
!
S
u
N
A
A8HLAND .TRIED
~
Notice is hereby given that a PUBLIC HEARING on the following request with respect to the ASHLAND LAND USE ORDIf\IANCE will be held before the
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION on meeting date shown above. The meeting will be at the ASHLAND CIVIC CENTER, 11175 East Main Street, Ashland,
Oregon.
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 thl~ issue, precludes your right of
appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) on that issue. Failure to specify which ordinance criterion the objection is basHd 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 prior 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.
During the Public Hearing, the Chair shall allow testimony from the applicant and those in attendance concerning this request. The Chair shall have the right
to limit the length of testimony and require that comments be restricted to the applicable criteria. Unless there is a continuance, if a participant so requests
before the conclusion of the hearing, the record shall remain open for at least seven days after the hearing.
If you have questions or comments conceming this request, please feel free to contact the Ashland Planning Department, at 541-488-5305.
SI
G.lcomm-devlplannmgINotIces MailedI2004-141 6-14-05.doc
ANNEXATIONS - APPROVAL STANDARDS
18.108.030 ADDroval standards
An annexation may be approved if the proposed request for annexation conforms, or can be made to conf<orm through the imposition of
conditions, with the following approval criteria:
A. The land is within the City's Urban Growth Boundary.
B. The proposed zoning for the annexed area is In conformance with the designation indicated on the Comprehensive Plan Map, and the
project, if proposed concurrently with the annexation, is an allowed use within the proposed zoning.
C. The land is currently contiguous with the present City limits.
D. Adequate City facilities for the provision of water to the site as determined by the Public Works Department; the transport of sewage
from the site to the waste water treatment plant as determined by the Public Works Department; thl~ provision of electricity to the
site as determined by the Electric Department; urban storm drainage as determined by the Public Works Department can and will be
provided to and through the subject property. Unless the City has declared a moratorium based upon a shortage of water, sewer, or
electricity, it is recognized that adequate capacity exists system-wide for these facilities.
E. Adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property. For the purposes of this section "adequate
transportation" for annexations consists of vehicular, bicycle, pedestrian and transit transportation meeting the following standards:
1. For vehicular transportation a 20' wide paved access exists, or can and will be constructed, along the full frontage of the project
site to the nearest fully improved collector or arterial street. All streets adjacent to the annexed! area shall be improved, at a
minimum, to a half-street standard with a minimum 20' driving surface. The City may, after assessing the impact of the
development, require the full improvement of streets adjacent to the annexed area. All streets located within annexed areas
shall be fully improved to city standards. Where future street dedications are indicated on the City's Street Dedication Map or
required by the City, provisions shall be made for the dedication and improvement of these streets and included with the
application for annexation.
2. For bicycle transportation safe and accessible bicycle facilities exist, or can and will be construct,eeI. Should the annexation be
adjacent to an arterial street, bike lanes shall be provided on or adjacent to the arterial street. Likely bicycle destinations from
the project site shall be determined and safe and accessible bicycle facilities serving those destinations shall be indicated.
3. For pedestrian transportation safe and accessible pedestrian facilities exist, or can and will be constructed. Full sidewalk
improvements shall be provided on one side adjacent to the annexation for all streets adjacent to the proposed annexed area.
Sidewalks shall be provided as required by ordinance on all streets within the annexed area. WhE~re the project site is within a
quarter of a mile of an existing sidewalk system, the sidewalks from the project site shall be constructed to extend and connect
to the existing system. Likely pedestrian destinations from the project site shall be determined and the safe and accessible
pedestrian facilities serving those destinations shall be indicated.
4. For transit transportation, should transit service be available to the site, or be likely to be extended to the site in the future
based on information from the local public transit provider, provisions shall be made for the construction of adequate transit
facilities, such as bus shelters and bus turn-out lanes. All required transportation improvements shall be constructed and
installed prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any new structures on the annexed property.
F. For all residential annexations, a plan shall be provided demonstrating that the development of the lmtire property will ultimately
occur at a minimum density of 90% of the base density for the zone, unless reductions in the total number of units is necessary to
accommodate significant natural features, topography, access limitations, or similar physical constraints. The owner or owners of the
property shall sign an agreement, to be recorded with the county clerk after approval of the annl~xation, ensuring that future
development will occur in accord with the minimum density indicated in the development plan. For purposes of computing maximum
density, portions of the annexed area containing undevelopable areas such as wetlands, floodplain corridor lands, or slopes greater
than 350/0, shall not be included.
G. For all annexations with a density or potential density of four residential units or greater and involving residential zoned lands, or
commercial, employment or industrial lands with a Residential Overlay (R-Overlay):
1. 350/0 of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 1200/0 of median income; or
2. 250/0 of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below '1000/0 of median income; or
3. 200/0 of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 800/0 of median income; or
4. 150/0 of the base density to quatifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 600/0 of median income; or
5. Title to a sufficient amount of buildable land for development is transferred to a non-profit (IRC S01(3)(c)) affordable housing
developer or comparable Development Corpo'ration for the purpose of complying with subsection 2 above. The land shall be
located within the project and all needed public facilities shall be extended to the area or areas proposed for transfer. Ownership
of the land shall be transferred to the affordable housing developer or Development Corporation prior to commencement of the
project.
The total number of affordable units described in this section G shall be determined by rounding down frad:ional answers to the nearest
whole unit. A deed restriction, or similar legal instrument, shall be used to guarantee compliance with affordable criteria for a period of
not less than .60 years. Properties providing affordable units as part of the annexation process shall qualify for a maximum density bonus
of 25 percent.
H. One or more of the following standards are met:
1. The proposed area for annexation is to be residentially zoned, and there is less than a five'.year supply of vacant and
redevelopable land in the proposed land use classification within the current city limits. "Redevelop4:Jble land" means land zoned
for residential use on which development has already occurred but on which, due to present or e>cpected market forces, there
exists the likelihood that existing development will be converted to more intensive residential uses: during the planning period.
The five- year supply shall be determined from vacant and redevelopable land inventories and by the methodology for land need
projections from the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan; or
2. The proposed lot or lots will be zoned E-1 or C-1 under the Comprehensive Plan, and that the appllicant will obtain Site Review
approval for an outright permitted use, or special permitted use concurrent with the annexation request; or
3. A current or probable public health hazard exists due to lack of full City sanitary sewer or water services; or
4. Existing development in the proposed annexation has inadequate water or sanitary sewer service,; or the service will become
inadequate within one year; or
5. The area proposed for annexation has existing City of Ashland water or sanitary sewer service extended, connected, and in use,
and a signed "consent to annexation" agreement has been filed and accepted by the City of Ashland; or
6. The lot or lots proposed for annexation are an "island" completely surrounded by lands within the city limits. (ORD 2792, 1997)
B.:J..
G: \comm-dev\p1anning\Notices Mailed\2004-141 6-14-05.doc
OUTLINE PLAN APPROVAL
IS.SS.030.A Criteria for Approval
The Planning Commission shall approve the outline plan when it finds the following criteria have been met:
a. That the development meets all applicable ordinance requirements of the City of Ashland.
b. That adequate key City facilities can be provided including water, sewer, paved access to and through the development, electricity, urban
storm drainage, police and fire protection and adequate transportation; and that the development will not cause a City facility to operate
beyond capacity.
c. That the existing and natural features of the land; such as wetlands, floodplain corridors, ponds, large trees, rock outcroppings, etc., have
been identified in the plan of the development and significant features have been included in the open space, common areas, and unbuildable
areas.
d. That the development of the land will not prevent adjacent land from being developed for the uses shown in the Comprehensive Plan.
e. That there are adequate provisions for the maintenance of open space and common areas, if required or provided, and that if
developments are done in phases that the early phases have the same or higher ratio of amenities as proposed in the entire project.
f. That the proposed density meets the base and bonus density standards established under this Chapter.
g. The development complies with the Street Standards. (Ord 2836, S2 1999)
SITE R~VIEW
IS.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.
B. 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.
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)
STRE~TS"'(ANDARDS
18.88.050 F - Exception to Street Standards
An exception to the Street Standards is not subject to the Variance requirements of section 18.100 and may bE! granted with respect to the
Street Standards in 18.88.050 if all of the following circumstances are found to exist:
A. There is demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements of this Chapter due to a unique or unusual aspect of the site or
proposed use of the site.
B. The variance will result in equal or superior transportation facilities and connectivity;
C. The variance is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty; and
o .The variance is consistent with the stated Purpose and Intent of the Performance Standards Options Chapter.
(Ord 2836, Amended, 02/02/1999)
TREE REMOVAL
IS.61.0S0 Criteria for Issuance of Tree Removal - Staff Permit
An applicant for a Tree Removal-Staff Permit shall demonstrate that the following criteria are satisfied. The Staff J~dvisor may require an
arborist's report to substantiate the criteria for a permit.
A. Hazard Tree: The Staff Advisor shall issue a tree removal permit for a hazard tree if the applicant demonstrSltes that a tree is a hazard
and warrants removal.
1. A hazard tree is a tree that is physically damaged to the degree that it is clear that it is likely to fall and injure persons or property. A
hazard tree may also include a tree that is located within public rights of way and is causing damage to existing public or private facilities or
services and such facilities or services cannot be relocated or the damage alleviated. The applicant must demonstrate that the condition or
location of the tree presents a clear public safety hazard or a foreseeable danger of property damage to an existing structure and such hazard
or danger cannot reasonably be alleviated by treatment or pruning.
2. The City may require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each hazard tree pursuant to AMC 18.61.004. Such mitigation
requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit.
B. Tree that is Not a Hazard: The City shall issue a tree removal permit for a tree that is not a hazard if the applicant demonstrates all of
the followi ng :
1. The tree is proposed for removal in order to permit the application to be consistent with other applicable Ashland Land Use Ordinance
requirements and standards. (e.g. other applicable Site Design and Use Standards). The Staff Advisor may require! the building footprint of
the development to be staked to allow for accurate verification of the permit application; and
2. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent
trees, or existing windbreaks; and
3. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes, canopies, and spe:cies diversity within 200
feet of the subject property. The City shall grant an exception to this criterion when altematives to the tree removal have been considered
and no reasonable alternative exists to allow the property to be used as permitted in the zone. Nothing in this section shall require that the
residential density be reduced below the permitted density allowed by the zone. In making this determination, the City may consider
alternative site plans or placement of structures or alternate landscaping designs that would lessen the impact on trees, so long as the
alternatives continue to comply with other provisions of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance.
4. The City shall require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each tree granted approval pursuant to AMI: 18.61.084. Such
mitigation requirements shall be.a condition of approval of the permit.
(ORD 2883 added 06/04/2002)
~3
G: \comm.-dev\p1anning\Notices Mailcd\2004-141 6-14-05.doc
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING
STATE OF OREGON
County of Jackson
The undersigned being first duly sworn states that:
1 · I am ernployed by the City of Ashland, 20 East Main Street, Ashland,
Oregon 97520, lin the Community Development Department.
2. On Mav 31, 2005, I caused to be mailed, by regular mail, in a sealed
envelope with postage fully prepaid, a copy of the attached Public Meetiing Notice
to each person listed on the attached mailing list at such addresses as S~3t forth on
this list under each person's name for Planning Action # 2004-141.
SIGNED AND SWORN TO before rne this 3L day of ./ICUf ' 200!~.
OFFICIAL SEAL
NANCY E SLOCUM
NOTARY PUBLIC .. OREGON
COMMISSION NO. 371650
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES SEPT. 18, 2007
"'i,.;;:'~;~~~
~ [! S'~u
N ary Pu~c for State of Oregon
My Commission Expires: 9.-/~-o 7
..." _ .,..-. ...WI:_,..1"!.J.~'
~~
G:\comm-dev\planning\Forms & Handouts\AFFIDAVIT OF MAllING.doc
ATTN: LEGAL PUBLICATIONS (JODY)
PUBLIC MEETING NOTICE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Public Hearing on the following items with respect to the Ashland
Land Use Ordinance will be held before the Tree Commission on June 9, 2005 at 7:00 p.m. at the office
. of Community Development and Engineering Services (Siskiyou Room) located at 51 Winburn Way,
Ashland, OR. At such Pubic Hearing any person is entitled to be heard.
Request for modification of a previously approved landscaping plan for the property located at 1!l1 - 55 W. Hersey
Street. The proposal is to remove trees and plantings that are inappropriate sizes and species and replace with
new trees andJ~I~rJting~J~f ~ppropriate size and species, given the space available and site charc:lcteristics.
Seventeen trees are proposed for removal and eight are proposed for replanting
Request for a Site Review approval to construct a 2%-story mixed-use building comprised of office space,
retail space, a meditation center and two residential. units for the property located at Parcel 2E oir the Clear
Creek Village Subdivision located on Clear Creek Drive. In addition, a request for a Conditional Use
Permit to use the middle floor as a religious use (Buddhist Meditation Center). The request includes joint
use of the parking facilities in which the office space, retail space and residential units will use thE~ parking
during business hours, and the meditation center and residential units will use the parking during off hours.
Request for Annexation, Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map change from Jackson County zoning RR-5
(Rural Residential) to City of Ashland zoning R-2 (Low Density Multi-Family Residential) for an
approximately 10-acre parcel located at 380 Clay Street. The request includes Outline Plan and Site
Review approval for a 117 -unit development under the Performance Standards Optionss. An Exception to
the Street Standards is requested to meander the proposed sidewalk on the Clay Street frontage around a
cedar tree located in the southwest corner of the property. A Tree Removal Permit is requested to remove
four trees on the site.
Request for Outline and Final Plan approval for a three-lot subdivision under the Performance Standards
Options for the property located at 945 N. Mountain Ave., within the North Mountain Neighborhood Plan
area. The development requests a Site Review approval for a six-unit multi-family residential development,
with three of the residential units that will include ground floor office spaces that can be used as cl Home
Occupation offices.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to partidpate in this .meeting, pleaSE! contact the Oty
Administrator's office at (541) 488-6002 (TIY phone number 1-800-735-2900). Notification 72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the dty to
make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title I).
By order of the Planning Director
John McLaughlin
Publish: 5/31/05
Date e-mailed: 5/26/05
Purchase Order: 65488
as
ASHLAND PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
Addendum
June 14, 2005
PLANNING ACTION: 2004-141
APPLICANT: D and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
LOCATION: 380 Clay Street
ZONE DESIGNATION: Jackson County RR-5 (Current); City of Ashland R-2-P (Proposed)
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Jackson County Rural Residential (Current);
City of Ashland Low Density Multi-Family
(proposed)
APPLICATION DEEMED COMPLETE: January 17, 2005
REQUEST: Annexation of an approximately 10-acre parcel located on the east side of Clay
Street, north of Ashland Street, at 380 Clay Street. The project involves Outline Plat1l and Site
Review approval for a 117-unit multi-family development under the Performance Standards
Option. A request for Tree Removal is included with the application, as well as an Exception to
City Street Standards to permit a portion of sidewalk to boe installed at curbside.
I. Relevant Facts
1) Background - History of Application:
The Planning Commission first reviewed this application at a public llearing on
February 8, 2005. Several issues and concerns were raised through C()mmissioner
discussion, public testimony, as well as in the initial Planning StaffR,eport. The
site plan has been substantially changed in order to address these con(~erns.
. The application was deemed complete on January 17, 2005. The applicant,
however, has submitted in writing an extension of the statutory requirement that
mandates a decision within a 120-day time period. An additional exte:nsion of the
120-day time limit is necessary in order for the City of Ashland to make a
decision in a timely fashion.
There are no other planning actions of record for this site.
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: D and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
Ashland Planning Department - Staff Rfeport Addendum
~ I June 14, 2005
';;)~ Page 1 of 21
2) Detailed Description of the Site and Proposal:
The application involves annexation and subsequent development of a 10-acre
parcel on the east side of Clay Street, between Ashland Street and East Main
Street. The property slopes gently (approximately 3.5%) to the north. The original
single family home, bam and other accessory structures are situated c~n that
portion of the site nearest to Clay Street. The application proposes to retain the
residence and remove the other detached, accessory structures. Approximately 31
trees (> 6-inches dbh) have been identified on the site, with the vast rnajority of
trees located near the southwest comer of the property in the vicinity of the
existing residence and out buildings. The Tree Protection/Tree Remo'val Plan
included with the application identifies trees scheduled for retention and removal.
The draft City of Ashland Wetland and Riparian Corridor Inventory and
Assessment identifies the location of a narrow wetland protruding into the
northerly portion of the property, as well as a smaller wetland pocket near the
northwest comer of the site. The wetland is described as possibly beiIlg part of a
larger 1.5-acre wetland that runs from south to north through the neighboring
semi-rural properties located north of the project. This wetland may be connected
to the wetland that extends through the eastern portion of Bud's DaiI)f
Subdivision, a housing development currently under construction further to the
north down Clay Street.
Project Overview
The application includes a request for annexation of an approximatel)' 10-acre
parcel that is contiguous to the current city limits boundary. The prop4:>sed R-2
zoning is consistent with Ashland's Comprehensive Plan designation of Low
Density Multi-Family Residential. As stated earlier, the project desigrL has been
substantially changed since the initial review of the application at the previous
public hearing on February 8, 2005.
The proposal entails a mix of housing types, including retaining the e){isting
single-family home and constructing a series of duplexes and fourple'~es. As noted
in the application (page 5), there will be 36 (A & B type) duplexes an~i 11 four-
plex buildings. Each duplex will consist of a three-bedroom unit and a one-
bedroom studio apartment of less than 500 square feet, for a total of 72 units.
Each fourplex building will include a two-bedroom unit and one bedr()om studio
on the ground floor with a two-bedroom unit and one bedroom studio on the
upper floor, for a total of 44 units. Exterior materials will consist of sInooth and
textured concrete masonry units, cement fiber, wood shingle and horizontal board
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: D and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
87
Ashland Planning Department - Staff Rf~port Addendum
June 14, 2005
Page 2 of 21
siding, four to six inch trim, brick and stone accents and composition. shingle
roofing.
Clay Street provides the primary access route to the project. Althougll Clay Street
is designated as a City Neighborhood Collector Street, only portions lDfthe street
are constructed to City standards. Large segments exist that are inadequate in
pavement width, and lack curb and gutter, sidewalks and urban storml drain
systems. In addition, much of the existing paved surface is uneven an.d in a state
of disrepair. The application identifies the construction of a half street
improvement along the frontage of the property. This would generall~y include a
pavement overlay, installation of storm drains, curb and gutter, bicyc]le lane,
planting strips, street trees and a public sidewalk. Additionally, the aI)plication
states the proposed improvements to Clay Street will be extended northward to
connect to the frontage improvements associated with the Bud's Dairy
Subdivision. Lastly the applicants have agreed to install a right turn lane on
southbound Clay Street at its intersection with Ashland Street.
A system of new public streets and multi-use pathways will be constructed to
serve and provide circulation throughout the entire project. The new tleighborhood
street system integrates two public streets that will terminate at the north property
line, but would eventually extend into the adjoining undeveloped pro]~erty to the
north. A new east-west oriented street will straddle a portion of the project's
northerly boundary. This street provides a second access to the project from Clay
Street, as well as providing future access to the abutting property to tile north. In
addition, a public alley system has been designed throughout the proj.~ct that
allows rear as well as side access to individual garages and surface-parking areas.
Public water, sewer and storm sewer lines are located in Clay Street and available,
or can be extended, to serve the project. Run-off from the site will be directed into
both the storm water facilities constructed within the project's streets and Clay
Street, as well as to an on-site wetland/detention system. Lastly, off-street, multi-
use pathways are proposed for installation at several locations around the
perimeter of the project. The pathways connect to the project's public sidewalk
and internal walkway system and can be integrated with existing and future
pathway connections upon adjacent properties.
II. Consistencv with Relevant Aooroval Standards
This portion of the report identifies, describes and discusses the application's consistency
with the primary, relevant approval standards governing the project. Specific issues have
been explained that may require the Commission to require additional infonn.ation or
clarification.
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: D and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
3g
Ashland Planning Department - Staff R,eport Addendum
June 14, 2005
Page 3 of 21
----. .---,------......--.---
Accordingly, the Commission has the ability to approve the project with con,ditions, or
continue the hearing to allow for additional information to be submitted by tltle applicant.
Additionally, if the Commission believes the applicant has failed to meet the required
burden of proof and does not believe there exists a valid basis for a continuwtlce, the
request for Outline and Site Review could be denied.
Annexation Request
The project site is within the City's Urban Growth Boundary and the propose:d zoning (R-
2) is in conformance with the Low Density Multi-Family designation indicat,ed on the
Comprehensive Plan Map. Additionally, the property is contiguous to the existing City
Limits on its south, east and west boundaries. Adequate City facilities for th(;~ provision of
water, sewer, power and storm drainage appear to exist. Run-off from the project will be
distributed between the piped storm drain system associated with public strec~ts and the
on-site wetland/detention system. The applicant notes that the wetland/detention systems
will be engineered so that the run-off discharge rate onto the adjacent proper1ty to the
north will be no greater than pre-development overland flow rates (page 8 - applicant's
findings).
In addition to the minimum half street improvement required along the Clay Street
frontage of the development, the applicant will complete a comparable impr{)vement
northward along the adjoining property's frontage, connecting to the street intlprovements
recently completed as part of Bud's Dairy Subdivision. Additionally, the applicant has
agreed to construct a right turn lane on southbound Clay Street at the intersec:tion with
Ashland Street. Further elaboration on the transportation needs and improvernents
associated with the project are discussed later in this report.
In accordance with the approval standards for Annexation, the application infoorporates 17
affordable rental or for purchase units into the project. The affordable units rfepresent 15%
of the total number of units (i.e. 117 units), and will be available to households with
incomes at or below 60% the Median Family Income for the Ashland/Medford area. This
is consistent with the affordable housing provision contained within the anne:xation
approval criteria (18.106.03 G. 4). The applicant proposes to spread the 17-units
throughout the II-fourplex buildings, without grouping affordable units in allY two
adjacent buildings. The application notes that the affordable units will also bfe dispersed
equally among one and two-bedroom units.
Incorporation of Additional Residential Land
Background
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: D and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
3q
Ashland Planning Department - Staff R~eport Addendum
June 14, 2005
Page 4 of 21
A variety of factors have been considered in determining the appropriate pro1cess and
procedures for incorporating (i.e. annexation) additional residential land into the city
limits. First, Ashland's Comprehensive Plan policies surrounding the incorpclration of
land are required to be consistent with Oregon's Statewide Planning Goals. In the early
1980's, the following two statewide planning goals were of primary consideration during
the development of Ashland's Comprehensive Plan policies relating to anne,(ation:
Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 14 - Urbanization: To provide for an orderly and efficient
transition from rural to urban land use.
Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 10 - Housing: To provide for the housing nEteds of
citizens of the state.
In addition, Oregon State Statutes require that a local government demonstrate that its
comprehensive plan provides sufficient buildable lands within the urban gro,~h boundary
( established pursuant to statewide planning goals) to accommodate estimatedl housing
needs for 20 years.
The City's approval of an annexation made in compliance with its acknowle(lged
comprehensive plan is considered to be consistent with statewide goals unless the
acknowledged comprehensive plan and implementing ordinances do not con1rol the
annexation. Ashland's Comprehensive Plan was acknowledged in 1982 and includes
policies regarding the incorporation of additional land within the city limits. 'These
policies are specifically carried out through the implementing ordinance language of the
Annexation chapter 18.108 that describes the relevant approval standards that determine
when and when not to annex land. The most relevant plan goals and policies, as well as
applicable implementing ordinances has been identified below:
Ashland Comprehensive Plan Chapter XII · Urbanization
GOAL: IT IS THE CITY OF ASHLAND'S GOAL TO MAINTAIN A COMPACT URBAN FORM AND TO INCLUDE
AN ADEQUATE SUPPLY OF VACANT LAND IN THE CITY SO AS NOT TO HINDER NATURAL' MARKET
FORCES WITHIN THE CITY, AND TO ENSURE AN ORDERLY AND SEQUENTIAL DEVELOPMIENT OF LAND
IN THE CITY LIMITS.
POLICIES
XII-1 The City shall strive to maintain at least a 5-year supply of land for any particular need in thE~
City's limits. The 5-year supply shall be determined by the rate of consumption necessitated in thE~
projections made in this Comprehensive Plan.
Implementing Ordinance - Chapter 18.108
XII-2 The City shall incorporate vacant land only after a showing that land of similar qualities does not
already exist in the City limits, or if annexation is necessary to alleviate a probable public health
hazard.
Implementing Ordinance - Chapter 18.108
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: 0 and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
If~
Ashland Planning Department - Staff Rleport Addendum
June 14, 2005
Page 5 of 21
I ----.----..-
The Need for Multi-Family Land
Available land supply is a primary consideration identified in the approval standards
governing annexation. The applicant is required to demonstrate that there exist less than a
five-year supply in the proposed land use classification (i.e. multi-family) within the
current city limits.
The application includes information regarding the current availability ofR-2 (low
Density Multi-Family) zoned land within the City Limits. The applicant's fiIJldings are
based upon taking the information from the adopted 1998/99 Buildable Lands Inventory
(BLI) and subtracting the acreage of projects developed over the past six years (1999 to
2005). Multi-family zoned property has been approved for development at a rate of about
2-acres per year over the past six years, leaving a current inventory of approxjmately 3.5
acres in the city limits. The projected need for a five-year period is approximately eight to
10.5 acres.
Staffbelieves the applicant's figures provide a fair representation of the currc~nt inventory
of multi-family zoned land. Although subtracted from the current available vacant land
supply, 6.4 acres is currently under construction but not yet occupied housin~~
(MaharlNeuman & ArcherdlDale).
Outline Plan and Site Review - Consistency with Approval Standards
The application proposes to construct approximately 117 housing units on an.
approximately 10-acre parcel. As noted earlier, the housing mix will include the existing
single-family home, 36 duplexes (72 units) and 11 fourplexes (44 units). The: project
density conforms to permitted density requirements of the R-2 Zoning Distri(~t, allowing
for a base density of 13.5 units/acre or approximately 127 units (.6 acres of"retland
subtracted from calculations as per 18.106.030 F.). This does not take into ac:count the
possible additional density bonus permitted due to the provision of affordabl.~ housing.
The project's neighborhood street design has been substanti~lly modified in ()rder to
account for the location of wetlands, the large cottonwood trees at the south~'est comer of
the site, as well as the existing farmhouse. The revised design of neighborho()d public
streets, as well as proposed improvements to Clay Street largely conforms to the City's
Local Street Standards. The project's streets have been designed at a width tc. allow on-
street parking along both sides of the street. Public alleys will provide access to individual
garages and surface parking areas, thereby leaving the vast majority of newly. constructed
streets free of driveway aprons and available for resident and guest parking. Ine proposed
network has been designed to permit the extension of a public streets and all(~ys, at a later
date, northward through the adjoining undeveloped property. This will enablc~ this project,
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: D and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
J../ I Ashland Planning Department - Staff Report Addendum
June 14, 2005
Page 6 of 21
the property to the north and Bud's Dairy Subdivision to be linked through a connected
local street network. These northerly street connections have been located as well to avoid
potential impacts to neighboring wetlands.
Outline Plan approval standards require that 5% of the total project area be iIlcluded
within commonly owned open space. About 10% of the total project area is included
within common areas and open spaces. This includes a picnic area adjacent tlD the YMCA
soccer fields, a children's active play area and the passive wetland area. It sh~Juld be noted
that the total lot coverage for the entire project is approximately 50%. This is:
considerably lower than the 65% lot coverage standard permitted within the )~-2 Zoning
District.
Potential Impacts and Previously Identified Concerns
Following is an overview of some of the primary issues and concerns raised in the initial
Staff Report, public testimony and Commissioner discussion. If the Commission believes
the record lacks sufficient information to make a decision and the issues Cantlot be
resolved through conditions of approval, the application could be continued to the July
meeting. If this were the case, the applicant would need to have all pertinent information
available for the Commission's July meeting, so that a decision could be ren(lered and the
annexation request forwarded onto the City Council.
Wetland determination and identification
The City of Ashland is in the process of completing a Local Wetland Inventory (L WI) in
accordance with the requirements of the Oregon Department of State Lands (DSL). The
Oregon Department of State Lands has reviewed the inventory prepared by tile City's
consultant and has outlined some relatively minor changes.
The most re,cent version of the Local Wetland Inventory (L WI) identifies a p()tential
wetland located near the north boundary of the project site, extending southw.ard into the
subject property and an isolated wetland near the northwest comer. At the Felbruary 8,
2005 public hearing, Staff recommended that the Commission take no action on this
application until the Oregon Department of State Lands has approved a delin.~ation of the
wetland boundary, so that the exact location of the wetland's boundary may b~e verified.
In addition, Staff recommended that the application include a general determination of the
location of the wetland on the adjoining property in order to ensure that prop()sed street
extensions avoid disturbance to the wetland area. Lastly, it was recommende(l that the
project design consider providing a buffer (i.e. 20-feet) along the wetland bOlmdary in
order to minimize possible impacts associated with construction and post de\relopment
run-off.
The applicant has enlisted the expertise of a local consultant to formally deliI1leate the
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: 0 and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
4A
Ashland Planning Department - Staff Rf:!port Addendum
June 14, 2005
Page 7 of 21
wetland boundary and submit the findings to Oregon Department of State Lands for
approval. At this time, the preliminary wetland delineation has not been com:pleted due to
the unusually wet weather experienced this late spring. The consultant notes that
hydrology data needs to be gathered and analyzed when more "normal" conditions exist.
This information is important to accurately map the boundaries of the jurisdil:tional
wetlands. Finally, the consultant expects to complete his preliminary delineation by mid-
June and then send it to the Department of State Lands.
The project design currently encroaches upon the preliminarily delineated bo"undary of the
wetland. In addition, buffer areas are not provided around the entire perimeter of the
wetland as originally suggested. The revised plan addresses disturbance to thle existing
wetland by providing a mitigation area that is larger than the impacted area. 1Lhe
consultant notes that the wetland mitigation area and the creation of wetlands for storm
water detention and treatment will provide better overall water quality in the Bear Creek
Basin, as well as providing wildlife habitat, recreation and aesthetic beauty for the site.
In Staff s opinion, it is difficult to fully assess the merits of the project withollt a
verification of wetland's size and location. The Planning Commission at the JFebruary 9,
2005 public hearing appeared to direct the applicant to complete and have th(~ Department
of State Lands approve the wetland delineation prior to proceeding further with the
application. While the natural functions of a wetland (i.e. water quality, habitat, and
passive recreation) can be enhanced through changes to the area resulting frOltD a
mitigation plan, a detailed mitigation and wetland enhancement plan has not lbeen
included with the application. Further, the wetland mitigation and enhancemc:mt plan
cannot be approved by the Department of State Lands until the final delineation and plan
has be submitted to the Department for review and approval. As stated in the previous
Staff Report, Staff does not believe the Commission should consider approval of the
Outline Plan and Site Review until the applicant has received written approval by the
Department of State Lands, and the qualities of a mitigation and wetland-plarlting plan
can be evaluated. '
Staff ConcernsIRecommendations: At this time, the preliminary wetland delineation has not been
completed due to the unusually wet weather experienced this late spring. This information is important in
order to accurately map the boundaries of jurisdictional wetlands. It is difficult to fully assess the merits of
the project without verification of wetland's size and location, and without a specific plan idc:~ntifying
mitigation and specific measures intended to enhance the area. Consequently, the Commission might again
consider continuing the application until the wetland boundary is verified and a detailed mitigation and
enhancement plan is included with the application.
I",pacts to Clay Street and Surrounding Intersections
The initial Traffic Impact Analysis included in application appeared to focus lon the
existing and future operation of nearby intersections, specifically the intersection of Clay
Street/Ashland Street. There was considerable testimony (from Commissioners and
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: 0 and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
43
Ashland Planning Department - Staff Rf~port Addendum
June 14, 2005
Page 8 of 21
citizens) regarding concern over the ability of Clay Street to accommodate th.e projected
increase in traffic, as well as provide safety for other users of the street (i.e. p~edestrians
and bicyclists). The Commission indicated that they would like the applicant to
specifically address the potential impacts to Clay Street and provide an addeIldum to the
Traffic Impact Analysis indicating that the street is adequate to accommodat(~ anticipated
traffic levels. The revised assessment would consider the build out of nearby
developments, such as Bud's Dairy and Barclay Place.
A letter from the applicant's Transportation Engineer, dated April 8, 2005, has been
included with the revised application submittals. Since the number of residel1ltial units has
been reduced from 130 units to 117 units, the Transportation Engineer has indicated that
a revised traffic study is not necessary. Again, the study concludes that all ke.y
intersections in the study will operate at an acceptable level with the exceptic.n of the
intersection of Ashland Street and Clay Street. The applicant has proposed to install a
southbound right turn lane on Clay Street at Ashland Street to mitigate the inlpacts of the
development.
Planning Staffbelieves Clay Street has adequate capacity to accommodate the projected
traffic increase resulting from the project, based upon the classification of th(~ street (i.e.
neighborhood collector) and the proposed and required improvements resulting from the
application. The applicant proposes to construct street improvements along tIle frontage
of the project as well as northward along Clay Street, connecting to the street
improvements and public sidewalk installed with the Bud's Dairy developmt:~nt. In
addition, the applicant has proposed to install a southbound right turn lane OIL Clay Street
at Ashland Street to mitigate the impacts of the development on that intersection. If the
Commission chooses to approve the application, Staffhas attached an additi{)nal
condition of approval that requires the installation of half street improvements along the
opposite side of the street (i.e. west side of Clay Street), from the south end olf
Wingspread Mobile Home Park, up to Clay Street's intersection with Ashlan,d Street.
While Staffbelieves the proposed and required improvements to Clay Street will
accommodate projected levels of traffic and include facilities for cyclists and pedestrians,
the initial and revised Traffic Impact Analysis does not include a specific evaluation of
the development's impact upon Clay Street. Since the burden lies with the ap'plicant to
provide assurance in the record that the project's impact to existing transportation
facilities have been appropriately addressed, the Commission could request additional
clarification. or deny the application for failing to sufficiently address the reqllired burden
of proof.
Staff ConcernsIRecommendations: The generation of approximately 800 to 900 vehicle trips will result in
considerable changes to current traffic volumes and conditions along Clay Street. The burdeJ1lies with the
applicant to provide assurance in the record that the project's impact to existing transportation facilities
have been appropriately addressed. In addition to those suggested by the applicant, Staffhas recommended
improvements along the opposite side of Clay Street, from Wingspread Mobile Home Park up to Clay
Street's intersection with Ashland Street, in order to accommodate safe automobile, pedestri~m and bicycle
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: D and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
'f~
Ashland Planning Department - Staff Report Addendum
June 14, 2005
Page 9 of 21
transportation along the entire length of Clay Street from East Main to Ashland Street.
Design and Capacity of Storm Water Facilities
Run-off and site drainage from the project will be divided between the piped. system
located within the street network and the wetland/detention system. The on-site storm
water system with pollution control structures will meter the runoff from the project
before entering the wetland area on the adjoining property to the north. The
wetland/detention system is designed to provide additional hydrology to wetlands located
north of the property.
The wetland/detention system will be engineered to avoid the possibility of flooding the
property to the north. In general, the system will be designed so that the amo1unt of water
diverted through the adjoining property to the north is not significantly greatc~ than that
associated with pre-development runoff volumes. These design consideratioIls are
included as a condition of approval and will be evaluated in greater detail at the time of
Final Plan.
Future Street or Path Connections to Tolman Creek Road
As noted in the previous Staff Report, Clay Street from Ashland Street to East Main
Street lacks east-west connector streets that could allow a greater distribution, of
neighborhood traffic. This would possibly reduce current and future demands placed upon
Clay Street, while potentially relieving some of the pressure on the Clay Stre.~t/ Ashland
Street intersection. Besides the nearly completed Abbott Avenue connection lbetween
lower Clay Street and Tolman Creek Road, no other east-west road connectictn exists or is
clearly planned. Creek Drive, centrally located on the west side of Clay Street is projected
to someday connect with Normal Avenue. The location of wetlands and the nleed for a
railroad crossing, however, pose design and access constraints that impact th(~ feasibility
and timeframe for that future street extension.
The applicant's revised plan includes a neighborhood street, public alley and pathway
network that could eventually permit connections over to Tolman Creek Roa(i through
adjoining properties. The current project layout would permit the extension of a narrow
public street or alley and multi-use pathway over to Tolman Creek Road. The: future
connection would likely travel from the northeast comer of the project, then along the
northerly edge of the Ashland YMCA soccer fields and link to the existing 2~~-foot wide
access driveway currently serving a multi-family complex along Tolman Cre(~k Road. It
should be clear that this is not a straightforward option and requires discussion and
cooperation from two or more property owners. Overall, Staffbelieves that project's
transportation system not only addresses the access needs of the development, but also
lays the groundwork for possible future connections to Tolman Creek Road.
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: D and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
Lt5"
Ashland Planning Department - Staff RE~port Addendum
June 14, 2005
Page 10 of 21
Evaluation of Poplar Trees
Although the Poplar species is thought to be undesirable within residential n.~ighborhoods
due to the potential for the breaking and dropping of limbs, the applicant has chosen to
retain these large majestic trees within. an open space area. Specifically, all tlu-ee large
poplar trees have been incorporated within a large common area (.61 acres) that surrounds
the existing residence.
The applicant obtained the services of an arborist to evaluate the health and structural
soundness of the large Poplar Tree. The arborist states that the large poplar trees have
never been topped and the trunks appear sound without any visible wounds. "[he report
notes, however, that Black Poplars are not a desirable tree to have in a devel()ped
landscape area because the tree is prone to limb and trunk breakage. In order to be
maintained within the development, the report recommends that the trees be Jpruned and
monitored over the rest of their lifetime. Even with good care, however, this type of tree
may break a large limb or even break at the trunk.
The project arborist provided a separate Tree Assessment that identified 22 trees within
boundaries of the site. A map corresponding with the arborist's numbering s)'stem was
not included with the application, so Staffhas relied on the Landscape Architect's
assessment included with the Tree ProtectionlTree Removal Plan. A discussion of
applicant's tree removal request is included below.
Request for Tree Removal Permit
Approximately 31 trees (> 6-inches dbh) have been identified on or immediately adjacent
to the site, with the vast majority of trees located near the southwest comer of the
property in the vicinity of the existing residence and out buildings. Of the 31 trees, eight
trees are requested for removal. Four of the eight trees are considered a hazarld due to
their poor health and state of decline. These trees exhibit many dead branches, poor leaf
size and structure, bleeding on the trunk and included bark. In the opinion of the project's
Landscape Architect, these trees present "a clear public safety hazard or a forleseeable
danger of property damage."
A Tree Removal Permit is requested to remove four, eight inch in diameter Almond trees.
The application notes that these trees are in relatively poor condition, indicative by either
twig and branch dieback or sparse, thin and small canopies. Given that the site is
relatively level, the removal of these trees will not increase erosion or reduce soil
stability. Additionally, the overall tree density and species variety will be mitigated
through the planting of more appropriate, healthy trees.
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: 0 and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
If~ Ashland Planning Department - Staff Roport Addendum
June 14, 2005
Page 11 of 21
In Staffs opinion, the applicant has taken admirable steps to incorporate the vast majority
of the site's existing trees. Based on comments from the Ashland Tree and Planning
Commissions, as well as neighboring property owners, the revised plan effectively
incorporates the large, majestic poplars in a sizeable open space away from the newly
proposed residences. Tree protection measures will be installed before and d1uring the
installation of public infrastructure and home construction. As a result of these efforts, 23
of the existing 31 trees on and immediately adjoining the project will be protected and
hopefully preserved.
Exception to Street Standards
In order to retain an existing, I8-inch in diameter cedar tree, a relatively minc)r exception
to City Street Standards is requested to permit the installation of a small segnnent of
curbside sidewalk along Clay Street. In Staff s opinion, the location, size andl health of
the tree presence a clear difficulty to complying with City street standards. TIle use of the
public sidewalk will not be compromised, given the relatively small adjustmc~nt in
sidewalk configuration. Accordingly, Staff supports this deviation and believ.es it
complies with the approval criteria for an exception.
III. Procedural - Reauired Burden of Proof
The approval standards for Annexation are described in section 18.106.030 of the Ashland Land Use
Ordinance as follows:
An annexation may be approved if the proposed request for annexation conforms, or can be made to e:onform through
the imposition of conditions, with the following approval criteria:
A. The land is within the City's Urban Growth Boundary.
B. The proposed zoning for the annexed area is in conformance with the designation indicated on ttle
Comprehensive Plan Map, and the project, if proposed concurrentiy with the annexation, is an allowed use within the
proposed zoning district.
C. The land is currently contiguous with the present City lim!its.
D. Adequate City facilities for the provision of water to the site as determined by the PU,blic Works Dtepartment; the
transport of sewage from the site to the waste water treatment plant as determined by the Public Works Department;
the provision of electricity to the site as determined by the Electric Department; urban storm drainage ciS determined by
the Public Works Department can and will be provided to and through the subject property. Unless the City has
declared a moratorium based upon a shortage of water, sewer, or electricity, it is recognized that adequate capacity
exists system-wide for these facilities.
E. Adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property. For the purposes of this
section "adequate transportation" for annexations consists of vehicular, bicycle, pedestrian and transit transportation
meeting the following standards:
1. For vehicular transportation a 20' wide paved access exists, or can and will be constructed, along the full frontage
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: D and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
~1
Ashland Planning Department - Staff Rt~port Addendum
June 14, 2005
Page 12 of 21
of the project site to the nearest fully improved collector or arterial street. All streets adjacent to the annexed area shall
be improved, at a minimum, to a half-street standard with a minimum 20' driving surface. The City may, after assessing
the impact of the development, require the full improvement of streets adjacent to the annexed area. J~II streets located
within annexed areas shall be fully improved to city standards. Where future street dedications are indicated on the
City's Street Dedication Map or required by the City, provisions shall be made for the dedication and i111provement of
these streets and included with the application for annexation.
2. For bicycle transportation safe and accessible bicycle facilities exist, or can and will be constructt~d. Should the
annexation be adjacent to an arterial street, bike lanes shall be provided on or adjacent to the arterial street. Likely
bicycle destinations from the project site shall be determined and safe and accessible bicycle facilities serving those
destinations shall be indicated.
3. For pedestrian transportation safe and accessible pedestrian facilities exist, or can and will be constructed. Full
sidewalk improvements shall be provided on one side adjacent to the annexation for all streets adjacent to the
proposed annexed area. Sidewalks shall be provided as required by ordinance on all streets within thE~ annexed area.
Where the project site is within a quarter of a mile of an existing sidewalk system, the sidewalks from 1he project site
shall be constructed to extend and connect to the existing system. Likely pedestrian destinations from the project site
shall be determined and the safe and accessible pedestrian facilities serving those destinations shall be indicated.
4. For transit transportation, should transit service be available to the site, or be likely to be extended to the site in
the future based on information from the local public transit provider, provisions shall be made for the lconstruction of
adequate transit facilities, such as bus shelters and bus turn-out lanes. All required transportation improvements shall
be constructed and installed prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any new structures on the annexed
property .
F. For all residential annexations, a plan shall be provided demonstrating that the development of the entire property
will ultimately occur at a minimum density of 90% of the base density for the zone, unless reductions in the total
number of units is necessary to accommodate significant natural features, topography, access limitations, or similar
physical constraints. The owner or owners of the property shall sign an agreement, to be recorded with the county clerk
after approval of the annexation, ensuring that future development will occur in accord with the minimum density
indicated in the development plan. For purposes of computing maximum density, portions of the anne>eed area
containing undevelopable areas such as we~ands, floodplain corridor lands, or slopes greater than 351%, shall not be
included.
G. For all annexations with a density or potential density of four residential units or greater and involving residential
zoned lands, or commercial, employment or industrial lands with a Residential Overlay (R-Overlay):
1. 35% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 120% of median income; or
2. 25% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below '100% of median income; or
3. 20% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 80% of median income; or
4. 15% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 60% of median income; or
5. Ti~e to a sufficient amount of buildable land for development is transferred to a non-profit (IRC 501 (3)(c))
affordable housing developer or comparable Development Corporation for the purpose of complying with subsection 2
above. The land shall be located within the project and all needed public facilities shall be extended to the area or
areas proposed for transfer. Ownership of the land shall be transferred to the affordable housing developer or
Development Corporation prior to commencement of the project.
The total number of affordable units described in this section. G shall be determined by rounding down fractional
answers to the nearest whole unit. A deed restriction, or similar legal instrument, shall be used to guarc~ntee
compliance with affordable criteria for a period of not less than 60 years. Properties providing affordable units as part of
the annexation process shall qualify for a maximum density bonus of 25 percent.
H. One or more of the following standards are met:
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: 0 and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
'-11 Ashland Planning Department - Staff Rl~port Addendum
June 14, 2005
Page 13 of 21
1. The proposed area for annexation is to be residentially zoned, and there is less than a five-year ~)upply of vacant
and redevelopable land in the proposed land use classification within the current city limits. "Redevelopable land"
means land zoned for residential use on which development has already occurred but on which, due to present or
expected market forces, there exists the likelihood that existing development will be converted to mOrE~ intensive
residential uses during the planning period. The five- year supply shall be determined from vacant and redevelopable
land inventories and by the methodology for land need projections from the Housing Element of the Cl:>mprehensive
Plan; or
2. The proposed lot or lots will be zoned E-1 or C-1 under the Comprehensive Plan, and that the applicant will obtain
Site Review approval for an outright permitted use, or special permitted use concurrent with the annexation request; or
3. A current or probable public health hazard exists due to lack of full City sanitary sewer or water slervices; or
4. Existing development in the proposed annexation has inadequate water or sanitary sewer serviCE~; or the service
will become inadequate within one year; or
5. The area proposed for annexation has existing City of Ashland water or sanitary sewer service extended,
connected, and in use, and a signed "consent to annexation" agreement has been filed and accepted by the City of
Ashland; or
6. The lot or lots proposed for annexation are an "island" completely surrounded by lands within the city limits. (ORD
2792, 1997; ORD 2895,2003)
The criteria for Outline Plan approval are described in section 18.88.040 A. 4 of the Ashland Lalrtd Use
Ordinance as follows:
The Planning Commission shall approve the ou~ine plan when it finds the following criteria have been met:
a. That the development meets all applicable ordinance requirements of the City of Ashland.
b. That adequate key City facilities can be provided including water, sewer, paved access to and through the
development, electricity, urban storm drainage, police and fire protection and adequate transportation; and that the
development will not cause a City facility to operate beyond capacity.
c. That the existing and natural features of the land; such as we~ands, floodplain corridors, ponds, largle trees, rock
outcroppings, etc., have been identified in the plan of the development and significant features have bt~n included in
the open space, common areas, and unbuildable areas.
d. That the development of the land will not prevent adjacent land from being developed for the uses shown in the
Comprehensive Plan.
e. That there are adequate provisions for the maintenance of open space and common areas, if requir1ed or provided,
and that if developments are done in phases that the early phases have the same or higher ratio of arrlenities as
proposed in the entire project.
f. That the proposed density meets the base and bonus density standards established under this Chapter.
g. The development complies with the Street Standards. (Ord 2836, S21999).
The criteria for Site Plan approval are described in section 18.72.070 of the Ashland Land Use ()rdinance as
follows:
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.
B. 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.
D. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, paved access to and through the developnnent, 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, Perfonnance
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: 0 and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
J..j 9 Ashland Planning Department - Staff Rl~port Addendum
June 14, 2005
Page 14 of 21
Standards Options. (Ord. 2655,1991; Ord 2836 S6, 1999)
The criteria for a Tree Removal Permit are described in section 18.61.080 of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance
as follows:
An applicant for a Tree Removal-Staff Permit shall demonstrate that the following criteria are satisfied. The Staff
Advisor may require an arborisfs report to substantiate the criteria for a permit.
A. Hazard Tree: The Staff Advisor shall issue a tree removal permit for a hazard tree if the applicant demonstrates
that a tree is a hazard and warrants removal.
1. A hazard tree is a tree that is physically damaged to the degree that it is clear that it is likely to fall and injure
persons or property. A hazard tree may also include a tree that is located within public rights of way and is causing
damage to existing public or private facilities or services and such facilities or services cannot be relocated or the
damage alleviated. The applicant must demonstrate that the condition or location of the tree presents .a clear public
safety hazard or a foreseeable danger of property damage to an existing structure and such hazard or danger cannot
reasonably be alleviated by treatment or pruning.
2. The City may require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each hazard tree pursuant to A~IC 18.61.084.
Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit.
B. Tree that is Not a Hazard: The City shall issue a tree removal permit for a tree that is not a hazard if the applicant
demonstrates all of the following:
1. The tree is proposed for removal in order to permit the application to be consistent with other applicable Ashland
Land Use Ordinance requirements and standards. (e.g. other applicable Site Design and Use Standards). The Staff
Advisor may require the building footprint of the development to be staked to allow for accurate verificcltion of the
permit application; and
2. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters,
protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks; and
...".
3. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes, canopies, and species
diversity within 200 feet of the subject property.
The City shall grant an exception to this criterion when alternatives to the tree removal have been ~nsidered and no
reasonable alternative exists to allow the property to be used as permitted in the zone. Nothing in this :;ection shall
require that the residential density be reduced below the permitted density allowed by the zone. In ma~cing this
determination, the City may consider alternative site plans or placement of structures or alternate land~)caping designs
that would lessen the impact on trees, so long as the alternatives continue to comply with other provisi1ons of the
Ashland Land Use Ordinance.
4. The City shall require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each tree granted approval pursuant to AMC
18.61.084. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit.
An exception to the Street Standards is not subject to the Variance requirements of section 18.100 and may be
granted with respect to the Street Standards in 18.88.050 if all of the following circumstances are found to
exist:
A. There is demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements of this chapter due to a unique or unusual
aspect of the site or proposed use of the site.
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: 0 and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
50
Ashland Planning Department - Staff Rt~port Addendum
June 14, 2005
Page 15 of 21
B. The variance will result in equal or superior transportation facilities and connectivity;
C. The variance is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty; and
D. The variance is consistent with the stated Purpose and Intent of the Performance Standards Options Chapter.(Ord
2836, Amended, 0210211999)
IV. Conclusions and Recommendations
In general, Staff believes that the revised Outline Plan is superior to the previous design
presented to the Commission at the February 9, 2005 public hearing. The existing
residence and three grand poplar trees have been preserved in a relatively spacious open
space at the southwest comer of the project. The newly proposed neighborho1od street,
public alley and pathway network takes into account the projected location of wetlands on
and off the site, while maintaining the possibility for future transportation links not only
to the north and south, but also east to Tolman Creek Road.
Based upon the direction given to the applicant by the Planning Commission at the
February meeting, however, Staff is very reluctant to assert that all outstanding issues
have been adequately resolved.
It was Staff s understanding, that the Commission recommended that the wetland
delineation .be completed and accepted by the Department of State Lands pri()r to
proceeding further with the application. While a preliminary field investigati4Jn of the
location of wetland has been completed, additional site hydrology data is still needed
before the wetland delineation can be submitted to the Department of State Lands for
their review. The application requests that a portion of the wetland be filled, 'with its
removal mitigated through the establishment of a larger wetland area linked to the
wetland area on the neighboring property. While this proposition may clearly have merit,
until the request is forwarded to the State, a determination of the appropriateIless of the
request cannot be considered. Additionally, the application does not include a detailed
wetland mitigation and planting plan that presents a case as to why the existillg and
mitigated wetland area is clearly superior to maintaining the entire wetland ill its current
location and configuration. Finally, the provision of a buffer area around the boundary
wetland, as recommended by Staff: has not been established around the area.
There was extensive testimony (from Commissioners and neighbors) at the F,ebruary
meeting concerning impacts to Clay Street due to the projected increase in traffic, as well
as the need to provide for the safety of all users of the street (i.e. pedestrians and
bicyclists). The initial Traffic Impact Analysis primarily focused on the operation of
nearby intersections, specifically the intersection of Clay Street! Ashland Stre(~t. It was
recommended that the applicant's traffic engineer further evaluate the project's impacts to
Clay Street and determine if the street with the proposed improvements is adc::quate to
accommodate anticipated traffic levels. While Staffbelieves Clay Street with the
suggested and recommended improvements can adequately accommodate existing and
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: D and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
SI
Ashland Planning Department - Staff RE~port Addendum
June 14, 2005
Page 16 of 21
------r-----"--"---"-
the projected increase in traffic, a revision to the initial traffic impact analysis has not
been included with the amended proposal. The Commission may still request that a
revised evaluation and report on the adequacy of Clay Street be provided by the Engineer
and inserted into the record of this planning application.
Because of issues primarily dealing with the identification and changes to tht~ wetland, as
well as a broadening of the scope of the traffic impact analysis, Staff does not believe
adequate information is included within the record to approve the project andl forward a
recommendation to the Council for annexation. The applicant has granted an extension of
the 120-day period in which to make a decision on this application, but the e){tension does
not provide enough time for the City to make a decision in a timely fashion. If the
applicant does not provide a written extension of the 120-day period by the e'vening of
June 12, 2005, Staffrecommends that the Commission deny the request for ()utline Plan
and Site Review, so that a decision can be rendered within the statutory time limit.
As noted in the previous Staff Report, the following list of conditions has betm provided
in order to provide the applicant with a clear understanding of Staff s suggested
recommendations:
1) That all proposals of the applicant are conditions of approval unIt~ss otherwise
modified here.
2) That a consent to annexation form be completed, which is non-revocable for a
period of one year from its date.
3) That a boundary description and map be prepared in accordance with ORS
308.225. A registered land surveyor shall prepare the description and map. The
boundaries shall be surveyed and monuments established as required lby statute
subsequent to Council approval of the proposed annexation.
4) That the applicant submit an electric distribution plan including load calculations and
locations of all primary and secondary services including transformers,. cabinets and
all other necessary equipment. This plan must be reviewed and approved by the
Electric Department prior to Final Plan approval. Transformers and cat.inets shall be
located in areas least visible from streets, while considering the access needs of the
Electric Department.
5) That a final utility plan for the project shall be reviewed and approved by the
Engineering Division and Building Divisions at the time of Final Plan. The utility
plan shall include the location of connections to all public facilities in 8.11d adjacent to
the development, including the locations of water lines and meter sizes~, sewer mains
and services, manholes and clean-outs, stonn drainage pipes and catcll basins.
6) That the identification, relocation and piping of existing irrigation facilities be
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: D and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
6.2"
Ashland Planning Department - Staff Rt~port Addendum
June 14, 2005
Page 17 of 21
addressed at the time of Final Plan. The design, relocation and installation of
irrigation system shall be reviewed and approved by the Talent Irri~~ation District
prior to the City of Ashland approval of the final engineered constructi()n documents.
The irrigation facilities shall be installed as part of the overall public infrastructure
requirements.
7) That the engineered design of all on-site storm water detention systerns (i.e.
wetland/detention system) shall be reviewed and approved by the Pul)lic Works
Department, Building Official and Staff Advisor prior to Final Plan approval and
the commencement of public infrastructure installation and the iSSUaI1Ce of an
excavation permit. The design of the wetland/detention shall incorporate required
pollution control systems (if applicable), while the discharge shall be designed so
as not to significantly increase the volume of runoff beyond pre-development
amounts onto the property to the north. The permanent maintenance of on-site
storm water detention systems must be addressed through the project~~s CC&R's
and approved by the Public Works Department and Building Divisioll.
8) That the engineered construction drawings for Clay Street comply with City of
Ashland Street Local Street Standards. Clay Street shall be improved along the
entire frontage of the property. Improvements to Clay Street shall conlsist
approximately with the following standards: 28-feet of pavement overlay width
(includes two travel lanes and an approximately six-foot bike lane), c.urb and
gutter, storm drains, 7.5' planting strip and a six-foot wide public sidc~walk. The
Final Plan shall include profiles and cross sections, with erosion control and slope
stability methodologies installed consistent with the standards contairled in AMC
18.62.080B.
9) That a half street improvement including curb and gutter, storm drain facilities
planting strip and public sidewalk be installed along the street frontag;e of the
neighboring property to the north (39 IE lICB, #1100). The design of these
improvements shall be consistent with Ashland's Local Street Standards, allow
for a smooth transition to the adjoining sidewalk network and be pro,rided at the
time of Final Plan. Such improvements shall be installed as part ofth~~ overall
public infrastructure requirements for the subdivision.
10) That an engineered design for a right turn only lane on southbound Clay Street at
Ashland Street shall be provided at the time of Final Plan approval. The
engineered design shall include the widening of pavement width at thle
intersection; installation of curb and gutter, storm drain facilities (if a]pplicable)
and sidewalks from the Clay Street! Ashland Street intersection to and through the
bend (i.e. elbow) in Clay Street to the existing curb and sidewalk on t]ne west side
of Clay Street, adjacent to Wing Spread Park. Such improvements shall be
installed as part of the overall public infrastructure requirements for tIle
subdivision.
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: D and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
.r; .3 Ashland Planning Department - Staff R1eport Addendum
June 14, 2005
Page 18 of 21
11) That the engineered construction drawings for all new public streets vvithin the
project shall comply with City of Ashland Local Street Standards. Thle minimum
street width shall be no less than 22-feet in width at intersections (unless
permitted by the Ashland Fire Department), and a minimum width of 26 to 28-feet
when accommodating on-street parking on both sides of the street. Plans to
include profiles and cross sections, with erosion control and slope stalbility
methodologies installed consistent with the standards contained in A~~C
18.62.080B.
12) That a street plug, one foot in width, be dedicated adjacent to public streets and
alleys that adjoin the north property boundary. In addition, a street pltLg shall be
dedicated along the eastern boundary of the project, between the public alley and
east property line.
13) That the engineered construction drawings for the project address the design and
installation of public multi-use pathways and fence gates from the pr()~ect to the
City of Ashland Parks/Ashland Family YMCA Soccer Fields. The design of the
multi-use pathway shall be in accord with City Local Street Standards:, reviewed
by the Director of the Ashland Parks Department, and approved by thle Staff
Advisor prior to signature of the final survey plat or the installation of
improvements associated with the subdivision.
14) That public easements shall be identified on the final survey plat for all multi-use
pa~hways. The project CC&R's shall note that the pathways are for plLblic use and
shall not be obstructed or through access to the east restricted unless authorized by
the City of Ashland and Ashland Parks Department
15) That the requirements of the Ashland Fire Department, including but Jnot limited
to hydrant placement and flow and apparatus access, shall be clearly ildentified on
the engineered construction drawings and reviewed by the Ashland Fire
Department at the time of Final Plan and approved prior to signature ()f the final
survey plat or the installation of improvements associated with the sul)division.
16) That all recommendations of the Ashland Tree Commission noted at th(~ir February 3
and June 9th, 2005 meetings, and consistent with Ashland's Site Design and Use
Standards and Tree Preservation Ordinance, shall be incorporated iJltO a revised
Landscaping Plan (if applicable) prior to Final Plan approval. The recolnmendations
shall be included on a revised landscaping plan and final irrigation plan at the time of
submission of building permit.
17) That prior to any disturbance occurring on the site or the issuance elf a building
permit, a Tree Verification Permit shall be applied for. Required Trc~e Protection
Measures (18.61.200) shall be instituted prior to any development activities,
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: D and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
Sf
Ashland Planning Department - Staff Rf~port Addendum
June 14, 2005
Page 19 of 21
I ------ --- -
including, but not limited to clearing, grading, excavation or demolitilon work, and
shall be removed only after completion of all construction activity, including
landscaping and irrigation installation.
18) That a final copy of the CC&R's for the Homeowner's Association shall be
provided at the time of Final Plan and approved prior to signature of the Final
survey plat. CC&R's to describe responsibility for the pruning and cOIltinual
monitoring of the three poplar trees, maintenance of common area lan.dscaping,
private driveways, multi-use pathways and on-site storm water detention facilities.
The Homeowner's Association is responsible for contracting with a utility
maintenance company for the maintenance of the storm water wetlancl/detention
facility. All parameters for maintenance of the facility, including time lines and
enforcement, shall be reviewed and approved by the City Public W or}~s
Department and described in the CC&R's.
19) That the project complies with the Affordable Housing Standards as d,escribed in
18.106.030 G. Each affordable unit shall be identified and the require~d term of
affordability agreements (i.e. in perpetuity) signed prior to signature of the final
survey plat, with proof of recording submitted to the City of Ashland :Housing
Program Coordinator prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
20) That the CC&R's identify which units are subject to the City's Afford.able
Housing requirements and terms of affordability.
21) That a Demolition/Move permit be issued for all applicable structures on the
property prior to signature of the survey plat.
22) That opportunity-to-recycle facilities shall be shall be identified in cOIljunction
with the design of each building and in accordance with the standards described in
section 18.72.115 of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance prior to issuan(~e ofa
building permit.
23) That the color, texture, dimensions, shape and building materials for all exterior
components of the project be included at the time of submission of building permit.
The information shall be consistent with the colors, texture, dimensions and shape of
materials and building details proposed and approved as part of the land use
application.
24) That required bicycle parking shall be identified on plans submitted at the time of
building permit review. The parking shall be designed and installed co'nsistent with
the standards described in 18.92.040
25) That the applicant agree to construct the project in accordance with the approved
. plan and City ordinances and waives the right to file a claim under Oregon
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: 0 and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
5 S- Ashland Planning Department - Staff Rleport Addendum
June 14, 2005
Page 20 of 21
Statewide Measure 37. The signed waiver shall be submitted to the City of
Ashland Legal Department for review and approval prior to signature of the
survey plat or adoption of a resolution or ordinance formally annexinJ~ the
property.
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: 0 and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
6~
Ashland Planning Department - Staff R'eport Addendum
June 14, 2005
Page 21 of 21
ASHLAND TREE COMMISSION
PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW
Applicant:
D and A Enter.prise
Date: June 9. 2005
Address: 380 Clay St.
Commercial:
Residential: X
Proposed Action:
Request for Annexation, Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map change from
Jackson County zoning RR-5 (Rural Residential) to City of Ashland zoning R-2
(Low Density Multi-Family Residential) for an approximately 10-acre parcel
located at 380 Clay Street. The request includes Outline Plan and Site Review
approval for a 117-unit development under the Performance Standards Options.
An Exception to the Street Standards is requested to meander the proposed
sidewalk on the Clay Street frontage around a cedar tree located in the
southwest corner of the property. A Tree Removal Permit is requested to
remove four trees on the site. Comprehensive Plan Design: Low Density Multi-
Family (Proposed); Zoning: R-2 (Proposed); Assessor's Map #391 E11 C; Tax
Lot: 2500.
Recommendation:
1) Tree Commission supports the idea of creating a functional wetland
2) Tree Commission suggests smaller trees on the east and south sides of the
wetland area so as to not shade the wetland too much and decrease the
pollutant removing aspects of the wetland area.
3) Tree Commission recommend sensitivity to soil conditions, and recol11lnends
irrigation of the poplars and other trees where necessary during the warm
weather events throughout the project duration.
Commission Representative: ~
Date:~'_ ~ ~ooS
Follow-up:
57
IN THE MATTER OF PLANNING ACTION #2004-141, Annexation of an ) ]~EQUEST FOR
approximately 10-acre parcel located on the east side of Clay Street, north of r--- i\N EXTENSION
)
Ashland Street, at 380 Clay Street. The project involves Outline Plan and Site r--- ~)F THE TIME
)
Review approval for a 117-unit development under the Performance - ]~IMIT
r--L
Standards Option. A request for Tree Removal is included with the ) ~)RS 227.178(1)
application, as well as an Exception to City Street Standards that would r---
)
permit a portion of sidewalk to be installed at curbside.
APPLICANTS: D and A Enterprise )
Applicants request a
227.178(1).
65
day extension to the time limit set forth in OIRS
b ~ / G.-D,:;
Date
Applicant
Date
[Note: ORS 227.178(5) provides that the "120-day period set in (ORS 227.178(1)) may
be extended for a specified period of time at the written request of the applicant. The total
of all extensions may not exceed 245 days."]
5rt
CIT.Y OF
AS H I..,AN 0
June 14, 2005
LEGAL DEPARTMENT
Michael W. Franell, City Attol11ey
Micheal M. Reeder, Assistant City Attomey
Sharlene P. Stephens, Legal Assistant/Claims Mgr. .
Nancy Snow, Legal Secretary
Andy Cochrane
Dand A Enterprise
1970 Ashland Street
Ashland, OR 97520
Re: Planning Action 2004-141
Dear Mr. Cochrane:
This letter is to advise you that the subrnission of the revised Outline Plan and Site Review,
received by the Planning Departrnent on May 16,2005, will be considered a significantly
changed application requiring the 120-day rule of ORS 227.178 to begin anew. Therefore,
May 16, 2005, the date of the revised proposal submission, is the date from whi<<:h this
application will be viewed in terms of complying with ORS 227.178(1).
The 120-day rule of 227.178 applies to the Outline Plan and Site Review, Exception to the
Street Standards and the Tree Removal Permit components of the application, t)ut does not
apply to either the Request for Annexation or the request for a change to the Comprehensive
Plan and Zoning Map.
If you have any questions regarding this notice, please feel free to contact me at 488-5350.
Sincerely,
Micheal M. Reeder
Assistant City Attorney
Cc: Tom R. Giordano, Architect/Agent
John McLaughlin, Director of Community Development
Bill Molnar, Planning Manager
G:\legal\Reeder\PLANNI NG\380 Clay Street Annex (Willowbrook)\Ltr to Cochrane 6-14-05 (120-day rule ).doc
LEGAL DEPARTMENT
20 East Main Street
Ashland, OR 97520
www.ashland.or.us
Tel: (541) 488-5350
Fax: (541) 552-2092
TTY: 800-735-2900
franellm@ashland.or.us
reedenn@ashland.or.us r a
stephens@ashland.or.us ~ I
snown@ashland.or.us
~.,
-.-------
RDK Engineering
TRAFFIC ENGINEERING/SIGNAL SYSTEMS
3350 Green Acres Dr., Central Point, OR 97502 - Phone (541) 664-0393 Fax (541) 664-9320
June 13, 2005
Andy Cochrane
D and A Enterprise
1970 Ashland Street
Ashland, OR 97520
Subject: Addendum to the Traffic Impact Study
Dear Mr. Cochrane:
This letter is in response to several questions raised by the City of Ashland Planning Staff
concerning traffic operations on Clay Street and a possible new street connection. from
your development to Tolman Creek Road.
Pedestrian and bicycle traffic will have additional facilities provided as a result of this
project. A new sidewalk will be installed along the frontage of the project as part of the
street improvements. Other new sidewalk will be installed to the North and South of the
project. When completed, new sidewalk will be in place on the East or West side of Clay
Street from Ashland Street to E. Main St.
Bicycle traffic can use the new sidewalk or continue to use the street. A new bicycle lane
will be constructed long the frontage of the project as part of the Clay Street
improvements.
Bicycle and pedestrian safety will be improved by this project.
The City of Ashland Planning Staffhas asked for additional clarification on the capacity
of Clay Street to accommodate traffic from this project, and other approved projects, to
City Standards.
The traffic study has taken into account A.M. and P.M. peak hour traffic flow volumes
obtained in August, 2004. Growth rates were applied to year 2024. Projected trips from
the Bud's Dairy and Barclay Square projects were included.
~6
I -------
Addendum to Tra(fic ImDact Studv
Page 2
The projected total average daily traffic on Clay Street in the future year 2024, with the
project, and with the other approved projects, will be 2,300 trips. Clay Street is a.
classified "Avenue." The City of Ashland standard for a "Two Lane Avenue" is a
maximum of3,000 trips per day.
The result of the data shows that this project can be accommodated on Clay Stree:t to City
of Ashland street standards.
The City of Ashland Planning Staffhave asked if we could estimate what percentage of
the total trips from the area would use a new street connection to Tolman Creek ltoad.
The new connection would be through the Northeast comer of the proposed proje~ct site.
The attraction of motorists to the new street would depend on how the street was
constructed. Alignment, number of intersections, parking and residential develof)ment
would have an effect on its use.
A general assessment is that the new street would attract approximately 200 project trips
per day, or approximately 20% of the projected project trips.
If there are any questions, please let me know.
Very truly yours,
ttert D. Kortt
Transportation Engineer
RDK Engineering
~I
~ ~'-------lt
;;'-~~ -- ~~( NORTHWEST BIOLOGICAL C:ONSUlTING
HABITAT RESTORATION - ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING
Col. Engineering Contractors Lic. #599428
June 13,2005
Willowbrook Project, Wetland Characteristi(~s
and Other Notable Po,ints of Interest
The following is a short list of information that generally describes the wetlands on the
Willowbrook property and provides brief information regarding an area that was
erroneously identified in the Local Wetlands Inventory as a wetland. In additio~~
information is also provided describing the wetland mitigation concept and the lase of
constructed wetlands to detain and treat stormwater runoff from the developmenlt
General Description of Wetlands on the Willowbrook property:
. The wetland size is approximately 28,000 sq. ft.( 0.66 of an acre ) (see map)
. Approximately 4,900 sq. ft. of wetlands could be impacted by the proposed project,
and there is at least 16,000 sq. ft.ofland available for wetland mitigation. 7,3.42 sq. ft.
of land would be the minimim required by DSL to meet the mitigation reqmements.
. Natural hydrology, supplemented by TID irrigation water would be available to
provide the necessary long-term water for wetland mitigation.
. The palustrine wetland is a typical wet meadow/grassland example, with corrlmon
wetland grasses and plants found in agricultural sites in the Ashland area.
. There are no endangered or threatened plants or animals associated with the ,;vetlands.
. The wetland is islolated from streams and does not contain any fish species olr habitat.
. The wetland provides limited biological complexity due to its lack of plant diversity
and structure and has minimal wildlife habitat value.
Erroneously Mapped Wetlands
The Ashland Local Wetlands Inventory (L WI) indicated the presence of a wetland swale
along the Northern property boundary, connected to an adjacent wetland swale ()n the
Cooper property.
. A wetland survey was conducted in this area and the findings did not indica1e the
presence of any wetlands. Three data plots w~e installed, and none of the pl()ts
indicated wetlands hydrology, soils, or dominant hydrophytic vegetation (see: map).
. The wetland swale on the adjacent Cooper property begins approximately 45 feet north
oftbe Willowbrook boundary and is not connected to the Willowbrook site (see map).
,~
P.O. Box671 . 324Terracestreet . Ashland/Oregon 97520 · (503)488-1061 Fax(503)488-6717
----,----'- ---_. ,-,._--
~-/----~
;;-~,~~ .. -~~( NORTHWEST BIOLOGICAL (~ONSUlTING
HABITAT RESTORATION - ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING
Col. Engineering Cc)ntraetors Lie. #599428
Wetland Mitigation on Site and Constructed Wetlands
. The property contains the right conditions (hydrology, soils, etc.) for wetlan(ls
mitigation to offset any potential impacts associated with the project develop:ment.
Approximately 16,000 sq. ft. of property adjacent to the wetlands would be available
for wetland mitigation to offset an estimated 4,900 sq. ft. of wetland impacts
associated with the development (see map).
. Mitigation wetlands would be designed and constructed to provide a variety elf aquatic
and riparian habitat that would result in greater habitat diversity and biologic:al
complexity.
. A variety of native grasses, forbs, shrubs, and trees would be planted in the e:mergent
zones and wetland boundaries to create more species diversity and habitat value.
. Swallow boxes, bat boxes, dragonfly habitat, goose nesting platforms, wildlife snags,
turtle logs and other wildlife habitat elements would be constructed and planted within
the created wetlands to enhance the biological and aesthetic value of the wetlands.
. Constructed wetlands would also be created on-site in association with the m~tigation
wetlands to filter, detain, and treat stormwater runoff from the impervious surfaces
derived from the project streets, sidewalks, roofs, parking areas, etc.
. The existing and created wetlands would be modified and built to enhance water
quality, provide more biologically complex habitat, and create aesthetic and ]~sive
recreation opportunities for the residents and the community at large.
. Specialized wetlands plants would be designed and planted which will help remove
nutrients, metals, and other toxic materials from the stormwater runoff.
. Stormceptor boxes would be installed to trap sediments and other pollutants from the
impervious runoff water. The boxes would be maintained and cleaned to protect the
wetlands and provide better water quality.
"
~~~
Scott English, for No~ Biolo~nsulting
b3
P.O. Box 671 . 324 Terrace street · Ashland, Oregon 97520 · (503) 488-1061 Fax (503) 488-6717
:JI
"
~J
,1
I~
l, v
r
t
It,
Willow Brook Wbtlands
- - ..
_.,',',>,",' ",' r"" ~"'"
-.' :.> .
~:" ~<, ..:,': ." ,it
~' '. ~~
~
'j
...--.
~ ~
. ~'fll
,
>1,
.1 :(
, ~,:", -, . " ~':''',' ..., ""., ,'!j,
.. ~~ ~
Cooper Property
.
~:~
..> i',!:~ .. . ~,. , .
'11" . t,.r"w, ~ _~' #~-~~)~
.... -, , . \~ ~ ~'~ ~~~~
,; ~~,4j. ~ 4. '. '
tJr ., ,& . · ,~',' i .~
~ ~
't
'1M;:
tr~,
~'
:~i ~)
.~~
"',' Ifr':"'1"~~ ~
Legend
Upland Points
D Wetland Boundry
Q Wetland Points
T axlots
Irl" . , .,';..,.,:. 'l'~ ,~i "I .
.~brth~st~lq~~~:;:~.;~~~IQ9
,,. ,jtT' ;,~'f;!.,.:;:,j! I~W>~~d..li~
.~ ..,2~~rerrace';J~:~~!~~~~'!i.ilLO
".~ tg~ 1 061" ..~y.~~ Y'~",t'
- - -- --
I .,'1 _
,rJ~ J'
L.,i....
,:
t._ '
~,~ -- -
It ~, ~.~
t'
~, ~
~
u
"
i
~:f' ,""
';.
t~
,." -,' f ~,
t,. .,.
fit
......... ';',
f'
I
'~'"
i' ,
'~t, "
~{. ': ~
....", ."
'Villowbrook Project .
380 Clay_St., M$h~and T39S, R1 E, Section 11 C, Tax Lot_2500
r ""0;.. :.. " .....l
- . .
"~
,
.
t:
,'~.?~~ .-:i~';~~
i
.~ 4
..
- --,'1t
D
Legend ~~
iii +-~...
Wetland Boundary
..
Data Plots
1__ J .......'~, ~."
Property Boundary
__ ____~ MV.
o 100
-II'
_. 4ir ,.... · '1.;t
. ,-
~~
c:f)/I ,$/ ;4 VI;/ jL
IJllAtJk~ ~/"#4 ~J
~o'f-Iq.1 ~
S03~~ 17e-38~(r)
'><.. . z. 8 Z.
ro~ -~o -.l~-4-' C")
.>ik V/slf 0tt/OS:-
~ 0J-e~/~ ,VL<-", a1.-,~ //bft ~~~"'If.';Ic
_ 6,k/'~ .'.. ~eI ,~i~u~~ ~~-../.z
,(,/J.t~,v.,-~7~~~/~ :z:::r:
.~/~d"'1 e.c...., Jt-/~I'~ '*
, L tJr tV-/7 ~
/
5~ cf7j)" ~ C/ ~~ ,,- "~;/lo~'r4QJ:
~. s ~-4- /,~fr d... u,~u- ~I, ..
/6,' ','II 'II/?, ~"P"", ,h, .,......M /:.. ~4-. ~ if
SWJJ- ~p~, LvJ.:c- ~~ I ~/a
;p/.-ft-4..4N'/4v</ ~~ ~ ~/o,)' ~ ~-d
~~"-#. ,5?/~:c: 'flt( V~~.-
cJ~If~~~ .:z L; ~ ~l;j~;?/~,J
~Ii-,( ~ ~/~ ,5"/:;.
: ~K/~4~ Ca~~ ~
, 4'~,od- ~ ct:d:' L . ~-j of~...t ?Il'\~.
,7P-.s;~ ~o/~~ 1?~"'~/7 ~ rOtAeR. (ttroV\-1-/ ~
6:,f (~OJ-,- ~~ ~r1~'1~' CS~
I:L L~ e,A'\.c'1 "'- ~ 4.(,€M.~-A ~ r- $) 1t
, pl~"'-J'....' ~rp~~,.
~~,r
c.~".,t :~.,- .- ~~.,,'- ~"-f'
@
~j :)jJi/D5
"'
"....fLAND LAND USE NOTIFICATION RM
(this form is to be completed only by planning department staff for mapped wetlands/waterways)
DEPARTMENT OF STATE LANDS WETLANDS PROGRAM
775 Summer Street NE, Suite 100; Salem, OR 97301-1279; (503) 378-3805
1. County: Jackson County Local Case File #: PA2004-141
City: AsWand DSL File #: WN 05 - on LJ<=t (glmpleted by DSL Statl)
Responsible Jurisdiction: ~ City 0 County DSL Project #: L/3:2'lO (glmpleted by DSL Statl)
2. APPLICANT: D&A Enterprise LANDOWNER: D&A Enterprise
name name
D&A Enterprise 1970 Ashland Street
mailing address mailing address
1970 AsWand Street 1970 Ashland Street
mailing address mailing address
Ashland. OR
Ashland. OR
city, state zip
(541)482-1270
phone
city, state zip
(541 )482-1270
phone
3. LOCATION
T 39 R IE S 11 ~ SW Tax Lot(s) 2500
Address (street/city) 380 Clay Street. AsWand. Oregon 97520
NWI quad map name Ashland. Oregon
Attach all the following (with site marked): ? L WI / NWI Map (if no L WI map) ? Parcel Map? Site Plan (if any)
If applicable attach: Il;J Other Draft L WI - Currently under review by DSL
4, SITE INFORMATION
LWI/NWI Wetland Classification Codes(s) PEMC
Adjacent Waterway (if any) Headwaters of tributary to Bear Creek Zoning Low-Density Multi-Family
5, PROPOSED ACTIVITY
Il;J site plan approval
o grading permit
o conditional use permit
Il;J Other Annexation
Project Description Annexation. 64-lot subdivsion and Site Review for development of 130 residential units
o subdivision
Il;J planned unit development
o building permit (new structures)
Completed by/Contact Bill Molnar. Planning Manager
Address Planning Div.. 51 Winburn Way. Ashland OR 97520
Date 2-08-2005
Phone: (541) ~552-2042
/ DSL RESPONSE ·
o A removal-fill permit is required from the Department of State Lands
o A removal-fill permit will be required when the development project proceeds
~A removal-fill permit may be required
(gA permit may be required by the Corps of Engineers (503-808-4373)
~Information needed includes:
~ A wetland determination/delineation report (Consultants list enclosed)
o
o State Permit # 0 was issued 0 has been applied for
o No removal-fill permit is required for the described project if/because:
Comments:. ~~ _~ - a.1~\.Q o..~~.~ J L.~h.., Gff~oo.A._ ~')-
.R l~ f\'A. A ( 't-e....
o On-Slte Visit By: Date: ~
Response completed by: c;..j " ,\ It-t o.."t't'- Date: 7 ,.
* If the project is changed to involve fill o~emoval from the wetlands area, a state removal-fill pe 't will be required.
http://www.oregonstatelands.us/wetlanduse.htm
~1
August 2004
CITY OF
ASHLAND
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
MARCH 8, 2005
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Russ Chapman called the Ashland Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. on March 8, 2005 at the Civic Center
Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street, AsWand, Oregon.
Commissioners Present:
Russ Chapman, Chair
Mike Morris
John Fields
Marilyn Briggs
Allen Douma
Olena Black
Michael Dawkins
Dave Dotterrer
Kerry KenCairn
Jack Hardesty - present
John McLaughlin, Planning Director
Bill Molnar, Senior Planner
Maria Harris, Senior Planner
Sue Yates, Executive Secretary
Absent Members:
Council Liaison:
Staff Present:
II. ANNOUNCEMENTS
A. The special presentation originally scheduled for this evening (P A2005-00084, 165 Lithia Way & 123 N, First Street,
Archerd & Dresner, LLC and Redco, LLC) has been cancelled. The presentation will be heard during the normal process on April
12,2005.
B. The Planning Commissioners' Chat will be held on March 22,2005 at the Community Development and Engineering
Services building located at 51 Winburn Way. Dotterrer will be attending.
C. There will be no study session in March.
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES AND FINDINGS
A, Dotterrer/Douma m/s to approve the minutes of the February 8, 2005 Regular Planning Commission meeting, Voice
Vote: Unanimous.
B, There were no Findings to be approved.
IV. PUBLIC FORUM - No one came forth to speak.
V. SPECIAL PRESENTATION - Cancelled as stated above.
VI. TYPE III PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. PLANNING ACTION 2005.14, 380 CLAY STREET, APPLICANT: D AND A ENTERPRISES
This action has been postponed.
B. PLANNING ACTION 2005-008
REQUEST ANNEXATION, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING MAP CHANGE FROM JACKSON COUNTY ZO~IING RR-5 (RURAL
RESIDENTIAL) TO CITY OF ASHLAND ZONING E-1 (EMPLOYMENT) FOR AN APPROXIMATELY 1.6-ACRE PARC:EL LOCATED AT 593
CROWSON ROAD. THE PORTION OF THE PARCEL ADJACENT TO CROWSON ROAD IS PROPOSED IN THE RE:SIDENTIAL OVERLAY
(R-OVERLA Y ) WHICH ALLOWS A RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT AND IN THE DETAIL SITE REVIEW ZONE WHICIH REQUIRES
ADDITIONAL BUILDING DESIGN FEATURES, THE APPLICATION INCLUDES A REQUEST FOR SITE REVIEW AI)PROVAL FOR A
,~
- _.."-~---~~_._._-~---_.-'--_.-
ANNOUNCEMENT: Chapman announced the project at 593 Crowson Road has been pulled from the agenda and will not be
heard tonight due to a noticing problem,
V. OTHER
A. Recommendation to vacate the right-of.way on Placer Run
Harris said the street vacation action was initiated because a building permit application was submitted on the parcel to the
north that is currently vacant. The street ended up getting built with a turnaround that led to the private drive that has been
installed to the south and serves the parcel to the south and west. The request is to vacate the top half of the cul-de-sac. The
Comprehensive Plan policies specify that pedestrian and bicycle access be maintained if a street right-of-way is vacated. The
half of the circle doesn't go anywhere so it doesn't lose pedestrian or bicycle access. Staff is recommending the vacation and
is asking the Commission to make a recommendation of approval to the Council.
Black/Douma m/s to recommend to the Council vacation of the Placer Run portion of the cul-de-sac that is not functioning as a
street. Roll Call: Unanimous.
VI. TYPE III PUBLIC HEARING
A. PLANNING ACTION 2004-141
REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING MAP CHANGE FROM JACKSON COUNTY ZNING RR-5
(RURAL RESIDENTIAL) TO CITY OF ASHLAND ZONING R-2 (LOW DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) FC>R AN
APPROXIMATELY TEN ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT 380 CLAY STREET, THE REQUEST INCLUDES OUTLINIE PLAN AND SITE
REVIEW APPROVAL FOR A 130-UNIT DEVELOPMENT UNDER THE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OPTION. AN EXCEPTION TO
THE STREET STANDARDS IS REQUESTED TO MEANDER THE PROPOSED SIDEWALK ON THE CLAY STREE:T FRONTAGE
AROUND A CEDAR TREE LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE PROPERTY. A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT IS
REQUESTED TO REMOVE THE NINE TREES ON THE SITE.
APPLICANT: D and A ENTERPRISE
Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts - Site visits were made by all. Black stated she lives in the vicinity of the: property and travels
by the property daily.
KenCaim has to leave the meeting by 9:00 p.m.
STAFF REPORT
Molnar said Staff's recommendation, as outlined in the Staff Report, is to continue this action. Additional information is
required in order to make a decision. He showed photos of the property.
The proposal is to construct 130 units on 64 lots on the ten acre parcel. The housing mix on the proposed multi-family zoned
parcel will consist of 26 single family residences, 24 duplex structures, and 14 fourplex structures, There are two access
points to the property, one at the south and one at the north end of the property. The northerly connection would ultimately
connect to Bud's Dairy. There is a series of alleys, providing access to the rear of the duplex units as well as access for surface
parking areas associated with the fourplex units.
The applicants are showing an open space area and biofiltration swale on the east side of the property. Approximately 50
percent of the property will be covered by impervious surfaces, allowing for 50 percent landscaping,
Annexation - The property is contiguous with the City Limits. The proposed zoning conforms to the Comprehensive Plan.
Nineteen units, or 15 percent, of the units will be affordable to families at 60 percent of the area median and will be designated
for a term of 60 years for affordability. The affordable units will be scattered amongst the fourplexes.
Public Improvements - Staff is recommending additional significant off-site improvements and would like to see a larger plan
view of the area and identify off-site improvements including sidewalk, curb, gutter and storm drain facilities. The traffic
study estimates approximately 1000 trips generated by this project, or a doubling of the current traffic loads. Staff is concerned
about safe pedestrian refuge along Clay Street and assuring there is a minimum sidewalk on one side or the other to allow
pedestrians to get out of the travel lane from Ashland Street to East Main Street. Staff is recommending in addition to what is
required, additional sidewalk improvements be extended through the five acre parcel to the north, connecting the sidewalk and
street improvement system at Bud's Dairy. Where the Wingspread street improvement ends, that curb, gutter and sidewalk
will be extended to the intersection and a right hand turn lane installed. This would allow the two turn lanes, travel lanes and
bike lanes to be well defined with curbs and minimize some of the cutting of the elbow on Clay.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETNG
MINUTES
FEBRUARY 8, 2005
2
IoCJ
_ --, ---~--- -~ -------------,- -
A new wetland inventory is close to being approved by the Division of State Lands. A wetland runs north to south and they
have identified a small narrow finger that could come onto the project property, Staff needs to tie down the location of the
wetlands because it could determine where the northerly street plug would be located. Staff would like at least a 20 to 25 foot
buffer from the wetland, The applicant has filed for formal delineation approval.
Potential Street or Multi-Use Path Connection to Tolman Creek Road - Staff would like to have the applkant investigate
further the possibility of an east/west connection to Tolman Creek Road to take the load off some key intf:rsections. The
northerly section of the project is an open space water detention area. Are there opportunities to set up a multi-use bike and
pedestrian path that would someday feed out of the proposed neighborhood, go across the northerly section of the YMCA
soccer fields and then out through an existing 24 foot wide driveway already existing along Tolman Creek Road? Or is there a
possibility for a minor vehicle connection? This would require negotiating with the Parks Department and a property owner
for easements and dedications.
Trees - The Tree Commission recommended the Planning Commission direct the applicant to seek the advice of an
independent arborist to evaluate the health and structural soundness of the cottonwoods and determine if there is an opportunity
to retain any of the cottonwoods in the project. Of the 12 trees slated for removal, nine have been identifi,ed as hazard trees.
Staff is endorsing the Tree Commissions' recommendation. Over the years, the Planning Commission and Tree Commission
have raised concerns over cottonwoods because of their tendency to drop limbs. Staff s only concern if an independent
arborist's report is required is not only the arborist report the health and soundness of the tree, but whether changes to the site
plan need to be made in order to incorporate one or more of these trees into a common area. Staff would like the arborist's
report to comment on the appropriateness of retaining such a tree where there would be activity. Would that provide a safe
environment for a common area?
Molnar said an issue was raised regarding the public posting of the sign. It was posted just yesterday. Staffbelieves that can
be remedied through a continuance of the application. Those present tonight will be given the opportunity to testify. The
hearing will remain open for additional testimony; the site will be re-posted with the new date and will allow others to
participate at the next meeting, The Commissioners decided a continuance was in order.
Briggs said the application discusses the Buildable Lands Inventory from 1998/1999 and they show a chart of those properties
that have been developed since then. Molnar said Staffs figures agree. For a five year supply, we look for eight to ten acres of
R-2 property within the City Limits. The ordinance isn't clear whether or not that five year supply means land that is approved
for building but not yet built out and occupied. Even if you add Barclay Square into the inventory, it is still only five acres of
land available within the City Limits, less than the eight to ten acres we look for.
PUBLIC HEARING
TOM GIORDANO, 2635 Takelma Way, stated the applicants don't have a lot of wiggle room to alter the design. Giordano
handed out a letter in response to the Staff Report,
Giordano addressed the following issues:
Street Improvements - They will comply with what City's request, including the sidewalk improvements up to Ashland Street.
Landscape/Open SpacelBioswale - Even though this is a very dense project, at least 50 percent is in landscaping or open space.
The common open space is five percent or 22,000 square feet, not including the bioswale buffer area that is a passive recreation
area. The bioswale area is 3.4 percent of the project. Chapman asked that any diversion of water to the north property be
shown on the site plan.
Wetland - The applicants feel pretty confident there is not a wetland on the property, In order to accommodate any potential
wetland to the north, they can move the street plug either to the east or west. The applicant is willing to go through the process
with the State to find out if there is a wetland or not.
Multi-Use Path - They don't have a problem with the multi-use path system across their property to connect with the soccer
fields to Tolman Creek Road.
Trees - The trees are spectacular. The applicants weighed their use. They are classified as hazard trees in the City's
Recommended Street Tree Guide. If they retain the trees, they will need a 108 foot radius around them and would end up
losing approximately eight dwelling units. They plan to replace the trees with almost 300 additional trees in private areas and
common landscaped areas.
ASHLAND PlANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETNG
MINUTES
FEBRUARY 8, 2005
3
7()
- ---------,---
JOHN GALBRAITH, Galbraith and Associates, 145 S. Holly Street, Medford, OR 97501, said he felt if the radius was tighter than
108 feet, gradually the tree would die. The three poplars protect each other. They are over their normal size. Once they start
infiltrating that area, it starts affecting how the trees get water. The trees have been very well maintained, In the wild, the trees
never would have lasted this long. As a professional, Galbraith said he cannot recommend saving the trees. It takes one slip-
up in maintenance (for example, trees improperly pruned) and a child might be killed if a limb falls,
Dawkins has not heard any reason to annex the property. He is concerned with-our water supply, loss of agricultural land and
bringing land into the City Limits when we already have inventory available.
Giordano said the property is within the Urban Growth Boundary and surrounded by the City on three sid€ls, It is very
developable because it is flat and the community can gain residential densities to help meet the housing needs. One would
have to conclude there is a need for R-2 housing, He believes the proposal meets the criteria for annexation,
KenCaim would like to see the fourplexes (affordable housing) more integrated on the site. Giordano said they provided
common open space between to soften the area.
DOUG IRVINE, 495 Emigrant Creek Road, said he wants the project to be a benefit to the community and they are open to
suggestions and recommendations.
Briggs said the alleys are going to be used as a street (Briggs coined the word "stralleys"). She has a problem with the criteria
"traffic to and through the development". She is suggesting the alley heading north is designated a street. Why not make it
wide enough to allow parking and call it a street? Giordano said by adding another street with parking, it will have to be at
least 28 feet in width. It might affect the design layout. Briggs commented, if it is not a street, it is a hWDIlmgous city block
and the "through" aspect is lost.
ROBERT KORTT, Transportation Engineer, 3350 Green Acres Drive, Central Point, OR 97502, said he was referred by ODOT to
the traffic recorder located south of Talent for a seasonal adjustment. There are not very many automatic (:ounters in Jackson
County. He feels the count is representative.
Those speaking tonight will be allowed to speak at the next meeting.
GLENN COOPER, P. O. Box 948, Novato, CA 94948, owns the five acre parcel to the north. Concerning the wetlands and
drainage, he would like assurance that the excess water will not be channeled onto his property. The wetland is a system that
straddles a lot of properties and it seems it is being dealt w/piecemeal. He reiterated he does not want a negative impact on his
property due to the proposed development.
ALLISON WILDMAN, 420 Clay Street, read her statement. She is concerned with increased traffic, preservation of privacy and
density. Concerning privacy, the proposed architecture for the home built adjacent to her property, greatly compromises their
privacy. A solution might be to consider a larger buffer between properties, She would like to see one-story homes and alter
the design to change rooflines and dormers, allowing for more privacy.
COLIN SWALES, 1282 Old Willow Lane, discussed the Buildable Lands Inventory. There is plenty ofR-2 land closer to the city
center than the proposed development, particularly in the Historic Districts. There is a lot of buildable land that is not on the
inventory. The Commission needs to look at what is available and is being carved up into smaller pieces all the time. There is
a whole load of parcels in the R-2 zone where there is one single family residence on a large parcel and th€~ house is a fixer-
upper. Those should be on the Buildable Lands Inventory. The Commission can't look at the annexation under the criteria for
lack of redevelopable land inventory until it is updated to reflect the current market value and the actual value that exists in the
current housing stock in Ashland,
Briggs asked if Staff could provide a current inventory, McLaughlin said the information has been providl~d. He believes
Swales is asking us to go back and apply a higher land value, assuming home values are not increasing and as a result that it
will open up many of the properties to redevelopment. McLaughlin is not certain this is truly the case. It is possible to update
the inventory in the way Swales has suggested, however, the Commission is basing their decision on the information provided.
KenCaim left the meeting,
ASHLAND PlANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETNG
MINUTES
FEBRUARY 8, 2005
4
7/
GREG GARGUS, 400 Clay Street, said traffic is his concern. He believes there should be a light at both ends of Clay. People use
Clay instead of Tolman Creek Road because there is no light on Clay. The trees have never dropped a bnmch, They are not
dangerous and should be saved. The house and bam are probably the oldest in town, There will no longer be any rural history,
ROBERT WILDMAN, 420 Clay Street, stated he has concerns about traffic. They are looking at an increase of 1300 vehicle trips
per day with just this development. With Bud's Dairy, Barclay Square and the hardware store, that will ble a significant
increase in traffic. It is necessary for Clay to have parking on both sides and at the very minimum to have bumpouts. The
elbow bend in Clay is a point of concern. He does not find the design of the development appealing. It is a grid pattern and the
house design is repetitive. He'd like to see some different designs and different depths. Wildman is conclerned with privacy.
He is requesting alternatives and a buffer throughout, but specifically for S8 and S9 to become single family residential homes
and to change the roofline. He is concerned with the wetlands.
ALBERT PEPPE, 321 Clay Street, Wingspread Mobile Home Park, said he noticed the wetland survey was done in August, the
driest season. The property is a really nice wildlife corridor, He would like to see the trees retained. He is concerned about
traffic too.
BRYAN HOLLEY, 324 Liberty Street, thinks the hazard tree might be a cultural concept. The Tree of Heaven on the Plaza has
been carefully maintained to keep it alive. The Tree Commission does not need to worry about the trees if they are structurally
sound. The Tree Commission recommended an aerial inspection. He referred to 18.61.080B3 and 18.61.094B.
McLaughlin asked Holley ifhe represented the Tree Commission. Holley said he represented himself but he was at the Tree
Commission meeting.
Staff ResDonse
Molnar said Cooper's (neighboring property owner) concerns are covered by the conditions of approval to review at final
engineering. He is asking that the amount of water draining onto his property from this development doesn't change unless the
developer has his permission.
Staff wants to make sure on-street parking can be provided on both sides and the 24 foot standard is the minimum for single
family developments, but 26 to 28 feet in width is for higher density.
The trees are identified as hazard trees. The burden of proof for hazard trees in the ordinance is a little different than a tree
removal permit. One of the recommendations by the Tree Commission is to hire an arborist to fmd if the trees are hazardous.
If it falls out of being a hazard tree, one or two of the trees could be incorporated. Staff is recommending 1m arborist's review.
POINTS FOR THE APPLICANT TO ADDRESS AT THE NEXT MEETING
· Update the Buildable Lands Inventory and additional discussion regarding inventory.
· More information from Staff about the size of the city block (within the development) because of all the alleyways
running through it.
· Additional information is needed with regard to the trees. Take a serious look at preserving the trees. What is a
hazard tree? Is a requirement of 108 foot radius so stringent that we need to provide an acre for just one tree?
· Additional explanation about the bioswales.
· Assurance that Clay Street is built to a standard from East Main Street to Ashland Street that can handle the traffic.
· What is the purpose of annexing this land in the first place? What are the pressures and forces we: are responding to in
order to say "yes? Can Staff give a presentation summarizing the reason for annexing? Why are we annexing
something in the first place? What are pressures and forces we are responding to?
· What is the water volume of the hydrology if the trees are removed?
· A request for a discussion about the CC&R's and governance issues.
· The trees and the wetlands are living things that do need to be preserved.
· Show a map of how the streets will tie together in the area.
· Water availability for increased pressure for annexations. How is it calculated into the mix?
· Show north/east access and be more specific as to what relief that could be for traffic. Size and how much traffic
would use it?
McLaughlin restated there is a housing inventory and a Buildable Lands Inventory.
The hearing will be continued next month, March 8, 2005 at 7:00 p.m. at the Council Chambers. No new notice will be mailed
but a notice will be posted.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 5
REGULAR MEETNG
MINUTES
FEBRUARY 8, 2005 1 ~
.-----..-,-.-
CIITY OF
ASI-lLAN D
Mr. Tom R. Giordano
2635 Takelma Way
Ashland, Oregon 97520
I have included a list of concerns and issues raised at the Planning Commission mec:m.ng of
February 8,2005. This is not intended to be a complete listing of the issues discussc::d, but rather
highlights some of the more important elements of the project where additional information and
evaluation is needed. I have itemized the issues and provided Staff direction.
· Evaluation of Poplar Trees
The applicant should obtain the services of an independent arborist to evaluate the health and
structural soundness of the large Poplar Tree. Staff would be agreeable to randomly selecting
an arborist to assure a perception of impartiality. I would suggest the arborist contact Staff
prior to conducting the evaluation so that adequate direction in the scope of examination is
provided.
· Retention of Poplar Trees
If the arborist report concludes that the trees are in good health and with appropriate and
regular care can be maintained within the project site, Staff would recommend that the
application consider retaining the "Poplar Grove" within the project's noted common areas.
· Addendum to Traffic Impact Analysis
The Traffic Impact Analysis appears to focus on the operation of nearby interse<:tions,
specifically the intersection of Clay Street! Ashland Street. There was co~iderable testimony
(from Commissioners and neighbors) regarding the ability of Clay Street to accommodate the
projected increase in traffic, as well as provide safety for other users of the street (Le.
pedestrians and bicyclists). Staff recommends that the project Traffic Engineer address the
impacts to Clay Street and provide an addendwn stating whether or not, based u]~n accepted
industry analysis, the street is adequate to accommodate anticipated traffic levels. The
assessment should consider the build out of Bud's Dairy, as well as Barclay Plac:e. It is
imperative that an expanded evaluation and report on the adequacy of Clay Strec::t is provided
by the Engineer and inserted into the record of this planning application.
Staff had discussed the possibility of planning for a 22- foot public street connec1ion over to
Tolman Creek Road through the northeast comer of the project. It would be helpful if the
-.,--
Community Development Tel: 541/488-5305
20 E. Main Street Fax: 541-/488-6006
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 8OOn35-29OO
www.ashland.or.us
73
---- -----T--
Traffic Engineer could estimate what percentage of total trips (or peak hour) would utilize
this connection based upon the build out of the neighborhood (should include Bud's Dairy,
Barclay, & Cooper property).
· Local Street Standards - Block Size Requirements
The Outline Plan should be evaluated to assure consistency with block length standards
adopted in the City of Ashland Local Street Standards Handbook. Staffwill be making an
independent review of this issue as well.
· Bio-Filtration Swale System
The application should consider providing additional assurance that the system (~ be
designed so that the potential for off-site flooding to Mr. Coopers' property is eliminated.
· Wetland Delineation
The wetland delineation should be completed and accepted by the Department of State Lands
prior to proceeding further with the application. As noted in the Staff Report, this should
include a determination of the wetland on the adjoining property to assure that proposed
street may be extended to the north without distwbing the wetland area, as well as providing
an ample buffer from the street (Le. 25-feet).
Based upon the location of the wetland on the adjoining property, Staff may suggest the
possibility of reserving the northeast comer of the project site for an additional future street
extension to the northerly property. This would allow for development of the eastern portion
of the adjoining property without necessitating a road crossing, potentially furth(~ distwbing
the existing wetlands.
· Governance of CC&R's
One Commissioner raised a concern or inquiry with regards to the governance of the
CC&R's within a project that mixes ownership and rentals. Staff believes this iS8ue can be
appropriately addressed through the Homeowner Association's CC&R's and bylaws.
However, the applicant may choose to provide additional background on this issue.
· Retention of Existing House
A couple of Commissioners have mentioned the idea of retaining the existing re~lidence,
based upon its connection with the local history of the neighborhood. One suggestion
included incorporating the building as a community building within a common area
associated with the Poplars. If the building is structurally unsound, the applicant might
consider the construction of a single or multi-family structure upon the location of the current
residence. This would be a way for the design to respect the location, scale and dlesign of the
Community Development Tel: 541/488-5305
20 E. Main Street Fax: 541-/488-6006
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 8OOn35-29OO
www.ashland.or.us
'7'1-
-.,--
property.s original residence. I have provided the following code provision in order to give
some additional background on this particular issue:
18.72.100 Power to Amend Plans
When approving an application the Planning Commission or/he Staff Advisor
may include any or all of the following conditions if they find it necessary to meet
the intent and purpose and the criteria for approval:
E. Require the retention and restoration of existing historically signlficant
structures on the project site.
· Extension of Time Limits
In general, any new information must be provided at least 10 days prior to the next Planning
Commission meeting in order for Staff to effectively evaluate the evidence and provide an
appropriate recommendation to the Commission. Given the number of outstanding issues,
please notify the Planning Department as quickly as possible if the requested information
cannot be provided by the deadline indicated above. If this were the case, the aplPlicant would
need to sign a request for an extension of the 120-day rule. A copy of the extension letter has
been enclosed.
Again, the list of issues raised in this letter is not intended to be all-inclusive, but rather
representative of the primary concerns discussed at the public hearing on February 8,2005. If
ou have any questions, feel free to contact me at your earliest convenience.
~
1 I Molnar, Planning Manager
Ashland Planning Division
552-2042
molnarb@ashland.or.us
c: file
Andy Cochrane, D and A Enterprise
Community Development Tel: 541/488-5305
20 E. Main Street Fax: 541-1488-8006
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 8OOn35-2900
www.ashland.or.us
7~
-.,--
ASHLAND TREE COMMISSION
PLANNING APPLICA nON REVIEW
Applicant:
D & A Enterprise
Date: February 3.2005
Address:
380 Clav Street
Commercial: Residential: X
Proposed Action:
PLANNING ACTION 2004-141 is a request for Annexation, Comprehensive Plan and Zoning
Map change from Jackson County zoning RR-5 (Rural Residential) to City of Ashland zoning R-1-
3.5 (Suburban Residential) for an approximately ten acre parcel located at 380 Clay Street. The
request includes Outline Plan and Site Review approval for a 130-unit development under the
Performance Standards Option. An exception to the Street Standards is requested to meander
the proposed sidewalk on the Clay Street frontage around a cedar tree located in the southwest
corner of the property. A Tree Removal Permit is requested to remove the nine trees on the site.
Comprehensive Plan Designation: Suburban Residential (proposed), Rural Residential (current);
Zoning: R-1-3.5, RR-5 (current); Assessor's Map #: 391E 11 C; Tax Lot: 2500.
Recommendation:
1) Based on public issues and City required density v. trees, the tree commission
would like to see an attempt made to save the 3 large Poplar trees.
2) Tree Commission recommends protecting Poplars if independent, certifi€xl
arborist determines that the trees are structurally sound through aerial inspection.
Commission Representative:
Date: 2.3.2005
Follow-up:
71"
ASHLAND PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
February 8, 2004
PLANNING ACTION: 2004-141
APPLICANT: D and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
LOCATION: 380 Clay Street
ZONE DESIGNATION: Jackson County RR-5 (Current); City of Ashland R-2-P (Proposed)
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Jackson County Rural Residential (Current);
City of Ashland Low Density Multi-Family
(Proposed)
APPLICATION DEEMED COMPLETE: January 17,2005
REQUEST: Annexation of an approximately 10-acre parcel located on the east side of Clay
Street, north of Ashland Street, at 380 Clay Street. The project involves Outline Plan and Site
Review approval for a 64-lot, 130-unit single and multi-family development under the
Performance Standards Option. A request for Tree Removal is included with the application, as
well as an Exception to City Street Standards that would permit a portion of sidewalk to be
installed at curbside.
I. Relevant Facts
1) Background - History of Application:
There are no planning actions of record for this site.
2) Detailed Description of the Site and Proposal:
The application involves the annexation and subsequent development of a 10-acre
parcel on the east side of Clay Street, between Ashland Street and East Main
Street, at 380 Clay Street. The property slopes gently (approximately 3.5%) to the
north. The original single family home, barn and other accessory structures are
situated on the property nearest to Clay Street and are proposed for n:moval.
Approximately 31 trees (> 6-inches dbh) have been identified on the site, with the
vast majority of trees located near the southwest comer of the property in the
vicinity of the existing residence and out buildings. The Tree Protection/Tree
Removal Plan included with the application identifies trees scheduled for
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: 0 and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
17
Ashland Planning Department - Staff Report
Page 1 of 19
m_ -----~-_...-- - ------r---------
retention or removal.
The draft City of Ashland Wetland and Riparian Corridor Inventory and
Assessment identifies the location of a narrow wetland protruding into the
northerly portion of the property. The wetland is described as being part of a
larger l.5-acre wetland that runs from south to north through the neighboring
semi-rural properties north of the project. This wetland is considered part of the
wetland that extends through the eastern portion of Bud's Dairy Subdivision, a
housing development currently under construction further down Clay Street.
Project Overview
The application includes a request for annexation of an approximately lO-acre
parcel. The proposed R-2 zoning is consistent with Ashland's Comprehensive
Plan designation of Low Density Multi-Family Residential. The project will entail
the construction of a mix of housing types, including single-family homes (26),
duplex (24) and four-plex (14) buildings. Approximately 28 or half of the 56-
fourplex units will be condominiums, allowing for each unit to be purchased
separately. Exterior materials will consist of concrete masonry units, cement fiber,
wood shingle and horizontal board siding, four to six inch trim and composition
shingle roofing.
Clay Street provides the primary access route to the project. Although Clay Street
is designated as a City Neighborhood Collector Street, only portions of the street
are constructed to City standards. Large segments exist that are inadequate in
pavement width, and void of curb and gutter, sidewalks and urban storm drain
systems. In addition, much of the existing paved surface is uneven and in a state
of disrepair. The application identifies the construction of a half street
improvement along the frontage of the property. This would generally include a
pavement overlay, installation of storm drains, curb and gutter, bicycle lane,
planting strips, street trees and a public sidewalk.
A system of new public streets will be constructed to serve and provide circulation
throughout the entire project. The street system accommodates a northerly street
plug that is intended to eventually extend into the adjoining undeveloped property
to the north. In addition, a proposed alley system, 20- feet in width, will be
installed to provide access to garages as well as surface parking lots associated
with the multi-family housing. At this time, Staffhas not determined which alleys
are intended to be public and which will function as private driveway aisles.
Lastly, the application states that some off-site improvements will be installed
further up Clay Street. Specifically, the application notes that the project intends
to install full street improvements up to the Barclay Square project (i.e. Ace
Hardware mixed-use) that was recently approved immediately south of this
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: D and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
Ashland Planning Department - Staff Report
Page 2 of 19
78
proposal.
Public water, sewer and storm sewer lines are located in Clay Street and available,
or can be extended, to serve the project. Run-off from the site will be directed into
storm water facilities constructed within the new streets and distributed to either
Clay Street or an on-site bioswale/detention system located along the leastem
boundary of the property, adjacent to the Ashland YMCA Soccer Field. Multi-use
pathways are proposed for installation across the detention system to permit
public access between the project and the City-owned playfields.
II. Annlication's Consistency with Relevant Annroval Standards
This report identifies significant areas within the application that require additional
information and further evaluation by City Staff before a decision on the application can
be made. Accordingly, Staff recommends that the Commission render no decision at this
time, but rather continue the application and public hearing until sufficient clarification
on these issues is provided.
Annexation Request
The project site is within the City's Urban Growth Boundary and the proposed zoning (R-
2; Low Density Multi-Family) for the annexed area is in conformance with the
designation indicated on the Comprehensive Plan Map. Additionally, the property is
contiguous to the existing City Limits on its south, east and west boundaries. Adequate
City facilities for the provision of water, sewer, power and storm drainage appear to exist.
Additional engineering information regarding the construction of an on-site
bioswale/detention system is necessary to determine potential impacts to the downstream
property owner and upon the public system along Clay Street. Since the adjoining
property to the north is outside the City Limits, directing additional run-off on that
property beyond the current flows is generally unacceptable. On-site detention will likely
be required due to the size of the project and the amount of coverage by impe:rvious
surfaces, as well as the potential need for metering peak run-off volumes into the
incomplete City storm sewer system along Clay Street.
In accordance with the approval standards for Annexation, the application incorporates 19
affordable rental units into the project. The affordable units represent 15% of the total
number of units (i.e. 130 units), and will be available to households with incomes at or
below 60% the Median Family Income for the Ashland/Medford area. The applicant
proposes to spread the 19-units throughout the 14-fourplex buildings, without grouping
affordable units in any two adjacent buildings. In addition, the application notes that the
project will include an additional 33 "guaranteed" rental units, for a total of 52 rental
units.
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: D and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
1CJ
Ashland Planning DepartmEint - Staff Report
Page 3 of 19
-~------'----~-'-"-~-'----'--'----.---
The transportation needs and improvements associated with the project have been
elaborated upon later in this report. However, in addition to the half street improvements
required by ordinance along the frontage of the development, Staff has recommended that
these improvements be extended and connect to the street improvements completed as
part of Bud's Dairy Subdivision. Given the volume of traffic generated by the: project,
Staff also recommends that the project be responsible for the installation of half street
improvements along the opposite (west) side of Clay Street, from the south end of
Wingspread Mobile Home Park, up to Clay Street's intersection with Ashland Street.
This would include the installation of a right turn only lane, at the intersection of Clay
Street! Ashland Street as recommended by the Traffic Impact Analysis.
Staff ConcernsIRecommendations: Given the substantial increase in traffic resulting from the project, Staff
believes additional street improvements well beyond the project frontage are necessary to accommodate
safe automobile, pedestrian and bicycle transportation along Clay Street. While the project narrative
stipulates additional street improvements, the extent of the proposed improvements is unclear. Given the
importance of this issue, Staff recommends that the application be continued until a revised plan is
submitted clearly identifying the location and scope of all off-site improvements to Clay Street.
Outline Plan and Site Review - Consistency with Approval Standards
The application requests to subdivide the 10-acre parent parcel into approximately 64-
lots, with the intention of developing a mixed housing project consisting of 130
residences. As noted earlier, the housing mix will include single-family homes, duplexes
and fourplexes. The project density conforms to permitted density requirements of the R-
2 Zoning District, allowing for a base density of 13.5 units/acre or approximately 135
units. This does not take into account the additional density bonus possible due to the
provision of affordable housing.
The design of new public streets within the project, as well as proposed frontage
improvements along Clay Street, largely conforms to the City's Local Street Standards.
The project's east-west running streets should be slightly greater in width to adequately
accommodate on-street parking needs generated by a multi-family development of this
size. The proposed street network has been designed to permit the extension of a public
street, at a later date, northward through the adjoining undeveloped property. This will
enable this project, the property to the north and Bud's Dairy Subdivision to be linked
through a connected local street network. In is imperative, however, that the application
includes evidence showing that the future street location is west of the wetland and an
adequate buffer area is provided (i.e. 20-feet).
Staff has identified two concerns related to Outline Plan approval standards. The
identification of potential wetland areas and the project's involvement in the installation
of off-site improvements to Clay Street has been described later in this repOIt. Lastly,
while the approval standards require that 5% of the total project area be included within
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: 0 and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
Ashland Planning Department - Staff Report
Page 4 of 19
2tJ
commonly owned open space, only 4.4% has been provided. Although the plan needs to
be amended to comply with this requirement, it should be noted that the lot coverage for
the entire project is approximately 50%. This is considerably lower than the 65% lot
coverage standard permitted within the R-2 Zoning District.
StaffConcerns/Recommendations: The Outline Plan must be amended so that 5% of the total project area
is included within common open space. Staffhas also suggested that the east-west segments of the new
public streets have a width of 28-feet so that adequate on-street parking can be provided. Lastly, it is
important that the application include evidence showing that the future street extension through the
northerly, adjoining property is situated west of the wetland and provides for an appropriate buffer width
(i.e. 20-feet).
Potential Impacts and Staff Concerns
Staff has outlined some specific concerns and reservations regarding the proposal at this
time. Given the size, scope and nature of impacts associated with the project, Staff does
not believe that solutions to these issues can be remedied through conditions of approval.
As noted earlier, Staff recommends that the application be continued until the additional
information and changes as indicated in the following sections are provided.
Wetland determination and identification
The City of Ashland is in the process of completing a Local Wetland Inventory (L WI) in
accordance with the requirements of the Oregon Department of State Lands (DSL). The
Oregon Department of State Lands has reviewed the inventory prepared by the City's
consultant and has outlined some relatively minor changes.
The Local Wetland Inventory (L WI) identifies a potential wetland located near the north
boundary ofthe project site, extending southward into the subject property. This
information was made available to the applicant at the pre-application conference. The
application includes a letter from Scott English, Northwest Biological Consulting, stating
that upon on-site investigation of the property, "the site does not contain any
jurisdictional wetlands." It is Staff's understanding that such a determination can only be
made and confirmed by the Oregon Department of State Lands.
Staff has contacted Oregon Department of State Lands concerning the contradictory
conclusions regarding the potential presence of a wetland on the property. As of the date
of writing this Staff Report, Oregon Department of State Lands had not received a formal
Wetland delineation for the property or any additional information that would lead them
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: D and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
~I
Ashland Planning Department - Staff Report
Page 5 of 19
to suggest removing the wetland from the Local Wetland Inventory. Consequently, it is
Staff s recommendation that the Commission take no action on this application until the
applicant has presented a delineation of the wetland boundary to the Oregon Department
of State Lands, so that the exact location of the wetland's boundary may be verified.
If the delineation determines that the wetland extends within the boundaries of the project
site, Staff recommends that the wetland and an appropriately sized buffer area be
incorporated within the project's common area. Staff is opposed to any modification, and
consequent mitigation, of the wetland due to its "significant" ranking in the Local
Wetlands Inventory. The southerly area of the wetland is located at the headwaters of a
larger wetland that runs from south to north, ultimately connecting to Bear Creek and its
associated floodplain. Consequently, this wetland, that is part of the same wetland that
extends through Bud's Dairy Subdivision, is considered to encompass essential water
quality functions.
Even if the wetland boundary terminates at or is located just short of the northerly
boundary of the project, Staff would recommend that a 20 to 25-foot buffer area be
provided around the perimeter of the wetland. The buffer area should be incorporated
within a common area, as suggested by Outline Plan approval standards (18.88.040 A.
4c), with its preservation described through the project's CC&R's and ensured through
the Homeowner's Association.
Staff ConcernsIRecommendations: The City of Ashland draft Local Wetland Inventory and the
information provided with this application arrive at contradictory conclusions regarding the potential
presence of a wetland on the property. Staff recommends that the Commission take no action on this
application until the Oregon Department of State Lands approves a delineation of the wetland boundary, so
that the exact location of the wetland's boundary may be verified and appropriate buffer areas, if applicable,
may be considered. As noted earlier, it is important that the application include evidence showing that the
future street extension through the northerly, adjoining property is situated west of the wetland and provides
for an appropriate buffer width
Improvements to Clay Street
A Traffic Impact Study was prepared by RDK Engineering and is included in the record
as part of the application. The purpose of the study was to identify any traffic related
impacts generated by daily operations of the proposed project and to determine the need
for any improvements to the nearby road system. The recommendations of the study
include the construction of a right turn only lane for southbound vehicles on Clay Street
at Ashland Street. A second option that may be warranted in the future entails the
installation of a raised median on Ashland Street to prohibit southbound left turn vehicles
from pulling into the Ashland Street center median from Clay Street.
The impacts from the proj ect on the surrounding road system and intersections are a
significant issue. Ashland's Comprehensive Plan policies and implementing subdivision
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: D and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
<g~
Ashland Planning Department - Staff Report
Page 6 of 19
and Site Review ordinances not only require that the application address potential impacts
to motorists that use the adjoining road system, but also pedestrians and cyclists that
currently and intend to make use of the surrounding transportation system. Consequently,
Staff believes that is incumbent on the City of Ashland to not only address the project's
impact on automobile circulation, but pedestrian and bicycle safety as well.
It is unclear to Staff what level of street improvements are proposed by the application.
The application notes on page 10 that: "The applicant will also improve (half street) Clay
Street along the frontage of the property and provide full improvements to the proposed
Barclay Square (i.e. Ace Hardware mixed development) project to the south. In
conjunction with the Barclay Square project, the applicant will participate in the
improvements at the intersection of Ashland/Clay Streets." The Ace Hardware mixed-use
project (i.e. Barclay Square) is required to improve Clay Street (112 street improvements)
from Ashland Street through the intersection of the new public street proposed to provide
access to the project. In addition, Barclay Square is required to provide a design and IIz the
costs associated with the installation of a multi-use walkway through the ODOT property,
ultimately linking up to the existing public sidewalk along Birchwood Lane.
The Barclay Square project south of this proposal has not received Final approval or
building permits. Consequently, there is currently no guarantee that the improvements to
Clay Street associated with that project will occur, nor is there any certainty on the timing
of those improvements. Given that the proposed development is projected to generate
approximately 1000 vehicle trips per day, Staff believes that two scenarios regarding
improvements to Clay Street require careful consideration before any decision can be
made.
1. First Scenario. If the Barclay Square project does not move forward, what type of
improvements to Clay Street should be considered to ensure adequate: automobile,
pedestrian and bicycle transportation along Clay Street? In this scenario, it is
Staffs opinion that this project would need to install a right turn only lane along
Clay Street at Ashland Street, as recommended in the Traffic Impact Study. This
would include the installation of curb and gutter, and sidewalk (one side) along
Clay Street from Ashland Street through the bend in Clay Street, connecting to the
existing curb and gutter at Wingspread Mobile Home Park. In addition, the project
should be responsible for safe pedestrian access north of the project to East Main
Street. This would most likely consist of a continuation of half street
improvements not only along the frontage of the development, but extending to
the existing improvements recently installed by the Bud's Dairy Subdivision.
2. Second Scenario. If the Barclay Square project does move forward, what type of
improvements to Clay Street should be considered to ensure adequate automobile,
pedestrian and -bicycle transportation along Clay Street? In Staff s opinion a
similar same level of improvements should be considered. The project would need
to install a right turn only lane along Clay Street at Ashland Street. This would
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: 0 and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
~
Ashland Planning Department - Staff Report
Page 7 of 19
include the installation of curb and gutter along Clay Street from Ashland Street
through the bend in Clay Street, connecting to the existing curb and gutter at
Wingspread Mobile Home Park. In addition, the project should be responsible for
safe pedestrian access north of the project to East Main Street. This would most
likely consist of a continuation of half street improvements not only aIong the
frontage of the development, but extending to the existing improvements recently
installed by the Bud's Dairy Subdivision.
In summary, the generation of 1000 vehicle trips represents a considerable change in
current traffic volumes. Based upon the 2004 existing traffic volumes, it appears that the
build out of the project would essentially result in a doubling of the current traffic
volumes. Consequently, the level of improvements along Clay Street and the timing of
installation must be clear and guaranteed prior to the issuance of any building permits
associated with the project.
Staff ConcernsIRecommendations: The generation of 1000 vehicle trips will result in considerable changes
to current traffic volumes and conditions along Clay Street. Street improvements should be installed that not
only accommodate adequate automobile access, but safe and direct pedestrian and bicycle transportation as
well. In Staffs opinion, the extent of off-site improvements to Clay Street proposed in the application is
unclear. In addition to improvements proposed along the frontage of the project, Staff recommends that City
storm drain facilities, curb and gutter, planting strip and public sidewalk be installed along the frontage of
the neighboring property to the north (39 IE 11CB, #1100). This would provide a pedestrian facilities past
the Bud's Dairy Subdivision to East Main Street. Additionally, the project would be responsible for the
widening of pavement; curb & gutter and storm drain improvements (and possibly sidewalk) on the
opposite side of the street from Wingspread Mobile Home Park up to Clay Street's intersection with
Ashland Street. The improvement of the intersection would include the installation of a right turn only lane
on Clay Street at Ashland Street.
Design and Capacity of Public Utilities
Run-off and site drainage from the project will be divided between the piped system
located within the street network and a bioswale/detention system situated along the east
boundary of the project. The on-site storm water system with pre-treatment bioswales will
meter the runoff from the site before entering the City's storm sewer system and the
adjacent property to the north. The bioswale/detention system is designed to provide
additional hydrology to wetlands located north of the property.
The bioswale/detention system must be designed to avoid the possibility of flooding the
property to the north. In general, the system should be designed so that the amount of
water diverted through the adjoining property to the north is not significantly greater than
that associated with pre-development runoff volumes. These design considerations can be
addressed at the time of Final Plan.
It appears that the majority of runoff generated by the project will be diverted to the City
storm water drainage system in Clay Street. The current system in Clay Street, however,
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: D and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
~~
Ashland ~Ianning Department - Staff Report
Page 8 of 19
consists partly of piped urban storm drain systems and partly of a open ditches. Staff is
concerned that the volume of runoff diverted to Clay Street may inundate the existing
street side open ditch located immediately north of the project. Additionally, the rate,
speed and volume of runoff diverted to the ditch may cause down cutting or a dramatic
deepening of the existing ditch, posing a potential safety risk to pedestrians and bicyclists.
Staff has recommended that a sidewalk be installed along the neighboring property's
frontage, in order to provide continuous and safe pedestrian access to the sidewalk system
associated with the Bud's Dairy Subdivision. As noted earlier, this would most likely
consist of a continuation of half street improvements not only along the frontage of the
development, but extending to the existing improvements recently installed by the Bud's
Dairy Subdivision
Staff ConcernsIRecommendations: The bioswale/detention system must be designed to avoid the
possibility of flooding the property to the north. In general, the system should be designed so that the
amount of water diverted through the adjoining property to the north is not significantly grealter than that
associated with pre-development runoff volumes. Additionally, the on-site system must evaluate the impacts
of peak flows upon the existing open ditches along Clay Street. These design considerations can be
addressed at the time of Final Plan.
Potential Street or Multi-Use Path Connection to Tolman Creek Road
An apparent reason for the existing and worsening operation of the Clay Street/Ashland
Street intersection is due to the lack of alternative routes that could result in a greater
distribution of neighborhood traffic, ultimately placing less demand on the intersection.
Besides the nearly completed Abbott Avenue connection between lower Clay Street and
Tolman Creek Road, no other east-west road connection exists or is clearly planned.
Creek Drive, centrally located on the west side of Clay Street is projected to someday
connect with Normal Avenue. The location of wetlands and the need for a raillroad
crossing, however, pose design and access constraints that impact the feasibiJlity and
timeframe for the street extension.
There may be an opportunity to potentially link the northeast comer of the subject site
with Tolman Creek Road further to the east. The connection would travel from the
northeast comer of the project, then along the northerly edge of the Ashland YMCA
soccer fields and link to the existing 24- foot wide access driveway currently serving a
multi-family complex along Tolman Creek Road. It should be clear that this is not a
straightforward option, requiring discussion and cooperation from two or more property
owners. In addition, the construction of the narrowest City Street (i.e. 22-feet with a
curbside sidewalk) would encroach upon the existing soccer fields and would add
additional traffic to the apartment complex's otherwise quiet access driveway.
Given the existing and future problems associated with the Clay Street/ Ashhmd Street
intersection, Staff believes that it is important to exhaust all potential long-term solutions.
At a minimum, it would seem wise to obtain an easement through the northeast comer
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: D and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
~5
Ashland Planning Departml3nt - Staff Report
Page 9 of 19
common area in order to allow the installation of a multi-use pathway should the
opportunity arise. The Commission could consider expanding the easement area to
encompass the entire northeast comer common. This would, at a minimum, not preclude
the possibility of a establishing a future road connection. Given that the application
involves the annexation of a large parcel of land, this is the time for evaluating some of
the long-term needs of the area's transportation system.
Staff ConcernsIRecommendations: It would appear that the predicted worsening of the Clay
Street! Ashland Street intersection is effected by the lack of an appropriate number of existing and planned
street connections between Clay Street and Tolman Creek Road. There may be an opportunity to potentially
link the northeast comer of the project site to Tolman Creek Road, ultimately creating a transportation
connection from Clay Street through the project and over to Tolman Creek Road. Staff recommends that the
Commission (an ultimately the City Council) consider the dedication of an easement through the northeast
common area that would maintain the possibility of establishing a road connection or multi-use pathway.
Tree Removal Permit
Approximately 31 trees (> 6-inches dbh) have been identified on the site, with the vast
majority of trees located near the southwest comer of the property in the vicinity of the
existing residence and out buildings. A Tree Protection/Tree Removal Plan identifies
trees scheduled for retention or removal. Of the 31 trees, nine are specified, in the opinion
ofthe project's Landscape Architect, as hazard trees because the tree present "a clear
public safety hazard or a foreseeable danger to property." Additionally, a Tree Removal
Permit is requested for three eight inch in diameter Almond trees. Consequently, 19 of the
existing 31 trees will be preserved, with tree protection measures installed during the
installation of public infrastructure and home construction.
A few tremendously large Poplar trees are located in the area surrounding the existing
home. A neighborhood petition has been included in the record requesting the
preservation of these mature Poplar trees (i.e. Cottonwoods). Poplar and related species
are identified Ashland's Prohibited Street Tree list. Each tree is an old specimen tree that
is considered near the end of its life expectancy (see pages 5 & 6 of Tree Removal
Narrative). Generally, the Poplar species is thought to be undesirable within residential
neighborhoods due to the potential for frequent breaking and dropping of limbs.
Exception to Street Standards
A relatively minor exception to City Street Standards is requested to permit the
installation of a small segment of curbside sidewalk along Clay Street in order to retain an
existing, IS-inch in diameter cedar tree. Given the small adjustment in sidewalk location,
Staff supports this deviation and believes it complies with the approval criteria for an
exception.
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: 0 and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
~~
Ashland Planning Departmemt - Staff Report
Page 10 of 19
The application also includes a request to permit the design of a meandering sidewalk
along the east side of the new street located closest to the Ashland Family YMCA soccer
fields. While Staff is not necessarily opposed to the request, the justification for the
exception is questionable based upon the primary objective of enlarging the useable space
adjoining the common area. Staff believes that there might be opportunities for
maintaining the width of the common area landscape buffer while still constmcting a
planting strip between the curb and sidewalk. Staff suggests that such options be explored
at the time of final plan.
III. Procedural - Reauired Burden of Proof
The approval standards for Annexation are described in section 18.106.030 of the Ashland
land Use Ordinance as follows:
An annexation may be approved if the proposed request for annexation conforms, or can be made
to conform through the imposition of conditions, with the following approval criteria:
A. The land is within the City's Urban Growth Boundary.
B. The proposed zoning for the annexed area is in conformance with the designation indicated
on the Comprehensive Plan Map, and the project, if proposed concurrently with the annexation, is
an allowed use within the proposed zoning district.
C. The land is currently contiguous with the present City limits.
D. Adequate City facilities for the provision of water to the site as determined by the Public
Works Department; the transport of sewage from the site to the waste water treatment plant as
determined by the Public Works Department; the provision of electricity to the site as determined
by the Electric Department; urban storm drainage as determined by the Public Works Department
can and will be provided to and through the subject property. Unless the City has declared a
moratorium based upon a shortage of water, sewer, or electricity, it is recognized that adequate
capacity exists system-wide for these facilities.
E. Adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property. For the
purposes of this section "adequate transportation" for annexations consists of vehicular, bicycle,
pedestrian and transit transportation meeting the following standards:
1. For vehicular transportation a 20' wide paved access exists, or can and will be constructed,
along the full frontage of the project site to the nearest fully improved collector or arterial street. All
streets adjacent to the annexed area shall be improved, at a minimum, to a half-street standard
with a minimum 20' driving surface. The City may, after assessing the impact of the development,
require the full improvement of streets adjacent to the annexed area. All streets located within
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: 0 and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
~7
Ashland Planning Department - Staff Report
Page 11 of 19
- ------ ----,--
annexed areas shall be fully improved to city standards. Where future street dedications are
indicated on the City's Street Dedication Map or required by the City, provisions shall be made for
the dedication and improvement of these streets and included with the application for annexation.
2. For bicycle transportation safe and accessible bicycle facilities exist, or can and will be
constructed. Should the annexation be adjacent to an arterial street, bike lanes shall be provided
on or adjacent to the arterial street. Likely bicycle destinations from the project site shall be
determined and safe and accessible bicycle facilities serving those destinations shall be indicated.
3. For pedestrian transportation safe and accessible pedestrian facilities exist, or can and will be
constructed. Full sidewalk improvements shall be provided on one side adjacent to the annexation
for all streets adjacent to the proposed annexed area. Sidewalks shall be provided as required by
ordinance on all streets within the annexed area. Where the project site is within a quarter of a mile
of an existing sidewalk system, the sidewalks from the project site shall be constructed to extend
and connect to the existing system. Likely pedestrian destinations from the project site shall be
determined and the safe and accessible pedestrian facilities serving those destinations shall be
indicated.
4. For transit transportation, should transit service be available to the site, or be likely to be
extended to the site in the future based on information from the local public transit provider,
provisions shall be made for the construction of adequate transit facilities, such as bus shelters
and bus turn-out lanes. All required transportation improvements shall be constructed and installed
prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any new structures on the annexed property.
F. For all residential annexations, a plan shall be provided demonstrating that the development
of the entire property will ultimately occur at a minimum density of 90% of the base density for the
zone, unless reductions in the total number of units is necessary to accommodate si~lnificant
natural features, topography, access limitations, or similar physical constraints. The owner or
owners of the property shall sign an agreement to be recorded with the county clerk after approval
of the annexation, ensuring that future development will occur in accord with the minimum density
indicated in the development plan. For purposes of computing maximum density, portions of the
annexed area containing undevelopable areas such as wetlands, floodplain corridor .Iands, or
slopes greater than 35%, shall not be included.
G. For all annexations with a density or potential density of four residential units or greater and
involving residential zoned lands, or commercial, employment or industrial lands with a Residential
Overlay (R-Overlay):
1. 35% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 120% of
median income; or
2. 25% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below '100% of
median income; or
3. 20% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 80% of
median income; or
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: 0 and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
<l~
Ashland Planning Department - Staff Report
Page 12 of 19
_____.n___ ------- -----------r-----
4. 15% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 60% of
median income; or
5. Title to a sufficient amount of buildable land for development is transferred to a non-profit
(IRC 501 (3)(c)) affordable housing developer or comparable Development Corporation for the
purpose of complying with subsection 2 above. The land shall be located within the project and all
needed public facilities shall be extended to the area or areas proposed for transfer. Ownership of
the land shall be transferred to the affordable housing developer or Development Corporation prior
to commencement of the project.
The total number of affordable units described in this section G shall be determined by rounding
down fractional answers to the nearest whole unit. A deed restriction, or similar legal instrument,
shall be used to guarantee compliance with affordable criteria for a period of not less than 60
years. Properties providing affordable units as part of the annexation process shall qualify for a
maximum density bonus of 25 percent.
H. One or more of the following standards are met:
1. The proposed area for annexation is to be residentially zoned, and there is less than a five-
year supply of vacant and redevelopable land in the proposed land use classification within the
current city limits. "Redevelopable land" means land zoned for residential use on which
development has already occurred but on which, due to present or expected market forces, there
exists the likelihood that existing development will be converted to more intensive residential uses
during the planning period. The five- year supply shall be determined from vacant and
redevelopable land inventories and by the methodology for land need projections from the Housing
Element of the Comprehensive Plan; or
2. The proposed lot or lots will be zoned E-1 or C-1 under the Comprehensive Plan, and that the
applicant will obtain Site Review approval for an outright permitted use, or special permitted use
concurrent with the annexation request; or
3. A current or probable public health hazard exists due to lack of full City sanitary sewer or
water services; or
4. Existing development in the proposed annexation has inadequate water or sanitary sewer
service; or the service will become inadequate within one year; or
5. The area proposed for annexation has existing City of Ashland water or sanitary sewer
service extended, connected, and in use, and a signed "consent to annexation" agreement has
been filed and accepted by the City of Ashland; or
6. The lot or lots proposed for annexation are an "island" completely surrounded by lands within
the city limits. (ORD 2792, 1997; ORD 2895, 2003)
The criteria for Outline Plan approval are described in section 18.88.040 A. 4 01: the Ashland
Land Use Ordinance as follows:
The Planning Commission shall approve the outline plan when it finds the following criteria have
been met:
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: D and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
11
Ashland Planning Department - Staff Report
Page 13 of 19
~._-_._--~------_._--_._-_._-------~----,--
a. That the development meets all applicable ordinance requirements of the City of Ashland.
b. That adequate key City facilities can be provided including water, sewer, paved access to and
through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, police and fire protection and
adequate transportation; and that the development will not cause a City facility to opHrate beyond
capacity.
c. That the existing and natural features of the land; such as wetlands, floodplain corridors, ponds,
large trees, rock outcroppings, etc., have been identified in the plan of the development and
significant features have been included in the open space, common areas, and unbuildable areas.
d. That the devel~pment of the land will not prevent adjacent land from being developed for the
uses shown in the Comprehensive Plan.
e. That there are adequate provisions for the maintenance of open space and common areas, if
required or provided, and that if developments are done in phases that the early phases have the
same or higher ratio of amenities as proposed in the entire project.
f. That the proposed density meets the base and bonus density standards established under this
Chapter.
g. The development complies with the Street Standards. (Ord 2836, S2 1999).
The criteria for Site Plan approval are described in section 18.72.070 of the Ashland Land
Use Ordinance as follows:
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 devellopment.
B. 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.
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)
The criteria for a Tree Removal Permit are described in section 18.61.080 of thE! Ashland
Land Use Ordinance as follows:
An applicant for a Tree Removal-Staff Permit shall demonstrate that the following criteria are
satisfied. The Staff Advisor may require an arborist's report to substantiate the criteria for a permit.
A. Hazard Tree: The Staff Advisor shall issue a tree removal permit for a hazard tree if the
applicant demonstrates that a tree is a hazard and warrants removal.
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: D and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
era
Ashland Planning Department - Staff Report
Page 14 of 19
_.__._~._.._-----_._._------------r-._._-
1. A hazard tree is a tree that is physically damaged to the degree that it is clear that it is likely
to fall and injure persons or property. A hazard tree may also include a tree that is located within
public rights of way and is causing damage to existing public or private facilities or services and
such facilities or services cannot be relocated or the damage alleviated. The applicant must
demonstrate that the condition or location of the tree presents a clear public safety hazard or a
foreseeable danger of property damage to an existing structure and such hazard or danger cannot
reasonably be alleviated by treatment or pruning.
2. The City may require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each hazard tree pursuant to
AMC 18.61.084. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit.
B. Tree that is Not a Hazard: The City shall issue a tree removal permit for a tree that is not a
hazard if the applicant demonstrates all of the following:
1. The tree is proposed for removal in order to permit the application to be consistE!nt with other
applicable Ashland Land Use Ordinance requirements and standards. (e.g. other applicable Site
Design and Use Standards). The Staff Advisor may require the building footprint of the
development to be staked to allow for accurate verification of the permit application; and
2. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of
surface waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks; and
3. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes,
canopies, and species diversity within 200 feet of the subject property.
The City shall grant an exception to this criterion when alternatives to the tree removal have been
considered and no reasonable alternative exists to allow the property to be used as permitted in
the zone. Nothing in this section shall require that the residential density be reduced below the
permitted density allowed by the zone. In making this determination, the City may consider
alternative site plans or placement of structures or alternate landscaping designs that would lessen
the impact on trees, so long as the alternatives continue to comply with other provisions of the
Ashland Land Use Ordinance.
4. The City shall require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each tree granted approval
pursuant to AMC 18.61.084. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the
permit.
IV. Conclusions and Recommendations
Staff recommends that the Commission continue the application and public hearing on
this matter until the issues raised in the Staff Report have been resolved. The primary
concerns involve a determination of the location of the wetland and appropriately sized
buffer area, as well as a clear understanding of the extent of proposed and required street
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: D and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
'11
Ashland Planning DepartmEmt - Staff Report
Page 15 of 19
improvements along Clay Street. In Staff s opinion, the application should include a
revised site plan that encompasses the surrounding area from East Main to Ashland
Street. The revised plan should clearly identify existing, planned and recommended street
improvements, or an alternate street improvement plan put forth by the applicant.
Given the size ofthe project and importance of the issues raised in this report, Staff
recommends that the Commission withhold any decision on the project at this time. A list
of suggested conditions has been provided in order to provide the applicant with a clear
understanding of Staff s suggested recommendations.
1) That all proposals of the applicant are conditions of approval unless otherwise
modified here.
2) That a consent to annexation from be completed, which is non-revocable for a
period of one year from its date.
3) That a boundary description and map be prepared in accordance with ORS
308.225. A registered land surveyor shall prepare the description and map. The
boundaries shall be surveyed and monuments established as required by statute
subsequent to Council approval of the proposed annexation.
4) That the applicant submit an electric distribution plan including load calculations and
locations of all primary and secondary services including transformers, cabinets and
all other necessary equipment. This plan must be reviewed and approved by the
Electric Department prior to Final Plan approval. Transformers and cabinets shall be
located in areas least visible from streets, while considering the access needs of the
Electric Department.
5) That a final utility plan for the project shall be reviewed and approved by the
Engineering Division and Building Divisions at the time of Final Plam. The utility
plan shall include the location of connections to all public facilities in and adjacent to
the development, including the locations of water lines and meter sizes, sewer mains
and services, manholes and clean-outs, storm drainage pipes and catch basins.
6) That the identification, relocation and piping of existing irrigation facilities be
addressed at the time of Final Plan. The design, relocation and installation of
irrigation system shall be review and approved by the Talent Irrigation District prior
to Final Plan approval and installed as part of the overall public infrastructure
requirements.
7) That the design of all on-site storm water detention systems (i.e. bio-swales) shall
be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department, Building Official and
Staff Advisor prior to Final Plan approval and the commencement of public
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: D and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
q~
Ashland Planning Department - Staff Report
Page 16 of 19
..__ ...._.._..__.._ .. ___un.. .._..------,-__.. __ __
infrastructure installation and the issuance of an excavation permit. The design of
the bioswale/detention shall not significantly increase the volume ofnmoff
beyond pre-development amounts onto the property to the north. The permanent
maintenance of on-site storm water detention systems must be addressed through
the project's CC&R's and is approved by the Public Works Department and
Building Division.
8) That the engineered construction drawings for Clay Street comply with City of
Ashland Street Local Street Standards. Clay Street shall be improved along the
entire frontage of the property. Improvements to Clay Street shall consist
approximately with the following standards: 28-feet of pavement overlay width
(includes two travel lanes and an approximately six-foot bike lane), curb and
gutter, storm drains, 7.5' planting strip and a six-foot wide public side:walk. The
Final Plan shall include profiles and cross sections, with erosion control and slope
stability methodologies installed consistent with the standards contained in AMC
18.62.080B.
9) That an engineered design for a right turn only lane on southbound Clay Street at
Ashland Street shall be provided at the time of Final Plan approval. The design
shall include the widening of pavement width at the intersection; installation of
curb and gutter and sidewalks from the Clay Street/Ashland Street intersection to
and through the bend (i.e. elbow) in Clay Street to the existing curb on the west
side of Clay Street and storm drain facilities (if applicable). Such improvements
shall be installed as part of the overall public infrastructure requirements for the
subdi vision.
10) That a half street improvement including curb and gutter, storm drain facilities
planting strip and public sidewalk be installed along the street frontage of the
neighboring property to the north (39 IE lICB, #1100). The design of these
improvements shall be consistent with Ashland's Local Street Standards, allow
for a smooth transition to the adjoining sidewalk network and be provided at the
time of Final Plan.
11) That the engineered construction drawings for all new public streets shall comply
with City of Ashland Local Street Standards. The minimum street width shall be
no less than 22-feet in width at intersections (unless permitted by the Ashland Fire
Department), while the west-east trending public streets shall have a minimum
width of 28-feet to adequately accommodate on-street parking on both sides of the
street. Plans to include profiles and cross sections, with erosion control and slope
stability methodologies installed consistent with the standards contained in AMC
18.62.080B.
12) That the final design of south-north trending alleys consider the installlation of a
walkway only on one side in order to evaluate the possibility of including a
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: 0 and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
q~
Ashland Planning Department - Staff Report
Page 17 of 19
planting strip w/sidewalk alongside the new street running parallel to the bio-
filtration swale/detention system.
13) That the engineered construction drawings for the project address the design and
installation of public multi-use pathways and fence gates from the project to the
City of Ashland Parks/Ashland Family YMCA Soccer Fields. The design of the
multi-use pathway shall be in accord with City Local Street Standards and
approved by the Director of the Ashland Parks Department prior to signature of
the final survey plat or the installation of improvements associated with the
subdivision.
14) That the requirements of the Ashland Fire Department, including but not limited
to hydrant placement and flow and apparatus access, shall be clearly identified on
the engineered construction drawings and reviewed by the Ashland Fire
Department at the time of Final Plan and approved prior to signature of the final
survey plat or the installation of improvements associated with the subdivision.
15) That all recommendations ofthe Ashland Tree Commission noted at their February 3,
2005 meeting, and consistent with Ashland's Site Design and Use Standards and
Tree Preservation Ordinance, shall incorporated into a revised Landscaping Plan (if
applicable) prior to Final Plan approval. The recommendations shall be included on a
revised landscaping plan and final irrigation plan at the time of submission of
building permit.
16) That prior to any disturbance occurring on the site or the issuance of a building
permit, a Tree Verification Permit shall be applied for. Required Tree Protection
Measures shall be instituted prior to any development activities, including, but not
limited to clearing, grading, excavation or demolition work, and shall be removed
only after completion of all construction activity, including landscaping and irrigation
installation.
17) That a final copy of the CC&R's for the Homeowner's Association shall be
provided at the time of Final Plan and approved prior to signature of1the Final
survey plat. CC&R's to describe responsibility for the maintenance of common
area landscaping, private driveways, multi-use pathways and on-site storm water
detention facilities. The Homeowner's Association is responsible for contracting
with a utility maintenance company for the maintenance of the storm water
detention facility. All parameters for maintenance of the facility, including time
lines and enforcement, shall be reviewed and approved by the City Public Works
Department and described in the CC&R's.
18) That the project complies with the Affordable Housing Standards as described in
18.106.030 G. Each affordable unit shall be identified and the required term of
affordability agreements (i.e. in perpetuity) signed prior to signature of the final
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: D and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
1'4-
Ashland Planning Departm1ent - Staff Report
Page 18 of 19
survey plat, with proof of recording submitted to the City of Ashland Housing
Program Coordinator prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
19) That the CC&R's identify which units are subject to the City's Affordable
Housing requirements and terms of affordability.
20) That a DemolitionIMove permit be issued for all applicable structures on the
property prior to signature of the survey plat.
21) That opportunity-to-recycle facilities shall be shall be identified in conjunction
with the design of each building and in accordance with the standards described in
section 18.72.115 of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance prior to issuance ofa
building permit.
22) That the color, texture, dimensions, shape and building materials for all exterior
components ofthe project be included at the time of submission of building permit.
The information shall be consistent with the colors, texture, dimensions and shape of
materials and building details proposed and approved as part of the land use
application.
23) That the applicant agree to construct the project in accordance with the approved
plan and City ordinances and waives the right to file a claim under Oregon
Statewide Measure 37. The signed waiver shall be submitted to the City of
Ashland Legal Department for review and approval prior to signature of the
survey plat or adoption of a resolution or ordinance formally annexing the
property.
Planning Action 2004-141
Applicant: 0 and A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane
15
Ashland Planning Department - Staff Report
Page 19 of 19
.... _. __ . - :::: ~')(.''ST,'''l1
:rMpt'"O \J e f\I\ E ~~
~~t=F ~Hlh- r-
,~'~
"$~
.ElI_" ~
1#,.. I"'~;I;~ .:Im
J*,~ ~ ..... .~ ~m
I~~ ~ :,:' .:', '~,' ,
oW?,:" 11'111:'1
........... . .
...... ..... . y .
.~: ,,:;~ "
City of Ashland Local Wetland and Riparian Corridor Invel1tory and Asse~ssment
Wetland Summary Sheet
(~ Site: Wetland 13
Site Code: W13
LOcation: West of Hamilton Creek, north of Ashland Street, south of East Main Str(~et
Township 398 Range IE Section 11 Quarter 8W
Tax Map Tax lot(s) 391EIIC 2500; 391EIICA 2762 & 12761; 391EIICB 1000 & 1100
DSL #: WD 01-0613
Approximate size (acres): 1.41
Cowardin classification: PEM
Hydrologic basin: Bear Creek
Soil type(s): Kubli
HGM classification: Slope Valley
Sample Plot Number(s): 1 - 4
Field verification date(s): 6/3/03
Dominant Plant Species (Common Names):
Trees:
Shrubs:
Herbs: common velvetgrass, meadow foxtail, Kentucky bluegrass, soft rush, cattail and spearmint
(
Other:
Primary hydrology source:
(including hydrology source and use of artificially created wetlands; any potential non-jurisdictional status)
Precipitation & TID
OFW AM Summary:
Wildlife Habitat: Medium
Fish Habitat: Low
Water Quality: High
Hydrologic Control: Medium
Determination of Goal 5 Locally Significant Wetland:
Significant? Yes Not Locally Significant (but still jurisdic:tional) No
Description of the wetland, including topographic position, land uses, alterations, and the basis for the wetland
boundary determination:
This wetland is the headwaters of a small unnamed tributary to Bear Creek that flows behind a
residential subdivision. The wetland consists of a gentle topographic swale trending north through
several agricultural properties. A portion of this wetland was previously delineated (DSL WD 01-
0613) and the adjacent area was partially plowed up to the edge of wetland. The wethmd is described
as containing common velvetgrass, meadow foxtail, Kentucky bluegrass, soft rush, cattail and
spearmint in the wetland delineation report. Several Canada geese were observed on the headwater
area in this area from off-site. Uplands are meadow foxtail, brome, tall fescue and orchard grass.
City of Ashland Local Wetlands and Riparian Corridor Inventory & Assessment
Fishman Environmental Services, LLC Project #03043
17
January 2004
Page 17
~:-l; .4 A,u~
LlttC.A( W...f(_~ ~1 :r~~4.r~
.~qS
~'e
.,
Legend .
rzzzJ Wetlands (FES)
... Wetlands (FES)
not field verified
_ Possible Wetlands
_ Pond
~ Safe Harbor (50 feet)
. Sample Plot
... Observation Point
~ Streams (Aerial Photo
Interpretation-COA)
Information shown on this map is for planring purposes
only and wetland information is subject to change. There
may be unmapped wetlarxJs Slbject to regulation and all
w~Uand boundary mapping is approximate. In all cases,
aI::tuaI field COIXitions determine wetland boundaries.
Y4)U are advised to contact the Oregon Division of State
Lunds and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers with any
regulatory questions.
Maps have been prepared using
Oity of Ashland cI91al or1hophoto&.
Photos are SID format
Pixel Resolution: l' pixel
Date of Photography: July 2001
;--1 Taxlots
1:::::1 Urban Growth Boundary
~ City Boundary
-...
--
Streams, intermittent drainages,
and ditches (FES)
---
Talent Irrigation District Canal
,..,..._.,~:~:,~t-:~~l;;- Sections
~~':':',?""}'5:.;,i;< Streets
W1 - LWI Wetland Unit
4a - NWI Wetland 10
Pirojection Infonnation:
NM> 1983 SlatePlane Oregon South APS 3602 Feet
Lumbert Conformal Conic
False Easting: 4921250.o00ooo
False ~: 0.o00ooo
Central Merician: -120.500000
Standard Parallel 1 : 42.333333
SIandard ParaJ1eI2: 44.o00ooo
l..uti1ude Of Origin: 41.666667
-+--+ Railroad
I
~
150
Study 8f "d~~ contained within the Bear Creek watershed
GCS North American 1983
Arint date: 112W04; Prepared By: R. Gutierrez
"-....... .'
'1'('
W+E
S
Feet
300
600
,"~ ..../,j
SUBDIVISION AND SITE REVIEVV
LAYOUT APPROVED BY PLANNI~~G
COMMISSION ON 6-14-05
----1---
- .'.~
'--.' \
RECErVED
ARCHITECTURE
LAND PLANNING
MAY 1 6 Z005
City of Ashland
REVISED
PROJECT NARRATIVE/FINDINGS
12 May 2005
PROJECT NAME: Willowbrook Residential Complex
TYPE OF PLANNING ACTION: A request for an Annexation/Zone Change (Chapter 18.106),
Site Review (Chapter 18.72), and approval for a Residential Subdivision utilizing the
Performance Standard Option (Chapter 18.88 and 18.24), located in the R-2 Zone District
(currently RR -5, County zoning).
PROJECT INFORMATION:
Owner/Applicant:
D and A Enterprise
Andy Cochrane
1970 Ashland Street
Ashland, OR. 97520
541-482-1270
Architect/Agent:
Tom R. Giordano
2635 Takelma Way
Ashland, OR. 97520
541-482-9193
Surveyor:
L.J. Friar and Associates, Inc,
816 W. 8th Street
Medford, OR. 97501
541-772-7824
Landscape Architect:
Galbraith and Associates
145 S. Holly Street
Medford, OR. 97501
541-770- 7964
2635 Takelma Way, Ashland, OR 97520 . Phone and Fax (541) 482-9193 . E-Mail tomarch@charter.net
99
1---
Wetlands Biologist:
Scott English
324 Terrace Street
Ashland, OR. 97520
541-488-1061
Civil Engineer:
Construction Engineering Consultants
304 S. Central Avenue
~edford,Olt. 97501
541-779-5268
Transportation Engineer:
ltobert Kortt
3350 Green Acres Drive
Central Point, OR. 97502
541-664-0393
Project Address:
380 Clay Street
Legal Description:
39-1E-11C Tax Lot 2500
Comprehensive Plan Design:
~ulti-ltesidential(City), Rural ltesidential (County)
Zoning Designation:
R-2 (City), RR-5 (County)
Overall Site Data:
Area of Property (10 Acres) 435,600 S.F.
Building Footprint 70,226 S.F.
Landscape/OpenspacelWetland 220,886 S.F.
Paving 144,488S.F.
(Sidewalks, streets, alleys, parking, walkways)
2
IOC
100%
16.1%
50.7%
33.2%
~I-----
DensitylBuilding Calculations:
Density
Area of property
Allowable density (w/out wetland and tree area)
Wetland area 25,917 S.F.
Tree area 26.600 S.F.
TOTAL 52,517 S.F. (1.2 acres)
435,600 S.F. (to acres)
135 units (13.5xl0)
Allowable Density (w/wetland and tree area)
Proposed Density
118.8 Units (l3.5x8.8)
117.0 Units (98.5%
allowable density)
Txpe of Building Lots
(E) House 1
Duplex Unit A 24
Duplex UnitB .12
Fourplex ( condos) 44
TOTALS 81
TOTAL PARKING
* Studio units less than 500 S.P.
** Additional on-street parking required.
Units
1
48*
24*
44*
117
Parking Required
2.0
72.0*
36.0*
60.5*
117.0**
287.5
Parking Provided
2
73
36
68
120** (5 are HC)
299
Bicycle Parking Requirements:
Type Required
Single Family
Duplexes/F ourplexes
Provided
117 Sheltered
117 Sheltered (throughout site &
within garages)
BACKGROUND ON REVISION:
The applicant has revised the original Application Package and Design that was dated 18
October 2005. The reason for the revision is due to Neighborhood, City Staff and Planning
Commission concerns regarding the existing popular trees, a possible on-site wetland and the
retention of the existing house. Additional information was obtained by the applicant regarding
these concerns and are attached within this document.
The attached independent Arborist Report states that the three large existing popular trees are in
good health but may be a hazard and will need continued pruning and monitoring to survive.
The applicant's arborist, see report, believes these trees are a potential hazard and should only be
3
/01
1--
located on an undisturbed parcel.
The Wetland Biologist returned to the site for further investigation, see Report. Although no
wetland conditions are located where the draft City Wetland Map and Staff have suggested,
there was another location discovered next to Clay Street, see Map in Report and Site Plan. The
biologist also investigated the property to the north (Cooper).
The condition of the existing house was investigated by American Management Associates. The
report, see attached, states that the existing house has many environmental, as well as physical
problems. Because of the above new information, the applicant has revised the Site Design to
keep the popular trees, the existing house, and use the wetland as a design feature. The revisions
are also reflected both in this Narrative and Findings.
SITE DESCRIPTION:
Land Use -
The 10 acre parcel is located on lower Clay Street. The subject property is currently in the
County but within the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) and adjacent to the City Limits of
Ashland on three sides, see Vicinity/Zone Map. In fact, except for a few parcels to the north, the
property is surrounded by City land. The County Zoning is RR-5 which allows a Single Family
Residence on a 5 acre parcel. The City's Comprehensive Plan Map shows this property to be R-
2 low density multi-residential when annexed to the City. The R-2 District (Chapter 18..24)... "is
designated to provide an environment suitable for urban living" with attached or unatta(:hed
units.
In the general vicinity of the site there are a variety of residential land uses which include single
family to higher density multi-residential housing types. The applicant is providing an overall
plan of the general area which shows both the existing development patterns as well as those
projects currently under construction. Further to the south and east are commercial activities
associated with Ashland Street/Highway 66 corridor. The land uses and zone districts
immediately adjacent to the subject property are as follows:
North - Single Family Residence and vacant land, Zoned RR-5 (County)
South - Commercial and Low-Density Multi-Family Residences, Zoned R-2 and C-I
East - Vacant YMCA soccer fields, Zoned R-2
West - Clay Street and mobile home residences, Zoned R-2
4
)b~
.. ~I-----
Physical Characteristics -
The property has a gentle 3.3% slope towards the north, see Site Plan and City Topo Map. There
is an open drainage ditch along the frontage of Clay Street. There is an existing Single Family
Home, barn and garage on the site. There are significant large trees adjacent to house located in
the southwest comer of the property, see Aerial Photograph and Site Plan. The property was
used for farming in the past. An irrigation ditch runs along the street frontage of the property
and also along the south boundary line. Although a wetland is shown on a preliminary City map,
no wetlands exist in this location, see attached letter from wetlands Biologist. There is however
a wetland located to the west, adjacent to Clay Street, see Map in Biologist Report and Site Plan.
Access to the Property -
The existing home has a driveway off Clay Street. Clay Street is designated as an avenml with an
existing 60 foot ROWand a 20 foot wide paved section in front of the property.
No sidewalks are on the frontage of the property; however, sidewalks have been installed to the
north (Bud's Dairy) and south, adjacent to the new development. On-street bike lanes are
proposed along Clay Street. Public transportation is located on Ashland Street, approximately
two blocks to the south. Bike lanes are on both East Main Street (to the north) and Ashland
Street (to the south), as well as adjacent to the railroad ROW. For most of the above mentioned
information the applicant is providing an overall plan of the general area.
Utilities and Services-
Overhead utilities and an open drainage ditch are located along Clay Street. There is an 8 inch
water line, and 8 inch sewer line and an 18 inch storm sewer line in Clay Street.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Request -
The applicant desires to annex this property into the City and utilizing the Performance Standard
Option, create a 117 dwelling unit residential subdivision consisting of the existing single family
home, duplexes and fourplexes. There will be 36 (A and B type) duplexes. Each duplex will
consist of a three bedroom unit and a one bedroom studio (less than 500 S.F.) unit for a total of
72 dwelling units. There will be 11 fourplexes. Each tourplex will consist of a two bedroom
and one bedroom unit (less than 500 S.F.) on the ground floor and a two bedroom and one
bedroom unit (less than 500 S.F.) on the top floor tor a total of44 dwelling units. Each duplex
will be on a lot and sold separately while each fourplex unit will be sold separately under
condominium ownership.
When annexed to the City, the allowable density for this parcel in the R-2 zone district would be
5
lo~
-----1----
135 dwelling units (10 acres x 13.5 = 135). However, due to the Physical Constraints of the
Poplar trees and the wetland a total of 1.2 acres is subtracted from the site total. The total
Allowable Density should therefore be 118.8 units (8.8 acres x 13.5 = 118.8). Per the
annexation requirements, the applicant must provide at least 90% of the allowable density for
the development. Ninety percent of the 118.8 allowable units is 106.92. The applicant is
providing 117 dwelling units which is 98.5%, see Site Review Finding A and Annexation
Findings.
In addition, the applicant must demonstrate a need for the proposed housing (Chapter
18.106.030 H) and designate a portion of the housing (Chapter 18.106.030 G) as afford.able. The
applicant will comply with these standards, see Annexation Findings. The applicant will
designate 17 (15% of 117) of the total units as affordable under the City's guidelines. Each of
the 17 units will meet the 60% of the medium family income.
Further, the applicant will provide needed apartment units as noted in the "Ashland Housing
Needs Assessment Report 2002". The existing single family and all duplex units will be under
single ownership with all of the studio apartments in the duplex buildings being potential rental
units (36 units). In addition, all of the fourplex units (44) will be condominium owned, The
duplex units (studios) will provide a total of 36 or 30.7% of the 117 units as potential nmtal
units. In addition the fourplex units proposed as condominiums will provide a mixture of
smaller more affordable "for sale" housing. The common land.scape, alleys and parking areas
for the duplexes and fourplexes will be shared by the tenants and maintained by the owners.
The applicant will use a "team approach" for the design of the project in order to insure that all
issues are addressed. This team will include: architect/land planner, landscape architect,
surveyor, wetland biologist, civil engineer, traffic engineer, attorney and contractor. This team
was formed prior to the preparation of the Outline Plan Application.
The yard requirements for the R-2 Zone District (Chapter 18.24) is a 15 foot front, 6 foot side,
and 10 foot per story for the rear. The proposed development will meet or exceed thest~
requirements adjacent to the perimeter boundaries of the project. The buildings within the
boundaries will utilize the Performance Standards Option in regard to distance between
buildings but will never be less than 16 feet apart, see Site Plan. Due to the layout of the site,
solar access for the proposed buildings should not be an issue, see Site Review Finding A.
Detailed solar access calculations was provided in the Findings.
The existing house will not be demolished at this time but will include in the lot with the
popular trees. The barn will be dismantled and relocated, possibly to the Lily Glen Park site in
Jackson County. All pennits will be obtained after Outline Plan Review.
Access -
The applicant is proposing a modified grid system for the proposed streets and alleys. To insure
6
IO'f
1- -
linkage to both existing and future streets, and adjacent properties the applicant has provided an
overall plan of the general area which shows existing, under construction and possible future
development patterns, as well as transportation routes. All proposed streets will have a 52 foot
wide ROW. Within the proposed ROW, there will be 5 foot wide sidewalks, 7.5 foot wide
parkrows and 6 inch curbs on each side of the street. The parkrow will become wider a.t the
intersections to provide pedestrian crossing and traffic calming, see Site Plan. The curb to curb
dimension will be 26 feet wide which will allow parking on each side of the street. Parking on
both sides of the street should not be a problem since there are no private driveways entering the
street. Clay Street will be improved per City standards (6 foot sidewalk, 7.5 foot parkrow, 6
inch curb, 6 foot bike lane and 10 foot travel lane) within the existing 60 foot ROW, se(~ Civil
Engineering Drawing for Street Sections. The additional on-street parking required for the
development is 117 , (one per lillit). The applicant will provide a minimum of 120 on-street
spaces.
Bus service is in easy walking distance to Ashland Street. The commercial activities at the
intersection at Tolman Creek Road are also close. Bicycle paths (East Main, Ashland Street and
along the railroad) are easily accessible. Pedestrian paths and sidewalks will connect to existing
and future facilities, see Site Plan and Overall Area Plan.
The Traffic Engineer will address the impacts generated by this development in a separate report
included in the application package. The report has been updated to reflect the new total of
units, see attached.
Landscape Strategies -
As shown on the Site and Landscape Plans, new landscape areas are located throughout the site.
These landscape areas will be specifically addressed in the Findings; however, in general they
will:
1) Meet or exceed permeable surface requirements for the overall site (over 50%);
2) Assist in a more natural drainage of the property (retention/wetland basins);
3) Visually and biologically enhance the existing wetland environment;
4) Provide screening to adjacent properties;
5) Create both private and common openspace;
6) Provide shade for the parking areas, and;
7) Provide scale/texture for the proposed buildings.
7
/tJ5"
1--- --
The Design Criteria for the wetland is to be:
1. A biologically diverse ecosystem and link to the other wetlands on adjacent property.
2. An aesthetic asset and educational tool for the community; and
3. A more natural way of controlling drainage run-off and storm water retention.
The Landscape Plan shows the above areas in greater detail. The Landscape Design will utilize
low water use plant material and irrigation as required by the City of Ashland.
Utilities/Service -
Within the development and along Clay Street the electrical, CTV and telephone servicc~ will be
underground within a proposed 10 foot wide PUB. The sanitary sewer and water lines will
connect to the existing services within the Clay Street ROW. The proposed storm sewer/runoff
for the development will connect to the existing system in Clay Street and to the wetlands, see
Landscape and Civil Drawings. Pollution control structures are provided to separate water from
pollution prior to the run-off entering the wetland. Further, the Run-off Discharge Rate will be
no greater than pre-development flow rates due to the use of water detention areas and outlet
control structures. Water efficient plumbing fixtures are proposed for all buildings.
When annexed to the City, Fire and Police protection will be available. Fire hydrants will be
added and located per the City's Fire Department requirements. All street comers will have a
minimum 20 radius to insure emergency vehicle access.
Architecture -
It is the intent of the applicant to provide an attractive and affordable housing development.
Further, the applicant desires to provide a selection of housing types to both owners and renters.
To incorporate these concepts, the applicant is proposing the following:
1) Retaining the existing Taylor family home;
2) Two types of Duplexes consisting of a three bedroom, two story home with an
attached studio unit less than 500 S.F. (above the garage);
3) A two story fourplex consisting of two bedroom unit and a one bedroom unit (less
than 500 S.F.) on both the ground and top floors.
It is the belief of the applicant, that this type of housing mix will encourage both "first time"
housing buyers as well as affordable rentals. The proposed buildings, however, will comply
with the City's Site Design Guidelines regarding streetscape, orientation, scale and location of
fenestration, see Exterior Elevations. Possible exterior building materials would includ4~:
8
I~c..
...__.~-_...._..-I-....
I) Smooth and textured CMU' s~
2) Cement fiber and shingle siding and horizontal board~
3) Brick and stone accent
4) Four and six inch wide building trim~ and
5) Composition asphalt single roofing.
As shown on the Exterior Elevations, a variety of traditional architectural styles are used. Also,
each building will have changes in color, detailing and materials to vary the architectural
character. Dormers will be used to break up roof mass as well as for extra natural light and
interior volwne.
Each unit will have an energy efficient heat pump or gas furnace HV AC system. The appliances
and water heaters will also be energy efficient. Energy consumption and building construction
will meet or exceed both the City's and State Energy Code Requirements
FINDINGS:
ANNEXATIONS (CHAPTER 18.106)
An annexation may be approved if the proposed request for annexation conforms, or can be
made to conform through the imposition of conditions, with the following approval criteria:
A. The land within the City's Urban Growth boundary.
As shown on the County Parcel Map and the Vicinity/Zone Map, the subject property is within
the City of Ashland's Urban Growth Boundary (UGB).
B. The proposed zoning for the annexed area is in conformance with the designation
on the Comprehensive Plan Map, and the project, if proposed concurrently with the
annexation, is an allowed use within the zoning.
The applicant is proposing a low density, multi-residential, R-2 Zone designation type project,
see Outline Plan and Site Review Findings. The proposed development is consistent with the
City's designation indicated on the Comprehensive Plan Map which shows low-density, multi-
residential, R-2 Zoning.
C. The land is currently contiguous with the City limits.
As shown on the County Parcel Map and City Zone Map, the City limits are located on three
sides of subject property. Further, the City recently approved an annexation (Bud's Dairy)
9
107
T---
located one parcel to the north of the property on Clay Street.
D. Adequate City facilities for the provision of water to the site as determined by the
Public Works Department; the transport of sewage from tI,e site to the waste water tJreatment
plant as determined by the Public Works Department; the provision of electricity to the site as
determined by the Electric Department; urban storm drainage as determined by the Public
Works Department can and will be provided to and through the subject property. Unless the
City has declared a moratorium based upon a shortage of water, sewer or electricity, it is
recognized that adequate capacity exist system-wide for these facilities.
The Site Review and Outline Plan Findings in this document as well as the preliminary civil
engineering drawings show compliance with this finding.
E. Adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject
property. For the purposes of this section "adequate transportation" for annexation consists
of vehicular, bicycle, pedestrian and transit transportation meeting the following standards:
1. For vehicular transportation a 20' wide paved access area exists, OJ~ can and
will be constructed along the full frontage of the project site to the nearest ful~v improved
collector or arterial street. All streets adjacent to the annexed area shall be improvetl, at a
minimum, to a half-street standard with a minimum 20' driving suiface. The City may, after
assessing the impact of the development, require the full improvement of streets adjacent to
the annexed area. All streets located within annexed areas shall be fully improved to City
standards. Where future street dedications are indicated on the City's Street Dedication Map
or required by the City, provisions shall be made for the dedication and improvement of these
streets and included with the application for annexation.
2. For bicycle transportation safe and accessible bicyclefacilities exist, or can
and will be constructed. Should the annexation be adjacent to an arterial street, bike lanes
shall be provided on or adjacent to the arterial street. Likely bicycle destinations from the
project site shall be determined and safe and accessible bicycle facllltles serving those
destinations shall be indicated.
3. For pedestrian transportation safe and accessible facilities exist, 01' can and
will be constructed. Full sidewalk improvements shall be provided on one side adjacent to the
annexation for all streets adjacent to the proposed annexed area. Sidewalks shall be provided
as required by ordinance on all streets within the annexed area. Where the project ~'ite is
within a quarter of a mile of an existing sidewalk system, the sidewalks from the project site
shall be constructed to extend and connect to the existing system. Likely pedestrian
destinations from the project site shall be determined and the safe and accessible pedestrian
facilities serving those destinations shall be indicated.
4. For transit transportation, should transit service be available to the site, or
be likely to be extended to the site in the future based on information from the local public
10
/o~
- -- ---------------------T------
transit provider, provisions shall be made for the construction of adequate transit facilities,
such as bus shelters and bus turn-out lanes. All required transportation improvements shall
be constructed and installed prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any new
structures on the annexed property.
As part of the Outline Plan and Site Review for the project, the applicant has provided a Traffic
Impact Study which evaluates the potential impacts of the project on surrounding streets, see
study included in this document. The applicant will improve (half street) Clay Street along the
frontage of the property and provide improvement to the Buds Dairy project to the north. The
intersection at Clay and Ashland Streets is currently operating at level of service "D". The
applicant will install a right turn lane at this intersection to keep the level of service at "D", see
Overall Area Plan. The Site Plan, Overall Area Plan, Engineering Plans and Site Review
Findings show compliance with the City Street Standards.
The proposed new streets will also conform to the City of Ashland's standards, see Site Review
Findings, and be constructed and dedicated to the City. The Site Plan also shows a future street
and pedestrian connections to the property on the north and south boundaries and an internal
alley/path system within the development, see Site Plan and Site Review Findings.
Existing on-street bike lanes are located on Ashland Street (to the south) and East Main Street
(to the north). There is also an informal bike-pedestrian path which connects to the Central
Ashland bike path under the railroad overpass on Ashland Street. The is also providing a six
foot wide bike lane path along the frontage of the property which will connect to the Barkley
Street project on the south.
As discussed in the Site Review Findings and shown on the Site Plan and General Area Map, the
applicant will provide paths and sidewalks to the adjacent properties on the north, south and
east. To further connect the development with nearby services (YMCA, Albertson's, etc.), the
Project Plans identify three pedestrian access points and possible vehicle route to the adjacent
soccer fields and through Barclay Square.
A transit route is located a short distance from the proposed development on Ashland Street.
The close availability of public transportation, sidewalks/paths, and bike lanes will help to
mitigate the number of vehicle trips generated by the development. Further, the Ashland
Street/Tolman Creek Road Commercial District is a short walking/biking distance from the
subject property.
F. For all residential annexations, a plan shall be provided demonstrating that the
development of the entire property will ultimately occur at a minimum density of 90% of the
base density for the zone, unless reductions in the total number of units is necessary to
accommodate significant natural features, topography, access limitations, or similar physical
constraints. The owner or owners of the property shall sign an agreement, to be recOJ"ded with
the county clerk after approval of the annexation, ensuring that the future development will
occur in accord with minimum density indicated in the development plan. For purposes of
11
11!J9
---1---
computing maximum density, portions of the annexed area containing undevelopable areas
such as wetlands,floodplain corridor lands, or slopes greater than 35%, shall not be included.
The applicant is proposing a maximum of 117 dwelling units for the project. The R-2 Zone
District allows 13.5 dwelling units per acre. The property is ten acres in area and therefore a
potential 135 dwelling units are possible. However, when the wetland and tree areas are
subtracted, the total area is 8.8 acres. Therefore, the total maximum allowable density is 118.8.
The applicant is providing 98.5% of the density (117 units). If all ten acres are used to calculate
density, the 117 proposed units would be 86.6 percent.
G. For all annexations with a density or potential density of four residential units or
greater and involving residential zoned lands, or commercial, employment or industj~iallands
with a Residential Overlay (R-Overlay):
1. 35% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or
below 120% of median income; or
2. 25% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with inconu~s at or
below 100% of median income; or
3. 20% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with inconu~s at or
below 80% of median income; or
4. 15% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with inconu~s at or
below 60% of median income; or
5. Title to a sufficient amount of buildable land for development is trllrnsferred
to a non-profit (IRC 501 (3)(c)) affordable housing developer or compfJ~rable
Development Corporationfor the purpose of comp~ving with subsection 2above.
The land shall be located within the project and all needed public faciUties
shall be extended to the area or areas proposed for transfer. Ownershlp of the
land shall be transferred to the affordable housing developer or Development
Corporation prior to commencement of the project.
The total number of affordable units described in this section G shall be determined by
rounding down fractional answers to the nearest whole unit. A dead restriction, or similar
legal instrument, shall be used to guarantee compliance with affordable criteria for CJ! period
of not less than 60 years. Properties providing affordable units as part of the annexation
process shall qualify for a maximum density bonus of 25 percent.
In accordance with the Annexation Approval Standards, 18.106.030, Section G, the applicants
are proposing to incorporate a total of 17 affordable rental or "for sale" units into the project.
The affordable units will be 15% of the project's 117 units and will be available for a 610 year
period to individuals or families that meet income limits of 60% of the Median Family Income
12
lit)
-~--- -
(MFI) for the Ashland/Medford area, established and annually updated by the Departme:nt of
Housing and Urban Development (RUD) and the City's Community Development Department.
The affordable units will be located in the fourplex units throughout the development.
By providing housing to households within the 60% Median Family Income range, the project
will be providing housing for individuals and families earning service industry wages. For
example, a family of two (single parent with one child) qualifies with an annual income: ofless
than $25,020 or a family of four (two parents and two children) qualify with an annual
household income less than $31,260. In contrast, a family of two earning 120% of the Median
Family Income earns $50,040 and a family of four earns $62,520 or twice the amount of money
earned by families projected under the project's affordable housing program.
As noted above, the affordable units will be retained for a 60 year period. The applicants will
agree to sign a deed restriction for all properties containing an affordable unit in order to
guarantee compliance with the City's affordable housing program and the Annexation Approval
Standards.
In an attempt to broaden the location of the 17 affordable units, the applicants propose to spread
the 17 units throughout the 11 four-plex buildings, without grouping the affordable units in any
two adjacent buildings. The affordable units will also be spread equally among the 1 and 2
bedroom units.
In addition to the 17 affordable units, the project will include an additional 36 rental studio
(duplex) units for a total ~r 30.7% of all units proposed to be constructed in the project. It
should also be understood that no restrictions would be in place that would limit the duplex or
fourplex property owner from renting a unites) to qualifying renters. In fact, as the City
progresses towards meeting the City's affordable housing goals, the City may provide incentives
to homeowners to rent their units as affordable units and thereby increase the project's overall
contribution to Ashland's affordable housing market.
Lastly, to the applicant's knowledge, this is the first un-subsidized project in the City of Ashland
to provide affordable housing. The applicants believe the annexation proposal, with the
incorporation of the 17 affordable units, plus the proposed market rate studio rentals, will
provide for a needed housing type that benefits the Ashland community and Ashland schools
system.
H. One or more of the following standards are met:
1. The proposed area for annexation is to be residentially zoned, and there is
less than a five-year supply of vacant and redevelopable land in the proposed
land use classification within the City limits. "Redevelopable land" means land
zoned for residential use on which development has already occurred but on
which, due to present or expected market forces, there exists the likeWlood that
existing development will be converted to more intensive residential uses during
13
III
1--- --
the planning period. The five-year supply shall be determined jrom vacant and
redevelopable land inventories and by the methodology jor land need
projections jrom the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan,: or
2. The proposed lot or lots will be zoned E-1 or C-1 under the Comprehensive
Plan, and that the applicant will obtain Site Review approval for an outright
permitted use, or special permitted use concurrent with the annexatio'n request,.
or
3. A current or probable public health hazard exists due to lack ojju.ll City
sanitary sewer or water services,. or
4. Existing development in the proposed annexation has inadequate water or
sanitary sewer service,. or the service will become inadequate within one year,.
or
5. The area proposed for annexation has existing City oj Ashland water or
sanitary sewer sen'ice extended, connected, and in use, and a signed Mconsent
to annexation" agreement has been filed and accepted by the City of Ashland,.
or
6. The lot or lots proposedfor annexation are an "island" completely
surrounded by lands within the City limits. (ORD 2792,1997)
In accordance with the Annexation Approval Standards, 18.106.030 H.1., the applicants must
demonstrate there is less than a five-year supply of vacant and redevelopable land in the R-2
(Multi-Family Residential) zoning classification within existing City limits.
1998/1999 Buildable Lands Inventory (BLI)
According to the 1998/1999 Buildable Lands Inventory (BLI), Tables 5.3.2 and 6.0, in April of
1999 there was a total of 10.25 "years" or 16.13 "acres" of surplus land within the existing City
limits zoned R-2. Since 1999, the following developments and redevelopments have occurred on
R-2 zoned lands within City limits:
*Table A
Name Location Acres
Butler Grant Street 1.54
MaharlNeuman Williamson Way 4.66
Beach S1. Condominiums Beach Street .67
Scenic S1. Townhomes Scenic Street .73
Murillo Beach Street .66
Mitchell Manzanita/HiR;h .51
Lovett B Street .22
14
II~-
--- -- - ----~----- ------1----
A~akanov Alida .24
Potocki Morse .18
Englund Morse .18
DeLuca E. Main .23
Spierings Beach Street .30
Sullivan Normal .73
ArcherdlDale Ashland/Clay Street 1.75
Total 12.6
Average Per Year (6 yrs) 2.1
Gargus * * Clay Street 1.00
* Table A is a "sample" list of developments that have occurred in the time period from April 1999 to present and that
more developments have likely occurred in the R-2 zone than identified hearin.
** The Gargus partition was consumed in the planning period but was inadvertingly missed in the April 1999 BU.
Therefore it's one acre was not added to the surplus.
Table A demonstrates that since April of 1999 (less than six years), the consumption rate has
steadily increased than originally anticipated in the BU. During this time, a total of 12.6 acres of
the 16.13 acres has been developed for an average consumption rate of2.1 acres a year. Taking
the consumption rate of2.1 acres per year times 5 years would require 10.5 acres ofneleded R-2
lands where only 5.01 acres is available or only 11f2 years of available surplus.
Tn accordance with the Annexation Approval Standards, 18.106.030 H.l, Table A not only
demonstrates there is less than a five year supply ofR-2 land, but that we are getting dangerously
close to the point to not having any available R-2 land. In the applicant's opinion, and most
likely agreed upon by staff, this is an important factor when considering affordable and moderate
income housing needs when there is little supply, but a lot of demand.
Base Density vs. Built Density:
Albeit in draft form, the applicants are aware and applaud the City's efforts to amend the R-2
and R-3 zoning classifications to maintain an 80% minimum density which is intended to
minimize consumption of multi-family zoned areas by single-family developments or multi-
family developments with less than planned densities. Regardless, the current Annexation
Ordinance requires annexation proposals to have a plan that demonstrates that the development
of the entire property will ultimately occur at a minimum density of90% of the planned base
density for the zone.
For example, the subject property has a planned zoning designation ofR-2 which has a base
density of 13.5 units to the acre. The subject site is 10 acres and therefore 135 units would be
15
1/.3;
--- --- ---------------~I-----
100% of the planned density. The annexation requirement of a minimum of 90% density would
require a minimum density of 121.5 units. The applicants are proposing a total of 117 units or
98.5% of the planned density. In other words, the application is keeping with the intent of the
City's efforts to not only minimize the loss of densities in the multi-family zoning areas, but that
also "compact urban form" is being maintained.
Mixture of Housing:
Table 4.1 of the 2002 Housing Needs Analysis, BCG Northwest, clearly demonstrates th.at from
1998 to 2001, only a small amount of "rental" multi-family housing was constructed when
compared to the single family housing. Although current data isn't readily available, there is no
indication the trend has slowed. The applicant's proposal is to create a family friendly
development that incorporates a range of housing types with a range of homeowners and renters
that have diverse age and socioeconomic backgrounds. Of the 117 proposed units, 44 units will
be in 11 fourplex buildings (37.6% of the units), 72 units in 36 duplex buildings (61.5% of the
units). At a minimum, 36 (30.7%) of the units within the project will be potential rental units.
This is a significant proposal considering from 1998 to 2001 the amount of expected multi-
family housing was supposed to be 30% of all units constructed, but only 9% were built.
Subsidies:
The application is not proposing any density bonuses or asking for any type of governml~nt
subsidy to provide the 17 affordable units and 36 potential rental units. The applicants believe
the proposal is clearly a risky business venture, one that can not be compared with in thc~
Community - regardless of size, but nevertheless is an opportunity to create a project that mixes
affordable housing with market housing and rental housing with owner-occupied housing.
SITE REVIEW (chapter 18.72)
The Planning Staff/Planning Commission can approve a Site Review when the following criteria
have been addressed:
A. All applicable City Ordinances have been met or will be met by the proposed development.
Multi-Residential Zone District-
The subject property is currently in the County and zoned RR-5 which allows one dwellling unit
per 5 acres. When annexed to the City the zoning for the property would be Low Density Multi-
Family Residential (R-2). The applicant is requesting annexation of this property, see
Annexation Findings above.
Chapter 18.24 Low Density Multi-Family Residential District, allows for either attached or
detached residential units at 13.5 units per acre. The density allowed for the lot area would be
135 (10 acres x 13.5 units per acre = 135). When an annexation is proposed the City requires
16
//'1-
.. ~-~--T-n --
that the property be developed to 90% of the allowable density.
The Annexation Ordinance also allows removal of land areas that cannot be developed,
(wetlands, floodplain, etc.), when computing maximum density. There is approximat~~ly 1.2
acres of land consisting of wetland and the large popular trees on the property. When these
areas are subtracted, the total maximum allowable density is 118.8. The applicant is proposing
117 dwelling units which equates to density of 98.5%, see attached Project Narrative and
Annexation Findings.
The applicant is proposing a portion of the development to be affordable. This issue is discussed
in the Annexation Findings, above.
The applicant is also providing a Site Plan of the area where the Poplar trees and existing house
are located. If removed, an additional eight units could be included for a total of 124 dwelling
units.
Overall Lot Coverage -
The maximum overall lot coverage allowed for impervious surface in the R-2 zone district is
65% (Chapter 18.72.040G). The applicant is providing 49.3%. Therefore, the applicant is
providing approximately 50.7% of the total site area in pervious surface space. This is: an
important fact considering the density of the project.
Performance Standard Option -
The applicant has utilized the Performance Standards Option (Chapter 18.88) to develop a
unique design and ownership concept. The applicant is proposing that each duplex unit will be
sold separately and each fourplex unit will have condominium ownership. It is the applicant's
belief that this type of ownership will encourage studio housing at a reasonable rent and
ownership at an affordable cost. This concept has the potential of creating both rental as well as
ownership affordable housing. Both the type ofumts offered (duplex, fourplex) and the type of
ownership will create flexible and affordable housing for the Ashland residential market. All
units will have frontage on a public street or public easement, see Site Plan. Reciproca.l
easements for parking openspace access, maintenance etc. will be included in the CC&R's of the
project. The parameter setbacks will comply with the R-2 district; however, the setbacks within
the development will vary, see Site Plan, but the space between buildings will not be less than 16
feet.
Solar -
Chapter 18.70 (Solar Access) regulates the amount of shading a building can project on adjacent
properties to the North. The applicant has located two fourplex and three duplex buildings near
the North property line of the adjacent property. The highest shade producing point (parallel to
the north property line) is 22 feet high (H), see Exterior Elevations. The average slope (S), in
17
/I~
1.---
this area is a negative 3.3%. The solar set back (SSB), therefore, is 38.8 feet.
Solar Calculations:
SSB= H-6
.445 + S
22-6
.445 + (-.033)
38.8 feet
Assuming a 5 ~:12 roof pitch, the Site Plan shows the minimum distance from the nOlth
property line to be 43 feet; therefore, the setback is in compliance with the Solar Ordinance.
Further, if any buildings within the site do not meet the solar requirements, the applicant will
meet the 15 point total for conservation in the Performance Standards.
Set Backs -
Again, the applicant is utilizing the Performance Standards Option for the site design; therefore
the front, rear and side setbacks conform to the R-2 Zone District while the distance between
buildings vary. The minimum required space between duplex buildings is 12 feet. The
applicant is providing 16 feet minimum and over 40 feet maximum for the "B" duplexes, see
Preliminary Exterior Elevations and Site Plan. The minimum required space between the
fourplex building is 22 feet. The applicant is providing 24 feet minimum.
Fire Access -
The applicant has provided fire hydrants per the City's Fire Department Requirements, see Civil
Engineering Drawings. All comers will have a 20 foot minimum radius to accommodate
emergency vehicles.
Parking -
The calculations in the Building Data Section of the Narrative shows compliance with Chapter
18.92, off-street parking. The applicant is also providing approximately 120 on-street spaces
(117 required). Since there is no private driveways on these streets, the 26 foot curb to curb
distance should be adequate for parking on both sides.
Tree Removal
The applicant has provided the location of the existing trees (6" dia @ 4.5' height) on the Site
and Landscape Plans. These Plans delineate which trees that will be either saved or removed.
Also, the landscape architect is providing a report (attached) that includes an existing tree
assessment, as well as a Tree Removal Application, and a Tree Protection Plan.
The applicant has had an "independent" Arborist examine the health and safety of the trees, see
attached report. In addition to the oaks and evergreen trees, the applicant will also save: the three
large poplar trees located in the southwest comer of the property, see Site Plan.
18
//~
~----I-~-
Demolition -
As mentioned in the Site Description there is an existing garage, barn and an older single-family
house on the site.
The two story, 1,600 S.F. house (Taylor Farm House), was constructed in several phasc;:s in the
early part of the 1900's. The house is in very poor condition in regard to mechanical, electric
and structural integrity. Further, there are environmental hazards located throughout the
building, see attached reports. However, the applicant will attempt to save this structure.
The applicant has offered the barn structures to the County to be used for the Lily Glen
Equestrian Park site. The more recently built concrete block building may also be retained. If
determined by the applicant that these barns and block buildings cannot be saved or moved, a
Demolition Permit will be submitted upon approval of the Land Use Permit and Annexation.
Multi-Use Pathways-
Multi-Use Pathways will connect the proposed project to the adjacent properties to the north,
south and east, see Site and Landscape Plans. The pathways to the north includes both sidewalks
on a proposed north-south streets and a path along the wetland/drainage feature, also se:e
Findings D, below. Paths will also connect the development to the YMCA soccer fields on the
east. Two paths are proposed from the south property line (the existing easement ofth(~ adjacent
development and from a proposed easement from the future development located on the
southeast corner). Further, sidewalks and paths are proposed throughout the project an:a, see
Site and Landscape Plans and the Overall Area Plan.
B. All requirements of the Site Review Chapter have been met or will be met.
Information Requirements -
The applicant is providing a written Narrative and Findings as well as Site, Overall Area and
Landscape Plans, Topographic Survey, Aerial Photograph, Preliminary Utility Grading/Drainage
Plans and Building Elevation drawings. This information is provided in the Application Package
and addresses the submittal requirements of Chapter 18.72.060. Further, letters and reports
regarding the trees, wetlands, and traffic impacts is included. As required for an Annexation, the
applicant is submitting a legal description of the property.
Lot Coverage/Landscape/Openspace -
As mentioned above in Finding A, the overall lot coverage for the entire site is 49.3%. The
newly created duplex lots will also comply with Chapter 18.72.040G when Final Construction
Plans are submitted.
19
117
...--r--
Although a high density development, the applicant has provided a significant amount of both
common and private landscaped openspace as shown on the Site and Landscape Plans. Also, the
Landscape Plan, Finding A, above, and the Project Description Section of the Narrative
addresses the requirements of this Chapter and types of landscape.
Recreation Space -
Chapter 18.24.040 H which requires 8% of the lot area to be dedicated for outdoor recrleational
space. The applicant is providing both common space and private recreation space. The
common recreation space includes the picnic area adjacent to the soccer fields (3,500 S.F.), and
the children's active play area (5,200 S.F.) and the passive wetland recreation area (33,772 S.F.),
for a total of 42,472 S.F. which is 9.7% of the site, see Site and Landscape Plans. Play
equipment located in this space will be reviewed by the City Parks Director to insure s1.1~tability
and safety.
The design of the project also includes private outdoor space for each dwelling unit. The
existing single family house be located on the lot with the popular trees (approximately half an
acre).
Each duplex unit will have a 6x14, 84 S.F. foot porch and large private yard of220 S.F. (11x20).
Each second story studio unit will have a minimum of an 8xlO foot private deck (80 S.l'.). The
total per lot is a minimum of384 S.F.
Each of the fourplex units will have two upstairs decks (288 S.F. each unit) and two ground floor
patios/front porches (176 S.F.). The approximate total of decks, porches and patios per fourplex
is 464 S.F.
The combined minimum private and common recreationJopenspace for the total development is
61.400 S.P. or 14% of the site which exceeds the 8% requirement.
Trash/RecyclinglBike Parking -
The applicant will locate shared trash/recycle areas for the duplexes and fourplexes within the
alley and parking areas. These areas will be screened from view by a 6 foot high split Diced
concrete block wall and landscaping. Covered bike parking (117) for the duplexes and
fourplexes will be provided in the garages and throughout the site.
Light and Glare -
All site and building lighting will be directed away from adjacent properties. Also see Finding
A, above, relating other Site Review issues.
Controlled Access! Easements -
20
II g
--_n-T-- -
The Site Plan shows that all curb cuts are greater than the minimum 50 feet for residential
streets. Also, the maximum distance from a residential street to an intersection is 30 feet. The
applicant is providing 40 feet.
Reciprocal Easements and CC&R's parking area for maintenance, landscaping, utilities and
access will be provided, prior to obtaining Final Plan Approval.
C. The development complies with the Site Design Standards adopted by the City Council for
implementation of the Chapter.
Approval Standards: Multi-family residential development shall conform to the following
Design Standards:
II-B-l)
Orientation
II-B-la) Residential buildings shall have their primary orientation toward the street when they
are within 20 to 30 feet of the street.
II-B-l b) Buildings shall be set back from the street according to ordinance requirements, which
us usually 20 feet.
II-B-l c) Buildings shall be accessed from the street and the sidewalk. Parking areas shall not
be located between buildings and the street.
As shown on the Site Plan, all units are 16 feet or more from the front property line of a public
ROW to allow for a 6 foot deep porch and a 10 foot PUB. This is consistent with the front yard
set back of the R-2 zone district (15 feet). The entrances of units are oriented toward either Clay
Street or towards the proposed new streets. The fourplexes located in the interior of the site are
greater than 30 feet from a street and therefore have on-site sidewalks linking them to a public
street. The proposed garages and parking areas (served by the alleys) are behind the buildings.
II-B-2)
Streetscape
Il-B-2a) One street tree for each 30 feet of frontage, chosen from the street tree list, shall be
placed on that portion of development paralleling the street. Where the size of the project
dictates an interior circulation street pattern, a similar streetscape with street trees is required.
II-B-2b) Front yard landscaping shall be similar to those found in residential neighborhoods,
with appropriate changes to decrease water use.
The Site Plan shows an existing mature cedar tree located adjacent to Clay Street. The applicant
is proposing that the sidewalk be allowed to meander around the existing cedar tree. This will
also allow the sidewalk to line up with the existing sidewalk to the south. The applicant is
requesting an exception to Street Standards to allow for the meandering sidewalk (Chapter
21
119
1--
18.88.050.F). Street trees will be added along all street frontages, per City requirements, see
Landscape Plan. Front yard landscaping will be consistent with the other residential
developments within the area and comply with low water use strategies required by the City.
II-B-3)
Landscaping
II-B-3a) Landscaping shall be designed so that 50% coverage occurs within one year of
installation and 90% landscaping coverage occurs within 5 years.
II-B3b) Landscaping design shall include a variety of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs
and flowering plant species well adapted to the local climate.
II-B-3c) As many existing healthy trees on the site shall he saved as is reasonably feasible.
II-B-3d) Buildings adjacent to streets shall be buffered by landycaped areas of at least 10 feet in
width.
II-B-3e) Parking areas shall be shaded by large canopied deciduous trees and shall be
adequately screened and buffered from adjacent uyes.
II-B-3f) Irrigations systems shall be installed to assure landscaping success. Refer to parking
lot landscaping and screening standardsfor more detail.
The Landscape Architect has provided detailed plans which show 50% coverage within one year
and 90% coverage within five years, see Landscape Plan. The Landscape Plan also shows a
variety of deciduous and evergreen trees, shrubs and flowering plants. The front yard se:tback of
all units is 10 feet for porches and 16 feet for buildings. This area will be landscaped p~:r City
Standards, see Landscape Plan. The Landscape Plan shows that the parking areas will be shaded
by large canopied trees and other proposed deciduous trees and landscaping. Further, the
landscape architect has added plant material to screen the parking from the common and private
openspace areas. The irrigation system will also comply with the City of Ashland Standards, see
notes on the Landscape Plan.
II-B-4)
Open Space
II-B-4a) An area equal to at least 8% of the lot area shall be dedicated to opens pace for
recreation for use by the tenants of the development.
II-B-4b) Areas covered by shrubs, bark mulch and other ground covers which do not provide a
suitable surface for human use may not be counted toward this requirement.
II-B-4c) Decks, patios, and similar areas are eligible fore open space criteria. Plan areas for
children are required for projects of greater than 20 units that are designed to include )ramil ies.
22
/~a
~ ------~ -~ ~~-------~-~----- -- --1--- --
The applicant is providing 14.0% of the site in common and private recreational openspace, see
Site and Landscape Plans for specific locations, see Finding B, above, for calculations. A
children's play area is also included, also see Findings A and B, above.
II-B-5)
Natural climate control
II-B-5a) Utilized deciduous trees with early lecif drop and low bare branch densities on the
south sides of the buildings which are occupied and have glazingfor summer shad and winter
warmth.
The Landscape Architect has selected deciduous trees which will provide bare branch(~s in the
winter and full leaves for shade in the summer, see Landscape Plan. These trees will ameliorate
the existing trees on the site.
II-B-6)
Building Materials
ll-B-6a) Building materials and paint colors should he compatible with the surrounding area.
Very bright primary or neon-type paint colors which attract attention to the building or use are
unacceptable.
Final materials and colors (muted) will be selected by the applicant and comply with this
Finding; however, suggested materials are shown on the preliminary Exterior Elevations and will
vary on each unit to add visual interest, also see Project Description Section - Architecture, of
the Narrative. No neon-type paint will be used.
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 follows:
II-D-l)
Screening at required yards
1) Parking abutting a required landscapedfront or exterior yard shall incorporate a sight
obscuring hedge screen into the required landscaped yard.
The screen shall grow to be at least 36 inches or higher than the finished grade of the parking
area, exceptfor required vision clearance areas.
The screen height may be achieved by a combination of earth mounding and plant materials.
Elevated parking lots shall screen both the parking and the retaining wall.
The detailed Landscape Plan shows a sight obscuring hedge screen between aU the parking areas
and the buildings. When mature, this hedge will grow to at least 36 inches higher than the
parking area.
23
I~I
------- ---1--- -
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.
The proposed alleys and parking spaces are located in the interior of the site. The Site and
Landscape Plans show compliance with this Finding.
II-D-3)
Landscape Standards
Parking lot landscaping shall consist of a minimum of7% of the total parking area plus a ratio
of 1 tree for each seven parking spaces to create a canopy affect.
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.
The tree shall be planted in the landvcaped area such that the tree bole is at least 2 feet from
any curb or paved area.
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.
Land'icaped areas shall be evenly distributed throughout the parking area and parking
perimeter at the required ratio.
That portion of a required landscaped yare, 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. Front or exterior yard landscaping may not be substituted for
the interior parking stalls.
The Landscape Plan, provided by the Landscape Architect, and the other Findings in this
document shows compliance with the above Standards.
II-D-4)
Residential Screening
Parking areas adjacent to a residential dwelling shall be set back at least 8 feet from the
building, and shall provide a continuous hedge screen.
The Landscape Plan shows a continuous hedge screen between the parking areas and rf~sidential
units. The eight foot total is exceeded in all locations except adjacent to the proposed garages,
see Landscape and Site Plans.
24
/~~
i-nn_-- ---
II-D-5)
Hedge Screening
The required hedge screen shall be installed as follows:
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 at 100% coverage is achieved
with 2 years.
The Landscape Architect has specified the above Standards, see Landscape Plan.
II-D-6)
Other Screening
1) Other screening and buffering shall be provided asfollows:
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 he contained within the refuse area.
The trash/recycle areas, located on the parking areas and alleys will have a six foot high split
faced masonry wall and be further screened with shrubs, see Landscape Plan.
Service Corridor Screen: When adjacent to residential uses, commerical and industrial service
areas shall reduce the adverse effects of noise, odor and visual clutter upon adjacent residential
uses.
Not applicable.
Light and Glare Screen: Artificial lighting shall be so arranged and constructed as to not
produce direct glare on adjacent residential properties or streets.
Both wall and Pole mounted lighting will be installed as to not produce direct glare on adjacent
residential properties or streets,
E. STREET TREE STANDARDS
APPROVAL STANDARD: AU developmtllt frontllll on pDbUe or prlva~ stneusllaU be
reqDlred to plallt ItrMt t.... In acoordallct with the followlnlstandards alld chOlell from
the recommtlldtd Ust of Itnet t.... toulld III this section.
25
1:23
I _n
II-E-l)
Location for Street Trees
Street trees 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.
ll-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 Stalf
Advisor's review and approval. The placement, spacing, and pruning Qf 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 he evenly spaced, with variations to the spacingpermittedfor 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. Exceptfor
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 2Yzfeetfrom 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 2feet Qf 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 Qf the tree. Space between the tree and such hard surfirce
may be covered by permeable non-permanent hard surfaces such as grates, bricks on
sand, or paver blocks.
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
26
I ;;. If
, ., - - ---~.~_.."._--- T'
development which will kill or weaken the tree. Sidewalks o/variable width and elevation
may be utilized to save existing street trees, subject to approval by the Staff Advisor.
1I-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 Stalf Advisor.
1I-E-4)
Recommended Street Trees
1) Street trees shall conform to the street tree list approved by the Ashland Tree Commission.
The applicant is proposing parkrows and sidewalks for both Clay Street and the new stn::ets. The
minimum width of the parkrows will be 7.5 feet plus a 6 inch curb. Tn one location the sidewalk
will meander. The reason for the meandering along Clay Street is to avoid an existing c:edar tree
and connect to the existing sidewalk to the south. The applicant is requesting an exception to
the Street Standard (Chapter 18.88.050.F) to allow the meandering sidewalks, see Exception
Findings.
AU of the proposed street trees will be located in front of the sidewalks. The width of the
parkrow will also be increased at the intersections for pedestrian crossing and traffic calming
purposes, see Site and Landscape Plans. The landscape architect has specified street trees which
comply with the above findings and standard established by the Department of Community
Development, see Landscape Plan.
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.
As mentioned in the Site Description section of this Narrative, there are existing utilities within
the ROW of Clay Street. The preliminary Civil Engineering Drawings show connection to these
utilities. Some of the existing utilities will be upgraded to accommodate the increased demand.
Further, the electric, CTV and telephone lines will be placed underground along Clay Street and
the new streets within a 10 foot wide PUE,
The site drainage will be divided between the street system and the wetland/detention system,
see CiviJ and Landscape PJans, This on-site stoon water wetland/detention system with the
pollution control structures will meter the runoff from the site before entering the wetland area
on the adjacent property to the north, see Grading/Drainage and Landscape Plans.
A Vehicle Impact Study has been provided and included with this document. The report
presents traffic generation, routes and recommendations, also see Annexation Finding E. This
original document has been updated, see attached.
27
/ ;;;.S
---- -~---'--T- - ,-
As mentioned in the other findings and shown on the Site and Overall Area Plans, there will be
sidewalks and paths throughout the site. The applicant will connect the Clay Street sidewalk to
the existing sidewalk to the north. In addition, the applicant will connect to the "Barclay Street"
project which connects to Ashland Street (Highway 66). The applicant also proposes a half
street improvement on Clay Street from the development to the Buds Dairy Project, sele Overall
Area Plan.
A six foot wide bike land is also proposed within the ROW of Clay Street. Existing public
transportation is on Ashland Street. The pedestrian connections, bike lanes and public
transportation will reduce the vehicle traffic generated by the development.
When annexed to the City the subject property will be located within the City of Ashland;
therefore, State and local law requires police and fire protection within established areas. The
applicant will also provide new fire hydrants per the recommendations of the City's Fire
Department, see Civil Engineer drawings.
OUTLINEIFINAL PLAN APPROVAL - (Chapter 18.88)
The Planning Staff/Planning Commission can approve a Subdivision when the following criteria
have been met:
a) That the development meets all applicable ordinance requirements of the City of
Ashland.
See Site Review Finding A, above and the Annexation Findings.
b) That adequate key City Facilities can be provided including water, sewer, paved
access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, police and
fire protection and adequate transportation; and that the development will not cause a City
facility to operate beyond capacity.
See Site Review Finding D, above, Annexation Finding E and the Project Description in the
Narrative.
c) That the existing and natural features of the land; such as wetlands, floodplain
corridors, ponds, large trees, rock outcrop pings, etc., have been identified in the plan of
the development and significant features have been included in the openspace, Clmlmon
areas, and unbuildable areas.
The existing natural features on the site are the wetland and existing trees, The applicant will
keep as many trees as possible; however, some trees will be removed. The applicant is
providing a Tree Assessment, Tree Removal Permit and a Tree Protection Plan, There is also an
"independent" Arborist Report attached to this document. Also, the applicant is including the
Findings for an exception to the Street Standards (Chapter 18,88.050.F.) To allow a meandering
28
/.:((,
------ -----------~I---
sidewalk along Clay and the new Streets.
d) That the development of the land will not prevent landfrom being developedfor the
uses shown in the Comprehensive Plan.
The proposed development will not prevent adjacent land from being developed. This is an in-
fill project within a proposed R-2 neighborhood. The project conforms to both the proposed
Zone District and Comprehensive Plan in regard to future development, see Annexation
Findings. Further, the Overall Area Plan shows how the property to the north (Cooper) could be
developed.
e) That there are adequate provisions for the maintellallce of openspace and commoll
areas, if required or provided, and that if developmellts are done ill phases that the early
phases have the same or higher ratio of amellities as proposed ill the entire project.
The applicant is proposing a three phase development. When more detailed engineering and
construction information is available, the exact Phasing Plan will be determined. The applicant
will provide this Plan prior to Final Plan Approval; However, the Plan will include an equal or
higher ratio of amenities in the early phases as proposed in the entire project. The Surveyor's
Plat Map will show areas that will be owned and maintained in common by an Owner's
Association. CC & R's and reciprocal easement/maintenance agreements will be provided prior
to Final Approval.
f) That the proposed density meets the base and bonus standards established under this
Chapter.
The proposed density of 117 dwelling units is more than 90% minimum density required by an
annexation. No bonus density is requested. See Site Review Findings A, above and Annexation
Findings.
EXCEPTION TO STREET STANDARDS (CHAPTER 18.88)
An exception to the Street Standards is not subject to the Variance requirements of section
18.100 and may be granted with respect to the Street Standards in 18.88.050 if all oftht:
following circumstances are found to exist:
A. There is a demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements of this
Chapter due to a unique or unusual aspect of the site or proposed use of this site.
B. The variance is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty; and
C. The variance is consistent with the stated Purpose and Intent of the Performance
Standards Options Chapter.
29
1~1
1- -
As mentioned in the Project Description, Site Review and Outline/Final Plan findings, the
applicant desires to keep an existing cedar tree along the south end of the frontage of Clay
Street. This tree is located where the six foot wide sidewalk would normally occur and not in
the 7.5 foot wide parkrow. To allow this mature tree to remain, the proposed sidewalk: must
meander towards the curb along the street, see Site and Landscape Plans. This is also the same
location of the existing sidewalk to the south. The applicant will also provide additional street
trees (1 :30 feet min.) adjacent to the driveway entrance and within the remaining parkrow, see
Landscape Plan. This variance request is consistent with the stated Purpose and Intent of the
Performance Standards Option Chapter by utilizing natural features in the design and the
preservation of existing trees.
30
I:<t'
1___
~zo~
>oz::r:
<~~(;)
:~~~
~~~~
z~~~
~~9~
tTlcs::-o
~~L.tn
Ommen
<wotn
t'rl cZ
~ :j~
~ ~
51 ~
o 1-1
m
r./}
O>"'tlZ
~z~o
>o>~
nt.OQ~
nt'rl~~
c>m>
~~zn
>W>---.ll-l
nz~~
~ov;~
~~~
>t'rl'Tj
~;gm
~m>
>C/l~
zmc
-3Z~
~-3tT1
>
-3
(3
Z
>
~
~ .>'') , .\, . - ..."'Z ..- \ -'s..:
1~---~r~=~/" - ~- .~~~~~\~~=~~-/~_
I r--J ~ \ \\ \ \ \ '\ \ \\ \ '\r-
I~ I\~ \ I -\ \ \ \ 1l.s
~_I\ ,\ \ J r ;f I
\ I \ \ I / j I I I
-~? I ')/"---/ I \ } / II I / / ) ch
(. [] I /[=1 I ) / / / I / ~ I r~ I _
1'-1 I fl I ( / I i / / If! f I~L
\L-;n)1 '-~ I I / ) )1 ~ ~ / 1/ j J~.r.--I
r~1 I I (/ / 00 I ,I I YII.._.~__J
If! I \ / / r /
/1 ~ \ I l' r-~ I ! / )
f l__-} ) \, I / / ~!~ I ,I ( )f
\ 1'/, ~-- --~- i ) J ( cng J I
( -----) i / I -10 / I
1\ . ~.--'-- 'j , \ J \ \
\. (/// / I / {I \ \ J
\ \, \ \ (I I / I / ) I /~-----
\ I \ \ \ 1\ ) I ( ( / / /~
":~ '\ \\ \ '\ \ ~ '\! l \ \ ( ( I\~
\ \ \ " \, \ \ \
) \ \ \~ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ "", """~",
k \ ) \~ \ \ ] \ \ \ \ \ ' 1
Ii:: \ l ) J ) / ) ) \ \ j \ }
{ /-----------~/' / / / /'4 / \ \ / I I
(----~-, / Ii Ii /$ Ii ) ) RJ:7CEI ~D (\
---- / / /'<4. / / /('0 / / /
- ~C- <! __--I ___~ I. r--~- _------j ___./ ~"/ IJAY 1 . Z005
-- 996'- "'; r (9S6'-
~
~~~Ed
<~r-<<~
td ~CI1
tJjF:(j~
ttjr-<<.....:>
~~~~
"tj>o~
~~~~
t'ttjttjCl1
~oo~~
~ ~oo
Ei1 a
t' trJ
00
I
\
L_
o~'"Cz
~ &;0
> (')~
(j~tt1~
(')tt1::.:~
~~~f)
()Z~p
~Ooo~
~~~
~~~~
oo~
~
:j
~
>
t""'4
,I \ :\ I 1 I! IL-i I
. I \ I \ ~r- \\' \ \ r-\ ,I. 1 I I I
r'--\ _Li \...! I \.J \ L-.\ \ L--1 1\ -j i.. i_r" I L___ I
\ \ rl ~ ----. '--L I · I I 1 I
\. 1\' \ L_J \ -.I _! __c r-J 1..lJ
i---' ~ L""\ ) /\\ ~---~-"--c---c- -,---.----~...."T--------c--~"-~__---_.______-c~f~
\ \ \.--- /,~;f>:I"I .'. . >J .>!:-<.... . I
\L, \ ./----::.\ .......< J' ..!. ". .... ../ . '. ..' '. . ...... .... .. (
\ \ \---21 /<'/'........................./J/-------L-/. -~----~-L_-~~~"C--~~~~L_C.
L,~ J./...:.............................., - r'--~ _ I L r- .
f/ . . r . I . 1__
.../..l'......... /' It L-'i iiL L, r L:1 I Irl --I
/.... ....x.... ........../ \ . \ . I I . '1' ! J "_1 fL
/. .....;. / i-I . ! '.-1 I f I '
-.c........... r."'-......./ i I___J J U I ;----1; LJ " / ,n: I
i I ; 1 L_J I r I I, --- I
1 \1) r-L, . IL, \r--L, , r-, ') ri I '/ (
\ 1\ r--\ I ,,) I I n ~ n I -~--;J, I .. n \ I I n I
21 \J/JLJ I ",!jfj' II ~t~i[J!) ~UI 141 I rut I i I!\
.J \ i r' ,k I '-' I 1 J : I: f /1-
I I I l ~ 1'--1 LJ ' I I J I; I
~ LJ I L.__.J L-___J ,_ LJ L-1
!
rnrn~ => ~~(M
.- .........\CQC
=~,., rn ~.-<=
....... ..... ~ =~n
.....a~ "
,., ... ..... n'-~ ....-/
~. ~ t: w
=> en~ ~
rn~= <= aN
~ fD ~ ~ etltrn
~ ... ==>~
fD t-t ...=>
... .... fIj
r-e='
....~
='
fD
....
.
Ii
.-
<=
~
;1
/
<---,
TELEPHONE
541.772-2782
L.J. FRIAR AND ASSOCIATES,~. C.
CONSULTING LAND SURVEYORS
816 WEST 8TH STREET
MEDFORD, OREGON 97501
FAX
541.772.8465
JAMES E HIBBS, PLS
Ijfriar@charter.net
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Beginning at the Northwest corner of Parcel 1 per Partition Plat No. P-10-
2002, according to the official plat thereof, now of record, in Volume 13,
Page 10 of ~Record of Partition Plats" of Jackson County, Oregon and filed as
Survey No. 17218 in the Office of the Jackson County Surveyor; thence along
the North line thereof, South 89052'59" East, 429.35 feet to the Northeast
corner of Parcel 3 of said Partition Plat; thence along that certain Boundary
Agreement Line recorded as Document No. 75-15343, Official Records of Jackson
County, Oregon, North 89017'32" East, 211.94 feet to the Northeast corner of
said Agreement line; thence along that certain Boundary Agreement Line
recorded as Document No. 86-19955, said Official Records, North 00017'57"
West, 653.04 feet; thence North 89036'10" West, 636.98 feet to thE! East line
of Clay Street; thence continue North 89036' 10" West, 60.00 feet to the West
line of said Clay Street; thence along said West line, South 00004'41" West,
659.48 feet; thence South 89052'59" East, 60.00 feet to the point of
beginning. Containing 10.55 acres, more or less.
TRACT TO BE ANNEXED
391EI1C TL2500 & CLAY STREET R/W
Andy Cochrane
04-206
October 5, 2004
REGISTERED
PROFESSIONAL
LAND SURVEYOR
'"
"-
OREGON
JULY 17, 1986
JAMES E. HIBBS
2234 .J
RENEWAL DATE 6-30-05
/:3/
flECE\VED
MAY 1 6 2005
City o'f l\S~l\and
_"_----,-__m _
ApI' 08 05 09:39a
Robert Kor,
j41 ,-9320
p.1
RDK Ellgilleering
TRAFFIC ENGINEERING/SIGNAL SYSTEMS
3350 Green Acres Dr., Central Point, OR 97502 - Phone (541) 664-0393 Fax (541) 664-9320
April 8,2005
Andy Cochrane
D and A Enterprise
1970 Ashland Street
Ashland, OR 97520
Subject: Traffic hnpact Study for Clay Street Residential Complex
Dear Mr. Cochrane:
RDK Engineering has received information that the Clay Street residential project has
been revised and that the total number of residential dwelling units has been reduced.
The original site layout provided for a total of 130 new units. The revised site plan
indicates 116 new units, for a reduction of 14 units.
The traffic impact study was based on 130 units. The study has shown that \vith the
projec~ the key intersections in the study area will operate at an acceptable Jc~vel of
service to City of Ashland and the Oregon Department of Transportation standards with
the exception of the intersection of Ashland Street and Clay Street. I
You have indicated that you would participate in the construction of a southbound right
turn lane on Clay Street at Ashland Street to mitigate the impact of your dev~,lopment. I
assume that you will continue to support tins requirement with the reduced site plan.
The reduction from 130 to 116 units should not require a new traffic study since the
impact of the project has already been identified. The new 116 unit design will not create
any additional impacts.
If there are any questions, please let me know.
Very truly yours,
~~11~~
/ :5;;J.-
F\ECE\VED
MAY 1 6 2005
City Of AS~i~8.nd
Transportation Engineer
RDK Engineering
RDK Engineering
TRAFFIC ENGINEERING/SIGNAL SYSTEMS
3350 Green Acres Dr., Central Point, OR 97502 - Phone (541) 664-0393 Fax (541) 664-9320
December 10, 2004
Andy Cochrane
D and A Enterprise
1970 Ashland Street
Ashland, OR 97520
RECEIVED
M.AY 1 6 2005
C;"',~, o,t 1\~~'''!<''1l'1d
...y j f~~.;.pIII....~1
Subject: Addendum toTratlic Impact Study for Clay Street Residential Complex
Dear Mr. Cochrane:
I have reviewed the existing and projected traffic volumes and level of service a.t the
intersection of Ashland S1. and Clay S1. in the City of Ashland.
LOS V/C
"D" 0.30
"E" 0.62
"F" 0.69
The traffic study shows the following levels of service during the P.M. peak hour:
Delay
29.3 sec. - existing year 2004
42.3 sec. - projected year 2006 with project and southbound Clay
St. right turn lane.
66.7 sec. - projected year 2024 with project and southbound Clay
S1. right turn lane.
The level of service data above includes several trips to and from the existing
unimproved commercial driveway located opposite Clay S1. If this driveway were
restricted to right turn in and right turn out, the following levels of service can be
obtained for Clay S1. and Ashland S1. (Copies of the revised calculations sheets are
attached. )
LOS V/C
"e" 0.24
"D" 0.48
"F" O. 50
Delay
23.2 sec., existing year 2004
29.2 sec., projected year 2006 with project and southbound Clay
S1. right turn lane.
59.9 sec projected year 2024 with project and southbound Clay
S1. right turn lane.
This information and revised study data at this intersection is submitted following a
meeting with Dan Dorrell, ODOT traffic engineer on December 8, 2004. The
commercial driveway opposite Clay St. was discussed. ODOT advises that there may be
1:33
a development occurring on that site in the near future. ODOT is considering a
restriction when that site is developed to right turn in and right turn out only. The ,(
restriction is due to the proximity to the overpass and intersection operating concerns.
Other options include a median barrier on Ashland St.
Until the site is developed, a stop sign with a "Right Turn Only" sign would rais€~ the
level of service as shown below.
In the event that the City of Ashland and Oregon Department of Transportation are
considering a raised median on Ashland St. through this intersection, it should b€~
determined prior to widening Clay St. to facilitate a right turn lane. A right turn lane is /
not necessary if a median barrier is installed. The median barrier could be designed for
right turn in and right turn out on the commercial driveway side and Clay St. could have
right turn in, right turn out and left turn in. The left turn out of Clay St. would b~~ I
prohibited.
The following indicates the level of service in the year 2024, with the project, and a
median barrier in place to prohibit the southbound left turn (information as shown in the
report) .
LOS V /C
"B" 0.25
Delay
11.7 sec. Year 2024 with project and median barrier.
Copies of these calculations are attached,
If there are any questions, please let me know.
Very truly yours,
~~~~
Transportation Engineer
RDK Engineering
CC: Dan Dorrell, ODOT Traffic Engineer
James Olson, P.L.S. City of Ashland
RECEIVED
MAY 1 6 2005
/;;'1
C'h C"~ t-:..~'.-~!~"'r"'id
1'..'1" J ~...., ih...l i
I~ECFnIED
NOV 3 0 ZOO~
.
.
TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY
Clay Street Residential Complex
Ashland, Oregon
September 27, 2004
Prepared by:
RDK Engineering
for
D and A Enterprise
.
.
/3~
--_..-_....,----~---------~----.-
.
.
TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY
Clay Street Residential Complex
Ashland, Oregon
,I
September 27, 2004
RENEWAL DATE 6-30-05 Prepared by:, '
RDK~ Engineering
for
D and A Enterprise
. .
1~6
-,- ,--- --~----'--------'-1-- ---- --
1
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
L
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......,....,..........."..,......................"..............,......... 1
n.
INTRODUCTION
Project Location.........................,..."'., ".. ,. ."... ." ...,., ..........."., ...,.. .." ..,.".,. ............" .".. .."...3
Project Description ........' ...................... ... ....,. ..,..,....... .,..'.......... ........ ........,.., ....... ..... .,. ..,..,.3
Study Process and Organization ... .. . . .. ... ... . .. . .. .. . . .. .. . . .. .. . . .. .. . . .. . .. .. . . .. . .. . .. . . . . .. . . . .. .. 3
m. EXISTING CONDITIONS
Existing Site Development ... ... .. . .. . .. . ... ... . .. .. . .. . . .. . .. .. . .. . . .. .. . . .. .. . .. . . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. .. .. 4
Traffic Counts ... .. , .. . . .. , .. .. , .. , .. , .. , .. . .. . . .. .. . . , . .. . .. . . .. .. , . , . . .. . .. ... . .. ... .. . .. . .. , , .. . .. . .. . .. .4
Roadway Classifications... .. . .. , .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . ... . .. ... .. . .. , .. . .. , . .. , .. . .. .. . ... .. . ... .. , ... ... .......4
Planned Street hnprovement Projects ... ... .. . ... .. .. .. ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. .. .. .. . . .. ... ... .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .4
IV. TRAFFIC SAFETY
I
I
I
I
Accident S1lll1IllalY ........................... ... ... .. . .. . .. . . .. .. . .. . . .. . . . .. . ... .. . ... ... . .. .. . .. . . . .. 5
Intersection Accident Summaries... ..' ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .., .., ... .., '..... ... ... ... ... ... ,.. ... .. ...5
V.
GROWm VOLUMES
Pipeline Traffic ......,................................,.......,.................,...........,............. 5
Background Growth.., '.. , .. ..' '.. ... ..' '.. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...... ... ..' ...... ... ... ... ... .., '" ... ....6
Seasonal Adjustment... ... ... ... ...... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .....6
VL
SITE TRAFFIC
Site Access ................................................................................................ 6
Trip Generation ... .. . .. . ... .. . .. . . .. ... .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. .. . , .. .. . ... ... . .. .. . .. . ... ... . .. .. . , .. .. , ... .... .6
Trip Distribution and Assignment................................. .....................'.......... .......7
Year 2006 Future Traffic Volumes ... ... ... ... ... ... ...... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...... .7
Year 2024 Future Traffic Volumes.., .. , .. , . .. .. . .. , .. . . .. .. . .. , . .. .. , . .. .. , .., .. , .. . , .. ... ... . .. ,.. .., ,7
.
VB. INTERSECTION CAPACITY AND ROADWAY ANALYSIS
Intersection Capacity and Level of Service Analysis ................................................ .8
vm IINTERSECTIO N SUMMARIES... .. . .. . . .. .. . . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . . .. . .. .. . 9
IX CONCLUSIONS.., ,.. ... .., ..' .... ..,.........................................,..,......,............... 11
J
I
/37
- -----.-.----,--....-
1
I
I
1
I
I
APPENDIX
A. Figures
B. Turning Movement Counts
C, Level of Service Description
D. Trip Generation
E. Accident Data
F. Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis
G. City of Ashland Street Classifications
CALCULATIONS
Year 2004 Existing PM peak hour Level of Service
Year 2006 "No Build" PM peak hour Level of Service
Year 2006 "Build" PM peak hour Level of Service
Year 2024 "No Build" PM peak hour Level of Service
Year 2024 "Build" PM peak hour Level of Service
LIST OF FIGURES (APPENDIX A)
I
I
]
I
Figure I
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8
Figure 9
.
Vicinity Map
Site Location
Preliminary Site Plan
Year 2004 PM Peak Hour Existing Traffic
Year 2006 PM Peak Hour "No Build" Option
Year 2006 PM Peak Hour Site Trip Percentages and Assignment
Year 2006 PM Peak Hour with Project Traffic
Year 2024 PM Peak Hour "No Build" Option
Year 2024 PM Peak Hour with Project Traffic
LIST OF TABLES
Table I
Table 2
Table 3
Table 4
Table 5
J
I
Roadway Classifications... . . , . .. .. . .. , . , . ,. . .. , . , . . . . . .. 4
Accident Summary ...... ..,.................,... .........5
Site Generated Traffic, AM Peak Hour... ... ... ... ... 7
Site Generated Traffic, PM Peak Hour... ... .. . ... ...., 7
PM Peak Hour Capacity and Level of Service... ....,8
/3?
1
I
I
1
I
I
Traffic Impact Analvsis
Clay Street Residential Complex
I.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Study Summary
This report provides an analysis of potential traffic impacts from a proposed mixed-use
residential development off of Clay Street. The development will include 26 single family
dwelling units, 48 duplex units, and 56 four-plex units.
Access to the site will be from E. Main St. to the north, Ashland St. to the south, and Abbott Ave.
to the east.
Peak hour impacts were analyzed for five scenarios:
· The existing year 2004 weekday P.M. peak hour level of service at key intersections
in the study area.
I
I
· The year 2006 weekday P.M. peak hour projected level of service at key intersections
in the study area if the proposed residential complex is not developed. "No Build
Option. "
· The year 2006 weekday P.M. peak hour projected level of service at key intersections
in the study area if the proposed residential complex is developed. "Build Option."
. The year 2024 weekday P.M. peak hour projected level of service at key intersections
in the study area if the proposed residential complex is not developed. "No Build
Option. "
I
· The year 2024 weekday P.M. peak hour projected level of service at key intersections
in the study area if the proposed residential complex is developed. "Build Option."
.
The study area is composed of four key intersections in the area of the proposed site:
E. Main Street & Clay Street
Ashland Street (Hwy. 66) and Clay Street
Abbott Ave. and Tolman Creek Rd.
Ashland Street (Hwy. 66) and Tolman Creek Rd.
Conclusions
J
I
The analysis results indicate that three of the four study area intersections will meet applicable
mobility standards given year 2004 traffic volumes and will continue to meet the standa~ds in the
year 2024 with the project.
September 27, 2004
Page 1
RDK Engineering
I~r
- --- -~-----------.-
1
I
I
I
I
I
1
Traffic Impact Analvsis
Clay Street Residential Complex
The intersection of Ashland St. and Clay St. meets the mobility standards in the current year 2004
and will continue to meet the ODOT VIC standard for a district highway in the year 2024. The
level of service standard will slip from "D" to "E" in 2006 without the project, and to "F" with
the project. Some improvement to the intersection should be considered to offset the impact of
additional traffic volumes.
The construction of a southbound right turn only lane on Clay St. will improve the level of
service in the year 2006, with the project, from "F" to "E." By the year 2024 the level of service
will have dropped to "F." This level of service is based on no southbound left turn vehides
pulling into the Ashland St. median to wait for a gap to merge with eastbound traffic. However,
motorists will use the median to merge. Assuming that 50% of southbound left turns will utilize
the median during the P.M. peak hour to merge with eastbound traffic, the level of service will be
at "E." This will bring the level of service back to the same level of service as the year 2006 ''No
Build. "
The 2nd option is to install a raised median on Ashland Street to prohibit the southbound left turn
from Clay Street. This option would bring the level of service to "B" in the year 2006, 'Mth the
project, and would continue level of service "B" through 2024. This option may be warranted in
the future.
I
I
I
I
In summary, it is recommended the construction of a right turn only lane for southbound Clay St.
at Ashland St. This improvement should keep the year 2024 P.M. peak hour operating conditions
at the year 2006 ''No Build" level which is level of service "E."
A check of projected traffic conditions in the year 2024 indicate that a traffic signal at tins
location is not warranted (See Appendix F).
.
September 27, 2004
Page 2
RDK Engineering
I 't'O
--~-----~------.-~-
-1
I
I
1
I
I
Traffic ImJXlct Analvsis
Clay Street Residential Complex
II.
INTRODUCTION
This report addresses transportation and traffic issues related to the development of the Clay
Street Residential Complex.
The purposes of this analysis are to identify any traffic related impacts generated by the daily
operations of the proposed project and to determine the need for any improvements to the nearby
road system.
The analysis years reviewed in this report for the City of Ashland include the P.M. peak hours for
the existing year 2004, the 2006 build-out year with and without the project, and the y~U' 2024
traffic impact with and without the proposed project.
The Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) has operational jurisdiction at two of the four
intersections identified in the study area. Ashland Street and Clay Street, and the interS€:ction of
Ashland Street and Tolman Creek Road.
Project Location
I
I
The property is shown on Jackson County Assessors Map 39-lE-II C, Tax Lot 2500 and is 10.0
total acres. The site is located along the east side of Clay S1. between E. Main St. and Ashland St.
A site vicinity map is shown on Figure 1. The site location is shown on Figure 2. The
preliminary site plan is shown on Figure 3.
I
I
I
Project Description
I
The proposed Clay St. Residential project includes a total of 26 single family dwelling units, 48
duplex units, and 56 four-plex units.
.
The property is currently zoned Jackson County RR-5. Proposed zoning will be to City of
Ashland R-2.
Study Process and Organization
The process used in preparing this traffic analysis follows a generally accepted approach for
preparation of a traffic impact study. This process conforms to the general requirements of the
City of Ashland and the Oregon Department of Transportation. To the extent possible, any
significant departures or modifications to this approach have been documented within this report
and coordinated with agency staff.
J
I
This report is formatted to first analyze existing traffic conditions, which will provide an existing
framework or reference for the remainder of the analysis. Next, background and pipeline traffic
along with the traffic generated by this development is assigned and distributed into the: existing
September 27,2004
Page 3
/~(
RDK Engineering
~,
-1
I
I
1
I
I
Traffic Impact Analvsis
Clay Street Residential Complex
street network and added to the existing traffic volumes. The report will analyze the projected
traffic flow at key intersections within the study area and note any mitigating measures 1hat may
be required to maintain an acceptable level of service.
III.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Existing Site Development
The site area is currently vacant land.
Traffic Counts
Existing traffic turning movement counts at key study area intersections for the year 2004 were
obtained by RDK Engineering. These traffic volumes are presented in Appendix B for both the
A.M. and P.M. peak hours.
I
I
The review of both the A.M. and P.M. existing year 2004 traffic counts show that the P.M. peak
hour produces the highest traffic volume period of the day. Therefore, the P.M. peak hour
volumes are used in this report.
Roadway Classifications
The following is a summary of the existing roadway classifications in the study area. City of
Ashland street design standards for each roadway classification are provided in Appendix G.
I
TABLE 1 - ROADWAY CLASSmCATIONS
.
Roadway
Ashlan4,.~!!e€:!,(H~66)
_ ,.~_~~u.~.. ,._.___.._
E. Main Street
Tolman Creek Road
C:lllY~!I'e~ n
_ ____.-.n.mu, '____.., _,__. ...__ '"
Abbott Avenue
Classification
Boulevard
Boulevard
Avenue
Avenue
Nei~bp~hood St.
Planned Street Improvements
J
I
A new residential street connection is planned from the proposed development to the north, The
new street will run north and south from the development to Abbott Ave. (See Figure 3 in
Appendix A). No schedule has been determined. Construction will depend on if and when the
property to the north submits a plan to develop the site.
September 27, 2004
Page 4
RDK Engineering
j4~
,_. -. -,._-- -.
1
I
I
1
I
I
Traffic Impact Analvsis Clay Street Residential Complex
IV. TRAFFIC SAFETY
Accident data for the study area intersections was obtained from the City of Ashland for the five-
year period from January 1999 through December 2003. Accident rates were calculated in
accordance with standard guidelines and average daily traffic volumes.
The minimum threshold for a high accident risk intersection is 1.0 accident per million vehicles
entering the intersection. Accident rates for area intersections are listed on the following page in
Table 2, Accident summaries are shown in Appendix E.
I
I
1
I
Intersection Accident Details
E. Main Street & Clay Street - One accident. Single vehicle I bicycle injury accident.
Clay Street & Ashland Street - Three accidents. All three accidents were right angle multiple
vehicle accidents involving injuries. A check of sight distance for eastbound Ashland St. traffic
approaching Clay St. indicates 400 ft. AASHTO design guide indicates 390 ft. interseCltion sight
distance for passenger cars at speed 35. Sight distance adjusted for the overpass grade increases
to 430 ft. Passenger car stopping distance at speed 35 is 280 ft, adjusted for the grade. As noted
above, the five year accident history does not indicate that this is a high accident intersection.
.
Abbott Ave. & Tolman Creek Road - Single vehicle hit fixed object. (Dun) No injuries.
Ashland Street (Hwy. 66) & Tolman Creek Road - Eight reported accidents. Two Multiple
vehicle rear-end accidents with injuries. Three Muhiple vehicle right angle accidents, one with
injury. One single vehicle I pedestrian accident with injury, One multiple vehicle, head-on
accident, no injury and one single vehicle I bicycle non-injury accident.
V.
GROWTH VOLUMES
Pipeline Traffic
J
I
Pipeline traffic is traffic generated by recently approved projects that have not been completed at
the time of analysis. City of Ashland planning staffhas indicated that the peak hour pipeline trips
from the old Buds Dairy site and Barclay Square projects should be included in the report. These
pipeline trips have been included on figure 5 in Appendix A ( year 2006 "No Build Option).
September 27,2004
Page 5
RDK Engineering
1~...3
----------------,----
'1
I
I
1
I
I
Traffic Impact Analvsis
Clay Street Residential Complex
Background Growth
Background growth rates for Ashland Street (Highway 66) were obtained from the Oregon
Deparbnent of Transportation. The average growth rate for the period from 1997 through 2002
was 1.4%.
The growth rate of 1.4% per year was applied to future years 2006 and 2024 traffic volumes on
Ashland St. (Hwy. 66), E. Main St., and Tolman Creek Rd. (See Appendix B).
Seasonal Adjustment
The ODOT Automatic Traffic Recorder (ATR) located on ORE99 1.4 miles south ofTa~lent was
used as the basis to obtain the adjustment factor.
Season high traffic volumes are shown to be during the month of October. Traffic volwnes
obtained during August and September were adjusted by 1.07% and 1.06% respectively.
Automatic Traffic Recorder data is provided in Appendix B.
I
I
VI.
SITE TRAFFIC
SITE ACCESS
I
I
All trips to and from the site will be from Clay Street. Two new street intersections are proposed
as part of the site plan. (See Figure 3 in Appendix A.)
I
In the future, the street extension to the north will be connected to the "Buds Dairy" project, with
connections to Tolman Creek Road, via Abbott Ave. This connection will be completed when
the site to the north between this project and the Buds Dairy project is developed.
.
The Clay Street Residential Complex will provide for:
· 26 Single Family Dwelling Units
· 48 Duplex Units. 24 of the units will be 2 bedroom, 24 will be 1 bedroom
''Townhouse'' rental units.
. 56 Aparbnent units. These are generally 4-plex rental units.
TRIP GENERATION
J
I
Trip generation calculations were prepared utilizing the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip
Generation, Seventh Edition. Rates shown for land use code 210, single-family houses and land
use code 220, Aparbnents (See appendix D). All site related trips were assumed to be new trips
made by private vehicle. Total trip generation anticipated from completion of the Clay Street
Residential Complex for the A.M. and P.M. peak hours are summarized in Tables 3 and 4 on the
following page.
September 27,2004
Page 6
RDK Engineering
/'1'1
-1
I
I
1
I
I
Traffic Impact Analysis
Clay Street Residential Complex
TABLE 3 - Site Generated Traffic, A.M. Peak
ResidentiCll Typ~
Single Family
2-l3d!m. DUElex
. .1 =l3~:P~e!~}( ".', .
4-Plex Units
Total
Total Dwelling Units
26
24
24
56
130
Average Daily Traffic
249
230
141
376
996
A.M. Peak Hour
Enter Exit Total
5 15 20
4 14 18
3 8 11
6 22 28
18 59 77
TABLE 4 - Site Generated Traffic, P.~. Peak
I
I
]
I
Units
TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT
Trip distribution is based on evaluation of existing traffic patterns at the study area intersections.
The distribution and assignment of these trips to the street network and the resulting total
projected traffic volumes are shown on Figure 6 (Site Trip Percentages & Assignment), Figure 7
(Year 2006 with Project) and on Figure 9 (Year 2024 with Project) in Appendix A.
.
YEAR 2006 COMBINED (FUTURE) TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Year 2006 P.M. peak hour combined traffic volumes include year 2004 base traffic, plus pipeline,
background, seasonal adjustment and site traffic. Figure 7 in Appendix A illustrates the:: total
combir!ed year 2006 traffic after completion of the proposed Clay Street Residential Complex.
YEAR 2024 COMBINED (FUTURE) TRAFFIC VOLUMES (ASHLAND ST.)
Year 2024 P.M. peak hour combined traffic volumes include year 2004 base traffic, plus pipeline,
background, seasonal adjustment and site traffic. Figure 9 in Appendix A illustrates tll(~ total
combined traffic after completion of the proposed Clay Street Residential Complex.
September 27,2004
Page 7
RDK Engineering
1'15
, --~_.-.-
1
I
-
1
I
I
Traffic Impact Analvsis
Clay Street Residential Complex
VII. INTERSECTION AND ROADWAY ANALYSIS
Intersection Capacity and Level of Service
Synchro software was used to prepare the capacity and level of service calculations at all
intersections. Synchro incorporates the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodologies.
Copies of the calculations are included in the "Calculations" sections of the report.
Appendix C gives a detailed description of Level of Service measurements for both signl31ized
and stop sign controlled intersections.
The level of service calculations address:
. Existing year 2004 P.M. peak hour traffic conditions.
. Combined year 2006 P.M. peak hour traffic conditions, without project (No Build).
No Build includes existing, pipeline, and background traffic volumes.
I
I
· Combined year 2006 PM. peak hour traffic conditions, with project. These include
existing, background, pipeline, and project traffic volumes.
· Combined year 2024 P.M. peak hour traffic conditions, without project (No Build).
No Build includes existing, pipeline, and background traffic volumes.
. Combined year 2024 P.M. traffic conditions on Ashland St. (State Hwy. 66.) with
project. These include existing, background, pipeline, and project traffic volumes.
I
The following table summarizes the level of service calculations for all five conditions. Table 5
is continued on the following page.
.
TABLE 5 - P.M. Peak Hour Capacity and Level of Service
Intersection
Year 2004 Year 2006
Existing No Build
0.30 - 29.3 - D 0.60 - 42.7 - E
0.71- 26.2 - C 0.72 - 28.4 - C
N/A N/A
0.20 - 10.7 - B 0.21- 10.8 - B
0.25 - 14.4 - B 0.29 -17.9 - C
Capacity - Delay - Level of Service
Ashland St.l Cla.Y ~t.
Ashland St.rrolman Creek
St.lSite Entrances
Tolman Creek/Abbott Av.
E, Main St.lCiay St.
*0.74 - 60.4 - F --- Existing intersection operation.
*0.62 - 42.3 - E --- With added Southbound Clay St. Right Turn Lane
*0.25 - 11.7 - B - With a "No Left Turn" restriction on Clay St.
Year 2006
With Project
*0.74 - 60.4 -, F
0.72 - 28.9 - C
0.02 - 9.3-A
0.21- 10.9 - B
0.35 - 19.8 - C
September 27, 2004
Page 8
RDK Engineering
J~"
~'_'__""'____'______m_."____________..__._,_~
l
I
I
1
I
I
Traffic Impact Analvsis
Clay Street Residential Complex
TABLE 5 (Continued) P.M. Peak Hour Capacity and Level of Service
Intersection
Year 2024 Year 2024
No Build With Project
0.65 - 66.7 - F 0.78 - 87.7 - F
0.79 - 32.0 - C 0.79 - 32.3 - C
N/A 0.03 - 9.3 - A
0.21 - 10.7 - B 0.21 - 10.7 - B
0.33 - 18.7 - C 0.34 - 20.2 - C
Capacity - Delay - Level of Service
Year 2024
With Mitigation
*See Note Below
**0.78 - 28.6 - C
Ashland St..fCl~y S1.
Ashland S1.!folman Creek
St.lSite Entrances
Tolman Creek/Abbott Av.
E. Main St.lqay S1.
*0.69 - 66.7 - F - With a S.B. Clay S1. right turn lane in service and no left turn vehicles pulling
into median to wait to merge with E.B. traffic.
0.52 - 46.6 - E --- With a S.B. Clay S1. right turn lane in service and 28 (50%) left tum vehicles
pulling into median to wait to merge with E.B. traffic.
0.31 - 12.2 - B --- With a ''No Left Tum" restriction on Clay St.
"With ProtectivelPermissive traffic signal phasing for north and south Tolman Creek Rd.
I
I
I
I
WI. INTERSECTION SUMMARIES
Ashland Street (Hwv. 66) & Clav Street
This is a T - Intersection with a private driveway on the south approach. There is stop sign control
for southbound Clay Street traffic.
The intersection is currently (Year 2004) operating at Level of Service "D" during the P.M. peak.
hour period.
I
In the year 2006, without this project, the P.M. peak. hour level of service will drop to "E" due to
pending "pipeline" trips from nearby projects that are underway or under consideration.
In the year 2006, the combined traffic, with the project traffic included, the P.M. peak hour level
of service will drop to "F."
Improving the intersection capacity should be considered to off-set the impact of proposed
developments.
J
I
The construction of a southbound right turn only lane on Clay St. would improve the level of
service in the year 2006, with the project, from "F" to ''E.'' By the year 2024 the level Otf service
will have dropped to "F." This level of service is based on no southbound left turn vehilC1es
pulling into the Ashland St. median to wait for a gap to merge with eastbound traffic. Hpwever,
Motorists will use the median to merge. Assuming that 50% of southbound left turns will utilize
the median during the P.M. peak hour to merge with eastbound traffic, the level of service would
be at "E." This will bring the level of service back to the same level of service as the year 2006
"No Build." Condition.
September 2 7, 2004
Page 9
RDK Engineering
/'+1
I
I
-
I
I
I
Traffic Impact Analysis
Clay Street Residential Complex
The 2nd option is to install a raised median on Ashland Street to prohibit the southbound left turn
from Clay Street. This option would bring the level of service to "B" in the year 2006, with the
project, and would continue level of service "B" through 2024. This option may be considered in
the future.
In summary, recommend the construction of a right turn only lane for southbound Clay 81. at
Ashland St. will bring the intersection operating conditions to the projected year 2006 "l'llo Build"
The addition of the right turn lane would offset the increased traffic from new development
traffic.
A check of projected traffic conditions in the year 2024 indicate that a traffic signal at this
location is not warranted (See Appendix F).
E. Main Street & Clav Street
This is aT-intersection with Clay St. stopped at E. Main Street.
I
-
The intersection is currently (Year 2004) operating at Level of Service "B" during the P.M. peak
hour.
In the year 2006 the intersection P.M. peak hour level of service will drop to "C" under the ''No
Build" option. This is due to the expected "pipeline" trips from earlier developments.
In the year 2006, the combined traffic, with the project traffic included, the P.M. peak hour will
remain at "C."
No mitigation is required.
I
Abbott Ave. & Tolman Creek Rd.
.
This is a T-intersection with Abbott Ave. stopped at Tolman Creek Road.
The intersection is currently (Year 2004) operating at Level of Service "B" during the P.M. peak
hour.
In the year 2006 the intersection P.M. peak hour level of service will remain at "B" undler the ''No
Build" or "Build" options.
In the year 2024, the combined traffic, with the project traffic included, the intersection P.M. peak
hour will remain at "R"
No mitigation is required.
Ashland Street (Hwv. 66) & Tolman Creek Rd.
September 27,2004
PageJO
1'1 f?
RDK Engineering
~l
I
I
I
I
I
Tratfic Impact Analvsis
Clay Street Residential Complex
This is a 4-way intersection controlled by "traffic actuated" traffic signals. This intersec:tion is
operated and maintained by the Oregon Department of Transportation.
The intersection is currently (Year 2004) operating at a VIC ratio of 0.71, with a level of service
"c" during the P.M. peak hour.
In the year 2006, under the No Build option, the intersection P.M. peak hour VIC ratio will
change to 0.72. The level of service will remain at "c."
In the year 2006, the combined traffic, with the project traffic included, the intersection P.M. peak
hour V IC ratio will remain at 0.72. Also the level of service will remain at "C."
In the year 2024, the combined traffic, with the project traffic included, the intersection P.M. peak
hour VIC ratio will be increased to 0.79. The level of service will remain at "C."
Recommend that ODOT consider changing the signal phasing for north - south traffic on Tolman
Creek Rd. from "Protected" north - south left turns to ProtectiveIPermissive left turn phasing.
This application is gaining support, especially in Jackson County. The change would lower the
VlC from 0.79 to 0.78. Average delay per vehicle would be decreased by approximately 4
seconds.
I
I
I
I
IX.
CONCLUSIONS
The analysis results indicate that three of the four study area intersections will meet applicable
mobility standards given year 2004 traffic volumes and will continue to meet the standards in the
year 2024 with the project.
.
The intersection of Ashland St. and Clay St. meets the mobility standards in the current year 2004
and will continue to meet the ODOT VIC standard for a district highway in the year 202:4. The
level of service standard will slip from "D" to "E" in 2006 without the project, and to "I~" with
the project. Some improvement to the intersection should be considered to bring the int,ersection
back to a satisfuctory level of service.
In the year 2006, the combined traffic, with the project traffic included, the P.M. peak hour level
of service will drop to "F."
The construction of a southbound right turn only lane on Clay St. will improve the level of
service in the year 2006, with the project, from "F" to ''E.'' By the year 2024 the level of service
will have dropped to "F." This level of service is based on no southbound left turn vehides
pulling into the Ashland St. median to wait for a gap to merge with eastbound traffic. However,
motorists will use the median to merge. Assuming that 50% of southbound left turns will utilize
the median during the P.M. peak hour to merge with eastbound traffic, the level of service will be
at "E." This will bring the level of service back to the same level of service as the year 2006 "No
Build. "
J
I
The 2nd option is to install a raised median on Ashland Street to prohibit the southbound left tum
from Clay Street. This option would bring the level of service to "B" in the year 2006, with the
project, and would continue level of service "B" through 2024. This option may be warranted in
the future.
September 27, 2004
Page 11
/~
RDK Engineering
1
I
I
I
I
I
Traffic Impact Analvsis
Clay Street Residential Complex
In summary, it is recommended the construction of a right turn only lane for southbound Clay St.
at Ashland St. This improvement should keep the year 2024 P.M. peak hour operating c:onditions
at the year 2006 "No Build" level which is level of service "E."
A check of projected traffic conditions in the year 2024 indicate that a traffic signal at this
location is not warranted (See Appendix F).
I
I
J
I
.
J
1
September 27,2004
Page 12
l5"eJ
RDK Engineering
. -------_._-_._._-~..--
HeM Unsignalized Interseci....In Capacity Analysis
9: Ashland St. & Clay St. Yr 2004 Existing No S(li.Gfj., AnDrZ)a.rh '--r;.~.Q::/c. 12/7/2004
. .
~ -... +- "-. \. .;
r;10Ymmrdl_a~J~.;~T~R~~~~
Lane Configurations .., tt t1t V
Sign Control Free Free Stop
Grade 0% 0% 0%
Volume (veh/h) 23 635 596 57 29 13
Peak Hour Factor 0.64 0.83 0.96 0.80 0.73 0.55
Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 36 765 621 71 40 24
Pedestrians 4 4
Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0
Walking Speed (ftIs) 4.0 4.0
Percent Blockage 0 0
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type None
Median storage veh)
\fe, conflicting volume 696 1115 354
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3,3
pO queue free % 96 79 96
cM capacity (veh/h) 893 193 638
~lorc11QiJJtll'"RirfA~~-a~t:BrZ~&'~"IWS'ff~12m1S"mW]E~\\f~~)1&;~ff~]~~:f~~{J.~~J,;~~
Volume Total 36 383 383 414 278 63
Volume Left 36 0 0 0 0 40
Volume Right 0 0 0 0 71 24
cSH 893 1700 1700 1700 1700 261
Volume to Capacity 0.04 0.23 0.23 0.24 0.16 0.24
Queue Length (ft) 3 0 0 0 0 23
Control Delay (s) 9.2 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 23.2
Lane LOS A C
Approach Delay (s) 0.4 0.0 23.2
Approach LOS C
r.T!iiearm~~,,,;~\~;.m,~~~~~~4i!_, .",',~ ,'; ,'" r",,',' , c', -~~<!f!tm>~!-~~~"I\l
..",~~, .-Q..J~,"'~LU;'J~t.y;,~~~~~{t~~~~~~~;r-K~!!f~~'..~ ,".'_ _~':~" _,__._~ ,; _, :'",;':CP ,__~:;'._ _.OF p~r~~-,~1ff~~.~~\.~~-tf.j
Average Delay 1.2
Intersection Capacity Utiliization 34.2% ICU Level of Service A
~- !\ {e D
"~,l.,jj~
MAY 1 6 Z005
'"" " d
::~ _ -", " : ':-'. J
j I' "__'" 'a __,..II ~ ' ,
Clay Street Residential Complex 2:00 pm 9/27/2004 Yr. 2004 Existing AM Peak
RDK Engineering
! ~I
.J~' !
Synchro 5 Light Report
Page 1
HeM Unsignalized Intersecl,_.1 Capacity Analysis
3: Ashland St. & Clay St. Yr.2006 No Build No SOi.c+),
ADO r D CL cJ, -rF a,.{..:r:;:[ c....
. ..
12/7/2004
~
-+
...-
'-
\.., ./
MQV(~'l)l~"a~~l:~~t..$__
Lane Configurations "i tt tft V
Sign Control Free Free Stop
Grade 0% 0% 0%
Volume (veh/h) 24 653 613 69 51 35
Peak Hour Factor 0.64 0.83 0.96 0.80 0.73 0.55
Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 38 787 639 86 70 64
Pedestrians 2 4
Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0
Walking Speed (tus) 4.0 4.0
Percent Blockage 0 0
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type None
Median storage veh)
ve, conflicting volume 729 1154 368
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3,3
pO queue free % 96 62 90
cM capacity (veh/h) 868 182 626
i5"""I.Y6~o~a'n'...' ", ',' ,\fIl""S' 'r,it~e;B-"1?iW<We'B~'~7:i':}~i"II'IO~~"fSi'iB~~fr'dJ3~;!;('~~~%t~~~~
P"~9Y,~',y,.,,-w,L'~'~.'~:--""'~:rJ~~?,~-,1I"\J;__.<:~ti~-<<~~J. _;;'~:c~~J:;,Q:~~(r:~V~~.P.':1",,~!~~y..V_P:~7{i~9_Q:aJ:'~~~~-1;&~"'2!;1f:;;~'l'?'~''<,~l!~~''''V~~_''i':~'~:fE'!f4.~~~~!~~
Volume Total 38 393 393 426 299 133
Volume Left 38 0 0 0 0 70
Volume Right 0 0 0 0 86 64
cSH 868 1700 1700 1700 1700 274
Volume to Capacity 0.04 0.23 0.23 0.25 0.18 0.49
Queue Length (ft) 3 0 0 0 0 62
Control Delay (s) 9.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 29.9
Lane LOS A D
Approach Delay (s) 0.4 0,0 29.9
Approach LOS D
rnf~_~~~~~~~
Average Delay 2.6
Intersection Capacity Utilization 38.3% J ICU Level of Service A
1-".-'"'\ --1\ ,tr-O
- '..,: {: ~-,;.._"'"" ~ .:~'i ,-'. .v""
,.. ,~:.~""' 'V ,10_ i W b.... .
MAY 1 6 2005
\., ,. " '..
~ c~l
~ ..t ~ .J...J
Clay S1. Residential Complex 4:15 pm 10/27/2004 Yr 2024 With Project PM Pk No SB L T Synchro 5 Light Report
RDK Engineering Page 1
J-''',
; ...:::J t'*~>
HeM Unsignalized Interse(,....m Capacity Analysis No SOi.Cl-h , .ppr6ac,hTFa:F+-/c
3: Ashland St. & Clay St. Yr.2006 w/Project, No Right Turn Lane 12/7/2004
~ -to- +- '-. \,. ~
~,~_a~art~_~
Lane Configurations .., tt t~ V
Sign Control Free Free Stop
G~e ~ ~ ~
Volume (veh/h) 36 653 613 97 57 41
Peak Hour Factor 0.64 0.83 0.96 0.80 0.73 0.55
Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 56 787 639 121 78 75
Pedestrians 2 4
Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0
Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0
Percent Blockage 0 0
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type None
Median storage veh)
vC, conflicting volume 764 1209 386
vC 1, stage 1 conf vol 0
vC2, stage 2 conf vol 0
tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9
tC, 2 stage (s) 3.1
tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3
pO queue free % 95 53 88
cM capacity (veh/h) 1123 166 609
~i?K~BE~~_EB~frl~we~_~~j.~~~~~i~
Volume Total 56 393 393 426 334 153
Volume Left 56 0 0 0 0 78
Volume Right 0 0 0 0 121 75
cSH 1123 1700 1700 1700 1700 257
Volume to Capacity 0.05 0.23 0.23 0.25 0.20 0.59
Queue Length (ft) 4 0 0 0 0 86
Control Delay (s) 8.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 37.5
Lane LOS A E
Approach Delay (s) 0.6 0,0 37.5
Approach LOS E
Average Delay
Intersection Capacity Utilization
3.5
39.4% '
ICU Level of Service
A
,',",::--I"""\,.....!\ ,~ 0
"" , :._ \ ,I"," j','" .
tl 'J.~V'~5 '.l___
MAY 1 6 Z005
(~~','", '
.. -'.!'
11"' L ""'.f
., !
; ~" ~,' ~ '~a
Clay S1. Residential Complex 4:15 pm 10/27/2004 Yr 2024 With Project PM Pk No S8 L T Synchro 5 Light Report
RDK Engineering Page 1
/5::~
HCM Unsignalized Intersec\._,' Capacity Analysis
9: Ashland St. & Clay St. 2006 wi proj. & Rt Turn Lane No S"ufh APtJrc>~), Tr"t++:lc_ 12/7/2004
..J
-+
-+-
"-
\,. .J
fmQytfm:em~eJ'.IEl?t"~L_S,~_{~I'1m__,
Lane Configurations ~ tt t~ ~."
Sign Control Free Free Stop
Grade 0% 0% 0%
Volume (veh/h) 36 653 613 97 57 41
Peak Hour Factor 0.64 0.83 0.96 0.80 0.73 0.55
Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 56 787 639 121 78 75
Pedestrians 4 4
Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0
Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0
Percent Blockage 0 0
Right turn tlare (veh)
Median type None
Median storage veh)
vC, conflicting volume 764 1209 388
vC 1 , stage 1 cont vol
vC2, stage 2 cont vol
tC, single (5) 4.1 6.8 6,9
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (5) 2.2 3.5 3.3
pO queue tree % 93 52 88
cM capacity (veh/h) 842 163 607
li\~re' ~io"'o'~1E~"-~e'''~'~'' i1r~'~" "E'~~re:""'~~" . " '~" '" :m~' i'5"~;, "~' .. - "'",,'" , ~- > .. ,,' :~-' YI
~IU:lt;l..";~.'~,'~O,. ~,;,' .'~,' ~.~ ", ~~.,_" 'g;?,C:,'::~ll.'DL~O:~~. .: . -. .' ,:~ ", ';;':,'" ': Q~ ,: _ ~';','- .~"""",_:;;c.m _:'" _ ,Y' _ _,"' _,' .'. ,_10...: t
,.>!-.,... , ,.. "'~' " '" 'Y , ,'" .. ,_ '," ",,>',; '. .''',....^'.__~, . '~_' """ ",~, . ,"" ,...." .,' ,',' ..J<, >, '." ,"', F'" 'db ,_" ~" , .'.. ,,'''', ,. ,...-..
Volume Total 56 393 393 426 334 78 75
Volume Left 56 0 0 0 0 78 0
Volume Right 0 0 0 0 121 0 75
cSH 842 1700 1700 1700 1700 163 607
Volume to Capacity 0,07 0.23 0,23 0.25 0.20 0.48 0.12
Queue Length (ft) 5 0 0 0 0 57 10
Control Delay (s) 9.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 45.9 11,8
Lane LOS A E B
Approach Delay (5) 0.6 0.0 29.2
Approach LOS D
mr~'f\lS ~,
Average Delay 2.8
Intersection Capacity Utilization 35.8%' ICU Level ot Service A
p~:~'""\r.: ';:':0
3 '~~~_'''''' 1';,~"i .'~.........~ 4._ ~
MAY 1 6 2005
C"',,~' ... ~l
.,,.J' '." 't.." ~ <' 1. .....i . _4
.'
Clay Street Residential Complex 2:00 pm 9/27/2004 Yr. 2004 Existing AM Peak
RDK Engineering
Syncl1ro 5 Light Report
Page 1
/54
HeM Unsignalized Intersecl...Jn Capacity Analysis Nc SowH. Apt ..?~.), TrA.f:.?/,-
3: Ashland St. & Clay St. Yr.2006 w/Project, No Clay St. Left Turn 12/7/2004
..,J --+- +- '- '. ..I
~t,~___rm~eJt__aB--$~J~il~~_.~,",......,~
Lane Configurations ~ tt t~ ."
Sign Control Free Free Stop
Grade 0% 0% 0%
Volume (veh/h) 36 653 613 97 0 41
Peak Hour Factor 0.64 0.83 0.96 0.80 0.73 0,55
Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 56 787 639 121 0 75
Pedestrians 2 4
Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0
Walking Speed (tUs) 4.0 4,0
Percent Blockage 0 0
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type None
Median storage veh)
vC, conflicting volume 764 1209 386
vC 1, stage 1 cont vol
vC2, stage 2 cont vol
tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (5) 2.2 3.5 3.3
pO queue free % 93 100 88
cM capacity (veh/h) 842 163 609
~~i5'lli1mE'~,"~"""~K~B'-"~88~'f,~~~~~~""
~lt<:~~~J~n,~~n~i,""~~)f#~~iJ~g4tJ~~~~,Q~Q~~,",v,p-'h,~~vJf:,1-_,,1~:J~9_P,::iJ~;~~~~~~~~~~~~~_~1
Volume Total 56393 393 426 334 75
Volume Left 56 0 0 0 0 0
Volume Right 0 0 0 0 121 75
cSH 842 1700 1700 1700 1700 609
Volume to Capacity 0.07 0.23 0.23 0.25 0.20 0.12
Queue Length (ft) 5 0 0 0 0 10
Control Delay (5) 9,6 0,0 0,0 0.0 0.0 11.7
Lane LOS A B
Approach Delay (5) 0,6 0.0 11,7
Approach LOS B
0.8
35.1% I
ICU Level of Service
A
Average Delay
Intersection Capacity Utiilization
.,~~ '""' r '\ "D
'. "''''''''''
. .~~ ,.~ ~
Mj~Y 1 6 2005
. ~ ,- d-
_ ___ ~Ii ~.; ,
Clay St. Residential Complex 4:15 pm 10/27/2004 Yr 2024 With Project PM Pk No SB L T Synchro 5 Light Report
RDK Engineering Page 1
/ k J-;
i ;.:.; ,j
HeM Unsignalized Intersec"...Jn Capacity Analysis
3: Ashland St. & Cla~' St. Yr.2024 No Build No Sou:f-J.. ApprQP-d /y,;rf+;C-,.
12/7/2004
~ -.. +- 4..... \.. ./
~Qi~:iit@l1.~~_m.m,a:e~_
Lane Configurations "I tt t1+ "I'"
Sign Control Free Free Stop'
G~e ~ ~ ~
Volume (veh/h) 36 818 767 69 51 35
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.96 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 40 909 799 77 57 39
Pedestrians 2 4
Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0
Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0
Percent Blockage 0 0
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type None
Median storage veh)
vC, conflicting volume 880 1376 444
vC 1, stage 1 cont vol
vC2, stage 2 cont vol
tC, single (5) 4,1 6.8 6.9
tC, 2 stage (5)
tF (5) 2.2 3.5 3.3
pO queue tree % 95 56 93
cM capacity (veh/h) 761 129 559
f)1~e~~~7A~~~~~aJ~}lfli.lm'~li~~~'~~
Volume Total 40 454 454 533 343 57 39
Volume Left 40 0 0 0 0 57 0
Volume Right 0 0 0 0 77 0 39
cSH 761 1700 1700 1700 1700 129 559
Volume to Capacity 0,05 0.27 0.27 0.31 0.20 0,44 0.07
Queue Length (ft) 4 0 0 0 0 49 6
Control Delay (s) 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 53.3 11.9
Lane LOS A F B
Approach Delay (5) 0.4 0.0 36.5
Approach LOS E
mtii.llIllmlljmJ;;y,~,
Average Delay 2.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 37.2%' ICU Level of Service A
RE(:E!VED
MAY 1 6 Z005
C:" ,.," " ~1 r, ,
,', ,.I f i' ., I' r""o'
to. ~ ~. j \,.,,: ~ i.' .. _ i t ~ ~~.'~ ~ l
Clay St. Residential Complex 4:15 pm 10/27/2004 Yr 2024 With Project PM Pk No S8 L T Synchro 5 Light Report
RDK Engineering r / Page 1
/ :;) Ie
HCM Unsignalized Intersec., ,n Capacity Analysis No St'U'H, Ap, leU.:!l 'T"A:-~:.p~ <'-
3: Ashland St. & Clay St. Yr.2024 w/Project, Existing Intersection 12n/2004
..J -+ +- -\... '. ~
&lat~m~~~~__mBlm~~
Lane Configurations "i tt tft V
Sign Control Free Free Stop
Grade 0% 0% 0%
Volume (veh/h) 36 818 767 97 57 41
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.96 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 40 909 799 108 63 46
Pedestrians 2 4
Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0
Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0
Percent Blockage 0 0
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type None
Median storage veh)
vC, conflicting volume 911 1391 459
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
tC, single (5) 4.1 6.8 6.9
tC, 2 stage (5)
tF (5) 2.2 3.5 3.3
pO queue free % 95 50 92
cM capacity (veh/h) 741 125 546
lJlrm~'1leij;~miE..~~iIlJrS4mws~SF2"1lsalfj~~~~m~~~
Volume Total 40 454 454 533 374 109
Volume Left 40 0 0 0 0 63
Volume Right 0 0 0 0 108 46
cSH 741 1700 1700 1700 1700 185
Volume to Capacity 0.05 0.27 0.27 0,31 0.22 0.59
Queue Length (ft) 4 0 0 0 0 80
Control Delay (5) 10.1 0,0 0.0 0.0 0,0 49.0
Lane LOS B E
Approach Delay (5) 0.4 0.0 49.0
Approach LOS E
rof~~1Ill!i ~
Average Delay 2.9
Intersection Capacity Utilization 40,8% ' ICU Level of Service A
~ ""' ~\ l~
'" ,11"-0
H ,.......... '"",-i \C. 1.._
MAY I 6 2005
/.,'~"~- ,
..., ,f;f 't
--""I
~ ~ t. ,
'" ~ -.. i1...
Clay S1. Residential Complex 4:15 pm 10/27/2004 Yr 2024 With Project PM Pk No S8 L T Synchro 5 Light Report
RDK Engineering Page 1
f""l
HCM Unsignalized Intersectl...... Capacity Analysis No Sc'i.d-J, A, ,JrO(~~), '7Y4..-t~
9: Ashland St. & Clay St. Yr 2024 w/Proj. & Rt. Turn Lane 12/7/2004
.~
-+
.-
'-
\.
4'
~<nmmMlt)l.f~~~t~1;"a-~lI'&~_~~~a~"..- ~rj.~
Lane Configurations "tt tt. "."
Sign Control Free Free Stop
Grade 0% 0% 0%
Volume (veh/h) 36 818 767 97 57 41
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.96 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 40 909 799 108 63 46
Pedestrians 4 4
Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0
Walking Speed (ft/s) 4.0 4.0
Percent Blockage 0 0
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type None
Median storage veh)
vC, conflicting volume 911 1391 461
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3
pO queue free % 95 50 92
eM cspaeity (veh/h) 741 125 543
mm'D'fi;f~aI~~1E:err~1f:[~a;~1S~m~B;:~~~
Volume Total 40 ,454 454 533 374 63 46
Volume Left 40 0 0 0 0 63 0
Volume Right 0 0 0 0 108 0 46
cSH 741 1700 1700 1700 1700 125 543
Volume to Capacity 0.05 0.27 0.27 0.31 0.22 0.50 0.08
Queue Length (ft) 4 0 0 0 0 59 7
Control Delay (s) '10.1 0,0 0,0 0.0 0.0 59.9 12.2
Lane LOS B F B
Approach Delay (s) 0.4 0.0 39.9
Approach LOS E
Average Delay
Intersection Capacity Utilization
2.4
38.6% I leu Level of Service
A
f'~-- ,"""' --
'.~ -- 1 '?..,~, lr-
, · .-.. ':.J " f \.1" .'. 0
"-"" ....-
MAY 1 6 2005
c.',., "'..
~ k, t.. ,)' "~"o!- ~a ,'. ....: If"'J
. -~. ",' :l ~.
Clay Street Residential Complex 2:00 pm 9/27/2004 Yr. 2004 Existing AM Peak
RDK Engineering
Synehro 5 Light Report
Page 1
~;
t}
e3/28/2~~5 1~:5~ 154- "92559
AMERICAN ...0.."..... ':iTONE
PAGE ~2/l4
.'
American Management Associates LL<:
2707 Main Street
Philo math, Oregon 9'370
541...929...3100
ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEY
AT
THE L.L. TAYLOR FARM PROPERTY
480 CLAY STREET
ASHLAND, OREGON
97520
FOR
R&C ENTERPRISES
ASHLAND, OREGON
Date of Survey: Febnuuy 21, 2005
Date of Report: March 14, 2005
Field Work _nd Report by~
Chade, McConnell, MS, CTS, m
Ameri~an Management Assoc;iates, LLC
SE!Ilior .Environmental Spedalist
Master of Science
Certified Testing Specialist
Industrial Hygienist
Licensed General Contractor CCB 84591
ISI
63/2B/2BB5 1B:5B
154;' "'92559
BACKGROUND
AMERICAN HOfot"'---;;TONE
PAGE 03/14
Charle05 McConnell, Senior Environmental Specialist with American Management
A~sociilte5, LLC was contacted by Andy Cochran ofRC Enterprises to conduct an
environmental assessment Qfthe '.LL. Taylor Farm'" home and property located at 480
Clay Street in &hlan~ Oregon.
PROPERTY mSTORY
The acreage has a two~story home ofapproxUx,.ately 1619 square feet. The home was
constructed in several phases in the early part of the 1900's. Part of the home h:
conStructed on dirt without a foundation. A cement walled root cellar (approx. l4'xlO')
carries some wall loading of the North and West portions of the blrilding. F1.Qol' framing
is post and beam. and the waIl~ are balloon framed. The home has three bedrooms. a
living roo~ kitchen. bathroom and large rear covered porch. Heating is dooe by a
kerosene stove for the upstsirs and a natural gu WAill heater for the do"9YIlSta.ini. All heat
was' previously done by wood fu=estanding stoves and fireplaces_ An. un-attached
garage/shop and two smaIl barns sit to the East of the home. In an interview wi1h Andy
Cochran of R&C EnteIpri5es regarding the history r.rf the property, the following
information was relayed:
, Surface water c:ontaro.ination
Soil and ground water contam.ination
PCB's
Asbestos
Leaded paint
Underground waste disposal
Underground storage tank
Above ground storage tank
Chemical storage areas
Radon
Mold smell
Home spedfications
Foundation
Root Cellar floor
Vapor barrier
Heating system
Insulation
Siding material
Roofing
Pipe wrap
Tank undercoating
None
None
N()Ue
Vinyl flooring possible
Probable
None
IN one
'Nt.':oe
None
Unknown
Some in upstairs and downs1tairS
15% on concrete wall in 1'001t cellar
Dirt
None
Kerosene and natural gas
None
type 106 fir lap sidjng over fir plank
3 tab rooting over 15# felt
None
None HECEIVED
I~o
MAY 1 6 2005
2
City of Ashland
~3/28/2665 16:56
1543/ 12559
AMERICAN HOMv~'--:TONE
PAGE 64/14
Electrical wiring
Floor coverings
Wall and ~jng finish
Window putty
Fireproofing
Guttersand downspouts
Fiber knob and tube and Romex
Vinyl, carpet
fabric wa1lp~ LU1d paint
Yes
None
some over entry ways
Garage specifications
Floor
Siding
Roofing
Finish
dirt
Wood
3-tab
none
INDOOR AIR QUALITY SA.l\fPLING METHODS
Airborne Fungal Sampling
· Air monitoring was conducted to identify and quantify total non-viuble spore
counts in the u.pstairs area of the home. An outdoor sample was not collected.
The sample was collected according to flow rates and times suggested by the
Bllalyticallaboratory. Sampling results for total fungal spore counts all;: reported
IiI3 fungal :;pore StruCture:3 per CUb.i9 meter of liir (Fungal StrUcture5lmJ). The
sample was, documented. sealed and sent under chain of custod;", to GM
Laboratorie.s, Inc:. of Seattle, Washingto~ specialists in analyzing microbial
contsminlUlts,
Asbestos and paint Bulk
· Samples were places into a Ziploc bag, labeled and forwarded to Certified
Environmental Consulting Inc. under a Chain of Custody docwnentation for
analysis.
Sample Type and Lo~atioD.5
G.M. Laboratory Inc.
Samp!e#-twe
L Air -O.Cell
2. Vinyl flooring
3. Vinyl flooring
4. Vinyl flooring
,. Blue paint
l?@.te
2/22/05
21221G5
2I22J05
2/22/05
2/22/05
D~3cciption
Upstairs bedroom
Kitchen floor and countertop
Kitchen/dining area
Upstail1l bedrooms
Walls in bedroom and ~:vell
), J
3
03/28/2005 10:50
1541__:32559
AMERICAN HOM. JTONE
PAGE 05/14
FINDINGS
Visual Findings
Property
Property iDspection found no buried tanks. A well head sits approximatly 50 feet to the
east of the home. There was no visible septic tank and drain field. There ~ no 'Visible
dead or dying vegetation from chemical spillage. There i5 no evidence ( dead or stunted
vegetation) of oil dumping near the garage area.
Home Fm.udatlOIl root celJar and crawlspace
I. The foundation of the home' is badly deteriorated.
2. The floor slopes at least 8" from the West to the East.
3. The band beam i" ;,itting on rocb and dirt.
4. There is no crawl space under the South portion of the home (1260 'sq. fi).
5. From the ~riDr extensive: rotting and bug damage is visible. Siding, trims and
balloon planking at the foundation are in ground contact
6. The support posts un~r the North section ofthe home are badly bug damaged and
deteriorated (s~c: pid:ure5).
7. There is decay in the floor joists as well as the some of the floor decking.
8. Water is visible on the floor of the root ceJlar and is moved away by means of a
sump pump.
9. The concrete walls of the root cellar are deteriorating. cracking and spalling
10. There is no vapor barrier .
II.Wooden floors in the basement are rotting and smell ~trong1y of mold.
12.Electrical wiring is a mixture of exposed romex and knob and tube.
13. Lots of insects
Exterior of the home
1. Siding is type 106 fu lap that is poorly maintained and heavily cracked OVI;:r plank
balloon framing.
2. Paint is cracking and peeling on the East and South sides of the building.
3. The band trim board on the bottom of the siding is dry rotted.
4. 1 d2 fJ.{' planking is in ground contact and is bug damaged and dry rotted.
5. Window sashes' are rotted and glass is loose
6. There are no flashings around doors and windows.
7. There is no weather barrier (tar paper) between the siding and :sub side puulking.
8. The entry porch system is sagging from posts settling l:IJld rotting.
9. WBt~r enters the root cellar t.1u'ough the door system that i~ bic~dewriorate:d.
10. The brick c~y :sy:;tQID.3 on thc North and center of the hom~ are badly
deteriorated at the morbu' joints with loose brick visible.
11. The mortar in the cinderblock cbimney on the South side of the home is
deteriorated. R E C E IVE D
12. From and ba.ck porch stairs are deteriorated and unstable.
13. The roof is 3-tab and appears to be less than 10 years (lId.
I'~
MAY 1 6 2005
Cpo .'0'" ^ II d
"'./ if 4~Snian
03/28/2005 10:50
154J 12559
AMERICAN HOM~TONE
PAGE 06/14
Interior of the home
1. The floors are oveN~pamled and unstable in the downstaits and upstairs.
2. The floor in the South portion of the home slope strongly dO\Vl1ward on the
east side of the home.
3. Romex wiring is run on the sw:face of the walls md. into plug-ins.
4. The inside of the home smells musty both downstairs and upstairs,
5. Caulk is missing from around the windows and rotting is evident.
6. The chimney systeIIl5 in the kitch~ living room and upstairs have been
Abandoned.
7. There is no insulation in the exterior walls or in. the attic.
8. There is evidence of water infiltration from staining in the upstairs ceiling.
9. The add-Qn rear porch is structurally unsound with 2x4 ceiling framing.
10. The plumbing is cast iron waste and galvanized 31lPPly and showing ~iigns of
rum-out from the pitting on the galv6l1ized pipe.
Garage
1. The gatage/cou:port (lac~ doors) is a pole type 5tructure with Ii dirt floor and is
relatively new.
Dam.s
1. The Two ba.rJ:13 arc badly weathered, the structural PQsts deteriorated and the
buildings structurally unsound.
Laboratory finding5
Air s_mpling
1. Small numbers of mold sporn inside of the building. There were significant
numbers ofinsoct body parts, and dust mites,
Asbestos testing
1. Vinyl on the kitchen, porch and bathroom floors doe5 not contain asbe:5tos.
The 'lrinyl on the kitchen countertops does not contain asbestos. The vinyl on
the floor in the upstairs is 15% Chrysotile.
CONCLUSION
The findings of this :survey is that there is no cost effective way of repairing the old
Taylor Fann House. Without building .stud walls in the interior. there is no way to jack-
up the balloon :framed home. The band beam is rotted as is the siding around the base ()f
the home which has caused the home to settle substantially. Th~re is no vapor burrier Q
1Ulder the home which probably accounts for the musty ~mel1 in the home. The sloBs IJJ
under th.e home are wet and support imec;:t growth. The concrete in the root ce~1f5 i:; ~
deteriorated and structuraliy compromised. The support strocture of the home IS badly l..U
deteriorated and structut'ally unsound. The electrical system is hodge-podge and U1lS8.fe. ()
The plumbing is near failing and should be removed and replaced. The single gJ.:azed LLJ ~
windows 81'e totting ill the~r sashes from iack of maintenance and the sashes ""ill need 0: ::E
I.t'"')
c::l
c::l
C'...J
~
"'0
c:
(TiJ
.......
r--
-":~.,-
Cr)
<;(
"'""",,
o
"""l
16g
>,,\
ti
5
Fron:PACIFIC ~ BJILDI~ i.DESl~ 541 482 0286
OS/25/2005 09: 14 # 10] P .001/00 1
replacing. The siding and sub side planldng is deteriorated and will need to be rc~placed.
The brick fireplaces and deteriorated and should be removed.
It is 'the opinion of this investigator that the home is a fire danger due to the wiriJlg and
chimney systems. The home should be considered to be stroctural1y 1m.SOund and is not
economically worthwhile to restore. Similarly, the barns are unsound and should be
removed.
Sincerely,
c
Charles McConnell, M.S., eTS, IH
Semor Enviromnenta1 Specialist
American Management Associates, LLC
!,
6
/61
03/28/2005 10:50
1541-_-;12559
AMERICAN HOM" JTONE
PAGE 07/14
GM LABORATORIES, INC.
4131 Southwest Rose Street
Seattle, Washington 98136
Telephone 2061933.1312
Facsimile 206/935-1914
.--
February 28~ 2005
Mr. Mac McConnell
American Management Arssociates
2707 Main Street
Philomath, Oregon 97370
RE: Andy Cochnn
GML# AMA-345
Dear Mr. McConnell:
Enclosed please find the data for the above referenced project. One sample (Table 1) was
received on February 23, 2005.
Air-O-Cell Analysis
The particle collection sampling substrate slides were removed, then mounted in lactophenol
cotton blue. The particulates were identified using optical roicl'QScopy tfi!CbniqUE!S. The result
of the fungal and nonfungal particulate count is given in both raw count and in particulates
per cubic meter. Both fungal and nonfungal particulates are reported in Table 2.
Interpretation of this test report requires information not in the possession ofUM
Laboratories, Inc. Such interpretation is therefore the re8pon:3ibility uf the client.
Thank you for choosing OM Laboratories, Inc. Should you have any questions ,iVith regard to
the foregoing, please do not hesitate to call.
Verr truly yours,
GM LABORATORIES, INC.
b~~~
President/Senior Mycologist
Enclos~s
/6S-
~3/28/2~~5 1~:5~
154" '92559
Sample
Number
AC.AMA.l
AMERICAN HO~~~STONE
GM Laboratories, Inc.
Table 1
Samples Submitted
Andy Cochran
Description
Upstairs
/,~
Att",,..hrTIcnt 1 _ P::lO'P ?
PAGE ~8/14
Sample
Type
Air-a-Ceil
Jlnaly,is;
Type
ANV
C€N~O
~e
\ ~ 1\)\)1
",~'i
~ ~sn\and
C\\'l 0
~3/28/2~~5 1~:5~
154- "3255'3
AMERICAN HOtyl'-,TONE
GM Laboratories, Inc.
Table 2
Nonviable Air Samples
American Manazement Associatea Client Andy Cochran
AoalYl$i~ Da~; 2/24/05
GML Sample '#: AMA.345.J
AMA. Sample #: .--
AC-AMA-l
"" ..
Description: U'Plltairs
Total Factor: 0.090
F'TlNGAL Raw Total
P A RTICULA'I'ES Count 1M3
$,.:...'.:. . .'. :;to~~::::::\,:':>::"::::::::::':':::<::::::::3~:;::'::::;:.:.: :':';.'.: :::;3.7.f\:::: :::-::>
Alternaria Sp. 3 33
Aspergillus / Penicillium 0 0
AlP ornamenl.C!d 1 11
Basidiospo(l;!s
Coprinaceae 2 ~Z
Ganodenna so. 1 11
Cladosporium large 6 67
Endophragmia 51'. 3 33
Hypha} fragments pbaeo 13 144
Mi:scellaneous spores 1 11
Perconia. sp. I 11
Pithomyces sP. 2 22
Ulocladiull1 :;p. I 11
NONFUNGAL Raw Total
PARllCULATES Count 1M3
$tiinitiili:ToialS.: .,:.:::: :::. ;:::: ';';'::; '::;:;:;:;::: :::::::~!J;lUo;:::::::;: ;:;:::: :. j3 i~3j,i:.:.:'::::-
Background particulates
Amol.'Phc:lUS 19,500 216,667
Crystalline 3,400 37,778
Combustion products
Fly ash 6 67
ChS1'l'ed wood fragments 1 11
Dander 5,400 60.000
Feather barbule 17 1'89
Insect hail' 2 22
Deunestid hastiseta 24 267
Moth scales 6 67
Manufactured fibers 1 11
... 67
Paint spheres/chips 6
Paper fibers 1,100 12.ZZ2
Paper fragments 1 11
Pollens 1 11
Pinaceae 4 44
Starch 350 3,889
Tire fragments 1 11
AUaChment2!~~3
PAGE ~'3/14
RECEIVED
MAY 1 6 2005
t
.. ,jf) I'
1 rr .c ~">'."~ ""'nd
J ,-, 1 ,,'-'. i ;.:.., .
fl3/28/2flfl5 lfl:5fl 15q~ '~92559
AMERICAN HOr STONE
PAGE lflll4
~ ~ ~ rI.l
s. ,g' ]' >
.lOI ~
I: s:: ~
g: 9= 1) .." "J (j l'I.l (")
B. 8- ~j &: ~. a y[
~ t:1' .g
';<; . r;- ei ~
Cl" ~i
0 ~
~ ~ ~
! fa ls ~
'lI
.. r\
'. 1
I\~ - Q
r-
~ ~ ~ ~
f'J \ $
! ~ ~ ~ ~
N ~ ~~
- ;1
.:;0,' ~
"
~ ~ ~ t1.I ~~
( S'
~
I ~ i ":r:I r:r.~
ii. -< ~ ~ ~,
~ [
8. ~~
~ r:ro ~ ~
':; k .eo ~
~ ~ ~
I! ~ 7i ti)"
~ {j~
~ ~ ~ [~
~ a
I J ~ CI.l ';!/ 1. ~j ~~
~ ~~ e. (")1:1)
R ~... = 0
EI .ij" ('J:l ('")
(II '. H f f a a ~.
~ ~i ~ ti.
~ ~
;~ f' ..
C n
~ ~ ~
-- W
- ~
I ....... \".
~
'.t. IJ
. .
..,
~tI) i
z ~I ~ \J
i 0
v 2 FlEC ~EI\J ED
v l:'
v
~ MAY 162 )05
j~p C itv 0 A,...t '~~nrl
,.
~3/2B/2~~5 1~:5~
154~ ''3255'3
AMERICAN HDfff'~TDNE
PAGE 11114
.:. CERTIFIED ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTn~G, INC. .:.
BULK SAMPLE ANALYSIS REPORT
AMERICAN MANAGEMENT ASSOCIA rES
SOURCE:
TAYLORFARlvl, 480 CLAY ST:REBT,
ASHLAND,OREGON
CLIENT
Q-467
TOM THOMPSON
AnN: CHARLES MCCONNELL
2707 MAIN STREBT
PHILOMA TH, OREGON 97370
SAMPLED BY:
LAB #
ANALYZED BY:
DATE SAMPLED:
DATE .ltECEIVED:
DAn: COMPLETED;
02.21-05
03~07-o5
03-07-05
ANALYTICAL METHOD: EPA, 40 CFR Part 763, Section 1, Subpart F,
A . endix A, PLMJDis ersiQo Stainin
"~~'~'::l;'~'>:': ',:S:_~." '. .SAMPLELOCA'i'JON :.':AsnS1'OS'CONnNT"'!"'''.':':~.~ .....:. ." ::::'.;:"'~~
~J{~:;H~.w ..:Irfi;:;~r.:r!',::F' :~:i~~~! . ',,:.. ,"= . ;~"~.' . . N"" :'::. " .. ' ,': ': ::;. ',~ ,." . '. ' '. ". ';': <'~';""::"~"" ....:: :, :,' '.~'':' .~~:.~:~".::.; ::' ~.::~.~::
:',!:t:,= ~~~:'.,:.:\: :,:,,:~'
AMA- . 35% CELLULOSE.
ASBESTOS~ SHEET VJNYL tJNKNOWN NONE DETECTED V1NYL, CALCITE, TAR,
1 ADHESIVE
AMA. 40% CELLULOSE,
ASBESTOS- SHEET VINYL UNKNOWN NONE DETECTED VINYL., CALCITE, TAR,
2 AOHUSIVJJ.
AMA.
ASBESTOS~
:3
SHEET VINYL
UNKNOWN
15% CHRYSOTILE
lO'Yo CELLULOSE,
VINYL, CALCIT.E, ADHESIVE
~m:~ ~rn
Kt:VIEWEIJ BY:
tb
DEVIATION FROM METHOD: NONE.
PERCENTAGES ARE ESTIMATES.
TEST IUiSUl:rs rI::R'l'A1N ONLY TO ITEMS TESJED.
* DETECTION LIMIT IS LESS THAN 1% ASBESTOS.
NON ASBE:rrOS MATERIALS ARE NOT NECESSARILY LISTED.
RECEIVED
MAY 1 6 2005
C;ity o'f Pl.sh~and
12806 NE 40TIi CIRCLE. V ANCOUVE~ WASHINGTON 98682
PORTLAND (503) 221-7904 .VANCOUVE~(360) 254-9385. FAX (360) 891-9633
. ..,.. ... . ..' l~r" .
OCUI124105
~3t28t2~~5 1~:5~ 154~ q2559
AMERICAN HOMr-;;TONE
PAGE 12t14
CERTIFIED ENVIRONMENTAL CONSUL~rING, INC.
. .:..-=
LEAD PAINT ANALYSIS REPORT
CLIENT:
AMERICAN MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATES
SOURCE:
TA YLOR FARM, 480 CLAY STREET,
ASHLAND,OREGON
CLIENT
Q467
EllS
ATTN: CHARLES Mc..:CONNELL
2701 MAIN STREET
PHlLOMATH, OREGON 97370
SAMPLED BY:
LAB #:
ANALYZED BY:
DATE SAMPLED: 02-21-05
DATE RECEIVED: 03-07-05
DATE (COMP): 03-09.05
PREPARATION METHOD: EPA 600!R-931200 ANALYSIS METHOD: EPA SW84IS 7420
. ','. "".. .",-n:"'-~, ... ....~...I<<A., '.N'"
"'l~;~". ....'.;::: '. . .......
AMA-LEAD- SHEET VINYl. WITH
I PAINT
UNKNOWN
7,400
REVlEWEDBY: ~_ ~~
RENE GARRETT
NOTJ:;: Instrument Detection .Limit :1.00 \18
Reponing Limit .25.0 ug.
Sample resvlts denoted with II "less than" (<;) sign contllin
le:l'l r.ha" 1.5.0 ug total lead, "Qed on a'O 1111. JlIllIple volumQ.
EP A ACTION LEVEL 5,000 PARTS PER MILLION (PPM)
aV
LAB DffiECTOR; ---Jl\
RECEIVED
MAY 1 6 2005
City O'{ Ashland
12806 NE 40TH CIRCLE . VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON 98682
PORTLAND (503) 221-7904. VANCOUVE~3~O~..~5~.-93~5_ ~F~ (~,~O~ 8.91~9633
. ......, .....-- .. -. ......... ... ...- -.. . ...-.. -'" . .
03/2B/2~~5 1~:50
154... ..:92559
AMERICAN HOIv., .5TDNE
PAGE 13/14
f I I i
I, I I I
i i I
I I ! I
I ! i !
I i I I
It; i
I I ! I
1 I ! I
I l i I
I 1 I f
iLl I
I I i I
I j ! i
Iii !
I I ' i
! i I I
i ! I I
I ' I i
i Iii
i 1" I,' ,+
ill, i
: I i
1 i I
! 1.- \
i I i
I I I'
i : ' !
( I ~ i
t-~! t",
. i I
! I ; i
I r t ! I
~ ; ii,
Ii' I' - 'f-""i
I ~ I i !
I~ -" "I t-
I ! I I I
I . I I
I I
J i
j j
i 1
I I
I i
I ;
I 1
i !
I l
I !
I 1
i '
l t
I i
'!,' i
!
i i
i :
i '
i I
\. i
; ~
I i
I I
I I
I I
, c
1
Wiri~
~ r .. I.... ,
.$llE!..:; I
=: s::; t c
~ ' -' i ""
;; t F ~ I
~ ' ,. 1 a .
'':''5Q..~~ .
I *" I ! I ~\ .,~
I I I ;,
~ . .. ,
I: ! ii I
I 111\;; Ii
; 'I il
i I iil 2
i i 1\1 I
Ii r\',
I i\.r
- i f ~ i
Ii , I .
I ;;;1~'3? i
I: ~1~131
a i E! i a
~ I '='" I ~ it
I 1,. ; I
:11 I t5 G
, I jj..J I
I .{:;- I~ ~
i t~ j
I ~~ ,.
I ~i~i~ f
i[I~.IE_i }
!i;SI~I~ E f
I iQ.!o.IO, i
I :::" I <l>.' I ".. I.
';"; ,~ i '!: ----,
I I I
.; I
j I . 1
, I . I
.. I j ! I
; I 1 I
! I f I
I I !'" .... i
I I I I
I ; i
! @ I
.-.1=>11- I I
I,~!~l~
:3d~!s-.
- I - ! ,
:;! j ('. I cs E
Ii l 3
j I I
I I i I
1- ! i ~
i
II 1
I I
I .. 0 i
j ""!I
;lV c.{.; c:: t
~ r::= ~_S
~~. ~=
~go :r;a
iQ a ~l
~ ~ I!
V C'
V
\f
~
.
I
&
~
I
i
i
I
i
j
i
i
I
.
i
.
I
i
I
I
;
!
i
I
I
I
I
I
i
i
I
!
i
!
I
,
i
;
i
I
J
l
1
i
I
i
I
i
i
.
.
i
I
;
i
!
I
I
i
I
'I
I
i
!
1
;
" ~
i
i
1
,
I
i
l'
j
.
I
I
I
,
I
i ! I
. i I::r. I
! I I I ~ I I
I,: j 11)1! ~ i n: i
. ! I,...... - ! -[ I
I I j'i l 0 j~. i
I I b.; I I ~!
I I !~; ! j
f I ~ I ! I
j ! !,! j !
I ! i' i ! !
i . I j i
! I rl I t
, ! Iii
-i.. i I 1\ I I
I ! tJ i ".... !, II;
I Kl ~ I
i i r,) r "~., I I
I !- I -,~ i !
I r-I -~.t:'~ I
j iQ! ~..!'\. ! i
i r'i ~:..i I
i !} I 1 !
j l... . i
i i "'p~ ! I
i 1 i j '\ i 1
r.; i "t\... 1 ,.,.,!
I t i....( I"" '\ I ."~": I!
I r--'i'~ .fe.. " I
"' , . '" ~"\ "'" ~
I S., ;''''1.\'''-,
I I '\ -~'\ .... . ,
I, I j.... i'~l~~6...:'\ 1 !
I TX I ~ .:II... j ,
L !-, "~" \i I
. _..4..-1 I'\. ,~'\. - ". '.
I l i '\~~, '\'
! i l~j\."',-J I
. I ~,~... \' i
!!..~'" ! '~Q.(t.~ l '
I I : &.... \i !
. I l'.. ~ '%'" i i
! I I,~.,.("''\.i !
! --L-J... \..("%'\.-.... ':.j i
I i j~).~~ i !,.
. . ''\~~..... .r.-.,,\ I
! I I ,i'i\' "\~ 1_ i;"
1 ! t'%).. '"1 \-! j
I I : ~~\. '\l .is i
OM , ''\ -<2'~~! ! yo I
I! l,,~'\ ~ '~!~l
I ; ~ ~, i f~ i
, ,I I t.. ~"'\. '\. i i i... !
I ! ~ 1"\ \1 ! ~ I
Ii, F'-; ''\. ,,~;\ !
I ~ \ . '-....' '
i I .q..! " 11 i! i
I I ~-. l ~\Ji:
· . I,... I I !! I
I I' if'> ! I l; I
! I ,j!) I I ~f !
I I I I": i
....,:!' ! l I I I
I ' ~ I : ,
; i i ; I -
. , ; i Ii,
I i I I : i I I
1, .; II I \! ! I
! i .~!
i i I i I
'I I! ! I
I ! I I I I
. . 1 ! I
I Iii , ,
I ; J I I I
i I i j I !
\' i I I I
I 1 .!
i I I I I I
f ! I 111/ 1 1
! i
I !
j i
i J "
, i !
I I
i I !
I ! 1
! I i
, ~ r
j I Ji
I i
i i i
! ~ <<
i I i
j i !
~ I i
i .
~ j ~--.;
I \ I
. I i
, I j
! i I
; J i
lit
I I ;
I I
j 1 r
! i i
i t 1',
I .
i j i
"'r -
1 I I
; : j
i I
'r" .
! i
! I
; I
, I
! !
I
i
j
~
i
-
f
I
, j
::r. f r, j
j 17) ~!
::. l...,r ;:s. ,
S' i~' :z i
~~~ I
~f' .. j
(II !
~ . !
.. lr '
tl\ I
10 I
!l"'. i
lS.. I
ji P. I
f ~ f
i J..... ,
I f" I
I' I I
I .
· i I
It!
:..r. 1,_ I !
S ! I
~, I' i i
~ ' f
'j I I
f ! .
I I !
! I I
! :' ,I
i
! I i
i I I
t:-; I ~ !
~ i r I
! I I
i I !
; i !
j ! i
i I 'I
iI,
~I -cl ;~.
::{ i .; H n,
1..:., i S." ~ 0:-: I
~ I I'! .~'! "r:! i
_ !l '.::>' :::! .
t"!; ,..,..~~~. i
;:::. I ~ I ~ a l.
'"' ....~',---,
~1 gh: =r
~ '1: .. r.... ~!
" I iT,\ n' j
I I' 'f I
! a; I
! ~ I
I ',-1 ,
; I I
!, i i
, I
t I j
: J t.
I, i i
I I
i ('")! !
Ii _.1 !
ro+ :
! '<I 3:: i:D
! 01 ~ 1m
! -hJ 10
i )>! - 1m
I ~-i ~ '<
i ::;;~! g lrn
! L? I U1 10
I ",,). I
I a..! I
! '1
~D"':III:!:t:.... '.............. 1 ~:
c;
~.
I
j
J
i
j
j
1
i
I
!
I
i
!
Q
i
;
;-;>1
~ ~ ~
g.~' i~
0-0 " t
" ~ '
;po,
p='I
~ ? i
.~ ~ I
~ a i"!
~. >-" .,
.;n :.:
9~ I
~ Wi
.....t"'!l
- -
.." ~ .
t'- ." .
~>I"
r.;a
r)~!
~ 0.1
....; ~ I
o..R_
'< tii i
[I
!i
I
I
:jl!
.
I
i.
I
I
It
-I
i
i
;
!
i
1--..
!
i
I
i
,
i
i
!
i
I
j
!
l
i i
I I
i i
i I
I r
i I
I I
f I
j i
j
t .
! !
l I
i !
1 t
I I
I i
i i
I I
I I
J i
I i
I i
I I
I i
!.~...,..J_i
t.. .
Page 1
TREE PROTECTION/REMOV AL PLAN NARRATIVE
Prepared by Galbraith & Associates, Inc.
For
WILLOWBROOK ON CLAY STREET
May 12,2005
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
Contrary to popular belief, the root systems of trees are not deep taproots in form. Instead most tree roots grow in
the top 12 - 18" from the soil surface and are horizontally oriented, extending far beyond the tre1e's drip line or
canopy. See tree and root section drawing Figure 1.
A rule of thumb is that a healthy tree may tolerate removal of approximately one third of its roots, and "A healthy,
vigorous tree may withstand removal of up to 50 percent of its roots without dying.,,1 If roots on onll side of a tree
are severed, it may become unstable and a hazard. Old and mature trees are less tolerant of construction impacts
than younger, more vigorous trees, and trees in a grove or forest stands are best retained in those groups.
The species tolerances for trees to be retained within this project are as follows:
RELATIVE TOLERANCE OF SELECTED SPECIES TO DEVELOPMENT IMP ACTS2
RELATIVE
COMMONNAME SCIENTlFICNAME TOLERANCE OOMMENfS
Incense Cedar Calocedrus decurrens Moderate ---
Pecan Carya illinoensis Moderate-good Moderately tolerant of construction damage.
Tolerant of some fill.
Deodar Cedar Cedrus deodara Good Tolerant of root and crown pruning. Intolerant of
excessive soil moisture; leads to Armillaria and
Phvtoohthora
Arizona Cypress Cupressus glabrus or Good (for Show considerable resistance to "Contractor
arizonica Cupressus spp.) pressures."
Oregon Ash Fraxinus oregona Moderate (for Moderately tolerant of root pruning
Fraxinus sPP.)
Walnut Juglans regia Poor Grafted onto Ca. black walnut stock, which is
intolerant of root loss. Intermediate tolerance to
saturated soils. Intolerant of mechanical injury
(poor compartmentalization) Response
constrained by soil aeration and water
availability.
Mulberry Morus alba Good Tolerant of disturbance and fill.
Poplar Populus trichocarpa Poor Mature trees prone to windthrow and trunk
failure.
Oregon White Oak Quercus f!arrvana Good ---
Locust Robinia pseudoacacia Good Tolerant of root loss and fill soil. Intolerant of
saturated soils. Sensitive to borers when stressed.
The size of the tree protection zone, the area protective fencing is shown on the Tree Protection Plan, is calculated
by species tolerance and tree age category which selects a distance factor from the trunk of the tree.
I Matheny, N. & Clark, J. 1998. Trees and Development: A Technical Guide to Preservation of Trees During Land
Development. p. 72.
2 Ibid. Appendix B selections, p. 165 - 178.
Galbraith & Associates, Inc.
/7:<
Landscape Architects & Site Planners
Page 2
GUIDELINES FOR OPTIMAL TREE PRESERVATION ZONES3
DISTANCEFROMlRUNK
SPECIF.STOLERANCE 1REEAGE (Feetoerind1 tnmkdiametfr)
Good Young
(<20% life expectancy) .5'
Mature
(20%-80% life expectancy) 0.75'
Over mature
(>80% life exoectancy) 1.0'
Moderate Young 0.75'
Mature 1.0'
Over mature 1.25'
Poor Young 1.0'
Mature 1.25'
Overmature 1.5'
1"'1 )"~1~'1'>;.$
Figure 1
Drawing used by permission of Dr. Gary Watson, The Morton Arboretum, Lisle, Illinois.
RECEIVED
MAY 1 6 2005
CiT~' C'~ ^'~'l/~:"lnd
i: \., ,J -';' il l ~"'\'; ~ - ~ li.. -
Note: This document and the ideas incorporated herein, as an instrument of professional service, is the
property of Galbraith & Associates, Inc. and is not to be used, modified, or changed in whole or in part, for
any other purpose without the express written authorization of John Galbraith, Landscape Architect.
3 Ibid., p. 74.
Galbraith & Associates, Inc.
113
Landscape Architects & Site Planners
---...--------,-------..--..--...---.....-.--.-
TREE PROTECTION SITE RECOMMENDATIONS
Page 3
GENERAL:
Trees in this section are recommended to be retained. See Tree Preservation notes on Protection Plan (hereinafter
called 'Plan') for requirements affecting all retained trees. See Plan for tree numbers, locations, and Tree Protection
Zone outlines for specific retention trees. Proposed Development is shown on the Plan.
#5 -- 18" Calocedrus decurrens, Incense Cedars
· The west edge of the tree protection zone for tree #5 falls within the proposed sidewalk. To protect the
roots during sidewalk construction, remove no soil within the tree protection zone. The sidewalk,
including sidewalk base, shall be installed above existing grade. Care will need to be given during
construction to protect the roots and tree canopy.
· Use no equipment that pulls and shatters roots, such as backhoe or trencher.
· Any fence posts which may be located within the tree protection zone are to be located so as to avoid
major roots where possible.
· During construction the tree shall be irrigated as required to maintain health.
#6 -- 18" Calocedrus decurrens, Incense Cedar
#7 -- 8" Robinia pseudoacacia, Black Locust
#8 -- 12" Cedrus deodara, Deodar Cedar
#9 - 2 - 6" Robinia pseudoacacia, Black Locust
#10 - 2 - 8" Robinia pseudoacacia, Black Locust
#11 -- 10" Robinia pseudoacacia, Black Locust
#13 -- 8" Robinia pseudoacacia, Black Locust
#14 -- 12" Robinia pseudoacacia, Black Locust
· These trees form a young grove and thicket which is located within the neighbor's yard. The tree
protection zones vary in size and do impose on the site; however the tree protection zones are not affected
by construction.
· No trenching shall occur within the tree protection zone. Use no equipment that pulls and shatters roots,
such as backhoe or trencher.
· Root pruning shall occur only under the direction of Certified Arborist. Where roots must be removed,
cut cleanly with appropriate equipment (e.g., rock saw). See root pruning note in Tree Preservation notes
on Plan.
· Any fence posts which may be located within the tree protection zone are to be located so as to avoid
major roots where possible.
#12 -- 8" Calocedrus decurrens, Incense Cedar
· This tree is located on the north side of the above-mentioned grove, on this site. The tree protection zone
for this tree is not affected by construction.
· No trenching shall occur within the tree protection zone. Use no equipment that pulls and shatters roots,
such as backhoe or trencher.
· Root pruning shall occur only under the direction of Certified Arborist. Where roots must be removed,
cut cleanly with appropriate equipment (e.g., rock saw). See root pruning note in Tree Preservation notes
on Plan.
· Any fence posts which may be located within the tree protection zone are to be located so as to avoid
major roots where possible.
· During construction the tree shall be irrigated as required to maintain health. R E eEl V E D
#17 -- 16" Cedrus deodara, Deodar Cedar
#18 -- 16" Cedrus deodara, Deodar Cedar
#19 -- 20" Cedrus deodara, Deodar Cedar
#20 -- 8" Cedrus deodara, Deodar Cedar
· The tree protection zones for these trees are not affected by building construction.
· No trenching shall occur within the tree protection zone. Use no equipment that pulls and shatters roots,
such as backhoe or trencher
MAY 1 6 2005
Ci"1
E,,,,;
.:-' ,I ~"'d
to ~ -_...11I ~
Galbraith & Associates, Jnc,
/1 ~
Landscape Architects & Site Planners
Page 4
· Root pruning shall occur only under the direction of Certified Arborist. Where roots must be removed,
cut cleanly with appropriate equipment (e.g., rock saw). See root pruning note in Tree Presl~rvation notes
on Plan.
· Any fence posts which may be located within the tree protection zone are to be located so as to avoid
major roots where possible.
· During construction these trees shall be irrigated as required to maintain their health.
#24 --10" Quercus garryana, White Oak
· This young native oak is adjacent to a proposed roadway. The roadway curb intrudes into the tree
protection zone a maximum of less than 2' on the north side. To protect the roots during curb and
roadway construction, remove no soil within the tree protection zone. The curb, including curb base,
shall be installed above existing grade. Care will need to be given during construction to protect the roots
and tree canopy.
· Use no heavy equipment that pulls or shatters roots, such as backhoe or trencher within the tree
protection zone.
· Root pruning shall occur only under the direction of Certified Arborist. Where roots must be removed,
cut cleanly with appropriate equipment (e.g., rock saw). See root pruning note in Tree Preservation notes
on Plan.
· During construction the tree shall be irrigated as required to maintain health.
#27 -- 24" Cedrus deodara, Deodar Cedar
· Two sidewalks are proposed within the tree protection zone for tree #27. To protect th<: roots during
sidewalk construction, remove no soil within the tree protection zone. The sidewalk, including sidewalk
base, shall be installed above existing grade. Care will need to be given during construction to protect the
roots and tree canopy. Prune canopy as required for sidewalk under direction of a Certified Arborist.
· Use no equipment that pulls and shatters roots, such as backhoe or trencher.
· During construction these trees shall be irrigated as required to maintain health.
#28 -- 18" Cedrus deodara, Deodar Cedar
· The roadway curb intrudes into a small (2' wide at maximum) sliver on the north of the Tree Protection
Zone for this tree.
· Hand excavate only within the Tree Protection Zone. Use no equipment that pulls and shatters roots,
such as backhoe or trencher within the Tree Protection Zone.
· Root pruning shall occur only under the direction of Certified Arborist. Where roots must be removed,
cut cleanly with appropriate equipment (e.g., rock saw). See root pruning note in Tree Presl~rvation notes
on Plan.
· Prune canopy as required for roadway under direction of a Certified Arborist.
· During construction these trees shall be irrigated as required to maintain health.
#29 -- 12" Carya illinoensis, Pecan
· This tree is located just off site near to the south property boundary, and its tree protection zone is not
affected by construction.
· Any fence posts which may be located within the tree protection zone are to be located so as to avoid
major roots where possible.
· No trenching shall occur within the tree protection zone. Use no equipment that pulls and shatters roots,
such as backhoe or trencher
· Root pruning shall occur only under the direction of Certified Arborist. Where roots must be removed,
cut cleanly with appropriate equipment (e.g., rock saw). See root pruning note in Tree Presl~rvation notes
on Plan.
· During construction the tree shall be irrigated as required to maintain health.
#30 -- 12" Cupressus glabrus, Arizona Cypress
· This tree is located within the neighbor's yard. The tree protection zone for this tree does not intrude into
the site; therefore it is not affected by construction.
· Root pruning shall occur only under the direction of Certified Arborist. Where roots must be removed, cut
cleanly with appropriate equipment (e.g., rock saw). See root pruning note in Tree Preservation notes on
Plan.
Galbraith & Associates, Inc.
11~
REICEIVED
Landscape Architects & Site Planners
MAY 1 6 2005
r",
,. ,
--"-'--
,. ,It< """,.._ 1\ ~,~ ","",,'
C" 1
'--..:.......-------,--..-.-.-.----..-
Additional Notes
1. The following trees are located in the Phase II undisturbed parcel and are note a part of the c:urrent phase of
work. Trees; #6-14,15,16,21-23.
2. Boring for utilities may be allowed within a tree protection zone under the direct supervision of a Certified
Arborist.
Page 5
TREE REMOVAL NARRATIVE
RECEIVED
MAY 1 6 2005
I.
HAZARD TREES
City 0'; ft.shland
We have carefully examined and evaluated the condition or location of certain trees which present a clear public
safety hazard or a foreseeable danger of property damage and determine that such hazard or danger cannot
reasonably be alleviated by treatment or pruning. In our opinion the following trees should be removed as hazard
trees.
#1 -- 12" Robinia pseudoacacia, Black Locust
· This tree, which is growing in a small grove with Tree #2 & #3, is in decline, as indicated by many dead
branches and a damaged, almost non-existent cambium layer. It is a hazard for dropping and breaking
branches and toppling in a sidewalk area, and is therefore recommended for removal.
#2 -- 8" Robinia pseudoacacia, Black Locust
· This tree, which is growing in a small grove with Tree #1 & #3, is not in good health, as indicated by poor
leaf size and structure. It is a foreseeable hazard for falling dead branches in a sidewalk area, and is
recommended for removal.
#3 -- 9" Juglans regia, English Walnut
· This tree, growing in a small grove with Tree # 1 & #2, is in poor condition. This is indic:ated by sappy
bleeding on the trunk, a condition which often indicates decay within. Another indication of stress and
poor condition is its basal suckering. It is a foreseeable hazard and is recommended for removal.
#31 -- 20" Quercus garryana, Oregon White Oak
· This tree has been damaged and shows included bark with wire and insulator showing near the base of its
trunk. When a trunk has included bark it is subject to splitting. It is, therefore, a foreseeable hazard and is
recommended for removal.
II. NON-HAZARD TREE REMOVALS
We have carefully examined the potential for impacts that might result from the removal of trees as contemplated in
this project and not categorized as hazard trees, and it is our opinion that the removal of these trees will not have a
significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing
windbreaks.
We have also examined how the removal of these trees will affect other existing trees to be preserved and it its our
opinion that the removal of these trees will not have a significant negative impact on the tree dtmsities, sizes
canopies, and species diversity within 200 feet of the subject property because:
#4 -- 8" Prunus dulcis, Almond
· This tree is located near to a proposed sidewalk at the southwest of this project. The tree
is in extremely poor condition as indicated by twig and branch dieback, and is nearly dead, As such it is
recommended for removal.
· Its removal will not have a significant negative impact on erosion or the flow of surface water because the
area is level. Surface drainage will continue to be within a landscaped area and the water flow does not
cause erosion.
· Soil stability will not be affected as this site is not sloped.
· This tree does not provide significant protection for adjacent trees and is not part of a windbreak.
Galbraith & Associates, Inc.
11'
Landscape Architects & Site Planners
Page 6
. The proposed nearby sidewalk will be sloped for drainage and landscape planting strips willi provide for
infiltration of surface drainage.
. Tree canopy and tree density will be mitigated by street trees and trees to be planted in community and
Open Space areas where no trees currently exist.
#25 - 2 - 8" Prunus dulcis, Almond
#26 - 8" Prunus dulcis, Almond
. These trees have sparse, thin and small canopies, indicative of their very poor health. Tree #25 has axe
wounds which have nearly led to its demise. These poor specimens are better replaced with appropriately
located healthy trees, and are thus recommended for removal.
. Their removal will not have a significant negative impact on erosion or the flow of surface water because
the area is level. Surface drainage will continue to be within a landscaped area and the water How does not
cause erosion.
. Soil stability will not be affected as the site is not erosive or sloped, with no stream flow or excessive
surface waters in the vicinity of these trees. The proposed sidewalks will be engineered to handle runoff
and will cover and stabilize soils.
. Tree density will be mitigated by street trees and trees to be planted in community and Open Space areas
where no trees currently exist.
. The very small canopy loss of these two small trees is negligible, and will be mitigated by strt:et trees to be
planted in community and Open Space areas where no trees currently exist.
. This tree does not provide significant protection for adjacent trees and is not part of a windbreak.
. Although this species will not remain on this site, it is not a rare species. Species divt:rsity will be
increased as the new residential development is landscaped, and trees added to the site in areas where no
trees currently grow. Thus, species diversity over time will not be negatively impacted.
Note: This document and the ideas incorporated herein, as an instrument of professional service, is the
property of Galbraith & Associates, Inc. and is not to be used, modified, or changed in whole or in part, for
any other purpose without the express written authorization of John Galbraith, Landscape Architect.
fiECEIVED
MAY 1 6 Z005
CiJ'\I O'~ !\ "h "-'lnd
.\.} 'j J .v. 11..... I
Galbraith & Associates, Inc.
/11
Landscape Architects 8, Site Planners
----.----------r-
~
/."'" , 0 VIr..-
rl> ;L-
~...
Upper Limb-it
Tree Service
PO Box 881
Ashland, OR 97520
Phone: 541-482-3667
Mark Knox
Pacific Northwest Building and Design
518 Washington 5treet,tp
Ashland, OR 97520
February 21, 2005
Tree Protection Plan for Clay St. Project
The Tree Protection Plan for the Clay 5t project is designed to address the needs of all existing
trees within the project. The trees are identified by number on the plan as well as by numbered tag
attached to the tree in the field. The enclosed specifications detail exactly how the trees are to be
protected. The building contractor and subcontractors will meet with a certified arborist before and
during construction to insure that the correct measures are in place. The specified tree protElction zones
(as stipulated in the enclosed tree inventory) will be drawn on the plans as well as delineated on the site
by approved fencing. A certified arborist must supervise any work done within the specified tree
protection zone. A certified arborist will conduct an inspection of the trees during and after construction.
If you have any questions regarding this tree protection plan please call me at 482-3667.
Tom Myers, Certified Arborist
DBA Upper Limb-it
I.
I ..:. I
RE(~E'VED
MAY 1 6 2005
C. J. ".-: f;....,' "', ' t', ,\..,. d
1..'1 (.i f",;:". ';.c.... I
II. J v
/1 i
--,----
Upper Limb-it
Tree Service
PO Box 881
Ashland, OR 97520
Phone: 541-482-3667
February 18, 2005
Tree Preservation Plan for Clay St. Project
Specific recommendations for individual trees
Tree # 15 Populus trichocarpa. This Black Poplar is a 70 inch diameter specimen tree. It has
never been topped and the trunk is sound without any visible wounds. The tree was last pruned about
12 years ago. The amount of dead wood in the tree is not unusual for a tree this old. Black Poplars
are not a desirable tree to have in a developed landscape because they are prone to limb and trunk
breakage. This tree would have to be pruned and monitored over the rest of its life if left to remain in
this development. Even with good care this tree could conceivably break a large limb or even break at
the trunk; Generally a tree that has no visible flaws will not break in a storm but Poplars are known to
break in high winds. After climbing this tree and doing an aerial inspection, I feel that it will continue
to thrive barring an act of God.
Tree # 3 and # 17 Populus trichocarpa. These Black Poplars have the same characteristics as the
first poplar discussed. If tree # 15 is left to stand it will need these trees to help buffet it from high
winds. Trees that develop together need their partners to survive. These three trees have developed in
this space together. They will need each other to survive. All three of these trees are currently in good
health but they will all need to be pruned and monitored to survive.
Tree # 5 Robinia psuedoacacia. This Locust has a split in the trunk with associated decay. This
is a hazard tree and should be removed,
Tree # 9 Morus rubra. This Mulberry has a split in the trunk with associated decay. This is a
hazard tree and should be removed.
Tree # 18 Robinia psuedoacacia. This is a dead tree and should be removed,
Tree # 22 Robinia psuedoacacia. This Locust tree has been girdled at the base ofthe trunk. The
top is dying. It is a hazard tree and should be removed.
The above specific recommendations should be considered in addition to the general
specifications in the tree protection plan. If you have any additional questions, please caJl me.
Sincerely,
Tom. Mye97Certified Arborist
~ n-.~.
DBA Upper Limb-it
RECE.lVED
MAY 1 6 2005
C", ,-: r" .....' .~"'~""
y,' C. i '--'" .
'''J
/1f
Specifications for Tree Preservation During Construction
1. Before beginning work, the contractor is required to meet with the consultant at the site to review all
work procedures, access routes, storage areas, and tree protection measures,
2. Fences must be erected to protect trees to be preserved. Fences define a specific protection zone for
each tree or group of trees. Fences are to remain until all site work has been completed. Fences may
not be relocated or removed without the written permission of the consultant.
3. Construction trailers and traffic and storage areas must remain outside fenced are:as at all times.
4. All underground utilities and drain or irrigation lines shall be routed outside the tree protection zone.
If lines must traverse the protection area, they shall be tunneled or bored under the tree.
5. No materials, equipment, spoil, or waste or washout water may be deposited, stored, or parked within
the tree protection zone (fenced area).
6. Additional tree pruning required for clearance during construction must be perfOlmed by a qualified
arborist and not by construction personnel.
7. Any herbicides placed under paving materials must be safe for use around trees and labeled for that
use. Any pesticides used on site must be tree-safe and not easily transported by water.
8. If injury should occur to any tree during construction, the tree consultant should t:valuate it as soon as
possible so that appropriate treatments can be applied.
9. The con~ulting arborist must monitor any grading, construction, demolition, or other work that is
expected to encounter tree roots.
10. All trees shall be irrigated on a schedule to be determined by the consultant. Irrigation shall wet the
soil within the tree protection zone to a depth of 30 inches.
11. Erosion control devices such as silt fencing, debris basins, and water diversion structures shall be
installed to prevent siltation and/or erosion within the tree protection zone.
12. Before grading, pad preparation, or excavation for foundations, footings, walls, or trenching, any
trees within the specific construction zone shall be root pruned 1 foot outside the tree protection zone
by cutting all roots cleanly to a depth of24 inches. Roots shall be cut by manuallly digging a trench
and cutting exposed roots with a saw, vibrating knife. rock saw, narrow trencher with sharp blades, or
other approved root-pruning equipment.
13. Any roots damaged during grading or construction shall be exposed to sound tissue and cut cleanly
with a saw.
14. Iftemporary haul or access roads must pass over the root area of trees to be retained, a road bed of 6
inche~ of mulch or gravel shall be created to protect the soil. The road bed ~~aI.~~ D
replenished as necessary to maintain a 6-inch depth. l" .....
I gz; MAY 1 6 ZOOS
Ci'h, ("~ !\ """l .,;
,.. I "i J . ". , '.
'~'d
,r'
~ ~ ;"...
,
15. Spoil from trenches, basements, or other excavations shall not be placed within the tree protection
zone, either temporarily or permanently.
16. No burn piles or debris pits shall be placed within the tree protection zone. No ashes, debris, or
garbage may be dumped or buried within the tree protection zone.
17. Maintain fire-safe areas around fenced areas. Also, no heat sources, flames, ignition sources, or
smoking is allowed near mulch or trees.
/~(
RECEIVED
MAY 1 6 Z005
CiJ..l. y O'~ ^ r-', "-" ~""d
i . Ii F..v. n....:1 j
--.----------------,---
Specifications for Tree Pruning
1. All trees within the project area shall be pruned to:
a) Clear the crown of diseased, crossing, weak, and dead wood to a minimum size of 1 1/2 inches
diameter.
b) Provide 14 feet of vertical clearance over streets and 8 feet over sidewalks.
c) Remove stubs, cutting outside the woundwood tissue that has formed around the branch.
d) Reduce end weight on heavy, horizontal branches by selectively removing small diameter
branches, no greater than 2 to 3 inches near the ends of the scaffolds.
e) Remove any mistletoe.
2. Where temporary clearance is needed for access, branches shall be tied back to hold them out of
the clearance zone.
3. Pruning shall not be performed during periods of flight of adult boring insects because fresh
wounds attract pests. Pruning shall be performed only when the danger of infestation is past.
4. All pruning shall be performed by a qualified arborist.
5. All pruning shall be in accordance with the Tree-Pruning Guidelines (International Society of
Arboriculture) and/or the ANSI A300 Pruning Standard (American National Standard for Tree Care
Operations) and adhere to the most recent edition of ANSI Z133.1.
6. Interior branches shall not be stripped out.
7, Pruning cuts larger than 4 inches in diameter, except for dead wood, shall be avoided.
8. Pruning cuts that expose heartwood shall be avoided whenever possible.
9. No more than 20 percent oflive foliage shall be removed within the trees.
10. While in the tree, the arborist shall perform an aerial inspection to identify d(lfects that require
treatment. Any additional work needed shall be reported to the consultant.
11. Brush shall be chipped and chips shall be spread underneath trees within the tree protection zone
to a maximum depth of six inches leaving the trunk clear of mulch.
)1"
REC:EIVED
MAY 1 6 Z005
Ci'"u C": i"....' , "-:d
· Ii. J iii I 11.",.'.. i....'4~ ill
-~~----~--~-------,------
Specifications for Demolition and Site Clearing
1. The demolition contractor is required to meet with the consultant at the site prior to beginning work
to review all work procedures, access and haul routes, and tree protection measures.
2. The limits of all tree protection zones shall be staked in the field.
3. Tree(s) to be removed that have branches extending into the canopy oftree(s) to remain must be
removed by a qualified arborist and not by demolition or construction contractors. The qualified
arborist shall remove the tree in a manner that causes no damage to the tree(s) and under story to
remain.
4. Any brush clearing required within the tree protection zone shall be accomplish<~d with hand-operated
equipment.
5. Trees to be removed shall be felled so as to fall way from tree protection zones ,md to avoid pulling
and breaking of roots of trees to remain. Ifroots are entwined, the consultant ma.y require first
severing the major woody root mass before extracting the trees. This may be acc;omplished by cutting
through the roots by hand, with a vibrating knife, rock saw, narrow trencher with sharp blades, or
other approved root-pruning equipment.]
6. Trees to be removed from within the tree protection zone shall be removed by a qualified arborist.
The trees shall be cut near ground level and the stump ground out.
7. All downed brush and trees shall be removed from the tree protection zone either by hand or with
equipment sitting outside the tree protection zone. Extraction shall occur by lifting the material out,
not by skidding it across the ground.
8. Brush shall be chipped and placed in the tree protection zone to a depth of 6 inches
9. Structures and underground features to be removed within the tree protection zone shall use the
smallest equipment possible and operate from outside the tree protection zone. The consultant shall
be on site during all operations within the tree protection zone to monitor demoliltion activity
10. All trees shall be pruned in accordance with the provided Pruning Specifications
11. A six-foot chain link fence with posts sunk into the ground shall be erected to enclose the tree
protection zone
12. Any damage to trees due to demolition activities shall be reported to the consulting arborist within six
hours so that remedial action can be taken, Timeliness is critical to tree health.
13. If temporary haul or access roads must pass over the root area of trees to be retained, a roadbed of 6
inches of mulch or gravel shall be created to protect the soil. The roadbed material shall be
replenished as necessary to maintain a 6-inch depth. RECEIVED
I ~,3
MAY 1 6 2005
C j;'-l' OJ fi,.. I, . ~ .... ,...J
Ii \. \f . ~ j Il'_~"", ~ .. i,~ ,,~ ~ '..,1
.;
EJ."
" ... '.' - ....
~ .. --
IJl)I)I~ll
I~I)III.Irl'
'f1I1~I~ AND tANJ)S(~Al.l~
Client:?~ I '
Address: 51 <6
Phone:
Bid From:
TOM MYERS
P.o.Sox 881 . Ashland.Oregon 97520' l' 503- 482'366;
Job Location:
Date: 2.. f L I
Labor:
Materials:
c~~ S~
z. 00
J 500
0.,2
~..2.
TOTA~I 3'f"CO I 0.2
f{Lf
RECEI\/ED
MAY 1 6 Z005
City C'; l\S:1~2nd
~--~~---,...__..__....
o C
.. 0
~CD~
:;:I U :::J
caC,b
- t! 1/1
~.!!C
.98
C ~
0,- ..
CD :;:I '1:1 Ql
~st!J!
I- 0 CD C
~ C ,-
CoO
N
C 1/1
~ .2
0'1:1
~ ca
OD::
u
Q)
.~
a..
(j)
>>
lU
(3
I-
J2
~
o
"E
Q)
>
c::
Q)
~
I-
J
o
z
C
o
:;:I
:s
C
o
o
.
..
.c
Cl
'ijj
:r:
:r:
al
C
.m
u
CD
~
;t
Gl
~
I-
"C
o
o
Cl
Q)
-
~
Q)
"C
o
E
LO
N
r-..:
.....
v
.....
LO
V
('t)
N
(JJ
t:::
g
(,)
~
(JJ
.g
~
.Q
(3
.....
..l<::
c::
2
-
o
-
Q)
C::"C
o 0
I- 0
c..3:
e!"C
lU m
I!!"C
lU Q)
-c::
8"2
a.. a..
e! iii
.a3
lU=
::E~
"C
o
o
Cl
Q)
-
~
Q)
"C
o
E
<0
<0
V
N
co
(JJ
t:::
g
(,)
~
~
~
.Q
(3
N
"C
o
o
Cl
I-
o
o
c..
o
LO
o
('t)
LO
LO
o
'<t
III
e-
III
(,)
o
"5
:s
~
g-
o..
('t)
"E
lU
ril
I
>.
~
Q)
"C
}
..l<::
c:: Q)
:::J >
~o
,5 E
..l<::e!
(,) .
~ Q)
(.)~
"C
o
o
Cl
"C
o
o
Cl
LO
C'!
.....
..-
o
.....
l"-
N
LO
..-
[!?
{g
o
~
(JJ
2
~
Q)
()
v
I-
o
o
c..
"C
o
o
Cl
...-..
c;;
>
o
E
Q)
-=-
..-
..-
l"-
V
o
N
III
'0
III
(,)
III
.g
~
(JJ
Q.
,Ill
.s
.Q
&
LO
"C
o
o
Cl
"C
o
o
Cl
<0
CJl
co
N
N
.....
[!?
.{g
o
~
~
~
<0
"C
o
o
Cl
"C
o
o
Cl
~
co
N
.....
LO
'<t
I"-
.....
[!?
.{g
o
~
2
~
<3
I"-
I~~
"C
o
o
01
"C
o
o
01
LO
~
LO
co
N
I"-
!!!
~
e
~
(JJ
.g
Q)
(.)
co
CD
>
e
E
~
ai
e!
-
"E
~
I
~
c::
2
I-
:!:
Q.
en
l-
e
o
c..
"C
o
o
01
...-..
c;;
>
o
E
~
.....
N
('I')
('t)
N
('I')
!!!
~
(JJ
2
~
CJl
CD
o
Qi
Cii
Ul
'E
Q)
c::
2
c..
"C
o
o
Cl
~
Q)
"C
o
E
CJl
.....
.....
LO
N
N
.....
'-
'~
o
~
!g
e
Q)
=::3
o
o
.....
"C
o
o
01
"C
o
o
01
LO
I"-
Lri
.....
CJl
.....
N
('I)
.....
N
[!?
.{g
e
~
(JJ
.g
Q)
()
..-
..-
I-
~
"C
o
o
01
LO
l"-
e>
co
.....
I"-
.....
('t)
.....
~
.{g
o
~
~
<3
N
.....
"C
o
o
01
"C
o
o
Cl
LO
c:i
..-
o
N
I"-
.....
v
.....
~
~
o
~
(JJ
.g
Q)
()
('I')
..-
..l<::
c::
:::J
I-
-
o
-
CD
C::"C
e g
c..~
~"C
lU m
I!!"C
lU Q)
- c::
8"2
a.. a..
~ iii
.a s
lU=
::E~
I-
~
"C
o
o
Cl
Q)
~
Q)
"C
o
E
I-
o
8.
LO
N
Lri
LO
r-:
co
<0
N
v
I"-
.....
co
LO
I"-
o
I"-
'~
~
!g
t:::
~
III
e-
~
~a
.s JJ
(JJ~
~~
~-
&: J..J
)
1.')
'$ .~
'<t
.....
lr'>
C>
C>
C',J
c:.c
"0
r:=
(j
~,-
f,'-".'-
....: '.
-
(."\
<:~.: .".
"
, '.
i...)
>-
<t
::E
-.,,,..
"
,
(...)
- ---------r---. --...-----
..I<:
c:
::l
...
-
.9
Q) Q)
C:-c >
o 0 0
... 0 E
c..3: ~ Q)
lE-c 0::
(11 l8 0 ~
~-c E c:
(11 Q) Q) 2
- c: 0:: -
8"2 cD c:
(L(L lE 0
Q) . - -c
U) ... Q) -c Q)
~ ::l ... 'E
_ ::l (11
(11= Q) C3
z ::2~ 0
c
0
:;:I
:s Ol
c -c -c -c -c -c
0 0 0 (11 0 0 ... c:
0 0 0 Q) 0 0 $ '>,
Ol Ol -c Ol Ol -c
.s c
0
~Q):e
:;:IuS .l!l
ca c
-l!U) ~
l!! .!! c Q) ... -c -c -c ... -c
.s 0 -c 0 0 0 0 0 0
U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
E c.. Ol Ol Ol c.. Ol
c ~ ,-... ,-...
o ,- .... Cii Cii
CI) :;:I 'C CI) > >
l!!Sl!J!! co 0 0 "<t "<t 00 0
LO E E
.... 0 !.5 Q) ~
... 0 -=-
CoN
C U)
~.2 0 ('I) N ...... 00 N 0>
e-g ..... ('I) ..... .....
o a::
....
s:
C) 00 LO 0 00 00 ...... 0
'ij) N LO ('I) ('I) ('I) ..... ('I)
:z:
:r: 0 N
m 00 00 00 00 00
C "<t .....
(\] (\] '~ '~
(\] '(3 '(3
~ ~ ~ (\]
.~ .- e- O
.~ ~ (\] (\] (\] (\]
C,l ,g 0 .g .g .g .g
ell .c: CI> ~ CI> ,(\] CI>
~ ~ .g ;:, ;:, 6l ;:,
U) ~ U) U)
..... 0.. 0.. ~ 0..
@ ~ (\] ,!!1 ,(\] U) .(\]
:c: ,I:: ,1: I:: .S
CI> 8- .Q .Q .Q (\] .Q
;:, 0 & & ':;. &
0 Q a:: ~
=It
CI)
l!! CO ...... 00 0> 0 ..... N
.... ..... ..... ..... ..... N N N
"0
C:) c
Lrl l\:')
LU =
=
.......-:) ('oo.J
.....
L =
c.
r'
( >-
:-:-~ I, )
~
I~"
~~( NORTHWEST BIOLOGICAL CONSULTING
HABITAT RESTORATION - ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING
Cal. Engineering Contractors Lic. #599428
To: Pacific Northwest Planning and Design Team
D And A Enterprise
518 Washington Street #2
Ashland, Oregon 97520
Ph. 482-0286
May 14, 2005
From: Scott English
Northwest Biological Consulting
324 Terrace Street
Ashland, Oregon 97520
Re: Completion of Preliminary Wetland Delineation Pending the Return of
Dry Conditions to. Allow for the Gathering of Final Hydrology Data
To the design team:
Attached is the Preliminary Wetland Report for the Willowbrook Project. I was hoping to
finish this wetland delineation but have been delayed due to the unusually wet we:ather. J
The last couple of months has produced record rainfall for this time of the year which has
delayed the gathering of hydrology data that is needed to complete the wetland
delineation. I expect that a week or so of warm and dry weather will provide the right
conditions so that! can complete the work.
As it stands now the Preliminary Wetland Report is a fairly accurate assessment and
description of the spring depression wetland area that exists on the site. The soils and
vegetation data have been gathered but the hydrology data needs to be gathered and
analyzed when more "normal" conditions exist. This is important to accurately map the
boundaries of the jurisdictional wetlands. The area calculation of 0.60 acres is somewhat
conservative and I expect that the hydrology data will defme a wetland area that is the
same size or smaller than the preliminary area and boundary.
I expect to complete thefina! wetland delineation by mid June and send it to DSL for -I
their blessing. Also, the Cooper property wetland delineation has also been delaYI;:d by the
heavy rains and I expect to have that delineation completed around the same time as
Willowbrook.
RECEIVED
MAY 1 6 Z005
1~1
P,O. Box 671 . 324 Terrace Street. Ashland, Oregon 97520 · (503) L188-1061
C't. Of. j'\ C'! d r;. '; d
'y . \ --,,~-. h_d I
-_.._----------~-~
PRELIMINARY WETLAND REPORT
Willowbrook Residential Development
City of Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon
Submitted To:
D AND A ENTERPRISE
Pacific Northwest Building & Design TeaJm
518 Washington street, #2
Ashland, Oregon 97520
Ph, 482-0286
Submitted By:
Northwest Biological Consulting
324 Terrace Street
Ashland, Oregon 97520
Phone (541) 488-1061
Date: May 14, 2005
RECEIVED
MAY 1 6 ZOOS
/f~
C' J,\ .1: t> ,~r . ~ : ~ ,..,I
IlY C. I ,_, "..... ._1
--~.__."_._~_._-~---~.-._-_.~------- --
Background and Introduction;
The project site is located in the city of AsWand, east of Clay street and west of Tolman
Creek road, and is adjacent to the YMCA Sports Field, along the East boundary. The
entire project and study area is approximately, ten acres in size. Please refer to the
attached project location map, and other maps and aerial photographs for more details
The landscape setting consists of a fairly flat, and slightly undulating livestock pasture
that is bisected by a small, shallow depression, located along the Northeasterly portion of
the property. This depression connects to the adjacent Cooper property wetlands but is
not a wetland due to the lack of hydric soil, hydrology and wetland plants. The Local
Wetlands Inventory (LWI) identified this depression as a wetland but the data collected
from three plots from this area did not confirm the LWI wetland findings. However,a
wet area, possibly a spring,is located in an area on the Northwest comer of the property..
The plant community found in the wet spring area is comprised mostly of wetland
species such as velvet grass, soft rush, and Kentucky bluegrass, with some buttercup and
cattails. The upland vegetation consists of typical pasture grasses, such as bluegrass,
clover and fescue, which was utilized for grazing by a small number of cattle. The site is
approximately 1950 feet above mean sea level. Please refer to the attached USGS
topographic map.
The site has historically was used as pasture for livestock grazing. Irrigation water was
supplied to the site via a Talent Irrigation District (Till) ditch. The land was recently used
as pasture for cattle, and TID water used to flood irrigate the pasture.
The adjacent land use on the north, and south consists of a small farm pasture, which
supports horses. The east boundary is the YMCA property and residential development,
and the west borders residential housing along Clay street.
The land is currently located outside the city limits of AsWand and is zoned as rural
residential, RR-5, in Jackson County. This parcel is proposed for re-zoning as suburban
residential in AsWand. The proposed development will impact existing wetlands" which
necessitates the completion of a wetland delineation. Wetland mitigation and the creation
of wetlands for stormwater detention and treatment will provide better overall water
quality in the Bear Creek Basin as well as providing wildlife habitat, recreation and
asthetic beauty for the site. RFCEIVED
General Wetland Description
MAY 1 6 Z005
C. :! r "; /\ ""'. ''''nd
"',."", ' L'. , ":,-,,..; iolw"" .
J
Palustrine Emergent Seasonally Flooded (PEMC) wetlands are located on the site, as part
of the spring system on the Northwest comer of the property. The wetlands occur within a
natural depression that collects upslope flood irrigation water and spring water. The
boundaries of wetland/non-wetland are characterized by the slopes of the shallow
1;9
2
depression, and natural site topography. I suspect that the spring is perched on tilted
bedrock which causes the groundwater to surface in this half acre area .See attached
photograph of the wetland.
Description of Site Alterations
Irrigation water was delivered to the site via a Till control structure, and then a series of
shallow ditches spread the water around the pasture. The water flows through the ditches
and laterals and collects at the northeast comer of the site. The TID structure and ditches
have been used on the property for many years, but they have recently been abandoned
and the cattle have been removed. Please refer to the hydrology/wetlands aerial
photograph for more details.
Methods and Rational
The Army Corps of Engineers 1987 Routine Method for delineation areas under 5 acres
was used. Vegetation, soils and hydrology information was collected from 10 temporary
data plots. Paired plots were established along the slope break to determine the boundary
between wetland and upland. Information on soil characteristics was obtained from the
Jackson County Soil Inventory. The depth of the hand dug data plots was 22 inches( See
data plot location map/aerial photograph for details). A Munsell color chart was used to
identify soil color.
Hydrology data was obtained from TID and from site investigation. Precipitation data was
obtained from the North Mountain Park weather station in Ashland.
The National List of Wetlands Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: Northwest (Region
9) was used to assign indicator categories to vegetation. The Jepson Manual of Hjgher
Plants of California and other botanical guides were used to identify the vegetation.
In addition the following sources of information were used:
· Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (1987)
· Natural Conservation Service Soil Survey of Jackson County
· National Wetlands Inventory Map for Ashland, Oregon
· Smart Maps and Aerial Photographs of Jackson County
· Topographic Map and Wetland Survey
· Precipitation Data from the North Mountain Park Weather Station
· USGS Topographic Map
· Conversation with local landowners
· Information from Talent Irrigation District and the City of Ashland
HECEIVED
MAY 1 6 Z005
CiJ"\1 C'~ t... ,..,'." :"'d
Ii.. ... ~~'~~~__4~,j~
Data forms were filled out for each of the 8 data plots, in terms of vegetation, soils and
hydrology. Plots that indicated a dominance ofhydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and
hydrology indicators met the criteria for Preliminary Jurisdiction Determination (PJD).
Five of the 8 preliminary data plots met the criteria for wetlands and the remaining
/9-0
3
plots indicated an upland condition. The preliminary boundary between upland and
wetland was drawn between paired plots that reflected wetland or upland characteristics.
Refer to the attached 8 data sheets and the data plot location map for more information.
The boundary of the wetland was flagged in the field after reviewing the plot data. Friar
Surveying completed the surveying and mapping of the wetlands based on the field
flagging of the wetland boundaries. They also calculated the preliminary area of the
wetlands as 0.60 acres. There are no waters of the state on the property, The wetland map
accuracy was within professional land surveying standards. Refer to Preliminary wetland
map for more details.
Field investigations took place on January, February, March, and May. There were very
high precipitation amounts recorded in Ashland during late March, April, and half of
May. Conversely, very low rainfall was recorded in January and February. The unusually
high rainfall has delayed the gathering of hydrology data which should be taken under
drier conditions in order to get more accurate readings and determine the wetland
boundaries. Please refer to the attached climatatological data for more details.
Preliminary Results and Conclusions
Vegetation: The agricultural land in question contains a plant community lying within
a spring depression that is dominated by hydrophytic species which are mostly introduced
pasture grasses including Holcus lanatus; velvet grass (F AC), Alopecurus pretensis;
meadow foxtail (F AC), and Poa pratensis; Kentucky bluegrass (F AC). Also included in
this emergent wetland community are sedges and rushes including Carex leporine:; hare's
foot sedge (F ACW), Juncus effuses; soft rush (F ACW), and some Typha angustifblia,
cattails (OBL), and Mentha spicata;spearmint (OBL). Festuca arundinacea; tall ft:~scue
(FAC-) is commonly found as a dominant species along with the hydrophytic species.
Data plots A',B',C', and D'reflect a dominance ofhydrophytic vegetation. Refer to the
attached data sheets, maps and aerial photographs for more information.
Outside of the spring depression, the tall fescue becomes the most dominant specil~s
present in an upland grass-forb community. Many of the species that are dominant in the
previously described wetland community are present as a non-dominant component of
this upland community. Included also in this community are weedy forbs including
Cirsium arvense bull thistle (FACU+), and Lamium amplexicaule; dead nettle (NOL).
Soils: The Natural Resources Conservation Service Soils Survey for Jackson County
indicates that the soil mapped on the property is 100A-Kubli loam, 0-3 percent slope.
This soil type is not listed as hydric. Kubli loam is a very deep, somewhat poorly drained
soil that occurs on stream terraces. This is an alluvial soil derived primarily from granitic
rock and is underlain by claey sediment. Typically, the surface layer is very dark brown
loam about 9 inches thick. The next layer is very dark grayish brown loam about 6 inches
thick. The subsoil is dark grayish brown about 16 inches thick. R E eEl \/ [ 0
/9/
MAY 1 6 Z005
4
City c; I\:':'~:'~>~.nd
The 4 data plots in the spring zone indicated the presence of hydric soil conditions and
typically had matrix colors of 10YR 3/1 and 10YR 4/1. Some slight mottling was also
noted in the soil horizon. Data plots A',B',C', and D' met the hydric soil indicator criteria.
The remaining plots indicated upland soil conditions. Please refer to the attached data
sheets and maps for more information.
Hydrology: This section will be completed when the site dries out and more
accurate hydrology data can be collected from the site,
Preliminary Findings
There is a 0.60acre Palustrine Emergent Seasonally Flooded Wetland (PEMC)(which lies
within the project area. Plots A',B',C', and D' all indicated the presence of hydric soils,
hydrology and hydrophytic vegetation. The wetland boundary is flagged in the fielld and
noted on various maps and aerial photographs as indicated previously.
Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination
"This report documents the investigation, best professional judgment and conclusions of
the investigator. It should be considered a Preliminary Jurisdiction Determination and
used at your own risk until it has been reviewed and approved in writing by the Oregon
Division of State Lands in accordance with OAR 141-090-0005 through 141-090-0055."
Rr.=C. CI\ICD
\ .._ L.- 'J ""-
MAY 1 6 Z005
Cj}-l .-:!" >r"~ "......d
,.. l Ci ; oj; ,/_.1 j
oJ
/9~
5
~._._-_.__._---------~----...._---_.~_._.._-----.--
: \,~,' -~:~~~ ' .~~:;' ~R~ ~ \ -or Site Location Map' ~~~~~_...'....., ' '..\'
t '., . ...,.Jl ~:~ \ " ~ b ~~~ / _~~n,~ -rl / /~ ~~-~'i k I~,.D
~ " . ,:." ..:. ~ ~. (0) ~~ J!.r -=tf- ~T::~'~- M~. 6~O :/~1
t ~:. .,~ '. . L ill '''':T~ \ .~-;;;;;I ~ · p \<~ y {~ /' ____ ~/; , . ~ . '., ; ._.
t \1'~~ 'i.~~ .. f7O'J4~ ~; \. /!PCR I ~,------- "'l' i- _(i.:' _ .,,! ,.~ -:~ ~ ' !~~
. \~I' ~~s~' " ..~. ~L ~v~~~ I ~~~I' ';' ,,',:' i ,,,.,, d;...,.d
t {~. .~. ,."'. " ~ ~ Nu~ .: "'- - ~~.~~~ <~Cl?f .~i ,'.'- '
. .~ ~ .... : ( It" I 0 'II 0 ~ P Q ;"'-~-.~_/ I . I -
_jJ/,''l' .-::a'it. . I 1"' o' II r C P') I~:' .-~ ' ~~ -,',
. ,'t)~ ~ ~ ',II r 1-. l' , . -
. .~ r~\; ., . · / Bl't'I U, · . f, we..........-=--..... .j:
;~ ~ ,:~~ "'I 5.J.. '- ~ -l~r ~~ ----=;..~~ ~\ - _ _ _ '. , i
~ .!t~~;t':W}~.;,,': . . /1134 · ~~:~ ,Z. ij~..~V~I( r ~~~~---r:_.;::.'~~~-'~~7~
t ~. ~ /' ~.. . . . ~ VDNtX F.~ kJ/r;: 813 ~ " · :; \'\~' .
. ,~~ ";:'.' .aM I.~~~. 'lll~ .~ ~ ,Iol t ~~'ro ~ II \ ',--r----.-
t '~'~~ I 'l.: I ~'" 8.9.11J') , .~v ~~" ,~~, " ,
,'] ~~: f' :~ru: . "i~ ,.. ~I~--l I /-,r~C{'o'/~~~'\~ ,,~ ;~~~
: l~lf:~~ ~(~- :~~~ . ,:' ~. proiect Locailon I~ lf~"~' 0~':-/Q'1\?~:
~"'1.I.\ h &e.. n y II ~ J ~~~]7 · , 0 P v I . II ~,,(.
. 7 m\~ "J '" .h.. . ,'t . 'U PI: iOC4~ "'.' i I\~' -1-9(,(, V\; .:. .' . " l\
. {~<1'~I~ 'a(J~... -'tIl . .. J l, (~." .' 'V;-l .~, 0n~\
1/".\;\ ;.~.~~ (~) I ' · ' · ~ am L~'..r Wr,r.--'; __1 ~','''\~\, ~ ~ ·
t ~,'\\}j)II;)fJ~d \. '; . :--~ ~ ,. I" II.' ~wo:~~cig ~.\t:~~~:~ \ j
. -::;/' '~'\ //11 ~Jl ~. ~ · II\'. -:,.31' o~~. ..f\. ~~,.--.. 1/
. \HlM. fll1Y,' t~.. ~:\\\' : r. "":' · ~~ ~ I).I
hi~ Q .:%~~:'r '~~I-- 0' ------:-~ ! "~. ~,1
a ieo/:G'~I'~~10r.:)t'~J ,~. 7~~\~~ ~. ,;:/3. _ ~. ,,{{~r~'..:'
~. iJj~ \''\ ( G =r;....-.. 1 < fl ' rT\ · ~ II ~\....
. r'. ') ~D \\ \UI ;nr~N +-. ,) '1/ ' _______' R!7 ( ~, II ~~'
· ~\:.A~~\~ ~D)((C~~"\\'~~ ~ ~,I' -, ~ ;: :.~~~
. ,;~ ~ ,=<"oj(1 )()jL--,-'-C~'. ~ ", 'Af';' : :, ~~< '~., I\~~
. I 0/.i. ~f, /1 ( ('.,'\..' - '-': ~ ~' '/ ...... \(' ", · ,\~,
10,,-, I~ijf \"'I\~ ( ~J)J~~~- . · · II ~ c::? ",,1 \.
· :,)1(. ~~'~~I\,,\\\~~~r1(QrJ/~'-~-- ~~' ~.- ~:' 1;~~:I'I'
. '. ~": ~~ I ~ A ~\.. 'j. ~ 1 ' -......1 ' :'l '~, fl' - ,r,
~~\~ r((}.~\ s\: i' · ~~~ )i;) If I, '" . ~ ~' · 'j, f':'~,:~r':l~\O ~
· 3I}/,;))))~0~~~~"~{(~~)t~~\\tr~l~ "~~'t;;,,, Y(I,~~~ · '.I! " ','.<":;E;J i'.,.,
t I ~j~ \\ \ \::'7 '( .\ '\ "'.; , /"'0.. \\\ ~'\~ POiJ //
It :;-.: · 'J I r~~ "" 'J. ~~ ,\11~ ()" ' l;' ''''- ';f~~ ~. . f' "I ~'.
. ~~'~I~ ~\' 1\." ~.\"~~I 1Y)~ l~~ ~ \ ~\~I '\ ~--. ' · ~)~ ,,-'
t ~)~ ~ '3'~ ~ ~~ ~ \ nil I ~ ~ D. . <0 tr.: ",:,!,'~';':--'
'(j{; }J~A~ ,~. ~ W0\~" ~(~ "< :::~~/~~)) v) Ip k . [- _.' :,. /1 i
, )/'~~v.,r/ " 'I f/~~~~~~ ~~~~ ~~r:v/" I. ~ ~::'--... '-..~'. '/'/ ///'--11 ~
,/,v 7,,/~ .,(1 III ~~\ 1\ ~~~'~~;:>V/, \ li ( ~ ~ ~:\ - --.. . II). Q
. ~ ~~~!(/J~~~~ ~ \~\~~ ~~(~~ ~ ~~~ ~~~/~ ,.If'~ ."0 -'~
. ~~ ~'l10~~~~((\\),i:>)\)\~~,i] lTJIj)(( /W~/~:,~ "'\\(~" !" ~ '.::' I~~
!"t'/! , ~~- ~ ({'\\) ~)J)(. 'ill/I(/I)) ~v::1~~\\\\\~:' :. / .
,
. ~~;L~~~~~I~ ~~~ ~)~ ~I~~\ ~ ~ ~::;:\ \ \~~If~"-~(:/((':::
.. 1~~)1D~~}m PI ~//f{,;~~'l,~'/~:~O<~~~~~~ ~ ~~' ~ ~:~)~. 'r!P1~;;:';:~
jt/~'1(1)1 \~ 11~<< ~~K~\ -(!J)! ;J) ~ ~ ~ n'"$~' >J~ ((1<:-:
, /-.~f; e.iri ~, '/ '(3 ))(l~r?)IJb-?J~'. ~/rl~~~ ~~\~f;j.) !" I/r.l~ "(,,
. SCALE 1:24 000
.
.
.:
tQI
~LOMffiRS
METERS
b
MILES
400) 5C(X)
1
1 (XX)
2
2<XXJ '
ROAD LEGEND
1 m p fO ved Road."...............................".......,....,
Unimproved Road ..........................,....,.......,......., =
FEET
. (fOUR INTERVAL 40 FEET
6CXX)
7000
8000
9(XX)
1 0 (XX)
QUADKANGLE LOCA lION
Trail .."...."...",.....",.,...,.......,.,..,..,",., ,...."""
. owr1 melen to ~ ~ by 3.2.808
nwr1 ~ to mdal ~ by 0.3048
1 2 3 1 Medford East
2 Rio c.oyon
3 Grlzzly P uk
4 5 4 Talent
5 Emigrant Lake
6 SLakiyou P e.ak ,
7 MLA5hland I
6 7 8 8 SldUyou Pus
o Interstate Boute
o U.S. Rou(e 0
.
9--3
ASHLAND, OJ
PROVISIONAL EDIT
~
)ltg
~l ~ ~
~
>- Q.. ~~ 8 r
~ ~~ I ~
.&, ::r~ Q ~
I ~ ~
., ~~~ ~- ~
~ m ~
< ~ 'a~ C:i ~ ~ ~
Ci ~ ! i ~ ~ ~ ~
.. ~ ~~ ~
, ~~~ 8 e ~ ~
I . M Q
. . . .
.. \J ~ f o~ OR: *~ 0~
...... :S ~
t .S; . ,,8 )(
( r:,~
1JO $
~ ~
.....
03)fbQ~
Il3JfNftI'.Z / .
----------
~L61
~
---<JL61
~~
~
-------------9961
~
~
~
~
-&1;61
.Q.
~
~
VII'
~
, ,.I.II}~:,~~/tm~~
.60'lmEZ'.t)~ ~~:
-{ MeiOI
. .110::ttll";.w/
.klliI. 01
MIAY 1 6 2005
"'.OL.~.eIlH
\tit
_._..-/~)MW6U3T~ONcif'-
~~.. ..~
,'_'- 1
i : ,...k~
/ ('
Q . / I "I ')
/7 "
. / / '
fI,,, . c~- ".'. ,....
Ii: . ~
c:
", ,t'l> 1"
~ -' ~ ~. >,~' ]~,J
,
,
,
"
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
a
,
"
M~'-~ ..
.'f- .. I
f
, i .
.1 r
~.> ~li
l ~.f
,
i
t:~~
~
"',,' -,
'~,~,
-t
1q
,!i
Ln
c::>
c::>
~
~
~
>-
<(
.~.
'; ~ 7
\ :
Hydrology/Wetland Map
East Village Project
N
+
200
Northwest Biological Consulting
o 200
,A >1.~:5'. .
" to.
i
400 Feet
"T March 6, 2002
\CKSON
COUN-ry
AR [A,
OREGON,
PAR -r s
OF
JACKSON
AN()
K LAMAT r-i CO U N1
Soils Map
,,:\~.
/::f', V'
278
: ) .
~./' ';"'1
.... ~ ,~
.......: v
43C
f".
t! . .
".t, (- - "'.- .. _ t ~
~~ fJ ':, ~
. ,,'~
TI/ .. I!\' <"~~i l -'~/ ,;" \ ~' I, """-w:J',j' ~'K~~~F-' (, I
~~ I \. ~~ / J -I - / ' . =-: ) u ',- _~----= ::::::_''___ ,
~ / · I \ ,,-__-'=J.;::::-/::; ~ ( 4 1 ~ -----J~ I~/
. ------- r 0 ~~~ ~'Z----I
'J r -- ~ l . ) ~: .,'" "'- . . rr---...-..
':,' ,~' '~, /1)" ,-($'" f\ '. . 1 . ~,~~
~~-~~" , l~~~ ~ ".' "~~P"~:~' \ ~
~I' · ": ~r--~ ~)) 1\ Be I" ': 'l\ ',' ;:-
". ~~ ~~ . ~ ) PfO<~~~~ 1/ _ ,'I ~ _ '/t/; k)0 \ ~ 5 C- J1\1
(9.. ~ ,,' 47~ ",,"/). I h ~~ ,~. / /ft If, '7111
o , {. '~~- :---- :" ~ l/'" 'I~'~O L~ /~~ ~', ~ ~ "t<~ \~
. ',0 ~~ . ,1 ..( 0'('" "Welt;T I' ~. ,~~ ',' . --.: , ' . '. . ~
, D ~, ~ ,'.. . co)' 1\~ "-.J~p ~~. \" Ii', I ~.
tf "'t::;;J- -- --- -. ./ . ,j} ~ ~
, ':. ." . " . . )~ )'\BFbl . ~11T . G. ~
.: rf~t~~'. ~.. . . P 6H . ~ ~lf: . I we ~'~...~ . ~ \ ~,h~ "_, '
'<< ,,' Hh. ", . ,'o,r ;' ,
". ~ , t:.. -~~v.'.' " ~ "'/ I - --::::: _ _ _ ..: _ B x ~. : .
~C'~ I7r'H~l~~~' '~.r'\,>~zr ~~~:,r, \ \ !~~ ~ Bllj'~
~/' : .n~~~" ...., .~' ~~Q~~~ ~I'I_~_'___/' \:~;>~{~ ." '.;~C' \~:~~~
~~ '\' -. ~~~' ~., """R~l'~~~~ ' L-i' ft~' ,I . '~.'^ "1t' ',' 5 .' ~rEMB '\'i"~0--~
o " . '- t . I;SL.. ,\ ,C 7-. H'L . ~ .. - -:- ~ E ' . "
,':, ... . ': D': "J5 ...l__~ ~~... , .Js. .... ~
~~: 0 :.10 fJBHho." . '~r - '~~. -..., ,', : ,M- . '.J, /. :.
~i_~ BtT\l'C, ,.!", ~. _ ......... _ PUblih 1\3 BHx II, {),,'" /~
r..... ~.3. <.\ II rs~, 19~. ~~~' ~. ~ .~, ~
..; "r~fl:,::?;.P~~l,~~~ d5~;~~-'-V~--J(~;~~-,"1 T. . --.~~,~~.~~;
- - :t 1t334 ~.. .., I IJ~ 'ptiBi:tl\:.:~1 '0 1{ fEMe.. '. v,
. .'~ VDNX" . ,.. 0 t~~1I ~~~~I "- o~, , /8~:J ~
. - ~I ~ J-B.9 I 1 I \'-\. ..:. L:. ~P,;EMCII-) "'=< u;;. I ; ~._.. __, -~-Wr-
r ~~ ~ I"~ · ) ~ J 1 ..... ..L ~ - '-'- ~ ..:.. tt ".. ~--7 JJl f"'k7t' /
.BtY\ .: :c:) :? Pl'~~ ..""...~ \ .~ :;~ I, "'~ '\ .' v-- ---n /~ /.
. '.' IC::'J" s~/ ~ '..a. " " ~ and ~ /" "/ /"
'- ' I.,~ ~927.1l~" ~L '== ~J' ,tJ":l '," ,~,1YY\ ~
~ o..J ,. I~ '.7'~ '/..!LT7T "ll=~HUn~?i"~ ./ t. "ru ~, , ',548 f-. ~~
~~ '. II n 4'5 r~ar ::.-:;~ N\H 'EM~D, ? C9 '!i (~, '---J. 4J_ '3 ------'
~~ ~~,~':4~ . . U~~!i ~ ~1~ ~ rn'~ m ~ ~U ~. EMC '~1 ~ " ~~. . \\ ~
~~~~~ - .~..~." ,:._,~QC~~~ 1 h ~ -WL~ff' , ~~~{ ~&~ :;( ~~I fM~ ~
':~. tI ~~ ~~ J , ~, ',,0 t'fi ~. ~:lll~~ ~~ ~U~~h': '011 ~~ 1 r ~ .,()t" lo9l.J~ r
I ~~~ r--~~ ~~' . . : CE""'~lh ~.~," ~,;=~1F\;,'J'--:-.' --'. 1\.1. ~" ?~. R'~ : ~ ~ ...__:...,.0 ~l
" . . I "I-.,-v.i/-41',v' II." "~I --.... ~. . . 0 ~ Z
. : ._~~..... . :' \ ~~Jl"H~"WUU,U 1\~~i1,9f'8~t;t:2'~~~ ,~o ::' ~~..t~_
. ~ ,~r~ ~~ ~ ~~~ . ~~~i~~ k ~r". Cl\~Jli.._ _1\ ,~~ ~ : """'. .~} '1 \ \: c- I
.. '" li~;m '/i~~W: , . ~ tJk. ,pt(~C ~ · ~', 1 !~({: " &~;~~ ~t 'tf c\ ;
--~, ~~r~i'":~ .' "'~o~ :~~-------=-~/I r f~~"o! '>" L bl',~ (V,'~I/
. ~ . -.:., . '. Ir.r · rtf · 'I ) · Co J. I
- :~"f" . ~~ '" j ~ . . .....~ . ~R '[/3 ~ ~~, ";',: ~,\ I
'\; .'~' .~... lit. lh i. . I !'. ~ . ,," ~.'~.;"'. c : ~ J ~. ~ :, ~:\ \ · ~f\ y) f ~\.~: S
l.lI<.l .' /.I!.s:. . '~ . ,Q7 II '" II "'''1' '\ ~,~ \ '"
~~~~~'lfg~~~~~_~- ,--. "Z~~~;:"'~~~"'-" i'j..~;. I -tefJ&' I' 0 .' 0" ~. ~
~.\ ~~~~~ ., '. .~~~ ~ ~ :h:,': . ~J'~ ..~:~: : 4 not,.';,,: p i41~v. _ :~. ~ \. [
I 'F-l' ';ftJIJ~. . . ]~ ~ l! ~, '~'~~~: If ~'- f:~' J~\" \: ~ .' ~-.....: . .~ -t'
~ :" ~ ., . " , , ,~ . ~ · ~ I : ~ V 'l'U h I rr "-
; ~. ~ ~ H>,i; :., ~ i ." · . . '~ 'j ~ ..d,
]r~~~Jlfj?I//P '" ,,~~. c~~:i,'r~~~ ~~~ · .:: ':' ~ '~~~~P\\
~~~v----. ::(l))/) ~~~~,... ,:m 'V"~"~.*Lt1.) , pQ ",.J ~~ '''-.: PEMe ~
~' ~~)}//0 ~"\:;:~~) \~ 10' r;f~~~~~~' T S . 0 '. 0 , ~ r->- ~~~POi
~\: :/!/krf"/I~d(/~~___~~")\ Ill. \ 0.'-..""s.'.... ~;;;.~,' Ij> ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~_ \
\ ~,\.)f((~0'JJ(1/_"\\..~'<__K-:~~ jl/(~~ni~'~~ll-:'l(,IH-~.:' [JO~'I ~\ 1\.,,.. ~
National Wetlands Inventory Map
f'~~:~~~, If:"""'-O
~,,' ''$ I, . ."" i'.\,' ~
I 1Il..- ~1i _ i 'IlJ ....-"3"
MAY 1 6 2005
/97
I
C.'
t, ~
.. .~t
.. j.. ". ~ ~ . ....,
App\,;ndix One Climatological Data
/r~
RCC!=I\fCD
l ..... ...... iI "i/ ___
MAY 1 6 Z005
("" i'> r.", ,.. ,!:."'" d
.J...} Co j-',,-,, ,1-.1 I
CLIMATOLOGICAL REPORT (DAILY)
CDUS46 KMFR 290843
CLIMEF
CLIMATE REPORT
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE MEDFORD, OR
141 AM PDT FRI APR 29 2005
.. .THE MEDFORD CLIMATE SUMMARY FOR APRIL 28 2005...
CLIMATE NORMAL PERIOD 1971 TO 2000
CLIMATE RECORD PERIOD 1911 TO 2005
WEATHER ITEM OBSERVED TIME RECORD YEAR NORMAL DEPARTURE LAST
VALUE (LST) VALUE VALUE FROM YEAR
NORMAL
............................... .......................... ................ .......................................... ......
TEMPERATURE (F)
YESTERDAY
MAXIMUM 66 445 PM 96 1926 67 -1 69
MINIMUM 50 652 AM 26 1967 41 9 40
AVERAGE 58 54 4 55
PRECIPITATION (IN)
YESTERDAY 0.11 0.59 1948 0.04 0.07 0.00
MONTH TO DATE 2.16 1.23 0.93 0.75
SINCE SEP 1 14.60 15.57 -0.97 16.31
SINCE JAN 1 5.83 7.65 -1. 82 8.35
SNOWFALL (IN)
YESTERDAY 0.0
MONTH TO DATE 0.0
SINCE SEP 1 5.0
SINCE JUL 1 5.0
SNOW DEPTH 0
DEGREE DAYS
HEATING
YESTERDAY 7 11 -4 10
MONTH TO DATE 376 380 -4 279
SINCE MAR 1 826 930 -104 655
SINCE JUL 1 3949 4215 -266 3528
COOLING
YESTERDAY 0 0 0 0
MONTH TO DATE 0 0 0 8
SINCE MAR 1 0 0 0 8
SINCE JAN 1 0 0 0 8
WIND (MPH)
HIGHEST WIND SPEED
HIGHEST GUST SPEED
AVERAGE WIND SPEED
10 HIGHEST WIND DIRECTION
12 HIGHEST GUST DIRECTION
4.2
W (290)
NW (300)
SKY COVER
POSSIBLE SUNSHINE MM
AVERAGE SKY COVER 0.9
WEATHER CONDITIONS
THE FOLLOWING WEATHER WAS RECORDED YESTERDAY.
LIGHT RAIN
Irf
1 "f ')
RECEIV~D
MAY 1 6 Z005
Ci~j c: /\:: >~:_~i~d
5/14/2005 1 :55 p~
CLIMATOLOGICAL REPORT (DAILY)
CDUS46 KMFR 280859
CLIMEF
CLIMATE REPORT
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE MEDFORD, OR
151 AM PDT THU APR 28 2005
...THE MEDFORD CLIMATE SUMMARY FOR APRIL 27 2005...
CLIMATE NORMAL PERIOD 1971 TO 2000
CLIMATE RECORD PERIOD 1911 TO 2005
WEATHER ITEM OBSERVED TIME RECORD YEAR NORMAL DEPARTURE LAST
VALUE (LST) VALUE VALUE FROM YEAR
NORMAL
........... .......... ........... .............,.......... ..........
TEMPERATURE (F)
YESTERDAY
MAXIMUM 75 1245 PM 95 1926 67 8 86
MINIMUM 46 518 AM 27 1955 41 5 52
AVERAGE 61 54 7 69
PRECIPITATION (IN)
YESTERDAY 0.55R 0.54 1943 0.04 0.51 0.00
MONTH TO DATE 2.05 1.19 0.86 0.75
SINCE SEP 1 14.49 15.53 -1. 04 16.31
SINCE JAN 1 5.72 7.61 -1.89 8.35
SNOWFALL (IN)
YESTERDAY 0.0
MONTH TO DATE 0.0
SINCE SEP 1 5.0
SINCE JUL 1 5.0
SNOW DEPTH 0
DEGREE DAYS
HEATING
YESTERDAY 4 11 -7 0
MONTH TO DATE 369 369 0 269
SINCE MAR 1 819 919 -100 645
SINCE JUL 1 3942 4204 -262 3518
COOLING
YESTERDAY 0 0 0 4
MONTH TO DATE 0 0 0 8
SINCE MAR 1 0 0 0 8
SINCE JAN 1 0 0 0 8
.. ................ .............. ..... .. ....10............... . . . . ...
WIND (MPH)
HIGHEST WIND SPEED
HIGHEST GUST SPEED
AVERAGE WIND SPEED
24 HIGHEST WIND DIRECTION
31 HIGHEST GUST DIRECTION
4.5
SW (210)
SW (220)
SKY COVER
POSSIBLE SUNSHINE MM
AVERAGE SKY COVER 0.5
WEATHER CONDITIONS
THE FOLLOWING WEATHER WAS RECORDED YESTERDAY.
THUNDERSTORM
~~
1 ~+'''l
I::)CC!=I\!CD
k_ _ 'I II.-
MAY 1 6 Z005
C" ,. '"
l"~! ..r,.....' ".' -; ,_
n,,/ (" J ,_), ,J_.i ld
5/14/2005 I: 54 Ptl
--------,----- ---
I UUU_____ -.'--- 11
Select Other Date
__.m ______ _____ _____ ______._-'
R. r::('~I\/CD
~ k_ V "- ".....
MAY 1 6 Z005
........... "'...-.. ,....,....,.... ....,..rtTr-I__A...1L ~:D:nl'.T1l~ fYl."'~rl" Tlto..Tr'llL4[nlto..T'T'UT.vn_Ii"DOn~....''''; '_L"''"!'~' ;I ': I'" d
'-~ ' t.. I ..... I ~ _. I -
lational Weather Service - Climate Data http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/cl1Jmate/getclimate.php?wfo=mfr
I Select Other Date
-----.-\ExDlanation of the Preliminary Climate Data (F6) Product
__ ______ pi
PRELIMINARY LOCAL CLIMATOLOGICAL DATA
CXUS56 KMFR 121001
CF6MFR
PRELIMINARY LOCAL CLIMATOLOGICAL DATA (WS FORM: F-6)
STATION:
MONTH:
YEAR:
LATITUDE:
LONGITUDE:
MEDFORD
MAY
2005
42 22 N
122 52 W
TEMPERATURE IN F:
:PCPN:
SNOW: WIND
:SUNSHINE: SKY
:PK WND
1
2
3
4
5 6A 6B
7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
AVG MX 2MIN
SNW DPTH SPD SPD DIR MIN PSBL S-S WX
17 18
DY MAX MIN AVG DEP HOD CDD
WTR
SPD DR
1 68 52 60 5 5 0 0.07 0.0 0 4.3 14 290 M M 9 17 290
2 73 52 63 8 2 0 T 0.0 0 3.2 13 360 M M 8 1 16 340
3 76 49 63 8 2 0 0.06 0.0 0 4.1 20 280 M M 5 1 23 280
4 71 53 62 7 3 0 0.33 0.0 0 3.8 23 130 M M 8 1 25 140
5 65 53 59 3 6 0 0.24 0.0 0 4.6 13 260 M M 10 1 15 260
6 60 52 56 0 9 0 0.27 0.0 0 3.8 14 360 M M 10 18 15 360
7 67 50 59 3 6 0 0.06 0.0 0 3.9 16 280 M M 8 20 290
8 65 48 57 1 8 0 0.65 0.0 0 5.4 21 270 M M 10 1 25 ,2 8 0
9 54 47 51 -5 14 0 0.19 0.0 0 5.1 15 270 M M 9 1 17 260
10 54 46 50 -7 15 0 0.12 0.0 0 2.3 9 290 M M 10 1 10 280
11 68 44 56 -1 9 0 0.00 0.0 0 3.1 9 50 M M 6 13 70
SM 721 546 79 0 1. 99 0.0 43.6 M 93
AV 65.5 49.6 4.0 FASTST PSBL % 8 MAX (MPH)
MISC ----> 23 130 # 25 280
NOTES:
# LAST OF SEVERAL OCCURRENCES
COLUMN 17 PEAK WIND IN M.P.H.
PRELIMINARY LOCAL CLIMATOLOGICAL DATA (WS FORM: F-6) , PAGE 2
STATION: MEDFORD
MONTH: MAY
YEAR: 2005
LATITUDE: 42 22 N
LONGITUDE: 122 52 W
[TEMPERATURE DATA] [PRECIPITATION DATA] SYMBOLS USED IN COLUMN 16
AVERAGE MONTHLY: 57.6 TOTAL FOR MONTH: 1. 99 1 FOG
DPTR FM NORMAL: 1.8 DPTR FM NORMAL: 1. 55 2 FOG REDUCING VISIBILITY
HT(:;HF.S'T': 76 ON 3 GRTST 24HR 0.70 ON 7- B A (/ I TO 1/4 MILE OR LESS
- - - -- ---------'.-"'-_...._- -.-
lllLJUUi:U vv caLlICI ..,0;;1 V 1'-'0;; - vUU"U'-' u......
........r..' .. ." .... --~._- -.. ""'
.
I Select Other Date
CLIMATOLOGICAL REPORT (MISC, INC MONTHLY REPORTS)
CXUS56 KMFR 010923
CLMMFR
APRIL 2005 CLIMATOLOGICAL REPORT
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE FORECAST OFFICE MEDFORD OREGON
223 AM PDT SUN MAY 1 2005
TEMPERATURE DATA.....
(DEGREES F)
AVERAGE MONTHLY TEMPERATURE..,. 51.8 OR 0.2 DEGREES ABOVE NORMAL
AVERAGE MAXIMUM TEMPERATURE.... 63.1 OR 1.2 DEGREES BELOW NORMAL
AVERAGE MINIMUM TEMPERATURE.... 40.6 OR 1.6 DEGREES ABOVE NORMAL
HIGHEST TEMPERATURE WAS........ 78 ON DAY 22
LOWEST TEMPERATURE WAS........ 29 ON DAY 13
HEATING DEGREES DAYS..
MONTHLY TOTAL............
DEPARTURE FROM NORMAL....
SEASONAL TOTAL (JUL-JUN).
DEPARTURE FROM NORMAL....
(BASE
387
- 15
3960
-277
65) COOLING DEGREES DAYS
MONTHLY TOTAL........... 0
DEPARTURE FROM NORMAL... -2
SEASONAL TOTAL (JAN-DEC) 0
DEPARTURE FROM NORMAL... -2
PRECIPITATION DATA....
TOTAL FOR THE MONTH..........
TOTAL SINCE JANUARY 1ST......
GREATEST 24 HOUR RAINFALL WAS
. .RAIN..
2.16 OR
5.83 OR
0.66 ON
0.85 INCHES ABOVE NORMAL
1.90 INCHES BELOW NORMAL
DAY 27-28
TOTAL FOR THE MONTH.........
TOTAL FOR THE SEASON........
GREATEST 24 HOUR SNOWFALL...
. . SNOW. .
o
5.0
o
WITH .01 INCHES
WITH .10 INCHES
WITH .50 INCHES
WITH 1.00 INCHES
. . NUMBER
12
9
1
o
OF DAYS..
HIGHS 32
HIGHS 90
LOWS 32
LOWS 0
DEGREES OR COLDER
DEGREES OR WARMER
DEGREES OR COLDER
DEGREES OR COLDER
o
o
1
o
OR MORE
OR MORE
OR MORE
OR MORE
SKY CONDITION. ........
NUMBER OF DAYS CLEAR...
NUMBER OF DAYS PTCLDY..
NUMBER OF DAYS CLOUDY..
SEA LEVEL PRESSURE............
HIGHEST 30.44 INCHES ON DAY 14
LOWEST 29.57 INCHES ON DAY 8
5
17
8
WIND DATA.............
THE AVERAGE MONTHLY WIND SPEED WAS... 4.7 MPH
THE FASTEST TWO-MINUTE WIND WAS...... 35 MPH FROM 250 DEGREES ON
DAY 13
THE HIGHEST PEAK WIND GUST WAS....... 40 MPH FROM 250 DEGREES ON
DAY 13
REMARKS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
THE MONTHLY AVERAGE TEMPERATURE WAS SLIGHTLY ABOVE NORMAL. THE
MONTH'S PRECIPITATION WAS SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER THAN NORMAL,
HOWEVER, THE WATER YEAR AND CALENDAR YEAR TOTALS REMAIN WELL
BELOW NORMAL. NO RECORDS WERE TIED OR SET DURING APRIL 2005.
~O~
-:("\C'\l~D
',- 'V ;... I " ....
MAY 1 6 Z005
,. .,- -- /"J,..,., '" ~ /''ij "....... d
.) ;", Ii il . '.....' ill ~ ~ _..I ~ '
5/12/20059:14 PN
CLIMATOLOGICAL REPORT (MISC, INC MONTHLY REPORTS)
CXUS56 KMFR 010941
CLMMFR
MARCH 2005 CLIMATOLOGICAL REPORT
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE FORECAST OFFICE MEDFORD OREGON
140 AM PST FRI APR 1 2005
TEMPERATURE DATA.....
(DEGREES F)
AVERAGE MONTHLY TEMPERATURE.... 50.3 OR 3.2 DEGREES ABOVE NORMAL
AVERAGE MAXIMUM TEMPERATURE.... 63.5 OR 5.2 DEGREES ABOVE NORMAL
AVERAGE MINIMUM TEMPERATURE.... 37.0 OR 1.1 DEGREES ABOVE NORMAL
HIGHEST TEMPERATURE WAS........ 80 ON DAY 11
LOWEST TEMPERATURE WAS........ 29 ON DAY 14
HEATING DEGREES DAYS..
MONTHLY TOTAL.. ..........
DEPARTURE FROM NORMAL....
SEASONAL TOTAL (JUL-JUN).
DEPARTURE FROM NORMAL....
(BASE
450
-100
3573
-262
65) COOLING DEGREES DAYS
MONTHLY TOTAL...........
DEPARTURE FROM NORMAL...
SEASONAL TOTAL (JAN-DEC)
DEPARTURE FROM NORMAL...
PRECIPITATION DATA....
TOTAL FOR THE MONTH..........
TOTAL SINCE JANUARY 1ST......
GREATEST 24 HOUR RAINFALL WAS
. .RAIN..
1.77 OR
3.67 OR
0.90 ON
0.08 INCHES BELOW NORMAL
2.75 INCHES BELOW NORMAL
DAY 27
TOTAL FOR THE MONTH.........
TOTAL FOR THE SEASON........
GREATEST 24 HOUR SNOWFALL...
. .SNOW..
o
5.0
o
WITH
WITH
WITH
WITH
.01
.10
.50
1. 00
INCHES
INCHES
INCHES
INCHES
OR MORE
OR MORE
OR MORE
OR MORE
. . NUMBER OF
10
5
1
o
DAYS. .
HIGHS 32
HIGHS 90
LOWS 32
LOWS 0
DEGREES
DEGREES
DEGREES
DEGREES
OR COLDER
OR WARMER
OR COLDER
OR COLDER
SKY CONDITION.........
NUMBER OF DAYS CLEAR...
NUMBER OF DAYS PTCLDY..
NUMBER OF DAYS CLOUDY..
SEA LEVEL PRESSURE.. .... ......
HIGHEST 30.43 INCHES ON DAY 30
LOWEST 29.40 INCHES ON DAY 19
13
6
12
WIND DATA.............
THE AVERAGE MONTHLY WIND SPEED WAS... 4.3 MPH
THE FASTEST TWO-MINUTE WIND WAS...... 31 MPH FROM 130 DEGREES ON
DAY 27
THE HIGHEST PEAK WIND GUST WAS....... 39 MPH FROM 140 DEGREES ON
DAY 27
REMARKS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
o
o
o
o
o
o
4
o
THE MONTH ENDED UP BEING SOMEWHAT WARMER THAN NORMAL BUT FELL SLIGHTLY
SHY OF THE PRECIPITATION NORMAL.
THE HIGH TEMPERATURE OF 80 DEGREES ON THE ELEVENTH SET A NEW DAILY
RECORD HIGH TEMPERATURE FOR THAT DATE. THE OLD RECORD WAS 79 DEGREES
SET IN 1934.
~a3
1 ~+'''l
R" r:rl::'!\!r.:D
iI. ...._ '-/' .... I ~ Iirloow.
MAY 1 6 Z005
C r- ": ,". ...." I "-'d
:' t Iv. I. _ , ,; ~."
..
5/12120059:16 Ptl
------_.__.._--_.,--~------~~-----------------_.- "---
=l
v~ ?
L Y-L I. .1 l.J .I T-i=1.T. Lei l Ll l .I l.J .1.1 I r I.T.
~ 1 _&
-
'----"
j
. I
lj~
0-'
~=1
<( .
0... -
~t1-n-~
I; ~
-'
~
~
R
1--.
1--'
H
~~
j
8 L
o I-- L
a
NEW STREET 52' ROW
>-
W
---1
~<t
81 _
~:l
V<V\
:)(X
0,?<
)<
L -I--
( .
-
'-- !-..-..-..-..-..-..-..-..-
PLAN IF TREES REMOVED
1" = 30'
).,6'1-
A2
i'-- 20' -----,
i
I.....J
i'--- 24' ----c
~
~
---J
-
~
A1
~
~
.~
~
Fe
F12 ~
~
[Sj
A17
~x
XX
'Xx
=-f'<
A18
/'
~\ ---
-:."""'~,\!~~
\:I.. ~""",....,,,,' ~I .1/1 a..,_
005
/
/
,/'
L
;'
/
v
l!i t--~-~-+-----+-~!. ^ Y-)---.lH-~'7~-~~-~----.!!- T~ U___)-_____~)_-~~ ~'--:~--~-'\
- \ l.I ...:'" ..:;.~ ;x~,,,&'";,::,:,:,..,:/ /,. ..... ~.;:.~ .' ..' .\:' ~ /Ii:' . '1 ".fo:-:-:-: .. . ~.'"" ,_. .o.'.,c.:'f-sr:, :,.,._"'"'......... . '" ..
i':'-\.rr' ..~ ~ Ii I . T1.: \ \I . L L\' I \ '.. I I"
~ci,.,n, ~~~: ::';:::':':':.":,~':.:;~.. :).':; ::Jt:~:.J/:~:; ~l:::T :.'.:.: n /:. :....~ "". .,::;lj t:>r~ . ;"",': ::....:.!,'..:?',} '7..:".:":'~.."."" .:''':C:~.'':'' ...... :h.' r.~.
~ ~~t~fi'i':~'~'::(';' . ".::: ''; \:',:; >J ~ \t/..~: ~;: ];\J :>:~J t "::""'~?'... "':'>.;X~:i!'('~~.':~~~~~11 ]~~
_ lJ:::',:';::;.,:':>"":"" L~ri.t,.. i" ...;;iJ t ~" ,'i: ",' "\'\:" ..' ,\~ 0~ 1 'i!
~ "..; ,:.:'::':- :.. ....'... . '. .. .. .. ',' t:~ .. ,.:. '..'\..' .j ..\ . . .... '.
~ ~ i':\, 5 .J~~,:::<:i>:; . ~., ., I:; .;: '.. .X',...:.... .'~ \j.... 0;,
c(.}:~< I:;:~:t:~e:' :.;::~... .':<. ..:Il- L..iJ .: '. t\J. :I~l:~ r:::J<:.;'::-cx:.) ,:; d;:,:/' :.': '. '. '. :J~ ~
i ~ .';-; "'. ......~:S.i~,;; ~... . ... ~, '" l...... .. ~ ~ ' ." \ =.... '-..<. ...---: D~ F,,~"t\ 'kl II~ .. 11
ill
~
Z'
~ ::;::",., '.' };::::,.;, .' , ~: '" . /., ',' ,(. T nil ;
~ ~.~;:::,;:~::~~ :: .::e: <. .;.. X";;;,:;; -' ~ ...... >:i':'Y)] . ,. <.::>./~ ~j( ,,:,: . .'. '':'.:,., ':..',' . I~ .:; " ~
_ ", ,~~ " I y--' . . , . '.L f'~ II ~
;; :+:.j -.... J ~: i'" : J ';c ;J: I &:l
~!_ :,,;:.;;.<:<'~. ~t:;~~., ~ /Z:' 0i I.~,. ~ ,l\v//~' J ~,~. '::}lj.m I 0 m~ l
~. ,'. >:,~\\ - .:~::", ; I ">:, f. -:'1<>, ' , ...~', ::J . i dt,'j..~y,:,,<~, ~'u"
..' : T' :"'(~ .' .~11 I"l...:. ..... ~t.~p ~"~:': ,\:,~~"":'.Vc.:'! ..'
',.
m'!:' ~.~~ ~~.. .~~ J .'.~I ~k~ ,- g1i'"":~l=-/ = 'C:!i,
WI"" "Z;~-'>i 'f" ~~~;Oi~ '''L::.~ It/I ~ __~ =. ~
,. ;t!~ ~~:-~s... '1;;.,' I /& ~ .,.,...- 1:1 I.>. ,-' I!I<:..I I
. .:: : '" : "r . ".. , .. --f-L.L, .
I ::. : .-...JI"':""^~'" . ,_,'li' ~,~ --.......'1.. ill T ,-~.
~.: ~Ii ,?.... .' ~. . . .?~~~'/ CD' ~~~. d. --. !i ~It ST~E1 ~. ROIl. ':i
~ ~: <J!'hL ...~ ..>~-~ ...... lH.~'tI .r1J'I
I ,lit....
! ' ,! ~ 'i~~ ... , /".- ,,~k...J ~ ~ ~ ~ 'J'
i~ -LlJ ~f;( / :j'~.. ':.:"';:. t ~.>~ ~:t ;;;:' :t-.,~ :t-h;if-:J,-i ~ f-:J '..~, .' ....,.~ .
~', l' -/,J' , .\ .t ~~ ~.: , '\ AU[Y ~ ......... (i~ ;~ ~ . AllEY ~:I
./ <:'1 \ "':'~ I
: 'I I i'~ .... ,,;{" , .. . >.-\ ' ~
~ po I J'<- ~.I---=. :J .' "',. -:. ;;- > ~! >'~ ~;;;; . . ~. ~ <::2: :!:: ~"N _
II ..: ~ ' i . c; ~ 00 J\ VI '" ,.,. O..~" 0 '"
.. .~ ,.... .: :e; 3l . I) <, ' t ~ ;t &
(~T<~~ . .::~ >.J,~I:t~'.:' 7ff:W.> / \ I> ~><l::........; }:::~). .:J ~ ':~I:'"'E:T : ~ ~
L::~f:j -; , . .. :::::::'::,:1 ...... '.' 'It ", .1-:::.:,j:L., !i..::.:.Y:.:. <i rr>:i :"1K' ., ---, '-.l
, ..,. Mn I
":~UJ',
C~. . .
~. ~ N.,.:
~ l:l).,.. 1 .' .
'i: ,'~~ (
Ii) q
~
-0
J:
0
'" '"
~ q
m
...
q
~
'"
q
~~ se~!;~>cn dogg~~ OJ
0.... ;; ~~O)r-(I) le~N"" le~"'O "'....
2'" Os;z;::i;=i ~'" ::E ~ "'C
~~;!;!6;:: '" c .....!cb!-~ ;:!~~ .....00 c;w ~~ . CD
:jO ~zl;l2~m "V:Sl- >:s.. : if'i a. ~o ~Ta
0'" ~Glozo ,..;!~~~~ r ~ 0' ~ ~~ G)A:l-tC') ..- iDZ
zm ....lii~Gl"O ;;Ueor ,..." ~~a.!!i.~ t:~=-o ~a:)Jo ~~ 5.0 p.l'O'
!:ccmDl 0-.... ....': 0
~m ~;i1;;;~;::> ~ O-l-l::EO iOS:~ g~ g ~ g.
........ ,.~!: !: ~O"'lI''' -O..a -n
-~ oiiii ;:; III ~~il:!!l~g Z ::G!,!):Io B:oH o~
Zz "11moo~r- :;Q(Q ct ....if .8~ "'..-
"0 ~!!l"'~mO o ~~~!j;~;g G') CDI. CD-~ ~ ~. ~.. ~
0", gat>> Z ~ [ !!l::;: ~o'O 3{
~JIl!l1<!!~C .."'" or;;;
~~ 8 Gl o m ::ozmo C "'lD ~ ~I ~;! ;..
i ~ !:~g~ ~... Q; 0 i- c;-
,.... ~~~~ ~ )> !!l. i .. ...
:jm fJl _ Z :;az::a J ~ a 3 5'
0-0 ::e!:!o -4 :;!!e ,:!e:;! -f ~
z.... "JIl~ - ,... _ N J~ ~ :; U> III ;:;:
~ .... 0 CD ~y, ~~e p \b 0 -
~ ~ 2 ~ '" .. o'
'" ~~ ~ ~~ N <
..
-0 ..... ~N"" ~ 0 ::J
:0 .0( Z .. 0::: ....,. Co '0 ..
0 ~r.o f::::er.o
... ~ ~ -tN~-'~ ~t>~~~ ~fgg~ ~~~8~ ~~~Clt;" 3
m ~... .~: ..
0 G~og-i .....!(Jt!!.~ :l
-I t:; ~~ ~- ~o~!.;n J,.-....=. ~_(lJcra.
~ ~ .1:1000 N ~~ ~"Cl::l'" ~[~g'~ ,,;0. ~.
'" ~F-Qa~. '?a~;:~
.. z>> 9'0 b~i~g
:0 -N 0 -0 _. IDee. i.o~ pD-g
~ ,;:..N......O :0 ~~ ilrJ !a~a~ iloa-oJ iO~ii"!!!
::t :.:~ !A " :Oil "I -XJcn::ro =!!t~
eo co N..,. N-- ~~~~: ;I'" m- . n " co-m:"! 1fD_ 0"
< CICI(DO)~ CD - ~ - m o. m ~~" ....1 '" gU?;
m ... ~ C> m ,. :0. " g<'" :g ~
,. C> u-cv. UlOO m m :0 '" -~i - i~
Z ,. P ~ ~ CDO :;
0 :0 ....'"
" 0 ~ g< ~ .. ~ II ..
:0 N" :;
Z m -0 '"
2 ~ ,.
~ :0 0
" 0
fJl Z '" "
0: .
" Gl '" ~
0 N..........cn~......N",o .. C
:0 ~g~g ~~~~~~o~ c z "
N:.....:...~ z ;;j if
~;i!:."$. S ~
0 ;;
m
0 ~
0
~
I
.'
-
T
..' . '.
'.' .
.'1'
~. ~~
~ ~ ~j
., i I
t
\
\
';;;
U\
1-...-
.
I
....
."
I
];
lQ STRf:E1 ~ J.ow
;;,
J
I
:
I
:
I
:
,...
.:;;
.'#1 :
~~
'i"
. d1,J ..
iii g
t:J ....1i
~
II
v ~ r AI . '..J1 .... In)lt, .... .l!,l
.! I m~~~..~~~lf
/L______~- we "m ~ we '1
1111 ,~: :ll.LJ:.7i _~l J
... ,--, ::::e=l1 '---' ~.
lAu.EY 7-! ~~ /
>
....
; ~..r.'
" "
. I'
"
f:
> ~ I
~ \h- _ ~_ __~
':= · j I Ilo.~
AU[Y I I
-----------------
*_......;;.
"';. .'.
f
.
......
i
~-
'"
..
.H\">:t . LJ
&. T ~~-
0: 7 1/
, 1.-
t~:.~~ . -
A:.
t ...
<<~--~~~---------_.._---------~..---------~---- ~~---.~-~----~._-~------.---------
o~ ~
~~ p
~ ~
~
a
li
~;.-.
;' r"2..
\,...; -:...
II
W
o
,.
q
~
~~~ C/)
iiiiiim :J:
g)g) m
'?'1>1>91" m
~~~~~ -I
)>
~
WILLOWBROOK RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
SITE PLAN
D AND A ENTERPRISE
1:I"")1\l
::tOlmOl
o./lo.::rtol
::l ....-01
.""Ill
::1-1
~Q1
./lo.O^
III Ql lD
::l~:>>3
Q. I I>>
(OlD
'11....Ul~
III CONI>>
>< (,) 0'<
s;:>
z;;U
O~
"0-
s;:~
zO
Z-l
_C
Z;;U
(j)m
~c:,
I ",
J?'-. M \;-';f
:l c") l
,:~::..~~,i. ""I r-'> . i""-' "~'" i~~,
..olo(' ... .. "J' .,,~ ..;J..'~
~ .~ ~-1"=~:~J~,:: ~Jll
1...1 .:ttIIIIP 0n "" '.-"> "").~ /-. ' .' ~'-L"
Or ,--(--r .~-- ~ ~ ti'" ...... --.)0 0. ,_ ,"'" '\) \' ,
I!...ll '-:::- . ~._,..; La ~ '.... v.. .\"1
m, "T.... '~.A~- ;,. ';I~ :."'"~O ,..~. 0. c. c;~";~.~'." ;ry:~,.\- \ 1 L :~
~} _ h/ '-".' -..-:'_.~'--....: ~ ~\~ ~
I~~ L::: --_ r;;.. ~ . i l' ,", ~l:' i~, y ~'. ~
~ ~ ,~ ~ 1 ~..~.~~~-,~- ~. /-
'/~=====~.~-~~f;;~-==~~~~"' I ~. ,. ~:~~;::':1i
'un () ,~~ C\
,q ii,
i 1:: . ~
\,. .'
i'
/~
~
-, {i'IV ~ r, , if'
\ ( (!J~ -'j (1 f} ;
\j 'j I~ I ,/ " Ii Q. ./ '
y I, h \JI I / !
/'~.\l-'-.--) i I / ,-. ~~' ~
f----. 'l';~I..\.t,; . ! i ! c-~ ! IT. L
\ -, "..t._.J CiS 0 '-"~ 'I' if
~;. ~~ 4. 'r~: .J(~
"i1V~' f\ 01 ,l r" ~""'--"- 0-
i \'i I? ~1 ! j t1 ~,~ ./'
( '\111'\ ! ~ I. 'f..
~:U.l \01 r1 J -'.
;, \~ .;:~ '-, ,,! <lfx; 0 (J 0 ,') ~ "'.....,l, !
f-~! L~ ,/--------. fi,
~~~h!i/I,~ ,-. il \. . ,"""" .
qlt 1 ~/ ~~:
\\ \:~1l If'\; \
~\\~J)\
I' i ..
/) Ill!)
'( (,1/ / !
t \ 'It.! i
t 1//1 r1
j vtl//
/', U!
"',1:- t
-t"~9
i 'y"j ()
~: /!/
IIp/(
; '7C.~
'0 ~) V r
) U -'1: (.f:. _-~.~ ,-.:c..-,
,Q ',\ \ ~:'_ ';'" ""t~.-
'S" I' X)..~ ~ ~~ -<
f"J <J:\ - _::;x~ '1~.-:>..:a...::7411
~ ._. tl,/" _' /'" "'" ~~~..,,..-') ,r-,_ ,?.rr'-'-
C} '''':;-'' ~ <:) .' ("i,. . ..........,.-..... X'--"-
Or.) ~~" ':)(':1 !~-..._~~..,. l L .......
o "~,,(r~ "x':j ,~,., A
;l"') "', ,:) ,.r') , . .- /'/ . ,-. ~ 0
~ ,.., "',~ ", ,~-:(. '- c i ::d 0
(~i <)'0\ ,(I c, '..; .'" 0. c:
i1 ~\i<:)O~;o \;~ ;11-~
\.u )
~~ .~M'"
~-~--
,/ \~..\ -'-1 -'"
/ 'J uO "': ".
.! lr...,oV ~ '
~.----~~~) V::"--.}<.. _Cl.~%-r-
, --', /...., \ (-< )>
("2 \., I r" ; :J> r;;
-.1' 'r ~ Wi- \, "'0
, ! ,""I! , . <p-::~-;-:~Pij fR
,.1 !,~~/~~~ ..f ~ ',Y' ;;'~N'6' ~?".~-
(1 .'~', ,..f'-,
t \ ., ~r !I---..:) ~~~
~~' \, " !t/~~~~ ~ ~ ~-~~ \
~ 0 'r:~ i.7'i' } :."'" 3: ,
L' \~t~~J f~j L~
--4 (, ~\! , \; \'}-1 \:-:C....: ~
f -' J<f1 ~\ \! ~ }/-- ;; --f-!r
~O /"'" \\; ,i ...... __~~ i m
. ",,\ >\' . <-~->;}1 I L.z-
)'\ '''f \, ..1 ,~. ; -.--!-)
,.\ \.i ~ \.-'-'--t l --,., .)$t"'
,.., U \"$58';:"'; " "'-''''"'J'-.I, (!.,)
;;t; - ~ lit .--""'- ~ -......): ~ ....-..
=_ ,". \ ' I ,l. /" - '1::=."" ....,
~S~') / .:J/ ,? 'J ~l :'<..; ~ -.
r \ '~::.. ^"_/, _-->, ~ -: r-- '- .
t ("---.............\. '_~ :r:.:;:~- ... ... ~, "!"
t;)-<~y{,;~i ;r-'~:}'-): ~;-~
f:-! ( \~_I:JJ; /r~~--t
r.^:'~1.~.\,., . - ~ , .?J L_
--' ,-f_'~--';~:,\ / 0 ":~1- f(";'
r- , 1 ~,..{ ~r.. ,9-"1.\ - ~ <J f--:;. _-,:
\ ~~ ,..;. ............~ ..... ........ .i \-{,-" ~- t ~.
t''''',,,,,~~..... i....( '":~""'-"t--,j. l~~ ~.~!~ ._-~
l--/-".... 1~ \ \,- l r J.;; (7.""....' ',....-=..,..~.. -~~.::~r-e:~~;..
\"t.\----~~~~~-d k~"''':;' ;::..
~ II f '" k %)0)>
-'>~''^ ',i \t 'l.~-J- f Cii "TI "G
~~"'~-'C;:o, "~-;::;-~--C?~ \,~ !. ~ i~
~ -"! Fr: -i.):j ,,\..1 vi t ,t., ' m 0 ! 0
\ ~ W ~: /,.",\ r (j~.:-_......~ \'0 ~. c:_
.. ;\ l 'y: 1x ' . / \ .. ",-,--. "'-'-. .---~ -~--
--'. -J .:.- r ~'~,\ "'>.J/ ) 04 ~ c" 1 ."v n -...- I ~
.~(~, ~~' ~ \~ ~~;-""-"~ r' --.,~ Jj J t.., ~
~-~~~l ~ LY- , ~~ ~~ fri~- .'~, ~ ( /1. -"'~'-'__
",~ I-~__~A~-. \~~/\(~--.A-'-) ~.::-_.~ ~, -; ,/"
" '"",~, \A ' .~. ~'-{~~ /i r:=--:..:>.....J I ('...r,,-.
. "", ',~"'" . i" /1......( ~--~~ k-, ~!
,,..,'" '~1---, '::::;::;'" 1(1.1,\ i i ,((>-,-'1 ,?::o" \\~::~:r:Q"
..,~" <-'\I'~'\~I' ^~:"'j;,~=-.L >~
r~,_ C "~: ~ (,1'-) t~~~__n~~--~~ )
I ~.. - .--. ~.. . o'!' (', ~ --~-,~
-::-f~'" . ~ ~~~~~~~~::;~~~=~~~--~~ --:=
.199f.'f J,,",~
t --.-. .i-:>------,.-.
-'-,-. {
....~
''',
-v.--~/~'\__~-=-. /
JneJQ .(
--.
"'----
"'"'-~-.....-
\
,
"
..)
(~rj'"
f
::UO
::UO
o.c:
z
~
: J) 'I.,\.,
i~J,-.........._-j
.. .
>./"
\i,
. ,\; ~-',.......-. -
" ...... //4{ --r "l .r.......~~---,~
!/'(l - _I" 5 Y
~~E-_ ".
t9JJ
--'---~
;.
11 '
......."..---/
Q "!
~
}
n
.
~
r-
m
"',
/J
;:VL
~.;1.J
.l"'-'f
f5..
'.:t
"';" (T'-" '.. : ;
.:.L---' :-Ji I
.f )'-.... ..~s''i'.
8
-<
3:
00
-)>
~~
o
o
v ~)
"TI
iii
r-
i
~' f V ./~/';':1---"-_.'~---_._-__~__
'~;~~~~J~t~l~ .
()-lr.;~ J "
I ,~ l
'----:-.-;:;: j . i
I ~
:, !
~L..J
'""- '_'<)L~-~~-~~I';
..c;=+-~. ;'\ ~'" \
.....,.../ :__, \._ _---:x:l.
}." ~~.;
~
s
, ',......" .~:::~
.r~.: .
.,.:,
.<)l
en
o
)>
r
m
l~
I
I fRO
-<0
i fRz
-t-t
m-
13:~
:r-~'--
" ('::,.
o
......
.:"1
::u0
N~
.....
:;~
II
....
o
o
~
,A:;"l-lt.-A:a;:'; '~..
~
\')
~
alAl
-<-
)>~
"G-t
"G-t
l:c:
O::u
)>z
~>
Z
m
~ en
In J:
m
~ m
@ -I
)>
N
WILLOWBROOK RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
OVERALL AREA PLAN
D AND A ENTERPRISE
"'D""'~t.)
[~:r~
Gl.:iOl
::1-1
po.
toof
GlQ),,_
:I~N3
Q. I .
lOll)
-n~~~
=~~~
>>
z::O
o~
,,-
~~
z-4
_C
Z::o
G)m
\ \
.\\
\, ','
\,
\. ~-,\ '-
';\:2:
t
\
~,
~) '~
\,
\
...
\, \.,
\,~
.-\ '\
\>.... i \
-'......j
.'\ .
\.
\ \\
o
o
c:
z
:;!
\
tl
~\
.' \:. ,,'
~~.--,.
--~
-..
'j
" ~'~
2'->1'
G
'cn-"'.
o % r-
..:.. 0 ~
--==..:..~ ~
<X} ~
O ;er'"
rTi'fR
z ""~,
-t
IT1:>
::u '"
-f'"
'."
SPR!Ni3';
'-'....-'-f tW""
I~
~I;
~i
'"
?=:-,
-p
'"
"'to
,::,~
"
,,-
",,,
I'"
",'"
"'.
g~
. '"
..,..,
~~
~J:'
'"
"'0
.::~
""
,,0
"'z
I
",,,,
-"
",,,,
"'8
>. >. >. >. Sf to
-0 -0 ~ -0 \'.'
-0 il il "l
'" () ~
() () () () i;
"i ~ "i "i D '"
!'" " D '" c<:
'" .,
Ui
'" 12
~ '"
-0
~
D D D D to D
>. >. >. >. >. >.
~ ~ ~ f;1 ~ ~
() ()
<.: <.:
D C)
'" '"
/ ~ '. .:',. : \':...</~
, "
", ~ - ~:
~
',)
_'::-f\
,,-''1---
'-{
'"...-- '1 r'
? ~::... "';~,n / ;, :L-=^",~X~~~.5S}-'^~'~"'-' ~,:,'__ - -'m',~'f'm:-:____=_ '~}~nn ':,,}-: - ~ - ;: ~~"~,,,l~" ',-- -'.m~"'-;' ~~""",,~
\> -)-""""!.'~'--'-""--~----:::i:!'--~'.'''''_''''-''',':;'U!!!,.l!!!.!!!!.!!!L-,''~---.l!'''~~T"'''J!!!U!!U!!U.-'I.- -- - - --.....!!!!!"")!!.J!!!!,~~~~!!"'-....
.--------~ , tc<,.. .. ....... .-':'.:_~i'w~L~ -.-....------- ,......___~...fi.Jiii_____._.......___... ----eX. 'w"-
.,
()
y ~]:pl~~'~':-":?::<':~'c;'~nf~"",r-
f--~~ 1(-"'-'/' ",(~, _' c: ,;: ~m_: I ;
:; ~ 1''- 'I I I"
~ ",,':...:' I.....' ( ; r 1 5<
I I 1 i ~
-'lJ:J \J., ,~..
"", J
I.: r:1 8.SS ' -,
1 ~ i (:r~__m_-n:,ri'-") ... nn:fi
, J c,,, ,; :, j: Ii, [,. I 0>'"
, " r! / ClJ,U ' ~_mmm... Ii
"\ f-~'(' "" I"'-___~ I: I /',\
"'-/:"1 ;;-/ ' ,"', , L::0-, ,"
,'/~ ",,; , ' ,/\ - "~ f~ i[,,:;/ , J,'
/ 'Y<j ~ ;- ~;"'-J" t
~>-\\ . , : ~~,/ ~'/; )'! '/C,i",. 'C:h~~,..J# .~~/
I> 1 ~ 1/<./', " ,. ") ...,"';/ "I.x~ / I,~~~l~~~~j ., f
~ /', -' y \ /i~ " / I I
( C""";:: ~ /", ~ ,(/V,-' '~~l ',< '. "'.".; / /
I (/'~"/' /'-',", /1-' ::/'- ~~~~I
I '\' :~J~l\, >~,>)"A'" ,<, , -"<~'~...J
\ ~-/ /I'RV, //) ",.' ~,. ~ 'm" .....,'""_~~~, '
~ . '\ /I X~ ',/" >;/ / I ',,-- " --.....:'.z '" .. p
\.'\. ,.~ ,.>X',,:-. ,/,' ) ,,,...... m ".................., . ;...., ''":'::--...
I ", ~/ />>"'(/" / /,/, ':::'" - 1..............."......_
I" ~ "", i ~,,/ ,,/.. /// ,-,'1 ~"<~~ I' '"
" ' ""~\ ",' '911' Y '," ~,-, /,
I ii, ~.- ,/ 7' ? · ~ '>' '- , ' ~...>' I,: --:;-~........ --, '-".m"'_____ '" "''''''''''''''''"....,8~'YY_._,
. i /' ':', ,:~, 'y)" /~:/J ~~:~ "'/'-~ /~' "-,' " !J, :; _ ~ . _ ~.,-,-- _ ~ ~ _ _ ~__,
:1" : '-~:::^/JJ'% /~~/ ~z"'" ,'?::r('-; j/ ~ ,->,.-,i ',.r: 1: ;~~ ";t"
" " / //'~~<(' ," ,/,( ," '" ...... .............
y."", "" ,.........
! :::;-?: :/' ~ /' /, ".( (<>" ~ ,I ::! .
I J ' "~I I\'/ 1; J 1...""..j' I" '" l",,,.,.J '_, '" ~
-" ( , , ".;., If I) /1 fr. ' c'' F"~'_' r-"'" Ii !
, ~~ i : ; LLlJ, I :1 nl:l1. I" .11,: I
.. - [' h;:" .
I ,:firi'!rT Jr~.~== ~~".~~=:=--=~r~~ =, c _::l::.::::~-"'_._=-:_.n C/ ',' J
",._..""",,,._____-'__""_'''...m'''''' I
.\
, ":j-(S'. ,I I ;0.(.1, Jr 'I I ii, 1 " ,
1 .---<)' 0' ,:; "I '.....J' ;,j I I I ~1 I ' i 1:1' , II I' ,
> "J...; 1 It ,~. t fl.~ I t v~ I ~ ,. J
',l .',.---.' J ",m.. \ ' l " -. L:::J U' ,,,) L.......J '" ,--. '" ,.... ........ ~/
>' ,I "; -~ I Tmm ;
L . 1",- 1 ..1-', r....J '" """_. "-"""",, ""-""""",, -,"'" "" ,m_,
A _ _ _ _'::::>=~ _ }~ ....z::::.::..--::: ::....~;:--..:z::::....- ::: ~:::::~~-:_ ,J. ~-~ ::~- ~~':', '-":: ~ - - --...- - -, -:-- - - ~ - -
~ - .=.T.:.......-- ..... -, ~~v-..~~~:<-v ._,~y:,_ '~y _ ~ _ _
,.1
...}
~8
~~
~~
m....
o
~
:1 "''':';~
\i
II
.,;
1
1
I
Ii
r
,[
",
"7
'i
,.;eI '~'"
~-C / (~')!
~ i !
"
I
I
I
_. i
I
'I
J
./-.L J ,
,(
I
-l""
, ..
__ ;j'.... I' r
, ~
. '
=-)-:-'~ - - ~ -' ~', :
~ ,,'." ""8"SS
"
\
\_J
'"
"l
S
~
~
"
--: ~ l..
';
-...
to
>.
'"
OJ
"
I f r
m
G)
. )t p m
+ z
0
~z, X "ll "ll "ll "ll X X
;0 ;0 ;0 ;0
v; 0 0 0 0 v; ~
Ei'- ~O -I "ll "ll "ll "ll -I
o _ Z 0 0 0 0 Z Z
"z
nIl Cl VI VI VI VI Cl Cl
II." m m m m
" 0 0 0 0 -n ~
"''' rn-l >
0'" VI VI -n ~ ;;;
;: ;21 z > ~ ;;; rn -I
~ Z m ::r: m
~ t"" ~ m ::r: m -< ;0
~ t'l ~ ;0 -< ;0 0 3:
;= ;0 3: 0 3: ~ >
m 5 () VI -< > ~ > Z
;on ~ VI Z Z z
>0 ~ ~ ::r: z -I
'" () ;:-:~ :a m 0 -I
zz ,. ~ ;0 m
0 r'
on '""< 3: ;0 m
0 3:
",m 7< rn > 3: 0
~~ ~ 0 n ~ z > ;0
'" "T1 0 Z n
m> 0 )> .. ",", ,-
;0,- <: V> ~ rn ~
"tl Vi I ;.. z
> 0 > ~ - 0
z
Z . ) ,,:( c
Z f') -I
0 = rn
=
U1 0
;.
,
0 ~
~
z 0 :<~'7
~ ~
z
0
c C\Cr'
~~---
n
o
z
z
n
....
....
o
I<
~
z
'"
\
"'"
';3-
"l"',
:rH-
~a_
>'''l
.,<;
-.v,
'"
.,
'"
I
I
i
i
I
1
J'
J
1
>- ......
"0
;=:-0
~o
",'
...",
=~ \
" j
,,~
",,,
I'"
",'"
"'.
~~
. '"
"''''
l<~
~!?
'"
"'0
.::~
"c:>
,,0
"'Z
I
",,,,
~"
",,,,
"':::
,. ,. ,. ,. 2 '"
iJ iJ iJ iJ ", ~
'" '" '" '" ~ ~
'" '" '" '"
~ ~ ~ ~ l:J '"
'" 'l'
'" 'l'
~
3:: :;2
.i: "
...y,..
."
~ I
I
I ,
I
II
!h
tll
II
HI
II,
1::> 1::> 1::> 1::> 1::> 1::> 1\
,. ,. ,. ,. ,. ,.
r;1 r;1 r;1 r;1 r;1 r;1 );1\
1::> '" 1\
~ ~
~ ~
\
\
"
~
;:;j
'"
"<
I 1 r-
I m
~ C)
. Bl t m
Z
I 0
~z, ." ." ." X ." 0
;JO ;JO ;JO ;JO
Er- ~o 0 0 0 Vi 0 ~
g.z ." ." ." -I ." Z
nD 0 0 0 z 0
" .., '" '" '" '" )>
., G)
..., UJ-I m m m m G)
0-+ 0 0 0 '" 0 m
Cl ~I '" n ~ -I '" 0
~~ ;: 0 c 0 -I ;;;
t""" :I ;JO Z ;JO 0 m
."S;! ~ t'J )> D> n :I ;JO n
(iZ j= Z Z :I: :I :I -I
)>Cl() 5 :I: r ~ )> :I 0
~ 0 !!l z )> z
')>0 '" Z
'" () r Z
~zz " m
;:tIo() 0 ~
mom 0
~~~ 7< 0 (")
'"
C -n
"'-c '" ;i:'"}o"
mz)> Cl )> :u
())>. <: V> "'<
::!Cl en I 3:
Om (5 ): ~ rn
z." Z (')
"'S; Z ~ ."' 0
Z 0 .....
... rn
,'"
". c:7:l
~- , -
~ <.-
" C> ~"""
~ l. C> rn
z LT1 0
'" :i
z
p
i~
~~
si
:c:
p
ill
"
\(!
~
---
,.
.......... :/
rl':
. t log
I I' lS~
t' ~-+
:;()
tis;
",-<
o~
i;~
I !!!~
I ~ ~
i Q 0
ri~
IO
~
Z
~ :
t
I
I
\J
II (: ~
, I
, I
)oJ!
"'..,
~8
~-+
~o
olE
~~
o
:I
::j
~
o
z
'.,;
I
I
I
I
I
,
~
o
'"
:I
o
~
z
~
-+
-+
o
~
~
~
0I00l!
llI~doIU.l~
""tl
o
r-
r-
C
:::!
o
z
()
o
Z
-i
;:c
o
r-
VI
-i
;:c
C
()
-i
C
;:c
m
n
IJ,.
rf;
Pj'
th
'I
i Ii
I
<r t; 'Ii .; f
U d ~i ~l
r it Ii if
J Ji 'f ;
i i II .
i I t
IWrjl'
tll~ ~t
Illii~.H
}IJIJH
HI} Ii
tlw:
~ H ~ E ;.: ~i
-+ ..,,,, Will II
~ l'r.J. f ~
~ ~~ ifnj
--' I[ ;)!
t-t.+@1h
~I
l' i'
" I
~ ,;
'1 8 'I
ii ~ II
I I; I II
~~ C I!
2 ~ .
~ I
'"
~
as'
!!~
!~~
...
=...
.:-.~
'"
"'11I
.:.~
::l~
"'",
J....
"",
1:r;
. t:I
~;:g
~~
'"
"'0
-",
-",
..,,"
..,,0
co'"
i
",co
-...
",CO
C::
.~"Ii!j, J. t ~
,,!!,.:I.', _i' ~i __ '';:1
~ ;:.i! ~:' ::J:',i '!' "J'I
to
~ ~
<::> ~ ~ <::> <::> <::>
" " " "
~ ~ f3 ~ ~ ~
i
i '" ""
~ '"
a
'" ".
'"
p
~
~
~
il'
;
~
;10
~~
~m
m;lO
)>-
.0
.;:a
~
I
. -----~
i
i -
() I $
~; ~ ~~ n
~ ~ fT'- t: --};
m!e II '"
!!I ~ U lri
II
~ --
~
""
i'
IT ----~
~",
." '"
C '"
~ ~
~J: ~tt ---~ g::l-
z)>- c~ <11 ~
o.z !!j<11 ()m ~ III
"V"T1~ -~ ~5 0
~~~ 3:.... Sil
~Sil ~ 8
zmO ~~ m;:a ~
.9Ej;:a Ej -<
3:-<
~ m
M\ 3
to
-<
~
~~ ~
J!2
nZ 6 ()
>~n
1"">0 ~ () -. :D
~zz ,. ~ "'J"
;DOn a '"'< 3:
mom rn
~~~ l: 0 0 !<
"T1 ()
mz~ !2 ~ -='--";11
q> S I--L rll
-~ !Q J: ";';:.
Om 0 > ~ . 0) -
z-a Z (.~ <
ens; Z '"
0 r:. -~ C) rn
z f____~ C)
. " LJ"1 0
' .
."J
::'J
I ~ Q..
~ ~
....ZZl,
, ,~..
'" '"
~
~
i
.,
~rj'~),
)' ,/ / .r ' ..
/)/~
'y", ,,-,..,;:;
t ....~;:,
'i~~ :i::.i-~~~ ,~ _
-----" ~
"'.
!/l
l<l
~
....
"
"'.
!/l
l<l
~
....
"
,:J.t:;1
IlR
1(,1 i
h."
i ;1IrA
~
il mil ;lool
~ s~ro~ to! ~
il ~~~" to! to!
r-c .. ~11' ~ ~
~ ~~
t"'::l
....0
s~
~-_._--- ________CI,..Ay__~ __'_ ____ ~_ _uJ)IR.E.Ef ___
f ~
!.
: ;d
l
;31
j.;,
, , ~;:J
~- ;
LT;'
/, "Y"~'"
R ~, Ii
.c:::L ~d
~"" "H: m moo DB !
~~ 'f, U LJ U U ;11,. '\
- ! /l c--nr~-D--LJ- Ll--D~'--
· c ~ 1m, i"'-c:,_j{ i, "1m -~If! 'J
.! ' : ~ : : ~ i I ~ ,___;
'T~TT : \ \ : 'T-'" '''iTJ.' "H" -' -I=HT. ,-ref".,
---L..L.L..L..:-Ll......:-1 J ,'II! r I I! I ~r-f" I c LlJ..' , ~'J..! 1_' rT-~
'_L1
"
. ('. ~"Cwe
: ! I 1ij1 "1i/ I ~ "
'._;~ ~mL~ L II
!I 91,I,m !lfill~ 11Ift I' .;e ~~I I I
H tq It; ill 11'11 It' tB I tIt_ t t
I I! 1 G 1!Ii an Bllnu 1.11 f. :J I
j, i HlliJ1 Bltt'hUlJb~J i~ ~bii
~ ~ '!Dill ~~.ktt !!j!,~11lP IS,' 11~1, t
I ~ 'I' II 1f11! i!i!!iil1j{ lli. Dllli
.
.
l
s
1
i =:.a:l~
6 t"Jt"Jt'"
if t <rIlt'"
- t"J-o
I: t"'=
.. i ~~I n
~E=~
~~~ . I ~ II
...')'0 I '- 1< ~~, (JQ
;~Pi I ;j~ ~e.
i ... lis: ~cJ
.. z ~~
~ .. ;I-t
~ z ~~.
~ ~~
"J'''cy . i ~g..
i':
:0
3: rn
:', ~ ()
. ~, rn
c:r:a -
t' ~
r-.) ""
. g rn
U1 0
: I
L't
).. }1'
c ,'rY
-.~ '=ill
~" ,.. ~
~~ <.. "'"i
-..-..-..-..-..-..-..-..-..-..-..-..-..-..-..-..-..-..-..-..-..-..-..i- t.....lI.-..-
_~_~_____ _J_L A Y _ _ __-_f J.
------ -t.:!
~E 'I "I
....~...n-.._.._.._.._.._.._.._.._.._.._.._.._.._..-
~ ;I ~
'" '"
- ees--
~- "- "-!r~.~ ~ . .:, ..:.~ ~ :~~) ~.
\ ;'11-. \ _ .4"~~' ~,~~ ',~ . -I:, Jj', r. ~+ + ill;1 ~~ E ~.) ~~
..,~ I' I . M"' ~~ i~;i III ~~, 1
, I + \ ~~ ~ -...... . ;;;;r- ~~ "'l~ I~ ~ I'~
\~" \ -- Wo..L _. - J , 'rc ~ ~ .] . ~ .,: i F= !
~E ii I I +. 1. ll~ ~ + +q ~ l ~ ~) '+ III I.
::: lI:~ (' \. I J N A -.: ~ "" ~ 0
I ii ~ 'x- '( ~..i ..
-~ ~ g .~rj~ ),
~ \J;}l/l l<;<... 0 : I
~ ! \~-:-: i. f~". · J -' ~ ~5 i ~
,. ~~. 9 0 00 0 .~~W~)i--
i '. v~YA7 0 ~ ~. ~ ~ 1
. ~ ....... "..... " ~---
+ .J{
~+ - -
~a~-: ~.~ . )~~
~.; II rot rJ.. r ;;, ~ b~U ~
. I I r.tt r; ~ ~ J r-- ~ "
t ~ +~ <l ~ ~ ~ t-
! ......."'A ) ~ . .,-;- ~
~~~. ac+~ ~ 4~ l~~ ~~ ~
~ .. ~.o~~~~ '.5.
! ~ It. ~ J ~
~~ .~ 0 0 0 ~o -: 0 0 .::. ~ v~, f- 0 ..:.. o.'~';' ~
, + Ir ~J L (f +J . I ) t
_: - - ~ + m 1'!rId: E
= <<+ - , , i \, __________ . _,,' . ':
- If..../' - t
g.H... .... ............ ..__.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..1. .. ..- _.._.
~. ._~-----------------------
x%
Ii
T
-
~ +l ~ _.._..
--. + 1
,.,
~~~
-~';
~~+~
~~
o.ft~,
J".
I.;~..
o
o
o
o
~
-=<l!!~~-=i;:!
~"1mI:ac
W!l .:...~ oW"
)0 !I! :j
~ ~ Ai
m %
,. ,.. ,. tot ,. "U <11)0" :Sf.-'" ",..,nC'> -
r- fill ilJilHh,H ~
8H~ ~ ~ i il ~ c: =l-rill
<""'r"" ,.. .... z I ~a 33~r'''.'''I;'
..mi5.. .. .. I C'>. ~ 111 '!tUi'
. US: s: s: ~F Z 112 II I~II f
..~~ ~ ~ ~I Q r
nzz z z :J ~ ~
~.." " " !i!
",ljl)o )0)0 !.. z i!.
~d ; ; ~ S:2 C
~'=! · - i ~~ ~ :i~ nU"fEU:
-,.z :JIo. _""
~ai = ~ - ~I! ::u 1=" lf~liJ&.iilj
~)o a,.. ~ I~ is Ii:
"':II" ill'" filii "! l'"~ n
~!! ~ a Hi ~ ~ Iff ~H C'>;c:rFj
~ I Ut 1"i!.311
h~ ! ii (1! .. 0 3 I g ...
..,.. ,.. iI z j ,
mr-o ~ i ,..
:II=~' -< ili Z
~C'>lil lil < ~ z ....---------
"i c: 0 51 il S J.n. ~.ee.ee,~,e-e-~~
Q~iE z
~..~ ~ K)o ~ m rrrrrrrrrr
!jlS:i: ; 5 (I)
=~~ l; i f,l
%~::1 I! )0
~n1~ J i ;
~~~ lI: - iii
Iii ~ g
:iz Ii
"'F~ ~
r-illr)oilit "U
i1!tUl, !;;u
If=--=-II m
i! ......r.i! ~ !:
trfi '" 13... ~
illlr= <l -
Ifl = Z
I ~
;;u
-<
"U
!;
Z
...
en
n
x
m
C
C
r-
m
l"~PIII
i i';IK(
-hUjZ
...
..
"U
!;
-<
~
::u
!:
m
Z
r-
~
;;u
Q
m
i:
m
Z
...
"'i~
in
)0-):
:II"''''
Ui
- z
j.
0:
if,l
If
ti
~
-----,-
~ . ~. . .:.
ilii"iiiii
~~~~~~
rrrrrr
\1 C~~i i": ~ t::l~~
~ ~!ie ~ i tt:l -
~ ?l~S ~ ~ <rn~
t-' ~ ... tt:l-o
> j;'
." .. l:""t::l~ 0
11~ po. Ott:l
N f ~2= -' JJ
~""'l~ r"'~
." tt:l~0 < :s: rn
~t'"~ n ~ ()
~ ,
..~ ..- m
,,- ~ -
.~\ '" <
c::> m
~,. .-- c::>
~ ~< L.Tl 0
. ::J
Cl.
~"'l . I
...f' I ~ i
;~Di ,) :
J"J'~ . ~
!
& ~ .
~~ ~~ ~~ Qq
"" o~;!~ ~
'j~ SJ~ i'~ ~
il ii ~~ ~.
> ~ gs:.
;( II
-,--
o
LU
>
ill
()
UJ
a:
Ln
c::::>
c:>
('J
-0
C
(tJ
f=--
;-in
~~J:;
,...-(
:z:
:.:>
--,
~
IU1I.___.-
:-J~ '__. H__
,tjo:Jll;~: .... . ..---
if ! il~N ...
~ ; fit<)
AI/ to;
, I ~ (,:7'. ~
_11/ -Zl~
~/ ~i~
~/ ~I~
!i~
-+
4j
;1;
(/
If
It'
ril~--
..,.
LL
A/~
C'..
X
~
:J
~
~
llJ
5:)
~
~
U-
~
~
'(,J
t-
Z
a
tr:
tL-
Z
o
~
?
UJ
~
1LJ
~
()
gz
\U
50
\
---
II
><~
Ul~
u:~
~
::J
tt
~
.4
u
\L
~
o
uJ
>
~
UJ
-0
uJ
a:
Ui
c::>
C)
c--J
~
z
::>
~J
-0
C
ro
-"""
J::
(/)
<:(
:~:Il'~~[
-w ---' ~a:pTr.-h'
-:~I':-f~:
~~g~IYIT- ,
o - --:~-~::':~-.:-=-~~-: '. .
....--- '
-u i'51tJ1H::' ;:
4 J;t~jl1t~I!- '
j~ ' ~ U11iJ:::t--- ---
;;~;:t ~~~]f~!jj-:
'1[- ~--:ill1"_ '~-~!liThm.--
:1~ -:- 7 -1).1:' ; ~ , " ,.!tr::
..~ '~ .... ::r~:i,,:-"~.:~"-+tt'
J~! 2 ..- ~Jil4~1-:1;:',
-j~ -0 .... ...., ----4-+=tJ:' H4=t \ +l-r-r,--. 'j'~
JJ-: it'~ :-::~.aI~
~_'_~:Iff~cIlr .
'<.- ,_._,
T ",-"q!+
-:r
I q
~
I
It z
"--.../
~
f
: t ~
I ~ ~
~- v ~
{J
~ 3'
""'
~
\5
1.-'-
~ q- " ,..'
~~f
i6
~1~
;Ll
.uJ ~
! ~'
i
.~
I I
. i
I
~
o
~ L_...
'r-=J.-~~
I
~....,
___h.~ _
--:6
l;'
~
~
'-...J
~
.4:
1Ll
~
>
~
'" ,..,.......
(.)
~. I ~
l<.,."'.;i.l
, I
4"
" . t. ~ --,.. ~'v; ..' ~. ,J.
N-
~
,-
- i
\. i~:. ~_ : I_FI
\., ---D
,i., ~----"--'~ _
.
q
f2
a
'Z.
'::::J
~
~
t
d)
~
:s"
.&..
~
iU
~
~)
~I'f
/'.
/ ,
\.
,
'.
:\ - _.~-.:., ,----- l. - --4.
_J\
I
1____+
.f----. , s . S 3 J.t+ TlVrj3I\ (;1
I'
~
uJ
~
'--.J
uJ
(\
~
~
z:.
o
~
/
lU
--
UJ
~
()
~
uJ :::0
~ =:,
ilJ;'
_./ 111
/'.... .~
uJ~
---1
0-
::J
D
--1
6
n=
)-
r-
~
3 MAP WAS PREPARED FOR
~ PURFmE ONLY
SI'e
SW1/4 SEX:TION 11 T.300. RtE. W.M
JACJ(S)N COUNTY
o
~
~ i~l
1-
(~\
.. '\
1"= ax>'
" --
t
.-... ,
<:r:> "". "...iII!
<(~
:: ,
t:t
r--...> "<l't
~5 '1
L,., 0
I
,
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
,
,
,
31
u~"
SEE MAP 39 1E 11
IR.
CD
~
.
136.33'
.
7.4&
.
.
SEE MAP
o
Q
..
39 1E 11CB
~~N\L'( ANN.E~ED
) "
\l5UP~ ~\-RY
I
I
~
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
MEAOOw
3~
C00~\l(
~
:J
8
111.12'
212.11'
344.'"
J45' 3"0.84'
2S.0 '
163.3'
c. \1Y &U~OA-R~
2500
10.00 ~.
1101
1,51 AC,
.
~
589' :
201
I.Oj
\<,-2
5-8
~lTe
LOT 7
CWI04
CWl13
12(]11
0.05 AC,
.
.
C5-110J3
.... .
....
.." .
R-2
~(:
~2
:>
F;l 8
)-4
.
~.
2-
::>
8
.
224 '
.
;;;
-
CD
..
RR-5
5-1
194.'"
....
..
;;;
1171'45'23-'
1I3.4L:..
S80'2' '41-[
4051 .17' TO
S.L COl. SEC. 11
cou~\'(
LOT 11
~-2
SEE MAP
39 1E 11CC
~
'-
C"4
ell
C"4
....
"'"
~
..
C't
-----
40t .2 ·
~
-
eft
-
fir
414.20 t
~
454. Sf ATE
------r
I
66
-,
MISCELLANEOUS
LETTERS
- ~-------'-'-_._.- ---~~-
Sall~ H. Giloth
805-687-2340
p.l
Fax 541-552-2050
June 11, 200.5
Susan Yates
Executive Secretary
Dept. of Community Development
RE: Planning Action #2004-141
Ashland Planning Commission Meeting
June 14, 2005 at 7:00pm
Thank you for sending the information regarding Planning Action #2004-141. I have
read it carefully and find that it addresses several issues that are of concern to me:.
I will mention that I am the owner of the 5 acre parcel at 300 Clay Street, directly to the
north of380 Clay Street.
I agree with the commission' s recommendation that the wetland delineation be completed
and accepted by the Department of State Lands prior to proceeding further with the
application. Additional site hydrology is still needed.
It is also essential to consider the impacts to Clay Street due to the projected incr4~se in
traffic and to determine if the street with the proposed improvements is adequate to
accommodate anticipated traffic levels.
I agree with the conclusions of Staff: "Because of issues primarily dealing with the
identification and changes to the wetland. as well as a broadening of the scope of the
traffic impact analysis, Staff does not believe adequate information is included within the
record to approve the project and forward a recommendation to the council for
annexation. .,
I appreciate the efforts of the applicant and the Ashland Planning Department Staff: as
well as local community input, to make this development as good as it can be.
Thank you and best wishes,
~~
Glen A. Cooper
~/"
---~----.-
"
A PIVl$ION OF
>) .sWCA
( . E"~"'or,"~,~,~lJl.l.1"n
Portland Office
434 NW Sixth Avenue, Suite> 304
Portland, Oregon 97209
TeI503.224,0333 Fox 503.224,1851
WWW.SWCQ.com
February 7, 2005
Mark Knox
Pacific Northwest Building & Design, LLC
518 Washington Street, Suite 2
Ashland, Oregon 97520
SUBJECT: City of Ashland Local Wetlands Inventory Mapping on Tax lot 391E11C 2500
Dear Mr. Knox,
I have prepared this letter upon your request to clarify the methodology used by Fishman
Environmental Services (Fishman) to conduct the Local Wetlands Inventory for the City of Ashland,
You specifically inquired about the methodology used on tax lot 2500, which is proposed for the
Willowbrook Development.
Fishman staff reviewed several sources of background information prior to conducting field work.
Background information included aerial photographs dated April 16, 1998 and July 2001 obtained from
the City of Ashland, 2-foot contour mapping and 100-year floodplain mapping obtained from the City of
Ashland, copies of previous wetland determinations and delineations conducted within the City of
Ashland obtained from the Oregon Department of State Lands, a report on the wetlands of Ashland
prepared by two Southern Oregon University students in 1990 obtained from the City of Ashland, the
U,S, Geological Service topographic maps, U,S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetlands
Inventory maps, and the Soil Survey of Jackson County Area,
Based upon the background information listed above, we developed a list of tax lots which appeared
to potentially contain wetland or water resources and for which site access was desired to evaluate
site conditions for the purpose of determining whether wetlands or waters were present. The City
mailed letters to approximately 1,500 property owners requesting their permission to grant Fishman
staff access to their property during the Local Wetlands Inventory field work,
Tax lot 2500 was one of those identified as potentially containing wetland or water resources and was
included in the mailing, The City did not receive the property owner's permission for Fishman staff to
access their property; therefore, we did not conduct an on-site evaluation of the property, Based upon
our review of background information, it appeared that wetlands were potentially present on the site, A
wetland hydrology signature was evident in the April 1998 aerial photograph, a subtle linear
~ 17
--~._---~----~----------.---.~--~- --
topographic depression was present on the 2-foot contour map, and a wetland had been delineated
north of the site by another consultant in 2001 (DSL #WD 01-0613). An aerial photograph included in
this prior wetland delineation report indicated that wetlands extended to the north property boundary of
tax lot 2500. Based upon these three sources of background information, it seemed likely to Fishman
staff that a wetland extended onto tax lot 2500. We viewed the subject property from off-site with
binoculars during our June 2003 site visit by standing immediately adjacent to the site on Clay Street
and on the YMCA property. Site vegetation consisted of a mixture of non-wetland and wetland pasture
grasses, and we determined that vegetation may meet the hydrophytic vegetation criterion for
wetlands. Since our site visit was conducted during the dry summer months, it was not possible to
determine the presence or absence of wetland hydrology on the site. However, a wetland hydrology
signature was evident in the April 1998 aerial photograph, indicating that the site might meet the
wetland hydrology criterion. Soils could not be documented from off-site. It was our bHst professional
opinion based upon background information and observed vegetation, that a wetland was likely
present on the site; therefore we mapped wetland unit W13 as extending onto the site.
A Local Wetlands Inventory (LWI) is not a wetland delineation, and is not intended for regulatory
purposes. Properties that are mapped as having wetlands in a LWI still need to be assessed and
delineated by a wetland delineation expert if site development is proposed. The wetland
determination/delineation conducted by your consultant is the documentation needed by state and
federal agencies to evaluate your proposed plans for the site.
The draft Local Wetlands Inventory has been submitted to the Oregon Department of State Lands for
their review and approval. We recommend that any site-specific information regarding the presence or
absence of wetland on the subject tax lot be submitted to the Oregon Department of State Lands for
their review.
Sincerely,
Stacy N, Benjamin
Senior Project Manager, Wetland/Environmental Assessments
~
Fishman Environmental Services
~J 8'
Page 2
--- .._----_._~._-------~~_._.._...._------
..~trld8_ ~V\c1\(deV)
32.\ C\aq ~+. * 3:2
A s~\a \J\.c\
\!\Aa v- c...\, \l.o I I, 0 CS
A E;~ l.QV\.cl \) b Ii\ V\. I ~5 C OW\ M l~ S \ b I/)e rs
])eay. pe'fSCVl5 :.
,~ _.J.V\ a\.\ ~~ e~~eneV'c.e>1\t\~ W~~O,{l~~ u\ ~e?~~le..
\ \V\v:.~ \~ -t\s,^-\.aV\c\ c\n V\otwa \.\.t a \J\.~ Cl ~ -]vl.l\ e\ d.eVelCfVVltV\E )
w\Mc\A l~ \;.)'^~ t\~ 'Wl\)Ved \\ex~. v\tosr \Je.bfle L 8~. (S\w~;re b~
wav\t voaci: w',\'vtl?v.x- tv a ~\C ,\C\WlS, ()\~eV\. \allld~ ~ \U\1<j~ ~ <;)?od
\il a TeX ,f e1l r) qi'tet ~( <:"I.UI\~~ a ~ \:. I EIh (e,. C ~ 0 \/,JCh "'~ w "ll
(3.ls'() \J'("\.v~~ c.y \ ~\J~.. l\'owc\\V\~ \/0\.\\ ~'< \\\t.! d\,>tov,,-e ~
\1~~vJrtll)V\ 1Yb"M. -\~ M~ CjL\lev 11\ V~Jl.V\..'f'W\.\L\) 1~ ~).Qve..
~\'(e&J
. .80 '~dt ~ 1€W \MeV\ tav\ wa'k Vv\'~~llD~~) \JV\a \I\i~ I
1Ino\il.~d wO\,l\d have to ~ut ~ ~v'iit\ a Yl.llY\ccl t.oW\W\lA~\4'
~\~~C~\V\5 \30 VV\o'(e de.~d~~v'v\Qw,^\i\~S DV\ Ct~ st. 's
cui\- a ~e..c ~ S ~~\\ ~ ~\el~ \.A '0 c v-s; r a v e.... e.-y..as ~e Y a.\C~J i
. With a bv.A~e.117 /lye y~~ 'J'(\ ill'DV\Ad.d e vJ ca ill .
a.fford to \J\Mj SC>W\€ ~ be~~\itl~~ ,wx-ce\s ~t c.DVV\,e we So-,
<t~\e ~ f,es::\(ve -rV\lS U.I/\L~U.e.- c..tt~!\Wl) ~~":Wl~\e:> are-
t\.\e e.ye.€.\~ >\.Je.. ?~-opert~ __ 0\1\ ~r;y-t\A VV\D\A"\'~tv) \l\.or ~et
de.s~Y-o,\~ Y>~-\- s.l~1e, J al 'feacLj to be. a\i\01kv ('v-olNde~
ste~l\e d.e\Je.\e~vV\ev\t) ~ -t\\Q. D\~ fa\"W\ oV\ C\~~ Sf,
\ .
~\ VKe~~ e.\l--\ ')
nZlAI~~ 1 )1~~1
(IjJfJ - O~ 37-)
~/9
- -------.---- --
.pt'~
~
. ~ls
~'
~
tl
~tf:
~
/j~7,j .
~~p~~J
of
7;.k~
UIl 4 e: c:;,70...lL....JOoi:)
Lo'-~D
t:Vf
680
L-Lkf-t
rl.
7/k
j:.Jo Ifo'-( /^ffS ,..{.A v 1"; ~
05 "tt) ~
'5/C; ...-I'S of 01 SfFatlsr" ol'L
L~I 71€S n~ ot3e.hD<J S
/,
(20'7 ;:::!ss(J es
7/i -7~s
J.tw~
ilL So
1S'~,..J
,-..,
~'L-V .JEO
.
_ A:&, r'":"'\ L-7 ...,d < .~ HI r.
(N0..L (.<)''1,,/ tVo th,j. Aut€' ~I.. """. 0.,. b ~, , ,
.
'i*- ::;?;" &7'7<>,JWO!>D I).", A6 OilV'l>J5 $I ~.F) ",,-- DS~
I~t.. ?~ 55 ";-0,"", 1fi~mtdr tYd7 ",t,~,,~,..,/ lY$'fi<k€'
~LM('o. 7kM":::;:-S ~ ~ ~€D -a.? o.;e..AJ-L
4.6
~..../ ~l>oD
.
? ~ '/?t€i:'..:J3. d!At..'7iI., ~.-o f}I ~ {.A..IOdt
-1k{1lf iI~ ~ 6n<1I\l..l.. . 6M17ft (11-' OLDC-<- ~cKk;;
lSu1 {('Job"""
/ ,..J-'Q '7k..~~AtL$ --70 ~ A'6 ,..11./.....
? Jk t..,
rS50cfS ~
OIit(lj)...LL- (on.. .4s Lonr''-''OI):> t:;o -?~bE AIlEY! C:;oOD th.t.-;;/
~ La~(2<A..J
A~ () .1/
Cf3VJI fi EO 1H~~r'7
I
---------.--..--
~_.,~~"-"~.._~_._.. -... --~ --~ ,
I" '.8.!!!Y..1.':l.9_~~21l"- 380 Clay Tree StatemE'-< 2 - Wildman,doc _
_._._.._.___o~""_~,,,,,,.."~_,,_"....____...,.."".._._.~
----..""'-..
-=,~=:=:~~~.
Robert and Allison Wildman
420 Clay Street
Ashland, OR 97520
February 4, 2005
Ashland Tree Commission,
This statement is in regards to the Tree Removal Permit that is being considered :t;Jr the
proposed Willowbrook Residential Complex Annexation on 380 Clay Street. Although I
was unable to attend the meeting last night, a statement was read on my behalf. Since
writing the statement I have attained a copy of the "Project Narrative/Findings" and the
"Ll" print for "Tree Protection / Tree Removal Plan". Based on information within, I
have decided to submit a second statement.
The "Tree Inventory" from "Ll" and a "zoom in" of the south west comer of the property
where the majority of the trees in question are located are provided on the following
pages. The trees that I am most concerned about are numbered 22 and 23 on the print.
They are the large poplars on the property.
Tree 22 - 70" Poplar
As defined by the "Tree Inventory", the "Health, Hazard Condition" for trele 22 is
"Specimen, Horizontal Branch Problem" and the "Recommendations" is
"Remove"; not "Remove/Hazard" as is the case with other trees that are delemed a
hazard.
Section 18.61.080 A of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance defines a "Hazardl Tree".
It states, "The applicant must demonstrate that the condition or location of the tree
presents a clear public safety hazard or a foreseeable danger of property dw:nage to
an existing structure and such hazard or danger cannot reasonablv be alleviated bv
treatment or pruning". Based on this requirement, it would seem that if the
"Horizontal Branch Problem" is indeed a "Hazard", pruning should be explored as
a mitigation option prior to condemning the tree. I request that the City consider
this option before permitting outright tree removal.
Tree 23 - 43" Poplar
As defined by the "Tree Inventory", the "Health, Hazard Condition" for tree: 23 is
"Good", yet the "Recommendations" is "Remove".
Section 18.61.080 B of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance defines a "Tree that is
Not a Hazard". It states that removal of a tree may be granted if "Removal of the
tree will not have significant negative impact on tree densities, sizes, canopies,
and species diversity within 200 feet of the subject property". I submit that
removal of this healthy tree would have significant negative impact of the trlee
Page 1 of3
~J
- --------------,--~ -- ,-----
m Anderson - 380 Cia Tree Statemer' '"' - Wildman.doc
.-
- ~----
-
--_..._--.._-,~_...,".,,""'-"'_.."'"-~.~
-- .- ~~g~
sizes and canopy. It is one of the largest trees in the area and has a huge c:anopy.
In conclusion, I urge the City to carefully consider the impact of removing these trees. I
feel that other options exist and should be explored for the following reasons:
· Neither of the trees are a Hazard as defined by the Tree Protection / Tree Removal
Plan created by the projects own landscape architect
· They are the largest trees in the area and provide a significant canopy
· The rest of the property is devoid of trees
· New trees that are planted will take many years to mature and provide a similar
canopy
· It is likely that tree 15 (43" poplar") will be removed due to hazard and will
already reduce the canopy
Thank you for your consideration,
Robert and Allison Wildman
Page 2 of3
;2. ~ ~.
~~-~2-~"d~an.doc~- _
_lIU'!'jI!toifl~"... .1 '''''II''~r'''~'ImlJil1lll''',I:'l...:.;G'-'''-...:T~!l!~'!ltt1'lm;r.r.~JI\l~_. , ~~ ,
....I......-............-.........~...., ~..,Il....!llJ.bdJj... ..........-.tIII~.1
Page: 3 of 3
~,~e.
...,I"'JI\~__
~
--,-
I---'-'---'---~--"---"-'--- -------,-------~-~-~--,---- --------.. '---------C~"':_:_--------.-----,-- ~_,--- _________.- _ _ __
l Amy And~rson- 380Clay Tree Stat~!:I'iP~' ? - Wlldm~n.d~_
. --"'- .-- ~~-"-'--- -- ---._---_.._-_._~-_.~.- .----..--...--.-.- -_.__._--_...~-, - ~ -- -.- .-.--------...----.--.,.-..-----....-----.- -.-.----. -.-
" ..'. '.
Pa~e
~ .'-"
TREE INVENTORY <I · ..... _..-
-
. PeCi'1&3 wa;.i.! "'I"'W~"'''~ OONOlnaH
~,~ ) I~~ ,
rH !,.. itr.UlT flIOC1I\, 010.-0 ~
to ~~ ':
'1/ ~~ \ ~~'QQferrD ,IIEM:M!
~~ , ~ MJIIP'f. ~ .-
ill .lM'.tMJf
t41 ~0Ut.al POMr MANOH DU.tOr..' ~y~~ '~
1&./ C,4lt~...~ ~
RCIrIUi~ F_~
m S,....~ ~,.... .~
~~ '..
m ~
QIDIJIIII~ rJrJa
if.}
ff'M~ ~,
1m ~.~~Ulltt ".--
.,.~
i\'01 )t~_.~
'1.I'N4lMa N!fA'f~ ~ 'G'F.~'
l't~ tr1.C\lCUl!'. ,
!~ -~~ ,ooc:ao .
-
"=:a-~ ~1flW)*^"'~ ,"T[ OU..,.
tU' ... '
lBNfIMG NIfA~JW)M Wn: ~~-
{fot} . -~r t..00l.II'f
I r;)' ~~P, IJlIfICII arT" ~~lfD.
~~
!1a> :.:.r~ ~'Wf~~T'r ~,~'*'
~-= ,-'
1ft; 8(J(Xj
tw. ~~
J.~~.~ CilCXXl
~"Wil~
11'; .. oocc
fm eeotUI~ ~
l2fi 1lfORJJI1iLJ.oI\ ~
<W"~n' POCR
~ ~m~ ~.~r.tlL. ~,JWlI!JI.IJ,4 IIIIIOW
1&' Ill>>lAR
( ftiJ .j ~~A =~ JlIiIitCM
~ ~~
{1Ij J;QCD m.'~t!CT
~~;- -'~~~~. ...". -,
(aJ
{2I,l ~rM.DII lllQlOFt; NIM.}' Cl&IC ~
{21f ,~ }n POORU'~ DOMIiIOI __'Mal'lct"
at! ~~ \ C~~DMW:IID v
iriiatihMA-
'(a: ,.=-~ qq:~,'
(~
~ ~~ j~ OFf ~
17'1:1 .:.==:m~ 'a.L~* H:LUOID"'e.w !J 1MI
Page 3 of 3
{'to ,
~,;
r.-'------------.-.---.--.~---~-----------_:_ - ------ --~,..------- ----------"'------------ _------__...-----,,- '___~_,___ ______ ------------c-------- u___ _ __ ___'_____ _________'_________~----
:_-_---:----___,___---_______ _ __
I Amy Anderson - 380 Clay T ree Statefl'~r. ') - Wildman.doc .. . . ...... ............ .. . Pag,
~-------------'_._---- . -------
~JI
J ~
. ITTfT~
:~' _~.~;-~ ~ _ ~TI TTfLrrlr r,Lf r,r.rr,-onrr
..- . _~\..,- \ ~,' '.--' .,.~___.t
"~" ~""'-
. "
~ JA-:
~, ~
. Q:'l ~ 1S-oaXJMCIDAA
~ .c;:3L P'M..,AA '\
/!
Page 4 of 3
I
l
I
I
,
I
I
I
-~
~
We the undersigned, are in strict agreement that the grand, decades old
cottonwood trees on the property at 380 Clay Street, be preserved.
Nj"M~
A II/son W/ldrmn
)
S;\~~~~
3:2
~B.5
--.--._.~__"__m_~ ____._.
nOfr~
A-o)d rE-SS
r ""\f'C r' ~
t!"":~~ .,.,...
JAN 2 l?! Z005
\
- , ~
!,YV\oti-...yi5CA..y He,fJONck'L 3J-1 tltLy ~+- #Z 2- .4S~I~ c ~
~ 1. ~ \<i'tl-l'4 '1s6Y~ "3:2.\ clAct sl',~I(" 4'3.\ltII\.\.-t/Ot
-PCL~ "" 'l1Cz,1 ~4 /1fQ- .~iJR
(;o.i\ ~(}((AQui{)%J ~~ 3::J-1 ~ ~J- J). ~
;;J..~~
----------'---------.--- ,---- -
We the undersigned, are in strict agreement that the grand, decades old
cottonwood trees on the property at 380 Clay Street, be preserved.
A.t?~~
? e I C-l.1{y "?r; #f
...s,
~~
\ ~ ~ctt
,
j... ~ 1
~ \<<5>
.c\,.l
cr<'.' ~
(,,-.' <", ~
<> ~ '\.
';)~
----~-~-----------.--------
9 February 2005
1 Ii! 7 1 11'" II B 8 II B R I . Ii: 27(H CoUft,! c.J2.$/!.1C.. ....,,,.r
ASHLAND, OREGON 97520
T: 541.488.6233 I 888.942.6773
F: 541.488.6239
E: CB@CAROLYNBRAND.COM
City of Ashland
20 East Main Street
Ashland, OR 97520
Attn: Mr. John McLaughlin, Community Development Director
Mr. Bill Molnar, Planning Manager
Re: Clay Street lO-acre subdivision proposed by D&A Enterprises,
as noted in Ashland Daily Tidings 2/8/2005
Dear Mr. McLaughlin and Mr. Molnar:
I am writing to you as a homeowner in an Ashland subdivision, called Clay Creek Gardens, of which
Andy Cochrane of D&A Enterprises, has been a developer. The purpose of this letter is to encourage
the Planning Commission to take the developer's Ashland track record into account in the process of
reviewing the application for such an aggressive development as is being proposed. My se:condary
purpose is to advise you that Mr. Dave Dotterer, as a sitting Planning Commission member, may have
a conflict of interest in regard to this applicant.
Clay Creek Gardens is a subdivision of 63 homes incorporated in March 2000. The development was a
partnership between Cochrane Construction and Suncrest Homes. Suncrest left the project in 2002, and
Cochrane has continued building the homes ONE at a time since then. Since purchasing my home in July
of 2002, that is for 2-112 years, the lot across the street from my home has been used by Cochrane as an
an equipment and junk yard - an unsightly and unsafe situation. I was advised by the Planning
Commission that the builder could use the property as a construction yard as long as they were still
building. That situation seems to be unending.
Our Clay Creek Gardens Homeowners Association has been ineffective in addressing the homeowners'
concerns about this situation. Dave Dotterer is the Association President, and he has consistently refused
to confont Andy who is his neighbor, about the situation. I feel it would be inappropriate for Dave, as a
Planning Commission member, to have any powers in connection with the application, be:cause of his
close personal friendship with Andy Cochrane and his prior actions promoting Andy's interests.
There are many aspects of the developer's performance in this subdivision project that have been
unsatisfactory. While the individual homes Andy builds are beautiful and well-made, the issues of slow
completion of the overall plan, lack of follow-through on landscaping and architectural standards, are of
concern. It is hard to imagine this firm taking on "Ashland's largest [subdivision] in two decades" when
this 63-home development remains incomplete. I hope these issues will be taken into consideration.
Sincerely,
~
j...~ ~
FEB 2 E 2005
February 25, 2005
PO Box 3217
Ashland, OR 97520
541 488-9292
Bill Molnar, City Planner
Ashland Riparian Corridor & Wetlands Protection Program
Ashland, OR 97520
Dear Mr. Molnar:
I question that the Staff concerns/recommendations for the Planning Action: 2004-141;
Applicant: D & A Enterprise; Andy Cochrane, are adequate protection for the Site:
Wetland 13 and the proximate wetlands.
It appeared to me that the report had insufficient connection to the Russell Dale, Clay
Street, wetland mitigation development. Was the probability of a development the size of
the Cochran proposal considered in the Dale mitigation measures? How will the city
evaluate the changes to the land around the wetlands that effect the hydrology, the water
quality, the wildlife values, and the surrounding land? Will there be a consistent
"monitoring" method and with data recorded on a regular basis? After completion, who
takes responsibility for the monitoring of mitigation and the wetland on the Cochrane
property? May Federal and State agencies be consulted for land use environmental
protection on a case-by-case need?
I hope that the Russell Dale, Clay Street mitigation project can serve as an example of
development with environmental wetland protection and that the Andy Cochraml
proposal does not create a threat to it. Please re-examine the Planning Action: 2004-
141. Namely, the buffer requirements, the change to sediment movement/flow, lthe
seasonal water levels, soil impacted by heavy equipment, and any construction activity
that has potential for permanent damage to the wetlands.
In addition, I want to express at this time, a thank you for the leadership of the Riparian
Corridor and Wetlands Protection Program and for the willingness to re-evaluate: the
wetland ordinances.
Sincerely,
~~
Elizabeth Cross
'd.-A1
00 I 00 ;U-V, ~~ M~t ~ .o-tll ~ ~./&:l-/ .~ :
5/(02 '-fW'tJ-~L -cAt. tt0 1i6L-a.t- 4uua-..
. January Jennings
Residential Landscape Consultant
Consultlng ISA Certified Arborist
TREE EVALUATION FORMltfliM*h.I'icLtMdavrd ()/
Common name: ~cL&fit,.yu"u~od . "'7 u (/0
Site Location: 3?O ~Sf. ,,-.
Tree # /5 Species: ;::hpuLao ~C;'-IPt'fl/l..p:7-
AfflOXHelght_d.2:'_Spreadi~':DBH_70 II .
Age: Young 0 Semi-mature 0 Mature a Senescent 0
Health: Annual Shoot Growth Good ~ Ave. 0 Poor 0 Epicormics 0 .
Wound wood response: Good 0 Ave.~ Poor ~~A.LdtO j :5t:r-7)(-e.if4~ (o-trl)
Vigor Class: Good f2r Average 0 Poor 0
Major Pests/ Diseases: /2A-b7'U-. ---
Site Conditions: Irrigation Yes 0 NoJa ~~1J:/ a....)../j>L ~__o /~"
Soil Volume: Good;8( Ave. 0 Poor 01) ~ ~ ~ ~ ..vr:' l.~ctduI':: d .6~-a..L-
ObstruCtions: &;;~dub~ 49~~~<-/~~IA0~b/tum oL5pdS
Tree Defects: ~~~ .bLJ-1L r7n &?;chmt/Y1~f 50!JtlQ/d ivuvnd--e-o. ·
--f::ROOts: Expo~ed 0 Heaving 0 Wounds::gf Mushroom~ O"!6U1ctMd ~/10 r
Trunk: Lean 0 Decay 0 Wounds 0 co-dominance 0 Flare~. #'5/7111f=/~T)
Included bark Ja Cankers 0 Cracks 0 Girdling 0 Conks Cl .
~ase of trunk .soundness ~~ {Qp'pd ~~ duf t~:JtJi1tU/;<-b()f&dtJ/-./
Bark: exit holes)a cankers 0 cambium damage O/i'llifS'8/116/CMfT. ~
Branches: Excess e~ weight 0 Cracks 0 Included bark:Ja: Hange~s 0 - ~
Woundsal. Stubs~Deadwooda broken brancheslll rka.-dwoo!7{t:dL
co-dominance of leaders 0 top die- back 0 /ftn :Jpec.u-o
~Oliage: yes 0 no 0 discoloration 0 sparse 0 ave. 0 dense 1:1 t-#
c.ommen;;f-O/d Ltrt!tJ--UJ / ~ a::t-/J~CU<-t1L ~~-<- /;;2 II Uivn(~0
( ~ ~ .M ~ Ta.a."I-/)1a:tio<-Wk71iAAl_JI?~ h/i/IIU;;oOd) ( tXd:" ) :;;,
:J~-0CL"tpmjJld-n" 'ti:.u.r6-'1 a,~LtM"d~. cj?ij- ~ll"...i ./
~~ a!~~~7 ~~,
- _~_.. ~~~~~'~ook'd-'
~ t:hL-~ UA 5pJ2~ aMAJL ~f f'~~_ .
~ aK-~d~<L#~~~
10', . ~,/s~<J~~-f~ ~ if;~~l!k>.'
~gete: ~br~~~~< ~~~CLdLhu/
~ -t?A-t/Y1 /G ?2M d ~o #f ;~" , '/?7'l tJ"U...., 0 ., - - . U
January Jenning~ 882 Garden Way Ashland, Or. 97520 482-8S8~~
~60
---,-------
THIS APPLICATION WAS FIRST HEi\RD
BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION
ON 2/8/05.
Outline Plan and Site Review were
substantially revised and ultimately approved
before the Planning Commission on 6/14/05.
,.'--'--'-
Notice is hereby given that a PUBLIC . .~RING on the following
request with respect to the ASHLAND LAND USE ORDINANCE
will be held before the ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION on
March 8, 2005 at 7:00 p.m. at the ASHLAND CIVIC CENTER,
1175 East Main Street, Ashland. Oregon.
The ordinance criteria applicable to this application are attached to this notice.
Oregon law states that failure to raise an objection concerning this application,
either in person or by letter, or failure to provide sufficient specificity to afford the
decision maker an opportunity to respond to the issue, precludes your right of
appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) on that issue. Failure to specify
which ordinance criterion the objection is based on also precludes your right of
appeal to LU BA 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 applica\,,,.., all documents and evidence relied upon by
the applicant and applicable criteria are availlable 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 prior 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.
During the Public Hearing, the Chair shall alllow testimony from the
applicant and those in attendance concerninl~ this request. The Chair
shall have the right to limit the length of testimony and require that
comments be restricted to the applicable criteria. Unless there is a
continuance, if a participant so requests bef,ore the conclusion of the
hearing, the record shall remain open for at I,east seven days after the
hearing.
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 i~i 1-800-735-2900.
~B..EC: PROPERTYJ
\,
to-
W
W
I;;
S
u
\ t
\,i
OJ
ASHLAND STREET
380 Clay Street
PLANNING ACTION 2004-141 is a request for Annexation, Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map change from
Jackson County zoning RR-5 (Rural Residential) to City of Ashland zoning R-2 (Low Density Multi-Family Residential)
for an approximately ten acre parcel located at 380 Clay Street. The request includes Outline Plain and Site Review
approval for a 130-unit development under the Performance Standards Option. An Exception to the Street Standards is
requested to meander the proposed sidewalk on the Clay Street frontage around a cedar tree located in the southwest
corner of the property. A Tree Removal Permit is requested to remove the nine trees on the site. Comprehensive Plan
Designation: Low Density Multi-Family Residential (proposed), Rural Residential (current); Zonin~j: R-2 (proposed),
RR-5 (current); Assessor's Map #: 391 E 11 C; Tax Lot: 2500.
APPLICANT: 0 and A Enterprise
NOTE: This Planning Action will also be heard by the Ashland Tree Commission on March 3,2005 in the Community
Development and Engineering Services building (Siskiyou Room) located at 51 Winburn Way at 7:00 p.m.
~61
.----.-T.-
ANNEXATIONS - APPROVAL STANDARDS
18.106.030 Approval standards
An annexation may be approved if the proposed request for annexation conforms, or can be made to
conform through the imposition of conditions, with the following approval criteria:
A. The land is within the City's Urban Growth Boundary.
B. The proposed zoning for the annexed area is in conformance with the designation indicated on the
Comprehensive Plan Map, and the project, if proposed concurrently with the annexation, is an
allowed use within the proposed zoning.
C. The land is currently contiguous with the present City limits.
D. Adequate City facilities for the provision of water to the site as determined by the Public Works
Department; the transport of sewage from the site to the waste water treatment plant as
determined by the Public Works Department; the provision of electricity to the site as determined
by the Electric Department; urban storm drainage as determined by the Public Works Department
can and will be provided to and through the subject property. Unless the City has declared a
moratorium based upon a shortage of water, sewer, or electricity, it is recognized that adequate
capacity exists system-wide for these facilities.
E. Adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property. For the
purposes of this section "adequate transportation" for annexations consists 01' vehicular, bicycle,
pedestrian and transit transportation meeting the following standards:
1. For vehicular transportation a 20' wide paved access exists, or can and will be constructed,
along the full frontage of the project site to the nearest fully improved collector or arterial
street. All streets adjacent to the annexed area shall be improved, at a minimum, to a half-
street standard with a minimum 20' driving surface. The City may, after assessing the impact of
the development, require the full improvement of streets adjacent to the annexed area. All
streets located within annexed areas shall be fully improved to city standards. Where future
street dedications are indicated on the City's Street Dedication Map or required by the City,
provisions shall be made for the dedication and improvement of these streets and included with
the application for annexation.
2. For bicycle transportation safe and accessible bicycle facilities exist, or can and will be
constructed. Should the annexation be adjacent to an arterial street, bike lanes shall be
provided on or adjacent to the arterial street. Likely bicycle destinations from the project site
shall be determined and safe and accessible bicycle facilities serving those destinations shall be
indicated.
3. For pedestrian transportation safe and accessible pedestrian facilities exist, or can and will be
constructed. Full sidewalk improvements shall be provided on one side adjacent to the
annexation for all streets adjacent to the proposed annexed area. Sidewalks shall be provided
as required by ordinance on all streets within the annexed area. Where the project site is within
a quarter of a mile of an existing sidewalk system, the sidewalks from the project site shall be
constructed to extend and connect to the existing system. Likely pedestrian destinations from
the project site shall be determined and the safe and accessible pedestrian facilities serving
those destinations shall be indicated.
4. For transit transportation, should transit service be available to the site, or be likely to be
extended to the site in the future based on information from the local public transit provider,
provisions shall be made for the construction of adequate transit facilities, such as bus shelters
and bus turn-out lanes. All required transportation improvements shall be constructed and
installed prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any new structures on the
annexed property.
ot~~
-- -----------------.- ---- -
F. For all residential annexations, a plan shall be provided demonstrating that the development of the
entire property will ultimately occur at a minimum density of 90% of the base density for the zone,
unless reductions in the total number of units is necessary to accommodate! significant natural
features, topography, access limitations, or similar physical constraints. The owner or owners of
the property shall sign an agreement, to be recorded with the county clerk ajFter approval of the
annexation, ensuring that future development will occur in accord with the minimum density
indicated in the development plan. For purposes of computing maximum density, portions of the
annexed area containing undevelopable areas such as wetlands, floodplain corridor lands, or slopes
greater than 35%, shall not be included.
G. For all annexations with a density or potential density of four residential units or greater and
involving residential zoned lands, or commercial, employment or industrial lands with a Residential
Overlay (R-Overlay):
1. 35% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 120% of
median income; or
2. 25% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below '100% of
median income; or
3. 20% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 80% of
median income; or
4. 15% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 60% of
median income; or
5. Title to a sufficient amount of buildable land for development is transferred to a non-profit (IRC
501(3)(c)) affordable housing developer or comparable Development Corporation for the
purpose of complying with subsection 2 above. The land shall be located within the project and
all needed public facilities shall be extended to the area or areas proposed for transfer.
Ownership of the land shall be transferred to the affordable housing developer or Development
Corporation prior to commencement of the project.
The total number of affordable units described in this section G shall be determined by rounding down
fractional answers to the nearest whole unit. A deed restriction, or similar legal instrument, shall be
used to guarantee compliance with affordable criteria for a period of not less than 60 years. Properties
providing affordable units as part of the annexation process shall qualify for a maximum density bonus
of 25 percent.
H. One or more of the following standards are met:
1. The proposed area for annexation is to be residentially zoned, and there is I'ess than a five-year
supply of vacant and redevelopable land in the proposed land use classification within the
current city limits. "Redevelopable land" means land zoned for residential use on which
development has already occurred but on which, due to present or expected market forces,
there exists the likelihood that existing development will be converted to more intensive
residential uses during the planning period. The five- year supply shall be determined from
vacant and redevelopable land inventories and by the methodology for land need projections
from the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan; or
2. The proposed lot or lots will be zoned E-l or C-l under the Comprehensive Plan, and that the
applicant will obtain Site Review approval for an outright permitted use, or special permitted
use concurrent with the annexation request; or
3. A current or probable public health hazard exists due to lack of full City sanitary sewer or water
services; or
4. Existing development in the proposed annexation has inadequate water or sanitary sewer
service; or the service will become inadequate within one year; or
5. The area proposed for annexation has existing City of Ashland water or sanitary sewer service
extended, connected, and in use, and a signed "consent to annexation" agreement has been
filed and accepted by the City of Ashland; or
6. The lot or lots proposed for annexation are an "island" completely surrounded by lands within
the city limits. (ORD 2792, 1997)
~~~
-----------,-------- ---
OUTLINE PLAN APPROVAL
18.88.030.A Criteria for Approval
The Planning Commission shall approve the outline plan when it finds the following critE!ria have been met:
a. That the development meets all applicable ordinance requirements of the City of Ashland.
b. That adequate key City facilities can be provided including water, sewer, paved access to and through
the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, police and fire protection and adequate
transportation; and that the development will not cause a City facility to operate beyond capacity.
c. That the existing and natural features of the land; such as wetlands, floodplain corridors, ponds, large
trees, rock outcroppings, etc., have been identified in the plan of the development and significant features
have been included in the open space, common areas, and unbuildable areas.
d. That the development of the land will not prevent adjacent land from being developed for the uses
shown in the Comprehensive Plan.
e. That there are adequate provisions for the maintenance of open space and common ,areas, if required
or provided, and that if developments are done in phases that the early phases have the same or higher
ratio of amenities as proposed in the entire project.
f. That the proposed density meets the base and bonus density standards established under this Chapter.
g. The development complies with the Street Standards. (Ord 2836, S2 1999)
SITE REVIEW
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.
B. 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.
D. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, paved access to and throu~~h 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)
STREET STANDARDS
18.88.050 F - Exception to Street Standards
An exception to the Street Standards is not subject to the Variance requirements of section 18.100 and
may be granted with respect to the Street Standards in 18.88.050 if all of the followin!~ circumstances are
found to exist:
A. There is demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements of this chapter due to a unique or
unusual aspect of the site or proposed use of the site.
B. The variance will result in equal or superior transportation facilities and connectivity;
C. The variance is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty; and
D .The variance is consistent with the stated Purpose and Intent of the Performance Standards Options
Chapter.
(Ord 2836, Amended, 02/02/1999)
~~~
-- ------.---- - -
TREE REMOVAL
18.61.080 Criteria for Issuance of Tree Removal - Staff Permit
An applicant for a Tree Removal-Staff Permit shall demonstrate that the following criteria are satisfied.
The Staff Advisor may require an arborist's report to substantiate the criteria for a permit.
A. Hazard Tree: The Staff Advisor shall issue a tree removal permit for a hazard tree if the applicant
demonstrates that a tree is a hazard and warrants removal.
1. A hazard tree is a tree that is physically damaged to the degree that it is clear thalt it is likely to fall
and injure persons or property. A hazard tree may also include a tree that is located within public rights of
way and is causing damage to existing public or private facilities or services and such facilities or services
cannot be relocated or the damage alleviated. The applicant must demonstrate that the! condition or
location of the tree presents a clear public safety hazard or a foreseeable danger of property damage to an
existing structure and such hazard or danger cannot reasonably be alleviated by treatment or pruning.
2. The City may require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each hazard tree pursuant to AMC
18.61.084. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit.
B. Tree that is Not a Hazard: The City shall issue a tree removal permit for a tree that is not a hazard if
the applicant demonstrates all of the following:
1. The tree is proposed for removal in order to permit the application to be consistent with other
applicable Ashland Land Use Ordinance requirements and standards. (e.g. other applicable Site Design
and Use Standards). The Staff Advisor may require the building footprint of the development to be staked
to allow for accurate verification of the permit application; and
2. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of
surface waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks; and
3. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on the tree densitiles, sizes, canopies,
and species diversity within 200 feet of the subject property. The City shall grant an exception to this
criterion when alternatives to the tree removal have been considered and no reasonabl'e alternative exists
to allow the property to be used as permitted in the zone. Nothing in this section shall require that the
residential density be reduced below the permitted density allowed by the zone. In making this
determination, the City may consider alternative site plans or placement of structures or alternate
landscaping designs that would lessen the impact on trees, so long as the alternatives continue to comply
with other provisions of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance.
4. The City shall require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each tree grantE~d approval
pursuant to AMC 18.61.084. Such mitigation requirements shall be.a condition of approval of the permit.
(ORD 2883 added 06/04/2002)
~ 1:> 5"
-----~~,---
City of Ashland
Community Development Department
Attn: Bill Molnar, Senior Planner
59 Winburn Way
Ashland, OR 97520
f'nln f? (;;' f"':" r"!.., ..... r-.
I., .. ,.~
j FED f) r; '1,' ~
U8L.:;;v;_~0 l0JJ ,
......-..-....~~~~ T.StV
------..
Subject: Willowbrook; Planning Action 2004-141; 380 Clay Street
During the February 8th, 2005, Planning Commission Public Hearing, staff and the
Planning Commission had asked the applicant to provide some additional infomlation on
the site's large Poplar Trees, potential wetlands survey and information pertaining to off-
site street improvements on upper Clay Street. We are in the process of obtaining this
information, but will not be able to have all of the information by the requested submittal
date. As such, we would like to request a 30 day extension with the goal of having the
requested information ready to submit to staff for the April Planning Commission
meeting.
rfyou have any questions pertaining to this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me at
482-2444 or Andy Cochrane at 482-1656.
~'l7~
bL ~Co
IN THE MATTER OF PLANNING ACTION #2004-141, Annexation of an ~ REQUEST FOR
approximately to-acre parcel located on the east side of Clay Street, north of ~ AN EXTENSION
Ashland Street, at 380 Clay Street. The project involves Outline Plan and Site ~ OF THE TIME
Review approval for a 64-lot, nO-unit single and multi-family development ~ LIMIT
under the Performance Standards Option. A request for Tree Removal is ~ ORS 227.178(1)
included with the application, as well as an Exception to City Street Standards )
that would permit a portion of sidewalk to be installed at curbside.
APPLICANTS: D and A Enterprise )
Applicants request a
227.178(1 ).
10
(p
day extension to the time limit set forth in ORS
2-2,--G~
Date
Applicant
Date
~~
I ii' FEB 2 8 2005 ,0 I
Ur.rrs13Gutr" . . ill I
..--------- ~~
--...........
[Note: ORS 227.178(5) provides that the "120-day period set in (ORS 227.178(1)) may
be extended for a specified period of time at the written request of the applicant. The total
of all extensions may not exceed 245 days."]
~~1
- -------------~-------.-- --~--
I Bill MQT6~r":Wilfowbrook Time Extensioi1....~=='~~:=======.~==:==.=:'=.= :,' ':~~=::=.:::= .."", -"_== ..~.::=~.=',,__'==~=:::J5a~e 1]
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
Bill,
"Andy Cochrane" <cochrane@mind.net>
<molnarb@ashland.or.us>, <bill@ashland.or.us>
2/24/2005 2:52:08 PM
Willowbrook Time Extension
We are still working on the wetland delineation and tree preservation work as requested during the
February Planning Commission meeting. However, we are requesting a 30 day continuance iin order to
gather the necessary information. This letter is intended to keep you informed as to the status of the
project as well as ask for the time extension. Please let me know if you need any additional information in
order to process the continuance.
Andy Cochrane & Doug Irvine
A~~
Notice is hereby given that a PUBLIC HEA 3 on the following
request with respect to the ASHLAND LA...,) USE ORDINANCE
will be held before the ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION on
FEBRUARY 8, 2005 at 7:00 p.m. at the ASHLAND CIVIC
CENTER, 1175 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon.
The ordinance criteria applicable to this application are attached to this notice.
Oregon law states that failure to raise an objection concerning this application,
either in person or by letter, or failure to provide sufficient specificity to afford the
decision maker an opportunity to respond to the issue, precludes your right of
appeal to the land Use Board of Appeals (lUBA) on that issue. Failure to specify
which ordinance criterion the objection is based on also precludes your right of
appeal to lUBA on that criterion. Failure of the applicant to raise constitutional or
other issues relating to proposed conditions of approval with sufficient specificity
to allow this Commission to respond to the issue precludes an action for damages
in circuit court.
A copy of the application, locuments and evidence relied upon by the
applicant and applicable crit" 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 prior 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.
During the Public Hearing, the Chair shall allow te!itimony from the applicant
and those in attendance concerning this request. The Chair shall have the
right to limit the length of testimony and require that comments be restricted
to the applicable criteria. Unless there is a continuance, if a participant so
requests before the conclusion of the hearing, thEl record shall remain open
for at least seven days after the hearing.
If you have questions or comments concerning this request, please feel free
to contact Susan Yates at the Ashland Planning Department, at 541-552-
2041. Our TTY phone number is 1-Boo-735-2900.
,
c::
I
r1
[
380 Clay Street
PLANNING ACTION 2004-141 is a request for Annexation, Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map change from Jackson
County zoning RR-5 (Rural Residential) to City of Ashland zoning R-2 (Low Density Multi-Family Resiidential) for an
approximately ten-acre parcel located at 380 Clay Street. The request includes Outline Plan and Site, Review approval for a
130-unit development under the Performance Standards Option. An Exception to the Street Standards is requested to
meander the proposed sidewalk on the Clay Street frontage around a cedar tree located in the southwest corner of the
property. A Tree Removal Permit is requested to remove the nine trees on the site. Comprehensive Plan Designation: Low
Density Multi-Family Residential (proposed), Rural Residential (current); Zoning: R-2 (proposed), RR-5 (current); Assessor's
Map #: 39 1 E 11 C; Tax Lot: 2500.
APPLICANT: 0 and A Enterprise
NOTE: This Planning Action will also be heard by the Ashland Tree Commission on February 3,2005 in the Community
Development and Engineering Services building (Siskiyou Room) located at 51 Winburn Way at 7:00 p.m.
A31
----------------------,-----
ANNEXATIONS - APPROVAL S'r\NDARDS
18.106.030 Approval standards
An annexation may be approved if the proposed request for annexation conforms, or can be made to conform through the imposition of conditions, with
the following approval criteria:
A. The land is within the City's Urban Growth Boundary.
B. The proposed zoning for the annexed area is in conformance with the designation indicated on the Comprehensive Plan Map, and the project, if
proposed concurrently with the annexation, is an allowed use within the proposed zoning.
C. The land is currently contiguous with the present City limits.
D. Adequate City facilities for the provision of water to the site as determined by the Public Works Department; the transport of sewage from the site to
the waste water treatment plant as determined by the Public Works Department; the provision of electricity to the site as dete,rmined by the Electric
Department; urban storm drainage as determined by the Public Works Department can and will be provided to and through tl,e subject property. Unless
the City has declared a moratorium based upon a shortage of water, sewer, or electricity, it is recognized that adequate capacity exists system-wide for
these facilities.
E. Adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property. For the purposes of this section "adequate transportation" for
annexations consists of vehicular, bicycle, pedestrian and transit transportation meeting the following standards:
1. For vehicular transportation a 20' wide paved access exists, or can and will be constructed, along the full frontage of the project site to the nearest
fully improved collector or arterial street. All streets adjacent to the annexed area shall be improved, at a minimum, to a half-street standard with a
minimum 20' driving surface. The City may, after assessing the impact of the development, require the full improvement of streets adjacent to the
annexed area. All streets located within annexed areas shall be fully improved to city standards. Where future street dedications are indicated on the
City's Street Dedication Map or required by the City, provisions shall be made for the dedication and improvement of these streets and included with the
application for annexation.
2. For bicycle transportation safe and accessible bicycle facilities exist, or can and will be constructed. Should the annexalion be adjacent to an arterial
street, bike lanes shall be provided on or adjacent to the arterial street. Likely bicycle destinations from the project site shall be determined and safe and
accessible bicycle facilities serving those destinations shall be indicated.
3. For pedestrian transportation safe and accessible pedestrian facilities exist, or can and will be constructed. Full sidewalk improvements shall be
provided on one side adjacent to the annexation for all streets adjacent to the proposed annexed area. Sidewalks shall be provided as required by
ordinance on all streets within the annexed area. Where the project site is within a quarter of a mile of an existing sidewalk system, the sidewalks from the
project site shall be constructed to extend and connect to the existing system. Likely pedestrian destinations from the project site shall be determined and
the safe and accessible pedestrian facilities serving those destinations shall be indicated.
4. For transit transportation, should transit service be available to the site, or be likely to be extended to the site in the future based on information from
the local public transit provider, provisions shall be made for the construction of adequate transit facilities, such as bus sheltE~rs and bus turn-out lanes. All
required transportation improvements shall be constructed and installed prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any new structures on the
annexed property.
All required transportation improvements shall be constructed and installed prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any new structures on the
annexed property.
OUTLINE PLAN APPROVAL
18.88.030.A Criteria for Approval
The Planning Commission shall approve the outline plan when it finds the following criteria have been met:
a. That the development meets all applicable ordinance requirements of the City of Ashland.
b. That adequate key City facilities can be provided including water, sewer, paved access to and through the
development, electricity, urban storm drainage, police and fire protection and adequate transportation; and
that the development will not cause a City facility to operate beyond capacity.
c. That the existing and natural features of the land; such as wetlands, floodplain corridors, ponds, large trees,
rock outcroppings, etc., have been identified in the plan of the development and significant features have been
included in the open space, common areas, and unbuildable areas.
d. That the development of the land will not prevent adjacent land from being developed for the uses shown in
the Comprehensive Plan.
e. That there are adequate provisions for the maintenance of open space and common areas, if required or
provided, and that if developments are done in phases that the early phases have the same or higher ratio of
amenities as proposed in the entire project.
f. That the proposed density meets the base and bonus density standards established under this Chapter.
g. The development complies with the Street Standards. (Ord 2836, S2 1999)
~41)
-_..__._.._._-_..._..._._-~._~-----_._._----~---_._._-.--....----
SITE REVIEW
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.
B. All requirements of the Site Review Chapter have been met or will be met.
e. The development complies with the Site Design Standards adopted by the City Council for 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. 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)
TREE REMOVAL
18.61.080 Criteria for Issuance of Tree Removal - Staff Permit
An applicant for a Tree Removal-Staff Permit shall demonstrate that the following criteria are satisfied. The
Staff Advisor may require an arborist's report to substantiate the criteria for a permit.
A. Hazard Tree: The Staff Advisor shall issue a tree removal permit for a hazard tree if the applicant
demonstrates that a tree is a hazard and warrants removal.
1. A hazard tree is a tree that is physically damaged to the degree that it is clear that it is likely to fall and
injure persons or property. A hazard tree may also include a tree that is located within public rights of way and
is causing damage to existing public or private facilities or services and such facilities or s€!rvices cannot be
relocated or the damage alleviated. The applicant must demonstrate that the condition or Ilocation of the tree
presents a clear public safety hazard or a foreseeable danger of property damage to an eXlisting structure and
such hazard or danger cannot reasonably be alleviated by treatment or pruning.
2. The City may require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each hazard tree pursuant to AMC
18.61.084. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit.
B. Tree that is Not a Hazard: The City shall issue a tree removal permit for a tree that is not a hazard if the
applicant demonstrates all of the following:
1. The tree is proposed for removal in order to permit the application to be consistent with other applicable
Ashland Land Use Ordinance requirements and standards. (e.g. other applicable Site Desi9n and Use
Standards). The Staff Advisor may require the building footprint of the development to be staked to allow for
accurate verification of the permit application; and
2. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface
waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks; and
3. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes, canopies, and
species diversity within 200 feet of the subject property. The City shall grant an exception to this criterion
when alternatives to the tree removal have been considered and no reasonable alternative! exists to allow the
property to be used as permitted in the zone. Nothing in this section shall require that the residential density be
reduced below the permitted density allowed by the zone. In making this determination, the City may consider
alternative site plans or placement of structures or alternate landscaping designs that would lessen the impact
on trees, so long as the alternatives continue to comply with other provisions of the Ashland Land Use
Ordinance.
4. The City shall require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each tree granted approval pursuant to
AMC 18.61.084. Such mitigation requirements shall be.a condition of approval of the permit.
(ORD 2883 added 06/04/2002)
d.. '-I (
STREET STANDARDS
18.88.050 F - Exception to ~~I~eet Standards
An exception to the Street Standards is not subject to the Variance requirements of section 18.100 and may be
granted with respect to the Street Standards in 18.88.050 if all of the following circumstances are found to
exist:
A. There is demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements of this chapter dUE! to a unique or
unusual aspect of the site or proposed use of the site.
B. The variance will result in equal or superior transportation facilities and connectivity;
C. The variance is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty; and
D .The variance is consistent with the stated Purpose and Intent of the Performance Standards Options
Chapter.
(Ord 2836, Amended, 02/02/1999)
~t.f;z.
I~ r::"" r: n I';;; 0
NOV 3 0 Z004
ARCHITECTURE
LAND PLANNING
PROJECT NARRATIVE/FINDINGS
18 OCTOBER 2004
PROJECT NAME: Willovv"brook Residential Complex
TYPE OF PLANNING ACTION: A request for an Annexation/Zone Change (Chapter 18.106),
Site Review (Chapter 18.72), and approval for a Residential Subdivision utilizing the:
Performance Standard Option (Chapter 18.88 and 18.24), located in the R-2 Zone District
(currently RR-5, County zoning).
PROJECT INFORMATION:
Owner/Applicant:
D and A Enterprise
Andy Cochrane
1970 Ashland Street
Ashland, OR. 97520
541-482-1270
Architect! Agent:
Tom R. Giordano
2635 Takelma Way
Ashland, OR. 97520
541-482-9193
Surveyor:
L.J. Friar and Associates, Inc.
816 W. 8th Street
Medford, OR. 97501
541-772-7824
Landscape Architect:
Galbraith and Associates
145 S. Holly Street
Medford, OR. 97501
541- 770-7964
~y,~
2635 Takelma Way, Ashland, OR 97520 . Phone and Fax (541) 482-9193 . E-Mail tomarch@charter.net
--'. -"T
Wetlands Biologist:
Scott English
324 Terrace Street
Ashland, OR. 97520
541-488-1061
Civil Engineer:
Construction Engineering Consultants
304 S. Central Avenue
Medford, OR. 97501
541-779-5268
Transportation Engineer:
Robert Kortt
3350 Green Acres Drive
Central Point, OR. 97502
541-664-0393
Project Address:
380 Clay Street
Legal Description:
39-1E-ll C Tax Lot 2500
Comprehensive Plan Design:
Multi-Residential(City), Rural Residential (County)
Zoning Designation:
R-2 (City), RR-5 (County)
Overall Site Data:
Area of Property (10 Acres) 435,600 S.F.
Building Footprint 87,713 S.F.
Landscape/Openspace 218,526 S.F.
Paving/Sidewalks 129,361 S.F.
(Sidewalks, streets, alleys, parking, walkways)
Lots and Units Provided:
Single Family (Detached)
Duplexes
Fourplexes
Totals
26
24
14
64
2
~L/-4-
100%
20.1%
50.2%
29.7%
26
48
5(~
130
-------.----- --
Auto Parking Requirements:
Type Required
Single Family 52
Duplexes 66
Fourplexes 77
On-Street
Provided
52
66
83 (4 are HC)
93 (approximately)
Bicycle Parking Requirements:
Type Required
Single Family 52
Duplexes 48
Fourplexes 35 Sheltered
17 Uncovered
Provided
52 (In garage)
48 (in garages or storage areas)
35 Sheltered
17 Uncovered
SITE DESCRIPTION:
Land Use -
The 10 acre parcel is located on lower Clay Street. The subject property is currently in the
County but within the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) and adjacent to the City Limits of
Ashland on three sides, see Vicinity/Zone Map. In fact, except for a few parcels to the north, the
property is surrounded by City land. The County Zoning is RR-5 which allows a Single Family
Residence on a 5 acre parcel. The City's Comprehensive Plan Map shows this prope:rty to be R-
2 multi-residential when annexed to the City. The R-2 District (Chapter 18.24)... "is designated
to provide an environment suitable for urban living" with attached or unattached units.
In the general vicinity of the site (see Aerial Photograph) there are a variety ofreside:ntialland
uses which include single family to high density multi-residential housing types. Fwiher to the
south and east are commercial activities associated with Ashland Street/Highway 66 corridor.
The land uses and zone districts immediately adjacent to the subject property are as follows:
North - Single Family Residence and vacant land, Zoned RR-5 (County)
South - Commercial and Low-Density Multi-Family Residences, Zoned R-2 and C-1
, East - Vacant YMCA soccer fields, Zoned R-2
West - Clay Street and mobile home residences, Zoned R-2
Physical Characteristics -
The property has a gentle 3.3% slope towards the north, see Site Plan and City Topo Map. There
is an open drainage ditch along the frontage of Clay Street. There is an existing Single Family
3
~Lf-b
-----"-------. ~~------.---------
Home, barn and garage on the site. There are significant large trees adjacent to hous(~ located in
the southwest corner ofthe property, see Aerial Photograph and Site Plan. The prope:rty was
used for farming in the past. An irrigation ditch runs along the street frontage of the property
and also along the south boundary line. Although a wetland is shown on a preliminalY City map,
no wetlands exist, see attached letter from wetlands biologist.
Access to the Property -
The existing home has a driveway off Clay Street. Clay Street is designated as an avenue (major
collector) with an existing 60 foot ROWand a 20 foot wide paved section in front of the
property. The City's transportation element of the Comprehensive Plan states that "on an
average day 3,000 to 10,000 Motor Vehicle Trips are made on a typical avenue." Further, the
transportation element recommends multi-family development along avenues.
No sidewalks are on the frontage of the property; however, sidewalks have been installed to the
north (Bud's Dairy) and south, adjacent to the new development. On-street bike lam:s are
proposed along Clay Street. Public transportation is located on Ashland Street, approximately
two blocks to the south. Bike lanes are on both East Main Street (to the north) and Ashland
Street (to the south), as well as adjacent to the railroad ROW.
Utilities and Services-
Overhead utilities and an open drainage ditch are located along Clay Street. There is an 8 inch
water line, and 8 inch sewer line and an 18 inch storm sewer line in Clay Street.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Request -
The applicant desires to annex this property into the City and utilizing the Performance Standard
Option, create a 130 dwelling unit residential subdivision consisting of single family homes,
duplexes and fourplexes. There will be 26 two story single family, three bedroom wlits. There
will be 24 duplexes. Each duplex will consist of a two bedroom unit on the ground noor and a
one bedroom (less than 500 S.F.) unit on the top floor for a total of 48 dwelling units. There will
also be 14 fourplex buildings. Each fourplex will consist of a two bedroom and one bedroom
unit (less than 500 S.F.) on the ground floor and a two bedroom and one bedroom unit (less than
500 S.F.) on the top floor for a total of 56 dwelling units. Seven of the fourplex buildings or 28
of the 56 fourplex units will be condominium units.
When annexed to the City, the allowable density for this parcel in the R-2 zone district would be
135 dwelling units (10 acres x 13.5=135). Per the annexation requirements, the applicant must
provide at least 90% of the allowable density for the development, see Annexation Findings.
Ninety percent of the 135 allowable units is 121.5. The applicant is providing 130 dwelling
4
~~b
units, see Site Review Finding A and Annexation Findings.
In addition, the applicant must demonstrate a need for the proposed housing (Chapter 18.106.030
H) and designate a portion of the housing (Chapter 18.106.030 G) as affordable. The applicant
will comply with these standards, see Annexation Findings. The applicant will designate 19 of
the total units as affordable under the City's guidelines. Each of the 19 units will me(:t the 60%
Medium Family Income.
Further, the applicant will provide needed apartment units as identified in the "Ashland Housing
Needs Assessment Report, 2002". All of the single family and duplex units will be under single
ownership with all of the apartments in the duplex buildings being rental units (24 rental units).
In addition, one-half (seven) ofthe 14 fourplex buildings or 28 of the 56 fourplex units will be
condominium units. The combination of the duplex and fourplex "rental" units will provide a
total of 52 or 40% of the 130 units as "guaranteed rental units", in addition the remaining 28
fourplex units proposed as condominiums will provide a mixture of smaller more affordable for
sale housing. The common landscape, alleys and parking areas for the duplexes and fourplexes
will be shared by the tenants and maintained by the owners.
The applicant will use a "team approach" for the design of the project in order to insure that all
issues are addressed. This team will include: architect/land planner, landscape archi1tect,
surveyor, wetland biologist, civil engineer, traffic engineer, attorney and contractor. This team
was formed prior to the preparation of the Outline Plan Application.
The yard requirements for the R-2 zone district is a 15 foot front, 6 foot side, and 10 foot per
story for the rear. The proposed property will meet or exceed these requirements adjacent to the
perimeter boundaries ofthe project. The buildings within the boundaries will utilize the
Performance Standards Option in regard to setbacks but will never be less than 12 feet apart, see
Site Plan.
Due to the layout of the site, solar access for the proposed buildings will not be an issue, except
between fourplexes F 12 to F 14 which are 32 feet away instead of33.9 feet, see Site: Review
Finding A. Detailed solar access calculations was provided in the Findings. The existing house,
garage and barn will be demolished.
Access -
A looped street off Clay Street is proposed to provide vehicle access, see Site Plan. This
proposed street will have a 52 foot wide ROW. Within the proposed ROW, there will be 5 foot
wid~ sidewalks, 7.5 foot wide parkrows and 6 inch curbs on each side of the street. The parkrow
will become wider at the intersections and to accommodate existing trees, see Site Plan. The
curb to curb dimension will be 26 feet wide which will allow parking on each side of the street.
Clay Street will be improved per City standards (6 foot sidewalk, 7.5 foot parkrow, 6 inch curb,
6 foot bike lane) within the existing 60 foot ROW.
5
~L.f?
,~
The parking required for the development is 195 spaces (26 three bdrm. x 2=52 plus 52 two
bdrms. x 1.75=91 plus 52 one bdrm. [less than 500 S.F.] x 1.0=52). The applicant will provide
212 plus approximately 93 additional on street spaces. The additional on-street parking spaces,
can be used for the overflow parking needs of the YMCA soccer fields.
Bus service is in easy walking distance on Ashland Street as well as the commercial activities at
the intersection at Tolman Creek Road. Bicycle paths (East Main, Ashland Street and along the
railroad) are easily accessible.
The traffic engineer will address the impacts generated by this development in a separate report
included in the application package.
Landscape Strategies -
As shown on the Site Plan, new landscape areas are located throughout the site. These landscape
areas will:
1) Meet permeable surface requirements for the overall site~
2) Assist in the drainage of the property (retention basins and "dry-creek" area on the east
boundary);
3) Provide screening to adjacent properties;
4) Create both private and common openspace;
5) Provide shade for the parking area, and;
6) Provide scale/texture for the proposed buildings.
The drainage corridor ("dry creek") and retention ponds will create a natural feature as well as
buffer the development from the YMCA soccer fields. Three pedestrian paths/bridg1es are
located on the Site Plan to afford access to the soccer fields. There will also be a central
openspace/recreation area through the middle of the development, see Site Plan. These
openspaceareas will include pathways for pedestrian access. The Landscape Plan shows the
above areas in greater detail.
The landscape design will utilize low water use plant material and irrigation as required by the
City of Ashland.
Utilities/Service -
6
"'+~
---_._--_._-----~~-_..,--"._-~-----.----_.._--_._-
Within the development and along Clay Street the electrical, CTV and telephone service will be
underground within a proposed 10 foot wide PUB. The sanitary sewer and water lines will
connect to the existing services within the Clay Street ROW. The proposed storm sewer/runoff
for the development will connect to the existing system in Clay Street and to the proposed
retention ponds and swales along the east boundary, see Landscape and Civil Drawings.
When annexed to the City, Fire and Police protection will be available. Fire hydrants will be
added and located per the City's Fire Department requirements.
Architecture -
It is the intent of the applicant to provide an attractive and affordable housing development.
Further, the applicant desires to provide a selection of housing types to both owners and renters.
To incorporate these concepts, the applicant is proposing the following:
1) Single Family, 1,400 to 1,700 S.F. three bedroom, two story homes that will be owned
separately but share a common driveway to conserve the amount of non-pemleable
surface area and to limit curb cuts.
2) Duplex, 1,400 S.F., two story homes with an attached 480 S.F. accessory unit (above
the garage).
3) Duplex consisting of a 960 S.F. two bedroom unit at ground level and a 499 S.F. one
bedroom unit located within the roof form to create a single family height and mass.
4) Fourplex consisting of an 800 S.F., two bedroom unit and 499 S.F. one bedroom unit
on both the ground and top floors.
5) Fourplex units consisting of 56 units with 28 units being rental units and 28 units be
condominium units. The intention is to provide a mixture of housing types with low cost
housing units that could accommodate single-parent renters, small family renters, first
time home buyers or seniors with limited means.
It is the belief of the applicant, that this type of housing mix will encourage both "first time"
housing buyers as well as affordable rentals. The proposed buildings, however, will comply with
the City's Site Design Guidelines regarding streetscape, orientation, scale and location of
fenestration, see Exterior Elevations. Possible exterior building materials would indude:
1) Smooth and textured CMU' s~
2) Cement fiber and wood shingle siding and horizontal board;
3) Four and six inch wide building trim; and
7
~4-1
- -----~-_._---_._--,------- -
4) Composition roofing.
As shown on the Exterior Elevations Drawings, a variety of traditional architectural styles are
used. Also, each building will have changes in color, detailing and materials to vary the
architectural character. Dormers will be used to break up roof mass as well as for extra natural
light and interior volume.
Each unit will have an energy efficient electric heat pump or gas furnace HV AC system. The
appliances and water heaters will also be energy efficient. Energy consumption and building
construction will meet or exceed both the City's and State Energy Code Requirements.
FINDINGS:
ANNEXATIONS (CHAPTER 18.106)
An annexation may be approved ifthe proposed request for annexation conforms, or can be
made to conform through the imposition of conditions, with the following approval criteria:
A. The land within the City's Urban GrDwth bDundary.
As shown on the County Parcel Map and the Vicinity/Zone Map, the subject propert:V is within
the City of Ashland's Urban Growth Boundary (UGB).
B. The prDpDsed ZDning fDr the annexed area is in cDnfDrmance with the designatiDn
,on the CDmprehensive Plan Map, and the prDject, if prDpDsed cDncurrently with thie
annexatiDn, is an allDwed use within the ZDning.
The applicant is proposing a low density, multi-residential, R-2 Zone designation type project,
see Outline Plan and Site Review Findings. The proposed development is consistent with the
City's designation indicated on the Comprehensive Plan Map which shows low-density, multi-
residential, R-2 Zoning.
C. The land is currently cDntiguDus with the City limits.
As shown on the County Parcel Map and City Zone Map, the City limits are located on three
sides of subject property. In fact, the subject property is an island of County land except for a
few parcels to the north. Further, the City recently approved an annexation (Bud's Dairy)
located one parcel to the north of the property on Clay Street.
D. Adequate City facilitiesfDr the prDvisiDn Dfwater tD the site as determined by the
Public WDrks Department; the transpDrt ,of sewage frDm the site tD the waste wateJ" treatment
plant as determined by the Public WDrks Department; the prDvisiDn ,of electricity t,o the site as
determined by the Electric Department; urban stDrm drainage as determined by the Public
WDrks Department can and will be prDvided tD and thrDugh the subject prDperty. Unless the
8
t<. E 1)
". -- -------..---------...--------."-----.----..--..-...-----..--
City has declared a moratorium based upon a shortage of water, sewer or electrici~y, it is
recognized that adequate capacity exist system-wide for these facilities.
The Site Review and Outline Plan Findings in this document as well as the preliminary civil
engineering drawings show compliance with this finding.
E. Adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject
property. For the purposes of this section "adequate transportation" for annexatiOin consists
of vehicular, bicycle, pedestrian and transit transportation meeting thefollowing standards:
1. For vehicular transportation a 10' wide paved access area exists, or can and
will be constructed along the full frontage of the project site to the nearest fully improved
collector or arterial street. All streets adjacent to the annexed area shall be improved, at a
minimum, to a half-street standard with a minimum 10' driving sutface. The City may, after
assessing the impact of the development, require the full improvement of streets a(J~acent to
the annexed area. All streets located within annexed areas shall be fully improved'to City
standards. Wherefuture street dedications are indicated on the City's Street Dedication Map
or required by the City, provisions shall be made for the dedication and improvenumt of these
streets and included with the application for annexation.
1. For bicycle transportation safe and accessible bicycle facilities exist, or can
and will be constructed. Should the annexation be adjacent to an arterial street, blike lanes
shall be provided on or adjacent to the arterial street. Likely bicycle destinations firom the
project site shall be determined and safe and accessible bicycle facilities serving those
destinations shall be indicated.
3. For pedestrian transportation safe and accessible facilities exist, or can and
will be constructed. Full sidewalk improvements shall be provided on one side adjacent to the
annexation for all streets adjacent to the proposed annexed area. Sidewalks shall be provided
as required by ordinance on all streets within the annexed area. Where the project site is
within a quarter of a mile of an existing sidewalk system, the sidewalks from the piroject site
shall be constructed to extend and connect to the existing system. Likely pedestrian
destinations from the project site shall be determined and the safe and accessible pedestrian
facilities serving those destinations shall be indicated.
4. For transit transportation, should transit service be available to the site, or
be likely to be extended to the site in the future based on information from the local public
transit provider, provisions shall be made for the construction of adequate transit facilities,
such as bus shelters and bus turn-out lanes. All required transportation improvements shall
be constructed and installed prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any new
structures on the annexed property.
As part of the Outline Plan and Site Review for the project, the applicant has providl~d a Traffic
Impact Study which evaluates the potential impacts of the project on surrounding streets, see
9
~6'
- ------~----.----- -----
study included in this document. The applicant will also improve (half street) Clay Street along
the frontage of the property and provide full improvements to the proposed Barclay Square
project to the south. In conjunction with the Barclay Square project, the applicant will
participate in the improvements at the intersection of Ashland/Clay Streets. The Site Plan,
Engineering Plans and Site Review Findings show compliance with the City Street Standards.
The proposed new streets will also conform to the City of Ashland's standards, see Site Review
Findings, and be constructed and dedicated to the City. The Site Plan also shows a future street
and pedestrian connections to the property on the north and south boundaries and an internal
alley/path system within the development, see Site Plan and Site Review Findings.
Existing on-street bike lanes are located on Ashland Street (to the south) and East Main Street
(to the north). There is also an informal bike-pedestrian path which connects to the central
Ashland bike path under the railroad overpass on Ashland Street. The applicant is also providing
a six foot wide bike lane path along the frontage of the property which will connect to the
Barclay Square project on the south.
As discussed in the Site Review Findings and shown on the Site Plan, the applicant has provided
paths and sidewalks to the adjacent properties on the north, south and east. To further connect
the development with nearby services (YMCA, Albertson's, etc.), the project plans identify three
access points to the adjacent YMCA Soccer Fields and through Barclay Square.
A transit route is located a short distance from the proposed development on Ashland Street.
The close availability of public transportation, sidewalks/paths, and bike lanes will help to
mitigate the number of vehicle trips generated by the development. Further, the Ashland
StreetITolman Creek Road Commercial District is a short walkinglbiking distance from the
subject property.
F. For all residential annexations, a plan shall be provided demonstrating that the
development of the entire property will ultimately occur at a minimum density of ~~O% of the
base density for the zone, unless reductions in the total number of units is necessary to
accommodate significant natural features, topography, access limitations, or similar physical
constraints. The owner or owners of the property shall sign an agreement, to be r.ecorded with
the county clerk after approval of the annexation, ensuring that the future development will
occur in accord with minimum density indicated in the development plan. For pl4:rposes of
computing maximum density, portions of the annexed area containing undeveloplrlble areas
such as wetlands, floodplain corridor lands, or slopes greater than 35%, shall not be included.
The applicant is proposing 130 dwelling wnits for the project. The R-2 zone district allows 13.5
dwelling units per acre. The property is ten acres in area and therefore a potential 135 dwelling
units are possible. The applicant is providing 96.2% of the base density.
G. For all annexations with a density or potential density offour residentlial units or
10
~.5~
.-----.-~~ - -- ----
greater and involving residential zoned lands, or commercial, employment or industrial lands
with a Residential Overlay (R-Overlay):
1. 35% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or
below 120% of median income; or
2. 25% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incoll'1es at or
below 100% of median income; or
3. 20% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incornes at or
below 80% of median income; or
4. 15% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or
below 60% of median income; or
5. Title to a sufficient amount of buildable land for development is transferred
to a non-profit (IRC 501(3)rQ)) affordable housing developer or comparable
Development Corporation for the purpose of complying with subsection 2
above. The land shall be located within the project and all needed public
facilities shall be extended to the area or areas proposed for transfe,..
Ownership of the land shall be transferred to the affordable housing developer
or Development Corporation prior to commencement of the project.
The total number of affordable units described in this section G shall be determined by
rounding down fractional answers to the nearest whole unit. A dead restriction, OJ" similar
legal instrument, shall be used to guarantee compliance with affordable criteria fo,r a period
of not less than 60 years. Properties providing affordable units as part of the annexation
process shall qualify for a maximum density bonus of 25 percent.
In accordance with the Annexation Approval Standards, 18.106.030, Section G, the
applicant is proposing to incorporate a total of 19 affordable rental units into the project.
The affordable units will be 15% of the project's 130 units and will be available for a 60
year period to individuals or families that meet income limits of 60% of the ME~dian
Family Income (MFI) for the Ashland/Medford area, established and annually updated by
the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the City's Community
Development Department.
By providing housing to households within the 60% Median Family Income rBlnge, the
project will be providing housing for individuals and families earning service industry
wages. For example, a family of two (single parent with one child) qualifies with an
annual income of less than $25,020 or a family of four (two parents and two children)
qualify with an annual household income less than $31,260. In contrast, a family of two
earning 120% of the Median Family Income earns $50,040 and a family of four earns
11
~6~
- _n_ ___ _.~__-----'. ----- ----
$62,520 or twice the amount of money earned by families projected under the project's
affordable housing program.
As noted above, the affordable units will be retained for a 60 year period. The applicant
will agree to sign a deed restriction for all properties containing an affordable unit in
order to guarantee compliance with the City's affordable housing program and the
Annexation Approval Standards.
In an attempt to broaden the location of the 19 affordable units, the applicant proposes
to spread the 19 units throughout the 14 fourplex buildings, without grouping the
affordable units in any two adjacent buildings.
In addition to the 19 affordable units, the project will include an additional 33
"guaranteed" rental units for a total of 52 rental units or 40% of all units proposed to be
constructed in the project. It should also be understood that no restrictions would be in
place that would limit the duplex or four-plex property owner from renting a unit(s) to
qualifying renters. In fact, as the City progresses towards meeting the City's affordable
housing goals, the City may provide incentives to homeowners to rent their units as
affordable units and thereby increase the project's overall contribution to Ashl,and's
affordable housing market. Second, the applicants are proposing to provide one-half or
28 of the fourplex units as small one and two-bedroom condominiums with the: intention to
provide low cost housing units that could accommodate first time home buyers or seniors with
limited means.
Lastly, to the applicant's knowledge, this is the first un-subsidized project in the City of
Ashland to provide affordable housing. The applicant believes the annexation proposal,
with the incorporation of the 19 affordable units, plus the proposed market rate rentals,
plus the variety of for sale houses will provide for a needed housing type that benefits
the Ashland community and Ashland schools system.
H. One or more of the following standards are met:
1. The proposed area for annexation is to be residentially zoned, and tArere is less
than a five-year supply of vacant and redevelopable land in the proposed land use
classification within the City limits. "Redevelopable land" means land zonedfor
residential use on which development has already occu"ed but on which, due to
present or expected market forces, there exists the likelihood that existing
development will be converted to more intensive residential uses during the
planning period. The five-year supply shall be determined from vacant and
redevelopable land inventories and by the methodology for land need pjrojections
from the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan; or
2. The proposed lot or lots will be zoned E-l or C-l under the Comprehensive
Plan, and that the applicant will obtain Site Review approval for an outright
permitted use, or special permitted use concu"ent with the annexation request; or
12
6t5't
_....._.__.._--~-_._-_.._.. -----.---------..-------......-
3. A current or probable public health hazard exists due to lack of full City
sanitary sewer or water services; or
4. Existing development in the proposed annexation has inadequate water or
sanitary sewer service; or the service will become inadequate within one year; or
5. The area proposed for annexation has existing City of Ashland wate,. or sanitary
sewer service extended, connected, and in use, and a signed "consent to
annexation" agreement has been filed and accepted by the City of Ashland; or
6. The lot or lots proposed for annexation are an "island" completely surrounded
by lands within the City limits. (ORD 2792, 1997)
In accordance with the Annexation Approval Standards, 18.106.030 H.1., the applicants
must demonstrate there is less than a five-year supply of vacant and redevelopable land
in the R-2 (Multi-Family Residential) zoning classification within existing City limits.
1998/1999 Buildable Lands Inventory (BLI)
According to the 1998/1999 Buildable Lands Inventory (BLI), Tables 5.3.2 and 6.0, in
April of 1999 there was a total of 10.25 "years" or 16.13 "acres" of surplus land within the
existing City limits zoned R-2. Since 1999, the following developments and
redevelopments have occurred on R-2 zoned lands within City limits:
*Table A
Name Location Acres
Butler Grant Street 1.54
Mahar/Neuman Williamson Way 4.66
Beach St. Beach Street .67
Condominiums
Scenic St. Townhomes Scenic Street .73
Murillo Beach Street .66
Mitchell Manzanita/High .51
Lovett B Street .22
Agakanov Alida .24
Potocki Morse .18
Englund Morse .18
Deluca E. Main .23
Spierings Beach Street .30
Sullivan Normal .73
10.85
13
~5~
Average Per Year (6 1.80
yrs)
Gargus ** Clay Street 1.00
Archerd/Dale (pending) Ashland/Clay St 1.75
* Table A is a "sample" list of developments that have occurred in the time period from April 1999 to
present and that more developments have likely occurred in the R-2 zone than identified heiar in.
** The Gargus partition was consumed in the planning period but was inadvertently missed in the April
1999 BlI. Therefore it's one acre was not added to the surplus.
Table A demonstrates that since April of 1999 (less than six years), the consumption
rate has steadily increased than originally anticipated in the BLI. During this time, a total
of 10.85 acres of the 16.13 acres has been developed for an average consumption rate
of 1.80 acres a year. Taking the consumption rate of 1.80 acres per year time~s 5 years
would require 9 acres of needed R-2 lands where only 5.01 acres is available or only 2%
years of available surplus. This number quickly drops to 1 % years with the development
of the Archerd/Dale development that was recently approved by the Planning
Commission on October 11, 2004.
In accordance with the Annexation Approval Standards, 18.106.030 H.1, Table A not
only demonstrates there is less than a five year supply of R-2 land, but that we are
getting dangerously close to the point to not having any available R-2 land. In the
applicant's opinion, and most likely agreed upon by staff, this is an important 'factor when
considering affordable and moderate income housing needs when there is little supply,
but a lot of demand.
Base Density vs. Built Density:
Although in draft form, the applicant is aware and supports the City's efforts to amend
the R-2 and R-3 zoning classifications to maintain an 80% minimum density which is
intended to minimize consumption of multi-family zoned areas by single-family
developments or multi-family developments with less than planned densities.
Regardless, the current Annexation Ordinance requires annexation proposals to have a
plan that demonstrates that the development of the entire property will ultimately occur
at a minimum density of 90% of the planned base density for. the zone.
For example, the subject property has a planned zoning designation of R-2 which has a
base density of 13.5 units to the acre. The subject site is 10 acres and therefore 135
units would be 100% of the planned density. The annexation requirement of Cl minimum
of 90% density would require a minimum density of 121 units. The applicant i:s proposing
a total of 130 units or 96% of the planned density. In other words, the application is
keeping with the intent of the City's efforts to not only minimize the loss of densities in
the multi-family zoning areas, but that also "compact urban form" is being maintained.
14
~5b
---'-'~-'--"-'----~-------.---'---
Mixture of Housing:
Table 4.1 of the 2002 Housing Needs Analysis, ECO Northwest, clearly demonstrates
that from 1998 to 2001, only a small amount of "rental" multi-family housing was
constructed when compared to the single family housing. Although current data isn't
readily available, there is no indication the trend has slowed. The applicant's proposal is
to create a family friendly development that incorporates a range of housing types with a
range of homeowners and renters that have diverse age and socioeconomic
backgrounds. Of the 130 proposed units, 56 units will be in 14 four-plex buildings (43%
of the units), 48 units in 24 duplex buildings (37% of the units) and 26 units in 26 single
family detached houses (20% of the units). At a minimum, 52 (40%) of the units within
the project will be "guaranteed" rental units. This is a significant proposal considering
from 1998 to 2001 the amount of expected multi-family housing was supposed to be
30% of all units constructed, but only 9% were built. Lastly. of the 56 fourplex units, 28
will be "for sale" units with intention is to provide low cost housing that could accommodate
first time home buyers or seniors with limited means.
Subsidies:
The application is not proposing any density bonuses or asking for any type of
government subsidy to provide the 19 affordable units and 52 rental units. The
applicants believe the proposal is clearly a risky business venture, one that Cl:ln not be
compared with in the Community - regardless of size, but nevertheless is an opportunity
to create a project that mixes affordable housing with market housing and rental housing
with owner-occupied housing.
SITE REVIEW (chapter 18.72)
The Planning Staff/Planning Commission can approve a Site Review when the following criteria
have been addressed:
A. All applicable City Ordinances have been met or will be met by the proposed dfwelopment
Multi-Residential Zone District-
The subject property is currently in the County and zoned RR-5 which allows one dwelling unit
per 5 acres. When annexed to the City the zoning for the property would be Low D(:nsity Multi-
Family Residential @-2). The applicant is requesting annexation of this property, see
Annexation Findings above.
Chapter 18.24 Low Density Multi-Family Residential District, allows for either attac~hed or
detached residential units at 13.5 units per acre. The density allowed for the lot area would be
135 (10 acres x 13.5 units per acre = 135). When an annexation is proposed the Ci~y requires
15
Q.h7
---r-~-----
that the property be developed to 90% of the allowable density. In regard to the subjc~ct property,
90% of 135 dwelling units is 121.5 dwelling units. The applicant is providing 130 dwelling
units, which is 96.2% of the allowable density~ however, since the duplexes and fourplexes have
units less than 500 S.F. the "calculated density" is 117. Chapter 18.24.040 Al allows units less
than 500 S.F. to be considered as .75 of a unit when computing the allowable density.
Housing Type
Single Family
Duplexes/Accessory Units
Fouplexes
Dwelling Units Available
26
48
56
Lots A vaiIable
26 (SI to S 26)
24 (Dl to D24)
14 (Fl to F14)
_Total
130
64
The applicant is proposing a portion of the development to be affordable. This issue is discussed
in the Annexation Findings, above.
Overall Lot Coverage -
The maximum overall lot coverage allowed for impervious surface in the R-2 zone district is
65% (Chapter 18.72.040G). The applicant is providing 49.8%. Therefore, the appli1cant is
providing approximately 50.2% ofthe total site area in pervious surface space. This: is an
important fact considering the density of the project.
Performance Standard Option -
The applicant has utilized the Performance Standards Option (Chapter 18.88) to develop a
unique design and ownership concept. The applicant is proposing that each duplex and fourplex
unit will be sold separately. It is the applicant's belief that this type of ownership will encourage
apartment housing at a reasonable rent, also see Annexation Finding G. The applicant also
desires to have the option of selling each unit under condominium ownership. This concept has
the potential of creating both rental as well as ownership affordable housing. Both the type of
units offered (Single Family, Duplex, Fourplex) and the type of ownership will create flexible
and affordable housing for the Ashland residential market. All units will have frontage on a
public street or public utility easement, see Site Plan. Reciprocal easements for parking
openspace access, maintenance etc. will be included in the CC&R's of the project. The
parameter setbacks will comply with the R-2 district; however, the setbacks within the
development will vary, see Site Plan.
Solar -
16
~~
- - --- - -----------,----------- ---
Chapter 18.70 (Solar Access) regulates the amount of shading a building can project on adjacent
properties to the North. The applicant has located a row of Single Family Homes 14 feet from
the North property line of the adjacent property. The highest shade producing point (second
story wall, parallel to the north property line) is 20 feet high (H), see Exterior Elevations. It
must be noted that each house design may be different and adjustments may have to be made in
regard to height and setback. The average slope (S), in this area is a negative 3.3%. The solar
set back (SSB), therefore, is 33.9 feet for the second story.
Solar Calculations:
First Story: SSB= H - 6
.445 + S
11-6
.445 + (-.033)
12.13 feet
Second Story: SSB = H - 6
0.445 + S
20 - 6
.445 + (-.033)
33.9 feet
Assuming a 5 ~: 12 roof pitch, the Site Plan shows compliance with the solar ordinance (14 foot
setback first story, 40 foot setback second story). The applicant is requesting a Performance
Standard approach for the solar setback between buildings Fl to F3 and F12 to F13 'within the
development where no building will cast a shadow greater than four feet in height upon the
opposite south wall of adjacent buildings.
Set Backs -
Again, the applicant is utilizing the Performance Standards Option for the site design; therefore
the front, rear and side setbacks conform to the R-2 Zone District while the setbacks between
buildings vary. The minimum required space between duplex buildings is 12 feet. The
applicant is providing 17 feet minimum, see Preliminary Exterior Elevations and Site Plan. The
minimum required space between the fourplex building is 21 feet. The applicant is providing 22
feet minimum.
Fire Access -
The applicant has provided fire hydrants per the City's Fire Department Requirements, see Civil
Engineering Drawings.
Parking -
The following calculations show compliance with Chapter 18.92, off-street parking.
17
~G1
-~..._.._------_..._--~-~_.._----
Type ofDwellingl
Amount of Bedrooms
26 Single Family 3 Bdrms
24 Duplexes 2 Bdrms and
1 Bdrm (less than 500 S.F.)
14 Fourplexes 2 Bdrms and
1 Bdrms (less than 500 S.F.)
Approximate on-street parking
Required
2x26=52
Provided
52
2.75x24=66
70
5.50x14=77
83
93
Further, each single family residence and duplex will have two covered bicycle parking spaces
either within the garage or in storage areas. The applicant will also provide 35 covered spaces
and 17 uncovered spaces for the fourplexes, see Site and Landscape Plans.
Tree Removal
The applicant has provided the location of the existing trees (6" dia @ 4.5' height) on the Site
and Landscape Plans. These Plans delineate which trees that will be either saved or removed.
Also, the Landscape Architect is providing a report (attached) that includes an existing tree
assessment, as well as a Tree Removal Application, and a Tree Protection Plan. Further, all the
oaks and evergreen trees will be saved and only the poplars and mulberries will be removed.
Demolition -
As mentioned in the Site Description there is an existing garage, barn and an older single-family
house on the site. All existing structures will be demolished. All buildings will be salvaged if
possible and all materials will be offered to interested parties for recycling. A Demolition
Permit will be submitted upon approval of the Land Use Permit and Annexation.
Multi-Use Pathways -
Multi-Use Pathways will connect the proposed project to the adjacent properties to the north,
south and east, see Site and Landscape Plans. The pathways to the north includes both sidewalks
on a proposed north-south street and a path along the landscaped drainage feature, allso see
Findings D, below. Paths will also connect the development to the YMCA soccer filelds on the
east. Two paths are proposed from the south property line (the existing easement ofthe adjacent
development and a proposed easement from the future development located on the southeast
corner). Further, sidewalks and paths are proposed throughout the project area, see Site and
Landscape Plans.
B. All requirements of the Site Review Chapter have been met or will be met.
Information Requirements -
18
t).."Q
---_._--._----~.._-_..._-~-----------.--_. ._----._-..---
The applicant is providing a written Narrative and Findings as well as Site and Landscape Plans,
Topographic Survey, Aerial Photograph, Preliminary Utility Grading/Drainage Plans and
Building Elevation drawings. This information is provided in the Application Package and
addresses the submittal requirements of Chapter 18.72.060. Further, letters and reports
regarding the trees, lack of wetlands, and traffic impacts is included. As required for an
Annexation, the applicant is submitting a legal description of the property.
Lot CoveragelLandscape/Openspace -
As mentioned above in Finding A, the overall lot coverage (impervious surface) for the entire
site is 49.8%. The newly created single family and duplex lots must also comply with Chapter
18.72.040G. To demonstrate compliance, the applicant has selected a single family and duplex
lot (S10 and D7) as examples. Lot SlO has a lot coverage of59.7% while lot D7 is 52.1%. Both
examples comply with this requirement.
Although a high density development, the applicant has provided a significant amowlt of
common landscaped openspace as shown on the Site and Landscape Plans. The common
landscaped openspace areas will be utilized to: 1. create water retention areas (control run-oft);
2. provide a buffer between the existing soccer fields to the (east) and the development on the
west; 3. provide separation between buildings; 5. protect three existing trees; and 6. Create a
water feature between Clay Street and the soccer fields. Also, the Landscape/Irrigation Plan,
Finding A, above, and the Project Description Section of the Narrative addresses the
requirements of this Chapter.
Recreation Space -
Chapter 18.24.040 H which requires 8% of the lot area to be dedicated for outdoor n;:creationa1
space. The applicant is providing recreation areas for both common and private recreation
space. The common recreation space includes the picnic area adjacent to the soccer fields
(4,200 S.F.), the space between the fourplexes for passive recreation (10.800 S.F.) and the
children's active play area (4,400 S.F.) for a total of 19,200 S.F. which is 4.4% ofthc;: site, see
Site and Landscape Plans. Play equipment will be reviewed by the City Parks Director to insure
suitability and safety.
The design of the project also includes private outdoor space for each dwelling unit. The Single
Family units will have a minimum backyard area/patio of640 S.F. (16x40 dimensions) plus a 6
foot x 14 foot front porch (84 S.F.) for a total of 18,824 S.F.
Each two-bedroom duplex unit will have a 6x14, 84 S.F. foot porch and large private yard of 220
S.F. (11x20). Each second story one-bedroom duplex unit will have a minimum of an 8xl0 foot
private deck (80 S.F.) For a total of9,316 S.F.
Each unit of the fourplexes will have two upstairs decks (288 S.F. each unit) and two ground
19
;(h I
- -~---_.,_..._-----'"---~~-'_. ,~~---
floor patios/front porches (176 S.F.). The approximate total of decks, porches and patios for all
fourplexes is 8,960 S.F.
The combined private and common recreationlopenspace for the total development is 56.400S.F.
or 12.9% of the site which exceeds the 8% requirement.
TrashIRecyclinglBike Parking -
The applicant has located shared trash/recycle areas for the duplexes and fourplexes within the
parking area, see Site Plan. These areas will be screened from view by a 6 foot high concrete
block wall and landscaping. The single family homes will have trash/recycle service: at the curb.
Ofthe required bike spaces for the fourplexes there will be 35 covered and 17 uncovered, see
Site Plan. Covered bike parking (2 each) for the single family and duplexes will be provided in
the garages and storage areas.
Light and Glare -
All site and building lighting will be directed away from adjacent properties. Also sc~ Finding
A, above, relating other Site Review issues.
Controlled Access/ Easements -
The Site Plan shows the maximum dimension between driveway curb cuts is 60 feet which
exceeds the minimum 50 feet for residential streets. Also, the minimum distance from a
residential street to an intersection is 30 feet. The applicant is providing 40 feet.
Reciprocal Easements and CC&R's for parking area for maintenance, landscaping, utilities and
access will be provided, prior to obtaining Final Plan Approval.
C The development complies with the Site Design Standards adopted by the City Council for
implementation of the Chapter.
Approval Standards: Multi-family residential development shall conform to the following
design standards:
lI-B-l) Orientation
II-B-l a) Residential buildings shall have their primary orientation toward the street when they
are within 20 to 30 fiet of the street.
II-B-l b) Buildings shall be set back from the street according to ordinance requirements, which
us usually 20 feet.
II-B-lc) Buildings shall be accessedfrom the street and the sidewalk. Parking areas shall not
20
A." ~
~._-----,..__._.._~_..._-----~---~~--_.~----.-._._-----
be located between buildings and the street.
As shown on the Site Plan, all units are 16 feet or more from the front property line of a public
ROW to allow for a 6 foot deep porch and a 10 foot wide PUB. This is consistent with the front
yard set back ofthe R-2 zone district (15 feet). The entrances of units D-l to D-8 are oriented
toward Clay Street while all other units are oriented towards the proposed new streets. The
fourplexes (F-l to F-14) located in the interior of the site are greater than 30 feet from a street
and therefore have on-site sidewalks linking them to a public street. Unit F-7 to F-8 are 16 feet
from the street and oriented to the new street. The proposed garages and parking areas (served
by the alleys) are in the center of the development.
II-B-2)
Streetscape
II-B-2a) One street tree for each 30 feet of frontage, chosen from the street tree list, shall be
placed on that portion of development paralleling the street. Where the size of the project
dictates an interior circulation street pattern, a similar streetscape with street trees is required.
II-B-2b) Front yard landscaping shall be similar to those found in residential neighborhoods,
with appropriate changes to decrease water use. The Site Plan shows an existing ma.ture cedar
tree located adjacent to Clay Street applicant is proposing that the sidewalk be allowed to
meander around existing cedar tree this will also allow the sidewalk to line up with existing
sidewalk to the south. The sidewalk also meanders around the picnic area to allow easier access
and more "useable" space. The applicant is requesting an exception to Street Standa.rds to allow
for the meandering sidewalk (Chapter 18.88.050.F). Street trees will be added along all street
frontages, per City requirements, see Landscape Plan. Front yard landscaping will ble consistent
with the other residential developments within the area and comply with low water use strategies
required by the City.
II-B-3)Landscaping
II-B-3a) Landscaping shall be designed so that 50% coverage occurs within one year of
installation and 90% landscaping coverage occurs within 5 years.
II-B3b) Landscaping design shall include a variety of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs
andfloweringplant species well adapted to the local climate.
II-B-3c) As many existing healthy trees on the site shall be saved as is reasonably feasible.
II-B-3d) Buildings adjacent to streets shall be buffered by landscaped areas of at least 10 feet in
width.
II-B-3e) Parking areas shall be shaded by large canopied deciduous trees and shall be
adequately screened and buffered from adjacent uses.
21
~1c3
---'----'-_.-.,~------~-----.-.~----
ll-B-3j) Irrigations systems shall be installed to assure landscaping success. Refer to parking lot
landscaping and screening standards for more detail.
The Landscape Architect has provided detailed plans which show 50% coverage within one year
and 90% coverage within five years, see Landscape Plan. The Landscape Plan also shows a
variety of deciduous and evergreen trees, shrubs and flowering plants. The front yard setback of
all units is 10 feet for porches and 16 feet for buildings. This area will be landscaped per City
Standards, see Landscape Plan. The Landscape Plan shows that the parking areas will be shaded
by large canopied trees and other proposed deciduous trees and landscaping. Further, the
landscape architect has added plant material to screen the parking from the common and private
openspace areas. The irrigation system will also comply with the City of Ashland Standards, see
notes on the Landscape Plan.
II-B-4) Open Space
ll-B-4a) An area equal to at least 8% of the lot area shall be dedicated to openspacefor
recreation for use by the tenants of the development.
II-B-4b) Areas covered by shrubs, bark mulch and other ground covers which do not provide a
suitable surface for human use may not be counted toward this requirement.
ll-B-4c) Decks, patios, and similar areas are eligible for open space criteria. Plan areas for
children are required for projects of greater than 20 units that are designed to include families.
The applicant is providing 12.9% ofthe site in common and private recreational openspace, see
Site and Landscape Plans for specific locations, see Finding B, above, for calculations. A
children's play area is also included, also see Findings A and B, above.
II-B-5)Natural climate control
II-B-5a) Utilized deciduous trees with early leaf drop and low bare branch densities on the south
sides of the buildings which are occupied and have glazing for summer shad and winter warmth.
The landscape architect has selected deciduous trees which will provide bare branches in the
winter and full leaves for shade in the summer, see Landscape Plan. These trees will ameliorate
the existing trees on the site.
II-B-6)Building Materials
II-B-6a) Building materials and paint colors should be compatible with the surrounding area.
Very bright primary or neon-type paint colors which attract attention to the building or use are
22
~C:,+
----------- ---~-------------,-------
unacceptable.
Final materials and colors (muted) will be selected by the applicant prior to receiving a Building
Permit; however, suggested materials are shown on the preliminary Exterior Elevations and will
vary on each unit to add visual interest, also see Project Description Section -Archite,cture of the
Narrative. No neon-type paint will be used.
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 follows:
II-D-1)
Screening at required yards
J) Parking abutting a required landscapedfront or exterior yard shall incorporate a sight
obscuring hedge screen into the required landscaped yard.
The screen shall grow to be at least 36 inches or higher than the finished grade of the parking
area, except for required vision clearance areas.
The screen height may be achieved by a combination of earth mounding and plant materials.
Elevated parking lots shall screen both the parking and the retaining wall.
The detailed Landscape Plans show a sight obscuring hedge screen between all the parking areas
and the buildings. When mature, this hedge will grow to at least 36 inches higher than the
parking area.
II-D-2)
Screening abutting property lines
J) 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.
The proposed alleys and parking spaces are located in the interior of the site. The Site and
Landscape Plans show compliance with this finding.
II-D-3)
Landscape Standards
Parking lot landscaping shall consist of a minimum of7% of the total parking area plus a ratio
of J tree for each seven parking spaces to create a canopy affect.
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.
23
~~5'
- - --- ~-- -------~--- -----.----- -~
The tree shall be planted in the landscaped area such that the tree bole is at least 2 feet from any
curb or paved area.
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.
Landscaped areas shall be evenly distributed throughout the parking area and parking
perimeter at the required ratio.
That portion of a required landscaped yare, 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. Front or exterior yard landscaping may not be substituted for
the interior parking stalls.
The Landscape Plans, provided by the Landscape Architect, and the other Findings in this
document shows compliance with the above Standards.
II-D-4)
Residential Screening
Parking areas adjacent to a residential dwelling shall be set back at least 8 feet from the
building, and shall provide a continuous hedge screen.
The Landscape plan shows a continuous hedge screen between the parking areas and residential
units. The eight foot total is exceeded in all locations except adjacent to the propose:d.garages,
see Landscape and Site Plans.
II-D-5)
Hedge Screening
The required hedge screen shall be installed asfollows:
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 scref;n strip shall be planted such at 100% coverage is achieved
with 2 years.
The landscape architect has specified the above standards, see Landscape Plan.
II-D-6)
Other Screening
1) Other screening and buffering shall be provided asfollows:
24
~~Go
._,..~".,~-_.,..._--'~_._--_.~~,...._-_.__._-
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.
The trash/recycle areas, located on the walkway near the parking area will have a six foot high
masonry wall and be further screened with shrubs, see Landscape Plan.
Service Corridor Screen: When adjacent to residential uses, commerical and industrial service
areas shall reduce the adverse effects of noise, odor and visual clutter upon adjacent residential
uses.
Not applicable.
Light and Glare Screen: Artificial lighting shall be so arranged and constructed as to
not produce direct glare on adjacent residential properties or streets.
Both wall and Pole mounted lighting will be installed as to not produce direct !~Iare on
adjacent residential properties or streets.
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 lstandards
and chosen from the recommended list of street trees found in this section.
II-E-1)
Location for Street Trees
Street trees 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.
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, spacinfJ, 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.
25
~u7
----------_________ _--,-_~_ ___ un
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 hydrf.mts, or
utility poles.
for
than 10 feet to
at least 20 feet distant.
c) Street trees shall not be planted closer than 20 feet to light standards. Except
Public safety, no new light standard location shall be positioned closer
any existing street tree, and preferably such locations will be
d) Trees shall not be planted closer than 2~ feet from the face of the curb except
at intersections where it shall be 5 feet from the curb, in a curb rEltum 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.
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 dama~1e 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.
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.
II-E-4)
Recommended Street Trees
1) Street trees shall conform to the street tree list approved by the Ashland Tree
Commission.
26
~~q
__ _ ___ _ _n__~___ ____~--.___ ______
The applicant is proposing parkrows and sidewalks for both Clay Street and the new
streets. The minimum width of the parkrows will be 7.5 feet plus a 6 inch curb. In two
locations the sidewalk will meander. The first location along Clay Street is to avoid
existing trees and connect to the existing sidewalk to the south. The second location,
along the proposed new street (adjacent to the YMCA soccer fields), is proposed to
allow a greater, more useable area for a proposed picnic area. The applicant is
requesting an exception to the Street Standard (Chapter 18.88.050.F) to allow the
meandering sidewalks, see Exception Findings.
The majority of the proposed street trees will be located in front of the sidewalks. The
width of the parkrow will also be increased both at the intersections for traffic calming
purposes and to save three existing trees, see Site and Landscape Plans. The
landscape architect has specified street trees which comply with the above findings and
standard established by the Department of Community Development, see Landscape
Plan.
D. That adequate capacity of city facilities for water, sewer, paved access to and
through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, and adeqUC'lte
transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject prOI)erty.
As mentioned in the Site Description section of this narrative, there are existing utilities
within the ROW of Clay Street. The preliminary civil engineering drawings show
connection to these utilities. Some of the existing utilities will be upgraded to
accommodate the increased demand. Further, the electric, CTV and telephone lines will
be placed underground along Clay Street and the new streets within a 10 foot wide PUE.
The site drainage will be divided between the street system and a bioswale/detention
system buffer located adjacent to the soccer fields, see Civil and Landscape Plans.
This on-site storm water detention system with pre-treatment bioswales will meter the
runoff from the site before entering the City's storm sewer system and adjacent property
to the north. This bioswale/detention system will also enhance the wetlands liocated to
the north of the subject property, see Grading/Drainage and Landscape Plans.
A Traffic Impact Study has been provided and included with this document. The report
presents traffic generation, routes and recommendations. Annexation Findin~l E also
recommends improvement for Clay street and the intersection with Ashland Street (Hwy
66).
As mentioned in the other findings and shown on the Site Plan, there will be ~;idewalks
and paths throughout the site. The applicant will connect the Clay Street sid~~walk to the
existing sidewalk to the south. In addition, the applicant will connect to the "Barclay
Square" project which connects to Ashland Street (Highway 66).
A six foot wide bike land is also proposed within the ROW of Clay Street. Existing public
transportation is on Ashland Street. The pedestrian connections, bike lanes and publiC
27
~1
-----~---~--.--~----
transportation will reduce the vehicle traffic generated by the development. It is
important to note that the Ashland StreetIT olman Creek Road Commercial District is
within easy walking distance to the site. The applicant will be providing a connection
from the development to the YMCA Soccer Fields, see Annexation Finding E.
When annexed to the City the subject property will be located within the City of Ashland;
therefore, State and local law requires police and fire protection within established
areas. The applicant will also provide new fire hydrants per the recommendations of the
City's Fire Department, see Civil Engineer drawings.
OUTLINEIFINAL PLAN APPROVAL - (Chapter 18.88)
The Planning Staff/Planning Commission can approve a Subdivision when the following criteria
have been met
a) That the development meets all applicable ordinance requirements of the City of
Ashland.
See Site Review Finding A, above and the Annexation Findings.
b) That adequate key City Facilities can be provided including water, sewer, pa~ved
access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, police and
fire protection and adequate transportation; and that the development will not cause a City
facility to operate beyond capacity.
See Site Review Finding D and Annexation Finding E, above.
c) That the existing and naturalfeatures of the land; such as wetlands,floodpll.lin
corridors, ponds, large trees, rock outcrop pings, etc., have been identified in tIre plan of
the development and significant features have been included in the openspace, common
areas, and unbuildable areas.
The only existing natural features on the site are the existing trees. The applicant will keep as
many trees as possible; however, some trees will be removed. These trees will be removed for
the following reasons:
1. Suitability within an urbanlbuilt environment,
2. To provide the minimum density allowed in the R-2 Zone District, and
3. Due to Site Ordinance Constraints such as solar setbacks, space between buildings
and the Site Design Standards.
It is important to note that all evergreen and oak trees will be saved. The applicant is providing a
Tree Assessment, Tree Removal Permit and a Tree Protection Plan. Also, the applicant is
28
B.1o
including the Findings for an exception to the Street Standards (Chapter 18.88.050.F..) To allow a
meandering sidewalk along Clay and the new Streets.
d) That the development of the land will not prevent land from being developed for the
uses shown in the Comprehensive Plan.
The proposed development will not prevent adjacent land from being developed. This is an
infill project within a proposed R-2 neighborhood. The project conforms to both the proposed
Zone District and Comprehensive Plan in regard to future development, see Annexation
Findings.
e) That there are adequate provisions for the maintenance of openspace and ctJ'mmon
areas, if required or provided, and that if developments are done in phases that the early
phases have the same or higher ratio of amenities as proposed in the entire proJect.
The applicant is proposing a three phase development. When more detailed engineering and
construction information is available, the exact Phasing Plan will be determined. The applicant
will provide this Plan prior to Final Plan Approval; However, the Plan will include an equal or
higher ratio of amenities in the early phases as proposed in the entire project. The Surveyor's
Plat Map will show areas that will be owned and maintained in common by an Owne:r's
Association. CC & R's and reciprocal easement /maintenance agreements will be provided prior
to Final Approval.
j) That the proposed density meets the base and bonus standards established under this
Chapter.
The proposed density of 130 dwelling units is more than 90% minimum density required by an
annexation. No bonus density is requested. See Site Review Findings A, above and Annexation
Findings.
EXCEPTION TO STREET STANDARDS (CHAPTER 18.88)
An exception to the Street Standards is not subject to the Variance requirements of sc:::ction
18.100 and may be granted with respect to the Street Standards in 18.88.050 if all of the
following circumstances are found to exist:
A. There is a demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements of this Chapter
due to a unique or unusual aspect of the site or proposed use of this site.
B. The variance is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty; and
C. The variance is consistent with the stated Purpose and Intent olthe Performance
Standards Options Chapter.
29
~i I
As mentioned in the Project Description, Site Review and OutlineIFinal Plan findings, the
applicant desires to keep an existing cedar tree along the south end of the frontage of Clay Street.
This tree is located where the six foot wide sidewalk would normally occur and not in the 7.5
foot wide parkrow. To allow this mature tree to remain, the proposed sidewalk must meander
towards the curb along the street, see Site and Landscape Plans. This is also the same location of
the existing sidewalk to the south. The applicant will also provide additional street trees (1 :30
feet min.) adjacent to the property line and within the remaining parkrow, see Landscape Plan.
This variance request is consistent with the stated Purpose and Intent of the Performance
Standards Option Chapter by utilizing natural features in the design and the preservation of
existing trees.
The applicant also requests a meandering sidewalk along the west and east side of the new street
which is adjacent to the buffer/drainage area next to the YMCA soccer fields, see Site and
Landscape Plans. The justification for this exception is to allow a larger, more efficient picnic
area (east) and provide a concentrated parking area for the children's play area and picnic area
(west). This Variance Request is the minimum necessary to improve the usability of this area. It
is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Performance Standard Option by creating a better
design option for a specific area and use.
30
~1 d--
Ul(!)
O:Z
::J-
tiZ
I!!~
_IL
J:Q
~5
~~:~
~...r
..II
i~9!
~~
:.!;:-!
!l~!l
3SIHdH3.1N3 V CINV 0
NV1d 3.llS 11V1~3^O
.LN3Wd013A30 1VI.LN301S3l:1 )lOOl:lBMCl11IM
....
<t
.... ~
w ~
W
:J: ~
UJ ~
;11
..~
till' ~
I dll f;iiilli
0 fj~
i i ~m" I~-!~
~n ~Ill:O ot;~<o'"
~ <.
l:I iii ~
I l it
c ~1~ rill" 1I "I
0 ~
i " it w
I ~ . ~ -'
E i I ~ ~I- : t fl! ;5
.2 i~ :~ IJI ill ~ J 5 ..
c: !~ t l~! it ()
-. j~ . <15 t! J! i ."
tiS ~~i~ ::!'~ iiil :;:
. H i ~~l j t~i : c~~1 . "-
.. 1 0... s ~ :; f~Jii 1 :-~ -: ~ .c.....~ ::i
o. ..~ ~ ~ I~ ~;, , .~ <~ ~e
a:' !~ ~ ~j;1 ~ ~31 ~~ ~ iiP Cl
'h'" ~ Uft'" .
Ie
t t t t t t
. f!I P.I P.I S I!I !I
~~
!
in I n
~II ~ I
~ I ~
I I n
. . ~
~
:y.'
II
I
I
!I~
i ~
t
II
i I~ ~ f · .1 p I
ti" I I I I I I I
I I I i ~ i I
i i i I I I I
I I i
~
I.
;1
p'"
('1
()
18
~~
'-s
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
n Il I
~ I I
m ; rr- --~
~
il h
ii I I
I
"'tit
:1
1f.tS!Uk\>iHI~;.',t,:i~nDU\ ;,:jJii';~'UI.' -ii;.i~,'.,~,l; "-,, ;!iiI!,"",,-,,;,'W_1iIlYc_;;,I, _ ~'
~6~~~~
< -i t-.... en
~ > ,< "7'
:D r c,; ~
~r:=~~
~ ~ '7'". ;c
!ill
:;;c ::j (/)
.; r--
:; ::j
L.-)
O>""Z
~zr-
>:;~j
~ to iT: ;~'
Cg:3:~
;;:o-rr:>
>c;~G
~Z-jr
-<CC/)~
~:;;c-<
>~=
- :;;c ,"
~lT:~
>~c
zz;;:o
-i-ilTJ
-<>
:j
-
z
>
r
f'"
rf1
......
0
..,
:3
r:J).
ro
~rj :;
r:> rc
.,'
~~ ..,
r:> ~
..~
l~ ::
.... rc
:1
rt>
~ww
----.. .", 00
N 0
~~(j
(j~r-
O(j>
~ t-...l ~
o fJt
= 0
.., Q
rJj
>'~t;{ --t~;
o
~
;JJ
re
"0
......
N
.-.
--
o
~
II
Q
o
~
.<.......~
~~~Ecl
<>-It''''-
tIj -<~
\' 01 ~ (') ~
1\ gJ~::j"tl
fl_ Zm';<~
I ..,>0_
~\ ~~~~
\ ~rn~~
"J ~ ~~
~ F=
~ 8
ttl
~
O~"tlZ
.., t""o
> 1;>-1
80lttl~
c~~~
~~Z(')
(')z>-Ip
-<or;;-
~~~
>"tl'"
~:::a!i'!
~~(j
~~~
:l
~
>
t""
I
L./
/ /
I / (;
I I ( I
I, \
1/------,1 \ ~ \ \,
'~!~ ''-, I
~__i\O \ \
I \:1) \
01 ~:j I )
iiui J Ii I I
\ L-r;' / '..J I )
Ii c.J.1 / I I
/~ yl / ~ I
l I 'I \
-.. , I I
// -----.------) \
! ( )'
I '
\ \ /----~
\ \ ( (/
) \ \ ~
\ \ \ \ '\
~ \ \\ \~ \ \
J \ (0 \ \
/'4 \ \, \~ \ 1\
/Ci;;> \ \ I
/~ \\ I ) J '
I '::, ~ / I /
I /____-----:J' I /
-1' , / I !
! ! I
(----... / / 1'4
J r---~ / / /~
~ / / j~
_/ J J
996" .-- \
~~
(1
--\----____J
11
1\
1\
?
!
.;,.--< ~~€AY'?':::_----:::-.-.<.~ ','.-
\ r" -r ~~\ "- -_'\ ---...: .-=;.----:.::~....:_.::----=o L _.. -- ."
\ \ \ \ ',~ "zSO'~' -~-=:=>
\ '\ \' \ \ ' "l1lS
\ \ \ \ \
\ \ \ \ \ \ \
I \ I I ! \ I
\ ) ) I I I i
I J / I I I I
) / I II I)
/ / / / I~' ;
/1 JI /w wi /f /'~ If
/Q)CD; i
/1 /' /0... I / I
l I / n~ ( / )
! / I II': I / /
)1 Ji (~/IO I II /
I I ,,. <II! I
I I VI - / I I
/ i I -II - I I
/ II iO II I \
/ . I I \ \
,/ I;f ( \ \
/ I I ) \
\", ) I ( ( /
, \ \ \ \
.'" \ \ \
" \ \ \ \
, \ \ \
\ \ '\. \ \
''1 ,\
./ ) \ \ \.
/ / \ \ \
I ~ I \ II
/ / \
Ii /i /~ ) \
j"" /1 /~ / /
; /'-V / I
(TI------~ . ......./ / //'
)( ( --'./
I I I 9S6~ (~.
I
00 00 ...=:
= .... .......
1:1 e SIll
_. .., ....
.... a t'll
= "I
~ 00 t'04
00 ~ ....
~ ~ :1
~ ~ t'll
~ ~
-.
~I:I
5;" ~
~
!
\
'\
\
I
I
!
i
1
=
....
00
~
"Cl
....
N
=
=
.1:;0.
....
Ii
....
=
=
4
~
I
/
.I
i
---..,
I
~tHtH
_\Cae
N....=
~~n
....~
Q(=;> :
a.N~
g~~
..,="'"-::1
rIl
->
'\
I. r--.'
\ i
\J
jL-'
I
)
i
'-j1
\- L\
.....1
co 1-
0'1
Cl
, -.r'j
UJ !
! -.____J
!
/
!
I
I
\
/)
/-----
!q;
fA.
I~
\
\
,
;
i
{
'",
-..,
._-/
"
"\
I
I
I
I
;
!
I
I
I
\
I
\
\
)
H-.;'UM : liUrF INET
PHO~~E NO. 1 760 6487443
Sep. 21 2004 01:43PM P1
;~~:: ~~~l NORTHWEST BIOLOGICAL CONSULTING
HABITAT RESTORATION. ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING
Co/. Engineering Contractors lie, ,:}'599428
To:
Andy Cochrane
D and A Enterprise
1970 Ashland Street,Suite 2
Ashland. Oregon 97520
Ph. 482.1270 Fax 482-1698
September 20, 2004
From:
Scott English
Northwest Biological Consulting
324 Terrace Street, Ashland, Oregon 97520
Re: Wetland Investigation for 10 acre parcel, at 380 Clay Street, Ashlland
T39S, RIE, Section,llC, Tax lot 2500
As per your instructions, I surveyed the above- mentioned site in August of this)'ear to
determine if wetlands were present. I visited the site on two occasions and I waU~ed the
property to examine the soils, hydrology, and vegetation to determine if the criteria for
jurisdictional wetlands were met. In addition, I discussed the site with Mr. Bob Lobdell
of the division of State Lands as to the status of a small fonner inigation pond that used
to exist on the property. My fmdings are as follows;
1. The site does not contain any jurisdictional wetlands. I found no evidenct~ to
support a wetland classification. The dom.inant vegetation was primarily upland
grasses such as tall fescue, brome~ and orchard grass. No evidence of hydrology
was found. The soils were not hydric.
2. My review of The National Wetlands Inventory Map did not indicate wetlands on
this property.
3. The local wetland inventory (L WI) by Fishman Environmental Services indicated
the presence of a portion of a PEM wetland on the property (W 13). I actu;ally did
the wetland delineation for the site they referenced (DSL WD 01-0613) blllt that
wetland was located on the adjacent down-slope properties and not on tax lot
2500. The wetland area indicated on the L WI as W 13 actually starts just beyond
the tax lot 2500 fence and the wetland swale flows into several down-slope
properties. but does not extend into tax lot 2500.
4. The abandoned, small irrigation pond was constructed in upland soils and Mr.
Lobdell, of DSL would not consider it jurisdictional. Refer to aerial photograph.
Please call if you have any questions. My cell phone while I am out of town is
(541) 941-2042.
Sincerely ~._,._~
Scott English, for Northwest Biological Consulting
A1~
;) O. Box 671 · 324 Terrace Street · Ashland. Oregon 97520 . (503) 488-1061
-- _.__._~--~-------.-----
TELEPHONE
541.772-2782
L. J. FRIAR AND ASSOCIATES, P. C.
CONSULTING LAND SURVEYORS
816 WEST 8TH STREET
MEDFORD, OREGON 97501
FAX
54'}.772.8465
JAMES E HIBBS, PLS
Ijfriar@charter.net
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Beginning at the Northwest corner of Parcel 1 per Partition Plat: No. P-10-
2002, according to the official plat thereof, now of record, in Volume 13,
Page 10 of "Record of Partition Plats" of Jackson County, Oregon and filed as
Survey No. 17218 in the Office of the Jackson County Surveyor; thence along
the North line thereof, South 89052' 59" East, 429.35 feet to the Northeast
corner of Parcel 3 of said Partition Plat; thence along that certain Boundary
Agreement Line recorded as Document No. 75-15343, Official Records of Jackson
County, Oregon, North 89017'32" East, 211.94 feet to the Northeast corner of
said Agreement line; thence along that certain Boundary Agreement Line
recorded as Document No. 86-19955, said Official Records, North 00017' 57"
West, 653.04 feet; thence North 89036' 10" West, 636.98 feet to the East line
of Clay Street; thence continue North 89036'10" West, 60.00 feet to the West
line of said Clay Street; thence along said West line, South 00004'41" West,
659.48 feet; thence South 89052'59" East, 60.00 feet to the point of
beginning. Containing 10.55 acres, more or less.
TRACT TO BE ANNEXED
391E11C TL2500 & CLAY STREET R/W
Andy Cochrane
04-206
October 5, 2004
/'
REGISTERED ""'\
PROFESSIONAL
LAND SURVEYOR
\.
OREGON
JULY 17, 1986
JAMES E. HIBBS
2234 ..I
RENEWAL DA1:E 6-30-05
~1q
-~'--"----------------r--'------
LlG.\~ SEE MAP 39 1E U
. . . . .
IR. . . . . . .
- .
.. -
~
.
.
.
l3&.3l'
I 7.41
I
I
I
I
/ SEE MAP
I
,
Co
Co
...
I 39 lE 11GB
I
I
I
I ~~t.\'-tTL'( . ~N.E~ED ~
Nt \) BUP~' ~\-RY"
p , 291.5 '
ABOOIT
Sl
11200 ~ 589':
~
~
...
-
;- /2.58 AC, 20(
.. .
...
..c . 8.01
- I .
.. C5-110J3
.
I~ ::
.., .
...
.. I .
. ..
.......
~ .
... I .
114'
/ EE SUP
ll!' ~ MAP
114.91'
SEE MAP
... &:
39 lE llCC .. '-
...
. .
...
... ..
- ...
... P.l
..
.., -----
601 11
... 0.77 At.
..
... 601A01
~
409.2'
ill 201' ..;
414.10' m. Sf ATE 66 T
SW1/4 SELTION 11 r;m RiE. W.M.
JACKIDN (X)UNTY
S MAP WAS PREPARED FOR
~ PURPOOE ONLY
L--
1"= ~ro
MEAOOw
~, ~
:J
8
C00~\y
I
I
l
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I~
leA.
{)
344.15'
HS' 340.84'
'!I.U'
2&2.51'
25.0 '
m.l'
2500
10,00 It,
1101
',51 AC,
c.. \1Y fajN~~
5-8 'R ~l
-c.
"
~\,..e )t.
LOT 7 Z CHI04
::::> C5-6S13
S
11201
RR-5 0,05 It,
R.-2.
~~
~2
:>
ti5 S
)-t
5-1
....
..
..,
...
~
..,
...
SIO'It'WE
4051.57' TO
S.L COl. SEC. II
.7I'45'U'W
3495.&8' TO d
S.L COl. src. 1 ~
ll5.0l'
34S'
cou~\Y
LOT 11
~-2.
3~
Ul,4l:..
201
0,32 It.
In.5ll:..
Page 1
TREE PROTECTION/REMOV AL PLAN NARRA TIV)~
Prepared by Galbraith & Associates, Inc.
For
WILLOWBROOK ON CLAY STREET
October 15,2004
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
Contrary to popular belief, the root systems of trees are not deep taproots in form, Instead most tree roots grow in
the top 12 - 18" from the soil surface and are horizontally oriented, extending far beyond the tree's dripline or
canopy, See tree and root section drawing Figure 1.
A rule of thumb is that a healthy tree may tolerate removal of approximately one third of its roots, and "A healthy,
vigorous tree may withstand removal of up to 50 percent of its roots without dying." I Ifroots on one side of a tree
are severed, it may become unstable and a hazard. Old and mature trees are less tolerant of construction impacts
than younger, more vigorous trees, and trees in a grove or forest stands are best retained in those groups.
The species tolerances for trees to be retained within this project are as follows:
RELATIVE TOLERANCE OF SELECTED SPECIES TO DEVELOPMENT IMP ACTS2
RElATIVE
COMMONNAME SCIENTIFIC NAME lOLERANCE COMMENfS
Incense Cedar Calocedrus decurrens Moderate ---
Pecan Carya illinoensis Moderate-good Moderately tolerant of construction damage,
Tolerant of some fill.
Deodar Cedar Cedrus deodara Good Tolerant of root and crown pruning, Intolerant of
excessive soil moisture; leads to Armillaria and
Phytophthora
Arizona Cypress Cupressus glabrus or Good (for Show considerable resistance to "Contractor
arizonica Cupressus spp.) pressures."
Oregon Ash Fraxinus oregona Moderate (for Moderately tolerant of root pruning
Fraxinus spp.)
Walnut Juglans regia Poor Grafted onto Ca. black walnut stock, which is
intolerant of root loss. Intermediate tolerance to
saturated soils. Intolerant of mechanical injury
(poor compartmentalization) Response
constrained by soil aeration and water
availability .
Mulberry Morus alba Good Tolerant of disturbance and fill.
Poplar Populus trichocarpa Poor Mature trees prone to windthrow and trunk
failure.
Oregon White Oak Quercus f!arryana Good ---
Locust Robinia pseudoacacia Good Tolerant of root loss and fill soil. Intolerant of
saturated soils. Sensitive to borers when stressed.
The size of the tree protection zone, the area protective fencing is shown on the Tree Protection Plan, is calculated
by species tolerance and tree age category which selects a distance factor from the trunk of the tree.
1 Matheny, N, & Clark, 1. 1998, Trees and Development: A Technical Guide to Preservation of Trees During Land
Development. p. 72.
2 Ibid. Appendix B selections, p. 165 - 178.
Galbraith & Associates, Inc.
~?I
Landscape Architects & Site Planners
-~--~----~---.--
Page 2
GUIDELINES FOR OPTIMAL TREE PRESERVATION ZONES3
DISTANCEFROMlRUNK
SPECIFSlOLERANCE lREEAGE (Feet~irrlJ. tnmkdianmr)
Good Young
(<20% life expectancy) .5'
Mature
(20%-80% life expectancy) 0.75'
Over mature
(>80% life expectancy) 1.0'
Moderate Young 0,75'
Mature 1.0'
Over mature 1,25'
Poor Young 1.0'
Mature 1.25'
Overmature 1.5'
, ~\ l~, ~"~1<f(1 '4!'
Figure 1
Drawing used by permission of Dr. Gary Watson, The Morton Arboretum, Lisle, Illinois,
Note: This document and the ideas incorporated herein, as an instrument of
professional service, is the property of Galbraith & Associates, Inc. and is not to
be used, modified, or changed in whole or in part, for any other purpose without
the express written authorization of John Galbraith, Landscape Architect,
3 Ibid" p. 74,
Galbraith & Associates, Inc.
~1'"
Landscape Architects & Site Planners
------- --------- -----.--.~.-- -'-~-T'-.-'" ___nn___
Page 3
TREE PROTECTION SITE RECOMMENDATIONS
GENERAL:
Trees in this section are recommended to be retained. See Tree Preservation notes on Protection Plan (hereinafter
called 'Plan') for requirements affecting all retained trees. See Plan for tree numbers, locations, and Tree
Protection Zone outlines for specific retention trees. Proposed Building Envelopes are shown on the Plan,
#5 -- 18" Calocedrus decurrens, Incense Cedars
. The west edge of the tree protection zone for tree #5 falls within the proposed sidewalk. To protect the
roots during sidewalk construction, remove no soil within the tree protection zone. The sidewalk,
including sidewalk base, shall be installed above existing grade. Care will need to bll given during
construction to protect the roots and tree canopy.
. Use no equipment that pulls and shatters roots, such as backhoe or trencher.
. Any fenceposts which may be located within the tree protection zone are to be located so as to avoid
major roots where possible.
. During construction the tree shall be irrigated as required to maintain health.
#6 -- 18" Calocedrus decurrens, Incense Cedar
#7 -- 8" Robinia pseudoacacia, Black Locust
#8 -- 12" Cedrus deodara, Deodar Cedar
#9 - 2 - 6" Robinia pseudoacacia, Black Locust
#10 - 2 - 8" Robinia pseudoacacia, Black Locust
#11 -- 10" Robinia pseudoacacia, Black Locust
#13 -- 8" Robinia pseudoacacia, Black Locust
#14 - 12" Robinia pseudoacacia, Black Locust
. These trees form a young grove and thicket which is located within the neighbor's yard, The tree
protection zones vary in size and do impose on the site; however the tree protection zones are not affected
by construction.
. No trenching shall occur within the tree protection zone. Use no equipment that pulls and shatters roots,
such as backhoe or trencher.
. Root pruning shall occur only under the direction of Certified Arborist. Where roots must be removed,
cut cleanly with appropriate equipment (e.g" rock saw). See root pruning note in Tree Pn:servation notes
on Plan.
. Any fenceposts which may be located within the tree protection zone are to be located so as to avoid
major roots where possible,
#12 -- 8" Calocedrus decurrens, Incense Cedar
. This tree is located on the north side of the above-mentioned grove, on this site. The tree protection zone
for this tree is not affected by construction,
. No trenching shall occur within the tree protection zone. Use no equipment that pulls and shatters roots,
such as backhoe or trencher,
. Root pruning shall occur only under the direction of Certified Arborist. Where roots must be removed,
cut cleanly with appropriate equipment (e.g" rock saw). See root pruning note in Tree Preservation notes
on Plan,
. Any fenceposts which may be located within the tree protection zone are to be located so as to avoid
major roots where possible.
. During construction the tree shall be irrigated as required to maintain health.
#17 -- 16" Cedrus deodara, Deodar Cedar
#18 -- 16" Cedrus deodara, Deodar Cedar
#19 -- 20" Cedrus deodara, Deodar Cedar
#20 -- 8" Cedrus deodara, Deodar Cedar
. The tree protection zones for these trees are not affected by building construction,
. No trenching shall occur within the tree protection zone, Use no equipment that pulls and shatters roots,
such as backhoe or trencher
Galbraith & Associates, Inc.
~r3
Landscape Architects & Site Planners
Page 4
. Root pruning shall occur only under the direction of Certified Arborist. Where roots must be removed,
cut cleanly with appropriate equipment (e.g., rock saw). See root pruning note in Tree Preservation notes
on Plan,
. Any fenceposts which may be located within the tree protection zone are to be located so as to avoid
major roots where possible.
. During construction these trees shall be irrigated as required to maintain their health,
#24 --10" Quercus garryana, White Oak
. This young native oak is adjacent to a proposed roadway, The roadway curb intrudes into the tree
protection zone a maximum of less than 2' on the north side. To protect the roots during curb and
roadway construction, remove no soil within the tree protection zone. The curb, including curb base,
shall be installed above existing grade. Care will need to be given during construction to protect the roots
and tree canopy,
. Use no heavy equipment that pulls or shatters roots, such as backhoe or trencher within the tree
protection zone.
. Root pruning shall occur only under the direction of Certified Arborist. Where roots must be removed,
cut cleanly with appropriate equipment (e.g" rock saw). See root pruning note in Tree Preservation notes
on Plan.
. During construction the tree shall be irrigated as required to maintain health.
#27 -- 24" Cedrus deodara, Deodar Cedar
. Two sidewalks are proposed within the tree protection zone for tree #27. To protect the roots during
sidewalk construction, remove no soil within the tree protection zone, The sidewalk, including sidewalk
base, shall be installed above existing grade, Care will need to be given during construction to protect the
roots and tree canopy. Prune canopy as required for sidewalk under direction of a Certified Arborist.
. Use no equipment that pulls and shatters roots, such as backhoe or trencher,
. During construction these trees shall be irrigated as required to maintain health,
#28 -- 18" Cedrus deodara, Deodar Cedar
. The roadway curb intrudes into a small (2' wide at maximum) sliver on the north ohhe Tree Protection
Zone for this tree.
. Hand excavate only within the Tree Protection Zone, Use no equipment that pulls and shatters roots,
such as backhoe or trencher within the Tree Protection Zone.
. Root pruning shall occur only under the direction of Certified Arborist. Where roots must be removed,
cut cleanly with appropriate equipment (e.g., rock saw). See root pruning note in Tree Pn:servation notes
on Plan.
. Prune canopy as required for roadway under direction of a Certified Arborist.
. During construction these trees shall be irrigated as required to maintain health.
#29 -- 12" Carya illinoensis, Pecan
. This tree is located just off site near to the south property boundary, and its tree protecltion zone is not
affected by construction.
. Any fenceposts which may be located within the tree protection zone are to be located so as to avoid
major roots where possible.
. No trenching shall occur within the tree protection zone, Use no equipment that pulls and shatters roots,
such as backhoe or trencher
. Root pruning shall occur only under the direction of Certified Arborist. Where roots must be removed,
cut cleanly with appropriate equipment (e.g., rock saw). See root pruning note in Tree Preservation notes
on Plan.
. During construction the tree shall be irrigated as required to maintain health.
#30 -- 12" Cupressus glabrus, Arizona Cypress
. This tree is located within the neighbor's yard. The tree protection zone for this tree does not intrude into
the site; therefore it is not affected by construction.
. Root pruning shall occur only under the direction of Certified Arborist. Where roots must be removed, cut
cleanly with appropriate equipment (e.g., rock saw). See root pruning note in Tree Preservation notes on
Plan,
Galbraith & Associates, Inc.
~?'f
Landscape Architects & Site Planners
--.------.---------.------
Page 5
TREE REMOVAL NARRATIVE
I. HAZARD TREES
We have carefully examined and evaluated the condition or location of certain trees which present a clear public
safety hazard or a foreseeable danger of property damage and determine that such hazard or danger cannot
reasonably be alleviated by treatment or pruning. In our opinion the following trees should be removed as hazard
trees.
#1 -- 12" Robinia pseudoacacia, Black Locust
. This tree, which is growing in a small grove with Tree #2 & #3, is in decline, as indicated by many dead
branches and a damaged, almost non-existent cambium layer. It is a hazard for dropping and breaking
branches and toppling in a sidewalk area, and is therefore recommended for removal.
#2 -- 8" Robinia pseudoacacia, Black Locust
. This tree, which is growing in a small grove with Tree #1 & #3, is not in good health, as indicated by poor
leaf size and structure, It is a foreseeable hazard for falling dead branches in a sidewalk area, and is
recommended for removal.
#3 -- 9" Juglans regia, English Walnut
. This tree, growing in a small grove with Tree # 1 & #2, is in poor condition, This is indicated by sappy
bleeding on the trunk, a condition which often indicates decay within, Another indication of stress and
poor condition is its basal suckering. It is a foreseeable hazard and is recommended for removal.
#15 -- 43" Populus trichocarpa, Poplar
. This is a tremendously large, old specimen tree, which is near the end of its life expectancy, This tree has
been damaged by multiple old pruning cuts where several of its large major lower branches were
previously removed. Cavities within the trunk have likely resulted from these cuts, providing an avenue
for disease and rot which is invisibly inside of the trunk. One major large scaffolding branch leans heavily
outward and presents a danger of splitting from the tree trunk.
. "Poplar and related species" is on the Ashland Prohibited Street Tree list, due to problematic species
characteristics. Roots of this tree will be severely damaged by construction within a large area,
encompassing three lots. When tree roots are severed by construction, an entry for bacteria and disease is
provided, Anchoring roots may be damaged, and the tree would be in danger of falling. The interior
structure of the tree is weakened, and it would present a major hazard to surrounding residences on several
sides,
. With its very large size and weight, this tree presents a major hazard to any building, roadway, or to people
within its canopy, and thus it is (regrettably) recommended for removal within this new land use.
#16 -- 16" Robinia pseudoacacia, Black Locust
. The lower major scaffolding branch of this tree is nearly as large as the trunk, and has a narrow angle of
attachment with a decaying cavity in the trunk. This weak attachment signals future failure and splitting of
the trunk, which would destroy the tree, and potentially surrounding things, Due to this foreseeable hazard,
it is recommended for removal.
#21-- 42" Morus alba, Mulberry
. This large tree has been damaged by severe pruning. Its major scaffold branches are poorly attached as a
consequence, and overall this tree exhibits poor scaffolding and structural form. Weak branch attachments
may lead to the splitting off and dropping of large branches, Due to this foreseeable hazard, it is
recommended for removal.
#22 -- 70" Populus trichocarpa, Poplar
. This tree is the largest on the site: an old specimen tree, which is near to the end of its litl~ expectancy. It
has long, wide-spreading, horizontal branches, and, as seen on the Plan, a large canopy. If this tree were
retained, it would require a 90.5' radius (181' diameter) tree protective zone, an area much beyond the
large tree canopy--an area which extends into neighboring property. Even given this tree protective zone,
Galbraith & Associates, Inc.
~?5'
Landscape Architects & Site Planners
--,----
Page 6
the tree's long term survival may not be ensured, due to its advanced age and the probability that
widespread peripheral feeder roots even beyond the Tree Protective Zone may be damaged.
. "Poplar and related species" is on the Ashland Prohibited Street Tree list, due to problematic species
characteristics. This species is undesirable within residential neighborhoods as well. Poplars have
characteristically brittle wood; the frequent breaking and dropping of its limbs poses a hazard in
neighborhoods, including heavily used neighborhood open spaces. Roots of this tree may be damaged by
construction within a large area. When tree roots are severed by construction, an entry for bacteria and
disease is provided. Anchoring roots may be damaged, and the tree would be in danger off alling,
. Even if this portion of the development were designated as a neighborhood Open Space, there would be an
increase in activities within the canopy area, due to the surrounding urban development. With its very
large size and weight, falling branches would present a major hazard to anything within its canopy and
beyond. It is our considered opinion that due to this foreseeable hazard this tree is (regrettably)
recommended for removal.
#23 -- 43" Populus trichocarpa, Poplar
. This is a very large, mature to overmature specimen tree located just north of tree #22, as described above.
If retained, this tree would require a 55,75' radius (111,5' diameter) tree protective zone, beyond its large
canopy, partially overlapping the Tree Protective Zone for tree #22. Again, as above, even given this tree
protective zone, the tree's long term survival may not be ensured, due to its advanced age and the
probability that widespread peripheral feeder roots even beyond the Tree Protective Zone may be damaged.
. "Poplar and related species" is on the Ashland Prohibited Street Tree list, due to prob1<:~matic species
characteristics. This species is undesirable within residential neighborhoods as well. Poplars have
characteristically brittle wood; the frequent breaking and dropping of its limbs poses a hazard in
neighborhoods, including heavily used neighborhood open spaces. Roots of this tree may be damaged by
construction within a large area, When tree roots are severed by construction, an entry for bacteria and
disease is provided. Anchoring roots may be damaged, and the tree would be in danger of falling.
. Even if this portion of the development were designated as a neighborhood Open Space, there would be an
increase in activities within the canopy area, due to the surrounding urban development. With its very
large size and weight, falling branches would present a major hazard to anything within its canopy and
beyond. It is our considered opinion that due to this foreseeable hazard this tree is (regrettably)
recommended for removal.
#31 -- 20" Quercus garryana, Oregon White Oak
. This tree has been damaged and shows included bark with wire and insulator showing near the base of its
trunk. When a trunk has included bark it is subject to splitting. It is, therefore, a foreseeabk hazard and is
recommended for removal.
Galbraith & Associates, Inc.
~ ?I,
Landscape Architects & Site Planners
-------,
Page 7
II. NON-HAZARD TREE REMOVALS
We have carefully examined the potential for impacts that might result from the removal of trees as contemplated in
this project and not categorized as hazard trees, and it is our opinion that the removal of these trees will not have a
significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing
windbreaks,
We have also examined how the removal of these trees will affect other existing trees to be preserved and it its our
opinion that the removal of these trees will not have a significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes
canopies, and species diversity within 200 feet of the subject property because:
#4 -- 8" Prunus dulcis, Almond
. This tree is located near to a proposed sidewalk at the southwest of this project. The tree
is in extremely poor condition as indicated by twig and branch die back, and is nearly dead. As such it is
recommended for removal.
. Its removal will not have a significant negative impact on erosion or the flow of surface water because the
area is level. Surface drainage will continue to be within a landscaped area and the water flow does not
cause erosion.
. Soil stability will not be affected as this site is not sloped.
. This tree does not provide significant protection for adjacent trees and is not part of a windbreak.
. The proposed nearby sidewalk will be sloped for drainage and landscape planting strips will provide for
infiltration of surface drainage,
. Tree canopy and tree density will be mitigated by street trees and trees to be planted in community and
Open Space areas where no trees currently exist.
#25 - 2 - 8" Prunus dulcis, Almond
#26 - 8" Prunus dulcis, Almond
. These trees have sparse, thin and small canopies, indicative of their very poor health. Tree #25 has axe
wounds which have nearly led to its demise. These poor specimens are better replaced with appropriately
located healthy trees, and are thus recommended for removal.
. Their removal will not have a significant negative impact on erosion or the flow of surface water because
the area is level. Surface drainage will continue to be within a landscaped area and the water flow does not
cause erosion,
. Soil stability will not be affected as the site is not erosive or sloped, with no stream flow or excessive
surface waters in the vicinity of these trees. The proposed sidewalks will be engineered to handle runoff
and will cover and stabilize soils.
. Tree density will be mitigated by street trees and trees to be planted in community and Open Space areas
where no trees currently exist.
. The very small canopy loss ofthese two small trees is negligible, and will be mitigated by street trees to be
planted in community and Open Space areas where no trees currently exist.
. This tree does not provide significant protection for adjacent trees and is not part of a windbreak.
. Although this species will not remain on this site, it is not a rare species, Species diversity will be
increased as the new residential development is landscaped, and trees added to the site in areas where no
trees currently grow. Thus, species diversity over time will not be negatively impacted.
Note: This document and the ideas incorporated herein, as an instrument of
professional service, is the property of Galbraith & Associates, Inc. and is not to
be used, modified, or changed in whole or in part, for any other purpose without
the express written authorization of John Galbraith, Landscape Architect.
01~
Galbraith & Associates, Inc.
Landscape Architects & Site Planners
(,c
o
GUY
~i~~
~iil:
~9~ ..
~8~g~
~"T1-1Q
~~~~
ii~~
0"~i
~
=~d~
~z 1::
-1 ~
y~ il iO i!~
ii 11 r ;1 i~t
'1-0 Ii! 5l!9.
!; ~I " Ii U!
f i~ i 1 ~ ~l5
~ Ii ! sl i~~
i ii i if i!J
i II t ~.I i i ~
{ SlC7 J i~ ili
I 'ii ! =1 HI
! Iii; z;!
i ~j ~ ~ 1 ~ I
i t i III #I~
~ & ~I I~
! i I Ii fJ
! J i ii II
i i ) Ii
0'0. CD ~!~!O~ ~
!lit iifilu
I~!~ I~'O ~5l ~ ~
. .O~ i~~li~~
ji~ Ij;~if I
i3 ~ ~a Si i ; i ~ ~ --
~Ol iiiigi8 ~
Ii! i~!illl
if! ili ii! DOl
Ii; i~I~~!
~~ I t!~i~1 ~
'O~o i!ta~i~
~! i i 51 ~ ~i. ~ ~
jll ~ii; i i
~I; "i~ii- ~
II ~ IJ if Sl
I I iu~IJg
Iii I~. I
I ~ Jii- ~f
~Ii i: 9
..if I if Ii
iii ili ~
.h iI"1
i}g I~ii!il~
Iii ilitiai"U
l~t t~Ns;~~J
lif ~iJ:lili'
.!~t ~8.il~2' I;
~~ ~ iis::7~~i
Igc i~~I~~il
;i! 1~:iI~ll~
Iii ~I~!j:iil
~;f -~o~-i-
~~I -I~i~lil!
Jig 1~~ii;~I~
~f ~il~igi
U IiUlin
"1 ';jl!aJi
II lifUU
I! H I ~i ~ i! I i
il 'Illil;
P ! tIU:!!
I ttilfiS-
ilf!
~i8og~-t
~I~~~II
aiill~ "U
~.~~ail
fS!&io.
~-8sil~ilg
IJ~I;Jl
niliii!
1b>~I'O~i
2~..z i&.-
i~~ ~~;
~Qi~!tii
1-~i~>>iI
i!;!~~g.g
-I~i!~;
ar-; 11 i:!
r-I*-,<
I fi~iI
il~il8'
lalill
ihiff
IjJ~li
-illl lil
, i. 11
t-!J-il
!I 1
'0 iI 8--1
~i.il
.~~"U
11.1
g!ll:Cl!a
~Iarg
i-~ !
~I!~
i~g..
.i!l
~!i_
iifi
lj ii
>>N~
a 'I
1'1
gl!!
~11
log
i~i
1~ I
Iii
aIL -
fi~
i:i
'11
~i
~
· . ;-.fY-'y-
>- L.,
}.. * ~ <
"U-'i m m 1
~i!!~; ~ r..,J-,...
~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ m
~n1 ~~- ~ ~~ -1
jiig III III lIlifi ~
. ~ a a d" ~
~;g~ ;g;g ! i:
m ~ ~ ~~ ~
~
~
~
~ i~!~ ~~ ~ ~~~
~ ~~cP =~ C5 ~~E=
~ =~~.. l"'J~ ~ > <rn~
~ =~ ;. ~~O
~ 6S ..
II t-~~
" po O~
~ ~l"'J 0 ~~=
""l ~~:;Q
t"4Q .
~..... Ii ~.....O
~~ ~~O
~- ~ ~
L-
):::a
~
~
~
~
c:::.:>
c::..>
t.n
EDGE C1F PA VEHENT
Sf'RD7'
~
~ ~ M ~ _ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ G ~ ~ m ~ ~ w _ ~ ~ G ~ ~ ~ e _ ~ ~
~o 0000..0 ," "l-ot;jNitc"o~OcaOmOca)1lt;:!t;;!")1I",=oO)1l )11 )11 0",)11 )1I1~O ,"U,~"I)1I
,.;fi'!ij'~ '21~21~~'.i!lqfi,; Iq '~~21021'21'21r=~,;~r=2r-2Ii~~~~2~~ '21b~~~'::~~j!~Qb~
c:~~;g iI~ ~j! ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~5i 8~ mj! :il~ i~ g~ SF 8~ g~ g 8~ ~ ~ ~~ p~ ~ ~g ~i! ~ i p~
~~ I. ~~ .Ii 5~ ~~ ;~;~ i; I; h ~UUi ili ~i~; ~i !lij,]~ ~i ~i ~~ ~i ~Hi d ~~ ~~!li
iill i II ~ ~ i II < n nil n IIII~~ III II IIU ~ ~ I
~ ...,..~ )> )> )> )> )> :. I )> )>>> :.)> I )>
~ ro>
-f
~
)11 at m
'2;G m
BZ 0
~~ m ~
I ~
:. ~
I~~ -.--
! ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o~
i i i i~ ~ ~i !
E ~ )11~! ~ ~
~ ]J i~ ~ ~ 2
g I -<ij i ~
e 0 II i i
i I
~
~ ~ ~
~ i
~ ~ ~ ~ ~I ~ ~
~ i ~ ~ ~ ~
~ -< 0 ~ ~
! s!ilo i
jIll-I i
i
~ I~ i i ~ i
~~o ~~ ~ ~ ~
~~ ~ ~ ~
~~Ui i
~ ClQlm QI
~ ~ fii iit fii
~
ill ~ ~
2 ~ ~
I
m
~illil~=11
~22~222
j j
S S
~ ~
Rl :lD
~ I
z
o
~
o
i
~ ~ ~ ~~!~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ !~ z~! !~ ~ ~~!J ~ ~! ~ 2 2
i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ; ; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
f'"' .
~~ &:~ ~~
t)C:1 ~ t'l- (Jq
o::c ...n
~l ~ "!l0 ;t~ >SU
01'""
~!:< 1St 2..-
; ill~~ ~;1 U ~o-
=1-1
~ ~ ~~ gSU
"/' I'~CT ~ -~.
> >f'"'t
:::r
DEe 1 7 2004
RDK Engineering
TRAFFIC ENGINEERING/SIGNAL SYSTEMS
3350 Green Acres Dr., Central Point, OR 97502 - Phone (541) 664-0393 Fax (541) 664-9320
December 10, 2004
Andy Cochrane
D and A Enterprise
1970 Ashland Street
Ashland, OR 97520
Subject: Addendum toTraffic Impact Study for Clay Street Residential Complex
Dear Mr. Cochrane:
I have reviewed the existing and projected traffic volumes and level of service a1t the
intersection of Ashland S1. and Clay St. in the City of Ashland.
LOS V/C
"D" 0.30
"E" 0.62
"F" 0.69
The traffic study shows the following levels of service during the P.M. peak hour:
Delay
29.3 sec. - existing year 2004
42.3 sec. - projected year 2006 with project and southbound Clay
S1. right turn lane.
66.7 sec. - projected year 2024 with project and southbound Clay
S1. right turn lane.
The level of service data above includes several trips to and from the existing
unimproved commercial driveway located opposite Clay St. If this driveway wt::re
restricted to right turn in and right turn out, the following levels of service can he
obtained for Clay S1. and Ashland St. (Copies of the revised calculations sheets are
attached. )
LOS V/C
"c" 0.24
"D" 0.48
"F" O. 50
Delay
23.2 sec., existing year 2004
29.2 sec., projected year 2006 with project and southbound Clay
S1. right turn lane.
59.9 sec projected year 2024 with project and southbound Clay
S1. right turn lane.
This information and revised study data at this intersection is submitted following a
meeting with Dan Dorrell, ODOT traffic engineer on December 8, 2004. The
commercial driveway opposite Clay S1. was discussed. ODOT advises that there may be
~&1
- --..---.. _._......._-~--_..__._-..--
DEe 1 7 200(
a development occurring on that site in the near future. ODOT is considering a
restriction when that site is developed to right turn in and right turn out only. The
restriction is due to the proximity to the overpass and intersection operating con<:erns.
Other options include a median barrier on Ashland St.
Until the site is developed, a stop sign with a "Right Turn Only" sign would raiSle the
level of service as shown below.
In the event that the City of Ashland and Oregon Department of Transportation are
considering a raised median on Ashland St. through this intersection, it should he
determined prior to widening Clay St. to facilitate a right turn lane. A right turn lane is
not necessary if a median barrier is installed. The median barrier could be designed for
right turn in and right turn out on the commercial driveway side and Clay St. could have
right turn in, right turn out and left turn in. The left turn out of Clay St. would he
prohibited.
The following indicates the level of service in the year 2024, with the project, and a
median barrier in place to prohibit the southbound left turn (information as sho"ffi in the
report).
LOS VIC
"B" 0.25
Delay
11.7 sec. Year 2024 with project and median barrier.
Copies of these calculations are attached.
Ifthere are any questions, please let me know.
Very truly yours,
~~~~
Transportation Engineer
RDK Engineering
CC: Dan Dorrell, ODOT Traffic Engineer
James Olson, P.L.S. City of Ashland
r+.Jo
~.__.._-_.._-_..-------_.__._.----.---_.__. -~-_.....__._--
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
9: Ashland St. & Clay St. Yr 2004 Existing No SnLG+h
! ii' '1 7 7nQ4'
ApDrz>a.rJ-. --r;~a/ ("
,
12/7/2004
~
--+
-+--
.....
\.. ..;
MQvetn~~~1fl!i1mB~I~Wf[R"'~B~~~~~~
Lane Configurations 'i tt t~ V
Sign Control Free Free Stop
Grade 0% 0% 0%
Volume (veh/h) 23 635 596 57 29 13
Peak Hour Factor 0.64 0.83 0.96 0.80 0,73 0.55
Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 36 765 621 71 40 24
Pedestrians 4 4
Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0
Walking Speed (ftls) 4.0 4.0
Percent Blockage 0 0
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type None
Median storage veh)
vC, conflicting volume 696 1115 354
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3
pO queue free % 96 79 96
cM capacity (veh/h) 893 193 638
Pi~iQni;~_:m~~'ij~liE~~~a,~_
Volume Total 36 383 383 414 278 63
Volume Left 36 0 0 0 0 40
Volume Right 0 0 0 0 71 24
cSH 893 1700 1700 1700 1700 261
Volume to Capacity 0,04 0.23 0.23 0.24 0.16 0.24
Queue Length (ft) 3 0 0 0 0 23
Control Delay (s) 9,2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.2
Lane LOS A C
Approach Delay (s) OA 0.0 23.2
Approach LOS C
rnt~~lM'~ -
Average Delay 1.2
Intersection Capacity Utilization 34.2% ICU Level of Service A
Clay Street Residential Complex 2:00 pm 9/27/2004 Yr. 2004 Existing AM Peak
RDK Engineering
c~91
Synchro 5 Light Report
Page 1
1. ' '~ '1 'JOfit,
'- " I... U';
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Ashland St. & Clay St. Yr.2006 No Build No St:'i..cfh AoorDach /Fa.++:ic
I .
1217/2004
.,J-
--.
-+-
'-
\.
~
~B_E~'t~R~SB~.~~"~~lIm'l_\~
Lane Configurations ~ tt tit V
Sign Control Free Free Stop
Grade 0% 0% 0%
Volume (veh/h) 24 653 613 69 51 35
Peak Hour Factor 0.64 0.83 0.96 0.80 0.73 0.55
Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 38 787 639 86 70 64
Pedestrians 2 4
Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0
Walking Speed (ftls) 4.0 4.0
Percent Blockage 0 0
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type None
Median storage veh)
ve, conflicting volume 729 1154 368
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
tC, single (5) 4.1 6.8 6,9
tC, 2 stage (5)
tF (5) 2.2 3.5 3.3
pO queue free % 96 62 90
eM capacity (veh/h) 868 182 626
Pi.r~iQ(l~~tfe~~E~Sl;;Z"E~1PJB,~~~IIIf~
Volume Total 38 393 393 426 299 133
Volume Left 38 0 0 0 0 70
Volume Right 0 0 0 0 86 64
cSH 868 1700 1700 1700 1700 274
Volume to Capacity 0.04 0.23 0.23 0.25 0.18 0.49
Queue Length (ft) 3 0 0 0 0 62
Control Delay (5) 9.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 29.9
Lane LOS A D
Approach Delay (5) 0.4 0.0 29.9
~~~~ D
Iiit~~~.Pm~ry.~.
Average Delay 2.6
Intersection Capacity Utilization 38.3% ICU Level of Service A
Clay S1. Residential Complex 4: 15 pm 10/27/2004 Yr 2024 With Project PM Pk No SB L T Synchro 5 Light Report
RDK Engineering Page 1
~ '1 ;;L..
~ &)1 0'.' 0" 0' It
.' :1 l.. wf
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis No S"'i.<.+h hPproa..c.h-r.c;.,,^-F.pie
3: Ashland St. & Clay St. Yr.2006 w/Project, No Right Turn Lane 12/7/2004
/' -.. +- ...... \". ..I
~oy,fime'~~~Bt:Ifi15alawal15M3Rr~~aR_~~~k__~~
Lane Configurations 1Ij tt t1+ V
Sign Control Free Free Stop
G~e ~ ~ ~
Volume (veh/h) 36 653 613 97 57 41
Peak Hour Factor 0.64 0.83 0.96 0.80 0.73 0.55
Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 56 787 639 121 78 75
Pedestrians 2 4
Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0
Walking Speed (fUs) 4.0 4.0
Percent Blockage 0 0
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type None
Median storage veh)
vC, conflicting volume 764 1209 386
vC1, stage 1 conf vol 0
vC2, stage 2 conf vol 0
tC, single (s) 4.1 6,8 6,9
tC, 2 stage (s) 3.1
tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3
pO queue free % 95 53 88
cM capacity (veh/h) 1123 166 609
Oi~GtiijJl!~net1t~Ean;1IlI-=~__aJ;~IW'la~~~~li1~ ~~~~
Volume Total 56 393 393 426 334 153
Volume Left 56 0 0 0 0 78
Volume Right 0 0 0 0 121 75
cSH 1123 1700 1700 1700 1700 257
Volume to Capacity 0.05 0.23 0.23 0.25 0.20 0.59
Queue Length (ft) 4 0 0 0 0 86
Control Delay (s) 8.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 37.5
Lane LOS A E
Approach Delay (s) 0.6 0.0 37.5
Approach LOS E
~';rsu -.........'""-_._.~_._----~-_._-------~
~~~"'t~(Uh. ... o;J'-IIIlJ~~
Average Delay 3.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 39.4% ICU Level of Service A
:~~i ~~~ ~ !~, ~:'i'~};f~~~
Clay 51. Residential Complex 4:15 pm 10/27/2004 Yr 2024 With Project PM Pk No S8 L T Synchro 5 Light Report
RDK Engineering :2. / 3 Page 1
DEe 1 7" ?[][J!<
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
9: Ashland St. & Clay St. 2006 wI proj, & Rt Turn Lane No South AP/Jr~,,~J. ~'':"~h:_' 12/7/2004
."J -. .- -\.. '. ..;
MQVe~ot_:E"S4.-a]~~R.$a~$"~~~~_
Lane Configurations "i tt t1+ "i'"
Sign Control Free Free Stop
Grade 0% 0% 0%
Volume (veh/h) 36 653 613 97 57 41
Peak Hour Factor 0.64 0.83 0.96 0.80 0.73 0.55
Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 56 787 639 121 78 75
Pedestrians 4 4
Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0
Walking Speed (fUs) 4.0 4.0
Percent Blockage 0 0
Right tum flare (veh)
Median type None
Median storage veh)
vC, conflicting volume 764 1209 388
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3
pO queue free % 93 52 88
cM capacity (veh/h) 842 163 607
~~i:(ft)l18d~~~~1J~~~~~~~~
Volume Total 56 393 393 426 334 78 75
Volume Left 56 0 0 0 0 78 0
Volume Right 0 0 0 0 121 0 75
cSH 842 1700 1700 1700 1700 163 607
Volume to Capacity 0.07 0.23 0.23 0.25 0.20 0.48 0.12
Queue Length (ft) 5 0 0 0 0 57 10
Control Delay (s) 9.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 45.9 11.8
Lane LOS A E B
Approach Delay (s) 0.6 0.0 29.2
Approach. LOS D
~Q:~~mma
Average Delay 2.8
Intersection Capacity Utilization 35.8%' ICU Level of Service A
>~.~~~~
Clay Street Residential Complex 2:00 pm 9/27/2004 Yr. 2004 Existing AM Peak
RDK Engineering d1 ,/4-
Synchro 5 Light Report
Page 1
n, r. r: 1 Ii} " ~
.~ r: "-,, . I I
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Nc> $t.'...-f-i, ApP/".:7tt.<.Jr Tr4.{":?,"c.-
3: Ashland St. & Clay St. Yr.2006 w/Project, No Clay St. Left Turn
..J -+- +- '- \.. ~
M(fveme.m__Btb~al1~"T~_B~$l3R~~
Lane Configurations "tt tt+ 7'
Sign Control Free Free Stop
Grade 0% 0% 0%
Volume (veh/h) 36 653 613 97 0 41
Peak Hour Factor 0,64 0.83 0.96 0.80 0.73 0.55
Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 56 787 639 121 0 75
Pedestrians 2 4
Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0
Walking Speed (ftIs) 4.0 4.0
Percent Blockage 0 0
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type None
Median storage veh)
vC, conflicting volume 764 1209 386
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
tC, single (5) 4.1 6.8 6.9
tC, 2 stage (5)
tF (5) 2.2 3.5 3.3
pO queue free % 93 100 88
cM capacity (vehlh) 842 163 609
Pi~tQO~n~11f;~'J:~a~E{4~~~B1t~~
Volume Total 56 393 393 426 334 75
Volume Left 56 0 0 0 0 0
Volume Right 0 0 0 0 121 75
cSH 842 1700 1700 1700 1700 609
Volume to Capacity 0.07 0.23 0.23 0.25 0.20 0.12
Queue Length (ft) 5 0 0 0 0 10
Control Delay (5) 9.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.7
Lane LOS A B
Approach Delay (5) 0.6 0.0 11.7
Approach LOS B
(O(~~QP'IW~
Average Delay 0.8
Intersection Capacity Utilization 35.1 % ' ICU Level of Service A
12n /2004
\:i T?:;~';7;~i~~7f!".if~:~
Clay St. Residential Complex 4:15 pm 10/27/2004 Yr 2024 With Project PM Pk No SB L T Synchro 5 Light Report
RDK Engineering ~. i .- Page 1
".-,.1,,"; .,
fJj:'(" 'I \f;I
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Ashland St. & Clay St. Yr,2024 No Build No 5c>u+-h ApPYdttd 'Tr;tr~;c_
12/7/2004
;
-+
-+-
'-
'. -cI
M'l~~f~1EeE~~wa~~a~BR,_lEC~~~
Lane Configurations "l tt t1+ "l 7'
Sign Control Free Free Stop
Grade 0% 0% 0%
Volume (veh/h) 36 818 767 69 51 35
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.96 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 40 909 799 77 57 39
Pedestrians 2 4
Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0
Walking Speed (ft/s) 4,0 4.0
Percent Blockage 0 0
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type None
Median storage veh)
vC, conflicting volume 880 1376 444
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9
tC, 2 stage (5)
tF (5) 2.2 3.5 3.3
pO queue free % 95 56 93
cM capacity (veh/h) 761 129 559
EJrr,eqtIP~ng~a~.el:f$2~~a~a~~~
Volume Total 40 454 454 533 343 57 39
Volume Left 40 0 0 0 0 57 0
Volume Right 0 0 0 0 77 0 39
cSH 761 1700 1700 1700 1700 129 559
Volume to Capacity 0.05 0.27 0.27 0.31 0.20 0.44 0.07
Queue Length (ft) 4 0 0 0 0 49 6
Control Delay (5) 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 53.3 11.9
Lane LOS A F B
Approach Delay (5) 0.4 0.0 36.5
~~~'~. E
mrEf~~mmafY
Average Delay 2.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 37.2% ICU Level of Service A
-~~1~~
Clay S1. Residential Complex 4:15 pm 10/27/2004 Yr 2024 With Project PM Pk No S8 L T Synchro 5 Light Report
RDK Engineering Page 1
,.2r~'
- HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis No S,'U+-J. ApI- -'?LeA 'T;k.(~;: <-
3: Ashland 81. & Clay 81. Yr.2024 w/Project, Existing Intersection
/ --+- +- 4.... \.. .J
MQY.~m~(it~l'~-eS~a3I~~RlI1S~BR'~.~~-~
Lane Configurations ~ tt tt. V
Sign Control Free Free Stop
Grade 0% 0% 0%
Volume (veh/h) 36 818 767 97 57 41
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.96 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 40 909 799 108 63 46
Pedestrians 2 4
Lane Width(ft) 12.0 12.0
Walking Speed (ftIs) 4.0 4.0
Percent Blockage 0 0
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type None
Median storage veh)
vC, conflicting volume 911 1391 459
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
tC, single (s) 4.1 6.8 6.9
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3
pO queue free % 95 50 92
cM capacity (veh/h) 741 125 546
.tfijCcliQ~n"_.E9~a~~~~1~~..t:l~~
Volume Total 40 454 454 533 374 109
Volume Left 40 0 0 0 0 63
Volume Right 0 0 0 0 108 46
cSH 741 1700 1700 1700 1700 185
Volume to Capacity 0.05 0.27 0.27 0.31 0.22 0.59
Queue Length (ft) 4 0 0 0 0 80
Control Delay (s) 10.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 49.0
Lane LOS B E
Approach Delay (s) 0.4 0.0 49.0
Approach LOS E
ril(~~~roa
Average Delay 2.9
Intersection Capacity Utilization 40.8% I ICU Level of Service A
i/.: 'I j 10n~
1217/2004
~~'~1;~i.~_ '~r< ~~~: ~~~
Clay St. Residential Complex 4: 15 pm 10/27/2004 Yr 2024 With Project PM Pk No SB L T Synchro 5 Light Report
RDK Engineering Page 1
a17
'HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis No Sc1;.d-h AfprOcLCh ''-;4.'W-/~.J LllL: 1 "{ 2004
9: Ashland St. & Clay St. Yr 2024 w/Proj. & Rt. Turn Lane 12/7/2004
/' -+ -+- " '. .;
M~~EB~El't{~~BR1fESBT:1ICSBF{~~~_.~i~~
Lane Configurations ~ tt t~ ~."
Sign Control Free Free Stop
Grade 0% 0% 0%
Volume (veh/h) 36 818 767 97 57 41
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.96 0.90 0.90 0.90
Hourly flow rate (veh/h) 40 909 799 108 63 46
Pedestrians 4 4
Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0
Walking Speed (ftIs) 4.0 4.0
Percent Blockage 0 0
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type None
Median storage veh)
vC, conflicting volume 911 1391 461
vC1, stage 1 cont vol
vC2, stage 2 cont vol
tC, single (5) 4.1 6.8 6.9
tC, 2 stage (5)
tF (5) 2.2 3,5 3.3
pO queue free % 95 50 92
cM capacity (veh/h) 741 125 543
h- ~'~.""!llI.'?^ .,.....,..u~Fi'iB.~~~"'aE~WB~~",~Er'~~D""2""'b"------~.,'.,....--._-~~~&.&.~%;
1;.I1(t;\,ill()n~~Q~"#,:~~,J::1: 'if, ".":PX~-"i<"",,, .i",;~ ,. ..):~~~",Vg~~..... ;i.,~~: "~~~~~m~~4i1\~Yl1i;~
Volume Total 40 454 454 533 374 63 46
Volume Left 40 0 0 0 0 63 0
Volume Right 0 0 0 0 108 0 46
cSH 741 1700 1700 1700 1700 125 543
Volume to Capacity 0.05 0.27 0.27 0.31 0.22 0.50 0.08
Queue Length (ft) 4 0 0 0 0 59 7
Control Delay (5) 10.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 59.9 12.2
Lane LOS B F B
Approach Delay (5) 0.4 0.0 39.9
Approach LOS E
tiit~~mnmlll'~.
Average Delay 2.4
Intersection Capacity Utilization 38.6% ICU Level ot Service A
Clay Street Residential Complex 2:00 pm 9/27/2004 Yr. 2004 Existing AM Peak
RDK Engineering
~1>f
Synchro 5 Light Report
Page 1
1
I
-
Traffic Impact Analvsis
Clay Street Residential Complex
I
I
APPENDIX A
I
I
FIGURES
I
.
J
I
September27, 2004
,:j19
{. /
RDK Engineering
~C;".EY RD
,
'\
Ii,....
'-. - -_.I
\"
I,~
~'L
-J-
-----------
I
. .~..~....., SC-_::_'~~ ,
~~\-" !\
\~ '\
\.' ~'':'; '.:'.:
..~ -\---
')
~
f ' '.
- -
...,
---=- -=-
...
,
"
'\',
110 I
\. r
'\ / I
.~
, \, \ I
-;~+ I
:..''\.
~
.\. I
'-
.'\.
'""
'--~
o
~
'~
~
~
~
~
~
~
o
,- CRE:1< DR
I . \0-
I
" ~
" L
100 "- ~
(j)
)a
~
IM~ AV ,. u
, I
" i i -1
" (
:..~ ST "- f
3
)a I_
e( e(
3: a:
.-
::;
AlRPOIRT
/.
./
'---
\.
I.
I
3
>-
~
~
~
a:
o
~
~
i:
I
I
J -
'05S LN
-..,
I'
. '_ CRES1V1EW OR
; . . t... ~.. TA.........;, I
. T"t'1 .
!- - ------ - -- ~
MOHAWK "1
I
r
I
,/
/
/
/
BlACK OM
/
I --JL
BlACK OA'
:",/
MORADA
SiJLP~E~
C"-,, SPRING
J
"
GRE:NMEAOOWS'tVA
6
N
.....,
..~ - ~ --:....:2....
\,
FIGURE 1
VICINITY MAP
400 0
~
'24A
236
" I
. - ~''''j
~~)()o
c..,~
23A
'''. ~ }.~l.rl" --
- ,lI 1--
-.'Jr ~ , .
· ! itJl ~
'-' - '~~
I
I
I
-
I
.
f-crg,
Jl ~~~'<a1
a ~a!~i
i I!l _ ::1 ~"C
(J) g~~gg:
~1=~8&
J~ ~~i~g
~t~gSlaca
~IJl'8ca3~
o ~ QJ g lit ;:;:
;..:.. 1-0 ~ -3 < et
G)\lig-!.C.
I~,i;-!~i
~I Qgoca
z ~~ 5!!.;~
~I~~ ~g ~
5 ;-. ~~"2.
~ po ~. ~
;01
8
l
;on
m~ 2..
~-< m
000 I
m~ -"
~
Z;o ()
:::im I
)>m ~
CJ'1
r~ 0
() 0
0
s: 0
z
1J en
r ~
m -i
>< m
- ~
/ J-- i ~j e.-<.j~ e :2-
8>= " .. If.
c;Q i.\ ii ~
. j,f- '~. '.~ i
.n
~/, .......,.
t.~_.._~- .
CLAY
STREET
~~
:~
i!='
s
~
~~
E
2
--====--=~~::-.:::.:::::::---=--===-
. . -,;o'm . . - . . - . . - . . - . . - . . - .. - . . - . .
~ ~:a.,)...
o :!1'fP
~
:DO oo~
m)> ~ ~
< -f ~ 1"'\
en ~ ~ '-4..""
m CD l"'J S
i~ ~ ~
~~
CLAY STREET RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
PACIFIC N.W. BUILDING & DESIG
"....... :>N
-r UI fa Ol
~:~it:
111 "" ~
Q.~
. II
DI ~~!
~~~ ,
. to U)
'l"'~~
II co Nil
)( W 0'<
r~
)>))
Zo
OJ:
~=i
)>m
zO
Z-f
_C:
Z;U
G)m
() :2---
-1
I
-
I
I
I
D
Vi
I
I
I
I
c
Ashland St.
~outn approoc:ll is
Priwte Driveway
o
NORTH
(NOT TO SCALE)
E. MOin St.
E
-0
a:::
.:JJf.
II>
II>
...
U
c
o
E
(5
~
F
xx = P.M. Peak Hour Volumes
'"
.... :? ON
:::l 0 ....0 \ ,
)
\ ',,-- 0 \ ',,-- 23 - --- 57
0 -596 323 -- _ 231
635- 35 '" ,5
, 0 , 0 0",- ,2
t { t { \ t ( \ (
~ '"
0 0 @ _ 0 @ 00 _ @
;0 ID
I') .... ;:~
.... 2
N ....
; ~ ; , ,
--- 71
1 ./ 98 ./
- 443
10 '" +68 - ,172
\ t 33 "- t (
co ... \
_ 0
@) N 0 ID Cl en
to CD ~
.
Figure 4
Year 2004 Existing Traffic
PM Peak Hour Volumes
I I
RDK Engineering I
D & A En terprise
Clay Street Residential Complex
10 Acre Site
~1J Eb
- - ---------------.-
I
I
-
1
I
I
Ef)
NORTH
(NOT TO SCALE)
e. Main St.
e. Main St.
D
E
~
,;
e::
.:zt;
Q)
Q)
'-
u
c
c
E
'0
r-
I
-
]
I
[
Ashland St.
F
/ South approach is
Private Driveway
xx - P.t.l. Peak Hour Volumes
.
on o in
'" '" '"
"'0 "'0 ~ ,
~\'o \ \ )
'0 24 .,,- -- 69
329 - - 237
653- -613
~ 0 /' 0 o ....... ~2 87 ....... /,13
t ( t ( " t ( " (
N ~
@ 00 _ @ '"
0 iD 0 @ iD 0
'" '" 0",
~ ~ ~IX)
N N
) ~ ) ~ ,
-71
1 ./ 102 ./
- 463
12 ....... t 497 - /' 174
" 34 ....... t (
- N "
N _
cD N 0 <Xl 0 (\j
10 '" ~
I I
RDK Enqineerinq I
Figure 5
Year 2006 P.M. Peak Hour
No Build Option
D & A Enterprise
Clay Street Residential Complex
10 Acre Site
?:ftJ4
I-._._._._~-
l
I
-
I
I
I
~~
NORTH
(NOT TO SCALE)
E. Main St. D /3 (57.)
(28%) 17
...........
\ f
~ I{)
E. Main St.
~~
:;:; ;!:
......, ......,
r 1 (27.)
......
~
I")
.....,
-
t E
,
~
N
......,
"0
a:::
~
Q)
Q)
L
U
c:
0
E
"0
f-
,
I{)
t I
to
-N'-
~~U)
-~
I{)
.....,
I
I
1
I
......
~
I{)
I")
'-'
N
.
f
0
<:t
......
~
It)
(0
'-' - -
~ ~
" "
....., .....,
(0 (0
f ,
(197.) 12 ./
- I{)
t ,
'- 1 (27.)
--25 (417.)
-?<<9.s-. 00y
/0: S~
<<9") t. cr<<9
/0/ <<9t
Co
~'o1.
&-+-
'- 28 (467.) Ashland St.
(37.) 1 ..."
(117.) 4 --
( 3 7.) 1 -....
c
-
~~
I") I{)
'-' -
.....,
South approach is
Private Driveway
F ,
I")
-
~
It)
......,
xx = PJI. PsaI< Hour Volumes
I I
RDK Engineering I
Figure 6 D & A Enterprise
Year 2006 P.M. Peak Hour Clay Street !Residential Complex
Site Trip Percentages & Assignment 10 Acre Site
3e5'
_ n__ ___ ______ ___ ______----,-___ ________
1
I 0
NORTH
(NOT TO SCALE)
I E. Main St.
D
I
I E
....
UJ
I
-0
a::
.Yo
CD
CD
'-
c..>
c
0
E
-0
l-
I [ Ashland St. F
I South approach is
PrillOte Driveway
XX = P.t.t. Peak Hour Volumes
J
I
"
"'0 '" - :;: 00()
"'- .... - ~ ,
~ " 11 ~ , I
'12 36 -" -- 97
-613 329- _ 237
653-
/ 6 / 6 1" /2 104 " /16
t { t { \ t { \ {
0() ....
0 '" ... @ ... <D @ o 0 _ @ " ...
" ... " -
... '" ~~
0() ~
... ...
} ~ ) ~ ,
1/ 103./ --72
- 488
17" t 501- /174
\ 35 " t {
" ... \
... -
@ N CV - 0 ...
" '" ~
I
.
I I
RDK Engineering I
Figure 7
Year 2006 P.M. Peak Hour
With Project Traffic
D & A En terprise
Clay Street Residential Complex
10 Acre Site
?:f1Jb
_ ~_u~_ u_ ___~n~n__ __ _~---'-n~_____
1
..., ,., .., 0;;;
...,0 ,.,0 ,.,
\''-0 \ , I \ ,
'-0 24 ." -- 69
412- ~ 297
818- -767
/ 0 /0 1, /2 87 , /13
\ ( \ ( '\ t ( '\ (
N ..,
@ ;0 0 @ u; 0 @ ~ ~ ~ @ co N
co '" 0",
N ;;; S! "'0
~ ~
) \ ) \ ,
1/ 127/ -- 89
.- 586
12, t 602- /,218
'\ 43 " t (
co .,. '\
NCO
@ N CD co .,. IX)
co :: N
N
I
-
1
I
I
D
u;
I
I
[
Ashland St.
/ South approach is
Private DrlYeWcy
I
I
.
J
I
o
NORTH
(NOT TO SCALE)
E. Main St.
E
-0
a:::
.:s-
...
...
l.-
t)
c:
o
E
o
~
F
xx a P.M. Peak Hour Valumes
Figure 8
Year 2024 P.M. Peak Hour
No Build Option
I I
RDK Engineering I
o & A Enterprise
Clay Street F~esidential Complex
10 ,A,cre Site
~()1
1
I
-
1
I
I
E. Main St.
D
~
I
-
I
I
[
Ashland St.
~South approach is
Priwte Driveway
o
NORTH
(NOT TO SCALE)
E. Main St.
E
-u
Ct:
~
III
III
...
U
c
o
E
o
I-
F
xx - P.M. Peak Hour Volumes
,....
0>0 ,..., - :; oon
,..., - ... - ~ ,
\ ',- 11 ~ , I
"- 12 36 "" '- 97
-767 412- - 297
818-
/' 6 /' 6 1, /,2 104' /' 16
t { t ( \ t { \ (
on 0
0 Ol N @ N ~ @ - - - @ ,.... ,...,
.... N ....
<D Ol -0
N ;;:; ~ Il'l_
- -
} ~ } ~ ,
,/ 128/ '- 90
- 611
17, \ t 606- /' 218
44 , t (
.... ... \
N <D
@) N CD Ol ... ao
lD ~ N
N
.
I I
RDK Engineering I
Figure 9
Year 2024 P.M. Peak Hour
Combined Traffic, With Project
o & A Enterprise
Clay Street Residential Complex
10 Acre Site
~o~
~---- ---------~--~-----,-_._..-
Date Received
\..,1.1 X U.l1 A~tlLA1~JJ PLANNlNli Al'l'bll.:ATlON 1 I .
\, Type [noa taP) V~
,.
/1- ZJO - 0 4 File No~ 2.otJ4 -/4/ Filing Flee AO J 17 q
1(JL--'~ ~cott" 0;).)\5)
Camp Plan Designation Receipt #
Zoning
APPliCATION IS FOR:
.. Outline Plan (# Units J 30 . ) .
o Final Plan
o Site Review
Annexation
II Zone Changl~
: 0 Comp Plan Change
. tJ StaffPennit
.0.SolarWaiver
Application pertains to
chapter, section, subpart
of the Ashland Municipal Oxle;
APPLICANT ~./>
""'~ 8
Name \. ') ~ - ~n\Je_ctoLPA,,-t-,
Address--' C). 7~ H "--., \,"\ \~. "', r~ 5t 4 d
PROPERTY OWNER
Name b~, ~Ci .~. f\ \l1L~ + ,1-1 6V7 f~
Address \C(iO A vh \,k Vl rP .~+ -.H /:J
','Phone '/f5d - /0270
4,)1. .; /.If) j DR. q7::; :2 n
,Phone q(5;l- /270
R~t7--tn ct OK 975c2(r:>
SURVEYOR. ENGINEER. ARCHITECT. LANDSCAPE ARqHITECT (may need to us<<~ back page)
Name L:":\. ~'?-\o..K Q H"2>~c..\'n=t-j \ . Phone '7 '} d - '} 8d ~
Address "6\~ (~. (S.~ ~.hUJli=' c7J1./j~?rQ OR Cj 7,')OJ
DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
StreetAddres~ '~8n '.r ~ Sf (lQp:f.
Assessor's Map No. 391E 11 c.. Tax Lot(s) !J.5C;o
When was the above dascribed property aCquired by owner? (~ (5{) Y
On. a separate sheet of paper, list any covenants, conditions or restrictions concerning use of property or improvements
contemplated, as well as yard. set-back and area or height requirements that were placed on the propert.y by subdivision tract
deve/o rs. Give date said restrictions.e Ire. ..
FINDINGS OF FACT
Type your response to the appropriate zoning requirements on another sheet(s) of paper and enclose it
with this form. Keep in mind your responses must be in the form of. factual statements or findings of fact
and su rted b evidenCe. List the findin s criteria and the evidence which su ort~~ it.
3C)~
---- - -~--~----,-
I hereby certify that the statements ~nd information contained in this appP"'1tion, including the enclosed
. drawings and the required finding~ . fact, are in all respects true and co. ." _ ct. I understand that all
property pins must be shown on tfie-drawings and visible upon site inspection. In the event the pins are
not shown or their location found to be incorrect, the owner assumes full responsibility.
I further understand that" this request is subsequently contested, the burden will be on me to establi$h:
1) that I produced sufficient faCtual evidence at the hearing to support this request;
2) that the findings of fact furnished justifies the granting of the request;
. ,3) that the findings offact furnished by me are adequate; and further
4) that all structures or improvements are properly located on the ground.
Failure in this regard will result most likely in not only the request being set aside, but ialso possibly in any
structures being built in reliance thereon being required to be removed a"'my expense. If I have any
dou advised to k competent professionaladvit;e and assistance.
J 1- ,A 1 ~ 0 ~
Date::. .
. As oWfJer: of the propertY involved in this ~quest, I have read and understood the comPlete application and
. its consequences to me as a property owner.
~...
. .
~.~)
Property~
/ 1- J.- 1- Q'/
Date
NOTICE: Section 15.04.240 of the Ashland Municipal Code prohibits the occupancy of a building or'a release.of
.: utilitil!S priorto the issuance of a Certjflcate of OccupQ.ncy by the Building Division.AND the completion of all zoning
requirements and conditions imposed by the Planning Commission UNLESS a satisfactory performance bond has
been posted to ensure completion. VIOLATIONS may result in prosecutionand/o.r disconnection of utilities.
3/CJ.
-----,---..