Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-0321 Council Mtg Packet . .' C I ~~. OF. . AS.HLAND rtnPortahf:'" Any 'blfiz~h ~tten'di!1g coLincil"me~tings~ay J3peak on 'any it~m' on the agen<;ta, unl~ss lttsth~'. 5}Jbje~r6f a pl:lblic hearin9, which h.as been closed. The Public For:um is the time 'to speak on' any subject not on the printed agenda. 'fyou-wish to speak, please fiUOuHheSpeaker Request form-located hear the'- entrance to the Council Chambers. The chair will recognize you and inform you as to the amount of time allotted to you. The time granted will be dependent to some extent on the nature of the item under .dis9ys.s,ion, .t~e nYlTlper s>f.peoRle who wi~h !o b~ heard~. ~n9 the length of the agenda. . ........ . -. .. ... .. "~',.. <ioOI"'- ".... ... '... . .. . .... .'.. '. ..... ". . ....-"'...~..-...., '. .. '. . '. ........ . ~'.' . . . eo AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL March 21, 2006 Civic::. Center Co.unci! Ch~mber$ 1175 E. Main Street 7:00 p.m. Regular Meeting I. CALL TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. ROLL CALL IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES [5 minutes} 1. Executive Session Meeting Minutes of March 3, 2006 2. Special Meeting Minutes of March 3, 2006 3. Executive Session Meeting Minutes of March 7, 2006 4. Regular Council Meeting Minutes of March 7, 2006 V. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS None. VI. CONSENT AGENDA [5 minutes) 1. Minutes of Boards, Commissions, and Committees 2. Liquor License Applicat.ion - Tabu 3. Liquor License Applicatian - Pipan's 4. Appaintment to Airport Cammissian 5. Autharizatian ta Enter inta a'Land Purchase Agreement VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Testimany limited to5 minutes per speaker, unless it is the subject of a Land Use Appeal. All hearings must canclude by 9:00 p.m., be cantinued ta a subsequent meeting, .or be extended ta 9:30 p.m. by a twa-thirds vate of council {AMC ~2.04.040}) 1. Annexation and Zone Change (Jackson County Rural Residential RR-5 to City of Ashland Low Density Multi-Family R-2) far an approximately 10-acre parcellacated on the East side of Clay Street, North of Ashland Street, at 380 Clay Street [2.5 hours) . . VIII. PUBLIC FORUM Business from the audience not included an the agenda. (Tatal time allawed for Public Forum is 15 minutes. Speakers .are limited to 5 minutes .or less, depending an the number .of individuals wishing ta speak.) [15 minutes maximum) (( Jl '\ ( II. \111 I T\ ( is :\ I <. I i \ 1 Z ( I \ 1 ) ( '. \ S I 1 1 \'1 () '\: ( -I L\ '\: '\: II . () . VISJ I. 'Ilofh CITY OF A~IILANI)'S_ \\'.LH SrI!: AI W W\V_ASf'lLAi\[).VR.I~S IX, UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. ALUO 18:68.050 Interpretations (30 Minutes) " " X."" NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS." 1. Possible Formation of Library District [15 Minutes) 2. Revisionsto Environmental'Protection Agency Standards for Fine Particulate Matter [15 Minutes) XI. ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS "1.' Reading by tItle Only of, "An Ordinance Amending" Chapter'15 (Building and Construction) of the Ashland Municipal Code Relating to the Adoption of Oregon Specialty Codes" XII. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCil MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCil LIAISONS XIII. ADJOURNMENT In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Administrator's office at (541) 488-6002 (TTY phone number 1-800-735- 2900). Notification 72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title I). lUI :\( Ii \11 1 11:\(:\ \I~l 1\1(( I \1 J(" \'-,11 1'.1 ()'\ ('1: \ '('<II VISll 1111:'.U.l \" UF ;\~IIL:\Nl),S \\"U~~lll;\ 1\\ \\\\ ".\.iJ II .\NIU)j{.l ~ ('In COUNCIL SPECIAL MLETlVc; :1fA Rell 3, ](JI)() /',101:' 10/ I MINUTES FOR THE SPECIAL MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL March 3, 2006 8:00 a.m. Siskiyou Room, 51 Winburn Way CALL TO ORDER Mayor Morrison called the meeting to order at 8: 15 a.m. in the Siskiyou Room 51 Winburn Way. ROLL CALL Councilors Jackson, Silbiger, Amarotico, Hardesty, Hartzell and Chapman were present. I. Adoption of Standards and Criteria to be used in the Evaluation of City Administrator Candidates Councilor Jackson/Hartzell m/s to adopt the Standards and Criteria. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. Meeting was adjourned at 8:20 a.m. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder John W. Morrison, Mayor ASIIL1!\'I) ern eOC?liCfL ME/~'nv(] !\fARCII ", 11)1)(i PAUE I 0/7 MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL March 7, 2006 Civic Center Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street CALL TO ORDER Mayor Morrison called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Councilors Hardesty, Amarotico, Hartzell, Jackson, Silbiger and Chapman were present. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Regular Council Meeting Minutes of February 21,2006 were approved as presented. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Minutes of Boards, Commissions, and Committees. 2. Liquor License Application - Agave. 3. Confirmation of Mayoral Appointment of Information Technology Director. Councilor Hardesty requested that Item 3 be pulled from the Consent Agenda. Councilor Hartzell! Amarotico m/s to approve Consent Agenda Items 1 and 2. V oice Vote: all AYES. Councilor Hardesty voiced his objections to the appointment of Joseph Franell as the IT Director. Mayor Morrison commented on the selection process and clarified that City Attorney Michael Franell did not participate in anyway, He also stated that Joseph Franell was selected on the basis of his qualifications and was clearly the best candidate. City Administrator Gino Grimaldi added that it is illegal for the City to discriminate because of family relationships. Councilor Jackson/Silbiger m/s to approve the Mayor's appointment of Joseph Franell as the Information Technology Director. Voice Vote: Councilor Amarotico, Hartzell, Jackson, Silbiger, and Chapman, YES. Councilor Hardesty, NO. Motion Passed 5-1. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Public Hearing on a Resolution Adopting a Supplemental Budget Establishing Appropriations within the 2005-2006 Budget. Administrative Services & Finance Director Lee Tuneberg presented the staff report and stated that it is necessary to create an appropriation recognizing a grant from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security for the purpose of purchasing firefighting tools and equipment. Public Hearing Open: 7:11 p.m. Public Hearing Closed: 7:11 p.m. Councilor Silbiger/Hartzell m/s to adopt Resolution #2006-03. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Hartzell, Amarotico, Hardesty, Jackson, Silbiger, and Chapman, YES. Motion Passed 6-0. PUBLIC FORUM Bryan Holley/324 Liberty Street/Spoke regarding the removal of the "Tree of Heaven", Mr. Holley noted A,\ffLA\fJ ('fTY cor 'NefL \fEETJ/\G MARCH -:. :l006 1'1 (iE :: of;' an article on this issue would be published in the Daily Tidings and encouraged the community to take notice of the tree before it is removed. He clarified that a removal date has not yet been set. Ambuja Rosen/Spoke regarding a dog-tethering ordinance and stated that an article regarding this issue would be published in the Ashland Free Press as well as posted to the websites www.ashlandfreepress.com and \vww.unchainyourdog.org. Ms. Rosen commented on how this ordinance should be initiated and noted that Ashland already has some animal control ordinances in place. Charles Carreon/33 3rd StreetNoiced his concerns with the Council's selection for the IT Director. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Airport Master Plan Update Review. City Surveyor/Project Manager Jim Olson and Administrative Assistant Dawn Lamb presented the staff report to the Council. Ms. Lamb explained this was an opportunity for Council to offer input before the document is finalized by the FAA; after which it will be returned to the Council for their approval. Ms. Lamb clarified that the airport can only facilitate small aircrafts and the length of the runway will not be able to be extended. Because the runway is locked into its length, this limits the size and the amount of aircraft that can utilize the airport. Ms. Lamb explained how noise complaints are handled by staff and suggestion was made for the City to consider developing a communication plan. Ms. Lamb stated that she would forward this request to the Airport Commission and noted that the Commission would be presenting an update to the Council when the Airport Master Plan comes back for adoption. 2. Planning Division Operational Audit Presentation. Interim Community Development Director Bill Molnar introduced Paul Zucker, President of Zucker Systems, who was responsible for the Planning Division Operational Audit. Mr. Molnar noted that no Council action is required at this time. Mr. Zucker delivered his presentation to the Council, which provided an overview of the following: .Complete presentation was submitted into the public record. . Methodology . Specific Activities Performed . Strengths and Positives . Problem Areas and Opportunities for Improvement . Key Priority Areas . Mission . Work Program . Staffing & Organization . Ordinance Issues . Enforcement . Development Processes . Process Software - Eden Mr. Zucker recommended that the City Administrator and Community Development Director review the study and agree on an implementation plan, with confirmation by the Council. Discussion was had regarding the current and proposed staffing levels in the Planning Department. Mr. Zucker 1.\HL4 'vI) CiTY cor /vOL MIJ TINe; MARC!! :'. lUU6 PIGE 30/7 stated that bringing in additional support staff for the planners rather than adding new employees at the planning level would not solve the City's problems. He stated that some of the clerical tasks could be handled more efficiently through the use of current technology and explained the option of a "blended staff'; where the City could staff to a certain level and additional workload would be handled through consultants. Mr. Zucker noted that the majority of the cities he has worked with have blended staff and suggested that Ashland consider this option. Mr. Molnar commented on the planning staff's preparation of minutes for the various commissions and committees and stated that this is one of the tasks that could be streamlined by preparing the minutes in a summary fashion. Council questioned whether an assessment was done on how time consuming some of the proposed tasks would be on staff. Mr. Zucker noted that the report recommends that the City bring on additional staff, but ultimately it is the Council's decision. He stated that some of the current tasks could be handled in a more efficient manner, and explained why he believes all phone calls and emails should be replied to the same day, even if only to state that it will take staff additional time to fulfill the request. Request was made for the Table of Recommendations to be provided in an Excel table or other sortable fashion. Colin Swales/461 Allison Street/Stated that the City's planning process was broken into two parts, and this evaluation was only half the issue. He reminded the Council of the number of recent appeals and the importance of the upcoming ordinance review. Mr. Swales suggested that the Council not make too many decisions at this point and suggested that the Planning Commission as well as the new City Administrator and Community Development Director be allowed to provide input. Eric Navickasl711 Faith Avenue/Stated that the Comprehensive Plan Review has not been done and the Riparian Plan and Downtown Plan also need to be completed. He commented on the recommendation for additional housing staff and the need for more affordable housing and work force housing in Ashland. Mr. Navickas also commented the issue of slow growth and how this relates to the Mt. Ashland Ski Area expansIOn. John Fields/845 Oak Street/Chair of the Planning Commission/Stated that he is encouraged by the report and commented on the issues facing the Planning Commission, including how to weigh competing rules. He stated that the City needs to clarify what its goals are and the direction for the City. He stated that time is of the essence in implementing the Zucker recommendations and hopes that the Planning Commission can be of assistance in fulfilling the recommendations. Mr. Molnar clarified that the Land Use Ordinance Review being performed by Siegel Planning Services will come before the Council in April and it will take roughly six months to implement the ordinance changes. Mr. Grimaldi explained the next step from here would be for Interim Director Bill Molnar to prepare a draft work plan, which would likely be reviewed by the incoming City Administrator rather than himself. Mr. Grimaldi recommended moving forward with Mr. Molnar as the Interim Director and not delaying action for the new director. He added that staff would communicate with Council regarding the implementation activities. 3. AFN Options. City Administrator Gino Grimaldi provided the staff report. He noted the work of the AFN Options Committee and provided a brief explanation of the four options being considered, which are: Sale, Spin-off, Spin-Off to Jefferson Public Radio Foundation, and Open Carrier. He also commented on the option .1Sfl!.AND CITY em Ne'lL MEET/N(; MARCH 7. ]{)(!(, PlUF1 evaluation criteria provided in the council packet. Councilor Silbiger submitted information into the public record regarding the Open Carrier Model. He explained that with this option, the City would provide base-level internet and base-level television for a flat fee charged to all businesses and residents, with an exception for low-income households and those that cannot currently receive AFN service. He explained that this model would cover AFN' s operational expenses as well as its debt payments. Silbiger stated that instead of charging everyone a $7.50 surcharge to cover the debt (which was previously approved and then repealed by the Council), and not offer anything in return; this option institutes a charge and also covers AFN's debt, but in return citizens will receive basic internet and television service. Councilor Silbiger offered an explanation of how the tables on page 4 of the packet materials were prepared. He stated that if every household paid $20 per month, the City would be able to payoff AFN's entire debt and everyone could receive internet as we have it now, as well as basic television. To get this figure to a place where the citizens would be more comfortable with this idea, he suggests a $10 fee per residential connection and $20 fee per commercial. He added that with the JPR spin-off option, the City would still be left with AFN's debt and a fee would need to be charged to the citizens without offering anything in return. Councilor Chapman added that with this option, the City could partner with a cable television provider, who could deliver cable channels over the city's wire. Mayor Morrison provided an overview of the Open Carrier Option before taking public input. He stated that with this option Ashland would retain the infrastructure and the City would provide internet and basic television. ISPs and outside cable companies could offer elevated service to any household that is interested in more than the basic connections offered by the City. Everyone would be charged a flat fee, with the exception of low-income households and those that cannot receive service, however the City would expand the service so that all households could hook up to AFN within 2 two years. The Model proposes a fee of $1 0 per household, which would cover AFN's operating costs, debt payments, and system improvements. Councilor Jackson noted the advice ofthe AFN Options Committee who felt that the Spin-Off option would be a more effective way to run AFN. She stated that the Open Carrier System is a way of operating, but does not address the organizational structure issues brought forward by the Options Committee. Councilor Silbiger explained that the type of decisions that would be difficult to make in the public environment would be handled by the ISPs and cable vendors and stated that the Open Carrier option would resolve many of these concerns raised by the committee. Colin Swales/461 Allison StreetNoiced his interest in the Open Carrier Option and suggested that the Council seriously consider this possibility. Ron Roth/6950 Old 99 S/Read an excerpt from a Daily Tidings article and stated that it is time for the Council to make a decision. Mr. Roth stated that the JPR model could serve the community well and recommended that the City continue its conversations with the JPRF staff. John Gaffey/637 Oak StreetN oiced his desire that at least one of the council members is considering the citizens in town who have already stated they cannot afford additional services. He questioned whether the City would allow some citizens a complete opt out and whether any potential buyers for the extra bandwidth have been identified yet. He added that for the same $10 debt payment charge, the citizens could be done with this issue and not have to worry about AFN anymore. Lenny N eimark/380 Kent StreetN oiced support for the Open Carrier Option but suggested that the Council simplify the language so that it is easier for citizens to understand. 'ISHLt\/l CiT) em iV( 'If. MI:LTl\G MARCil :. ](J()6 P,IUE 5 or Charles Carreon/33 3rd Street/Commented on the various services offered by the City and sees a hidden value in the IT services. Mr. Carreon suggested that the Council consider how they are going to market and communicate the Open Carrier Option to the public and stated that this seems like a simple solution to the problem. Leah Ireland/PO Box 284/Stated that this is a long-term and important decision that will affect the City for many years to come. Ms. Ireland stated that this is not just about debt, but whether Ashland is a progressive and special town that offers opportunities available nowhere else. She voiced her support for giving the new IT Director a chance and does not believe the community would approve of the JPRF Spin-Off option. She also expressed her concern about the rates Charter Communications would charge. Ron Kramer/120 Wimer Street/JPR FoundationINoted that they have had a number of conversations with City staff and stated that if this is something the City would like to pursue, they believe it would lead to a good result and are open to further discussions. He added that if the City decides to pursue a different option they are fine with that too. Mr. Kramer commented on the AFN channel agreements and stated that it is his understanding that the City has entered into contracts through 2014 and that they are unbreakable. He questioned how the City would deal with this issue if the Open Carrier Option is selected. Paul Collins/1257 Tolman Creek Road/Noted that he served on the AFN Options Committee and expressed concern for the spin-off options. He stated that theoretically they are sound, however JPRF has never operated a television service. He voiced his support for the Open Carrier Option and stated that this alternative focuses on the succeeding internet service and shared his confidence in the City's ability to provide internet to the community. Councilor Hartzell/Jackson m/s to extend meeting to 10:30 p.m. Voice Vote: All AYES. Alan Oppenheimer/110 S. LaurellVoiced support for the Open Carrier Option and commented on the benefits of selecting this alternative. He stated that this option would retain many of the things they did right with AFN, while fixing many of the things that were done wrong. He stated that they need to flush out the issues, and get behind this option and make it a reality. Councilor Hartzell/Silbiger m/s that it is the intent of the City Council to implement the Open Carrier Option and direct staff work with the drafters of this model to refine the strategy, numbers, legalities, and to identify next steps and bring it back to Council. DISCUSSION: Councilor Hartzell stated that she would like to see this at the next Council Meeting, but recognizes time limitations. Mr. Grimaldi stated that this would likely return to Council in April. Councilor Silbiger briefly addressed the concerns raised during John Gaffey's testimony. City Attorney Michael Franell spoke regarding the concern raised about the AFN channel contracts and clarified that the City has engaged legal counsel who specializes in this area and he is reviewing the contracts and will be providing his opinion soon. Councilor Jackson voiced her support of handling the internet as a utility, however she is not ready to support this option due to the lack of financial details. She suggested if this motion does pass, that the new IT Director be allowed to evaluate this model. Councilor Hardesty suggested that the decision to operate this service as a utility should be placed before the voters. Mr. Grimaldi clarified that if this motion passes, staff would approach this option in an effort to make it work. If they ran into something that shows otherwise, they would bring it back to Council. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Hardesty, Amarotico, Hartzell, Silbiger, and Chapman, YES. Councilor Jackson, NO. Motion Passed 5-1. 4. AFN Debt Service Alternatives for the City. Agenda item not discussed due to time constraints. A,"'HLi;VU ('I IY COrNelL Mf:ETlNU ;1/A Nell -:', :}(j(J() PHil,' () ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. Reading by title only of, "An Ordinance Amending Chapter 2.50 and 2.52 of the Ashland Municipal Code Relating to Rules of Procedure for Public Contracting and Personal Service Contracts". Agenda item not discussed due to time constraints. 2. Reading by title only of, "A Resolution Setting Forth the City of Ashland's Plan to Correct Budget Deficiencies Disclosed in the FY 2004-2005 Audit". Administrative Services and Finance Director Lee Tuneberg presented the staff report and requested Council's approval of the proposed resolution. Councilor J acksonl Amarotico m/s to approve Resolution #2006-04. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Hardesty, Amarotico, Jackson, Silbiger, and Chapman, YES. Councilor Hartzell was out of the room. Motion Passed 5-0. 3. Reading by title only of, "A Resolution Transferring Appropriations within the 2005-2006 Budget". Mr. Tuneberg explained that it is necessary to transfer appropriations from Contingency to Economic & Cultural Grants to correct for budgeting less than required by Resolution 2004-32 and also to correct unanticipated costs within the Police Deparment. The total transfer amount is $117,000. Councilor JacksonlAmarotico mls to approve Resolution #2006-05. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Hardesty, Amarotico, Hartzell, Jackson, Silbiger, Chapman, YES. Motion Passed 6-0. 4. Reading by title only of, "A Resolution Adopting PGE's Earth Advantage Program Standards in Existence January 1,2006, as the Standard for the City's Earth Advantage Program". Electric Director Dick Wanderscheid explained that the Council previously adopted an ordinance granting density bonuses to developers who construct their homes to the Earth Advantage Standards; that ordinance required that the Earth Advantage Standards be adopted by resolution. Staff has prepared two resolutions for the Council's consideration. Option 1 requires that developers of more than 5 homes pay $1,000 per lot to the Conservation Division when the new subdivision is created. This money would then be paid to the builder of the home after it complies with the Earth Advantage Standards. Option 2 does not require the payment and the City's Conservation budget would provide the incentive instead of the developer. Staffs recommendation is to adopt Option 2 for at least one year. Staff could report back on the progress ofthis program at the end of the year and provide information as to who has been receiving the bonus. If they find that the $1,000 payment is necessary it can be added at that time. Mr. Wanderscheid noted a correction to both resolutions; the title should not include 'PGE' before 'Earth Advantage Program Standards' . Councilor Hartzell expressed concern with providing a double incentive to the developer. Council Jackson voiced her preference to follow staff s recommendation and give the program a try for a year; then change the resolution later if they find that the developers are getting away with too much. Councilor JacksonlAmarotico mls to approve Earth Advantage Resolution #2, which does not require the $1,000 payment. DISCUSSION: Councilor Hartzell explained why she would be voting against this motion. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Amarotico and Jackson, YES. Councilor Hardesty, Hartzell, Silbiger and Chapman, NO. Motion Fails 4-2. Council ChapmanlHartzell m/s to approve Earth Advantage Resolution #1 [Resolution #2006-06]. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Amarotico, Hartzell, Jackson, Silbiger, and Chapman, YES. Councilor Hardesty, NO. Motion Passed 5-1. ---.- ASHLL\D ('frY COUN( 'JL MEEnVC; MARCH 7. 2()()(, PH)E '7 5. Reading by title only of, "A Resolution Repealing 2000-24 and Adopting New Community Development Fees". Interim Community Development Director Bill Molnar presented the staff report and stated that this resolution would approve an increase in the current Community Development Fee by approximately two tenths of a percent. He noted the Council Communication provides some history and requested Council's approval of the resolution. Councilor Hartzell/Chapman m/s to approve Resolution #2006-07. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Hardesty, Amarotico, Hartzell, Jackson, Silbiger, Chapman, YES. Motion Passed 6-0. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS 1. Request from Councilor Hartzell to discuss consideration of a request from Ashland Independent Film Festival regarding Economic and Cultural Development Grant. Agenda item not discussed due to time constraints. 2. Request fron Councilor Hartzell to discuss a citizen's request for Council interpretation of ALUO 18.68.050 per procedures laid out in 18.108.160 - Ordinance interpretations. Councilor Hartzell noted that Council had received email communications about this issue from a concerned citizen. Councilor Hartzell/Hardesty m/s that Council instruct staff to interpret Ordinance 18.68.050 to determine that a 20 ft. deep yard facing the arterial specified in the ordinance is required regardless of whether it is a front, side, or back yard. DISCUSSION: City Attorney Michael Franell requested clarification. He stated that the ordinance itself lists specific streets that require specific setbacks from the centerline of the road. The ordinance also refers to a front yard setback for all other arterials. He questioned if the motion refers to just the unnamed arterials or if it also changes the specific street setbacks named in the ordinance. Councilor Hartzell stated that it was not her intention to change the setbacks for the named arterials. Mr. Molnar was called forward and gave his opinion that this action would require an ordinance change. Mr. Franell concurred and stated that the language in the ordinance was not subject to interpretation and offered to go over this in more detail with the Council. Councilor Hartzell withdrew her motion and requested that this item come back at the next Council meeting. ADJOURNMENT: Meeting adjourned atlO:34 p.rn. April Lucas, Asst. to City Recorder John W. Morrison, Mayor CiTY COI.SCIL STliDr SE.':i.,),/(J;\ Harch 9, ]U()n P.tU/;' j on MINUTES FOR THE STUDY SESSION ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL March 9, 2006 Civic Center Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street CALL TO ORDER Mayor Morrison called the meeting to order at 5 :22 p.rn. in the Civic Center Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Councilor Hardesty, Hartzell, Jackson, Silbiger and Chapman were present. Councilor Amarotico was absent. 1. Street Condition Assessment and Financine: Interim Public Works Director Joe Strahl introduced street employees Steve Burkhalter and John Peterson. Mr. Strahl explained that a street condition inventory had been completed and it indicated that there is a back- log of streets that are in need of repair and the condition is getting worse. He stated that the number of streets and expense related to repair is increasing. Overall there is approximately $5.3 million worth of unfunded street work in the city that needs to be addressed in order to maintain the system in a cost effective manner. The depamnent is prepared to do what is necessary but cannot do the work without the money. Staff recommends that a task force be appointment to work with staff to develop funding options for council's consideration. Mr. Burkhalter gave brief explanation on how streets are evaluated and determination on the condition of the street. Mr. Strahl explained that it is not unusual to have a back-log of streets in need of repair and due to priorities in the department, the rise of fuel costs, level of average street conditions and other factors can result in an increase in the number of back-logged streets in need of repair. He stated that basing your standard on an average may not be the way to go and he suggests concentrating on the low end of the system to make sure more streets don't fall into this category. He explained that when deteriation sets in, in sets in quickly. Council and staff continued their discussion on various areas of the community where street repair is needed. It was suggested that street System Development Charges (SDC) be reviewed. Mr. Strahl suggested that the lower end streets be focused on as a priority and that it could be part of a capital improvement project. He stated that the city does contract out for engineering. It was clarified that SDC's can only be used for improvement based on capacity and could not be used for maintenance. Mr. Strahl gave examples of capacity improvements. He stated that "load limiting" needs to be done with care, that there are streets that are designed to handle certain loads. One ofthe problems with load limiting is that the people in construction trades feel they are already paying the fair share ofthe cost. Council and staff continued discussion regarding various streets with steep slopes and how drainage is important in these types of streets. Staff suggested forming a task force consisting of staff and citizens that could bring back funding options for the council to consider. It was suggested that a sub-committee consisting of staff and council may be a better ClTr COI ity'CIL STUD} SCSSJU\ Murch I). JI)I)() PI GE 2 oF3 approach due to the complexity and different sources of revenue streams that may in competition for by other groups. Finance Director Lee Tuneberg spoke regarding the various revenue streams. He also noted that it may be beneficial to have a group look at various revenue streams to evaluate whether we have our fees set appropriately. He stated that it is important to look at what else is being funded and that by having a group look at the big picture may be important, especially if it is done sooner rather than later. It was clarified that the task force would be to explore funding options, clear expectations and have a time-line. Mr. Tuneberg stated that due to the size ofthe project it will take longer to identify funding and is a multi-year project. Mr. Strahl stated that there is a need to plan now in order to plan projects. Staff will develop a charge for the task force and may work with the SDC committee. Council consensus was to move forward with the formation of a task force and will determine who the members of this task force will be when the charge has been developed and brought back to the council for consideration. 2. Ethics Code City Attorney Mike Franell presented the staff report on the concerns that have recently been expressed concerning public officials and ethics in Ashland. He sited these concerns as 1) public officials using their position for personal financial gain and 2) public official participation on issues in which the public official has a potential conflict of interest. He requested discussion from council on tightening the provisions by the City relative to public official ethics. Mr. Franell provided several examples from various cities on what they have in regards to ethics. He stated that there are very few cities that have ethic codes, as many rely on the State's ethics guideline. He stated that the current ethic code by the City of Ashland is one ofthe strictest, but that it relates directly to employees not elected officials and members of Boards and Commissions. It is assumed that ethic laws for elected officials and members of Boards and Commissions are based on the State's guidelines. Mr. Franell explained, in relationship to the acceptance of Shakespeare tickets, that the donor of Shakespeare tickets is "Shakespeare" and that the council would be in the "presence" ofthe donor and could then accept the tickets. He also spoke to the situation where there is a "client for hire" before the Board, Commissions or Council. He requested guidance from council in regards to elected officials, members of Boards and Commission and the acceptance of gifts. Or, limit the "client for hire" if coming before the decision making body. It was suggested that the current city code incorporate the elected officials, Boards and Commissions. Mr. Franell requested further guidance from council in regards to "client for hire" before the board of which they are a member. He gave examples of "client for hire" situations in order to clarify what this means. Council continued discussion on the level of participation when there is a potential conflict of interest. Mr. Franell stated that the City of Corvallis code is clearer and better understood than our code, but is not stricter. He believes that having clear language is important, but trying to define every area that officials would be precluded would be too cumbersome. The important thing is to develop an overall policy. -.- CITY em Neff. STun 5,I'SS/(fV Horch I). lUUt> PHiL' 3 ? Mr. Franell stated that there is a need to determine who would enforce the ethic code. He shared the models used by the City of Eugene and the City of Salem. Staff requested direction in regards to what to include in the Charter. His recommendation is to use language currently used by the City of Gresham, where the council had direction to provide an ordinance for ethics. Further direction was requested on who these ethics should apply to and whether to tighten up the ethics in regard to "client for hire." And, how do you want to enforce the ethic procedures. Mr. Franell stated that he prefers that the City Attorney's office handle ethic complaints. He clarified that he is seeking direction from council on how restrictive the council would want to be on restricting someone from representing a client for hire before a commission or board. Council continued discussion in order to determine their direction on these recommendations. Council consensus on the short statement in the charter, with consideration of adding some language that was included in the Portland code, to include elected officials and members of Boards and Commissions in the current ordinance relating to ethics, consider enforcement for ethic complaints be conducted through the City Attorney's office and to tighten up the presentations before commissions/boards where the individual is a member. Consideration of a time-frame for when an individual was a member of a commission/board should be included. It was questioned on what the consequences would be based on ethic violations. Mr. Franell explained that if it were an employee, sanctions would be done by the supervisor. For elected officials or appointed, it could be based monetarily or actually be removed from office. He recommends that if an elected official was involved that it would be the council that should render the sanctions. City Recorder Barbara Christensen noted that she is currently working with the State's Government Standards & Practices to offer a class on Ethics. ADJOURNMENT: Meeting adjourned at 7:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Barbara Christensen, City Recorder Ashland Traffic Safety Commission Minutes January 2~~....~.~~6 Members Present: Patti Busse, Doris Mannion, Colin Swales, Terry Doyle, Noal Preslar Staff Present: Jim Olson, Dawn Lamb Members Absent: Russ Silbiger, Keith Massie, Alan Bender, Pam Hammond I. CALL TO ORDER - II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: December 8th, 2005 Minutes approved as written. III. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION: A. PUBLIC FORUM ITEMS: Nancy Seward, 115 Church Street, reported that a community meeting had been held on January 14th at the Ashland Library. Six residents were in attendance and Seward went over many of the background items that had already been discussed regarding why many of the physical changes would not be an option on the narrow, steep and financial constraints. The Church Street neighbors considered many of the ideas presented in the David Engwitch book, Mental Speed Humps and looked at other programs that supported neighborhood interaction to improve speeds and perceptions of roads. Seward asked how several of these items should be implemented and what approval process she should investigate. The idea of a banner and signage was strongly supported but would require physical attachments on both sides of the street. There are only electric poles on one side of Church Street. Would it be possible to install some kind of pole to attach to on the other side? What are the limitations for signs and banners? The Church Street neighbors also like the idea of painting patterned crosswalks similar to the brickwork crosswalks in Central Point. The crosswalks requested would be at the intersections 'of Almond, Baum and High Streets. The other idea included adding a welcoming sign for the neighborhood. There would need to be consideration to visibility and location. Olson will forward information on signage and banner use to Seward and suggested she talk to the Planning Department for background on approvals of this nature. The banner would need to be high enough to not hinder emergency vehicles or other tall vehicles. Signage of any kind needs to follow the Planning Department ordinances which are online. Olson did have some hesitation on the painting of the crosswalks where no curb or sidewalk exist. The neighborhood has done a wonderful job of researching ways to make the neighborhood safer. Their efforts are greatly appreciated. The Commission will include Church Street on the next agenda and asked Seward to come forward with a packet of suggestions that the Commission would then be able to support. The Commission would like to sponsor neighborhood projects of this nature and would like to have examples to take to the Council for financial support. B. REVIEW OF TRAFFIC REQUESTS / PROJECTS PENDING/ACTION REQUIRED 1. Traffic Concerns on Faith Avenue and Clay Street A request was received by Greg and Liz Jones and Joanie Keller-Hand expresses concern regarding the traffic on Faith Avenue and Clay Streets and requests that the TSC review the area particularly as to their following six listed areas of concerns: 1. Faith Ave. carries more traffic than normal streets and traffic moves faster than 25 mph. 2. Traffic speeds on Ashland St. increase from 30 to 35 mph at or near the Faith Ave. intersection. 3. West-bound traffic on Ashland also speeds up at this intersection and the vegetation in the median blocks views of oncoming traffic. 4. The median does not provide a merge area for traffic entering Ashland St. and there is no crosswalk at Faith. 5. The intersection of Clay and Faith is poorly designed. C:\DOCUME-1\shipletd\LOCALS-1\Temp\Jan 26 06 TSC.doc Page 1 of 7 -.- 6. Vegetation at the northwest corner of the Faith / Ashland intersection blocks views. As indicated in their letter, this commission reviewed this intersection in August of 2002. Site observations have shown that most of the original problems that existed in 2002 are still prevalent including: 1. A general disregard of the stop sign on Clay St. A brief count of 20 vehicles approaching the stop indicated that only 8 vehicles came to a complete stop while 12 merely slowed down or completely ignored the sign. 2. A large number of the vehicles turning onto Faith Ave. from the westbound lane on Ashland St. cut the corner encroaching into the stop position (when not occupied) at Faith Avenue. 3. A majority of the southbound Faith Avenue traffic turning into Clay Street also sharply cut the corner encroaching into the northbound traffic lane. Although Jones and Keller-Hand do make some good points in their letter, not all can be supported. Following is a response to each of the six specific concerns: 1. The traffic volume on Faith Ave. in 2002 was 1054 VPD. A current count shows 1086 VPD, a 3% increase. The Clay St. traffic went from 1325 VPD in 2002 to 1189 VPD, a 10% decrease. Neither of these volumes is unusually high and in fact are average for neighborhood collectors. 2 & 3. The speed limit actually changes near Normal Ave., not at Faith, so the speed through the intersection is 35 mph. Speeds are expectantly harder to control on the steep approach grade of the railroad overpass structure. Additional police enforcement may help to slow the faster moving traffic. 4. The median was specifically designed to eliminate the long oblique merging of traffic that is so common in unbroken center medians. The purpose of the median is to provide a temporary refuge for vehicles making turn movements and should never be allowed to be used as a merge lane. 5. There is virtually nothing that could be done to revise the configuration of the intersection of Faith and Clay that would not involve the acquisition and possible condemning of several residences and Park's land. 6. The Cedar tree at the southwest (not northwest) corner of the intersection again needs to be trimmed of some of the lower branches; however, the center median does not appear to present a vision obstruction. As pointed out in the letter, some of the directed changes from 2002 were never implemented and the centerline stripe that was installed on Faith Avenue was obliterated with the recent street overlay. It is recommended that the solutions identified in 2002 be completed as soon as possible. The installation of a stop sign on Faith at Clay may have some benefit to help eliminate some queuing at the Ashland Street stop, but it may also introduce some additional safety problems especially with the high incidence of disregard of the stop sign on Clay Street. Discussion: Olson will follow up on items that were not implemented in 2002 and have the items that were inadvertently removed during the overlay process reestablished. The volume changes are not out of line for the residential neighborhood. The speeds on Ashland Street were lowered because of a request by the Commission during the Ashland Street construction project. The speed does decrease at Normal Avenue. We may want to have ODOT revisit the speeds now that more development on Ashland Street is in process. The medians on Ashland Street were specifically placed there to stop drivers from using the center lane as a merge lane. That practice is illegal and has been discouraged by the medians. The Parks Department maintains the vegetation in the medians and we can suggest they do more aggressive pruning within the medians. The design of the intersection is awkward and has been since it was first constructed along with the overpass. To reconfigure the intersection would mean the City would need to acquire several of the properties near the intersection. Olson recommends installing an extra large 36 inch stop sign and moving the stop bar back from the C:\DOCUME-1\shipletd\LOCALS-1\Temp\Jan 26 06 TSC.doc Page 2 of 7 ---.-- intersection and painting it wider, up to 24 inches. Olson also suggests putting in a yellow centerline double-line that carries through the intersection and carries on an extra 100 hundred feet south down Clay Street. Doyle asked if the installation of a mounted curb instead of a yellow line would be a possibility. Olson felt this would hinder large trucks from negotiating the turn. Busse asked if a stop ahead sign or a stop ahead road painting could be installed prior to the stop sign. Joanie Keller-Hand, 652 Faith Avenue has witnessed the change in traffic as further development has been constructed on Clay Street. There are many traffic generators along Clay; the Takelma development has increased traffic, the church and the school and affordable housing along with the established offices and the apartment contribute to traffic. She was surprised the study showed less traffic on Clay Street with all these generators. She was impressed with the items she overheard Nancy Seward talking about. Greg Jones, 641 Faith Avenue, reported several accidents that have occurred along Faith and even recalled a pedestrian death about ten years back. The intersection of Ashland and Faith Avenue is particularly dangerous because vehicles are coming down the grade of the overpass and are not expecting cross traffic to be pulling out. The grade lends to an increase of speed and hinders visibility of both the driver on Ashland Street and the driver queued at the Faith intersection. The medians make it hard to decipher which lane of traffic the driver on Ashland Street is in. The children on Faith cross Ashland Street at this spot to get to the school and bikepath. He is glad to hear the Commission made site visits and witnessed some of the problems. We need to change the habits of the drivers but this does not happen quickly. Keller-Hand agrees that the children crossing should have more protection. They cross to get to Walker School and the park. There needs to be crosswalks. She avoids using the Faith/ Ashland intersection because it makes her nervous. Drivers hesitate pulling out onto Ashland Street because of the visibility problems and then cars stack up and if enough cars stack up vehicles trying to turn from Ashland Street onto Clay Street can not make it through. Jones realizes that large changes can't be made because of the physical constraints, but what changes are feasible? Keller-Hand felt the few changes that were made in 2002 helped while they existed and would like to see them reestablished. Jones reported that there is a meeting once a week that happens at the property located at 1970 Ashland Street, which is the corner of Faith and Ashland and across from Clay Street, where vehicles park up and down the street. This worsens the visibility issue immensely. Could the yellow curb for this property be extended past the driveway closer to the property at 575 Faith Avenue to help mitigate the congestion. Olson would like to ask ODOT to reexamine the speeds along Ashland Street. The Commission agreed that traffic traveling over the overpass towards town has a tendency to speed up and can see where the risk for vehicles trying to pull out onto Ashland could be a problem. Olson felt he could reasonably ask for 30 MPH before the overpass. Jones asked if school zone signs could be installed in this area and Olson informed him that ODOT has strict criteria for where the signs are placed and Ashland Street is not within the criteria. Jones said the speed of traffic and disregard for the traffic signs makes people afraid of leaving their houses. Olson suggested looking through some of the items that Mental Speed Bumps suggests for reclaiming your street. The City does still have the KKAD 25 signs and suggested Jones try some of the signs. Jones asked if a restriping similar to Walker Street, which included bike lanes and the narrowing of the traffic lanes might be reasonable. Olson informed him that improvements along Clay Street are scheduled in the Capital Improvements Plan and that is hopefully beginning next fiscal year. The C:\DOCUME-1\shipletd\LOCALS-1\Temp\Jan 26 06 TSC.doc Page 3 of 7 -r improvement includes construction of sidewalks and traffic calming features similar to Tolman Creek Road. The plan should impact the intersection of Faith and Clay Streets. Sherman Peters, Napa Store Manager, 1952 Ashland Street, feels the installation of the medians in Ashland Street at the corner of Faith have caused serious maneuvering issues for vehicles leaving Faith and for large delivery trucks trying to access his property for delivery. He would like to see the planter removed. He understands that the medians make a good refuge for pedestrians, but for drivers along Faith and Ashland Street are hindered. This is a dangerous situation. Jones agrees that the median closes options for drivers and keeps the visibility blocked not working as a traffic calming device at all. He feels that a small segment of the median should be removed also. Keller-Hand feels drivers don't recognize that they have entered the City until they are at the Siskiyou Blvd. intersection. The addition of a gateway sign similar to the one on Hwy 99 at the north end of town would help people realize they are in Ashland when they cross over the overpass. A welcoming sign has been made but there has been opposition by ODOT on installing it in their right of way and staff has been considering putting the signs on City right of way to avoid the conflict. Doyle asked that the vegetation be trimmed by the Parks Department and that the 35 MPH speed zone be moved back to the south side of the overpass. Olson would like to recommend the ODOT speed study from Tolman Creek to Siskiyou Boulevard. If the request is to specifically slow the speed to 30 MPH from Tolman Creek to Normal Avenue in both directions ODOT might consider. They will not consider a reduction to 25 MPH, that is too low for the street. Preslar asked if the median could be removed or altered. Olson would want to present that recommendation to Council for consideration because of the lengthy and extensive review process that the street went through during the Siskiyou Bouvlevard Redesign process. Preslar asked for staff to look into the median and see if any modification could be made and bring the results to the Commission for further study. Decision: Busse moved to: 1) Change the stop sign on Clay to a larger 36 inch sign; 2) Make the existing stop bar on Clay Street 24 inches wide; 3) Paint a yellow double line on Faith and Clay Streets delineating the turn movement and extend the line 200 hundred feet down Clay Street; 4) Request the cedar tree on the southwest corner be trimmed up for visibility; 5) Recommend that staff apply to ODOT for a speed study to reduce speeds on Ashland Street from 35 MPH to 30 MPH from Tolman Creek Road to Normal Avenue in both directions. Mannion seconded the motion. Doyle amended the motion by adding a stop ahead sign be placed prior to the stop on Clay. Amendment accepted and seconded by Mannion. Vote passed unanimously. 2. Traffic Concerns on Meade Street The Engineering Staff occasionally receives requests for traffic studies from the Police Department (as passed along from private citizens) and sometimes directly from citizens. Many requests are from residents who feel that traffic is "barreling" on their street and that something should be done to slow the traffic. The first step is to verify that there is, in fact, a speeding problem. C:\DOCUME-1\shipletd\LOCALS-1\Temp\Jan 26 06 TSC.doc Page 4 of 7 The most accurate measurement is by use of traffic classifiers, which can determine not only the volume of traffic, but the speed and composition of the traffic as well. Results Of Study A classifier study concluded on January 11, 2006 showed traffic on Meade Street between Vista Street and Iowa Street to be traveling at an average of 23.5 mph with an 85th percentile speed of 29.4 mph. The results of the speed study indicate that traffic is well within acceptable ranges for a residential zone. No further action is suggested for this street. Discussion: Olson reiterated that the speed study reflected no problem and that this may be a perception of speeding on the small street becaus~ of the close feel of vehicles. Swales commented that the street has no sidewalks and pedestrians walk in the street which causes vehicles and walkers to be in very close proximity. Decision: Doyle moved to accept staff recommendation of no further action; seconded by Swales, vote passed unanimously. 3. Bike and Pedestrian Issues and Concerns (Bike & Ped Agenda wfminutes) No members attended the Bike and Pedestrian meeting. C. Follow-Up on Previous Actions - No discussion. D. Traffic Safety Education 1. "Designing Streets for Bicycles", February 17 OSU 2. "Designing Streets for Pedestrians", March 16 & 17, OSU E. Development Review: 1. Planning Commission Agenda 2. Hearings Board Agenda F. Capital Projects Update: No discussion. G. Other: 1. Results of Radar Speed Display Sign 2. Miscellaneous Communications 3. Railroad Crossing Upgrade Update: Olson received a response letter from ODOT Rail Division offering the following recommendations. Glenn Street: offer a safety upgrade of Oak Street in exchange for the closure of Glenn Street. Glenn would be converted to a multi-use path allowing pedestrian/bicycle access. Laurel/Hersey Streets: making the intersection into a T closing off the south approach of Laurel Street. It would allow automatic gate signal in the southwest quadrant to bring the safety device closer to the tracks. The railroad offered $100,000 toward the cost of signalization at the Laurel/ Hersey intersection if the south approach of Laurel is closed off. Olson application asked for improvements to Laurel and Hersey, Main Street and Glenn Street crossings. The ODOT Rail Division has a goal to close all at grade crossings throughout Oregon and they do not make a consideration for any other modal operation other than trains. Olson is not wiling to accept the offered changes and would like input from the commission on moving forward with other recommendations. Doyle asked if they really looked at the Laurel Street closing; he commented that they obviously didn't C:\DOCUME-1\shipletd\LOCALS-1\Temp\Jan 26 06 TSC.doc Page 5 of 7 live here. Olson will need to go to Council with recommendations, but would like to have some other options to present. Olson would like to go further and use recommendations from the HDR R/R Safety report and offer two other closures. He considered Glenn and Wightman because they have the least traffic volume or a better gain. Glenn is very isolated without a lot of interconnectivity. Wightman doesn't have a high volume but does offer some connectivity. Wightman could be continued as a pedestrian crossing. Olson would like to go back to ODOT and say that we won't consider closing Glenn or Laurel, but would consider Wightman. Olson felt that the campus housing could be supportive of the closure to help with speed, which they have complained about, and making it a safer neighborhood for children. Doyle was supportive of Wightman over any other crossing. Olson will need to begin research with the emergency departments, the neighborhood and with the armory who would also be impacted. Doyle suggested getting input soon from the neighborhood. Swales asked what the cost implication of the improvements means to the City. Olson confirmed that funds have not been secured. If the Glenn and Wightman are upgraded to passive controls with stopping gates the cost would be around $150,000 for the pair. For the Hersey and Laurel intersection it would require four gate installations at $150,000 each. The costs make funding hard to secure. Preslar felt that closing Wightman down would cause the Mill Pond neighborhood area to zig zag into the south end of town. Olson ensured the Commission that any closure will cause opposition. This is not an easy decision. Swales commented that the offer of pedestrian paths is a better than a complete closure for all modes of traffic. He is in favor of exploring the possibility of the closure. He also asked if knock down bollards could be used at the closures to help with emergency vehicle access. Olson felt there would be no room to create a turn around, but a hammer head end may be feasible at the rail road property. Commission was in support of exploring the possibility of closing Wightman. IV. Adjourned 8:40 PM C:\DOCUME-1\shipletd\LOCALS-1\Temp\Jan 26 06 TSC.doc Page 6 of 7 CITY OF ASHLAND ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION HEARINGS BOARD MINTUES FEBRUARY 14,2006 CALL TO ORDER - Commissioner Russ Chapman called the meeting to order at 1 :30 p.m. at the Ashland Civic Center, 1175 East Main Street. Commissioners Present: Russ Chapman Olena Black John Fields, Chair Absent Members: None Council Liaison: Jack Hardesty, absent Staff Present: Maria Harris, Senior Planner Derek Severson, Assistant Planner Amy Anderson, Assistant Planner Sue Yates, Executive Secretary APPROVAL OF MINUTES - The January 10, 2006 minutes will be reviewed at tonight's meeting. TYPE I PLANNING ACTIONS PLANNING ACTION 2006-00034 REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP OF THE TRAVELER'S ACCOMMODATION BUSINESS FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER TO A BUSINESS OWNER FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 34 UNION ST. APPLICANT: STEPHANIE CLARK This action was approved. PLANNING ACTION 2006-00086 REQUEST FORA LAND PARTITION TO CREATE THREE PARCELS INCLUDING ONE FLAG LOT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 975 TOLMAN CREEK RD. A NEW "HALF-STREET"IMPROVEMENT WILL BE INSTALLED ADJACENT TO THE EXISTING PRIVATE DRIVE TO THE NORTH TO ACCESS THE PROPOSED PARCELS. APPLICANT: URBAN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC This action was approved. TYPE II PUBLIC HEARINGS PLANNING ACTION 2005-01307 REQUEST FOR A SITE REVIEW APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A SECOND RESIDENTIAL UNIT ABOVE THE EXISTING GARAGE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 125 SHERMAN ST. A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IS REQUIRED TO EXPAND THE NON- CONFORMING GARAGE STRUCTURE. THE GARAGE IS LOCATED WITHIN A FOOT OF THE REAR PROPERTY LINE AND TEN FEET IS REQUIRED. A SOLAR SETBACK VARIANCE IS REQUESTED TO CREATE A GREATER SHADOW ON THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH THAN IS PERMITTED. APPLICANT: RUSS DALE Site Visits or Ex Parte Contacts - Chapman and Black each had site visit and Fields had a drive-by site visit. STAFF REPORT Severson said the Commission is reviewing the applicant's redesign after review by the Historic Commission. A detailed description of the proj ect is outlined in the Staff Report. The Historic Commission wanted to go on record as strongly opposing covering of the original siding on the main house with vertical siding resulting in the loss of the historical integrity on the structure. But, since it is already covered, the Commission believes it is more compatible to keep the vertical siding treatment on the new addition consistent with the main house. The Tree Commission suggested one additional Condition. The landscape plan has been provided as well as a tree protection plan, however, the landscape plan doesn't show the level of detail required for Site Review. A Condition has been added that the landscape plan be revised and submitted at the time of building permit submittal. Severson added a Condition that any conditions of the Tree Commission be made conditions of approval. Staff is recommending approval of this application as it will result in a moderately sized rental unit within close proximity to SOU, to the downtown and to the transit route. Staff has suggested these added Conditions: Condition 15 - Remove the old driveway asphalt (to the East of the proposed unit) and replace it with appropriate landscaping to the alley boundary. Condition 16 - That a mutual access easement (for garage access) with the property owner to the west be recorded prior to issuance of a building permit. Condition 17 - That a revised tree protection plan addressing the recommendations of the Tree Commission be submitted prior to issuance of a building permit. PUBLIC HEARING - No one came forth to speak. Staff Response - None COMMISSIONERS' DISCUSSION AND MOTION Black said since the applicant is changing the ridgeline, she would like to see the end closest to the alley have a slope down (Dutch gable). Harris said the Historic Commission did not discuss this at their meeting. Fields suggested leaving it optional. Fields/Black m/s to approve PA2005-01307 with the three suggested added conditions. Roll Call: The vote was unanimous with Black, Chapman and Fields voting "yes." PLANNING ACTION 2006.00057 REQUEST FORA VARIANCE TO THE SIDE YARD SETBACK REQUIREMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO EXPAND A NON. CONFORMING BUILDING FOR FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITIONS TO THE HOME LOCATED AT 247 THIRD ST. THE PROPOSED ADDITIONS ARE LESS THAN THE REQUIRED SIX FEET FOR A SIDE YARD ON BOTH THE NORTH AND SOUTH SIDES OF THE BUILDING. A SOLAR SETBACK VARIANCE IS REQUESTED TO CREATE A GREATER SHADOW ON THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH THAN IS PERMITTED. APPLICANT: MARC VALENS & ANNE GOLDEN Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts - Chapman had a site visit, Black drove by the site and Fields is familiar with the house. STAFF REPORT Anderson said the main components of this application outlined in the Staff Report include the Variance request, the Conditional Use Permit and the Maximum Permitted Floor Area. The Historic Commission concluded in their meeting that using the approach of including the floor area with seven feet of headroom or more is a way to encourage applicants to retain the use of half stories and pony walls. The Historic Commission listed items to be included on the revised drawings as well as outlining a list of recommended changes. The Historic Commission recommended continuing this application based on the need for more detail and asked for consistency with what is written in the findings and shown on the plans. Staff supports this recommendation. Staff is concerned about impacts to the existing trees along the alleyway. The trees are right on the property line. The Tree Commission would like to see Condition 10 stricken. They suggested Conditions that would allow the applicant to reserve the right to take out some of the trees. There are four Conditions suggested by the Tree Commission listed on the Planning Application Review dated February 9,2006. 1: Hand digging within the root zones of the black walnut, 2. Recommend removal of the existing Birch tree and replace with one large stature tree or two large stature trees, 3. The owner reserves the right to remove the plum tree (tree #7) and supports their removal with appropriate permits and not requiring a modification of this approval. The Historic Commission is very supportive of this application. There are a lot of details that have been left up to verbal discussions between the Historic Commission and the applicant and it's easy for those to get lost They are asking that the hearing be left open and the applicant will come back. . ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION HEARINGS BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 14,2006 2 PUBLIC HEARING MARC VALENS, 127 Third Street, handed out a packet at this meeting. He had done recalculations and believes they are within the allowed maximum permitted floor area. He is not sure how they can get the headroom without getting too bulky. Bedroom two really needs more headroom. He showed revised elevations. They are leaving the front the same and will use shingles as requested by the Historic Commission. They will remove the existing fascia and replace it with one that matches the front of the house. They disagree with the Historic Commission with the upstairs balcony. They are hoping to keep the 4x9 foot balcony. He showed several photos of balconies on houses in the Historic District. They showed a gable end over the enclosed patio on the back side of the house. The Historic Commission has asked for a hip end. He made an error 011 the solar shadow. There is almost no new shading. The Tree Commission said they might not want to remove the trees along the south property line as they provide a lot of shade. They'd be happy if they would start removing and begin replanting over time one by one. Valens is hoping for an approval without a continuance. He believes they have met the Historic Commission concerns. They would rather not lose the balcony. ANNE GOLDEN, 127 Third Street, said this is a modest expansion of an old house. They want to create more living space while maintaining the integrity of the existing house. JEROME WHITE, 253 Third Street and LIZ ALEXSON, 253 Third Street spoke. 1. White said they support the application. He suggested the Hearings Board approve this because the Variance is the minimum necessary. Fields said it is unusual the Historic Commission would ask that they come back to the Hearings Board too. Harris suggested if they approve it, add a condition that the items presented by the Historic Commission be addressed with the Historic Commission (entire Commission) prior to submission ofa building permit. That would allow the approval process to move ahead but still give the Historic Commission the final review. Harris asked the applicant if he knew the size of the tree #7 and #3. The two trees on their property would require a tree removal permit if they are greater than six inches diameter at breast height (dbh). Valens said there is an inventory that describes each tree. Valens said the Tree Commission was hoping they would remove #7, the plum tree and plant another tree. Harris said that would require a tree removal permit planning action that would have to be noticed. That could be done separately because it wasn't rolled into this application. Fields thought the hip or gable roof can only be seen from the back yard. He doesn't see that is something we need to regulate. With regard to the balcony on the back of the building, the applicant brought plenty of evidence (photos) showing balconies on the front of buildings in the Historic District. Include in Condition 9 the four Tree Commission recommendations. A new Condition 10 stating "That prior to tree removal, trees on the property or in the alley, that the appropriate tree removal permit is obtained." Revise Condition 10 to read "That tree protection fencing be installed in accordance with Chapter 18.61.200 for the cedar tree on the adjacent property to the north. " Harris recommended re-wording of Condition 6 to say "That the plans shall be revised incorporating the February 8, 2006 Historic Commission recommendations except the balcony and hip roof on the back, and submitted to the full Historic Commission for approval prior to submission and issuance of a building permit. Fields/Chapman m/s to approve PA2006-00057 with modified Condition 10 and 6 and a new Condition 17. PLANNING ACTION 2006-00069 IS A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO THE REAR YARD SETBACK REQUIREMENT FOR A SECOND STORY ADDITION TO THE GARAGE LOCATED AT THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 758 B STREET. THE REQUIRED REAR YARD SETBACK FOR THE SECOND STORY IS 20 FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE, AND THE PROPOSAL IS TO LOCATE THE SECOND STORY 14 FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: MULTI- FAMILY RESIDENTIAL; ZONING: R-2; ASSESSOR'S MAP #: 391E 09 AC; TAX LOT: 2000. APPLICANT: PHILIP LANG ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION HEARINGS BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 14, 2006 3 Lang stated in his letter of January 12, 2006 that there is a member of the Planning Commission who is not acceptable to them as a member of the Hearings Board. Lang stated, however, that this no longer applies in this case. Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts - Fields had a site visit with no conflicts of interest. Black viewed the property from the alley. She is aware of Lang's presence as an active member of the community. She believes she can be impartial although it seems there are a lot of complications and nuances with this application and she hopes she will be up to being able to consider it in a fairly short period of time. Chapman had a site visit. STAFF REPORT Harris showed the site plan. The garage structure meets setback requirements. There is a permitted open air deck on top of the garage. The Staff Report points out that the Variance is supposed to be a unique or unusual circumstance that is specific to the site or the property. Commonly it is a physical feature of the property that requires a setback that cannot be met. The applicant talks about setback patterns. If the Hearings Board moves toward finding there is a unique or unusual circumstance, they need to really make it site specific or look at this particular alley. Harris understood the applicant wanted to go ahead with the original packet of information they had submitted and the Variance request. The later material is a Plan B. Harris discussed the benefits of the proposal compared to the negative impacts. The applicant talks about the second floor deck and how the enclosure will provide more privacy on neighboring property owners. Harris reminded the Commission that a second story addition is something that is possible. The Variance is applying to only the greenhouse addition which is the first six feet of the addition. It is a 300 square foot, low profile, very articulated, detailed building with the most attractive side of the building toward the alley. The addition has a step back roof system to soften the height. The Historic Commission recommended denial of the application as outlined in the packet. They listed four reasons for the denial. They did not believe there was a unique or unusual circumstance that necessitated the Variance. They did not believe the positive benefit of the proposal outweighed the negative impacts. They felt the bulk and scale of the two story accessory building on the alley was not typical of this alley. They felt the proposed deck on the south side of the second story is an incompatible element and they had some concerns about the deck railing being retained rather than using something like a bellyband. PUBLIC HEARING PHILIP LANG AND RUTH MILLER, 758 B Street. LANG raised a procedural question. On page 2 ofthe Staff Report, Project Impact., he wondered why Staff decided to use their discretion and make this action a Type II review. How many 2005 Variances were administratively passed and how many were kicked up to a Type II procedure? Harris explained it is discretionary. She does not know how many applications were brought up to a Type II. It is common for Staff to forward an Administrative Action to the Hearings Board or Planning Commission to make the decision. Variances in the past year have come under a lot of scrutiny. Lang said this is a six foot Variance and it is 15 feet wide or 90 square feet. It is one-half the height allowed. It is not visible from B Street and hardly visible to the neighbors. Lang addressed the Variance in his Findings included in the packet. Unique or Unusual Circumstances - Their entire neighborhood is a unique and unusual circumstance and determined by the Council in another application. It is justified due to the existing development pattern in the historic neighborhood. The existing patterns of streets and alleys are unique and unusual circumstances. Lang said the reason for the first story ten foot setback and a 20 foot setback is to prevent the creation of canyons. In their case, they have a one story garage (existing) that is already 26 feet from the neighbor's garage and studio garage across the alley and right on the property line. The distance between their second story wall (greenhouse) and the neighbors is 30 feet. He concluded that the presence of alleys in the district is another unique and unusual feature creating openness and preventing the canyon affect. The addition functionally meets side and rear yard setback requirements. Lang noted a comparable situation that exists at 872 B Street. He noted that many alley structures were built directly on the property line according to the Sanborn fire maps. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION HEARINGS BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 14, 2006 4 -----.- The proposal's benefit will have no negative affect on the adjoining properties. There will be a positive affect on the property at 762 B Street. Currently, they can look into the neighbors at 762 B Street. Since Lang will be using glass block in the addition, the neighbors will have total privacy. It is self-evident that the conditions and circumstances have not been willfully self-imposed. Lang showed better copies of the photos included in the packet. Chapman said he has to look at the criteria for granting the Variance. The fact that he can have the addition without the greenhouse and meet the criteria would suggest that the additional space he wants to add is strictly self-imposed. Lang explained if they push the building out into their six foot side yard seven feet, it would lower the roof to 15 feet. They could do that. Instead, they have tried to keep this addition simple and low and not offensive. If they could build it without the greenhouse walls, that would be an option. Chapman said as far as unique and unusual circumstances, he believes the letter from Mike Reeder citing the Lovell case, the Variance has to be site specific. If it applies to a whole area, by definition, it means it is no longer unique or unusual. He has never granted a Variance based on something happening somewhere else. Lang said it is his reading that the Railroad District is a unique and unusual circumstance as he explained. He looked at the Lovell decision and they do not believe the facts are relevant. The Council made a decision based on unique development patterns. Fields said it becomes difficult to [md the benefit and why it is unusual. Is there a benefit to the development pattern to encroach into the alley even more? We are being asked to disregard today's standards. Lang responded that if the Railroad District was turning over quickly, we would eliminate the wonderful historic pattern and everyone would be reduced to sameness. Black asked ifthere was a structural reason why he needs to include the greenhouse at the time of building permit. MILLER said they included the greenhouse because it made a nice finish to the whole project. It is a structure. Staff Response - None. Rebuttal - Lang still wondered why this was a Type II planning action. The DeLuca application on East Main was going to be an Administrative Variance and the citizens called it up for a public hearing. COMMISSIONERS' DISCUSSION AND MOTION Chapman does not believe there are unique or unusual circumstances. He does not believe the Council meant for their decision to apply to the entire Railroad District (E. Main project). If that was the case, Variances wouldn't be required for anything there. Over time, as ordinances have passed, they have not excluded the Railroad District, so he would have to assume they apply. He believes the Variance is self-imposed. Black said the letter of February 9th would suggest the greenhouse structure is self-imposed. The greenhouse in this historic area seems appropriate to her. She believes the request for the constructed solar feature is self-imposed. Fields believes the Variance is self-imposed. Fields/Chapman m/s to deny the Variance for the rear yard setback for PA2006.00069. Roll Call: Black, Chapman and Fields voted "yes" to deny. The action was denied. ADJOURNMENT - The meeting was adjourned at 4:00 P.M. Respectfully submitted by Susan Yates, Executive Secretary ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION HEARINGS BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 14,2006 5 CITY OF ASHLAND ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 14, 2006 CALL TO ORDER - The meeting was called to order by Chair John Fields at 7:00 p.rn. in the Council Chambers located at 1175 East Main Street, Ashland, OR. Commissioners Present: John Fields, Chair Michael Dawkins Mike Morris Russ Chapman Olena Black Allen Douma John Stromberg Pam Marsh Absent Members: Dave Dotterrer Council Liaison: Jack Hardesty, present Staff Present: Bill Molnar, Interim Planning Director Maria Harris, Senior Planner Sue Yates, Executive Secretary ELECTION OF OFFICERS BlackIDouma m/s to draft an ordinance amendment in April to change the election of officers so it will coincide with the terms of Commissioners' appointments. Voice Vote: Unanimous. Douma/Chapman m/s to hold the election tonight and nominate the existing officers as a slate to be voted upon (John Fields, Chair and Michael Dawkins, Vice Chair). Voice Vote: Unanimous. Morris/Douma m/s to close the nominations. Voice Vote: Unanimous. ANNOUNCEMENTS Molnar reported on the following: . The Council recently finished their goals covering the next two years. . The organizational audit is available. The consultant, Paul Zucker will make a presentation to the Council at their March 7th meeting, 7:00 p.rn. . The Land Use Ordinance review is tentatively scheduled to be reviewed at the March 14, 2006 meeting by the consultant, Scott Siegel. . There will be a Study Session of the Planning Commission on February 28th. There will be a report of committees. APPROVAL OF MINUTES AND FINDINGS HEARINGS BOARD Black/Chapman m/s to approve the minutes of the January 10,2006 Hearings Board meeting. Voice Vote: Approved. Douma/Chapman m/s to approve the Findings for PA 2005-01836, 695 Walnut Street. Voice Vote: Approved. Chapman/Black m/s to approve the Findings for PA2005-02186, 1449 Windsor Street. Voice Vote: Approved. FULL COMMISSION BlacklDawkins m/s to approve the minutes of the January 10,2006 Regular Meeting. Voice Vote: Approved. DoumalBlack m/s to approve the minutes of the January 24,2006 Continued Meeting. Voice Vote: Approved. Chapman/Morris m/s to approve the Findings for 1651 Ashland Street. Voice Vote: Approved. Marsh abstained as she had not yet been appointed to the Commission. Dawkins/Marsh m/s to approve the Findings for 1500 Oregon Street. Voice Vote: Approved. PUBLIC FORUM - No one came forth to speak. TYPE II PUBLIC HEARINGS PLANNING ACTION 2005-01834 REQUEST FOR A SITE REVIEW APPROVAL FOR A THREE STORY, MIXED-USE BUILDING FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 479 RUSSELL STREET. THE PROPOSED BUILDING IS COMPRISED OF RETIAL OFFICE SPACE ON THE GROUND FLOOR, AND THREE RESIDENTIAL UNITS ON THE SECOND AND THIRD FLOORS. THE PROPOSED BUILDING IS APROXIMATEL Y 9,700 SQUARE FEET IN SIZE. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE DETAIL SITE REVIEW ZONE AND IS ALSO SUBJECT TO THE LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. THE APPLICATION INCLUDES A REQUEST FOR AN ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCE FOR THE SITE DESIGN AND USE STANDARD FOR THE FLOOR AREA RATIO (FAR) TO BE .60 WHICH EXCEEDS THE MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA RATIO OF .50. APPLICANT: RUSS DALE AND DARREN LECOMTE Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts . Fields was not present at the last meeting but he had a site visit and has watched the video and he would like to participate. No one objected. . Marsh stated she was not a member of the Commission when this item was fIrst heard, therefore, she stepped down from the hearing. · Stromberg asked that the correspondence received tonight be read aloud. Fields said he will read them as long as the writers are not testifying. (Fields suggested talking about this at a Study Session.) Stromberg had an ex parte contact with Valerie Rasmussen. He stopped the conversation when he realized it was going to pertain to tonight's action. Rasmussen submitted a letter telling the Commissioners about a development off Clay Street to see a real example of how a two-story building backing another two-story building will look. . Morris was not at the last meeting but he watched the video and heard the minutes. He took some measurements on- site. . Black had a site visit. She measured some of the areas. She reviewed previous hearings (PA2003-347) and picked up a Falcon Heights Subdivision real estate sales flyer. She was influenced by the prices they were asking for the lots. It seems like the Variance the applicants are requesting is based on an economic factor. . Chapman drove through the parking lot. . Douma had a repeat site visit. . Dawkins ran through the site and ran the neighborhood. STAFF REPORT Molnar stated this is a continuation of the hearing last month. The applicant's response is in the packet. They have kept the building where it is and they discussed some of the problems with moving it forward. There was discussion at the last hearing regarding the grading and natural grade. Staff reviewed the engineered grading plan for Falcon Heights and has come up approximately a two to three foot raise in the elevation from what was there before this development occurred. At the last meeting there were issues of screening. The Site Design Standards allow for the Commission to impose conditions to create a continuous vegetative screening as well as the installation of fencing. The applicant has indicated the installation of fencing. Staff would caution the Commission about the applicant's willingness to work with individual owners with regard to each owner's particular screening needs. Staff would need guidance on how to condition that. Molnar said the main change from the January 2006 meeting is the applicant asked for some of the garages to be enclosed, which led to a Variance to the Floor Area Ratio (FAR). After further review of the Land Use Ordinance, Staff is not convinced that enclosing the garages has an impact on the FAR. The language in the ordinance tends to point that in either case, either structure whether enclosed or open, would be part of the gross floor area of the building. Whether it is an open carport structure or enclosed garage system, there would be a Variance to the FAR. He noted the following provisions: 18.08.260, 18.72.020D, SDUS II-C-2a2. He referred to the defInition of garage, private, and Floor-Area Ratio. When this ordinance was adopted 13 years ago, the feeling probably was that outside the Historic District there is a point where the proportion of building mass to the lot area should be set at a maximum because it could seem out of character with the development pattern. In the downtown it is common to have FAR's of greater than one. Molnar said Staff reviewed a book of defInitions, Illustrated Book of Development DefInitions. He discussed the defInition of Gross Floor Area. Molnar referred to 18.75.050 C. The key sentence in this section: "Automobile parking areas located within the building footprint and in the basement shall not count toward the total gross floor area." Staff feels the Variance to the FAR is open to interpretation, but the code language seems to support including an open carport and/or enclosed garage structure in the FAR. If the Commission chooses to approve this application, Staff is recommending two additional Conditions. The fIrst would be a more formalized calculation for solar access, identifying natural grade, Next, before any building permit is issued for one of these lots, the pedestrian bridge shall be replaced. Reeder reiterated that if the Commission does fInd that the ordinance gross floor area needs to be interpreted, there is some guidance in 18.20.040.G, 18.24.040 I and J, and 18.28.040 I. PUBLIC HEARING MINUTES FEBRUARY 14, 2006 2 TOM GIORDANO, 2635 Takelma Way, said his letter of January 25,2006 addresses the items from the last meeting. The grade varies, but was approved as part of the subdivision. That parking lot has been approved. Giordano was one of the authors of the FAR ordinance. He remembers they determined that covered patios and decks were not counted as FAR. With this application, the neighbors have requested they enclose the carports. A carport doesn't have to have walls. Does that make it a building? There is no livable space above the carports. He does not believe carports with decks above should be considered in the FAR because the carport is outside the interior space. He would like guidance from the Commission. DARREN LECOMTE, 1110 Gate Park Drive, Central Point, showed a rendering of the rear area with the carports. If the Commission denies the Variance, he would try to do something to make the building look good. Chapman interjected the project appears to be a work in progress. If the applicants want to have an aesthetically pleasing project, an effort has to be made to incorporate some of the concerns of the neighbors. The Commission has some definitions that need to be worked out. Giordano said the building meets all the criteria with the exception of the FAR. Kerry KenCaim, 545 A Street, countered that there have been lots of iterations that have come out of numerous discussions with the neighbors. Chapman noted the applicants have failed to respond entirely, but it's a matter of degree. LeComte said there is not that much difference between a two or three story building with regard to visual blockage. Fields read an e-mail from COLIN SWALES dated 2/14/2006. Fields read a letter from VALERIE RASMUSSEN, 245 Tolman Creek Road #37, received January 13, 2006. Fields comments from EDWARD HUNGERFORD, 456 Williamson Way, opposing the project. KERI GREEN, 288 Ninth Street Alley, spoke to larger concepts as a community. This could be the last remaining jewel. The City was invited to participate in a master plan for the railroad district. She doesn't see enthusiasm or excitement from anyone except the architects about this project. We are talking about more than pleasing neighbors or meeting ordinances. We are looking for compatible and complimentary development. If we accept this plan, we set a new standard. What sort of standards is the Commission wishing to set? We run the risk of betraying the City's greater interest if we don't consider the goals we established in the master plan. Then we make decisions based on each parcel, piece by piece. SURYA BOLOM, 470 Williamson Way, said the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. Cars, their fumes and noise are not that nice to be around. She doesn't think the major concerns of the neighbors have been addressed. The key is to move the building ten feet closer to Russell Street in order to give the neighbors a decent buffer. She believes the grade level was changed. The applicant's entire landscape strip should be increased ten feet at the narrow part with a five foot fence. Bolom showed pictures. She questions the natural grade and solar setback too. JANET TUNEBERG, 327 Starflower Lane, has watched the development grow up behind their house and the dump trucks of fill. She submitted a photograph of the area before it was filled. She has been less than impressed with some of the practices she has seen. They will need screening after the pedestrian bridge is removed. She would like to see a two-story building, not three. She is hoping for restoration of the creek sides. It is reasonable to grant moving building Lot 4' s building toward Russell ten feet. LEE TUNEBERG, 327 Starflower Lane, thought the grade has changed between three to five feet. He knows this comes down to economics. He believes the neighbor's property values will drop. Just because the applicants meet the criteria, should their proposal be approved? ERIC NAVICKAS, 711 Faith Avenue, requested the Planning Commission reject the request for a Variance. They haven't shown the demonstrable difficulty. He is concerned mostly about the continued development. He believes we need to be very strict about the FAR. Navickas recalled, with regard to the FAR, that it was meant to allow underground parking, not an exemption for above ground parking. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FEBRUARY 14,2006 3 MERA GAGNON, 466 Williamson Way, showed a real estate flyer for the subject property. She is surrounded on two sides by the development. She gets limited light in her house. She suggested limiting the building to two stories and moving the building forward by ten feet. That would give her more of a buffer and more privacy and the neighborhood would get what they need with solar. She would like some nice plantings. Half the existing plants are dead. The trash cans are still 15 feet from her dining room. She knows the natural grade is lower. She is concerned a precedent will be set by allowing a three-story building. ALLYN GREGORIO, 474 Williamson Way and BILL HOLMES, 357 Starflower Lane gave their time to ARLEN GREGORIO, 474 Williamson Way. Gregorio thought they'd made some real progress at the last meeting. Since they received the last public hearing notice on January 10th, there has been no communication from the applicants. Gregorio has reviewed the applicant's letter of January 25,2006. The neighbors have problems with screening, size of the building looming over them, and the solar measurement that should be made at the base of the fence looking north from the applicant's property to find natural grade. He showed photos showing natural grade around 2000 at the start of the project. It is important to have an independent assessment of natural grade. They have asked for individual written landscape requests from each owner for those that want them so there won't be any misunderstanding. They need landscaping even with a five foot fence. He would support the building moving toward Russell Street. He asked for a 35 foot cap on building height. They do want garage doors. They would agree with removal of the northeast deck cover. Staff Comments - Molnar said it is best for the Commission to focus on the Variance. If there is agreement that there is not evidence for the Variance, there would have to be changes to the design that might ultimately involve some of the other items the neighbors have addressed. It appears that the base of the wood fence would be the natural grade. The Commission could ask the applicant to come back with additional landscaping. Rebuttal - LeComte & Giordano said it seems everything hinges on the FAR. They are not opposed to moving the building forward six to seven feet and still meet building code. They are agreeable to continue this if they have some guidance from the Commission. KenCaim said moving the building and changing the infrastructure would not work. The plant material hasn't survived but it will be replaced. The applicant is required to take care of these things. They can resolve the fence issue and address the landscaping. Stromberg asked if they could fmd a creative way of using the space in the parking lot to create a buffer experience rather than just a bigger parking lot. Dawkins agreed. KenCairn said adding more landscaping to the back edge is not an option because they are not able to just go out and dig a bigger planting bed. Giordano would like some assurance if they do lower the building to two stories and move the building forward and try to improve the back area, would they get support from the Commission regarding the FAR? Molnar said if the Commission asks for a continuance, they will need a 60 day extension from the applicant. COMMISSIONERS' DISCUSSION AND MOTION Fields noted the burden of proof is on the applicant to locate natural grade. He also said the applicant is maxing out the FAR and the solar. The applicant is allowed 8100 square feet of gross floor area. He feels any kind of structure is floor area. If they want covered garage parking they will have to reduce the square footage of the building. If they want greater volume of building because we think putting parking in garages is better, then the mitigation comes into play. They can mitigate for the neighbors if they decide they have to have covered garages. They can't change the back curb. A five foot buffer with enough landscaping could make it work. They can't really tear out the back parking lot. Fields continued that this project is about volume, mass and scale and the impact to the neighbors looking up the hill. They don't want the solution to be worse, they want it better. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FEBRUARY 14, 2006 4 The Commissioners discussed holding the line on the.5 FAR. They would consider the Variance on reducing the front plaza. They are looking for an improvement on the line of sight. Stromberg/Dawkins m/s to agree to a continuance with the assumptions that the FAR stays at .50. The Commission would entertain an Administrative Variance to the front setback with the expectation there will be a reduction in the perceived bulk and scale and in the sight line as well as verification of the elevation of the natural grade. Molnar said there would still need to make sure there is adequate break up of the volume. Fields said it would impress him if they came back with six feet or under for the solar shadow. Roll Call: The motion carried with Dawkins, Chapman, Fields, Douma, Stromberg and Morris voted "yes" and Black voted "no." RE.OPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING LeComte asked for clarification. Fields said the Commission does not object to the garages. It's the scale of the building that is impacting the neighbors. They want the building whittled down to the .50 FAR. Move it forward as much as possible. This action will be continued to the March 14, 2006 Regular Meeting. The applicants agreed to a continuance. Marsh rejoined the meeting. PA2006-00088 REQUEST FOR SITE REVIEW APPROVAL FOR A MIXED.USE BUILDING FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 588 N. MAIN STREET. THE PROPOSED BUILDING IS COMPRISED OF MEDICAL OFFICES, AND IS APPROXIMATELY 6,100 SQUARE FEET IN SIZE. A VARIANCE IS REQUESTED TO ALLOW A COVERED ENTRY, STAIRS AND A WHEELCHAIR ACCESSIBLE RAMP TO INTRUDE INTO THE REQUIRED 20-FOOT FRONT YARD FOR PROPERTIES ABUTTING ARTERIAL STREETS. APPLICANT: ASHLAND COMMUNITY HOSPITAL FOUNDATION Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts - Site visits were made by everyone. STAFF REPORT Harris gave the Staff Report. The Variance component of the application requires a public hearing. The applicant is proposing to locate a stair structure as well as an accessibility ramp and an entry porch bumping out a small portion of the front of the building that intrudes into the setback area. The majority of the building is within the 20 foot setback. The unique or unusual circumstance is the drop of five and one-half feet in the area from the front property line to where the existing parking starts. It is within proximity to a bus line (building requirement) making it accessible to transit. It has to be accessible for people with disabilities to the back also. It's the combination of the slope and the accessibility requirements at the front and rear of the building that are identified as the unique or unusual circumstance. The benefit is shown as the accessibility. The slope and access are not self-imposed. There are 16 Conditions of approval. A letter from ODOT was submitted, but Harris thinks ODOT is not aware that access is taken from the neighboring property. She would not recommend adding the condition suggested by ODOT. PUBLIC HEARING JAC NICKELS, Architectural Design Works, 821 Beach Street, said he did not have any issues with the Conditions. PAT FLANNERY, Director of Development for ACH Foundation, 280 Maple Street was available for questions. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED Douma/Morris m/s to approve PA2006-00088 with the added 16 Conditions. Roll Call: Unanimous with Morris, Dawkins, Black, Douma, Fields, Marsh, Chapman and Stromberg voted "yes." ADJOURNMENT - The meeting was adjourned at 11 :06 p.rn. Respectfully submitted by Susan Yates, Executive Secretary ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FEBRUARY 14, 2006 5 -- ----------.- CITY OF ASHLAND ASHLAND HOUSING COMMISSION MINUTES FEBRUARY 27,2006 CALL TO ORDER - Chair Faye Weisler called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. at the Community Development and Engineering Services Building at 51 Winburn Way, Ashland, OR. Commissioners Present: Faye Weisler, Chair Bill Street (left at 7:00 pm) Carol Voisin Don Mackin Jennifer Henderson (left at 7:00 pm) Liz Peck Alice Hardesty Matt Small Sunny Lindley Cate Hartzell (arrived at 6:50 p.rn.) Brandon Goldman, Housing Specialist Sue Yates, Executive Secretary Absent Members: SOU Student Liaison: Council Liaison: Staff Present: Goldman announced there will be a review of a pre-application at this meeting. The CDBG public hearing is scheduled for March 20, 2006. Goldman introduced Sunny Lindley. She is the SOU Student Liaison. APPROVAL OF MINUTES There were two corrections to the January 9,2006 Housing Commission minutes. Under "New Business" and "Old Business" there were two incomplete sentences that need to be struck. Voisin/Mackin rn/s to approve the minutes as corrected. Voice Vote: The minutes were approved as corrected. PUBLIC FORUM - No one came forth to speak. REPORTS AND UPDATES SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS Education - Hardesty submitted a written report. Save Our Schools and Playgrounds (SOSP) comprised of 300 members would like to organize a large educational kind of meeting. The purpose would be to brainstorm and educate their members and the general public about the affordable housing problems but also to come up with resources and ideas. SOSP would run the effort, but with the Housing Commission attending to help out. The Housing Commission expressed an interest in participating, but would need to know the date, place and time of the forum. Employer Assisted Housing - Hardesty said they want to keep the interest going. Hardesty said she'd heard from the Carleton Hart architectural fIrm in Portland, developers of Oleson Wood. They asked if there would be an interest in hearing a presentation from them. What is the possibility of inviting them to the study session on April 26, 2006? The purpose of a visit would be for them to tell the Housing Commission and perhaps Planning Commissioners and the Council about how they were able to do what they did by combining affordable housing with environmental concerns - green building and funding. She would like to respond to their offer. Hartzell arrived at 6:50 p.rn. The study session was set for April 26th from 3:00 to 7:00 p.rn. A potluck was suggested. Goldman suggested potential modifIcations of the annexation ordinance as a topic. An e-mail reminder will be sent to Commissioners. Henderson and Street left the meeting at 7:00 p.rn. Hardesty noted that Street has agreed to chair the Education Committee. Land Use - Hardesty is now chairing the Land Use Connnittee. Other members on the connnittee are: Peck, Henderson and Mackin. They discussed inclusionary zoning and what kinds of changes could be made to the code to make it more beneficial to the community and improve the aspect of affordable housing in these developments. Goldman said he would research construction costs for typical project developments. The regular meeting date will be the second Thursday of the month from 12 to 1:00 p.rn. The next meeting is March 9th from 12 to 1:00 p.m. Finance - Goldman brought the connnittee up-to-date on work that had been done previously. Goldman understood they were looking for a consultant to investigate continuous funding streams. The Connnissioners brought up other ideas and questions. However, mixing too many issues will only add to the Connnission's frustration, for example, learning about funding sources, hearing from developers as to why they are not seeking funds for affordable housing, different housing need& - workforce, homeless, transitional, etc. The Connnission decided to focus on how to get the housing trust fund to work. Goldman said he will go to the Planning Director and City Administrator to see if there are funds available in the current budget for hiring a consultant. There was consensus by the Connnission for Goldman to proceed with hiring an outside consultant to look at potential funding streams for a housing trust fund. A recommendation would be made to Bill Molnar, Interim Planning Director and Gino Grimaldi, City Administrator to see if there are funds under the current budget to allow for a consultant. Hartzell mentioned it to Grimaldi this morning and she suggested the request go straight to Grimaldi. Goldman thought a consultant would work independently and provide a report. Hartzell suggested Goldman come back to the next meeting or Finance Connnittee with a potential scope of work. A possible future agenda item would be the relationship of the existing land trust to our formation of a housing trust fund. Liaison Reports - Hartzell reported the Council has not prioritized their goals, but one of the highest goals was the creation of 200 affordable housing units by 2010. Goldman will send the document he produced in this regard. David Pearce Snyder, Washington, DC, was the keynote speaker at the Workforce Housing Sunnnit. Hartzell will send a link to his informative website. She took notes at the housing sunnnit and can share those with the Connnission. Goldman can provide extra packets to those who are interested. Hartzell attended last month's meeting of the Homeless Task Force of the Jackson County Housing Coalition. They said if Ashland gets to the point where we are asking for money for homelessness, consider ourselves a subconnnittee of that task force and that puts us in line to get money. Goldman noted the City has been a member for the last three years. Hartzell, during the cold snap, organized a homeless shelter using The Grove. Unfortunately, not everything was in place until too late. It at least jump started the process and hopefully it will put some concrete things in place for the future for cold nights. Lithia Lot - Peck said the funding for Kendrick (developer) came back $400,000 short of their goal to create the housing. It has been sent back to Kendrick saying they need to figure out how to close the gap. Kendrick came back saying they would turn 1500 square feet of the proposed housing into commercial or market rate house. Goldman said he will meet with their representative to determine what their proposal is. He will then take it to the Council because it could be a modification of the project. There was consensus that Weisler contact Grimaldi for the Housing Connnission to review it before it goes to the Council. NEW BUSINESS Pre-Application Review for the property at 146 S. Mountain Avenue; Applicant: FullertonlHenthom. Request: Conditional Use Permit to convert existing units into condominiums. Final Plan with Outline Plan Approval for a three-unit Performance Standards Subdivision. Goldman said the applicant is required to have at least 25 percent of the houses affordable. The standards require ownership units at 120 percent for condominium conversions or rental units at the 80 percent AMI for a period of not less than 20 years. In this case, one unit will have to meet the affordable requirement. ANTHONY HENTHORN said they built two of the units two years ago. Each unit has its own private yard. The one bedroom is already rented to meet the affordability requirement. All the units currently exist. The Connnissioners did not have any suggestions or recommendations. PLANNING ORDINANCE REVIEW AND DISCUSSION ASHLAND HOUSING COMMISSION MINUTES FEBRUARY 27, 2006 2 Annexation IZone Change Criteria Discussion Goldman said his memo in the packet outlines the existing Land Use Ordinance relating to affordable housing. Are the five standards for affordability under ALUO 18.106.030 G. adequate to attain affordable housing? Even though this ordinance has hardly been used over the last several years, as more pressure develops on lands outside the City Limits but inside the Urban Growth Boundary, the ordinance will be used more often. Goldman suggested the Land Use Committee review any changes in wording and the Housing Commission could review it again on April 26th at the study session. Then, immediately schedule a joint study session with the Planning Commission to recommend any changes. Hopefully, there would be specific language that could come out of the study session that might address the concerns raised. What is the target goal, how do we defme workforce and affordable housing and what is the intention behind the annexation ordinance to provide what housing for what income group? Hartzell thought they were going to talk to developers to fmd their break even point. Goldman isn't sure Staff has direction yet from the Commission as to how to craft language to serve what purpose. Hardesty had listed six items that the Land Use Committee suggested as types of changes that could be made to the ordinance. Goldman would like to bring the concepts to the Land Use Committee. The language will require legal review. Mackin said there will be two regularly scheduled Land Use meetings before the study session. They can talk about the concepts. Hartzell would like to begin scheduling the joint study session with the Planning Commission. Density Bonus Criteria Discussion Goldman explained this is a voluntary bonus people can get that develops affordable housing. They can increase the percentage of units on the property by an equal percentage of affordable housing. For every affordable unit you add, you get a one unit increase. This has not been working too well because of land costs. Weisler thought as we discuss these things, can Goldman give the Commission an idea of how much the density bonus has been utilized and how much affordable housing has been added and how much will be anticipated in terms of applications and trends? She would like to see the Commission focus on the changes that will bring the most affordable housing. Hartzell said it would be helpful to put on the agenda when we know there is a decision to be made or where we want to get with a particular item. Goldman said Annexation and Zone Change will not be coming back to the Commission in March. Condominium conversion criteria discussion can be put on the next agenda. Ask the Land Use Committee to structure that portion of the study session to be organized so they can focus and move down the list. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) applications. Peck said she would be happy to talk to any of the Commissioners about the ten units in the downtown (Lithia Lot). At what cost do we want the ten units on the ground? PUBLIC FORUM RICH ROHDE, Oregon Action, said he was impressed with the work the Housing Commission is doing and the public ought to know that. ADJOURNMENT - The meeting was adjourned at 8:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted by Sue Yates, Executive Secretary ASHLAND HOUSING COMMISSION MINUTES FEBRUARY 27, 2006 3 CITY OF ASHLAND ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MINUTES FEBRUARY 28, 2006 The Commission recognized and thanked Kerry KenCaim for her years of service and on the Commission. CALL TO ORDER - Chair John Fields called the meeting to order at 7: 1 0 p.rn. at the Ashland Civic Center, 1175 E. Main Street, Ashland, OR. Commissioners Present: John Fields, Chair Michael Dawkins Mike Morris Russ Chapman Olena Black Allen Douma John Stromberg Pam Marsh Dave Dotterrer Absent Members: None Council Liaison: Kate Jackson, present Staff Present: Bill Molnar, Interim Planning Director Maria Harris, Senior Planner Sue Yates, Executive Secretary I. CITIZENS GUIDE FOR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS Chapman said he'd like to see the guide put on the City's website before he leaves in April. He noted a typographic error on page three, paragraph four. The sentence should read: "A citizen can request a public hearing on a particular land use application by requesting it in writing." Other minor items to change or add: . Clarify the reason for the rebuttal. The reason for rebuttal is to rebut testimony, not to bring up new information. . Clarify language regarding meetings on 2nd and 4th Tuesdays and the 5th Tuesday. . Add contact information: Community Development Dept. address Phone Number E-mail Address . How to send a written message to the Commission. . City Recorder and Legal will review the guide. . Add web links. . Add a process flow chart. . Staff to work out any other items. . Highlight changes that are made. There was a discussion concerning reading items aloud at the meeting that are turned in after the packet has been distributed. The Commissioners decided that the Citizens Guide should state that written materials need to be submitted seven days prior to the public hearing. Staff will make additional copies of materials not included in the packet available at the meeting to members of the public. Reading letters aloud will be left to the discretion of the Chair. COLIN SWALES commented because the Staff Report is not required to be completed until seven days prior to the meeting. the window of opportunity to respond to the Staff Report is short. II. COUNCIL CHAMBERS REMODEL Molnar said the architectural fIrm that has been charged with designing a remodel for the Council Chambers has asked for each Commissioner's feedback. If anyone has any comments, they can be e-mailed to Bill Molnar. Ideas & Suggestions . Go back a couple of years and fInd the list of fundamental changes that were made by Bill Street and Ann Seltzer that would facilitate both the television and live audience and how testimony is presented. . Can the architect show the Commission several options? . There is a problem with availability of the room. Look at finding a second meeting place. . Would the City consider purchasing a collection of mobile equipment? . Identify what the problems really are before trying to fix anything. III. COUNCIL GOALS Out of respect for the Council, Molnar is waiting for the final draft from the Council before presenting them to the Commission. IV. COMMITTEE REPORTS A. Downtown Stromberg reported that the City has received a work program from Crandall Arambula outlining the process for Phase II of the Downtown Plan. He explained the process the consultants would use to get to an end product. The consultant's estimated cost for the project s in the neighborhood of $227,000. (For further information regarding Crandall Arambula's presentation and methods, see the Downtown Plan Meeting notes dated January 26,2006.) At the end of the process, the community will have come to an agreement on what they think the future vision of the town is in a very concrete way (specific properties, specific uses and how traffic is handled, etc.) There will be explicit guidance for the changes that need to be made to our Land Use Ordinance. Additionally, they will provide us with an explicit strategy for how to roll out all the major capital projects, both public and private and the funding sources. The cost for re-writing the design standards and public improvement standards would cost between $40,000 to $80,000. The consultant will be giving a presentation of Phase I to the Council probably in May. The Council will be evaluating the financial strategies to fund a project of this size. The current Downtown Committee, an official committee of the Planning Commission, will finish Phase I. Crandall Arambula discussed a steering committee for Phase II. The Council will have to figure out who to appoint to the steering committee. Molnar has talked to the Mayor and he thought it likely in Phase II, the Council will solicit a broad based steering committe:e. B. Roles & Duties Dotterrer said he had provided a menu of roles and duties to the Commissioners a couple of months ago but has not received any feedback. He will send it out again. However, after reviewing the Zucker report, one cannot talk about the Planning Department without talking about the Planning Commission. What are the roles and mission of the Planning Commission? What is the Planning Commission's purpose? He envisions the Planning Commission doing more long range planning. Dotterrer asked for discussion of an idea he has. He sees the Planning Commission's role as providing the direction and focus to the City planning program. He believes the City's planning goals should be initiated from the Planning Commission. He will send out recommendations for a mission statement. He asked the Commissioners to take a look at the more specific things about the role of the Planning Commission in relationship to the Comprehensive Plan, Citizens Planning Advisory Committee, citizen involvement, and the processes themselves. He believes the process comes first. He would not recommend spending any money on any resources or do any reorganizing until we figure out what the process is. Councilor Jackson asked Dotterrer to investigate state statutes. Dotterrer said the State gives the Planning Commission a wide array of what they can do. Jackson noted that the Planning Commission is advisory to the Council. Dotterrer meant the Council would be well served to use the Planning Commission. Douma would like to be presented with options of roles and duties along with the risk/benefits/costs of each option. In making their recommendations to the Council, the Planning Commission should give their reasons for their recommendations and let the Council come to their own conclusions. The idea of a hearings officer can be discussed at the retreat. Councilor Jackson said if anything the Commission is doing would have a budget impact based on the Zucker report, bring it to the Budget Committee through Molnar. C. Citizen Input Black said she met with'two other citizens and they reviewed the chapters of the Comprehensive Plan. The purpose and direction of the analysis was to look at each section of the Comp Plan and identify data that would not support, or ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MINUTES FEBRUARY 28, 2006 2 is in question, of the underlying assumption. They tried to see if the goal had been achieved, not achieved or if the data was current. They are in the editing process. When it is complete, Black will send her document to Staff and it can be distributed from there. D. Ordinance Amendments The Land Use' Ordinance Review will be presented to the Council by the consultant, tentatively, on April 18, 2006 at 7:00 p.rn. E. Communications In addition to the Citizens Guide, the committee is trying to define what specifically does the Commission want presented to them when trying to make decisions about a project, policy or plan, particularly as presented to them by Staff. He would suggest they be given the authorization to go forward and create a simple template or checklist. V. PLANNING COMMISSION RETREAT Suggested topics: Infill Hearings officer Should the Commissioners do a tour of past projects? The retreat has been scheduled for Saturday, May 20,2006. Let Staff know if this date is a problem. ADJOURNMENT - The meeting was adjourned at 9:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted by Susan Yates, Executive Secretary ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MINUTES FEBRUARY 28, 2006 3 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Liquor License Application Meeting Date: Department: Approval: March 21, 2006 City Recorder Gino Grimaldi f' f1- Primary Staff Contact: Barbara Christensen 488-5307 christeb@ashland.or.us Estimated time: Consent Agenda Statement: Liquor License Application from Lisa Beam dba Tabu at 76 N Pioneer Street. Background: Application for liquor license is for a change in ownership license. The City has determined that the license application review by the city is set forth in AMC Chapter 6.32 which requires that a determination be made to determine if the applicant complies with the city's land use, business license and restaurant registration requirements (AMC Chapter 6.32). In May 1999, the council decided it would make the above recommendation on all liquor license applications. Council Options: Approve or disapprove Liquor License application. Staff Recommendation: Endorse the application with the following: The city has determined that the location of this business complies with the city's land use requirements and that the applicant has a business license and has registered as a restaurant, if applicable. The city council recommends that the OLCC proceed with processing of this application. Potential Motions: Motion to approve Liquor License application. Attachments: None ~A' CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Meeting Date: Department: Approval: Liquor License Application March 21, 2006 Primary Staff contact~ara Christensen City Recorder 488-5307 christeb@ashland.or.us Gino Grimaldi ~'J.-. Estimated time: Consent Agenda Statement: Liquor License Application from Jorge Oliva dba Pipon's at 29 N Main Street. Background: Application for liquor license is for a change in ownership license. The City has determined that the license application review by the city is set forth in AMC Chapter 6.32 which requires that a determination be made to determine ifthe applicant complies with the city's land use, business license and restaurant registration requirements (AMC Chapter 6.32). In May 1999, the council decided it would make the above recommendation on all liquor license applications. Council Options: Approve or disapprove Liquor License application. Staff Recommendation: Endorse the application with the following: The city has determined that the location of this business complies with the city's land use requirements and that the applicant has a business license and has registered as a restaurant, if applicable. The city council recommends that the OLCC proceed with processing of this application. Potential Motions: Motion to approve Liquor License application. Attachments: None ~~, CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Appointment to Airport Commission Meeting Date: Department: Approval: March 21, 2006 City Recorder Gino Grimaldi 'J-- (fr Primary Staff Contact. ar ara Christensen 488-5307 christeb@ashland.or.us Estimated time: Consent Agenda Statement: Confirmation by Council of the Mayor's appointment of Alan DeBoer to the Airport Commission for a term to expire April 30, 2008. Background: This vacancy was created when Vicki Griesinger resigned her seat from the Airport Commission. Proper notice was made in our local newspaper of the vacancy and four applications were received and considered. Council Options: Approve or disapprove Mayor's appointment. Staff Recommendation: None Potential Motions: Motion to approve appointment of Alan DeBoer to the Airport Commission for a telm to expire April 30, 2008. Attachments: Applications received r~' Please publish: Thursday, February 9, 2006 and Saturday, February 18, 2006. Refer to P.O. 69467 Please contact Barbara at 488-5307 with questions The City of Ashland has a vacancy on the AIRPORT COMMISSION for a term to expire April 30, 2008. If you are interested in being considered for a volunteer position on the Airport Commission, please submit a letter of interest along with a completed application to the City Recorder's Office. Applications are available at the City's Recorder's Office or can be downloaded from the City's website at www.ashland.or.us by selecting the CITY NOTICES link on the homepage. Questions?: Contact City Recorder Barbara Christensen at 488-5307. APPLY TO: The City Recorder, City Hall, 20 East Main St., Ashland APPLY BY: Friday, February 24, 2006 ~.t. 1 CITY OF ASHLAND CITY OF ASHLAND APPLICA TION FOR APPOINTMENT TO CITY COMMISSION/COMMITTEE Please type or print answers to the following questions and submit to the City R(:corder at City Hall, 20 E Main Street, or email christeb@ashland.oLus. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact the City Recorder at 488-5307. Attach additional shleets if necessary . Name ALittV ~1=- ~OEt<'- Requesting to serve on: A-, R. P o~-\ ~ornyYl (Commission/Committee) Occupation ~d, b 0 M 0 'R ~ OA- -A.u ~ b.e q l€- v LN Address Phone: Home ..s L( I .. Y g 2.... :3.69..s- Work 5<-1 I - Y l?::L.. ;;t.. 4 , ( Email ~ w cl.. b @ C<...~,. (o yy"\ Fax I. Education Back2round What schools have you attended? What degrees do you hold? A6~d 0.... ht'J. ~_J\ t:><) \ 'b. h,..\.t- Gv~c..l.. \ ~ 61 &0.0. ~ i ,I ~( Co" 1-\ ... IJ e ; J'L eel NC~ ( What additional training or education have you had that would apply to this position? '"?i , 0+ - \.4.\. \ <...c. f -k..t Y"Y)u l+-~ ''As\: vv ~ t- 2. Related Experience What prior work experience have you had that would help you if you were appointed to this position? \ ,^CA ~ ~v-v-t J ~ ~ ~ ~ Ca-.---..... YY\~.. ~~~ ~ ~~) ~~"'-b\ v--e.. ~0Si.Y"u2'S~ ~c.vk~~8- Q;,O ~ ~ Lb",,",,-S-'\-;/"--.I ~~ .~- C~U"I'- \ r') lJc:.l~tr- Q..~ Do you feel it would be advantageous for you to have further training in this field, such as attending conferences or seminars? Why? \ ~ ,\-,. \--~ \ ~~'""\ c.: Jl ~ , \J "'- ~~ I ---tIre..; 'rLll. J RECEIVED r:.l ~ E B !.. / LuU6 --_.~~-_.~ 3. Interests Why are you applying for this position? --\0 'fI" D ..~ ~ ""6 -J6'\ rJ s,::> 'Y.... c, ~i. a~ -\0 ~\~ lSus', \0"'", ~ ~~ ~~+o v,-,\ Cl..>"J (.~ -+LL c,-\-, ~"Y\J-s +c ,^-e\r - "\-5 5JCLe sS ",--",c.-l FS\ ~- t ~ e....$,.'"' -{:..IDW 4. Availability Are you available to attend special meetings, in addition to the regularly scheduled meetings? Do you prefer day or evening meetings? '-i .e s I -::0 f't-<-{ I 5. Additionallnformation How long have you lived in this community? 5'4 ~~<A..-.r<;;. / IVI\-\-ive.... Please use the space below to summarize any additional qualifications you have for this position D\~) C\.-o..-\~ - \ CJu:) '<0 n k <-<- '.,.-'<. ~ uvc-v"J., a..; (' f \ 0.. n...R.. ~ fct. c.Q ~c... '" (5'- :::, ~c0\- \ --\ vc "'" --\.-k C:. (-t-<(j e--.-I {' <. ~ v' ~ 0-- --\\-~~ cC '''"'. \ 5 _ C' ('\ L \..v.. ~ Ctlrt'\VV\, *e. .5 J ba..~ o.JY\ ~- ~ ,~ c..... LV (' V L-Y\, -\- YY\..LL -\-j " J 5 . (f Y"I ~ Y<1\.. 4-, ......, \a0~-, Y\.R.~ -e.~ f-€. v, t':Yl ~ ~CfJ h i.~ -\--1::> v 1 oY) 'If L~~ n v--L '+\~ -,~ )~-f-- rv...t. J. s -1-e.t{.YY). ;?- " 9 - 0 Co Date ~L2~ Signature rj.' ~ EMBRY-RIDDLE ~ AERONAUTICAL UNIVERSITY Dr. Alan R. Bender Chair: Research and Scholarship Associate Professor-Aeronautics Extended Campus Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University Office: 145 Almond Street Ashland, OR 95720 Telephonll: (916) 719-9506 FAX: (541) 488-4411 E-Mail: alan.bElnder@erBu.edu RECEIVED February 16, 2006 FEB 1 1:U06 Mayor John Morrison City Hall 20 East Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 Dear Mayor Morrison: I am interested in applying for a position on the Ashland Airport Commission. As you may know, I have been quite involved in Airport Commission activities over the last 14 or 15 months, even though I am not an appointed member of the commission. Commission Chair Lincoln Zeve should be able to attest to my commitment to the work of the Airport Commission. I need to mention that you appointed me to the Ashland Traffic Safety Commission last summer (following the resignation of a former commissioner), and I want to continue serving on that commission as well. As I am considered a transportation "expert," I feel I can be of significant assistance to both commissions. However, you do have my word that if I am appointed to serve on both the Airport Commission and the Traffic Safety Commission, I will NOT apply to serve on any other City of Ashland commissions until my terms on J) the Airport Commission, and 2) the Traffic Safety Commission, have expired. (I am a new father as well, so I will have my wife to answer to if I volunteer for too many civic posts!) I've attached an Application for Appointment to the Ashland Airport Commission as well as an updated vita. Thank you for giving my application your consideration. Sincerely, ~\\L Alan R. Bender, Ph.D. Enclosures Leading The World In Aviation and Aerospace Education -'"--~-_._-.- .--- ---.- -----------y--- CITY OF ASHLAND APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO CITY COMMISSION/COMMITTEE Please type or print answers to the following questions and submit to the City Recorder at City Hall, 20 E Main Street, or email christeblalashland.or.us. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact the City Recorder at 488-5307. Attach additional sheets if necessary. Name: Alan R Bender, Ph.D. Requesting to serve on: Ashland Airport Commission Address: 145 Almond Street, Ashland, OR 97520 Occupation Professor of Aeronautics Embry-Riddle Aeronautical Univ. 1. Education Backeround What schools have you attended? Phone: Home 488-4967 Work 488-4967 Email: alan.bender@erau.edu Fax 488-4411 UCLA and UC Berkeley What degrees do you hold? B.A. (Honors) Geography, UCLA; M.A. Geography UCLA; M.S. Transportation Engineering UC Berkeley; Ph.D. Geography (Specialization: Transportation) UC Berkeley What additional training or education have you had that would apply to this position? Have attended and presented at innumerable air transport-related conferences and seminars since] received my Ph.D. in 1987 (please refer to my vita, attached). 2. Related Experience What prior work experience have you had that would help you if you were appointed to this position? Almost 18 years as a university professor specializing in aeronautics related issues; publications in refereed transportation journals; aviation research work; ayiation related consulting work; National Air and Space Museum's (Smithsonian) 2000-1 Alfred Verville Fellow in Aeronautics; quoted on airport and airline issues in virtually every major newspaper in the United States over the last 8 years, plus on- air interviews on CBS Radio, ABC, NPR, and others. Do you feel it would be advantageous for you to have further training in this field, such as attending conferences or seminars? Why? Yes. Aviation is constantly changing! Further education--conferences, seminars-are absolutely essential. ] currently attend approx. 6-8 such forums each year, many sponsored by my university. ---.--~ -- rj.' 3. Interests Why are you applying for this position? My chosen profession is aviation education and research, so I feel I'm a natural for an Ashland Airport Commission appointment. 4. A vailabilitv Are you available to attend special meetings, in addition to the regularly scheduled meetings? Do you prefer day or evening meetings? Yes. I can arrange my schedule so that I can attend tbe Airport Commission's regular meetings-and probably special meetings as well. Fact: During the last 14 months I attended more Airport Commission meetings tban some of the appointed commissioners--even though I'm not a commissioner! I bave no preference between day and evening meetings, tbougb I realize it is customary for the Airport Commission to meet in the morning. 5. Additional Information How long have you lived in this community? I bave lived in Ashland for 1 % years. Altbougb tbis is a relatively sbort time, I've endeavored to become involved in community service since Day One. Please use the space below to summarize any additional qualifications you have for this position Over tbe last 14 or 15 months I have become an active participant in Asbland Airport Commission matters-for example, working closely witb SOU stude:nts and faculty on their recent airport economic impact study. I have also volunteered for other commission work-that is, as a citizen volunteer-as I am not yet an Asbland Airport Commission member. I feel I can do even more in tbe future, and I am hopeful that tbe City of Ashland bas had sufficient time to observe my knowledge of aviation matters...as well as mv willin1!ness to work. I believe that Commission Chair Lincoln Zeve can attest to my hard work...and my dedication to the duties of llie:T\d~7:~mmiSSiOD. k ~ ~ Date Signature rj.' CURRICULUM VITAE ALAN R. BENDER, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Aeronautics Research and Scholarship Program Chair Extended Campus Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University 600 South Clyde Morris Blvd. Daytona Beach, FL 32114 Office: 145 Almond Street Ashland, OR 97520 Tel. 541.488.4967; Fax 541.488.44JJ Email: alan.bender@erau.edu EDUCA TION Ph.D. Geography (Specialties: Transportation Geography; Economic Geography) University of California, Berkeley 1987 M.S. Civil Engineering (Specialties: Transportation Planning; Airport Planning) University of California, Berkeley 1978 M.A. Geography (Specialties: Anglo-America, Australasia, Urban, Transport) University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) 1976 B.A. Geography (Honors) University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) 1974 ACADEMIC AND PROFESSIONAL APPOINTMENTS Chair of Research and Scholarship, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Extended Campus, Daytona Beach, FL (2003-present) Smithsonian Research Associate, National Air and Space Museum, Washington, DC (2002- present) Alfred Verville Fellow in Aeronautics, Smithsonian Institution, National Air and Space Museum, Washington, DC (2000-2001) Visiting Professor of Aviation Business Administration, Autonoma University of Madrid, Spain (Summer 1994; Summer 1995) Associate Professor of Aeronautics, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Daytona Beach, FL (1993-present; tenured in 1997) Assistant Professor of Aeronautics, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Daytona Beach, FL (1988-1993) -,~ -- --~---.-- Teaching Assistant, Department of Geography, University of California, Berkeley, CA (1980-1983) Research Assistant, Department of Civil Engineering, Division of Transportation Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, CA (1977-1981) CURRENT PROFESSIONAL SOCIETY AFFILIATIONS National Academy of Sciences, Transportation Research Board (Appointed university representative) Transportation Research Forum (Board of Directors) Air Transport Research Society Association of American Geographers University Aviation Association San Francisco Aeronautical Society Washington Airline Society American Society of Civil Engineers RESEARCH INTERESTS Commercial Air Transportation Transportation Economics Transportation History Transportation Policy Transportation Geography Urban Geography CURRENT PROFESSIONAL SOCIETY COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS Member, Aviation Economics and Forecasting Committee (National Academy of Sc:iences, Transportation Research Board) Member, Air Transport Committee (Transportation Research Forum) 2 Member, Transportation Geography Specialty Group (Assn. Of American Geographers) COURSES TAUGHT Airport iOperations and Management (Grad) Seminar in Aviation Labor Relations (Grad) Research Methods and Statistics (Grad) Graduate Research Project (Grad) Thesis (Grad) The Air Transportation System (Grad) Advanced Aviation! Aerospace Planning Systems (Grad) Management of Research and Development in the Aviation! Aerospace Industry (Grad) Advancled Aviation Economics (Grad) Airline Operations and Management (Grad) Airline Marketing (Grad) A viatioltl Labor Relations (Undergrad) Transportation Principles (Undergrad) Airport Management (Undergrad) Airport Planning and Design (Undergrad) Airline Management (Undergrad) Trends and Current Problems in Air Transportation (Undergrad) International Aviation Management (Undergrad) Currenlt Issues in America (Undergrad) Urban Geography (Undergrad; teaching assistant) Historical Geography of Transportation (Undergrad; teaching assistant) Physic~ll Geography (Undergrad; teaching assistant) 3 ~--- -"1" ELECTED OFFICES Speaker of the Faculty Senate, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Extended Campus (1999-2000; 2002-2004) Vice-Speaker of the Faculty Senate, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Extended Campus (1997-1999; 2001-2002) Secretary of the Faculty Senate, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Extended Campus (1993-1997) MAJOR UNIVERSITY COMMITTEE AND SERVICE ASSIGNMENTS Chair, Graduate Research & Communications Committee (Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Extended Campus, 1992-2002) Member, Graduate Curriculum and Degree Requirements Committee (Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Extended Campus, 1989-present) Member, Master of Aeronautical Science Subcommittee (Embry-Riddle Aeronauticlll University, Extended Campus, 1989-present) Member, Faculty Handbook and Review Committee (Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Extended Campus, 1989-2002) Member, Professional Doctoral Degree Committee (Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, 1992-1994; 1996-1998; 2000-2001) Member, Tenure and Promotion Boards (Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, E:x:tended Campus, 1998; 1999; 2000) Representative of Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Extended Campus, to accreditation/quality assurance site teams from the Southern Association of Colleg4~s and Schools (SACS), ~ality Education Services Program (~S), Military Installation V oluntary Education Review (MIVER), and the State of California (1991-present) HONORS, A WARDS, AND RESEARCH GRANTS Alfred Verville Fellowship in Aeronautics (Smithsonian Institution, National Air and Space Museum, 2000-2001) Business Research Grant [with Professor Fred Stephenson] (University of Georgia, 1994) Best Research Paper A wards (Society of Logistics Engineers, 1993; 1994) Faculty Research Development Grants (Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, 1989; 1990) 4 First Prize: Graduate Student Paper Competition (Transponation Research Forum, (980) Regenu Graduate Fellowship (University of California, 1976) President's Undergraduate Fellowship (University of California, 1974) EDITORIAL BOARDS Editori:11 Board,JOUTlIaI of the Transportation Research Forum (1991~present) Editori:11 Board, Proceedings of the Transportation Research Board (1997-present) WORK WITH THE PRINT AND ELECTRONIC MEDIA Since 1998, Dr. Bender has been Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University's most prolific airline industry "expen commentator" for newspaper, magazine, radio, and television stories. Dr. Bender's perspectives on the airline business have appeared in vinually every major newspaper in the United States including the Wall StreetJournal, USA Today, Washington Post, New York Times, Boston Tribune, Detroit Free Press, Newsday, Christian Science Monitor, Miami Herald, Chicago Tribune, Dallas Morning News, Houston Chronicle, Portland Oregonian, and scores (If others. On-air interviews include the following radio and television networks: ABC, CBS, NBC, NPR, Fox, MSNBC, CNBC, and BBC; in addition, numerous local radio and tel.~vision stations have interviewed Dr. Bender. PROFESSIONAL MEETING CHAIRMANSHIPS Chair, '''Airline Industry Financial Performance" (Transponation Research Forum, Washinglon, DC, 1005) Chair,"Efficiency and Productivity in Air Transpon" (Transponation Research Forum, Chicago, 1004) Chair, "Airline Economics Issues" (Transponation Research Forum, Williamsburg, V A, 1001) Chair, "Airline Mergers" (Transportation Research Forum, Annapolis, MD, 1000) Chair, "Aviation Issues" (Transportation Research Forum, Washington, DC, 1999) Chair, "Jet Crew Costs and Productivity inthe Nineties and Beyond" (Transponation Researc:h Forum, San Antonio, 1996) Chair, UPS Paper Session, "Changes in Business Travel Behavior and Demand" (Transportation Research Forum, Daytona Beach, FL, 1994) Chair, "Air Transpon Geography Special Session" (Association of American Geographers, Los AI'1.geles, 1981) 5 PROFESSIONAL MEETING P APERS/pROCEEDINGS Bender, A. R. (2003). U. S. non-scheduled airlines (l94os-1950s). Paper presented at the: nt" annual meeting of the Conference of Historic Aviation Writers, Oklahoma City, OK. Bender, A. R. (2003). America's first no-frills airlines. Paper presented at the 44th annual meeting of the Transportation Research Forum, Washington, DC. Bender, A. R. , Tacker, T., & Chumley, K. (1998). Social impacts of airline pricing. Paper presented at th,: 40th annual meeting of the Transportation Research Forum, Philadelphia. Bender, A. R. (199S). Battle 2000: New jet entrants versus the regionals. Paper presented at the 37th annual meeting of the Transportation Research Forum, Chicago. Bender, A. R. (1994). The future of u.s. business air travel. Paper presented at the anl1lual meeting of the Society of Logistics Engineers, Anaheim, CA. (Best paper award) Bender, A. R. (1993). The challenge facing the U. S. airline industry. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society of Logistics Engineers, Ontario, CA. (Best paper awa:rd) Bender, A. R., & Stephenson, F. J. (1992). Airline passenger fare strategies. Paper presented at the 34th annual meeting of the Transportation Research Forum, St. Louis. Bender, A. R. (1991). The geography and politics of military air base reuse. Paper presented at the 87th annual meeting of the Association of American Geographers, Miami. Bender, A. R. (1988). Flying on the "cheap": The evolution of affordable airline service. Poster session presented at the 84'" annual meeting of the Association of American Geographers, Phoenix. Bender, A. R. (1981). Local air service under regulation and deregulation. Paper presente:d at the 77'1. annual meeting of the Association of American Geographers, Los Angeles. Bender, A. R. (980). Comparative analysis of Soviet and U. S. airline service patterns. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Canadian Association of Geographers, MontreaL Bender, A. R. (1977). Geographical analysis of U. S. airline services. Paper presented alt the annual meeting of the Canadian Association of Geographers, Regina, SK. INVITED GUEST LECTURES Invited guest speaker, Washington Airline Society (Washington, DC, October 2002) History of Technology lecture, National Air and Space Museum, Smithsonian Institution (W ashington, DC, October 2001) 6 Invited Iguest speaker, Transocean Air Lines reunion (Oakland, CA, September 2001) Invited Iguest speaker, Utah Air Travel Commission (Salt Lake City,June 1999) Invited 19uest speaker, Autonoma University of Madrid (Madrid, Spain, October 1994: Novemher 1995). Lunchec1n speaker, Transportation Research Forum, Northern California Chapter (Berkeley, CA, September 1994) Lunchec;'n Speaker, Transportation Research Forum, Northern California Chapter (San Francisco, October 1986) REFEREED AND NON-REFEREED PUBLICATIONS Bender, A. R. (2003, September/October). The right price. Aircraft Economics, 19-20. Bender, A. R. (2001,july 24). Deregulation could die if airline deal ever happens. Newsday. Bender, A. R. (2000). Fasten your seat belts. Journal of Aviation! Aerospace Education e Research.. 10(1), 9-10. Bender, A. R. (1999, Spring). Yield management: A double-edged sword? The Leader, 21. Bender, A. R. (1998, June 22). Allied airlines: The new robber barons? Aviation Week e Space Technology, 70. Bender, A. R., & Stephenson, F.j. (1998). Contemporary issues affecting the demand for business air travel in the United States. Journal of Air Transport Management, 4(2), 99-no. Bender, A. R., Schultz, J. T., & Landgren, E. W. (1993,1994. 1996, 1997). Guide to the Graduate Research Project (I", 2nd, 3.d, & 4th eds.). Daytona Beach, FL: Riddle Press. Bender, A. R. (1996). Battle 2000: The new jet entrants versus the regional partners. Journal of Aviation! Aerospace Education e Research, 6(1), 7-18. Stephenson, F.j., & Bender, A. R. (1996). Watershed: The future of U. S. business air travel. TransportationJournal, 356), 14-32. Bender, A. R. (1993,june 14). Majors' inefficiency may benefit upstarts: Day of reckoning for U. S. airline industry is at hand. Aviation Week e Space Technology, 97. KanafaI1li, A., Gosling, G., Novak, E., & Bender, A. R. (1981). San Francisco Bay Area off- airport ttnninal demonstration project (Institute of Transportation Studies Research Report). Berkele)., CA: University of California, Institute of Transportation Studies. 7 -----y- Gosling, G., Kanafani, A., Bender, A. R., and Evmolpidis, V. (1977). Off-airport passrnger terminals (Institute of Transportation Studies Research Report). Berkeley, CA: University of California, Institute of Transportation Studies. PUBLIC SERVICE Commissioner, Traffic Safety Commission, Ashland, OR (2oo5-present) REFERENCES Available upon request 8 ----~--r----- -- CITY OF ASHLJ\ND APPLICA TION FOR APPOINTMENT TO CITY COMMISSION/COMMITTEE Please type or print answers to the following questions and submit to the City Recorder at City Hall, 20 E Main Street, or email christeb{al.ashland.or.us. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact the City Recorder at 488-5307. Attach additional sheets if necessary. Name OLAF rAUL Requesting to serve on: . 1/ o{!~r-66L A h- ~ , (Commission/Committee) Address 2.5 7,) ~ ({ E~,J /J\ E f\ I) D W5 W J. '1 Occupation 12tJ"'-< Jell rJ1wJ ae ~hone Hlne if f t q 4 3 J V~~ ))..d,A) Work I V. Email Yv\..D it.., c: (j civvJ1dL I ~ Fax ~ (f' 'tit3 J U~~\ I'x 1. Education Backeround What schools have you attended? 41~jU~ What degrees do you hold? What additional training ~?~tr have you had that would apply to this pos.ition? /P~ L 2. Related Experience What prior work experience have you had that would help you if you were appointed to this position? 1/ r 1/ r J / )V d^~c, vV'-- ~aJ~ D./.t ~A1V C?CL<,llh.-d/ ~~~.Jf~ "'- U.f.r k4~ Do you feel it would be advantageous for you to have further training in this field, such as attending conferences or seminars? Why? RECEIVED ~A. ./M~ fl::B ~ J LeDS CITY OF ASHLAND COl1l1lwnity Service Volunteer OLAF G. PAUL Name VOLU";;j~ S lUre ---. -----..- CITY l()F ASHLJ\ND ImploVlDent ApplleaUon The City of Ashland is an equal opportunity employer and will not discrimilate against an employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, age, marital status, national origin or mental or physical disability unless based on a bona fide occupational qualification. In accordance with Federal Law, proof of authorization to work in the United States is required upon employment. Reasonable accommodation will be made for applicants with a disability which requires an auxiliary aid or 5eIvice to participate in the selection process. Individuals requiring accommodation MUST inform the Personnel Office in writinQ nO! later than the final filing date as stated on the job announcement. Requests must include an explanation as to the type and extent of accom- modation needed to participate in the selection process. PlEASE TYPE OR PRINT IN BlUE OR BLACK INK APPLICANT INFORMATION NAME: ~ c-r Pt U L- Last SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER: C)l-A~ First c:;;; E Dtl~ E Middle ~- J!L - _I~~~ ~ CURRE? MAILING ADDRE~: ),)7 ~~~ ~~ Wa~ Street City Y-\>J{~ State CONTACT INFORMATION: Home: (SZih 4fE 'i 4 3 6>~ '17S?!l> Zip Message: ( E-Mail: POSITION INFORMATION The City of Ashland will only accept applications for advertised vacancies. Unsolicited applications and10r resumes will not be considered and will not receive a response from the Personnel Department. POSITION APPLIED FOR: Vo~lJralZ. - ;:tIItPoe.T (!LNU,W.ssioN RECRUITMENT NUMBER: Full-Time Part-Time _ Temporary ~~, Please fill-out 1111 sections of this form completely. F ailLXe to complete this application (including using "See Resume"), could result in rE:jection during the selection process. This application and all attachments (Resumes, Certificates, letters of reference, etc.) Il>ecome property of the City ~ Ashland and will not be returned to the applicant I I/tJ/..tJAJ re~e.1 . Are you employed by the City of Ashland at this time? /t6HU1Iil> ~~ I C .E:: /)61'1: Were you previously employed by the City? ~() If yes, please specify your Job Title, Department and dates of employment. (Attach addrtional sheets if necessary). ~ Yes No Yes ,/ No mLE DEPT. FROM to -- TITLE DEPT. FROM to -- Do you havEl relatives employed by the City? Yes No IT yes, IOOlcate: NAME DEPT. RELATIONSHIP NAME DEPT. RELATIONSHIP SECTION 2: CONVICTIONS Have you ever been convicted of a felony or a misdemeanor other than a minor traffic violation? (Conviction is not an automatic bar to employment. Each case ;s considered individually based on its relation to the duties of the position applied for). Yes ~NO If yes, attaclh additional page with explanation of conviction (5) to this application. Include: 1} Date, 2) Charge, 3) Jurisdiction, and 4) Disposition. SECTION 3: CERTIFICATION, AUTHORIZATION AND RELEASE BY MY SIGNATURE BELOW, I: Certify that all information I provide as part of this application process is true and complete to the best of my knowledge and that I understand that any misstatement of fact may result in my disqualification from consideration for city employment or in the termination of my employment with the City of Ashland; Authorize the City of Ashland to contact my prior employers, educational institutions, references, and any institution or organization with whom I have been associated to give the City of Ashland any pertinent inlformation about my employability; and Further Release the individual, company, institution or organization and all individuals connected therewith worn all liability whatsoever incurred in giving such information; and further release the City of Ashland from all liability whatsoe er. cu i btaining or using such information. Signature lof Applicant: Date: ~~ 2 -.. ...'1 SECTION 4: EMPLOYMENT HISTORY In the following section. please be sure to describe the duties you have performed whiCh demonstrate that you l1ave the knowledge and skills to perform the duties of the job for which you are applying. You may include on-the-job n'aining. volunteer activity and military experience. Please account for any periods of unemployment or self employment. Beain with 'YOUr present, or most recent iob--list an jobs separately. If a supplemental questionnaire is requied for the position you are applying for. it must accompany this completed application. PIZe.S 6 NT ~ . ~~ e T I € e C> 6,.AlC~ 1~9 C} EIIPlOYIIENT INFORMATION DESCRIP110N OF JOB DUnES AND RESPONSIBIl..fT1ES 0RGAfIZA 110N CQNTAC::1INFORIIA lION - E'1IOYed From: Job Duties: Employed By: I "t - 1'99~ A lIiIr7/() # Ct-I'ti 1)1 s Sat' e- n'Jp I' (J ~ t! J) -,- to -'- - Mo' Yr Mo' Yr 5Fee/ltusl Address: Be/.G' L7 N) - -rAlV ~S TG/t1i ./)~ tJF -r Fe/l Alee . Your Title (s): 1t1~ClV}- F=r ItCCl D&~rs Phone Number: ( ) f(j rc. Rme-€JCflAJ + starting Salary: $_ ~tJ~ PCA-N :;rAJ.Q)eANCG Supervisor's Narne and Title: Ending Salary: $- &/rl,oAIJie S Hourslweek: Reason for Leaving: Number of people f=.Er;ec,i~ -- you supervised: ,wAA$ - May we contact this em~:Ji! ~ Yes ~ No EMPlOYMENT INFORMATION DESCRIP110N OF JOB DUnES AM) RESPONSIBII..mES 0RGAfIZA TION CONTACT INFORMATION ~'7J~F~f / _'_ to_'_ Mo' Yr Mo' Yr Your Title (5): Job Duties: /tViA7/"AJ tJL..'t;/YI S S 'PI US 11.5. MJD Bt:J..G/tJ IVJ {~ rec- AlAr/4 AJItL /.[)S5 ItlfJt/STee HltIJ{)/,eD ~h1S F~e . ~--'t;.A11t woeLP UJ/DG- Employed By: Cl&~ A Address: IDLJ PWIJA ., r' I Phone Number: ( Starting Salary: $~ y- ttl'T'lt4n~, - Ending Salary: $_ Supervisor's Narne allld TtUe: Hourslweek: ~ Number of people you supervised: , Reason for Leaving: . 8AUY ?~T/~/I1t.v 3 .... ._~ EIFlOYMENT IFORIMTION DESCRIPTIOIII OF JOB DUnES AM) RESPOIISIBIU11ES ORGANIZATION CONTAt'T -~11ON E~IOYed F~: tJ Job Duti.s: Employed By: AlIh'itJN ;:J- L / '-5-/S 7 A-v i Pr-riD A.J J.OSS Ii tlilrn i,V tJJ\JPeeve. ~ _,_ to__,_ Mo' Yr Mo , Yr FtD~(} sree. Address: S. To LlJ or s m; SSOtJ f?.J Your TItle (s): Phone Number: ( ) Starting Salar:t': $~ Supervisor's Name and TItle: '? Ending Salary: $________ Jl AI Hourslweek: l ~ Reason for Leaving: . t)PFtJe-rllNI ry Number of pe<e>>ple you supervlSMI: WiTH C;GJJ A- ,. --0- ce.. S EIFlOYIIENT N'ORIMT1OIII DESCRIPTlON OF JOB DUnES AM) RESPONSIBIU11ES ORGANIZATION CONTAt:T 1NFORIM11ON Employed Frclm: Job DutI.s: Employed By: -,- to -'- Mo' Yr Mo' Yr Address: Your Title (5):: Phone Number. ( ) Starting Salalry: $_ Supervisor's Name and nue: ending Salar;,: $- Hourslweek: Reason for Leaving: Number of people you supervised: Have you graduated from High School or have a G.E.D.? No If no, list thE! highest grade you have completed: 4 ~~, --.- Give information for additional education after high school: COlllGES, VOCAlJONAL OR TICHfICAl MAJOR IINOR lNTS COMPl..ETID TYPE OF SCHOOL. OR TRAINING CENTERS SUBJECT(S) SUBJECT(S) OR CER1lF SEMESTER QUARTER ()Ni v. br rnlA/A/t!9JT It -;nn-6e - 'f~ iiAr) "NIt . ;,.:- I'" '. .. .~ oJ DEGREE. DIPlOMA ICATE EARNED ~'" list below any licenses/certificates you possess that may be required for this position: TYPE OF LICENSE OR CERTIFICATE: Pe if M6 Number: I ~ 5 Jl6g r Issuing Agency: f 1111 If '- /) T : 6/ AJG-Le [;A} fir ,'/J (f. t..A uJ) Exp.Date: ~~r ~lJeeEIJT TYPE OF LICENSE OR CERTIFICATE: pre.j rJOt. '5 LJ ce AlSo Number: 733J~'l? Issuing Agency: ST ~ tJUG6,v Exp.Date: O~3./~-;<a/~ TYPE OF LICENSE OR CERTIFICATE: 5~ieT'1 dF 1t,R. SAFer t _ i1JltE.s ,I GIfT ae.s - . Number: 5/ () Issuing Agency: S 11 S I Exp. Date: -1.\/ tM/e. Ust below any additional skills that you would like us to know about in considering you for city etrllployment: V.5. fiRM!:! /95/-- /953 iter/tie ])tlT.J - U. S. R.F. IC~ /96L/- - /97S Return your completed application to: The City of Ashland Personnel OffICe . 20 E. Main Streel . Ashland. OR 97520 Phone: (541) 552-2110 Fax: (541) 488-5311 5 r:., CITY OF ASHLAND APPLICA TION FOR APPOINTMENT TO CITY COMMISSION/COMMITTEE Please type or print answers to the following questions and submit to the City Recorder at City Hall, 20 E Main Street, or email christeb@ashland.or.us. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact the City Recorder at 488-5307. Attach additional sh<<~ets if necessary. Name: Brittany Wise Requesting to serve on: Airport (Commission/Committee) Address: 534 Crowson Road Ashland, OR 97520 Occupation: Office Manager Phone: Home 541-261-2775 Work 541-488-1095 Email bwise_27@msn.com Fax 541-488-8353 1. Education Backeround What schools have you attended? Ashland High School, Southern Oregon University What degrees do you hold? I am pursuing a degree in Business Management with a concentration of Small Business Management and pursuing a minor in education. What additional training or education have you had that would apply to this posilion? I was the youth liaison for the aioort commission during my iunior year of high school and I am very familiar with the General Aviation industry through business and personal expenences. 2. Related Experience What prior work experience have you had that would help you if you were appointed to this position? I currently work for a General Aviation company out of Ashland and I am well versed on the aviation industry. I also travel frequently to small general aviation airports and have a good general knowledge of what an airport should provide to its tenants, visitors, and the general public. The company I work for operates both helicopters and airplanes.. so I feel I could bring a little of both to the commission. Do you feel it would be advantageous for you to have further training in this field, such as attending conferences or seminars? Why? I think that it would be an advantage to anyone to have further training, Education is the key to staying current and aware of situations that could harm and benefit an airport or a community, I think that when a member or members of the commission are constienently exposed to different airports, resources, and methods of funding you get a brooder picture in the whole that helps govern your decisions and what you brinR to the . . . .. comrmSSlOn as a comnllSSlOner. -_.._--~-- ~A' 3. Interests Why an: you applying for this position? I love the aviation industry, it is one of the most exciting and growing industries in the world today. I want to be part of the growth of Ashlcmd's General Aviation. There are so many more great things that Ashland could offer to the general aviation community and I think that with my involvement on the commission I could help bring in the new ideas. 4. Availability Are yoU! available to attend special meetings, in addition to the regularly scheduled meetings? Do you prefer day or evening meetings? I am available to attend all Ashland Airport Commission Meetings 5. Additionallnfonnation How 10:rlg have you lived in this community? 6 years Please use the space below to summarize any additional qualifications you have for this position I have been around the general aviation industry for my whole life. My family is the industrvand I currently work in the industry. I have a good standing with the current businesses that are involved in the industry and I can see that the growth is coming fast and will be large. I have extensive experience Participating and coordinating commissions, counsels, and organizations and I think that I can bring a helpful approach that embraces change and helps to maintain the excellent state that the airport is currently maintaining. FebruaJry 16. 2006 Date ~rittany Wise Signature ~A' City Recorder 20 E Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 RE: Letter of Interest I am writing a letter of interest to be a commissioner on the Airport Commission. thave been around the general aviation industry for my whole life. My family is the industry and I currently work in the industry. I have a good standing with the current businesses that are involved in the industry and I can see that: the growth is coming fast and will be large. I have extensive experience participating and coordinating commissions, counsels, and organizations and I think that I can bring a helpful approach that embraces change and helps to maintain the excellent state that the airport is currently maintaining. Please take in to consideration my application and my interest for the commissioners position. I feel strongly and would represent the citizens of Ashland well. 'Brittany Wise ------------ _.__._-~-----y----- [ApriHu~s~ Ai~ort'CC~missio~er Application -~,- . -~:=".,,-'~~ _.:_~=-' -= _.~=_._--:=_~:=-~=._~~~- -~. ~_. Page -~J From: To: Date: Subject: "Brittany Wise" <bwise_27@msn.com> <christeb@ashland.or.us> 2/1612006 4:54:12 PM Airport Commissioner Application RECEIVED f: I~ L. LJO Dear City Recorder: Please accept the following attachements as my application and letter of interest for the vacancy of an airport commissioner on the Airport Commission. Kind Regards, Brittany Wise -~-~--- .- CITY Of ASH Li\.N D Council Communication Authorization to Enter into a land Purchase Agreement Meeting Date: Department: Contributing Departments: Approval: March 21, 2006 Parks and Recreation Legal, Finance, Planning Gino Grimaldi ~O\. Primary Staff Contact: E-mail: Secondary Staff Contact: Estimated Time: Don Robertson robertsd@ashland.or.us Mike Franell Consent agenda Statement: Ashland Parks and Recreation, in conjunction with the City of Ashland, will purchase 2.57 acres of property located at T37, RIE, SI4CD, TLIOO for the use of a neighborhood park and affordable housing. Background: In 2002, Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission and Ashland City Council adopted the Open Space Plan. In 2006 the commission and council adopted the Trail Master Plan. Both the Open Space Plan and the Trail Master Plan recognize this piece of property as beneficial to the citizens of Ashland. Further, the location, size, and topography lend themselves to the use of a modest portion of the property for the purpose of affordable housing. The commission has reviewed this purchase and fully recommends it. Spending and budget authority has been approved by way of supplemental budget at the March 7, 2006, council me:eting. A signed contract will be presented at the meeting. Related City Policies: Open Space Plan and Trail Master Plan. Council Options: Approve entering into the contract for the purchase of the property Deny approval of the contract. Staff Recommendation: This parcel of land is identified in the Open Space Plan and the Trail Master Plan. It has been reviewed by the commission, which recommends approval. It will be suitable for a neighborhood park with an affordable housing component. The price was determined by certified appraisal as fair market. Staff recommends approval of entering into contract for the purchase of this property. Potential Motions: Move to authorize the contract for the purchase of2.57 acres of property at T37, RIE, SI4CD, TLIOO for the purpose of a neighborhood park and affordable housing. Attachments: None. r.l1 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Planning Action 2004-141 - Annexation and Zone Change (~ackson County Rural Residential RR-5 to City of Ashland Low Density Multi- Family R-2) for an approximately 10-acre parcel located on the east side of Clay Street, north of Ashland Street, at 380 Clay Street. Meeting Date: March 21, 2006 Department: Community Development Contributing Departments: None Approval: Gino Grimaldi ~~ Primary Staff Contact: Bill Molnar, 552-2042 bill@ashland.or.us Secondary Staff Contact: No0J'v'- Estimated Time: 2.5-hours V Statement: This item includes a public hearing on the Annexation, Zone Change and withdrawal from Jackson County Rural Fire Protection District 5 of an approximately 10-acre parcel located at 380 Clay Street. The Planning Commission first reviewed this application at a public hearing on February 8, 2005. Several issues and concerns were raised during Commissioner Discussion and public testimony, as well as in the initial Planning Staff Report. The site plan and overall layout of the project was substantially changed and the application returned before the Commission in June 2005. At its meeting of June 14, 2005, the Planning Commission granted Outline Plan and Site Review approval, as well as a Tree Removal Permit and an Exception to City Local Street Standards. The Findings, Conclusions and Orders of that decision are contained in the record (pages 14-24). Additionally, the Commission recommended approval of the Annexation and Zone Change request to the City Council. 8ackground: As noted above, the Planning Commission first reviewed this application at a public hearing on February 8,2005. Several issues and concerns were raised at that meeting and the application was continued in order to afford the applicant the opportunity to further research, evaluate and address those items. The issues needing further clarification are outlined in the Planning Commission minutes and described in a letter drafted by Staff to the applicant in February 2005 (see pages 73-75 - Council record). Significant changes to the layout of the project were made and brought back before the Planning Commission at their regular meeting on June 14,2005. Many of the revisions to the application 1 ,., were based upon a more accurate determination of the size and location of an existing wetland. Additionally, the amended plan addressed the retention of some large existing poplar trees as well as the retention of the original farm house residence. New information also elaborated upon potential transportation impacts and associated neighborhood connectivity issues, as well as the design and capacity of both on and off-site storm water detention and piped faciliti<::s. At the meeting of June 14,2005, the Planning Commission also evaluated the application's request for Annexation and Zone Change from Jackson County zoning RR-5 (Rural Residential) to City of Ashland zoning R-2 (Low density Multi-Family). The Staff Report addendum, dated June 14, 2005 (page 39-41 - Council record), describes a variety of factors that have been considered in determining the appropriate process and procedures for incorporating (i.e. annexation) additional residential land into the city limits. Applicable Ashland Comprehensive Plan policies and implementing ordinances are cited in the addendum. At the conclusion of deliberations on June 14,2005, a second motion was made to recommend to the City Council that they approve the request for Annexation. The motion passed by a five to three vote. Staff Recommendation: The Planning Commission recommended, by a five-to-three vote, that the City Council approve the request for Annexation. Staff recommends the Council approve the request for Annexation. The Council may consider attaching other conditions, which they deem relevant to meet the criteria for approval. Potential Motions: Move to approve the request for Annexation, Zone Change and withdrawal from Jaekson County Rural Fire Protection District 5 of an approximately 1 O-acre parcel located at 380 Clay Street. Move to approve the request for Annexation, Zone Change and withdrawal from J a(;kson County Rural Fire Protection District 5 of an approximately 10-acre parcel located at 380 CIlay Street with the attached following conditions. Move to deny the request for Annexation, Zone Change and withdrawal from Jackson County Rural Fire Protection District 5 of an approximately I O-acre parcel located at 380 CJlay Street. Attachments: The record was attached as part of February 21,2006 Council packet. 2 Aletha Lundblad 2165 Birchwood Lane Ashland Oregon 97520 541-488- 3291 Ashland City Council Ashland, OR 97520 February 20, 2006 RE: Proposed multi-family units at 380 Clay Street Dear Council Members: I am concerned about the amount of building in the Clay Street area. I live next to the future Ace Hardware store and the 4 4-plexes, which wiill house 16 units. If all of these people, along with the normal amount of traffic on Clay, enter Ashland Street on the over ramp, I think it will create a problem. Presently it is already a dangerous intersection; with the slope of the over-ramp it is difficult to see oncoming traffic. Several times I have almost been rear-ended while waiting on Ashland Street to make a left-hand turn on Clay. Cars come up the ramp too fast and aren't ready t-o see a stopped car waiting to turn left. Possible we need a left-hand turn lane there with arrows. I would like to see more area for the wet lands. Could we have fewer houses and more space for greenways, etc? If you want to improve the lower Clay area why not make a walkway to enter the bike path? Either we have to Tolman Creek Rd or to Walker St to access the path. SinCe~eIY, .... .I-li ~??JlP/; Aletha Lundblad Citizen Speaker Request Form Please complete this form and return to the City Recorder. THIS FORM IS A PUBLIC RECORD ALL INFORMA nON PROVIDED WILL BE MADE A V AILABLE TO THE PUIBLlC SUBJECT: Meeting Date: 2,..- 2.1 PI"~Vll ~ ~"ho ~ '2.001- 14- I AGENDA NUMBER (if on tonight's agenda): vII FF-I LAND USE HEARING (Please check one): FOR: AGAINST: >< 4f- III ,,",": ..IJ.'~Jn-Uis"BMAlL ~11"~ r-Q..Q,/tIt,~(J()<-o ~v ~.f' -' ,':},..... --.,., , , " . WRITTEN COMMENTS: vv'1~~ t; p{-t.a d "'lit l~ I S'ow lll\t ~ I t:l q.o~ d~ ,^,'h.'~I~ ."" A->,^ltc.-""J . It- ~,-t S~J I Iov + --tr..Je.. P~ft\) SO 111;\JA.~{ V^~t> I '" ~() ~ I <<1 ~ d""'....~~ lL.{fcc.t T4 Q..V\.-l-\~ ~V"<it.C\ . Ad. J It, ~...p 1 re f)'" ,,, / >1 J< ""~~S .,...., botz... ~l.l..e.S" ~ >-rl&e..-t; ~eQ.W\ Vft"~(~~5t:1t"'7' """''^'J T4 ~ V'CoII,t 4r r~V\'.e.d -CIII/' ~ vJ,~~ S P r(:..AJ ~""'~" ",.~ _ 'P(~ge IF YOU WISH TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL: 1. Please complete this form and return it to the City Recorder. 2. Address the City Council from the table podium microphone. 3. State your name and street address for the official record. 4. Please limit your comments to 5 minutes, unless otherwise instructed by Mayor. 5. If written documentation is presented, please furnish one copy to the City Recorder for the official record. IF YOU WISH TO SUBMIT WRITTEN COMMENTS TO THE CITY COUNCIL: 1. Please complete this form and return to the City Recorder. 2. Written comments will be part of the official record. t~ te'h~, J~v I j , 1 q W"'fA.. "fl^t. IV """ lot, , (.. '" 11'\ \ -r C; 1://1 'w~ d. . ~1~ - - _.-.._------------- - ._---~- ( ,'4- ~ ' SfJ2 "'-~ 4 71M--t T 2 - 2- \ Pl~ A-c~~ 2ool/ - IlJ I A ~0~G0,- V / I -=Ff I t-~-f~ \' . AJ~-( ><- n . f) r. - - ~ c l~ 1 7 / L/ l/- V'-. _ 3Z(cl~~ i=t 1( L/ ~ ~ I 4 i) 7 :J 5 c "'--e I'Z. ~ /-ALo ( C~ . k)r~~ C~__~ _ / {!. ~ ~ /I2e+ ~ Ilz /."a..-, -{ r ~ IL~ VhV1 P1A-"-c~ cl...~lVt91r~ 7('~ 0-33 L~ Avc-~ .<--'6~~ V( u~f~'b ~ frMA-vv'( A~<,- ~ ~A-tu f~~1 <J1.~. -.. --- .---------r--- 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,ed. 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 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) SITE R~VIEW 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 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 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 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. Suchhmitigation 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 employed 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 me this 3L day of /lCUf ' 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\AFFID.AVIT 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: 8OOn35-2900 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 distuIbing 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(~ disturbing 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: 800/735-2900 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: 541-1488-6006 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: aoon35-2900 www.ashland.or.us 7~ -m- ASHLAND TREE COMMISSION PLANNING APPLICA nON REVIEW Applicant: D & A Enterprise Date: February 3.2005 Address: 380 Clay 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_ _____~_____ _ __-----,-_______ 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 10-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.tT1 Ommen <wotT1 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 > ~ ~ .>'') , ,\, . . ..,,",, ..- \ ''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 ~ ~ / ;/ 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 \ !,/, ~-- --~- 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 \ } { / ----.-----~ I' / / / /'4 / \ \ I I I (---.~-, / Ii Ii /$ Ii ) ) RJ:7CEI ~D (\ ----- / / /'<4. / / /('0 / / / - ~C- <! __--I ___~ I, r--.--/ _ _------j ___./ ~./ IJA Y 1 . Z 005 .- 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 l.! I \.J \ L-.\ \ L-1 1\ -j i.. i_r" I L___ I \ \ rl ~ ----. '--L I · I I 1 I \. 1\' \ L_J \.J _! __c r.J l.1.J i--' ~ L"\ ) /\\ ~-"-~-"-"C--"C- ..,...........~...."T---------c-c~.-~__----.-------c~f~ \ \ \.--- /,~;f:/.'I ". . >J '>j:.< '.. " I \L, \ /----::.\ ....".< J' ..!. ", "., . 'I . " ..' '. , ...'.. ,... '. ( \ \ \---21 /<'/'.....'.,.....,..........'/J/-------L-/. .~----~-L_-~~~"C--~~~~L_c. L-~ 1./".:....,...'"......,'."..,.'"., - r'--~ _ I L r- . f/ . . r . I . 1__ ..,/..l'.,.'....' /' It LJj ilL L, r L:1 I Irl --I /.,,' .,.'\,'.. ',.'.,...,/ \ . \ ' I I , '1' ! J "_1 fL /. ...,.;. / i-I ' ! '.-1 I f I ' .,...'...',... r....,"..../ i I___J J U I ;---1; I..J " / ,n: I i I ; 1 L_J I r I I, --- I 1 \1) r-L, . IL, \r--L, , r-, ') ri I '/ ( \ 1\ r--j I ,,) I I n ~ n I -~""), 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 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= ....~ 1:1 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 --------,----... - 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 tlus 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 St. 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 St. right turn lane. 66.7 sec. - projected year 2024 with project and southbound Clay St. 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 were restricted to right turn in and right turn out, the following levels of service can be obtained for Clay St. and Ashland St. (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 St. right turn lane. 59.9 see projected year 2024 with project and southbound Clay St. 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 IC "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 S1lll1Ill3l'y ........................... ... . .. .. . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . , , .. ... .. . ... ... . .. ... ... , . .. 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 IINTERSECTION 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 NIA 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 Turn" 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 vehides 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 '1 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 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 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> iL-- ~"' 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.\VED MAY 1 6 2005 C", ,-: r" ,.-,' ,~,.,~..., y,t 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.~~ 0 replenished as necessary to maintain a 6-inch depth. l" ..... I gz; MAY 1 6 2005 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 2005 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": if'.....' , "-: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: 2/2..1 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 2005 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 .- c.0 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 ..... I'- N LO ..- [!? {g o ~ (JJ 2 ~ Q) () v I- o o c.. "C o o Cl ,-.. c;; > o E Q) .:- ..- ..- I'- V o N III '(3 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 ('l') ('t) N ('l') !!! ~ (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 ('t) ..... N [!? .{g e ~ (JJ .g Q) () ..- ..- I- ~ "C o o 01 LO I'- a> 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) () ('l') ..- ..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,'-".'- ....: '. - C.'"\ <:~.: .". " , '. 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: Q.Q. 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 ta 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) :E: ::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 = = .......-:) C"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 ./ 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 2005 1~1 P,O. Box 671 . 324 Terrace Street. Ashland, Oregon 97520 · (503) L188-1061 COt. 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 2005 /f~ C. J,\ .1: t> ,~r . ~ : ~ ,..J 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 2005 Cj}'l .":!" ~.~ .'......d ,.. l Ci ; 0"'; ,/_.1 j .J /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 - ,jl/,''l' .-::a'it. . I 1"' o' lire 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/,j. ~f, /1 ( ('.,"\..' - '-': ~ ~. ./ ...... \(' ", · \\~, 1_,.-, I~ijf \"'I\~ ( ~J)J~~~- . · · II ~ c::? ",,1 \. · :,)1(. ~~'~~I\,,\\\~~~r1(QrJ/~'-~-- ~~' ~.- ~:' 1;~~:I'I' . '. ~": ~~ I ~ A ~\.. 'j. ~ 1 ' -......1 ' :'l '~, Il' - ,r, ~~\~ r((}.~\ s\: i' · ~~~ )i;) If I, '" . ~ ~' · 'j, f':'~,:~r':l~\O ~ · 3I}/,;))))~0~~~~"~{(~~)t~~\\tr~l~ "~~'t;;,,, Y(I,~~~ · '.I! " ','.<":;E;J i'.,., t I ~j~ \\ \ \::'7 '( .\ '\ "'.; , /"'0.. \\\ ~"\~ POiJ // It :;-.: · 'J I r~~ "" 'J. ~~ ,\11~ ()" ' l;' ''''- ';f~~ ~. . f' "I ~'. . ~~'~I~ ~\' 1\." ~.\"~~I 1Y)~ l~~ ~ \ ~\~I '\ ~--. ' · ~)~ ,,-' t ~)~ ~ '3'~ ~ ~~ ~ \ nil I ~ ~ D. . <0 tr.: ",:,!,'~';':--' '(j{; }J~A~ ,~. ~ W0\~" ~(~ "< :::~~/~~)) v) Ip k . [- _.' :,. /1 i , )/'~~v.,r/ ,"~I f/~~~~~~ ~~~~ ~~r:v/" I. ~ ~~ "~'. '/'/ ///'--11 ~ ,/,v 7,,/~ .,(1 III ~~\ 1\ ~~~'~;:>V/, \ li ( ~ ~ ~:\ - --.. . II). Q . ~ ~~~!(/J ~~~~ ~ \~\~~ ~~( ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~~~ ,~ ,.lr!'~' "0 -' ~ . ~~ ~'l10~~~~((\\),i:>)\)\~~,i] lTJIj)(( /W~/~:,~ "'\\(~" !" ~ '.::' I~~ !"t'/! , ~~- ~ ({'\\) ~)J)(. '111/1(/1)) ~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 pro 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 nw.r1 ~ 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' ~ . . '1,11}~:,~~/tm~~ ,60'lmE~:-.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~'-~ .. ,r- .. 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.. - " ... i 400 Feet "T March 6, 2002 \CKSON COUN-ry AR E.A, OREGON, PAR -r s OF JACKSON AN() K LAMAT r-i CO U N1 Soils Map ..:\~. /::i.. 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 .) ~: .,"'",- . . ~ ':,' ,~' '~, /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.!) 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~ fl, ? 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 ~ .pt" lo9l.J~ r- I ~~~ r--~~ ~~' . . : CE""'~lh ~.~," ~,;=~1F\;,'J'--:-.' --'. 1\.1. ~" ?~. R'~ : ~ ~ ...__:...,.0 ~l " . . I "I....'Voi/.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 I.U.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~\" \: ~ .' ~'-.: . .~ ./ ~ :" ~ " , ," . ,~ . ~ · ~ 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 , ~,-. ~~~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 110 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 _U______ -.'--- 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: :.:> --, ~ IU11.___.- :-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 ])e.ay. 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~~) ,^^a\l\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 CDVV\,e we So-, <t~\e ~ f,es::\(ve. -rV\lS \,tI/\L~U.e.- Ctt~!\Wl) ~~":Wl~\e:> are- t\.\e e.ye.e\~ >\.Je ?~-opert~. 0\1\ ~rJ\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 cle\Je\e~vV\ev\t) ~ 1-\\Q. D \~ fa\" W\ oV\ C\~~ s+ I \ . ~\ VKe~~ e.\l--\ ') nZlAI~~ 1 )1~~1 (1jJ)).- 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) t.f' '5/C; ...-I'S of 01 SfFatlsr" ol'L L~I 71€S n~ ot3e.hD<J S I. (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 fl'OClI\, 010.-0 ~ to ~~ .: '1/ ~~ \ ~~'QQferrD .IIEM:M! ~~ , ~ MJIIP'f. ~ .- ill rlMi.!.MJf t41 ~0Ut.al POMr MNfOH 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.~' n.~ tr1.C\lCUl!'. . !~ -~~ .0DC:l0 - - "=: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 fW' ~~ 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 .. irii8tihMA. '(a: ..=-~ qq:~.' (~ ~ ~~ j~ OFf ~ 17'1:1 ':.==:m~ 'a.L~* H:LUOID"'e.w !J 1MI Page 3 of 3 {it ~ . ~... r--.-------..---.-..--.-..~.--~.-----.----_:_ - -- .....- .-~,-----.-- ....---..-"'------.---- _----.._--,-.--,,- . '_'~"___ ______ ---------.-c-...--- >>_'_ _ _' ___._____ .._....__._________~-.--_: -----:----...,.__-.-_.___... ._ I Amy Anderson - 380 Clay T ree Statefl'~r. ') - Wildman.doc .. . . ...... ............ .. . Pag, ~._._--------_._._--_. , ------- ~JI J ~ . ITTfT~ :~' _~.~;-~ ~ _ ~TI TTfLrrlr T.Lf T.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..~~ _u__ ~____""~-----.-_' .---- . 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.$/!.IC. ....,,,.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: ~('L&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 ~__ 0 /~,- Soil Volume: Good;8( Ave. 0 Poor 01) ~ ~ ~~..vr:'I.~ctduI'::d.6~4L- ObstruCtions: &;;~dub~ 49~~~<-/~~IA0~b/tum oLspdS 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 -a 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-{.,t,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'~/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 a,lIow 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 Iless 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) ~~~ -----------,-------- --- 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 1? (;;' 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. If you 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. -----,---.. CITY OF ASH Li\.N D Council Communication Meeting Date: March 21 , 2006 Department: Legal ~~ Contributing Departments: (fU - , Approval: Gino Grimaldi ALUO 18.68.050 Interpretation '/L Primary Staff Contact: Michael W. Franell ,;rr- E-mail: franellm@ashland.or.us ./ / r Secondary Staff Contact: E-mail: Estimated Time: 30 minutes Statement: Councilor Hartzell requested that this item be placed on the Council agenda for a Council review of the interpretation issue. The legal department issued an opinion that in regards to the 20 feet front yard setback set forth in ALUO 18.68.050, there is not any interpretation to be made as the language in the ordinance is clear and unambiguous. Therefore, if the Council is dissatisfied with the way in which 18.68.050 applies on unspecified arterials, it can give staff direction to have the Planning Commission work on an ordinance to change ALUO 18.68.050 to read as the Council desires. Background: In connection with the proposed Northlight project on the old Copeland Lumber site, the legal department was asked to review and give an opinion on the application of ALUO 18.68.050 to that particular project. ALUO 18.68.050 reads: To permit or afford better light, air and vision on more heavily traveled streets and on streets of substandard width, to protect arterial streets, and to permit the eventual widening of hereinafter named streets, evelY yard abutting a street, or portion thereof, shall be measured from the special base line setbacks listed below instead of the lot line separating the lot from the street. Street East Main Street, between City limits and Lithia Way Ashland Street (Highway 66) between City limits and Siskiyou Boulevard SetbClck 35 fel9t 65 fel9t Also, front yards for properties abutting all arterial streets shall be no less than twenty (20) feet, with the exception of the C-1-D district. Attached is a copy of the legal analysis provided to the planning commission in August 2005, outlining thl3 issue and the relevant sections of the code. Colin Swales is asking the Council to interpret this provision to say that all lots fronting along arterial streets, regardless of whether that frontage is front yard, side yard or rear yard. Currently, as you can see, ALUO 18.68.050 indicates that front yards for properties abutting all arterials shall be no less than twenty (20) fElet, with the exception of the C-1-D district. Since the ordinance specifically refers to front yards, and "front yards" am defined in our code, we are bound to apply the 20 feet front yard only to those properties which have front yards along arterials. Related City Policies: None. r;., Council Options: If Council desires to expand the 20 feet setback to apply to all yards fronting arterial streets, the ordinancH would need to be amended to so read. The Council can leave the ordinance as written, realizing that only those properties with front yards along arterials will have the 20 feet yard set back. Staff Recommendation: None. This is a policy choice. Potential Motions: I move the Council direct staff to submit this issue to the Planning Commission for their recommendation on an ordinance change applying the 20 feet minimum yard requirement to all yards fronting along arterial streets. I move the Council not direct staff to submit this issue to the Planning Commission. Attachments: Legal Memorandum dated August 23, 2005. r~' CI1~Y OF ASHLAND Memo DATE: TO: FROM: RE: August 23,2005 Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council Mike Reeder, Assistant City Attorney Response to Colin Swales' Issues Concerning the Northlight P A #2005-00084 The purpose of this memorandum is to respond to the issues raised by Colin Swales in his recent emails to the Legal Department and to the City Council dated August 18,2005, August 19, 2005, and August 22,2005. Issue #1: Effect ofa Lot Line Adjustment on the Front Yard ReQuirement of ALVO 18.68.050. Please see pages 2 and 3 of the applicant's "Additional Applicant's Response to Planning Action #2005- 00084 Northlight Project" dated August 12,2005. In his August 18, 2005, email.Mr. Swales asks us if it is accurate to state that". .. the City Attorney is in agreement with. .." the applicant's "interpretation" of the effect of a boundary line adjustment as proposed by the applicant. Mr. Swales states that the applicant's "solution"} to the front yard setback requirement of ALVO 18.68.050 "seems to be an obvious end-run around the meaning and intent of our City's laws..." However Mr. Swales, or the applicant, choose to characterize it, the applicant's proposed boundary line adjustment is allowed by the code. ALVO 18.76.140, "Lot Lill(~ Adjustments." Mr. Swales is correct, that to date, the applicant has not yet received approval of a lot line adjustment from the City. We agree with the applicant's reading2 of the effect of the boundary line adjustment as proposed. Please refer to our earlier memo, dated May 27,2005 which discusses the applicability of ALVO 18.68.050 to the application as originally proposed. Section 18.68.050 requires every yard abutting a street listed by the ordinance to be measured from the special base line setbacks (35 feet for East Main Street, between City limits and Lithia vVay, and 65 feet for Ashland Street between City limits and Siskiyou Boulevard). Therefore, all yards, including front and side yards, abutting the listed streets are subject to the "special base line setbacks" standard. Lithia Way is not listed as a street subject to the "special base line setbacks," and is therefore not subject to 1 This is the applicant's characterization of the effect of adjusting the lot lines of the two parcels of the subject property. 2 The applicant calls this an "interpretation" of the code. However, this is not an interpretation, but rather a plain language reading of the code. Interpretations are made when the code language is ambiguous. Here the language is clear and therefore need not be "interpreted." PG&E v. BOLl, 317 Or 606 (1993). CITY OF ASHLAND 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 Michael W. Franell, City Attorney Micheal M. Reeder, Assistant City Attorney Sharlene P. Stephens, Legal AssistanVClaims Manager Nancy Snow, Legal Secretary ~~, _..._..~.._._-_._------_._-_._._---_.._._...----.-- these particular requirements. The applicant's property is subject to the last sentence ofthe ordinance as discussed below, but only if the subject property has afront yard abutting Lithia Way. Section 18.68.050 requires front yards for properties abutting arterial streets to be at least twenty feet, with the exception of the C-I-D district. Therefore, properties abutting arterial streets must have a twenty-foot setback for front yards. However, properties with yards, other thanfront yards, abutting arterials are not subject to the twenty-foot requirement. Regardless of the effect of such a reading of the code, we are required to give effect to the plain language of the code. We cannot substi1ute language to fit a policy objective. The fact that the drafters of this ordinance required a special base line setback for every yard for specifically selected streets, and a 20-foot front yard "setback" for arterials is evidence that the drafters intended to impose a "setback" of 20 feet for only front yards abutting arterials. This requirement may only be changed legislatively and may not be "interpreted" away by the Planning Commission. In order to determine whether a lot has a front yard (making the applicant's property su1:~ect to the 20- foot yard requirement), we must look at the code definition for "front yards." Section 18.08.840 defines the "front yard" as: A yard between side lot lines and measured horizontally at right angles to the front lot line from the front lot line to the nearest point of the building. Section 18.08.420 defines "front lot line" as: In the case of an interior lot, the lot line separating the lot from the street other than (m alley. A corner lot shall have one (1) street line considered the front lot line. The narrower street frontage shall be the front lot line except when the Staff Advisor determines topographical or a:ccess problems make such a designation impracticaL The lot in question is a comer lot. See ALva 18.08.370. Therefore, the definition of "front lot line" for a comer lot applies to this application. With a lot line adjustment, the applicant will have a narrower street frontage on a non-arterial street (First Street), thus, making the yard abutting Lithia Way a side yard. Since the front yard, under the proposed application, is on a non-arterial street, th(~ twenty-foot front yard requirement of ALVa 18.68.050 is not applicable. Issue #2: Policy Considerations Although Mr. Swales has argued that the proposed lot line adjustment is an "end-run" around the "meaning and intent" of ALVa 18.68.050, the proposed application meets plain language of our ordinance. As stated above, state law requires us to apply our ordinances to give effect to the plain language of the ordinance. Weare not at liberty to substitute words in the ordinance. The Planning Commission has no authority to consider the motivations ofthe applicant. We stated in the May 27, 2005, memo, "[w]e cannot read more into the ordinance than already exists." In that memo we explained that the 20-foot front yard requirement of ALVa 18.68.050 applied to the su1:~ect property because at that time a front yard abutted an arterial. The applicant argued that the ordinance did not 2 CITY OF ASHLAND Legal Department 20 East Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 www.ashland.or.us Tel: 541-488-5350 Fax: 541-552-2092 m: 800-735.2900 Michael W. Franell, City Attorney Micheal M. Reeder, Assistant City Attomey Sharlene P. Stephens, Legal Assistant/Claims Manager Nancy Snow, Legal Secretary ~~, " apply because our code did not require a front yard in C-1 zones and that since the ordinance omitted the C-1-D zone from the special setbacks ordinance, the 20-foot front yard "setback" should not apply to the subject property. The applicant's attorney argued that the "Downtown area's purpose is to 'enhance the appearance. . . of the areas' and that new proposals be 'in context with their historic surroundings. ' Downtown areas do not historically or normally include front yards or setbacks from the street or sidewalk." See applicant's attorney Alan Harper's June 20,2005, letter in response to our May 27, 2005, memo. Just as we declined to allow the applicant's policy considerations sway our interpretation of ALva 18.68.050 in our May 27,2005, memo, we decline to let Mr. Swales' policy arguments sway our plain language reading of the code. Issue #3: Review of the Lot Line Adiustment Mr. Swales, in his August 18,2005, and August 22,2005, emails also challenges the ability of the applicant to pursue a lot line adjustment. He cites ALva 18.76.140, "Lot line Adjustm{mts," apparently for the proposition that the lot line adjustment as proposed is changing the number oflots from 7 to 2. However, there are only two lots of record on the subject property. See Surveyor's Map P-98-1990, R.S. # 12197. The official survey map shows only two parcels. The fact that the Jackson County Assessor's map shows other tax lots is irrelevant. Land use law generally, and our code specifically (ALVa 18.08.350), regulate lots of record created by partition or subdivision, not tax lots as ascribed to property by the county assessor's office. It is common to have a single parcel created through th{: partition or subdivision ordinances that have been given multiple tax lots by the County. These tax lots are not legal lots but are used by the County for convenience. Therefore, the applicant's proposed lot line adjustment does not change the number of parcels of the subject property. According to the applicants, the three condominium tax lots are to be vacated by the County. This vacation procedure is not associated with the lot line adjustment. In short, the number of lots on the subject property will not change with the proposed lot line adjustment. Mr. Swales also asks the City Council to intervene and "instruct Staff to bring this important matter (that affects Ashland's future street plans and livability) before the full Planning Commission - under 18.76.050 - as a matter fully deserving their deliberation and discretion." However, the Planning Commission does not have the authority to review a lot line adjustment. Section 18.76.050 grants the Planning Commission authority to review certain partitions that create new lots. Lot line adjustments that do not create new lots are not partitions and are governed by ALva 18.76.140. Lot Line Adjustments are ministerial acts that do not allow review by the Planning Commission.3 ALva 3 Section 18.76.140, "Lot Line Adjustments," states: The adjustment of a lot line by the relocation of a common boundary, where the number of parcels is not changed and all zoning requirements are met, shall be accepted by the City, provided the requirements of Sections 18.76.090 through 18.76.130 are satisfied, in addition to Section 18.76.170, where the lot adjustment causes access to be changed to an exterior unimproved street. (Emphasis added). The language of ALVa 18.76.140 is prescriptive. Therefore, if the requirements of ALva 18.76.090 through 18.76.130 are met, City staff must accept the lot line adjustment. 3 CITY OF ASHLAND 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 Michael W. Franell, City Attorney Micheal M. Reeder, Assistant City Attorney Sharlene P. Stephens, Legal AssistanVClaims Manager Nancy Snow, Legal Secretary ~.t. 1 18.108.020(A)(5). Mr. Swales' plea for the City Council to intervene cannot legally be granted because our code does not have a procedure for review and because it is not a land use action. Issue #4: The Adequacy of the Parking Lot Easement This issue was previously discussed in the June 13,2005, memo to the Planning Commission, pages 4-5. The actual width of the easement at the boundary between the City parking lot and the applicant's property is slightly over 30 feet. It is difficult to respond to Mr. Swales' concern about the adequacy of the easement without further specific argument. G:\legal\Reeder\PLANNING\Northlight (Copeland)\PC Memo Northlight Response to Swales Issues 08-23-05.doc 4 CITY OF ASHLAND 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 Michael W. Franell, City Attorney Micheal M. Reeder, Assistant City Attorney Sharlene P. Stephens, Legal AssistanVClaims Manager Nancy Snow, Legal Secretary r~' CITY OF ASHLi\ND Council Communication Possible Formation of Library District Meeting Date: March 21, 2006 Department: Administration ~ Contributing Departments: n/a Approval: Gino Grimaldi . ~ Primary Staff Contact: Gino Grimaldi E-mail: grimaldg@ashland.or.us Secondary Staff Contact: none Estimated Time: 15 Minutes Statement: Ronnie Lee Budge, the Library Director for Jackson County, has requested time with the City Council to discuss the possible formation of a library district that would provide a stable source of revenue for the operation of libraries in Jackson County. If the city of Ashland would like to be included in the district, a resolution consenting to be included in the district would need to be adopted by May 17, 2006. The suggested election date for the formation of the district is November 7, 2006. Background: See Attachment I prepared by Jackson County Library Services. Related City Policies: None Council Options: The City Council may want to consider providing initial feedback regarding the creation of the formation of a library district and, if desired, direct staff to schedule consideration of a resolution consenting to the formation of district prior to May 17, 2006. Staff Recommendation: None. Potential Motions: None. Attachments: Attachment I - Background Information on Funding & Possible District Election for Ashland City Council Meeting r~' . ~J~~~s~g~ COUNTY Background Information on Funding & Possible Library District Election for Ashland City Council Meeting March 21, 2006 What do your libraries do? Jackson County libraries help us learn to find, evaluate, and use information we need for our jobs, health, and education. They enable us to make informed decisions about our self-governance by promoting unrestricted access to information. Librarians answer our questions about virtually anything and help us comprehend and navigate a vast web of electronic resources. Jackson County libraries foster in our children the habit of reading with story hours for pre-schoolers, outreach to daycare, summer reading programs, and award-winning educational programs for teens and children. They support a competitive workforce through basic skills information, improved literacy, and access to career- development resources. In short, Jackson County's 15 branches are community centers for lifelong learning. Branch librarians work closely with local schools, business leaders, and civic groups in keeping with the library's mission of strengthening the communities it serves by providing open and affordable access to ideas and information. More than 125,000 adults and children in Jackson County use their local community libraries every year, and the demand for materials, services, and longer open hours continues to grow. This year users will borrow 1.45 million items; ask 220,000 reference questions; attend 4,000 programs in library meeting rooms; and book more than 220,000 sessions on library computers. How are your libraries funded? The library's operating budget for 2005-06 is approximately $8 million, of which 94%, or $7.55 million, is from the Jackson County General Fund. The General Fund comprises many sources of revenue, some dedicated to particular programs or services. The two most significant sources of non-dedicated revenue are property taxes ($24 million), and Federal "O&C" payments through Public Law 106-393 ($16.9 million). Public Law 106-393 is due to expire soon. The final payment will be in October 2006 for the county fiscal year that ends June 30, 2007. The Board of Commissioners is diligently seeking re-authorization of these federal funds. If funds are not renewed, however, Jackson County stands to lose approximately 36% of its non-dedicated revenue. Non-dedicated revenue funds a broad array of public services in Jackson County. Some of these services are required by statute to be provided to citizens, e.g. public health/communicable disease control; assessment and tax collection; juvenile services; the district attorney; and the jail. Two services are entirely discretionary: Sheriff s patrol and public libraries. If the county loses nearly $17 million in Federal O&C revenue each year, it will be unable to continue funding its public: libraries and will need to make other reductions as well. All 15 library branches may need to close their dOlOrs unless another source of operating revenue can be secured. ----...------.-- _ --L..-._ February 4, 2006 Page 2 Is there an alterDlltive for funding your libraries? The Library Advisory Committee, a citizens committee appointed by the Board of Commissioners, has devoted the past ye:ar to exploring all options for keeping public libraries open. It has met with the Oregon State Librarian and other consultants with expertise in public library operations and funding. The Committee has learned that under Oregon law, there is only one way to ensure sustainable, long-term support for public library operations. That way is to ask voters to approve the creation of a "library district" and to ask voters to approve permanent, dedicated property taxes for library operations. What is a library district? A library district (like a fire district, vector control district, or patrol district) is a separate jurisdiction under Oregon law. What are the boundaries of a library district? Part of the process of creating a library district is to determine its boundaries. In this case, because we already have countywide library service, we believe that the library district boundaries should be exactly the same as the boundaries of Jackson County. However, Oregon law requires that before any city can be included within a library district, the city council must first pass a resolution to be included. Even if the city council passes such a resolution, the district cannot be created unless a majority of the voters in Jackson County say yes. How is a library district governed? There are two possibilities for governance under Oregon law. It can be created under ORS 451 as a "county library district" with the Board of Commissioners as the governing body. Or it can be created under ORS 357 as an independent district with an elected, five person governing board. How is a library district funded? When voters are asked to approve the library district, they are asked at the same time to approve a permanent property tax rate. This is expressed in dollars and cents per thousand dollars of Assessed Value. If approved, it becomes a new, additional property tax to be assessed annually. From that point forward, it is subject to the same limitations on growth as all other property taxes in Oregon. What tax rate willi be proposed? The Library Advisory Committee has not yet decided what tax rate to recommend. It is still seeking input from citizens about whether they wish merely to retain only the current, basic level of services and hours, or whether they want their libraries to be open longer hours with more books and more services. There's so much Ilew construction going on, doesn't this bring in more tax dollars for Jackson County? Oregon's Measure 50 property tax law, approved by the voters, limits the increase in Assessed Value on any given piece of property to 3% annually. New construction does increase the total Assessed Value in Jackson February 4, 2006 Page 3 County. However, if a new house is built today its Assessed Value is calculated as though it existed in fiscal year 1995-1996 less 10%, with a 3% increase each year after that. That means that currently only 57.5% of the value of new residential construction is added to the Assessed Value of the tax districts. With this new construction, the total Assessed Value in Jackson County has been growing by about 5% i.n recent years. We don't know what the rate of new construction will be in future, but ifit stays constant, the new valuation will represent a smaller and smaller portion of the total and the annual increase in Assessed Va.lue will trend towards the 3% limit. At the same time, O&C revenue grows by only half of the increase in the CPI each year. O&C revenue may all but disappear after the payment due in October 2006. How would a new property tax impact other jurisdictions' ability to levy taxes? There should be very little impact on the property taxes that other jurisdictions, e.g. cities" are currently authorized to collect. You may have heard the term "compression." Under Oregon law, no piece of property maybe taxed more than $10 per $1000 of Real Market Value for general government (all jurisdictions combined). If this limit is reached, it is called "compression," and each jurisdiction that gets a share of taxes from the property will receive a little less than it is otherwise entitled to. Note that Real Market Value is different from a property's Assessed Value. The Assessed Value cannot grow more than 3% each year (unless there is new construction on the property). However, a property's Real Market Value can increase (or decrease) in accordance with market conditions. Real Market Values in Jackson County are generally growing at a faster rate than Assessed Values. The Assessor has determined that there are very few pieces of property in Jackson County wh~:re compression occurs. While cities may be losing some money due to compression, the vast majority of properties in every taxing district have increased in Real Market Value to a point where the tax rates being considered for a Library District would not reduce the taxes that cities receive from those properties. When would the election for a library district be held? The suggested election date is November 7, 2006. If our city wants to be included in the library district, when does our City Council OIl~ed to approve? City resolutions should be adopted no later than May 17, 2006. A certified copy should be sent to the Jackson County Board of Commissioners. The Board will hold its first hearing regarding a district election in June. A sample city resolution is attached for your information. What if our City Council does not approve? The boundaries of the proposed library district will be drawn around any city that does not wish to be included. Residents of that city will not vote on the question of whether to create the distJict, and if the district passes, they will not be taxed for the district. By the same token, they will not be ,entitled to library services provided by the district and it is likely that the branch located within that city will close, unless a February 4, 2006 Page 4 contract or agreement is made to fund library services at that branch in some different manner. What would you like our City Council to do at this time? We would like to hear your questions, suggestions, and advice. The Library Advisory Committee expects to make a recommendation to the Board of Commissioners in April. We seek broad citizen input in order to craft a proposal that will be supported by a majority of voters. We expect to return to you in April or May to ask you to adopt a resolution to include your city in a library district if approved by the voters. Information prepared by Ronnie Lee Budge, Director, Jackson County Library and the Jackson County Library Advisory Committee 205 S. Central Avenue Medford OR 97501 541-774-8675 BudgeRL(a),i acksoncountv.org Sample City Resolution Approval of County Order RESOLUTION NO. Resolution Approving Jackson County Order to Initiate Formation of Library Distdct The City Council of the City of Finds: a. The Jackson County Commission intends to form a library district under the authority of ORS 357.221. A library district would have authority to fund improvements to library services for all county residents. b. The Jackson County Commission may initiate the formation of a library district by adopting an order under authority ofORS 198.835. The Commission would like to include all county territory within the boundaries of the library district. c. The territory of the City may only be included within the boundaries of the library district if the City Council adopts a resolution approving the County order initiating the formation of the library district. d. The City Council believes a library district will be able to better meet the needs for public library and informational services of all city residents. The City Council of the City of Resolves: The City of consents to the inclusion of all the territory of the City within the boundaries of the proposed Jackson County Library District, and approves the Jackson County order initiating the formation of that district. Adopted by the City Council of the City of th day of 2005. , Jackson County, Oregon this Attest: City of City Recorder By Mayor STATE OF OREGON ) ) ss County of Jackson ) I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the original resolution on file in the office of the City Recorder. City Recorder Draft 12-19-05 Thomas Sponsler ----.- James -.arai:ly ~lngtetary, PubrW>er Robert L Hunter, Editor Gary E. Nelson, Editoriall'a&e Editor Julie Wurth John N. Reid EDITORIALS Libraries hang in the balance = = - = N - ~ Sheriff's patrols could be threatened, too, if federal payments dry up Who'd spend nearly $39 million to build a county full of new librari~s and then close them all seven years later?. . It's a crazy idea but also a real possibility in Jackson County, which is facing the,potEmtial loss of more than $20 million a year - about halfits general fund - from the federal govern- ment by 2007. A story in Wednesday's Mall Tri- bune reported that library director Ronnie Budge has warned employeeS that their jobs will end ifthe county can't find a way to 'raise money to keep the libraries open. ' This isn't the last ofthe dire predictions we expect out of county government in the coming year, but even on its own it helps clarify the se- riousness of the problems the funding gap would cause. It would be exacerbated by the fact that some of the county's most obvious services - li- braries and sheritrs patrols are two examples - are not those that are required by law. They might seem like the basics, but the county will have to pay for others first. Jackson County can't do what it does today without the federal money, which comes here not as the juicy piece of pork some would make it out to be but as compensation for local losses of tax revenue on once-private land now con- trolled by the federal government. In 1916, the federal government took over ownership and management ofland that had belonged to the Oregon and California Rail- road. To compensate the 18 Western Oregon counties for lost property tax revenue, Con- gress agreed to split the proceeds from timber sold from the lands with the counties. That money, together with payments in lieu of taxes from national forest lands, gave the counties a steady source of income until fed- eral logging restrictions beginning in 1990 slowed the pace oflogging. Ifthe money stops coming, the pain will be immediate and it will be personal. We'll face requests from the library and from others for money to maintain a host of basic services. Oregon's congressional delegation has vowed to fight this to its end. A huge lobbying effort on behalf of Jackson County and others continues at the federal level. Yet many still believe that the writing's on the wall for the compensation program. The war in Iraq and a series of natural disasters are squeezing the federal budget and lending cre- dence to the idea that governments like J ack- son County can do without. Things look different here, the state's tourism slogan once alerted visitors. If Jackson County loses this federal funding, they really will. ~ ,Q 'J: E-4 :; ::e . .,;:}'Cua.II,,'II:;;;"UU.I.\....l.a..L3 ..&. Committee to confirm Judge Samuel AUto for the Supreme Court, presaging a similar outcome in the full Senate, certifies the depth of the diviSion between Republicans and Democrats on basic national policy. That reality shadows the start of this session of Congress and raises doubt about the government's ability to address any of the major challenges facing the country. The layoffs announced this week at Ford, coming aftertltose decreed earlier at General Motors and Delphi, spell out the threatto America's industrialbase~ Runaway health care costs for the automakers' retirees area tiigpart of the problem, but a COngress wracked by partisansJrlIi has been stuck in neutral on systemic health reform for over a decade. The same thing is true when it comes to Social Security, to energy and to the management of the federal budget Party-line votes in all these areas have become the basic pattern. Of28 votes in the House and Senate last year, I , WAC "''''''.:JO.l.V.I..l, .a....UJV.L .1.\0. parties opposed ~a( ~t seven. In the He subjects th; disagreeml immigratio cell researt and interre arms sales Central An Trade Agre (CAFTA), tI Species Ac the interve Commentary Terri Schia . IntheSe split on cla lawsuits, b: protection, CAFTA, the budget, defense energy and the nom Bolton to the Unitel The variety of sut the broad dimensio differences. They el cultural, economic: policy issues. The 01 of agreement betwe was on the big trans loaded with pork-b~ both Republicans a Overall, Congres~ reported that 2005 v most partisan years its record-keeping. David Broder LETTEJ Budgets cut, families hurt Anyone else read about the "budget bulge" in the paper and wonder what that means to the everyday worker? The gist was that the federal government's fiscal policy of running record- breaking annual deficits starting with the Bush administration will catch up with us in the form of higher prices, higher interest rates. It's a version of what goes around comes around. At the same time, one reads that when adjustedfor inflation, a single-income family in the early 1970s had as much discretionary incolJle!is the dual-income families of today. Close to twice as much total earnings with both spouses working now but much higher fixed costs. The tax cuts help the well-off more than the average folk. And I've yet to read a study that links these tax cuts with stimulating the economy in a significant, causal way. If the country is up to its ears in deficit spending that is likely fueling economic growth too. Current leaders say everything is fine, don't worry about deficits or tax cuts. But you decide if things are getting better or not for you and listen to who has ideas to help you out. Then decide who to support. -Steve Haskell, ~hland ... _ ~ _1_ I.!__ __ ft _ _ __ _!u c: .: S~~;.~~~:-.,.: ~~~~~~~ " .~ ~~~~ .' ,'. answer because a ~ properly brings Gc debate. That is not rigid scientific dog modern science WI examine both side scientist is against Mr. Sadler's care CITY OF ASHLi\ND Council Communication Revisions to Environmental Protection Agency Standards f:or Fine Particulate Matter Meeting Date: March 21 J 2006 Department: Administrationca Contributing Departments: n/a Approval: Gino Grimaldi :S' Primary Staff Contact: Gino Grimaldi E-mail: grimaldg@ashland.or.us Secondary Staff Contact: none Estimated Time: 15 Minutes Statement: The Environmental Protection Agency (EP A) has proposed new federal air quality heallth standards for fine particulate matter and inhalable coarse particulate matter. John Becker from the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality has requested time with the City Council to discUlss the proposed rules. Background: See Attachment I prepared by John Becker. Related City Policies: None. Council Options: The City Council may want to consider submitting formal comments regarding the proposed rules. The deadline for the submittal of comments to EP A is April 17, 2006. Staff Recommendation: None. Potential Motions: None. Attachments: Attachment I - Revised PM Standard Q&A r~' Revised PM Standard Q&A EP A Fine Particulate Proposal The Environmental Protection Agency (EP A) has proposed new federal air quali1ty heath standards for fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and inhalable coarse particle matter (PMlO- 2.5)' EP A has proposed keeping the current annual PM2.5 standard the same (at 15 ug/m3), but lower the daily (24-hr average) standard from the current 65 ug/m3 to 35 ug/m3. Overall, Oregon has had a long and successful history of meeting the challenge to reduce air pollutants. Under the proposed standards, most of Oregon will remain in compliance, however some areas like Klamath Falls and Medford may have trouble meeting a lower PM2.5 standard. We will need to wait for EP A's final action before knowing what areas in Oregon are potential new nonattainment areas. Oregon will likely have a number of areas on the borderline of a new PM2.5 health standard, so 2006 will be a time to engage with these communities on pollution prevention. Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) staff are tracking this proposal and will work with other western states to evaluate and respond to EP A's proposed revision. Some Q&A Why has EP A adopted new standards? The Clean Air Act requires EP A to review and revise air quality standards at least once every five years to ensure that they protect the public from air pollution. The Ckan Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) has reviewed hundreds ofthe most recent medical studies and believes that current standards should be strengthened to better protect the public from short-term fine particle exposures. EP A is required, under consent decree, to complete its review of the PM standard. EP A must propose a revised PM rule by December 20, 2005 and finalize it by September 27, 2006. What is PM (particulate matter) and how does it affect me? Particulate matter comes mostly from smoke from fuel combustion (large and small engines, home heating, construction equipment, etc.), some industrial processes, motor vehicle and truck exhaust, and wind-blown dust. PMlO refers to particulate matter 10 microns in diameter and smaller, whereas PM2.5 refers to particulate matter 2.5 microns in diameter and smaller. (The average strand of human hair is 70 microns in diameter.) Health studies over the past decade show that there are harmful effects from breathing PMlO particles and additional harmful effects from breathing particles measuring less than 2.5 microns in diameter (PM2.5). This size fraction is inhaled deep into the hmgs and can lodge there for weeks and months, aggravating asthma, heart disease, and other circulatory and respiratory conditions. 2/15/06 What are the revised standards? EP A has proposed new standards that address primary health standards as well as secondary welfare standards. Primary Health Standards EP A has proposed to lower the daily (24-hour average) PM2,5 standard about 46%, from 65 uglm3 to of 35 micrograms per cubic meter (uglm3) and to retain the current annual average standard of 15 micrograms per cubic meter. EP A has also proposed to eliminate the current PMlO standards and replace them with a new standard that focuses on the coarse particles that are between PM10 and PM2.5. This new standard is known as PMcoarse or PMlO-2,5. The PMlO-2.5 standard will have a 24-hour average concentration of 70 micrograms per cubic meter. EP A proposes to limit this standard to "urban" areas only, specifically where PMlO-2,5 comes from high-density traffic on paved roads, industrial sources, and construction activities. PMlO-2.5 from rural windblown dust and soils and agricultural and mining sources would be excluded. EP A is not proposing an annual standard for PMlO-2,5, due to a lack of scientific evidence showing significant public health risks associated with long-term exposure to coarse particles. Secondary Welfare Standards In addition to the proposed primary standards, EP A has also proposed secondary standards to protect the public welfare such as crops, vegetation, wildlife, buildings and national monuments and visibility. However, for both PM2.5 and PMlO-2.5, these levels are identical to the primary standards. What Oregon communities might be affected by the new standards? Most of Oregon should meet the new standards, however, some communities may have trouble and be classified as nonattainment based on the proposal. Because there is still a public process that EP A has to go through before finalizing the rules, the propos(:d standard could change. Therefore, DEQ cannot say with certainty which specific communities will be in nonattainment. Areas that have had problems in the past include Klamath Falls, Medford, Eugene/Springfield, and Oakridge, and these areas are again at risk of non attainment under EP A's proposal. Attainment determinations will depend on EPA's final standards and the years they choose for monitoring. At this time, it appears that EP A is planning on using 2004-2006 for PM2,5. 2/15/06 What does this mean for Oregon? Over the past twenty years, Oregon has invested in strategies to reduce particulate matter. These strategies have significantly reduced both PMlO and PM2.5. Ifwe have area.s that are in nonattainment, we will likely need to further reduce sources of smoke and dust, such as open burning, transportation, industrial sources and woodstoves. According to EP A's PM2.5 implementation timetable, Oregon will use monitoring data from 2004-2006 to make initial PM2.5 nonattainment area recommendations to EP A. Following any new PM2.5 designations, Oregon will develop plans to reduce the emissions of fine particles and any new nonattainment areas will have until 2015 to meet the new PM2.5 standard. The new PM10-2.5 standard represents a new approach for particulate measurement and regulation, and EP A must start with fundamentals such as developing a standardized monitoring approach. For PMlO-2.5, EP A has proposed a new federal reference method to measure it. Once that monitoring method is finalized and in place, Oregon will have to collect three years of monitoring data, currently expected in the 2009-2011 timeframe. Any nonattainment areas designated under the PMlO-2.5 standard will need to come into compliance by 2018. What will happen to the PMlO standard? EP A is proposing to revoke the current daily (24-hour average) except in specified areas, none of which are in Oregon. EP A recently published an advance notice of proposed rulemaking addressing implementation of the revised PM NAAQS (National Ambient Air Quality Standards). One important section of this proposal will address the transition from PMlO to the new PMlO-2.5 standards, including important anti-backsliding issues affecting existing PMlO strategies. Is the EP A accepting comments? Yes. Comments from the public will be accepted by EP A until April 17, 2006. Where can I get more information about the proposal? Visit EPA's website at: http://www.epa.gov!oar/particlepollution/actions.html For questions within Oregon, you may contact Rachel Sakata at 1-503-229-5659., or at 1- 800-452-4011, or at: http://www.SAKATA.rachel@deq.state.or.us Next Steps States will know EP A's final decision on the new standards in late 2006. EP A wiill then expect initial attainment and nonattainment area designations in 2007. If Oregon does have new PM2.5 nonattainment areas, DEQ will need to conduct the technical analysis and research work needed to understand the contribution of key emission sources and other 2/15/06 factors driving PM2.5 nonattainment. This fundamental research will provide the foundation on which to build an effective and equitable attainment strategy. In 2006, DEQ will be developing its budget for the next biennium, and will seek the resources needed for answering fundamental science and technical questions about PM2.5 as well as for working with communities on strategy development. In the meantime, DEQ and communities can start with the basics, such as updating local woodstove and open burning ordinances that are sensitive to the new PM2.5 standards. DEQ and community partners can also begin to develop the public's understanding of new PM2.5 issues and look for other opportunities for pollution prevention. States and federal budgets for particulate monitoring have been severely reduced. Funding for monitoring will likely be a critical issue that EP A will need to address as they roll out new standards for PM2.5 and PMIO-2.5. 2/15/06 CITY OF ASHL.AND Council Communication Chapter 15 Revisions and Additions Meeting Date: March 21, 2006 Department: Building Division, Community Development ~~ Approval: Gino Grimaldi, City Administrator and Bill Molnar, Interim Community Development Director Primary Staff Contact: Mike Broomfield E-mail: broomfim@ashland.or.us Secondary Staff Contact: Mike Franell E-mail: franellm@ashland.or.us Estimated Time: 30 Minutes Statement: The Building Division requests that revised portions of Ashland Municipal Code Chapter 15.04 be adopted. Revisions include 15.04.010 Code Adoption, 15.04.60 Excavation and Grading15.04.080 Unsafe Buildings, and 15.04.180 License Requirements for Heating and Cooling. Background: The City of Ashland has administered the Oregon Specialty codes through the statewide adoption process. In each code cycle (usually three years), new codes are adopted by the state and are effective in all jurisdictions. Additional portions of the parent codes may be adopted by local jurisdictions. This year, Oregon jurisdictions have adopted an entirely new structural specialty code based on the International Building Code. The option for local jurisdictions to adopt appendices (not adopted by the statewide process) to that code is available. Ashland properties continue to develop with many challenging code concerns. Many developments proceed with private streets, private utilities, and other common area improvements not regulated under public works policy. The building division currently regulates many of these systems through the building codes including trenching for utilities, retaining walls and other structures. To complete this regulatory process in a uniform manner, the adoption of Appendix J - Grading - of the International Building code is requested. Excavation permits generated by this process may include electrical, plumbing, and mechanical permits as needed (see exhibilts A & B). In addition to these permits, the grading and trenching will meet street standards imposed by the public works process as a seamless approval of public and privately owned access to the public way. Related City Policies: The City of Ashland has previously adopted Appendix Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building code which regulates excavation (not adopted by the State of Oregon). r;., Council Options: OPTION # 1: Include Appendix J of the 2003 International Building Code in revisions to update Ashland Municipal Code to the current Oregon Structural Specialty Code. OPTION # 2: Adopt revisions to update Ashland Municipal Code to the current Oregon Structural Specialty Code not including optional Appendix J of the 2003 International Building Code. Staff Recommendation: Adopt by resolution, the revised Ashland Municipal Code Chapter 15.04 for the City of Ashland Building Code Inspection Program. Provide a public hearing pursuant to ORS 294.160. Potential Motions: Attachments: Exhibit A r~' ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 15 (BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION) OF THE ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE ADOPTION OF OREGON SPECIALTY CODES. Annotated to show deletions and additions to the Ashland Municipal Code, Chapter 15. Deletions are lined through and additions are underlined. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Ashland Municipal Code Chapter 15 is amended to read: TITLE 15 BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION CHAPTERs: 15.04 BUILDINGS CODE 15.06 SOLID FUEL BURNING DEVICE REGULATIONS 15.08 MOVING OF BUILDINGS 15.10 FLOOD DAMAGE PREVENTION REGULATIONS 15.16 PLUMBING CODE 15.20 ELECTRICAL CODE 15.24 UNDERGROUND ELECTRICAL SERVICE 15.28 FIRE PREVENTION CODE 15.36 NUMBERING OF BUILDINGS Page 1 of 48 -----.---T- SECTIONs: 15.04.010 15.04.020 15.04.030 15.04.040 15.04.050 15.04.060 15.04.070 15.04.080 15.04.090 15.04.095 15.04.096 15.04.100 15.04.105 15.04.110 15.04.115 15.04.180 CHAPTER 15.04 BUILDINGS CODE Code Adoption. City Code Administration. Building Official Designated. Fire Zones. Agricultural Buildings. Excavation and Grading. Local Interpretation. Unsafe Building. Building Permits Generally. Building Permits--Required Street Dedications. Reimbursement for Street Improvements. Inspections Required. Barrier Removal Improvement Plans, Liens. Used Material-- Repealed by Ord. 2685,1992) Condominiums. License Requirements for Heating and Cooling or Ventilating Appliance Installations. 15.04.185 Heat Pumps and Mechanical Devices. 15.04.190 Underground Utilities. 15.04.192 Location of Electric Meters. 15.04.200 Board of Appeals. 15.04.205 Structural Specialty Code. 15.04.210 Demolition or Relocation of Structures. 15.04.212 Demolition Review Committee. 15.04.214 Approval Process. 15.04.216 Demolition and Relocation Standards. 15.04.218 Deleted 15.04.220 Mechanical Specialty Code Fee. 15.04.230 Violation-- Penalty. 15.04.240 Certificate of Occupancy. 15.04.250 Notice of Non-Compliance and Violation. ECTION 15.04.010 Code Adoption. The following codes are adopted as a part of this chapter and are further refe:rred to in this title as "the specialty codes". 1. 1993 Oregon Structural Specialty Code 2004 Oregon Structural Specialty Code as defined in Oregon Administrative Rule 918-460-010. 2. 1992 Oregon State Plumbing Speeialty Code 2003 Oregon Plumbing Spedalty Code as defined in Oregon Administrative Rule 918-750-010. 3. 1993 Oregon Mechanical Speoialty Code 2004 Oregon Mechanical Specialty Code as defined in Oregon Administrative Rule 918-440-010. Page 2 of 48 ----.- 4. 1993 Oregon One and Two Family Dwelling Specialty Code 2005 Oregon Residential Specialty Code as defined in Oregon Administrative Rule 918-480-000. 5. Eleetrieal Speeialty Code 2005 Oregon Electrical Specialty Code as defined in Oregon Administrative Rule 918-290-010. B. The following codes are adopted as a part of this chapter except those portions of these codes which conflict with or overlap the specialty codes. 1. 1991 edition of the Unifurm Code for Abatem.ent of Dangerous Buildings, as published by the International Conferenee of Building Offieials, 2003 International Existing Building Code as published by the International Code Council, a copy of which is on file with the Building Official. 2-:- 1991 edition of the Uniform Swimming Pool, Spa and Hot Tub Code, as published by the International Conferenee of Building Offieials, a copy of \'/hieh is on 15.le with the Building Official. ~ Chapter 70 oHhe f~ppendix ofthe 1991 edition of the Uniform B:ailding Code, as published by the Intematioaal Conference of Building Offieials, Appendix ~r of the 2003 International Building Code as published by the International Code Council, a copy of which is on file with the Building Official. (Ord. 1981 Sl, 1978; Ord. 2102 Sl, 1980; Ord. 2394,1986; Ord. 2442 S2, 1988; Ord. 2521 S2, 1989; Ord. 2685, 1992; Ord.2712, Sl, 1993) SECTION 15.04.020 City Code Administration. The City shall provide for the administration of a plan checking, permit and inspec:tion program for structural, mechanical, plumbing work and electrical work. This City program is applicable to public buildings, including state buildings, as well as private buildings. (Ord. 1825, 1974; Ord. 2685, 1992) SECTION 15.04.030 Building Official Designated. The City Administrator shall designate a City employee to carry out the functions and duties of the Building Official as described in the Oregon .J..9W 2004 Structural Specialty Code, unless such individual is a department head, in which case such designation shall be by the Mayor with confirmation by the City Council. Such person shall be state certified as a Building Official in all the codes adopted by this Chapter, and may delegate portions of responsibility as may be deemed necessary. Designation by the City Administrator of the Building Official shall be done in writing in a document filed with the City Recorder. (Ord. 1981 S2, 1978; Ord. 2685, 1992) SECTION 15.04.040 Fire Zones. (Repealed by Ord. 2712, S5, 1993) SECTION 15.04.050 Agricultural Buildings. (Repealed by Ord. 2685, 1992) Page 3 of 48 _____u_ ----.- SECTION 15.04.060 Excavation and Grading. (Repealed by Ord. 2685, 1992) SECTION 15.04.070 Local Interpretation. (Repealed by Ord. 2685, 1992) SECTION 15.04.080 Unsafe Building. (Repealed by Ord. 2712, S5, 1993) SECTION 15.04.090 Building Permits Generally. Permits shall be obtained as required by the specialty codes. General contractors shall obtain all permits for a given job at one time. No building permit that would result in the construction of new structures, or the enlargement or change in use of existing structures shall be issued prior to the presentation of an approved zoning permit to the Building Official by the applicant. Such zoning permit shall be issued by the Planning Director, or a designee, and shall verify that the contemplated project is in accord with all applicable zoning and planning regulations. It shall also set forth any special conditions to be met by the applicant prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or any other planning and zoning related conditions to be enforced by the Building Official. The issuance and continued validity of any building permit issued by the City of Ashland shall be contingent on compliance by the applicant with all applicable city, county, state, or other regulations. On properties or in areas designated to be of significant historical value or interest applications for building permits, not requiring review by the Planning commission pursuant to Title 18 of the Municipal Code, shall be referred to the Ashland Historic Commission for review and recommendations, who shall have a period of time not to exceed seven days to complete such review and recommendations. (Ord 1981 S6, 1978; Ord. 2037 S3, 1979; Ord 2685, 1993; Ord 2712 S2, 1993; Ord 2775 SECTION 15.04.095 Building Permits--Required Street Dedications. In issuing building permits for proposed buildings, dedication of abutting streets shall first be made to the City of Ashland as follows: A. Dedication of Streets--Public Need. Whenever a property owner requests a building permit, land partition or subdivision approval, and such proposed use of the land or division of the land causes a public need for increased street right of way, the property owner shall dedicate such additional right of way to the City of Ashland before approval is given for the subdivision, land partition or application for a building permit. In determining public need the following factors shall be considered: 1. Accommodation of increased traffic generated by the development; 2. The ability to provide traffic circulation to neighboring properties in order to make the most economic use of land, thereby fulfilling the intent of the City Page 4 of 48 Comprehensive Plan and State Planning Code; 3. The health, safety, and welfare of future residents of the area, if the area is developed through flag partitions or other piecemeal, irregular means, causing inadequate access; and 4. Such other factors as may be found relevant during consideration of a particular application. B. Dedication of Streets-- Width established. Whenever a property owner requests approval of a land partition, subdivision or building permit, and the property abuts on a street shown on Exhibit "A" attached to Ordinance No. 2012 which is hereby incorporated herein, and the street at that location is not dedicated to the widths requin.::d by Section 18.80.020(b) of this Code, approval of the application shall only be granted after the property owner has dedicated such required additional right-of-way to the City of Ashland. For purposes of this Section, all streets not designated on Exhibit "A" as arterial or collectors, shall be designated as minor streets. C. Dedication of Streets--New Streets. Whenever a property owner requests approval of a land partition, subdivision or building permit, and the property abuts on a planned street which has been adopted by resolution of the Planning Commission as a part of a precise street plan for an area, approval of the application shall only be granted aftelr the property owner has dedicated such required right-of-way to the City of Ashland. D. Setbacks. All setbacks required under Title 18 of this code shall be measured from the new right-of-way line established pursuant to Subsections A through C, above. (Ord. 2052 S6, 1979) SECTION 15.04.096 Reimbursement for Street Improvements. (Repealed by Ord. 2756, 1995) SECTION 15.04.100 Inspections Required. Inspections shall be called for and made as provided in the specialty codes. The general contractor will notify the Building Official when ready for inspections as listed on the inspection card. Inspections will be made within twenty-four (24) hours after notification, Saturdays, Sundays and Holidays excepted. Electrical permit inspections shall follow the Oregon Electrical Specialty Code requirement of 48 hours after written notice. (Ord. 1981 S7, 1978; Ord. 2088 Sl, 1980; Ord. 2712, S3, 1993) SECTION 15.04.105 Barrier Removal Improvement Plans, Liens. A. The Building Official may approve a Barrier Removal Improvement Plan authorized under ORS 447.241 when: 1. All requirements of that statute are met and approved by the building official; 2. The approval by the building official is made in writing together with the date of the approval; and Page 5 of 48 3. The value of the improvements required by the plan are entered into the city lien docket as provided in section 15.04.105.B or adequate security is deposited by the plan applicant as provided in section 15.04.105.C. B. Unless adequate security is deposited as provided in section 15.04.105.C, the value of the improvements required by the plan shall be chargeable as a lien upon the property subject to the plan. The city recorder shall enter in the city lien docket a statement of the: value of the plan improvements together with a description of the plan improvements, the name of the owners of the property and the date of the approval of the plan by the building official. Upon such entry in the lien docket, the amount so entered shall become a lien upon the property. 1. The determination of value for the plan improvements shall be made by the building official. Such determination shall include the value of all construction work necessary to accomplish the plan, as well as all finish work, painting roofing, electrical, plumbing, heating, air conditioning, elevators, fire extinguishing systems and any other permanent equipment. The value shall also include the cost of future inspections by the Building Official to determine if the plan is being or has been met. 2. Upon completion of the plan improvements, the building official shall certify to the city recorder that all improvements have been made. Upon such certification, the city recorder shall remove the lien on the property from the lien docket. 3. Upon partial completion of the plan improvements, the building official, when requested by the property owner or plan permittee, shall certify to the city recorder that plan improvements have been partially made. The certification shall state the value of improvements yet to be made and the city recorder shall amend the lien do(:ket to reflect such value. 4. If the plan is not completed according to its terms, the city may proceed to foreclose the lien in the manner provided by the general law in the State of Oregon for the collection of real property liens. No foreclosure suit shall be filed, however, unless the property owner is first given 30-days written notice specifying the nature of the incomplletion and an opportunity for the owner to complete the plan within such 30-day period. C. The plan applicant may provide adequate security in a sum equal to the value of the improvements required in the plan to secure performance of the plan in lieu of the lien described in section 15.04.105.B. Adequate security includes but is not limite:d to a surety bond furnished by a surety company authorized to do business in Oregon or an irrevocable letter of credit from a bank doing business in Oregon or such other security as the may be approved by the director of finance. SECTION 15.04.110 Used Material-- Repealed by Ord. 2685,1992) (Repealed by Ord. 2685,1992) SECTION 15.04.115 Condominiums. Structures being converted from multiple-family rental unit use to condominiums shall conform to State Code standards in effect at the time of conversion, and a building permit shall be obtained for such conversion. (Ord. 2035 S6, 1979) Page 6 of 48 SECTION 15.04.180 License Requirements for Heating and Cooling or Ventilating Appliance Installations. Chapter 2 ofthe State Mechanical Code is modified by adding the following sections: A. Any person, firm, or corporation desiring to engage in the business of appliance installing or altering, or repairing any gas piping system, burner, or heating or ventilating equipment within the City of Ashland shall obtain a license for doing so from the Building Division. It shall be unlawful for any person to engage in any activity described in this section unless such person, or the activity, as the case may be, is c:urrently and validly licensed hereunder. For the purpose of controlling the safety of appliance and materials, and controlling the competence and standards of workmanship in the installation and repair of all heating and ventilating equipment and/or gas piping systems within the City of Ashland, licenses shall be issued in the following classifications, to persons or firms who qualify as prescribed in the provisions of this code: 1. Heating, Cooling and Ventilation Installation Contractor. Any person, firm or corporation engaging in the business of installing, repairing, altering, or servicing any apparatus, or any gas piping system or any appurtenance thereto, shall obtain a "Heating, Cooling, and Ventilating Installation Contractor's License." The license also permits the sale of appliances, appurtenances, etc., and does not entitle the holder to perform the actual labor required to make the installation or part thereof unless further licensing for gas systems is required as prescribed by the code below. 2. Gas Fitter. Any person performing (for hire or otherwise) the labor or service of installing, altering or servicing any gas appliance, any appurtenance thereto, or any gas piping system, shall obtain, and be in possession of, a valid "Gas Fit1ter's License" as prescribed by this code. 3. State Liquified Petroleum License. A state LPG Fitter's License: shall be a prerequisite for any fitter performing work on any part of a Liquified P,etroleum Gas Fuel System or any appliance using Liquified Petroleum Gas. 4. Revocation of License. No person shall lend any license to any other person nor shall a licensed person, firm or corporation apply for a permit for use of any other person, firm or corporation. Any person, firm or corporation so doing, or refusing to comply with any other requests of this code, may have their license suspended or revoked by the Building Division in accordance with other provisions of this code. 5. License Fees. Fees for licenses and conducting examinations for licenses required under this chapter shall be set by resolution of the Council. All licensles to perform installations shall expire on the 31 st day of December each year unless revoked for cause. (Ord. 2664, 1992) B. Application for License. The Building Division shall qualify an applicant for gas piping as required in (a) herein, by conducting examinations, which shall be designed to determine applicant's knowledge of the standards for safe installation and the use of gas burning equipment and piping systems and the applicants competency to perform such installations. The Building Division shall prepare a written examination to determine the qualifications and competency of all persons making application for gas fitter's license Page 7 of 48 and shall adopt rules and regulations pertaining to the giving of said examinations and said examination paper shall be filed as official records of the Building Division. (Ord. 2171 Sl, 1982) SECTION 15.04.185 Heat Pumps and Mechanical Devices. The following standards shall govern the issuance of permits and noise levels of he:at pump and other mechanical installations: A. Existing Heat Pumps and Mechanical Devices. No person owning or controlling an existing commercial or residential heat pump or mechanical device shall cause or permit operation of that noise source if the noise levels generated by the h€:at pump or mechanical device exceed fifty (50) DBA measured within twenty-five (25) feet of the nearest residential structure on an adjacent parcel ofland. B. New Heat Pump and Mechanical Installations. Effective upon adoption of this Section, no person shall install or operate a commercial or residential heat pump or mechanical device if noise levels from its operation exceed forty-five (45) DBA within twenty-five (25) feet of the nearest residential structure on an adjacent parcel of land lOr within the setback zone of any adjacent unoccupied parcel ofland zoned for residential use. C. Permit Requirement. No person shall install a commercial or residential heat pump or mechanical device prior to submitting a permit application to the Building Official and receiving approval. All applications shall certify that the operation of the heat pump or mechanical device will meet the provisions of Section 2 using the Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute Standards for Application for Sound Rated Outdoor Unitary Equipment. (Standard 275) D. Enforcement Responsibility. It shall be the responsibility of the Building Official to assure all provisions of this Section are met prior to issuing an installation permit for a heat pump or mechanical device. E. (Repealed by Ord. 2685, 1992) (Ord. 2153 SI, 1981) SECTION 15.04.190 Underground Utilities. A. Underground Utilities Required. In conjunction with the issuance of a building permit for a new electrical service all on-site utility lines, including but not limited to, electric, communications, and cable television, shall be installed underground. For the purpose of this section, appurtenances and associated equipment such as, but not limited to, surface-mounted terminal boxes and meter cabinets, and terminations for concealed ducts in an underground system, may be placed above ground. B. Underground Utilities--Exceptions. Underground utilities need not be installed in the following instances: 1. Any replacement or relocation of a service on a lot when it does not necessitate any increase in the number of existing overhead lines and/or utility poles; Page 8 of 48 2. Any increase in service size if no additional overhead lines and/or utility poles are required; or 3. Single family dwellings, when utility poles exist along property lines, or abutting streets, except for underground facilities required by Section 18.80.060 ofthe Ashland Municipal Code, provided that a service panel and stubbed conduit shall be installed to convert to underground utilities at a future date. (Ord. 2052 S7, 1979) C. Underground Utilities--Cost. The applicant for service shall be responsible for all trenching and backfilling, and shall pay to the City the connection fees specified in Section 14.16.090 ofthis Code. (Ord. 2148 SI, 1981) D. Underground Utilities--Rules and Regulations. The City Council may, by resolution, adopt rules and regulations governing the installation and allocation of costs for underground utility extensions as a condition of building permit issuance. SECTION 15.04.192 Location of Electric Meters. In conjunction with the construction of new residential structures, electric meter bases shall be installed on the side of the structure, nearest the City's service point and nearest the front of the structure as practicable, unless an alternate location is approved by the Director of Electric Utilities. On comer lots, the meter base may be located on the rear of the structur1e, nearest the City's service point and nearest the side street as practicable. No meter installation shall cause service entrance conductors to enter a structure without a service disconnecting means at the closest point of entry as described in the National Electrical Code Article 230-70.. (Ord. 2282 S1, 1983; Ord. 2712, S4, 1993) SECTION 15.04.200 Board of Appeals. In order to determine the suitability of alternate materials and methods of construction, to provide for reasonable interpretations of the provisions of standards applicable to building and related activities administered through this city and to consider appeals as the Demolition Review Committee, there is created a Board of Appeals consisting of six voting members, including one planning commission member, who are qualified by experience and training to pass upon matters pertaining to building related activities and the demolition and relocation of buildings. At least one member shall also have experience, knowledge or an interest in demolition-debris recycling. The Building Official shall be an ex officio non-voting member and shall act as Secretary of the Board. The board shall adopt reasonable rules and regulations for conducting its investigations and appeals and shall render all decisions and findings in writing. The decision and findings shall be mailed to all persons who appeared before the Board. The administrator of the State Building Codes Division shall be furnished copies of decisions interpreting state building code requirements. Except for the planning commission member who shall be selected by the chair of the planning commission, members shall be appointed by the mayor, with confirmation by thle council. All members shall serve terms of three years, expiring on April 30 of each year. The two members who have served on the Board for the longest period as of December 31,2001, shall continue to Page 9 of 48 serve until April 30, 2002. The two members who have served on the Board for the next longest period as of December 31, 2001, shall continue to serve until April 30, 2003. The member serving on the Board the least period of time as of December 31, 2001, shall continue to serve until April 30, 2004. The initial term of the planning commission member shall expire on April 30, 2004. Any vacancy shall be filled by appointment by the mayor with confirmation by the city council for the unexpired portion of the term. A member is eligible for reappointment. (Ord 2878, Amended, 12/04/2001) SECTION 15.04.205 Structural Specialty Code. (Repealed by Ord. 2685, 1992) SECTION 15.04.210 Demolition or Relocation of Structures. A. For purposes of sections 15.04.210 through 15.04.218, the following terms, phrases, words and their derivations mean: 1. Demolition: To raze, destroy, dismantle, or any act or process that may cause partial or total destruction of a structure where less than 60% of the structure's external walls will be retained in place; or where less than a majority of the facade will remain. 2. Facade: The front or principal face(s) of a building, excluding an attached garage of a residential structure, sometimes distinguished from the other faces by elaboration of architectural or ornamental details and often serving as the primary entrance. B. Except as provided in section 15.04.210.D, a permit is required before any structure, or part of a structure as defined in subsection A.l above, can be demolished or relocated. The permit fees for demolition or relocation of a structure will be set by resolution of the council. C. No demolition or relocation permit is required: 1. For structures ofless than 500 square feet in size. 2. For relocation of a structure upon the same lot. 3. To demolish a building declared to be dangerous under the Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings pursuant to section 15.04.01O.B. D. In addition to the enforcement provisions of this Title, the City Attorney may, or upon order ofthe City Council shall, immediately commence action or proceedings for the prevention of the demolition or relocation of a structure in the manner provided by law, and may take such other steps and apply to such courts as may have jurisdiction to grant such relief as will prevent the demolition, moving, removal, or damage to a building or structure, or using property contrary to the provisions of this Title. The remedies provided for in this section shall be cumulative and not exclusive. 1. For any demolition or relocation in violation of sections 15.04.210 to 15.04.218, the court shall also have the authority to order the person convicted of the violation to rebuild or restore the structure to its appearance prior to the demolition or to move and restore the building to its original site. 2. For any flagrant violation, the court may impose a fine up to and including the assessed market value of the structure demolished or relocated. A flagrant violation is an act by a Page 10 of 48 ~----"..__._-_._~._..- person who, after being notified of a violation, intentionally continues it. (Ord 2858, Amended, 06/2012000) SECTION 15.04.212 Demolition Review Committee. The Demolition Review Committee shall be the same as the Board of Appeals as established in section 15.04.200. (Ord 2878, Amended, 12/0412001; Ord 2866, Amended, 02/0612001; Ord 2858, Am,ended, 0612012000; Ord 2852, added, 01/21/2000) SECTION 15.04.214 Approval Process. Applications for demolition or relocation permits will be processed as follows: A. A complete application must be submitted to the building official and must include all of the required information for the specific action requested. The application must be signed by one or more property owners of the property where the structure is located. The application must be accompanied by the appropriate application fee. B. Within 14 days after receipt of a complete application, the building official will approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application unless such time limitation is extended with the consent of the applicant. Notice of the decision of the building official will be mailed to the applicant within seven days of the decision. C. If the application is approved, or if the application is denied and the applieant desires a hearing before the Demolition Review Committee, the applicant must post and publish a notice of the decision. The notice must be posted on the property in such a manner as to be clearly visible from a public right-of-way and be posted within 5 business days of the date the applicant received the decision. In addition, the notice must be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the city at least 7 days prior to the date requests for hearing must be filed. D The applicant or any person may request a hearing before the Demolition Review Committee by filing a request for a hearing with the building official. The request for a hearing must: 1. Be in writing and be filed within ten days of the date of the decision, if the request is by the applicant. Otherwise the request must be filed within ten days of the date the notice is posted or 7 days after the notice is published, whichever date is later. 2. Contain the specific grounds for which the decision should be reversed or modified, based on the applicable demolition or relocation standards. E. The following information is required to be contained in the notices required by this section. 1. Notice of the decision by the building official described in subsection B above is to contain the following information: a. The decision of the building official and the date of the decision. Page 11 of 48 b. The requirements of the applicant for posting and publishing notice of the decision. c. A statement that no hearing will be held before the Demolition Review Committee unless specifically requested. d. A statement that a request for a hearing by the applicant must be made within 10 days of the date the applicant received the decision and that a request for a hearing must include: i. The name and address of the applicant, ii. the file number of the demolition or relocation application, and iii. the specific grounds for which the decision should be reversed or modified, based on the applicable demolition or relocation standards. 2. The posted and published notices described in subsection C above must contain: a. A brief description of the approval and the application file number, b. The phone number and address of the building official, c. The date the notice was posted, and d. A statement that anyone who objects to the approval must file a request for a hearing on a form furnished by the building official, by a date not more than 10 days from the date the notice was posted or seven days from the date the notice was published in the newspaper, whichever date is later. F. If a request for a hearing is timely received, the Demolition Review Committee will conduct a hearing at least 15 days, but not more than 30 days, from the date of the request. G. Notice for hearings before the Demolition Review Committee will be published in a daily newspaper of general circulation within the city at least 10 days prior to thc~ hearing and mailed to the applicant or authorized agent at least 10 days prior to the hearing. In addition a notice must be posted on the property by the applicant in such a manner as to be clearly visible from a public right-of-way at least 10 days prior to the date of the hearing. The applicant must certify, for the record of the hearing, that the::: posting was accomplished. The posted notice must contain a brief description of the proposal, the time, date and place of the hearing, and the phone number and address for contact with the building official. H. Within 15 days of the hearing, or within 15 days of the receipt of the report described in section 15.04.216.A.l is received, whichever date is later, the Demolition Review Committee shall issue its decision in writing and mail it to the applicant and all persons who appeared and spoke at the hearing. 1. The decision of the Demolition Review Committee may be appealed to the eouncil by the applicant or someone who spoke at the hearing. In addition, the council may review the decision on its own motion. The decision is appealed by filing a notice of appeal with the city administrator. The appeal fee, as set by resolution of the council, must accompany the notice of appeal. The appeal must be filed within 15 days of the date the decision of the committee is mailed. The appeal notice must contain: 1. the appellant's name and address, Page 12 of 48 -----.- 2. a reference to the decision sought to be reviewed, 3. a statement that the appellant is the applicant or someone who appeared and testified at the hearing, 4. the date of the decision being appealed, and 5. the specific grounds for which the decision should be reversed or modified, based on the applicable standards. J. The notice of appeal, together with notice of the date, time and place of the hearing on the appeal by the Council will be mailed to those who appeared at the hearing before the Demolition Review Committee at least 20 days prior to the hearing. The appeal before the council shall be a de novo hearing based solely on the evidence in the record made before the Demolition Review Board. The applicant shall have the burden to prove the standards have been met. The council may affirm, reverse or modify the decision and may approve or deny the request, or grant approval with conditions. The Council shall make findings and conclusions, and make a decision based on the record before it as justification for its action. The Council shall cause copies of a final order to be sent to all persons participating in the appeal. (Ord 2858, Amended, 06/20/2000; Ord 2852, added, 01/21/2000) SECTION 15.04.216 Demolition and Relocation Standards. For demolition or relocation of structures erected more than 45 years prior to th4~ date of the application: 1. The applicant must demonstrate that either subparagraphs a or b apply: a. The structure cannot be rehabilitated or reused on site as part of any ec:onomically beneficial use of the property. In determining whether an economically beneficial use can be made of the property, the Demolition Review committee may require the applicant to: (i) Furnish an economic feasibility report prepared by an architect, developer, or appraiser, or other person who is experienced in rehabilitation of buildings that addresses the estimated market value of the property on which the building lies, both before and after demolition or removal, or (ii) Market the property utilizing a marketing plan approved by th€: Demolition Review Committee or by advertising the property in the Ashland Daily Tidings and Medford Mail Tribune at least eight times and at regular intervals for at least 90 days and by posting a for sale sign on the property, four to six square feet in size and clearly visible from the street, for the same 90 day period. b. The structure proposed for demolition is structurally unsound despite efforts by the owner to properly maintain the structure. 2. In addition to subparagraphs a or b above, the applicant must also: a. Submit a redevelopment plan for the site that provides for replaceml~nt or rebuilt structure for the structure being demolished or relocated. The replacement or rebuilt structure must be a minimum of 1,000 square feet, unless the stlUcture being demolished or relocated is less than 1,000 square feet. If the structure is less than 1,000 square feet, the replacement structure must be a minimum of 500 square feet. Page 13 of 48 ..--,-- The redevelopment plan must indicate in sufficient detail the nature, appearance and location of all replacement or rebuilt structures. No replacement structure is required, however, if: (i) the applicant agrees to restrict the property to open space uses and a finding is made that such restriction constitutes a greater benefit to the neighborhood than redevelopment would, or (ii) the structure being demolished or relocated is a non-habitable accessory structure. b. Demonstrate, if the application is for a demolition, the structure cannot he practicably relocated to another site. 3. If a permit is issued and the redevelopment plan: a. Requires a site review permit, no demolition or relocation may occur lllntil the site review permit has been issued, unless the site is restricted to open space uses as provided in section 15.04.216.A.2. b. Does not require a site review permit, no demolition or relocation may oecur until the building permit has been issued for the replacement or rebuilt structure, unless the site is restricted to open spaces uses as provided in section 15.04.216.A.2. 4. The Demolition Review Committee may require the applicant to post with the city a bond, or other suitable collateral as determined by the city administrator, ensuring the safe demolition of the structure and the completed performance of the redevelopment plan. B. For demolition or relocation of structures erected less than 45 years from thl~ date of the application: 1. The applicant: a. Has the burden of proving the structure was erected less than 45 years from the date of the application. Any structure erected less than 45 years from the date of the application, which replaced a structure demolished or relocated under section 15.04.216, shall be considered a structure subject to the standards in subsections 15.04.216. b. Must submit a redevelopment plan for the site that provides for a replacement or rebuilt structure being demolished or relocated. The replacement or rebuilt structure must be a minimum of 1,000 square feet, unless the structure being demolished ore relocated is less than 1,000 square feet. If the structure is less than 1,000 square feet, the replacement structure must be a minimum of 500 square feet. The n~development plan must indicate in sufficient detail the nature, appearance and location of all replacement or rebuilt structures. No replacement structure is required, however, if: (i) the applicant agrees to restrict the property to open space uses and a finding is made that such restriction constitutes a greater benefit to the neighborhood than redevelopment would, or (ii) the structure being demolished or relocated is a non-habitably accessory structure. 2. If a permit is issued and the redevelopment plan: a. Requires a site review permit, no demolition or relocation may occur until the site review permit has been issued, unless the site is restricted to open space uses as Page 14 of 48 ~ --_.--_..._---~- provided in section 15.04.216.B. b. Does not require a site review permit, no demolition or relocation may occur until a building permit has been issued for the structure or structures to be replaced or rebuilt, unless the site is restricted to open space uses as provided in section 15.04.216.B. C. For any demolition approved under this section, the applicant is required to salvage or recycle construction and demolition debris, in accordance with a demolition debris diversion plan that complies with the requirements adopted the Demolition Review Committee. The applicant shall submit such a plan with the application for demolition. (Ord 2891, 2002) D. For any relocation approved under this section, the applicant must also comply with the provisions of Chapter 15.08. (Ord 2891, Amended, 11/19/2002; Ord 2858, Amended, 06/20/2000, Added 2/21/2000 Ord 2852) SECTION 15.04.218 Deleted (Ord 2858, Deleted, 06/20/2000, Added 01/21/2000 Ord 2852) SECTION 15.04.220 Mechanical Specialty Code Fee. For application in this city, Section 304 of the mechanical specialty code deleted. TIle fee schedule for mechanical specialty code fees shall be established by resolution of the city council. (Ord 2896, Amended, 06/03/2003) SECTION 15.04.230 Violation--Penalty. It shall be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to erect, construct, enlarge" alter, repair, move, improve, remove, convert or demolish, equip, use, occupy or maintain any building or structure in the City or cause the same to be done contrary to or in violation of any of the provisions of this title. Any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions of this title shall be deemed guilty of an offense and each such person shall be deemed guilty of separate offense on each and every day or portion thereof during which any violation of any of the provisions of this ordinance is committed, continue or permitted and upon conviction of any such violation such person shall be punished as prescribed in Section 1.08.020. (Ord. 1825, 1974; Ord. 1956, 1978) SECTION 15.04.240 Certificate of Occupancy. No building for which a permit has been issued shall be occupied nor shall utilitiles be released until a final inspection has been made and a certificate of occupancy has been issued by the Page 15 of 48 ______________ __ __------,-_ n Building Official. Such Certificate shall not be issued until all relevant requirements of Title 15 of the Ashland Municipal Code have been met and all requirements of the Planning Commission shall have been completed. However, with respect to requirements of the Planning Commission, which shall include but not be limited to variance, conditional use permits, site plans and planned unit developments, the Building Official may, unless otherwise directed by the Planning Commission or City Council release a temporary Certificate of Occupancy and a temporary release of utilities before the installation and completion of such requirements, and provided the owner has posted a performance bond satisfactory to the City Administrator to insure the installation of said requirements within a specified time which must also be satisfactory to the City Administrator. (Ord. 1923, 1977) SECTION 15.04.250 Notice of Non-Compliance and Violation. A. No permit or certificate of any kind shall be issued by the Building Official for a structure or occupancy which would violate any provision of the Ashland Municipal Code. B. Provided written notice and an opportunity to be heard is first given, the Building Official, upon determining that a violation of this chapter exists, shall have authority to file a notice of non-compliance in the Jackson County Records office upon any property which contains a structure or is occupied in violation of this chapter. C. The notice of non-compliance shall specify the owner of the property as reflected in the Jackson County Records office, the property description, the date and brief description of the violation and the citation to this chapter section. D. Whenever the violation for which the notice of non-compliance was filed is (:orrected, the Building Official shall, upon payment of the recording fee for the notice of nOlil-compliance and the recording fee for the notice of cor of non-compliance and specify that the violation has been corrected. (Ord. 2685, section, immediately file a notice of correction. The notice of correction shall reference the noticel992) Page 16 of 48 CHAPTER 15.06 SOLID FUEL BURNING DEVICE REGULATIONS SECTIONs: 15.06.010 Definitions. 15.06.020 Installation requirements. 15.06.030 Enforcement and Penalties. SECTION 15.06.010 Defmitions. As used in this Chapter, the following words shall have the meanings indicated: A. "Solid fuel burning device" means a device designed for solid fuel combustion so that usable heat is derived for the interior of a building, and includes, without limitation, solid fuel burning stoves, fireplace inserts, woodstoves of any nature, or pellet stoves used for space heating which can bum solid fuel. Unmodified fireplaces and solid fuel burning devices not subject to DEQ certification are excluded from this definition. B. "Certified stove" means a solid fuel burning device certified by DEQ as meeting the 1988 particulate emission standards for certified wood stoves specified in Oregon Administrative Rules 340-21-115. SECTION 15.06.020 Installation requirements. It shall be unlawful to install any solid fuel burning device which is not a "certified stove" as defined in this chapter. SECTION 15.06.030 Enforcement and Penalties. Any person, firm or corporation, whether as principal, agent, employee or otherwis€:, violating or causing the violation of any of the provisions of this ordinance has committed an infraction, and upon conviction thereof, is punishable as prescribed in Section 1.08.020 of the Ashland Municipal Code. Such person, firm or corporation is guilty of a separate violation for each and every day during which any violation of this Title is committed or continued by such person, firm or corporation. (Ord. 2552, 1990) Page 17 of 48 CHAPTER 15.08 MOVING OF BUILDINGS SECTIONs: 15.08.010 Permit for Moving Building. 15.08.020 Moving Structures Procedures Inspection. 15.08.030 Fees. 15.08.040 Plans Filed. 15.08.050 PreMoving Conference. 15.08.060 Issuance or Denial of Permits. 15.08.070 Use of Dollies. 15.08.080 Insurance. 15.08.090 Damages to City Property. 15.08.100 Penalty. SECTION 15.08.010 Permit for Moving Building. No person shall move a building on the streets or alleys of the City without first obtaining a permit from the Building Official, or an authorized designee. Approval must also be obtained according to Section 15.04.210 and Chapter 13.16 of the Ashland Municipal Code. SECTION 15.08.020 Moving Structures Procedures Inspection. Upon payment of an inspection fee as established in 15.04.210 of the Ashland Municipal Code, the Building Official shall inspect the house, building, or other structure, and advise the applicant whether or not the same can be moved in accordance with this Section. No moving permit shall be issued until the building or structure has been so inspected. SECTION 15.08.030 Fees. The applicant shall, upon filing the application, pay to the City the moving permit fee in the amount set by Section 15.04.210 of the Ashland Municipal Code. This fee covers the use of City streets only and is not to cover costs for other services such as police or other escort services, posting of "No Parking" signs, traffic rerouting, tree trimming, moving, lifting, relocating, or otherwise protecting City-owned utilities, or for protecting, moving or relocating privately owned vehicles or other private property. Separate charges for such services shall be determined by the affected department or agency and paid by the building mover. SECTION 15.08.040 Plans Filed. Plans and specifications must be filed with the Building Official as part of a building permit application before a moving permit will be issued. The plans should include the folllowing: A. A plot plan of the site showing the proposed location of all buildings and improvements, including driveways. B. Reconstruction or alterations necessary to comply with the City Building Codes. Page 18 of 48 C. The proposed route of the building move, and all trees which must be trimmed to accommodate the move. SECTION 15.08.050 PreMoving Conference. The Building Official may require the person, firm or corporation requesting a pennit to move a building, to meet with concerned persons or agencies which shall include but not be limited to, the State, County, City or any other interested persons or private agencies, for thl~ purpose of making necessary preparations in their affected areas of interest. All said agencies, a.t the time of the pre-moving conference, shall furnish, in writing to the Building Official and the persons requesting to move a building, the conditions and requirements of their agencies. Persons requesting a pre-moving conference shall give a minimum of twenty-one (21) days notification to the Building Official, and the meetings shall take place not less than one week before the requested moving date. A decision shall be made by the Building Official within thirty (30) days of the application for a permit, unless mutually extended by the Building Offidal and the applicant. SECTION 15.08.060 Issuance or Denial of Permits. The Building Official shall investigate and examine the building proposed to be moved, the streets and public and private property over, along, or across which the building is proposed to be moved, and the new location of the building, for the purpose of determining if the building may be moved with safety and made to comply with all the requirements of the City of Ashland, and to determine whether any streets or public or private property will be injured or damaged by the proposed move. The Building Official shall consult with the Ashland Historic Commission in accordance with Section 15.04.210. The Building Official shall also consult with the Ashland Tree Commission regarding required tree trimming in public rights-of-way and other issues which may affect trees owned by public entities. If the building and the proposed move meet all of the terms, conditions and restrictions as set forth in the moving ordinance and in the opinion of the Building Official, the moving of the building will do no damage to any streets or public or private property along the route of the proposed building move, then the Building Official shall issue the permit. The Building Official shall refuse to issue a permit if it is found: A. That the building is too large to move without endangering persons or property in the City, or would damage property as set forth above, including unacceptable damage to the City's street trees. B. That the building is in such a state of deterioration or disrepair, or is otherwise so structurally unsafe, that it cannot be moved without endangering persons or property. C. That the building is structurally unsafe or unfit for the purpose for which it is moved, if the new location is in the City. D. That the applicant's equipment IS unsafe and that persons and property may be Page 19 of 48 endangered by its use. E. That zoning or other ordinances would be violated by the building in its new location. F. That for any other reason persons or property would be endangered by moving of the building. SECTION 15.08.070 Use of Dollies. A person engaged in the business of moving buildings shall use only dollies with rubber-tired wheels. The weight of the building shall be supported on the dollies so that the wheel load will not exceed the pavement design as established by the City Engineer, or properly designed planking shall be used so as not to overload or damage pavement or under-ground utilities within the public streets. Planking shall be required over all sidewalks and curbs over whkh a building is moved. SECTION 15.08.080 Insurance. The applicant, prior to receiving a permit, shall submit to the City's Director of Finance or Risk Manager a certificate of liability insurance coverage. Said certificate shall, in a foml satisfactory to the Director of Finance or Risk Manager, attest to the house mover having current auto and general liability insurance coverage, in amounts not less than those set forth in ORS 30.270, with the City of Ashland, its officers, employees and agents named as additional insured with respect to the house moving operation. SECTION 15.08.090 Damages to City Property. The house mover shall reimburse the City for any and all damages to electric, watler and sewer utility facilities; streets, storm drains, signs, sidewalks, curbs and traffic signals; stn:et lights and appurtenances; bridges, trees and all other City-owned facilities. SECTION 15.08.100 Penalty. Any person refusing or neglecting to comply with the requirements of this chapter" or violating any provisions therein, is guilty of an infraction, and shall be subject to the penalties set forth in Section 1.08.020 ofthe Ashland Municipal Code. (Ord. 1810 (part), 1974; Ord. 1376 31, 1965; Ord.2382 17, 1986) (Ord. 2410, 1987). Page 20 of 48 CHAPTER 15.10 FLOOD DAMAGE PREVENTION REGULATIONS SECTIONs: 15.10.010 Purpose. 15.10.020 Statutory Authority. 15.10.030 Findings of Fact. 15.10.040 Methods of Reducing Flood Losses. 15.10.050 Definitions. 15.10.060 General Provisions. 15.10.070 Administration. 15.10.080 Provisions for Flood Hazard Protection. 15.10.090 Variances and Appeals. 15.10.100 Penalties. SECTION 15.10.010 Purpose. The purpose of this section is to promote the public health, safety, and general we:lfare, and to minimize public and private losses due to flood conditions in specific areas by provisions designed to: A. Protect human life and health; B. Minimize expenditure of public money on costly flood control projects; C. Minimize the need for rescue and relief efforts associated with flooding and generally undertaken at the expense of the general public; D. Minimize prolonged business interruptions; E. Minimize damage to public facilities and utilities such as water and gas mains, electric, telephone and sewer lines, streets and bridges located in areas of special flood hazard; F. Help maintain a stable tax base by providing for the sound use and development of areas of special flood hazard so as to minimize future flood blight areas; G. Ensure that potential buyers are notified that property is in an area of special flood hazard; and H. Ensure that those who occupy the areas of special flood hazard assume responsibility for their actions. SECTION 15.10.020 Statutory Authority. The Legislature of the State of Oregon has in Oregon Revised Statutes, Chapter 197, delegated the responsibility to local governments to adopt comprehensive plans and land use regulations designed to promote the public health, safety, and general welfare of its citizenry. SECTION 15.10.030 Findings of Fact. A. The flood hazard areas of Ashland are subject to periodic inundation which results in loss of life and property, health and safety hazards, disruptions of commerce and governmental Page 21 of 48 services, extraordinary public expenditures for flood protection and relief, and impairment of the tax base, all of which adversely affect the public health, safety and general wdfare. B. These flood losses are caused by the cumulative effect of obstructions in areas of special flood hazards which increase flood heights and velocities, and when inadequatdy anchored, damage uses in other areas. Uses that are inadequately flood-proofed, elevated, or otherwise protected from flood damage also contribute to the flood loss. SECTION 15.10.040 Methods of Reducing Flood Losses. In order to accomplish its purpose, this section includes methods and provisions for: A. Restricting or prohibiting uses which are dangerous to health, safety and property due to water or erosion hazards, or which result in damaging increases in erosion or in flood heights or velocities; B. Requiring that uses vulnerable to floods, including facilities which serve such uses, be protected against flood damage at the time of initial construction; C. Controlling the alteration of natural flood plains, stream channels, and natural protective barriers, which help accommodate or channel flood waters; D. Controlling filling, grading, dredging, and other development which may increase flood damage; and E. Preventing or regulating the construction of flood barriers which will unnalturally divert flood waters or which may increase flood hazards outside of identified flood hazard areas. SECTION 15.10.050 Def"mitions. Unless specifically defined below or elsewhere in this Code, words or phrases used in this Chapter shall be interpreted as to give them the meaning they have in common usage and to give this Chapter its most reasonable application. A. Appeal means a request for a review of the Building Official's interpretation of any provision of this Section or a request for a variance. B. Area of Shallow Flooding means a designated AO or AH zone on the Flood Insurance Rate Map. The base flood depths range from one (1) to three (3) feet; d~arly defined channel does not exist; the path of flooding is unpredictable and indetetminate; and, velocity flow may be evident. AO is characterized as sheet flow and AH indicates ponding. C. Area of Special Flood Hazard means the land in the flood plain within a community subject to a one percent (1%) or greater chance of flooding in any given year. Designation on maps always includes the letters A or V. D. Base Flood means the flood having a one percent (1%) chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year. Also referred to as the "IOO-year flood". Designation on flood maps always includes the letters A or V. E. Development means any man-made change to improved or unimproved real estate, including but not limited to, buildings or other structures, mining, dredging, filling, grading, paving, excavation or drilling operations located within the area of special flood hazard. Page 22 of 48 F. Flood or Flooding means a general and temporary condition of partial or complete inundation of normally dry land areas from: 1. The overflow of inland or tidal waters; and/or 2. The unusual and rapid accumulation of runoff of surface waters from any source. G. Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) means the official map on which the Federal Insurance Administration has delineated both the areas of special flood hazards and the risk premium zones applicable to the community. H. Flood Insurance Study means the official report provided by the Federal Insurance Administration that includes flood profiles, the Flood Boundary - Flood way Map, and the water surface elevation of the base flood. I. Flood-way means that channel of a river or other watercourse and the adjacent land areas that must be reserved in order to discharge the base flood without ,cumulatively increasing the water surface elevation more than one (1) foot. J. Habitable Floor means any floor usable for living purposes, which includes working, sleeping, eating, cooking or recreation, or a combination thereof. A floor used only for storage purposes is not a "habitable" floor. K. Lowest Floor means the lowest floor of the lowest enclosed area (including basement). An unfinished or flood resistant enclosure, usable solely for parking of vehides, building access or storage, in an area other than a basement area is not considered a building's lowest floor, provided that such enclosure is not built so as to render the: structure in violation of the applicable non-elevation design requirements of this ordinance found in Section l5.1O.080(B)(1)(b). L. Manufactured Home means a structure, transportable in one (1) or more seetions, which is built on a permanent chassis and is designed for use with or without a permanent foundation when connected to the required utilities. For flood plain management purposes the term "manufactured home" also includes park trailers, travel trailers, and other similar vehicles placed on a site for greater than one hundred eighty (180) consecutive days. For insurance purposes the term "manufactured home" does not include park trailers, travel trailers, and other similar vehicles. M. Manufactured Home Park or Subdivision means a parcel (or contiguous parcels) ofland divided into two (2) or more manufactured home lots for rent or sale. N. New Construction means structures for which the "start of construction" commenced on or after the effective date of this Ordinance and includes new mobile home parks and mobile home subdivisions. O. Start of Construction includes substantial improvement, and means the date: the building permit was issued, provided the actual start of construction, repair, reconstruction, placement or other improvement was within one hundred eighty (180) days of the permit date. The actual start means either the first placement of permanent construction of a structure on a site, such as the pouring of a slab or footings, the installation of piles, the construction of columns, or any work beyond the stage of excavation; or the placement of a manufactured home on a foundation. Permanent construction does not include land preparation, such as clearing, grading and filling; nor does it include the installation of streets and/or walkways; nor does it include excavation for a permanent basement, footings, piers, or foundations or the erection of temporary forms; nor does it include the installation on the property of accessory erection or temporary forms; nor does it include the installation on the property of accessory buildings, such as garages or sheds not Page 23 of 48 occupied as dwelling units or not part of the main structure. P. Structures as it pertains to the provisions of this Chapter is a walled and roofed building, including a gas or liquid storage tank that is principally above ground. Q. Substantial Improvement means any repair, reconstruction, or improvement of a structure, the cost of which equals or exceeds fifty percent (50%) of the market value of the structure either: 1. Before the improvement or repair is started; or 2. If the structure has been damaged and is being restored, before the damage occurred. For the purpose of this definition, "substantial improvement" is consid{:red to occur when the first alteration of any wall, ceiling, floor, or other structural part of the building commences, whether or not that alteration affects the external dimensions of the structure. The term DOES NOT, however, include either: a. Any project for improvement of a structure to comply with existing state or local health, sanitary, or safety code specifications which are solely necessary to assure safe living conditions, or b. Any alteration of a structure listed on the National Register of Histori,c Places or a State Inventory of Historic Places. R. Variance means a grant of relief from the requirements of this Chapter which permits construction in a manner that would otherwise be prohibited by this Chapter. SECTION 15.10.060 General Provisions. A. Lands to which this Chapter applies. This Chapter shall apply to all areas of special flood hazards within the jurisdiction of the City of Ashland, Oregon. B. Basis for establishing the areas of special flood hazard. The areas of special flood hazard identified by the Federal Insurance Administration in a scientific and enginl~ering report entitled "The Flood Insurance Study: City of Ashland, Oregon, Jackson County", dated June 1, 1981, with accompanying Flood Insurance Maps is hereby adopted by r,eference and declared to be a apart of this Ordinance. The Flood Insurance Study and accompanying maps (as updated) are on file at City Hall, Ashland, Oregon. C. Compliance. No structure on land shall hereafter be constructed, located, extended, converted, or altered without full compliance with the terms of this Ordinance and other applicable regulations. D. Abrogation and Greater Restrictions. This Chapter is not intended to repeal, abrogate, or impair any existing easements, covenants, or deed restrictions. However, where this Ordinance and another Ordinance, easement, covenant, or deed restriction conflict or overlap, whichever imposes the more stringent restrictions shall prevail. E. Interpretation. In the interpretation and application of this Chapter, all provisions shall be: 1. Considered as minimum requirements; 2. Liberally construed in favor ofthe governing body; and 3. Deemed neither to limit or repeal any other powers granted under state statutes. F. Warning and Disclaimer of Liability. The degree of flood protection required by this Chapter is considered reasonable for regulatory purposes and is based on scientific and engineering consideration. Larger floods can and will occur on rare occasions. Flood heights may be increased by man-made or natural causes. This section does not imply that land outside the areas of special flood hazards or uses permitted within such areas will be Page 24 of 48 free from flooding or flood damages. This Ordinance shall not create liability on the part of the City, any officer or employee thereof, or the Federal Insurance Administration, for any flood damages that result from reliance on this Ordinance or any administrative decision lawfully made thereunder. SECTION 15.10.070 Administration. A. Establishment of Development Permit. A development permit shall be obtained before construction or development begins within any area of special flood hazard established in Section 15.10.060(B). The permit shall be for all structures including manufactured homes, as set forth in the Definitions, and for all other development including fill and other activities, also set forth in Definitions. Application for a development permit shall be made on forms furnished by the Building Official and may include, but not be limited to, plans in duplicate drawn to scale showing the nature, location, dimensions and elevations of the area in question; existing or proposed structures, fill, storage of materials, drainage facilities; and the location of the foregoing. Specifically, the following information is required: 1. Elevation in relation to mean sea level, of the lowest floor (including bas(:ment) of all structures; 2. Elevation in relation to mean sea level to which any structure has been flood-proofed; 3. Certification by a registered professional engineer or architect that the flood-proofing methods for any nonresidential structure meet the flood-proofing criteria in Section 15. 1 0.090(B)(2); 4. Description of the extent to which any watercourse will be altered or relocated as a result of proposed development. B. Designation of the Building Official. The Building Official is hereby appointed to administer and implement this Chapter by granting or denying development permit applications in accordance with its provisions. C. Duties and Responsibilities of the Building Official. Duties and responsibilities of the Building Official shall include, but not be limited to: 1. Permit Review: a. Review all development permits to determine that the permit requirements of this Section have been satisfied. b. Review all development permits to determine that all necessary permits have been obtained from those federal, state or local governmental agencies from which prior approval is required. c. Review all development permits to determine if the proposed development is located in the flood way. If located in the flood way, assure that the encroachment provisions of Section 15.1O.080)C)(I) are met. 2. Use of Other Base Flood Data. When base flood elevation data has not been provided in accordance with Section 15.1O.060(B), "Basis for Establishing the Areas of Special Flood Hazard", the Building Official shall obtain, review, and reasonably utilize any base flood elevation and flood-way data available from a federal, state or other source, in order to administer Sections 15.1O.080(B)(I) "Specific Standards: Residential Construction", 15.10.080 (B)(2) "Specific Standards: Nonresidential Construction, and 15.1O.080(C) Page 25 of 48 "Flood-ways" . 3. Information to be Obtained and Maintained. a. Where base flood elevation data is provided through the Flood Insurance Study or required as in Section 15.l0.070(C)(2), obtain and record the actual elevation (in relation to mean sea level) of the lowest habitable floor (including bas(:ment) of all new or substantially improved structures, and whether or not the structure contains a basement. b. For all new or substantially improved flood-proofed structures: i. Verify and record the actual elevation (in relation to mean sea level); and ii. Maintain the flood proofing certifications required in Section 15.1 0.070(A)(3). c. Maintain for public inspection all records pertaining to the provisions of this Section. 4. Alteration of Watercourses. a. Notify adjacent communities and the Water Resources Commission prior to any alteration or relocation of a watercourse, and submit evidence of such notification to the Federal Insurance Administration. b. Require that maintenance is provided within the altered or relocated portion of said watercourse so that the flood carrying capacity is not diminished. 5. Interpretation of FIRM Boundaries. Make interpretations where needed, as to exact location of the boundaries of the areas of special flood hazards (for example" where there appears to be a conflict between a mapped boundary and actual field conditions). The person contesting the location of the boundary shall be given a reasonable opportunity to appeal the interpretation as provided in Section 15.10.090. SECTION 15.10.080 Provisions for Flood Hazard Protection. A. General Standards. In all areas of flood hazards the following standards are required: 1. Anchoring: a. All new construction and substantial improvements shall be anchored to prevent flotation, collapse or lateral movement of the structure; b. All manufactured homes must likewise be anchored to prevent flotation, collapse, or lateral movement, and shall be installed using methods and practices that minimize flood damage. Anchoring methods may include, but are not limited to, use of over- the-top or frame ties to ground anchors (Reference FEMA's "Manufaetured Home Installation in Flood Hazard Areas" guidebook. 2. Construction Materials and Methods: a. All new construction and substantial improvements shall be constructed with materials and utility equipment resistant to flood damage. b. All new construction and substantial improvements shall be constructed using methods and practices that minimize flood damage. c. Electrical, heating, ventilation, plumbing, and air-conditioning equipment and other service facilities shall be designed and/or otherwise elevated or located so as to prevent water from entering or accumulating within the components during conditions of flooding. 3. Utilities: a. All new and replacement water supply systems shall be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of flood waters into the system; Page 26 of 48 ---.- b. New and replacement sanitary sewage systems shall be designed to mInImIZe or eliminate infiltration of flood waters into the systems and discharge from the systems into flood waters; and c. On-site waste disposal systems shall be located to avoid impairment to them or contamination for the during flooding. 4. Subdivision Proposals. a. All subdivision proposals shall be consistent with the need to minimize flood damage; b. All subdivision proposals shall have public utilities and facilities such as sewer, gas, electrical, and water systems located and constructed to minimize flood damage; c. All subdivision proposals shall have adequate drainage provided to reduce exposure to flood damage; and d. Where base flood elevation data has not been provided or is not available from another authoritative source it shall be generated for subdivision proposals and other proposed development which contain at least fifty (50) lots or five (5) acres, whichever is less. 5. Review of Building Permit: a. Where elevation data is not available, either through the Flood Insurance Study or from another authoritative source (Section 15.10.070(C)) applications for building permits shall be reviewed to assure that proposed construction will be reasonably safe from flooding. The test of reasonableness is a local judgment and includes use of historical data, high water marks, photographs of past flooding, etc., wht:re available. Failure to elevate at least two (2) feet above grade in these zones may result in higher insurance rates. b. To determine the flood base elevation, the applicant's Oregon registered engineer or land surveyor shall investigate all available sources of information, such as historic flooding profiles, high water marks, photographs of past flooding, soil characteristics, or any other feasible methods. A report shall be submitted to the City by the applicant, setting forth said elevation and citing the evidence upon which the estimate is made. Said report may be accepted or rejected by the City. The Oregon registered engineer or surveyor shall place a permanent elevation marker on the property. B. Specific Standards. In all areas of special flood hazards where base flood elevation data has been provided as set forth in Section 15.1O.060(B), "Basis for Establishing the Areas of Special Flood Hazard", or Section 15.10.070(C)(2), "Use of Other Base Flood Data, the following provisions are required: 1. Residential Construction: a. New construction and substantial improvement of any residential structure shall have the lowest floor, including basement, elevated to at least two (2) feet or above base flood elevation. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy by the City, the property owner shall furnish certification by a registered engineer or surveyor of the actual elevation of the lowest habitable floor, including a basement. b. Fully enclosed areas below the lowest floor that are subject to flooding are prohibited, or shall be designed to automatically equalize hydrostatic flood sources on exterior walls by allowing for entry and exit of flood-waters. Designs for meeting this requirement must either be certified by a registered professional engineer or architect or must meet or exceed the following minimum criteria: Page 27 of 48 1. A minimum of two openings having a total net area of not less than one (1) square inch for every square foot of enclosed area subject to flooding. ii. The bottom of all openings shall be no higher than one (1) foot above grade. iii. Openings may be equipped with screens, louvers, or other eoverings or devices provided that they permit the automatic entry and exit of Hood-waters. 2. Nonresidential Construction: New construction and substantial improvement of any commercial, industrial or other nonresidential structure shall either have the lowest floor, including basement, elevated to the level of the base flood elevation; or together with attendant utility and sanitary facilities; shall: a. Be flood-proofed so that below the base flood level the structure is watertight with walls substantially impermeable to the passage of water; b. Have structural components capable of resisting hydrostatic and hydrodynamic loads and effects of buoyancy; and c. Be certified by an Oregon registered professional engineer or architect that the designs and methods of construction are in accordance with accepted standards of practice for meeting the provisions of this subsection based on their development review of the structural design, specifications and plans. Such certifications shall be provided to the official as set forth in Section 15.1 0.070(C)(3)(b). d. Nonresidential structures that are elevated, not flood-proofed, must meet the same standards for space below the lowest floor as described in 15.10.080(B)(1)(b). e. Applicants flood-proofing nonresidential buildings shall be notifi€::d that flood insurance premiums will be based on rates that are one (1) foot below the flood proofed level (e.g., a building constructed to the base flood level will be rated as one (1) foot below that level). 3. Manufactured Homes: All manufactured homes to be placed or substantially improved within Zones AI-30, AH, and AE shall be elevated on a permanent foundation such that the lowest floor of the manufactured home is at least two (2) feet above the base flood elevation and be securely anchored to an adequately anchored foundation system in accordance with the provisions of Section 15.1 0.080(A)(I). C. Flood-ways: Located within areas of special flood hazard established in Section 15.1O.060(B) are areas designated as flood-ways. Since the flood-way is an extremely hazardous area due to the velocity of flood waters which carry debris, potential projectiles, and erosion potential, the following provisions apply: 1. Prohibit encroachments, including fill, new construction, substantial improvements, and other development unless certification by a registered professional engineer or architect is provided demonstrating that encroachments shall not result in any increase in flood levels during the occurrence of the base flood discharge. 2. If Section 15.10.080(C)(I) above is satisfied, all new construction, and substantial improvements shall comply with all applicable flood hazard reduction provisions of Section 15.10.080, "Provisions for Flood Hazard Protection". SECTION 15.10.090 Variances and Appeals. A. Appeals shall be granted consistent with the standards of Section 1910.6 of the Rules and Regulations of the National Flood Insurance Program (24 CFR 1909, etc.). Page 28 of 48 - -- ----""--- ._~~-r---._..- B. The Board of Appeals established by Section 15.04.200 of this Chapter shall hear variances and appeals from the t"mal decisions of the Building Official. C. In passing upon applications for appeal or variance, the Board of Appeals shall consider all technical evaluations, all relevant factors, standards specified in other parts of this Code; and 1. The danger that materials may be swept onto other lands to the injury or loss of others; 2. The danger to life and property due to flooding or erosion damage; 3. The susceptibility of the proposed facility and its contents to flood damage and the effect of such damage on the individual owner; 4. The importance of the services provided by the proposed facility to the community; 5. The availability of alternative locations for the proposed use which are not subject to flooding or erosion damage; 6. The compatibility of the proposed use with existing and anticipated development; 7. The consistency of the proposed use with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan and flood plain management program for that area; 8. The safety of access to the property in times of flood for ordinary and emergency vehicles; 9. The expected heights, velocity, duration, rate of rise, and sediment transport of the flood waters and effects of channel movement, if applicable, expected at the site; and 10. The costs of providing governmental services during and after flood conditions, including maintenance and repair of public utilities and facilities such as sewer, gas, electrical, and water systems, and streets and bridges. D. Upon consideration of the factors of and the purpose of the Chapter, the Board of Appeals may attach such conditions to the granting of variances as it deems necessary to further the purposes of this Chapter. E. The Building Official shall maintain the records of all appeal actions and report any variances to the Federal Insurance Administration upon approval. F. Conditions for Variances: 1. Variances shall not be issued within any designated flood-way if any incrlease in flood levels during the base flood discharge would result. 2. Variances shall only be issued upon a determination that the variance is the minimum necessary, considering the flood hazard, to afford relief. 3. Variances shall only be issued upon: a. A showing of good and sufficient cause; b. A determination that failure to grant the variance would result in exceptional hardship for the applicant; and, c. A determination that granting the variance will not result in increased 1100d heights, additional threats to public safety, extraordinary public expense, create nuisances, cause fraud on or victimization of the public, or conflict with existing laws or Ordinances. 4. Any applicant to whom a variance is granted shall be given written notice that the cost of flood insurance will be commensurate with any increased risk that may result from development for which the variance is issued. SECTION 15.10.100 Penalties. Any person, firm or corporation, whether as principal, agent, employee or otherwis(~, violating or Page 29 of 48 causing the violation of any of the provisions of this ordinance has committed an infraction, and upon conviction thereof, is punishable as prescribed in Section 1.08.020 of the Ashland Municipal Code. Such person, firm or corporation is guilty of a separate violation for each and every day during which any violation of this Chapter is committed or continued by such person, firm or corporation. In addition, violation of this Ordinance shall constitute a public nuisance and may be regarded as such in all actions, suits and proceedings. Said nuiscmce may be prosecuted in the courts of the State of Oregon. Page 30 of 48 CHAPTER 15.16 PLUMBING CODE SECTIONs: 15.16.010 State law adopted. 15.16.020 Septic tanks. 15.16.030 Drainage system--Public sewer. 15.16.040 Privies--Cesspools. 15.16.050 Necessary connections. 15.16.060 Location of sewer and water lines. 15.16.070 Trench for house sewer. 15.16.080 Installation of house sewers. 15.16.090 Water Test. 15.16.100 Pipe testing. 15.16.120 Water closet bends. 15.16.130 Drainage lines--Sinks--Dishwashers. 15.16.140 Cleanouts. 15.16.150 Vent offsets. 15.16.160 Supports for piping. 15.16.170 Lawn sprinklers--Cross connections. 15.16.190 Water supply--Sizing of residential piping. 15.16.200 Gas pipe installations. 15.16.220 Plumbing and sewer business license-Required--Issuance. 15.16.240 Permits-Fees. 15.16.250 Compliance with plumbing law. 15.16.260 Notification of inspector. 15.16.300 Plumbing provisions violation--Notice. 15.16.310 Control of construction. 15.16.320 Plumbing license--Suspension. 15.16.330 Hearing--Appeal. 15.16.340 Penalty. 15.16.350 Liability. 15.16.360 Exemptions. 15.16.370 Labor by owner. SECTION 15.16.010 State law adopted. Oregon Revised Statutes 447.010, 447.020, 447.030, 447.033, 447.035, 447.040, 447.050, 447.060,447.110,447.120,447.130 and 447.140 and Articles I to XIII, inclusive, of Regulations Governing Plumbing and Water Supply and Distribution, adopted by the State Board of Health and on file with the Secretary of State, are adopted by reference in this code. All acts declared unlawful by the sections of Oregon Revised Statutes and by the regulations of the State Board of Health enumerated in this section shall be considered offenses against the City wh(:n committed within its boundaries. If a provision of the incorporated statutes or regulations conflicts with a specific provision of this chapter, then the provisions containing the most restrictiv(: requirement shall prevail. (Ord. 1376 Sl, 1965). Page 31 of 48 T- SECTION 15.16.020 Septic tanks. Where connection to a public sewer cannot be made, a septic tank and drain field shall be installed in accordance with Regulations Governing Sewage and Waste Disposal of the State Board of Health, as now or hereafter amended. (Ord. 1376 S2, 1965) SECTION 15.16.030 Drainage system--Public sewer. It is unlawful for any person to deposit by any means whatsoever into any plumbing fixture, floor drain, sand trap, sump, receptacle or device which is connected to any drainage system, public sewer, private sewer, septic tank or cesspool, any garbage, fruit or vegetable paring, ashes, cinders, solids, rags, inflammable, poisonous or explosive liquids or gases, liv{: steam, oil, grease, or any other substance whatsoever which would or could cause damage to the drainage system or public sewer. This section shall not be construed to prohibit the use of domestic garbage disposal equipment. (Ord. 1376 S3, 1965) SECTION 15.16.040 Privies--Cesspools. Except as provided under Section 2, Article II, of Regulations of the State Board of Health Governing Plumbing and Water Supply, as incorporated in this code by Section 15.16.010, no person shall construct, install, or maintain a privy, outhouse, or cesspool within the city. (Ord. 1376 S4, 1965) SECTION 15.16.050 Necessary connections. Within time specified by the plumbing inspector, but not to exceed one (1) year after notice from the plumbing inspector, the owner or person having legal control of any building or premises within City the shall connect the building or premises with the sanitary sewer if available, or to a septic tank if the sewer is not available. Such connections shall provide outlets for all water closets, wash stands, slop stands, sinks, and any other equipment and devices for the disposal of sewage and drainage from the building or premises. (Ord. 1376 S5, 1965) SECTION 15.16.060 Location of sewer and water lines. Sewer and water lines shall not be laid in the same trench, unless both of the following conditions exist: A. The bottom of the water pipe at all points shall be at least twelve (12) inches above the top of the sewer line. B. The water pipe shall be placed on a solid shelf excavated at one side of the common trench. (Ord. 1702 SI, 1971; Ord. 1376 S6, 1965; Ord. 2088 S3, 1980) SECTION 15.16.070 Trench for house sewer. A house sewer shall be installed in a trench per Section 1006 of the State Plumbing Code (Ord. Page 32 of 48 - -...-..-.-.-------~~-.------_______r__--- 1376 S7, 1965; Ord. 2088 S4, 1980) SECTION 15.16.080 Installation of house sewers. That part of the horizontal piping of the drainage system beginning five (5)two (2) feet outside the structure, for the purpose of receiving discharge of the house drain and conveying the same to the public or private sewer, or septic tank, is the house sewer. House sewers must be installed by the owner of the premises or by a journeyman plumber or licensed sewer contractor, and must be constructed by either cast iron pipe, vitrified clay pipe, transit pipe, rubber gasket concrete pipe, bell and spigot cement pipe, or plastic pipe approved by the State Board of Health and the Director of Building Safety. At or near the point of beginning of a house sewer there shall be installed a cleanout which shall be located above or at the surface of the ground. Other cleanouts to grade shall be installed at one hundred (100) foot intervals. No floor drains or other drains for surface or seepage water shall be connected to sanitary sewers, except by consent of the City Engineer (Director of Public Works), when it has been determined there is no other practical means of disposing of the storm water. (Ord. 1702 ssl and 2,1971; Ord. 1376 S8, 1965; Ord. 2088 S5, 1980) SECTION 15.16.090 Water Test. A. Except for a house sewer or alteration work, every soil waste or drainage system shall receive a water test in the presence of the plumbing inspector. The test shall apply to the entire system, or upon approval of the plumbing inspector, as provided in subsection B of this Section. If the test applies to the entire system, all openings, except the highest opening above the roof or other highest point, shall be tightly closed and the system filled with water to the point of overflow. Whether in sections or in entirety, all dead ends shall be relieved of air during the process of filling. B. In multiple story buildings or buildings covering a large ground area, the system, upon approval of the plumbing inspector, may be tested in sections. If the system is tested in sections, each opening shall be closed, except for the highest opening under test, but no section shall be subjected to less than the pressure of a five (5) foot head of water. The pressure shall be maintained for at least fifteen (15) minutes. If air pressure is applied it shall be pressure of five (5) pounds per square inch. C. The person installing the soil waste or drainage system shall give notice to the plumbing inspector when the system is completed and ready for testing. Not later than the end of the next business day following the day on which the notice is received, the plumbing inspector shall make the inspection required in subsections A and B of this section. Failure of the inspector to appear for the test within the prescribed time constitutes a waiver thereof. (Ord. 1376 S9, 1965; Ord. 2088 S6, 1980) SECTION 15.16.100 Pipe testing. A. Testing of all piping, waste, water or gas, shall be completed before laying any sub-floor. The following procedure shall be followed: 1. Waste, Drain and Vent Piping. Fill with water to elevation required and if leaks are noted, they shall all be caulked or faulty fittings replaced prior to the arrival of inspector. Page 33 of 48 ----,-- (Ord. 2088 S7, 1980) 2. Water Piping. Normal water main pressure at the particular structure applied and its leaks are indicated by a drop in pressure, joints tightened or faulty fittings replaced prior to arrival of inspector. 3. Gas Piping. Same procedure as for water piping, test ten (10), psi air pressure for fifteen (15) minutes. (Ord. 2088 S7, 1980) B. If the above steps have not been taken before the inspector arrives the inspector will not be required to wait, but will return the following work day. (Ord. 1461 (part), 1966; Ord. 1376 S10, 1965) SECTION 15.16.120 Water closet bends. All water closet bends shall be anchored to the bottom of the floor, or to blocking in contact with the floor, so that no movement of the closet bend, in any direction, is possible. (Ord. 1702 S4, 1971,Ord. 1569 (part), 1968; Ord. 1376 SILl, 1965) SECTION 15.16.130 Drainage lines--Sinks--Dishwashers. A. All drainage lines for sinks shall be two (2) inches in diameter. (Ord.2088 S7, 1980) B. The waste line from a pump-type dishwasher shall, at a high point, touch the bottom of the counter top, and shall be anchored securely thereto. The dishwasher waste shall be connected to a waste fitting above the sink trap, or to a separate trap. The Dishwasher waste may be connected to a garbage disposal or trap serving a garbage disposal. (Ord. 1702 S5, 1971; Ord. 1461 (part), 1966; Ord. 1376 S12, 1965; Ord. 2088 S8, 1980) SECTION 15.16.140 Cleanouts. A run of horizontal waste pipe shall be provided with a cleanout, and the run of piping which is more than one hundred feet (100') in length shall be provided with a cleanout for each one hundred feet (100') of length or fraction thereof. A change. in direction of horizontal piping shall have a cleanout if the change is over one hundred thirty-five (135) degrees. Every c:leanout shall be installed to open in the direction opposite to the flow of the soil or waste or at right angles thereto, and shall be so installed that there is clearance of not less than eighteen (18) inches in front of the cleanout and in a position making the cleanout readily accessible. Cleanouts shall be placed in every horizontal drainage system including upper end of four (4) inch horizontal soil pipe. Cleanout fittings shall be of the same nominal size as the pipes they serve, up to and including four (4) inch pipe, and not less than four (4) inch for large pipes. There shall be installed an accessible cleanout on sink wastes. (Ord. 1376 S13, 1965; Ord. 2088 S9, 1980) SECTION 15.16.150 Vent offsets. Whenever a vent has a horizontal offset, the height of the offsets shall be as nearly forty (40) to forty-two (42) inches above the floor as possible and in no case shall it be less than six (6) inches above the rim of the fixture. (Ord. 1376 S14, 1965) Page 34 of 48 SECTION 15.16.160 Supports for piping. In buildings more than two (2) stories in height, stacks shall be secured at each floor with metal floor clamps or other methods approved under state law. Hot and cold water pipe within the building shall be secured at proper grade with hangers of perforated straps spaced not more than ten (10) feet apart, or some other approved method. For soil pipe, heavy hanger iron spaced not more than four (4) feet on centers. (Ord. 2088 S10, 1980) SECTION 15.16.170 Lawn sprinklers--Cross connections. A. Lawn Sprinklers. When a lawn sprinkling system is connected to a domestic or water supply there shall be a valve placed so it will shut off the entire sprinkler system and a vacuum breaker placed between this valve and the discharge side of the line. B. Cross Connections. No cross connection as between the City water system and such other sources of water supply as Talent Irrigation District, private wells or springs, shall be allowed. (Ord. 1376 S16, 1965) SECTION 15.16.190 Water supply-Sizing of residential piping. A. Sizing of House Pipes and Laterals. 1. When no landscaped area or lawn or garden is to be maintained in conjunction with a single or two (2) family residence, piping size may be reduced one (1) nominal size except that the minimum size in all cases shall be a three-quarter (3/4) inch house pipe and one-half (~) inch laterals. 2. Pressure regulating valves shall be installed, if City water pressure exceeds ninety (90) psi. The valve will be installed inside the foundation, if the house has a crawl space. If the valve must be installed outside, it must be enclosed in a casing which is large enough to allow servicing. (Ord. 2088 SII, 1980) B. All piping installed under concrete slabs or concrete floors or through or under concrete footings shall be threaded pipe wrapped with approved plastic wrap or painted two (2) coats with an approved asphaltic paint, or approved copper pipe with joints soldered with silver solder and protected as above where passing through concrete. C. All copper water pipe shall be type L or type K. D. Not more than one (1) dwelling unit and/or building shall be connected to a water meter, except for approved apartment complexes and dwelling groups. A dwelling group is defined in Section 15.16.080. (Ord. 1702 S7, 1971; Ord. 1461 (part), 1966; Ord. 1376 S17, 1965) SECTION IS.1(;.200 Cas pipe mstallati8Bs. .^JI gas pipe and fittings shall be blaek steel, pipe in ASA B36.10 1950. Exoeption: Conneetors Page 35 of 48 may be used as speeified in the Uniform RHildiflg Code, 1991 Edition. (Ord. 1161 (part), 1966; Ord. 1376817.1,1965; Ord. 2088 812,1980; Ord. 2712, 86,1993) SECTION 15.16.220 Plumbing and sewer business license--Required--Issuance. A. No person shall engage in the business of plumbing without a valid business license issued by the City Recorder as provided in this Section. Upon presentation of a valid state master plumber's certificate the City Recorder shall issue the license. Neither shall any person engage in actual plumbing work without a valid state journeyman's license verified by the City Recorder. Where two (2) or more persons are engaged in a plumbing business as partners, the license shall be issued in the name of the partnership. Any membe:r of the firm or partnership may qualify for the firm or partnership. A person or firm applying for a license must file with the City Recorder the master plumber's certificate of the state and must have a permanent place of business. When a licensed plumber or the member of the firm retires from business or dissolved the partnership, the license shall terminate and no other license shall be issued to the plumber or the firm until the plumber or some member of the firm has been licensed by the City Recorder. B. Sewer contractors shall be licensed by the City under the same regulations as plumbing contractors. Upon presentation of a valid state sewer contractor's license, the City Recorder shall issue a business license. (Ord. 1376 S19, 1965; Ord. 2088 S13, 1980) SECTION 15.16.240 Permits-Fees. For application in this city, the plumbing specialty code fees shall be established by resolution of the city council. (Ord 2896, Amended, 06/03/2003) SECTION 15.16.250 Compliance with plumbing law. No person with a permit to do plumbing work shall do the work in a manner other than that set forth in the application for a permit, or contrary to the provisions in this Chapter. All work done pursuant to permit taken out shall be done in a good and workmanlike manner. (Ord. 1376 S22, 1965) SECTION 15.16.260 Notification of inspector. The plumbing inspector or the building department shall be notified before all new work or remodeled work is covered from view. (Ord. 1376 S23, 1965) SECTION 15.16.300 Plumbing provisions violation--Notice. When a licensed plumber or employee of a licensed plumber or a member or employee of a licensed plumbing partnership commits a violation of this chapter, the Building Inspection Superintendent shall cause written notice of the violation to be personally served upon the Page 36 of 48 licensee or upon any member of the licensed partnership which requires the licensee to correct the violation within ten (10) days after the notice is given. (Ord. 1376 S27, 1965) SECTION 15.16.310 Control of construction. Whenever work is being done contrary to the permit or to the requirements of this chapter, the Building Inspection Superintendent or Plumbing Inspector is empowered to stop further work until the violation is corrected. (Ord. 1376 S28, 1965) SECTION 15.16.320 Plumbing license--Suspension. The licensee shall comply with the notice prescribed in Section 15.16.300. If the licensee does not correct the alleged violation within the period prescribed in Section 15.16.300, the Building Inspection Superintendent may rescind or suspend the license of the licensee subject to a review of the Board of Appeals (if activated). No person or partnership shall conduct a plumbing business or perform any plumbing work while their license is suspended. For the purposes of this section the term "proved violation" means any violation specified in the Building Inspection Superintendent's notice on which no appeal is taken within the ten (10) day correction or appeal period, or by the City court in prosecution, therefore, to be supported and proved by the evidence. (Ord. 1376 S29, 1965) SECTION IS.lfi.330 DeariBg '.Appeal. l\ny lieensee receiving a violatiea Botiee 1:1I1der the terms of Section 15.1(:).300, may appeal the ela-imea 'liolatieR to the Board of l\ppeals (if aeti'fated). No appellant or perSOR intorestea iR the hasiRess of an appellant shall sit as a member of the Boara of Appeals iR determi:l'latien of the isslies presemed by the aplleal of the appellaRt, ana, iR this event, the interested member of the Boar-d shall disqllalify himself afld the refRaining members of the Board shall appoint a perSOR to aet as a men:lber m:Q. ~, '.vhieh person has the qualifieations reql:1ired for a member of the Board in the first instance. The finding or reoommeRdation of the Board as to the existeRoe of a violation is biRding upon the Bl:lilaing Inspeetion Superintendent, but the ql:1estion of ..yhether or Bot to suspend the lieense is within the sole discretion of the Superintendent acting upon the decision of the Board of ,^..ppeals. In the event no Board of Pll:lfl1bing Appeals is activated, the Counoil may sit as the ,^..ppeals Board. (Ord. 1376 S30, 19€i5) SECTION 15.16.340 Penalty. Any person refusing or neglecting to comply with the requirements of this chapter or violating any provisions therein is, upon conviction, punishable as prescribed in Section 1.08.020. (Ord. 1810 (part), 1974; Ord. 1376 S31, 1965; Ord. 2382 S17, 1986) SECTION 15.16.350 Liability. Any person violating any of the provisions of this chapter is, in addition to the penalties described in Section 15.16.340, liable to the City for any expense, loss or damage o(;casioned the Page 37 of 48 City by reason of such violation. (Ord. 1376 S32, 1965) SECTION 15.16.360 Exemptions. Railroad, electric or communications public utilities are exempt from the permit reqlllirements of this chapter for plumbing work performed or installations made in the exercise of their function as utilities when located outdoors or in buildings used exclusively for that purpose. (Ord. 1569 (part), 1968; Ord. 1376 S33, 1965; Ord. 2712, S7, 1993) SECTION 15.16.370 Labor by owner. Nothing in this chapter shall prohibit any person from doing plumbing work in a single family dwelling used exclusively for living purposes, including the usual accessory buildings, where such person holds title to or is the land sale contract purchaser of such property, and where such person occupies said premises, and where such person purchases all material and personally performs all labor in connection therewith. Nothing herein shall be construed to excuse such person from complying with any of the construction standards required by this code. The statement required by ORS 701.055(4) shall be submitted on a State of Oregon Construction Contractors Board form prior to installation under this provision. (Ord. 1376 S34, 1965; Ord. 2712, S8, 1993) Page 38 of 48 CHAPTER 15.20 ELECTRICAL CODE SECTIONs: 15.20.010 Purpose. 15.20.020 Code Adoption. 15.20.030 Powers and Duties of Building Official. 15.20.040 Fee Schedule. 15.20.050 Permit format. 15.20.060 Electrical permits generally. 15.20.070 Minor Electrical Installation Label. 15.20.080 Inspections Required. 15.20.090 Violation--Penalty. SECTION 15.20.010 Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to establish a municipal electrical program by the City of Ashland for the administration and enforcement of the State of Oregon Electrical Specialty Code. Pursuant to ORS 479.855, such administration and enforcement may to delegated by the State to the City provided certain minimum standards are met. SECTION 15.20.020 Code Adoption. Adopted as a part of this chapter and further referred to in this chapter as "the electri,cal code" are the following: A. The Electrical Specialty Code as defined in Oregon Administrative Rule 918..290-010, B. The Uniform .^..dministratiye Code Pro':isions fDr the National Electrical Code, 1993 Edition, afld G:-B The electrical code requirements for ORe and Two Family Dwellings under the Oregon Two FBfIlily Dwelling Code One Residential Specialty Code and in OAR 918, Division 480. SECTION 15.20.030 Powers and Duties of Building Official. The Building Official is authorized and directed to enforce all the provisions of the electrical code. SECTION 15.20.040 Fee Schedule. The fee schedule for electrical shall be established by resolution of the city council as the fee schedule for the City in the administration of the electrical code. (Ord 2896, Amended, 06/03/2003) SECTION 15.20.050 Permit format. Page 39 of 48 The permit format established in OAR 918-260-031 is adopted as the permit format for the City is the administration of the electrical code. SECTION 15.20.060 Electrical permits generally. Permits shall be issued in compliance with ORS 479.560 and OAR 918-301-060. SECTION 15.29.979 MiB8r Eleetrieal IBstallati8B Lahel. The program for minor eleetrieal installatiofllabeling established by O.^...R 918 310 to 918 310 110 is adopted as the City's program. SECTION 15.20.080 Inspections Required. Inspections shall be called for and made as provided in the electric code and OAR 918-302-010 to 918-302-040. The general contractor will notify the Building Official wh(m ready for inspections as listed on the inspection card. Inspections will be made within 48 hours after notification, Saturdays, Sundays and Holidays excepted. SECTION 15.20.090 Violation--Penalty. Any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions of this chapter shall be deemed guilty of an offense and each such person shall be deemed guilty of separate offense: on each and every day or portion thereof during which any violation of any of the provisions of this ordinance is committed, continue or permitted and upon conviction of any such violation such person shall be punished as prescribed in Section 1.08.020. Page 40 of 48 CHAPTER 15.24 UNDERGROUND ELECTRICAL SERVICE SECTIONs: 15.24.010 Residential Service Authorized. 15.24.020 Contract--Required. 15.24.030 Contract--Form. 15.24.040 Denial of Obligation. SECTION 15.24.010 Residential Service Authorized. Underground electric service may be provided by the Electrical Department of the City to service residential lots within the City if determined feasible by the Electric Superintendent with the approval of the City Council. (Ord. 1392 Sl, 1965) SECTION 15.24.020 Contract--Required. Such service will be provided upon contract with the adjoining property owners, the form of which shall receive prior approval of the City Council. Said contract shall provide for the amount or proportion of cost to be paid by the adjoining property owners. (Ord. 1392 S2, 1965) SECTION 15.24.030 Contract-Form. A copy of the contract form approved as of the date of the ordinance codified in this Chapter is on file in the office of the City Recorder, and by this reference made a part thereof; provided, however, that said form may be revised at any time hereafter upon approval of the City Council. (Ord. 1392 S3, 1965) SECTION 15.24.040 Denial of Obligation. The City shall under no circumstances be compelled to furnish such underground electrical distribution service, but shall, within its sole discretion, determine the financial feasibility of the installation of such service. (Ord. 1392 S4, 1965) Page 41 of 48 CHAPTER 15.28 FIRE PREVENTION CODE SECTIONs: 15.28.010 Adoption Of Uniform Fire Code And Uniform Fire Code Standards. 15.28.020 Establishment of Duties. 15.28.030 Defmitions. 15.28.040 Above-ground Storage of Flammable or Combustible Liquids. 15.28.050 Storage of Liquified Petroleum Gases - Restricted. 15.28.060 Storage of Explosives - Prohibited. 15.28.070 Amendments to the Uniform Fire Code 15.28.080 Appeals. 15.28.090 New Materials, Processes, or Occupancies - Permits Required. 15.28.100 Penalties. 15.28.110 Severability. 15.28.120 Firefighting Outside City - Authorized. 15.28.130 Firefighting Outside City - Resources. 15.28.140 Firefighting Outside City - Assessment. SECTION 15.28.010 Adoption Of Uniform Fire Code And Uniform Fire Code Standards. One copy of this code and appendices shall be filed in the office of the City R'ecorder. The Oregon Uniform Fire Code and all appendices adopted in this section will be refeIred to in the Ashland Municipal Code as the Uniform Fire Code. (ORD 2827, SI 1998) SECTION 15.28.020 Establishment of Duties. A. The Uniform Fire Code shall be enforced by the Fire Department of the City of Ashland which shall be operated under the supervision of the Chief of the Fire Departmel1lt. B. The Fire Chief may detail such members of the Fire Department as inspectors as shall from time to time be necessary. The Fire Chief shall recommend to the City Administrator the employment of technical inspectors who, when such authorization is made, shaH be selected through an examination to determine their fitness for the position. The examination shall be open to members and nonmembers of the Fire Department, and appointments made after examination shall be for an indefinite term with removal for cause. SECTION 15.28.030 Defmitions. A. Wherever the word "jurisdiction" is used in the Uniform Fire Code, it is the City of Ashland. Wherever the words "Chief of the Bureau of Fire Prevention" are used, they shall mean "Fire Marshal." Wherever the words "Bureau of Fire Prevention" are used, they shan mean "Fire Department. " Page 42 of 48 SECTION 15.28.040 Above-ground Storage of Flammable or Combustible Liquids. The limits referred to in Section 7902.2.2.1 of the Uniform Fire Code in which the storage of flammable or combustible liquids is restricted are established as follows: All City of Ashland residential and historical district areas as defined in the Comprehensive Plan. (Ord. 2785, 1996) SECTION 15.28.050 Storage of Liquified Petroleum Gases - Restricted. The limits referred to in Section 8204.2 of the Uniform Fire Code, in which storag(: of liquefied petroleum gas is restricted, are established as follows: All City of Ashland residential and historical district areas as defined in the Comprehensive Plan. (Ord. 2785, 1996; Ord 2827, S2 1998) SECTION 15.28.060 Storage of Explosives - Prohibited. The limits referred to in Appendix VI-E of the Uniform Fire Code, in which storage of explosives and blasting agents is prohibited, are established as follows: All areas within City of Ashland limits. SECTION 15.28.070 Amendments to the Uniform Fire Code The Uniform Fire Code is amended in the following respects: A. Section 903.2: Delete entire section and replace with the following: Distances to an approved water supply may be increased, as approved by the chief, when tht~ structure to be protected has an approved automatic fire sprinkler system. B. Sections 7902.1.7 through 7902.1.7.4.2 are deleted in their entirety. C. Appendix III-A, section 5.1: Replace the entire section as follows: "Notwithstanding the requirements in Appendix III-A of the Oregon Uniform Fire Code, within the City of Ashland the minimum fire flow and flow duration requirements for one and two-family dwellings having a fire area which does not exceed 3,600 square feet shall b(~ 750 gallons per minute. Fire flow and flow duration for one and two-family dwellings having a fire area in excess of 3,600 square feet shall not be less than that specified in Table No. A-III-A-1. " "EXCEPTIONS": 1. A reduction in required fire flow of 50 percent, as approved by the chief, is allowed when the building is provided with an approved automatic fire sprinkler system. 2. One and two-family dwellings in excess of 3,600 square feet, when equipped with an approved automatic sprinkler system, may have a minimum flow of at least 375 gallons per minute. 3. Additions or remodels to dwellings after the date this provision is adopted shall be permitted unless the addition or remodel creates a new dwelling unit or the dwelling and the addition have a fire area in excess of 3,600 square feet. D. Section 902.2.2.4 Dead Ends: Change 150 feet in length to 250 feet in length. E. Sections 902.2.2.2 and 902.2.2.5: Replace entire sections as follows: Filre apparatus access roads and bridges shall be designed and maintained to support up to 44,000 lbs. gross vehicle weight and shall be provided with a surface so as to providl~ all-weather Page 43 of 48 driving capabilities. (Ord 2827, S3 1998) F. Section 1102.1 through 1102.2.5: Delete in its entirety. G. Section 11 02.3.1: Replace the first sentence as follows: Permission to burn shall be in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code chapter 10.30. H. Section 7701.1: Notwithstanding the exceptions listed in this section, the sale of DOT classification I.4G (Class C common fireworks) is prohibited within the City of Ashland. The use of common fireworks within the City of Ashland is prohibited during any declared fire season except when the sale of fireworks is permitted within the State of Oregon pursuant to ORS 480.127 (June 22 to July 6 of each year). (Ord 2871, 2001; Ord 2876,2002) I. Appendix III-C, section 1: Replace entire section as follows: Inspection, testing and maintenance of water-based fire protections systems regulated herein shall be conducted annually, in accordance with Standard A-III-C-l, or when an inspection by the chief indicates that there is reason to believe that the systmn or device would fail to operate properly in an emergency. Before any existing fire detection and/or suppression system is removed, the chief shall be notified.(Ord. 2785, 1996; Ord 2827, S3 1998) (Ord 2876, Amended, 09/0412001; Ord 2871, Amended, 08/0712001) SECTION 15.28.080 Appeals. Whenever the Chief disapproves an application or refuses to grant a permit applied for, or when it is claimed that the provisions of the code do not apply or that the true intent and meaning of the code have been misconstrued or wrongly interpreted, the applicant may app1eal from the decision of the Chief to the Ashland Appeals Board within 30 days from the date of the decision appealed. SECTION 15.28.090 New Materials, Processes, or Occupancies - Permits Required. The Building Official, the Chief and the Fire Marshal shall act as a committee to d,etermine and specify, after giving affected persons an opportunity to be heard, any new materials, processes or occupancies for which permits are required in addition to those now enumerated in the Oregon Uniform Fire code. The Building Official, in accordance with section 104.2.7 of the Uniform Building Code, shall record and enter in the files of the building department any action granting approval of new or alternate materials. (Ord 2827, S4 1998) SECTION 15.28.100 Penalties. A. Any person who violates any of the provisions of this chapter, the Uniform JFire Code or Uniform Fire Code Standards as adopted in this chapter or who shall violate or fail to comply with any order made thereunder, or who shall build in violation of any detailed statement of specifications or plans submitted and approved thereunder, or any certificate or permit issued thereunder, and from which no appeal has been taken, or who shall fail to comply with such an order as affirmed or modified by the Ashland Appeals Board or by a court of competent jurisdiction, within the time fixed herein, shall severally for each and Page 44 of 48 every such violation and noncompliance, respectively, be guilty of a violation punishable by a fine as set forth in Ashland Municipal Code, Section 1.08.020. The imposition of one penalty for any violation shall not excuse the violation or permit it to continue: and all such persons shall be required to correct or remedy such violations or defects within a reasonable time; and when not otherwise specified, each ten days that prohibited conditions are maintained shall constitute a separate offense. B. The application of the above penalty shall not be held to prevent the enforced removal of prohibited conditions. SECTION 15.28.110 Severability. Should any section, paragraph, sentence or word of this ordinance or of the Code or Standards hereby adopted be declared for any reason to be invalid, it is the intent of The City of Ashland that it would have passed all other portions of this ordinance independent of the elimination here from of any such portion as may be declared invalid. SECTION 15.28.120 Firefighting Outside City - Authorized. In accord with ORS 476.290, the Fire Chief or representative is authorized to extinguish uncontrolled fires that are found to be burning in unprotected areas situated outside the boundaries of the City and that are causing or may cause an undue jeopardy to life or property if, in the opinion of the Fire Chief or representative, such fire is causing or may cause an undue jeopardy to life or property. (Ord. 1698 SI, 1971) SECTION 15.28.130 Firefighting Outside City - Resources. In extinguishing a fire pursuant to Section 15.28.120, the Fire Chief or repres(~ntative may employ the same means and resources used by them to extinguish similar fires within the City. (Ord. 1698 S2, 1971) SECTION 15.28.140 Firefighting Outside City - Assessment. Whenever a fire is extinguished or attempted to be extinguished by the fire department outside the City of Ashland, the owner of the property involved in such fire shall pay for the cost of providing such fire suppression service, as follows: A. For the first hour or fraction thereof: 1. Pumper apparatus - $250.00/hour 2. Brush apparatus - $100.00/hour 3. Rescue standby - $100.00/hour 4. Staff vehicle - $ 50.00/hour For each piece of apparatus per hour following the first hour, payment shall be on a fractional basis to the nearest 15 minutes. B. Personnel cost shall be actual cost with a minimum charge of one hour for each person Page 45 of 48 --.----~- - --------r- responding to the fire emergency, plus all personnel costs in excess of regular time for each person performing standby services in place of those who respond, to be billed on a fractional basis to the nearest fifteen minutes after the first hour for any fractional portions of hours of service. (Ord. 2711, 1993) Page 46 of 48 CHAPTER 15.36 NUMBERING OF BUILDINGS SECTIONs: 15.36.010 N umbering-- Required--Generally. 15.36.020 N umbering-- Placement. 15.36.030 Frontage allowed. 15.36.040 Numbering--Required-- Time Limit. SECTION 15.36.010 Numbering--Required--Generally. All entrances from the public streets of the City to buildings shall be numbered as: provided in this chapter. Numbers and letters shall meet all applicable signage requirements of Chapter 31 of the Oregon Structural Specialty Code. (Ord. 331 Sl, 1907; Ord. 2712, S9, 1993) SECTION 15.36.020 Numbering--Placement. A. In all cases where a building is located on or back of the property line of the street on which the building fronts, the numbers may be placed either at the side of the main entrance of said buildings, over said main entrance, upon the porch or piazza, or said numbers may be placed over or at the side of the gateway of said property, or upon any steps or other structure near and back of the property line thereof, in such a manner that the same may be plainly seen from the street in front of said property. B. Whenever houses are located back of the property line, said numbers shall he placed and maintained in such a manner that the same will not be hidden from view from the street by any trees, bushes, shrubs or other obstructions. (Ord. 331 82, 1907) SECTION 15.36.030 Frontage allowed. A. Twelve and one-half (12 Y2) feet frontage of all lots shall be allowed for each number only on such streets where so specified. The City Recorder shall assign the numbers on either side of the street as designated on the official map of the City, the consecutive even and uneven numbers being opposite each other as far as practicable and shall furnish information on application of the number controlled by each lot. B. 8aid numbers shall be at least two (2) inches in height and of corresponding width. (Ord. 331 83, 1907) SECTION 15.36.040 Numbering--Required-- Time Limit. All owners, agents, occupants, lessees, tenants and subtenants of buildings which may hereafter be erected, who have not provided such buildings with the proper numbers on or before fifteen (15) days after the completion of said buildings shall be subject to notification to do so in writing, at anytime, by the City Engineer and if, within fifteen (15) days from h€:: date of said notice, they neglect or refuse to do so, they are guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof are punishable as prescribed in section 1.08.010 (Ord. 1810 (part) 1974; Ord. 331 84, Page 47 of 48 1907) The foregoing ordinance was read by title only in accordance with Article X, Section 2(C) of the City Charter on the day of , 2006. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of ,2006. John W. Morrison, Mayor Reviewed as to form: Michael W. Franell, City Attorney Page 48 of 48 --------.-...~-... ~--~---. -- ..-----------r--- APPENDIX J GRADING II Adopted by the State of Oregon for optional use in municipalities. The provisions contained in this appendix are not mandatory unless specifically referenced in the culopting ordinance. SECTION J101 GENERAL JI01.1 Scope. The provisions of this chapter apply to grading, excavation and earthwork construction, including fills and em- bankments. Where conflicts occur between the technical re- quirements of this chapter and the soils report, the soils report shall govern. n01.2 Flood hazard areas. The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to grading, excavation and earthwork construc- tion, including fills and embankments, in floodways within flood hazard areas established in Section 1612.3 unless it has been demonstrated through hydrologic and hydraulic analyses performed in accordance with standard engineering practice that the proposed work will not result in any increase in the lever of the base flood. SECTION J102 DEFINITIONS n 02.1 Definitions. For the purposes of this appendix chapter, the terms, phrases and words listed in this section and their de- rivatives shall have the indicated meanings. BENCH. A relatively level step excavated into earth material on which fill is to be placed. COMPACTION. The densification of a fill by mechanical means. CUT. See Excavation. DOWN DRAIN. A device for collecting water from a swale or ditch located on or above a slope, and safely delivering it to an approved drainage facility EROSION. The wearing away of the ground surface as a result of the movement of wind, water or ice. EXCAVATION. The removal of earth material by artificial means, also referred to as a cut. FILL. Deposition of earth materials by artificial means. GRADE. The vertical location of the ground surface. GRADE, EXISTING. The grade prior to grading. GRADE, FINISHED. The grade of the site at the conclusion of all grading efforts. GRADING. An excavation or fill or combination thereof. KEY. A compacted fill placed in a trench excavated in earth material beneath the toe of a slope. SLOPE. An inclined surface, the inclination of which is ex- pressed as a ratio of horizontal distance to vertical distance. 2004 OREGON STRUCTURAL SPECIAL TV CODE TERRACE. A relatively level step constructed in the face of a graded slope for drainage and maintenance purposes. SECTION J103, PERMITS REQUIFIED JI03.1 Permits required. Except as exempted in Section 1103.2, no grading shall be performed without first having ob- tained a permit therefor from the building official. A grading permit does not include the construction of retaining walls or other structures. JI03.2 Exemptions. A grading permit shall not be required for the following: 1. Grading in an isolated, self-contained area, provided there is no danger to the public, and that such grading will not adversely affect adjoining properties. 2. Excavation for construction of a structure permitted un- der this code. 3. Cemetery graves. 4. Refuse disposal sites controlled by other regulations. 5. Excavations for wells, or trenches for utilities. 6. Mining, quarrying, excavating, processing or stockpil- ing rock, sand, gravel, aggregate or clay controlled by other regulations, provided such operations do not affect the lateral support of, or significantly increase stresses in, soil on adjoining properties. 7. Exploratory excavations perform.ed under the direction of a registered design professional. Exemption from the permit requirements of this appendix shall not be deemed to grant authorization for any work to be done in any manner in violation of the provisions of this code or any other laws or ordinances of this jurisdiction. SECTION J104 PERMIT APPLICATION AN[) SUBMITTALS JI04.1 Submittal requirements. In addition to the provisions of Section 105.3, the applicant shall state the estimated quanti- ties of excavation and fill. n04.2 Site plan requirements. In adldition to the provisions of Section 106, a grading plan shall show the existing grade and finished grade in contour intervals of sufficient clarity to indi- cate the nature and extent of the work and show in detail that it complies with the requirements of this code. The plans shall show the existing grade on adjoining properties in sufficient detail to identify how grade changes will conform to the re- quirements of this code. 627R APPENDIX J JI04.3 Soils report. A soils report prepared by registered de- sign professionals shall be provided which shall identify the nature and distribution of existing soils; conclusions and rec- ommendations for grading procedures; soil design criteria for any structures or embankments required to accomplish the pro- posed grading; and, where necessary, slope stability studies, and recommendations and conclusions regarding site geology. Exception: A soils report is not required where the building official determines that the nature of the work applied for is such that a report is 110t necessary. JI04.4 Liquefaction study. For sites with mapped maximum considered earthquake spectral response accelerations at short periods (Ss) greater than O.5g as determined by Section 1615, a study of the liquefaction potential of the site shall be provided, and the recommendations incorporated in the plans. Exception: A liquefaction study is not required where the building official determines from established local data that the liquefaction potential is low. SECTION J105 INSPECTIONS JI05.1 General. Inspecltions shall be governed by Section 109 of this code. JI05.2 Special inspeCtions. The special inspection require- ments of Section 1704.7 shall apply to work performed under a grading permit where required by the building official. TOP OF FILL '~ -5 FT (1524 mm) OR GREATER SECTION J106 EXCAVATIONS JI06.1 Maximum slope. The slope of cut surfaces shall be no steeper than is safe for the intended use, and shall be no steeper than 2 horizontal to I vertical (50 percent) unless the applicant furnishes a soils report justifying a steeper slope. Exceptions: 1. A cut surface may be at a slope of 1.5 horizontal to I vertical (67 percent) provided that all the following are met: 1.1. It is not intended to support structures or sur- charges. 1.2. It is adequately protected against erosion. 1.3. It is no more than 8 feet (2438 mm) in height. 1.4. It is approved by the building official. 2. A cut surface in bedrock shall be permitted to be at a slope of 1 horizontal to I vertical (100 percent). SECTION J107 FILLS JI07.1 General. Unless otherwise recommended in the soils report, fills shall conform to provisions of this section. JI07.2 Surface preparation. The ground surface shall be pre- pared to receive fill by removing vegetation, topsoil and other unsuitable materials, and scarifying the ground to provide a bond with the fill material. \L SLOPE [NATURAL SLOPE " " " ...' " ,.' ,." " " " " " ... 11 KEY } 2 FT (610 mm) MINIMUM ::;;5 REMOVE UNSUITABLE MATERIAL "-.1011 (3048 mm) MINIMUM For 51: 1 foot = 304.8 mm FIGURE J107.3 BENCHING DETAILS 628R 2004 OREGON STRUCTURAL SPECIAL TV CODE J1 07.3 Benching. Where existing grade is at a slope steeper than 5 horizontal to 1 vertical (20 percent) and the depth of the fill ex- ceeds 5 feet (1524 mm) benching shall be provided in accor- dance with Figure n07.3. A key shall be provided which is at least 10 feet (3048 mm) in width and 2 feet (610 mm) in depth. J107.4 Fill material. Fill material shall not include organic, frozen or other deleterious materials. No rock or similar irre- ducible material greater than 12 inches (305 mm) in any dimen- sion shall be included in fills. JI07.5 Compaction. All fill material shall be compacted to 90 percent of maximum density as determined by ASTM D 1557, Modified Proctor, in lifts not exceeding 12 inches (305 mm) in depth. JI07.6 Maximum slope. The slope of fill surfaces shall be no steeper than is safe for the intended use. Fill slopes steeper than 2 horizontal to 1 vertical (50 percent) shall be justified by soils reports or engineering data. SECTION J108 SETBACKS JI08.1 General. Cut and fill slopes shall be set back from the property lines in accordance with this section. Setback dimen- sions shall be measured perpendicular to the property line and shall be as shown in Figure n 08.1, unless substantiating data is submitted justifying reduced setbacks. J108.2 Top of slope. The setback at the top of a cut slope shall not be less than that shown in Figure J 1 08.1, or than is required to accommodate any required interceptor drains, whichever is greater. JI08.3 Slope protection. Where required to protect adjacent properties at the toe of a slope from adverse effects of the grad- ing, additional protection, approved by the building official, APPENDIX J shall be included. Such protection may include but shall not be limited to: 1. Setbacks greater than those required by Figure n 08.1. 2. Provisions for retaining walls or similar construction. 3. Erosion protection of the fill slopes. 4. Provision for the control of surface waters. SECTION J109 DRAINAGE AND TERHACING J109.1 General. Unless otherwise recommended by a regis- tered design professional, drainage facilities and terracing shall be provided in accordance with the requirements of this sec- tion. Exception: Drainage facilities and terracing need not be provided where the ground slope is not steeper than 3 hori- zontal to 1 vertical (33 percent). J109.2 Terraces. Terraces at least 6 feet (1829 mm) in width shall be established at not more than 30-foot (9144 mm) verti- cal intervals on all cut or fill slopes to control surface drainage and debris. Suitable access shall be provided to allow for clean- ing and maintenance. Where more than two terraces are required, one terrace, lo- cated at approximately mid-height, shall be at least 12 feet (3658 mm) in width. Swales or ditches shall be provided on terraces. They shall have a minimum gradient of 20 horizontal to 1 vertical (5 percent) and shall be paved with concrete not less than 3 inches (76 mm) in thickness, or with other materials suitable to the ap- plication. They shall have a minimum depth of 12 inches (305 mm) and a minimum width of 5 feet (Jl524 mm). Property Una I ! Cut or Fill Slope HIS but 2 ft. (610 mm) mirimum and nIled rot8xC88d 10 ft. (3048 mm) mallimum P~Jty Una I I : Toe 01 HIS but2 ft. (610 mm) mirimum 141 S1ql8 an:! nB8d rot 8llCe8d 20 ft. (6096 mm) maximum . ! i tAlBlor Firish Grade For SI: 1 foot = 304.8 mm ,./ h l FIGURE J108.1 DRAINAGE DIMENSIONS 2004 OREGON STRUCTURAL SPECIAL TV CODE 629R ----,.--- APPENDIX J A single run of swale or ditch shall not collect runoff from a tributary area exceeding 13,500 square feet (1256 m2) (pro- jected) without discharging into a down drain. JI09.3 Interceptor dr'ains. Interceptor drains shall be in- stalled along the top of cut slopes receiving drainage from a tributary width greater than 40 feet (12 192 mm), measured horizontally. They shall have a minimum depth of 1 foot (305 mm) and a minimum width of3 feet (915 mm). The slope shall be approved by the building official, but shall not be less than 50 horizontal to 1 vertical (2 percent). The drain shall be paved with concrete not less than 3 inches (76 mm) in thickness, or by other materials suitable to the application. Discharge from the drain shall be accomplished in a manner to prevent erosion and shall be approved by the building official. JI09.4 Drainage across property lines. Drainage across property lines shall not exceed that which existed prior to grad- ing. Excess or concentrated drainage shall be contained on site or directed to an approved drainage facility. Erosion of the ground in the area of di:;charge shall be prevented by installa- tion of nonerosive down drains or other devices. SECTION J110 EROSION CONTROL J110.1 General. The faces of cut and fill slopes shall be pre- pared and maintained to control erosion. This control shall be permitted to consist of effective planting. Exception: Erosion control measures need not be provided on cut slopes not subject to erosion due to the erosion-resis- tant character of the materials. Erosion control for the slopes shall be installed as soon as practicable and prior to calling for final inspection. J110.2 Other devices. Where necessary, check dams, crib- bing, riprap or other devices or methods shall be employed to control erosion and provide safety. SECTION J111 REFERE:NCED STANDARDS ASTM D 1557-00 Test Method for Laboratory 1107.6 Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Modified Effort [56,000 ft-Ib/ft3 (2:,700kN-m1m3)]. 630R 2004 OREGON STRUCTURAL SPECIAL TV CODE CITY OF ASHLAND GRADING FEES Exhibit a General. Fees shall be assessed in accordance with the provisions of this section or shall be as set forth in the fee schedule adopted by the City of Ashland. . Plan Review Fees. When a plan or other data are required to be submitted, a plan lreview fee shall be paid at the time of submitting plans and specifications for review. Said plan review fee shall be as set forth in Table A. Separate plan review fees shall apply to retaining walls or major drainage structures as required. For excavation and fill on the same site, the fee shall be based on the volume of excavation or fill, whichever is greater. Grading Permit Fees. A fee for each grading permit shall be paid to the City of Ashland, nuilding Dept. as set forth in Table A. Separate permits and fees shall al~ply to retaining walls or major drainage structures as required. There shall be no separat'e charge for standard terrace drains and similar facilitieS. TABLE A - GRADING PLAN REVIEW FEES 50 cubic ds orless No fee 51 to 100 cubic $23.50 101 to I 000 cubic $37.00 1 001 to 10,000 cubic ds. $49.25 10,001 to 100,000 cubic yards....$49.25 for the first 10,000 cubic yards, plus $24.50 for each additional 10000 or fraction thereof. 100,001 to 200,000 cubic yards...$269.75 for the first 100,000 cubic yards, plus $13.25 for each additional 10 000 cubic or fraction thereof. 200,00 I cubic yards or more.. .$402.25 for the first 200,000 cubic yards, plus $7.25 for each additional 10 000 cubic ds Or fraction thereof. Other Fees: Additional plan review required by changes, additions or revisions to approved plans..... .$50.50 per hour* minimum c e - one-balfhour *Or the total hourly cost to the City, whichever is the greatest. This cost shall include supervision, overhead, equipment, hourly wages and fringe benefits oCthe employees involved. TABLE B - GRADING PERMIT FEES. 50 cubic $23.50 51 to 100 cubic $37.00 101 to 1,000 cubic yards...$37.oo for the first 100 cubic yards plus $17.50 for each additional 100 cubic or fraction thereof. 1,001 to 10,000 cubic yards...$l94.50 for the first 1,000 cubic yards, plus $14.50 for each additiCinall,OOO cubk dsorfractionthereof.. 10,001 to 100,000 cubic yards....$325.oo for the first 10,000 cubic yards, plus $66.00 for each adlditional 10 000 ds or fraction thereof. 100,00 1 cubic yards or more.. .$919.00 for the fmt 100,000 cubic yards, plus $36.50 for each additional 10 000 cubic ds or fraction thereof. Other Inspections and Fees: 1. Inspections outside of normal business hours (minimum charge - two hours) $50.50 per hour 2. Re-mspection fees $50.50 per hour 3. tions for which no fee is s wcall indicated minimum c e - one-half hour $50.50 hour 'The fee for a ending permit authorizing additional worlc to that under a valid permit shall be the difference between the fee paid for the original permit and the fee shown for the Clltire project. .2()r the total hourly cost to the City, whichever is the greatest. This cost shall include supervision, overheadl, equipment, hourly wages and mnge benefits of the employees involved. AcLi ~ ~.O~~ EXCAVATION PERMIT CHECKLIST CITY OF ASHLAND - BUILDING DIVISION LOCATION: Applicant: Phone # Land Use A roval Storm, Sewer & Water Public / Private Electric, includin location of transformers : Elevation cuts, Fills and Yarda e Easements / Ri Location / T e Roads: Public or Private Utilities under Roads / Drivewa s: Public or Private I Plumbin Descri tion Electric Descri tion Structural Descri tion - ,..~ .. " -' -' -, - .. Point Person for Public Works: Signiture of Applicant submitting plans Inspector Date . This list does not constitute a plan review CITY OF ASHLAND EXCAVATION PERMIT - FLOW CHART APPLICATION I FLOW CHART TO DEVELOPER / PRE- APPLICATION I FINAL PLAN APPROVAL by PUBLIC WORKS & ENGINEERING, ALL UTILITES & ACCESS LAND USE APPROVAL ELECTRIC / LOCATION OF TRANSFORMER, AND SIGNED BY ELECTRIC DEPARTMENT I BUILDING DIVISION REVIEW SOILS ENGINEER I CONTOUR MAP, CUTS / FILLS, ~ RETAINING WALLS ( ENGINEERING REQ'D PRELIMINARY PLAT EASEMENTS / BOUNDRlES I I BUILDING PERMIT I ROADS PUBLIC / PRIVATE I l I I PLANl\fING / LAND USE I I I PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR SIGNS PLANS & PRINTS PUBLIC WORKS ~ PRE-CONSTRUCTION CONFERENCE DOCUMENTS/PA EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT THE MARCH 21, 2006 CITY COUNCIL MEETING , , PURCHASE OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT T37, RIE, S14CD, TLIOO (SOUTH OF THE ASHLANDER APTS.AT SISKIYOU BLVD. & CLAY STREET FOR THE USE OF A NEIGHBORHOOD PARK AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING. I OWN THE PROPERTY ADJOINING THIS PARCEL ALONG MOST OF THE SOUTHERN PROPERTY LINE. THIS PROCESS FAILED TO GIVE ANY NOTICE TO ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS OR PERMIT ANYONE TO TALK ABOUT IT.. I HAD BEEN IN CONTACT WITH THE OWNER OF THIS PARCEL TO PURCHASE IT WITH THE INTENT, ON MY PART, OF CREATING OPEN SPACE ON A PORTION OF THE PROPERTY AND DEVELOPING HOME SITES ON THE BALANCE. THE COST OF THIS PROPERTY IS $500,000 ACCORDING TO THE OWNER. UNDER THE DEAL STRUCK BY THE CITY PARKS DEPARTMENT, THE CITY WILL GET A PARK SIMILAR TO THE OPEN SP ACE THAT I WOULD HAVE DEDICATED FOR FREE AND THREE HOME SITES THAT THE CITY WILL USE FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING INSTEAD OF THE PRIVATE HOME SITES THAT I WOULD HAVE CREATED. THE COST TO THE TAXPAYERS IS PRESUMABLY WHAT I WOULD HAVE HAD TO PAY FOR THE PROPERTY, WHICH IS $500,000. FOR THIS THE CITY WILL GET SUBST ANTIALL Y THE SAME OPEN SPACE AS I WOULD HAVE PROVIDED FOR FREE AND THREE AFFORDABLE HOME SITES. ASSUMING THE PARK IS SUBST ANTIALL Y THE SAME AS THE OPEN SPACE THAT I WOULD HAVE GRANTED, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT I WOULD HA VE DONE AND WHAT THE CITY IS DOING IS THE CREATION OF THREE AFFORDABLE HOUSING SITES, AT A COST OF APPROXIMATELY $500,000. I MADE ATTEMPTS TO PRESENT THESE OPTIONS TO OFFICIALS BUT WAS TOLD THAT IT COULDN'T BE DISCUSSED THEN. IF THE CITY PURCHASES THIS PROPERTY, THEN I WOULD LIKE TO AT LEAST HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SUGGEST WAYS IN WHICH THE CITY CAN BE SPARED SOME OF THE EXPENSE OF CURBS, GUTTERS, SEWERS, STREET AND SIDEWALK PAVING AND THE INSTALLATION OF PUBLIC UTILITIES, THROUGH A JOINT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT WITH ME THAT WILL ACCOMPLISH THE CITY'S GOALS. I WOULD BE WILLING TO PARTICIPATE IN THOSE COSTS IN ORDER TO GAIN ACCESS TO MY PROPERTY FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THREE HOUSING SITES ON MY PROPERTY. IF THIS PROJECT GOES THROUGH WITHOUT GRANTING ME ACCESS TO CLAY STREET, THEN I WILL BE UNABLE TO DEVELOP ANY HOUSING SITES ON MY PROPERTY. Submitted before the Ashland City Council Meeting March 21, 2006 By: Craig Gorson 1000 Clay Street Ashland 488-7969 - ---y- .. a ~DOm~ w aJ ~i;:~f :~1ll0'. :~~~I ~i .wi ! il ." 81; ee_ l;) q ~ [;j;l!~5m .. 5: -::r=3il -::r" !oS -0 'II:'. .)0 t- ::r ~il:~ -Z! = a ~ sill ... ~~)(i~ ~~F F~ r- ::J :Ii- Ni~ef H' !Qg 1 co' " 2m ~~~m~ C ~- ,~l .. - ",!!1 :z: ~~ 2 ~alll~~o 0:0 .... -01. .. -"" ~m Ii"" l.n n "II;;;;;; ;= z t:=I! lS:a2g i~:;i ng, ;:: Z2 21 mi!m~m:: ...li ii',& '" Ii; 2I~ 8ID. 2 Ci) ~::e :a""::J ~ .. 0 "" ~g I a' ?< 2 2 1:1 1ft""~2liii!l S " "'. ::"'1 i~ 8 Gl g l!l'< ll... ,. -. m 0 CD." - J 0, I 3 " n ." z m )Iomm N 2: _ !!! i'1i illi'1i:a !l '" ::1m ~ g 0" 0 t - N J~ ~ ~ .~~ :; , !. III !! z~ z l!: ~:: Ill,!'i:-::: ~ !' f cr. ~ 6> N 0 Ill~ 011 Cfo.SCDZg" ... N. ~ e=O =oflg f ::J :a ~ m t U: -'~ -I.~!>>~. :~:::~-4 ~;r:~~~ ~~~[I ~fi~5" -4 m ... ~:n:n:n~:n d:aSril n '5_ ~I!"J; ~.-4 . ~!!"Ii a ... -< . ~? z~ E!I;):l1 q ~ w Gl- !j.5,i! '" .. t~Cl~ z: 0)10 "i'" 6:- ~ II i ~- if ji I ... 1:11il lIOn :j~~1 =~hl i~lli'!!! !=ii~ ii;.,!:: ~ · III ill - (I)~2. ::I Ill-- ;!:f5:;1t:: Ill- !! 0" " 5igw~ ~I I i\i ..Ill,;. - .. - m :a i !l' ;: g::r ....0 m . 0.9. . 0 Utou. UlIOO m ~!l .. -"i o ~ ~ .i z . p . ~ I i. If .. 1:1 n ~ - !~ ::l. .. "II ill ~ " z .. 2 !! ~ ~ ~ 2 ~ i Gl Z _ Gl c "II t:Sa:g ii~~~;::~J e i 0 z i :a N:"':"~ 000 0 ;;; #.#.#. S lil w 1:1 .. ~ .g II W o ,- ~ :!l~ 5~ en ~ ~ n ".....)>1\) :T0I1/l0l o.jlo.j'c..l :J~-OI CD.....Ol ::1-; POOl .jIo.O'" 1\I Ol CD :Jtv:U3' Q., Ol COCO "T1~~~ OlCOI\)Ol X CllO'< ~~~~j? en iiiiiiiiiiii;;l :J: ~RqR m Y'......i?'i" m ~~~f~ -I (JI(J1U'1~X :J> ...a. WILLOWBROOK RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SITE PLAN D AND A ENTERPRISE >)> z::O oQ "tl- >rrl zO z-l _C z::o G)m We, the residents and neighbors of lower Clay Street, adamantly oppose the Willowbrook Development and the annexation of the Taylor Ranch property at 380 Clay Street for the following reasons: 1. Excessive density in one area with a narrow street access. City o! ASEhlah~bd't . . Planmng x I I 2. ExcessIve Impact on traffic patterns. Exhibit # (:c~ .;~<'\v 3. Wetland concerns given the existing discrepancies as to the actual '~f .;)';'-'1- ifl the wetlands. Oatt{,~Staff 17../ 4. Impact on the existing wild life habitats. t .~ '. I Name (Printed) A-\6elf'\- ~ ~ ~ M 'c: '- '"t.v Signature Address 'Y()i)Gl A-,) M AJ~)'H -;21 CLA~ ,<;1' # 2 ct . 3 :) \ C r (\, \ (.:r::t ,:;Yr .;t>~ (Ci(( l 30 ) ~ ~~ ~ t;J!r U REFJi~ f!1!-lt/Te,~ tn~/Y7J1-( L 3J.1 elM '5T 18 IrSHlIWIJ ". ~, ~ ( ~,j.. .' t' ~. ....... /-1 1', _ ....! c..~ -:s;) (I c.~'. <>+-Jt:';}0 .A-"f.-,/ ~ n~V-~ ::~..Y Y-1J\2_~.!?,~j~ /' .. " -, 1._. .~ , 'v'j:f ~2f2) A-SH \JU7Jj :57;rr~~' ~ We, the residents and neighbors of lower Clay Street, adamantly oppose the Willowbrook Development and the annexation of the Taylor Ranch property at 380 Clay Street for the following reasons: 1. Excessive density in one area with a narrow street access. 2. Excessive impact on traffic patterns. 3. Wetland concerns given the existing discrepancies as to the actual site of the wetlands. 4. Impact on the existing wild life habitats. (Printed) Address ,# CJ-i 52/ ~f. -#-* 3;tL) ef.J!ty, JJ: #21 / ,I/~ !;f~7S2c As~ I~d ", Ie .-/" -K Cl" {"'\ 'v\h..... '" I v' ~\(.\ 1 J... I l (""- # I :) 5 /l ~ t.J_c...~ ( c1 7 c;- .Le, \ # l~7 45~/qtl S / \ (t: (/ -fr -+II ( (J J-J<)( I {tA' ,.,( " 2--1 C k~ 'it : J1l .1; l~....,) YL ; L L /J Y st. 7~ J ~'I) (/1-'1/ 0 -,l 'I -i .d-"J' Ali' 3 - (Lj' )\ 1) f'k \.- "'-I-d l l' ", # 7 'b 1111" I ~{ 3'(\ C ct . s.f *~3 .Ast ~u,J . / V I ([ II ::: ;1;:J/ 6:L\ ckO l?(:. ~o ~ \. - Ii III I ~' - /) 6l; f.I f' fI-r a i L /.l- We, the residents and neighbors of lower Clay Street, adamantly oppose the Willowbrook Development and the annexation of the Taylor Ranch property at 380 Clay Street for the following reasons: 1. Excessive density in one area with a narrow street access. 2. Excessive impact on traffic patterns. 3. Wetland concerns given the existing discrepancies as to the actual site of the wetlands. 4. Impact on the existing wild life habitats. I Name (Printed) Signature Address (2~X'WL"te )~t.\m~t C~~);(<hkRA.vf ,~ ' . ' 1) ~'/r> ' ZZ--. ~ \J \.. u 3> 2. \ cis r. #- ~3 tiL:.. .t!,.. . r(J&/L~,./:v :! ,v'* S j.l f - (r v'~ "70 '" 3.21 C'~vsJ.. frss- \ ' (t, ,- /I- 52: I (// (/1 f r" '0 32t CJ (;\;1* #fjo 3 L. I C~ 4 '1 ~?-- 321 Cf/)'j Sl; %6-6 ~\~~ - ('~ 9h ~~ eh4AJJJ/ -lbl~ -3~f (JOe"! Jt -#-9S Plalt"- , {I u,?^ ~ >~ _ flrY Gre3Ppr.Naro ~/?,_lAi:-~ 11/ {'/"''l <;f -#17 joeV1J1'l W 11/JYlJ tAl ski - ~ y- "-- dl#1UA uJ71AJ }'7)V5&,' -~ c.o ~ +7-, We, the residents and neighbors of lower Clay Street, adamantly oppose the Willowbrook Development and the annexation of the Taylor Ranch property at 380 Clay Street for the following reasons: 1. Excessive density in one area with a narrow street access. 2. Excessive imp~ct on traffic patterns. 3. Wetland concerns given the existing discrepancies as to the actual site of the wetlands. 4. Impact on the existing wild life habitats. I Name (Printed) Signature Address -:.:.- ("J 1t- q' ({ ~C/C' t () ,if ~:i < ~2 !l t~--- ~I( 4~{_ / Suaaested Condition: That 50% of the affordable units shall be completed and occupied by qualified households, at or below 60% area median income, prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the last of the first 50% of the market rate units. Prior to issuance of a building permit for the final market rate unit, the final SO% of the affordable units shall P'e have been issued building permits. All affordalble units must be occupied, or a rental agreement or purchase agreement shall be executed with qualified low-income households prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the final market rate unit. Purchasers or rE!nters of the designated affordable units shall be income qualified by the City of Ashland and the City shall be presented with copies of all rental or sales agreements associated with the designated affordable units. City of Ashland Planning Exhibit Exhibit # .' (? .;..r. ( / PA #;y?(i' II '{''II. '~ Date~~V( I~ _ Staff 0: "'=-'