The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAshlandCreek_636_PA-2011-00696 ITY OF July 25, 2011 Habib Shahin PO BOX 111 Ashland OR 97520 RE: Planning Action#2011-00696 Notice of Final Decision On July 25, 2011, the Staff Advisor for the Ashland Planning Division administratively approved your request for the following: PLANNING ACTION: 2011-00696 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 636 Ashland Creek Road APPLICANT: Peter L. Cipes Building Design DESCRIPTION: A request for Physical and Environmental Constraints Review Permit approval to construct a 3,475 square foot single-family home on slopes greater than 25 percent for the property located at 636 Ashland Creek Drive. The application includes a request for an Administrative Variance from the Development Standards for Hillside Lands to allow for two small sections of the south vertical wall to be at 21 feet, and 21 feet, 6 inches high respectively on the downhill side of the home where only a 20 foot downhill wall height is typically allowed; and a modification of the Lithia Creek Estates subdivision(PA-94-003)to allow the allocation of some lot coverage from subdivision open space to the subject property. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: RR-.5;ZONING: E-1; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 lE 17AA TAX LOT: 1128 The Staff Advisor's decision becomes final and is effective on the 13t'day after the Notice of Final Decision is mailed. Prior to the final decision date, anyone who was mailed this Notice Of Final Decision may request a reconsideration of the action by the Staff Advisor as set forth in the Ashland Land Use Ordinance (ALUO) 18.108.070(B)(2)(b) and/or file an appeal to the Ashland Planning Commission as provided in the ALUO 18.108.070(B)(2)(c). An appeal may not be made directly to the Land Use Board of Appeals. Oregon law states that failure to raise an objection concerning this application, 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 LUBA on that issue. Failure to specify which ordinance criterion the objection is based on also precludes your right of j 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 Department to respond to the issue precludes an action for damages in circuit court. The application, all associated documents and evidence submitted, and the applicable criteria are available for review at no cost at the Ashland Community Development Department, located at 51 Winburn Way, Copies of file documents can be requested and are charged based on the City of Ashland copy fee schedule. If you have any questions regarding this decision,please contact the Community Development Department between the hours of 8:00 am and 4:30 pm, Monday through Friday at(541)488-5305. I cc: Parties of record and property owners within 200 ft i COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel:541-488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax:541-552-2050 Ashland,Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us i ASHLAND PLANNING DIVISION FINDINGS & ORDERS PLANNING ACTION: 2011-00696 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 636 Ashland Creels Road APPLICANT: Peter L. Cipes Building Design DESCRIPTION: A request for Physical and Environmental Constraints Review Permit approval to construct a 3,475 square foot single-family home on slopes greater than 25 percent for the property located at 636 Ashland Creek Drive. The application includes a request for an Administrative Variance from the Development Standards for Hillside Lands to allow for two small sections of the south vertical wall to be at 21 feet, and 21 feet, 6 inches high respectively on the downhill side of the home where only a 20 foot downhill wall height is typically allowed; and a modification of the Lithia Creek Estates subdivision(PA#94-003)to allow the allocation of some lot coverage from subdivision open space to the subject property. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: RR-.5; ZONING: E-1; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 lE 17AA TAX LOT: 1128 SUBMITTAL DATE: May 25, 2011 DEEMED COMPLETE DATE: June 13, 2011 STAFF APPROVAL DATE: July 25, 2011 APPEAL DEADLINE: August 8, 2011 FINAL DECISION DATE: August 9, 2011 APPROVAL EXPIRATION DATE: August 9, 2012 DECISION The subject property is a vacant flag lot located in between the cul-de-sac of Ashland Creek Drive and Granite Street, and is zoned RR-.5. The parcel is approximately 22,200 square feet in size, irregular in shape, and has a downhill slope to the south-southeast at approximately 18-20 percent, with steeper slopes of 25-30 percent on the western portions of the property. The bulls of the parcel sits at the bottom of a steep, 110 foot long flag drive that is paved and currently accessed by two additional residences. The property is also bound on the southern and eastern edges by a private drive that gains access off of Granite Street. Although the eastern portion of the drive are located on the subject parcel, the applicant is not permitted to gain access off of this drive as a condition of the original subdivision approval was that all lots within the subdivision take access only from Ashland Creek Drive. The subject property is therefore required to utilize the existing steep flag drive from Ashland Creek Drive. The lot is generally covered with dense, native grasses and a few scattered oak and evergreen trees along the lower portions of the parcel. i The subject property is designated as Lot 20 in the Lithia Creek Estates Subdivision located above Granite Street, adjacent to Lithia Park. The subdivision, which has a long history dating to the early 1980s, was ultimately platted in 1999, allowing for 28 units to be constructed on 24 lots. The overall area of the parent property was approximately 25.6 acres, however because a significant portion had slopes in excess of 55 percent, which were deemed unbuildable, slightly more than 15 acres (a total of 655,768 feet) of the parent property were required to be retained in open space as part of the subdivision in order to protect these sloped, forested areas from the i PA-2011-00696 636 Ashland Creek Dr./MP Page 1 impacts of development. The applicant is proposing to construct a new two and a half story single family home with attached two car garage and daylight basement. The project also includes a vehicle turnaround space and two seven foot retaining walls placed immediately east of the home. Because the area of development has slopes greater than 25 percent, the new home is subject to the City's Development Standards for Hillside Lands, as described in the Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) Chapter 18.62.080; and therefore must obtain a Physical & Environmental Constraints Permit. The applicants are also requesting an Administrative Variance to the maximum vertical wall height of 20 feet in two small portions of the home. As with all Hillside development projects, a.Geotechnical Design Report is required to determine the parcel's geologic suitability for construction. In this case, the geotechnical report provided concludes that "the underlying massive, dense granite and granite rock formations which make up the site is stable; and the conditions are suitable for the proposed home and its associated site improvements provided the recommendations contained in this report are followed during design and construction of the project." Because the existing flag drive is steeper than 15 percent slope and greater than 50 feet in length, the home's design is largely dictated by providing a suitable parking and turnaround area that must be limited to 15 percent slope, which ultimately controls the main elevation of the home to be built at the top of the lot. Hillside Development Design Standards are utilized in order to preserve the natural slope of the property by preserving natural features and utilizing design techniques. The proposed home complies with the maximum height requirement of 35 feet from natural grade, and includes a 13 foot wide offset on the downhill facing elevation to provide open space in the form of a decking. The home has been cut into the hillside as much as possible given the constraints of the existing flag drive. The main floor will have the garage, kitchen, master bedroom, and living areas. The bottom floor will have three additional bedrooms, two bathrooms, and a family room. There will also be a 320 square foot storage area in the basement at the southeast corner of the home. The roofing has a general orientation with the natural slope of the parcel, and lower portions are utilized as outdoor space on the main level. The proposed exterior will be light beige and gray that complements the surrounding neighborhood, and utilizes texture and landscaping to reduce the visual bulls. The applicant is requesting an Administrative Variance to the Hillside Design Standards that requires downhill facing walls be less than 20 feet in height as measured from natural grade. The applicant has presented plans showing two small sections of the building are 21 feet, and 21 feet, six inches high from natural grade due to the east-west slope of the property at this location. These portions of the home are the deck railing off the dining room in the southwest corner of the home; and a portion of the open roof bean support at the southeast corner of the home. The plans show that the lower level roof eave is well below the required 20 foot height requirement at the west side of the home. But as the roof moves east, the east-west slope of the property drops nearly eight feet, and the roof line ends 18 inches above the 20 foot line. In justifying the request, the applicant explains that this portion of the parcel is somewhat steep, and was created prior to the adoption of the hillside ordinance. Also because the home's design PA-2011-00696 636 Ashland Creek Dr./MP Page 2 is dictated by its relationship to the existing flag drive, the home has to be placed at the top of the lot where the steeper slopes are located. In addition, the east-west slope of the property makes it difficult to have building elevations, and subsequently roof forms that follows natural grade. The applicant has made an attempt to meet the intent of the hillside ordinance by having the home built into the hillside as much as possible, stepping the footprint into the hill, using split pad foundations and moving the home towards the drive, while still meeting standard setbacks and solar access requirements. In staff's view, the Administrative Variance requested seems relatively minor given the site's constraints, and staff believes that the application can be found to meet the burden of proof in addressing the applicable criteria. Ashland Municipal Code 18.62.080.B.8 does not allow for terracing on hillside lots except to develop a level building pad and provide vehicular access thereto. Due to the existing topography and constraints posed by the location and slope of the existing driveway, the remaining 40 feet of pavement requires two structural retaining walls be placed east of the home. The upper wall to be placed at the end of the turnaround area will structurally support the driveway and turnaround area, while the second, lower wall will support the upper wall. Both walls will be seven feet in height, have a safety rail attached to the top, be revegetated and be constructed by the recommendations provided in the Geotechnical Design Report submitted by the Galli Group. The report notes that the retaining wall configuration is the least damaging alternative to preserve as much of the natural state of the property while providing access to the home. The report also recommends that the property owner strictly limit the amount of additional fill that is brought in due to the amount of fill that is already placed on the lot; and that all of the pre-existing fill must be incorporated behind the proposed retaining walls. The report finds that the granitic soils are prone to erosion if disturbed and left unprotected, and makes recommendations for grading, foundation setting and bearing, drainage and erosion control measures to limit impact to the site. Findings and recommendations of the Geotechnical Design Report dated May 3, 2011 submitted by The Galli Group will become conditions of approval for the Physical and Environmental Constraints Permit approval, and therefore must be instituted into the development and construction the proposed home and site improvements. The report also discusses the need for periodic inspections in order to assure compliance with the Geotechnical Expert's findings and recommendations. This will allow the Galli Group time to evaluate each mitigation proposal during the construction of the residence. All mitigation techniques noted in the applicant's Geotechnical Report will also be conditions of approval. In addition to a geotechnical report, a Landscape Planting Plan is also required that includes re- vegetation of the fill slopes that are terraced by retaining walls. The planting plan shows groundcover, shrubs and several trees to be planted in areas of development, including Lavender, Rosemary, Oregon Grape and Red Flowering Currant immediately surrounding the retaining walls. Only a small portion of lawn in between the two retaining walls will not be landscaped to create a level yard area. The majority of remaining undeveloped potions of the lot will be retained in a natural state. The tree survey indicates there are 15 trees greater than six inches diameter at breast height on the property, the majority of which are multi-trunked Madrone and Oak trees scattered on the south and western portions of the property. The application proposes to remove a 16-inch x PA-2011-00696 636 Ashland Creek Dr./MP Page 3 diameter at breast height (d.b.h.) Pine and an 11-inch d.b.h. Oak within the building footprint, a cluster of four Oaks within the foundation area of the home, and a seven-inch d.b.h. Pine tree south of the proposed home for a total of seven trees. For vacant properties within the RR-.5 zoning district, the removal of significant trees is regulated by the Ashland Municipal Code. Because none of the trees slated for removal are the requisite 18-inch diameter-at-breast-height, they are not defined to be significant under the Tree Preservation and Protection Ordinance (AMC 18.61), therefore no tree removal permits are required, and the proposed removals are considered here only in terms of the broader impacts of the development as part of the Physical and Environmental Constraints Permit. The Tree Commission at their July 7th meeting had no specific comment regarding the proposal, except questioned the need to remove a seven-inch d.b.h. Cedar which appears to be outside the building envelope and within the proposed tree protection fencing. The application did not include an arborist report on the health and suitability of the trees slated to be removed, nor did a representative speak at the Tree Commission meeting to answer questions. The Commission approved the request as submitted. The application includes proposed tree protection fencing which will be placed along the western property line and southwest corner of the lot; and along the eastern property boundary lining the private drive. The planting plan and tree conservation and planting details will become conditions of the Physical and Environmental Constraints Permit approval, and must be instituted with the development of the lot. Chapter 18.62.080.D.6.b has standards for trees being replanted when associated with removal. No mitigation trees are proposed to replace the trees being removed, however in the upper portions of the lot by the parking and turnaround area, four trees (two Forest Redbuds, a Persian Ironwood, and a Red Oak) are proposed. And along the lower portion near the private drive, two Red Oaks and a Persian Ironwood are proposed, as well as another Redbud and shrubs at the base of the home. No replacement trees are proposed in the area of removal as the majority of the trees being multi-trunked, or under existing canopy. The undeveloped portion of the parcel will be left in a "natural state" with slopes that extend downward towards the shared private drive, which bounds the lot on both the south and eastern edges. Staff had initial concerns regarding storm drainage and run off from the development. The geotechnical report notes no natural drainage ways, wetlands, mapped landslide areas, rock outcroppings, or other site conditions that would affect water flow are present; and that surface drainage will continue move down slope across the site towards the roadside ditches along the shared driveway below. The report continues to say that the total project impervious being installed will be 4,885 square feet, which includes roof area, sidewalks, and the driveway and turnaround area. Because the project has an impervious surface calculation of less than 5,000 square feet, the applicant is not required to make improvements to the existing storm water system. However, the applicant is proposing to install a landscaped area at the bottom of the lot that will naturally filter runoff and storm water pollutants before entering an 8" culvert that ultimately leads into Ashland Creek. PA-2011-00696 636 Ashland Creek Dr./MP Page 4 The final component request included in the application is a modification of the Lithia Creek Estates subdivision (PA #94-003) to allow the allocation of some lot coverage from the subdivision's open space to the subject property. The Performance Standards Options Chapter (AMC 18.88) provides a measure of flexibility to allow for innovation in design and site planning for Performance Standards subdivisions in exchange for greater efforts to protect neighborhood character and natural features, as in this case where the parent subdivision included 28 units constructed on 24 lots, but also protected roughly 15 acres of steeply sloped, forested lands in open space and limited vehicular access to the development via only one street so as to minimize vehicular disturbance of the surrounding neighborhood, forest lands and nearby drainages. The RR-.5 zoning district includes a lot coverage standard which allows only 20 percent coverage, which would limit the subject property to no more than 4,102 square feet of impervious surface. As proposed, the application includes 6,335 square feet of coverage, or approximately 30.9 percent of the site and has requested that the flexibility inherent in the Performance Standards Options chapter be applied to allow the allocation of this additional 2,233 square feet of coverage from the subdivision open space to the subject property. This allocation amounts to approximate 30.9 percent lot coverage for the subject property, yet involves the allocation of only a small percentage of the coverage that might otherwise have been associated with the 15 acres now protected as open space. The application explains that the subject property is crossed by a driveway from Granite Street that long pre-dates the subdivision approval and serves a number of neighboring properties. In similar instances, the Planning Commission and Council have generally supported coverage allocations for common driveways crossing properties and contributing to lot coverage. The application emphasizes that while this driveway contributes approximately 1,507 square feet to the lot coverage of the subject property (or approximately 7.5 percent towards the standard 20 percent of available coverage) the applicant is prevented from utilizing the drive as a condition of the subdivision approval, yet because it provides the only access to a number of neighboring properties it's removal is not an option for the applicants. The applicant further explains that because they are required to utilize the flag drive from Ashland Creek Drive, rather than the driveway to Granite Street, they must include a turn-around to allow cars to turn and exit in a forward manner and this area constitutes an additional 4 percent toward the standard 20 percent of available coverage. They thus equate the additional 11.5 percent of coverage requested to be allocated as necessary to address site constraints posed by the existing driveways. In staff s view, the additional coverage is minimal in the context of the larger open space, allows the applicant to respond to site conditions relating to the existing drives, and can be found to be in keeping with the purpose and intent of the Performance Standards Options Chapter. Staff believes that the applicant has proposed a home that displays the least impact to the site given the natural and existing constraints of the lot, and has considered all potential hazards of the proposed development. The applicant will mitigate each adverse impact, including storm water runoff, slope stability, and tree protection by instituting the recommendations of the geotechnical design report and landscape plans. PA-2011-00696 636 Ashland Creek Dr./MP Page 5 Approval criteria for a Physical and Environmental Constraints (P&E) Permit as described in AMC Chapter 18.62.040.1: 1. That the development will not cause damage or hazard to persons or property upon or adjacent to the area of development, 2. That the applicant has considered the potential hazards that the development may create and implemented reasonable measures to mitigate the potential hazards caused by the development. 3, That the applicant has taken all reasonable steps to reduce the adverse impact on the environment. Irreversible actions shall be considered more seriously than reversible actions. The Staff Advisor or Planning Commission shall consider the existing development of the surrounding area, and the maximum permitted development permitted by the Land Use Ordinance. 4. That the development is in compliance with the requirements of the chapter and all other applicable City Ordinances and Codes. Approval criteria for an Administrative Variance to the Hillside Development Standards, as described in AMC Chapter 18.62.080.H: 1, 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; 2. The variance will result in equal or greater protection of the resources protected under this chapter; 3. The variance is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty; and 4. The variance is consistent with the stated Purpose and Intent of the Physical and Environmental Constraints Chapter and section 18.62.080. Approval criteria for an Outline and Final Plan approval, as described in AMC Chapter 18.88.030.A: 1, That the development meets all applicable ordinance requirements of the City of Ashland. 2. 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. 3. 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, 4, That the development of the land will not prevent adjacent land from being developed for the uses shown in the Comprehensive Plan. 5. 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. 6. That the proposed density meets the base and bonus density standards established under this Chapter. 7. The development complies with the Street Standards. Planning Action 2011-00696 is approved with the following conditions. Further, if any one or more of the following conditions are found to be invalid for any reason whatsoever, then Planning Action 2011-00696 is denied. The following are the conditions and they are attached to the approval: 1. That all proposals of the applicant shall be conditions of approval unless otherwise modified here. l PA-2011-00696 636 Ashland Creek Dr./MP Page 6 j I 2. That all recommendations of the Geologic Design Report dated May 3, 2011 by the Galli Group shall be instituted in the development of the property; and that the Galli Group be retained until the project is completed and a final Certificate of Occupancy is issued, and perform inspection to the site according to the Construction Inspection schedule of the Geologic Design Report dated May 3, 2011 3. Building plans shall be in substantial conformance with those approved as part of this application; and plans must be stamped a by a certified engineer. 4. This lot is held to Solar Setback Standard A and calculations depicting compliance with Standard A are required to be shown on the building permit submittals. 5. Prior to the issuance of a building permit: a. That a preconstruction conference to review the requirements of the Hillside Development Permit shall be held prior to issuance of the building permit. The conference shall include the Ashland Planning Department, Ashland Building Department, the design professional, the general contractor, geotechnical expert, landscape/tree professional and project engineer. Contact the Ashland Planning Department to schedule the preconstruction conference. b. That written verification from the project geotechnical expert addressing consistency of the building permit submittals with the geotechnical report recommendations (e.g. grading plan, storm drainage plan, foundation plan, etc.) shall be submitted with the building permit submittals. c. That the applicant shall obtain a Tree Verification Permit and all requirements of AMC 18.61.042 shall be complied with prior to any tree removal, site work including grading and/or storage of materials; and that tree protection fencing shall be installed at the drip line of all trees to be preserved, and inspected by the City of Ashland Planning Division prior to any site work, storage of materials, the issuance of an excavation permit, and/or the issuance of a building permit. d. That the temporary erosion control measures (i.e. silt fence and bale barriers) shall be installed according to the approved plan prior to any site work,-storage of materials, issuance of an excavation permit and issuance of a building permit. The existing temporary erosion control measures shall be replaced and repaired as identified in the Galli Group report dated May 3, 2011. The temporary erosion control measures shall be inspected and approved by the Ashland Planning Department prior to site work, storage of materials, the issuance of an excavation permit, and/or the issuance of a building permit. e. That a performance bond or the financial guarantee in the amount of 120% of the value of the landscaping and irrigation for re-vegetation of cut and fill slopes shall be j provided prior to issuance of the building permit. f. That the applicant submit an electric design and distribution plan including load j 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 the building permit submittal. Transformers and cabinets shall be located in areas least visible from streets, while considering the access needs of the Electric Department. PA-2011-00696 636 Ashland Creek Dr./MP Page 7 6. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy; a. That all requirements of the Ashland Fire Department shall be met, including addressing, gates and fencing, installation of fire sprinklers, and providing fuel break areas as described in the pre-application comment sheet dated February 2, 2011. b. That all re-vegetation including hydro-seeding of all cut/fill slopes shall be installed prior to issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. Vegetation shall be installed in such a manner as to be substantially established within one year of installation. c. That all measures installed for the purposes of long-term erosion control, including but not limited to vegetative cover, rock walls, retaining walls and landscaping shall be installed according to the approved plan, inspected and maintained in perpetuity on all areas which have been disturbed including public rights-of-way in accordance with 18.62.089.B.7. d. Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for the house, geotechnical expert shall provide a final report indicating that the approved grading, drainage and erosion control measures were installed as per the approved plans, and that all scheduled inspections were conducted by the project geotechnical expert periodically throughout the project. 7. That the maintenance of replacement trees shall be the responsibility of the property owner. The replacement trees shall be continuously maintained in a healthy manner. Trees that die within the first five years after initial planting shall be replaced in kind, after which a new ive ear replacement period shall begin. b (Bill Nlol ar, Director Date ` ,Community Development Department PA-2011-00696 636 Ashland Creek Dr./MP Page 8 PA-2011-00696 391E17AA 600 PA-2011-00696 391E17AA 1106 PA-2011-00696 391El7AA 1123 BENNETT JANI/HARVE CALLANAN DAVID A/ELIZABETH CARRACIO GEORGE V JR TRUSTEE 445 GRANITE ST 518 GRANITE 676 ASHLAND CREEK DR ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2011-00696 391E17AA 1124 PA-2011-00696 391E17AA 1129 PA-2011-00696 391E17AA 1127 CARTER JAMES K TRUSTEE ET AL CLINTON STEPHEN T TRUSTEE ET AL DE WIT ELISE M 668 ASHLAND CREEK DR 628 ASHLAND CREEK DR 644 ASHLAND CREEK DR ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2011-00696 391E17AA 1126 PA-2011-00696 391El7AA 1105 PA-2011-00696 391E17AA 1125 EARLY ORWELL J/SUSAN M JOHNSON NATALIE L ET AL JONES JEAN TRUSTEE ET AL 652 ASHLAND CREEK DR 3548 DICKERSON ST 660 ASHLAND CREEK DR ASHLAND, OR 97520 ARLINGTON, VA 22207 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2011-00696 391 E17AA 2100 PA-2011-00696 391 E17AA 500 PA-2011-00696 391 E17AA 1130 KENNEDY JAMES P LEMANNE DAWN TRUSTEE ET AL LEVITT RICHARD M/ELIZABETH 506 GRANITE ST 435 GRANITE ST 620 ASHLAND CREEK DR ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2011-00696 391E17AA 1132 PA-2011-00696 391E17AA 1600 PA-2011-00696 391El7AA 1100 NELSON GORDON 0/LESLEY W NIX ZAN E PITBLADDO RICHARD SR 612 ASHLAND CREEK RD 512 GRANITE ST 6949 BENT GRASS DR ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 NAPLES, FL 34113 I PA-2011-00696 391E17AA 1140 PA-2011-00696 391E17AA 1104 PA-2011-00696 391El7AA 2000 RUTTER TIMOTHY J/JOANNE M SALNERS EDWARD A JR SANTEE MARY ANN 516 GRANITE ST PO BOX 781 508 GRANITE ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 HATBORO, PA 19040 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2011-00696 391 E17AA 1128 PA-2011-00696 391 E17AA 1200 PA-2011-00696 SHAHIN HABIB M TRUSTEE ET AL STAMPER VIOLA E Peter Cipes PO BOX 111 524 GRANITE ST 317 N Main St ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 Ashland OR 97520 636 ASHLAND CREEK 7/25/11 NOD 21 i i i i CITY OF ASHLAND ASHLAND TREE COMMISSION Type I—Recommendations to Staff Advisor July 7,2011 PLANNINGACTION.• 2011-00696 SUBJECT PROPERTY 636 Ashland Creek Road APPLICANT. Peter L. Cipes Building Design DESCRIPTION.• A request for Physical and Environmental Constraints Review Permit approval to construct a 3,475 square foot single-family home on slopes greater than 25 percent for the property located at 636 Ashland Creek Drive. The application includes a request for an Administrative Variance from the Development Standards for Hillside Lands to allow for two small sections of the south vertical wall to be at 21 feet, and 21 feet, 6 inches high respectively on the downhill side of the home where only a 20 foot downhill wall height is typically allowed; and a modification of the Lithia Creek Estates subdivision (PA-94-003) to allow the allocation of some lot coverage from subdivision open space to the subject property. COMPREHENSIVE PLANDESIGNATION.•RR-.5 ZONING:RR-.5;ASSESSOR'S MAP: 391E 17AA; TAX LOT. 1128 i The Tree Commission recommendations: 1) Has no comment on this proposal. j i I i i i i i g0£g-gwl.j7q;e uoisw4 6wuueld pueIgsy ag;;oe;uoo o;eag teal oseeld';sanbaj siq;6wweouoo s;uawwoo io suogsanb aneq noA;I "0Z9L6 u06910'puelgsy'AeAA wnquM bg'6ufplm9 soowag 6uu99w6u3 2;uawd0jana0 Ap.unwwoo'uo!siAiO 6wuueld puelgsy aq;;e algeliene aie sleua;ew py pa;sanbai p.';soo algeuoseei;e pap!Aoid aq pim pue;soo ou;e uoi;oedsui col algeliene We eua;uo algeogdde pue;ueopdde eq;Aq uodn pagan aouapma pue s;uawnoop Ile'uoi;eogdde aq;to Adoo y ynoo;mono ui sabewep jo;uogoe ue sapnioeid anssi aq;o;puodsai o;;uew;reda0 siq;mope o;A;rog!oads;uaio!}ns yjim lenoidde;o suoi;epuoo pasodoid o;6ugelai sans!iaq;o jo leuogn;i;.suoo asiei o;;ueopdde aq;;o ampe3 uoua;uo;eq;uo Vanl o;Ieadde;o;y6u inoA sapnpaid osle uo paseq si uoipafgo ag;uouapio eoueuipjo go!gm Alroads o;amlied •anssi;eq;uo(vem)sleaddy;o pjeos ash P-1 aq;o;jeadde;o ;y6u moA sapnpeid'anssi aq;o;puodsai o;Ap.unyoddo ue iajew uoisioap aq;pjo;se o;A;iogioads;uaiog;ns apmaad o;ajnliel jo'jagal Aq'uoi;eogdde siq;6wwaouoo uoi;aefgo ue asiej o;ampe;;eg;save;s met uo6ejo eogou s!q;o;pagoege aie uogeapdde siq;o;algeopdde et a;uo aoueuipjo agl (040'806'86 ofryy) -uoisioap leug;o 6wpew aq;;o alep aq;wog sAep ZL wgUm uois!A!a 6u'uue[d puelgsy aq;o;6ui;um ui apew aq;snw uoisioap sg}e;g uoismi0 6uiuueld ag;;o uo!ssiwwoo 6uiuueld aq;o;leedde uy uo!s!oap;o sAep g wq}j.m saIyadad awes aq o;papew si uoisioep;o aoi;ou y •uogeopdde ag;uo uo!sioap Jeug a anew 1184S.481S uoisini0 6u'uueid aq;'a;aldwoo pawaap 6uiaq uogeopdde eq;wog sAep qy ueq;ajow;ou pue poped;uawwoo eq;jagy *pouad;uawwoo Aep qb e jo;smope gagm uoi;eopdde 6ui;uwgns Ayadwd agl;o;aal OOZ wg;im sagiadwd 6wpunonns o;;uas si aogou e'ssauelaldwoo to uogeulwia;ap uodn 'leg!wgns to sAep 0£uig;im 9191dwoo si uogeopdde ash pue-I ell au!aua;ap ge;g u0isw0 6uiuueld puelgsy -anoge umogs a;ep augpeap aq;uo-w'd 0£:4 o;joud OZ9L6 uob�aj0 'puelgsy'AeAA wngwM 69'uoiswp 6u'uueld puelgsy;o Apo eq;o;s;uawwoo ua;}um�.wgns o;;y6u a seq;uapisai jo jeumo A;ladad pa;oage Auy "anoge pa;ou A}adoid ag;jol uogeogdde a;aldwoo a paAiaoaj seq};e;g uoismi0 6uiuueld puelgsy agl ;aad 004 09 9Z 0 algoalnas Sou`filuo aoua�a.(al lo,(a�a sau}2 fi7.`adatd h tl tYGI� g Y / �g p2� 99a0 puelusb 9£9 '-�� lL®Z 19 Ainr :S1N3WW03 N311INM 30 NOISSBW8f1S 2103 3NIlOV30 LbOZ`ZZ aunt :N0111/3l1ddV 3131dW03 30 33110N •!eM umgwM 6S W palmmi(woos noAfjsiS)6uippq sammaS 6uu80uf6u3 pue;uawdojanap R;iunwwo0 aq;w•w•d 00:9;e MZ`L AIn0 uo uof;ay 6uiuue)d sfq;MOIAOJ osIe pfM uofssfwwo0 aaJI puefgsy ag1:310N S L l:101 Xd11VL4 34 6£:ddW S,HOSS3SS`d-'S'-NN:JNINOZ!Ie!}uap!saM IeJn21:N0I1dNJIS30 NVId 3AISN31-13WW03 -49doJd laafgns aql o;a3eds uedo uolsiAlpgns woJ}o6emoa;ol ems}o uollmile 04;nnolle of(£00 V6-dd)uolslAlpgns sale;s3 jawo e14111 9q;}o U01;e31 11pow a pue!p8molle Allea!dii S,146,04 Ilene ImuMop 1001 OZ a Rluo 0104M awoq 041 10 ap!s p!qunnop 041 uo A13AllaadsaJ 4614 Sepu!9`pal 6Z pue`1981 6Z ;e eq 01 Ilene IB311aan q;nos eq;;o suo1laas hews one;Jo}Mope o;spue-I aplsll!H Jot spJepue}S;uawdolana0 0411111011 aaueueA 9A1;e1;s1u1wpd ue io;;senbei a sapnpui uo1le3lldde oq1 •aAIJQ)laa13 puelgsd 9£9 le pepool ApedoJd eq;Jo;;unied SZ ueq;jepej6 sedols uo awoq AI!we;-al6uls;ool aJenbs 9Lq`£e ;anJ;suoo o;Ienoadde;!waad nnalAa21 slule4SU03 Ieluawu0nnu3 pue IealsR4d Jo};senbaJ d:NOI1dIN3S30 u6lsa0 6ulppg sedl3.1 Ja;ad :1Nd311ddd anlJO 188J3 pue14SV 9£9 :A1213d0Nd 133f 8f1S 96900.660Z :N0110V ONINNVId N0IiV0l1ddV 30 30110N 006Z-9U-008-6:,W_ sn'lo,puelgse*W—m 090Z-Z99-6ti9:xej 90E9-88b-4ti9 1 0 A .1 1'D 0Z9L6 uo6al0'pue1gsy`Aep' '9qu!M L9')uawjjeda0 6ufuuejd ' (666 Zs`seal w0) •spjepuels laajls ay;ql!M sa!ldwoo luawdolanap eqi -6 •jeldego s!ql japun pagspgelse spjepuels R;lsuap snuoq pue eseq oLp slaaw(l!suep pasodojd ay)legi •} ;oaloid ajgua ay;u!pasodad se sag!uawe}o oRe jay6!y jo awes aql aney saseyd(ljea aL4legl sasegd ui auop axe s;uewdolan9p41.leyl pue'pap!nojd jo paj!nbei}I'seaje uowwoo pue coeds uado;o aoueualulew aql jo;suo!s!Aojd alenbape aje ajegl le41 •a 'ueld aA!suagajdwoo ay;ul uMogs sasn ay;jol padolanap 6u!aq wa;puel luaoefpe luanajd lou @M puel eql;o luawdolanap ay;;egi -p -seaje alqepl!nqun pue'seaje uowwoo'coeds uado aql w papnloul uaaq aneq s91(gea;1004!u6!s pue;uawdolanap eq;;o ueld aLg ui pagguapj uaaq aney"ola`sbu!ddojolno j ooj'seeil e6jel'spuod'sjoppm u!eldpoog'spuelpm se qons''puel aql}o sajnlea}lejnleu pue bugs!xa agl;egi 'o -/l!oedeo puo(aq alejado of Al!l!oe},(l!0 a asneo lou p!M luawdolanap ayl legl pue''uo!leljodsuej;alenbape pue uogoa;ojd ajg pue aollod '96ewejp wjols uegjn'llpiloala'luawdolanap ayl g6nojgl pue of ssaooe paned'jaMas'jaleM 6wpnpul pap!nad aq ueo sa!l!lloe;f1!0 bail alenbope;egi -q 'puelgsV;o f110 ay;;o sluawajnnbaj aouewpjo algeo!ldde lle slaaw luawdolanap ayl legi •e :law uaaq aney eualuo 6u!Mollol agl spug l!uagM ueld awllno aql Widde pegs uo!ss!wwOO 6uluueld 941 lenojddV veld auwgno jo;eualuo y'V'0£0'8e-e 4 IVAOSddV NVId 3NIlino (166'9oaZ 080'sooa UK oa0) 'OZO'804,e1 w pau!gno se possaoojd aq gegs saoueuen angejls!u!wpe 6u!nlonu!suo!s!oap;o sleaddV '0e0'Z9,e4 uogoas pue je;de40 sluwejlsuo0 leluawuoj!nu3 pue leo!s(gd aql;o lualul pue asodjnd palels aql ql!M lualslsuoo s1 aoueuen aqi 'j, pue'(llnog}lp aLg ele!Aape ol,Oessaoau wnw!u!w ay;sl aoueuen aqi •g 'jaldego slgl japun paloelad saojnosel eql;o uogoalojd ja;eaj6 jo lenba ui llnsaj ll!M aoueuen aqi 'Z 'al!s aql }o asn pasodojd jo alp aql;o loadse lensnun jo anb!un a of anp joldego s!ql;o sluawajmbaj og!oads agl 6ugaaw ui fglnoy;!p olgejlsuowep sl aja41 6 :;s!xo of puno; aje seouelswnoj!o 6u!Mollo;@41 jo lie}!spuel ap!sll!H jo;spjepuels luawdolanap aql of loodsaj ql!M poluej6 aq Aew pue 004•gl uogoas}o slumunbaj aoueuen aql of loa[gns lou si uo!}oas s!ql japun aousljeA V '08079'84 -spuel ap!sll!H jo;spjepuelS luawdolanap wojd aoueueA angejlslulwpV •H H'0e0'Z9'94 SONVI 301SIIIH—30NVINVA 3A[I"ISINIWOV (aooZ 1962 aa0:a6U`vela aao'L661'soaZ aaol -aoueu!pjo esn puel aq;Aq pal}luuad luawdolanap pall!wjad wnw!xew aql pue'eaje bu!punajns ayl}o luawdolanap 6ugs!xo aql jap!suoo pegs uo!ss!wwo0 6u!uueld jo jos!ApV}}elS ayi suo!loe alq!sjanaj uegl Aisnoues 01Ow pajap!suoo aq pet's suog0e alq!sjanajj! -luawuonnue aql uo;oedwi asjaApe ayl oonpaj of sdals algeuoseaj lie ualel seq;ueolldde aLg 1841 '£ luawdolanap ayl Rq pasneo spjezey legualod aql a1e6!l!w of sajnseew paluaweldwi pue aleajo Aew luawdolanap aql legl spjezeq legualod eLg pajaplsuoo seq lueo!ldde aql legl 'Z -pezlw!u!w uaaq aney sloedwi asjanpe pue'pajap!suoo uaaq aney seaje 6gjeau pue Aliedojd aql of sloedw! legualod egl'jaldego s!ql;o spjepuels luawdolanap aql;o uogeo!!dde eql g6nojgl '4 :6uvAopo}aql saleAsuowap lueogddV eq;uagM jos!ApV ge;S aql dq ponssi aq lleys l!wad Ma!Aaa slulejlsu00 leols(yd V lenojddV jo}eualuo I'040'Z9'e 4 SIN IVNiSN00 lV1N3W NON IAN3'81V01SAHd y el pp } E d ,w tt Ott E INFOR7Maker MA - 002 i ! i U �° Front Counter Legend J's " F Highlighted Feature theSuffer ti y theBufferTarget FF d �` ' f ( � Tax Lot Outlines f Tax Lot Numbers vI t , r 1 r` s i8 r' f' 3 k � Iliadrt ,� 1 t pie w (rt y y�jlrT1i �(fir°tlL.<r... 't fi a ••„.� M •r8 '� JACKSON COUNTY ' Oregon This map is based on a digital database compiled by Jackson County From a variety of sources.Jackson County cannot accept �n„®117 a; p responsib Ionallly for errors,omissions,or gtl`lr+l positional accuracy.There are no °� warranties,expressed or implied. Please recycle with colored office grade paper Created with MapMaker Map created an 6121/20112:42:17 PM using web.lacksoncounty.org t PA-2011-00696 391 E17AA 600 PA-2011-00696 391 E17AA 1106 PA-2011-00696 391E17AA 1123 BENNETT JANI/HARVE CALLANAN DAVID A/ELIZABETH CARRACIO GEORGE V JR TRUSTEE 445 GRANITE ST 518 GRANITE 676 ASHLAND CREEK DR ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2011-00696 391E17AA 1124 PA-2011-00696 391E17AA 1129 PA-2011-00696 391E17AA 1127 CARTER JAMES K TRUSTEE ET AL CLINTON STEPHEN T TRUSTEE ET AL DE WIT ELISE M 668 ASHLAND CREEK DR 628 ASHLAND CREEK DR 644 ASHLAND CREEK DR ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2011-00696 391E17AA 1126 PA-2011-00696 391E17AA 1105 PA-2011-00696 391E17AA 1125 EARLY ORWELL J/SUSAN M JOHNSON NATALIE L ET AL JONES JEAN TRUSTEE ET AL 652 ASHLAND CREEK DR 3548 DICKERSON ST 660 ASHLAND CREEK DR ASHLAND, OR 97520 ARLINGTON,VA 22207 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2011-00696 391El7AA 2100 PA-2011-00696 391El7AA 500 PA-2011-00696 391E17AA 1130 KENNEDY JAMES P LEMANNE DAWN TRUSTEE ET AL LEVITT RICHARD M/ELIZABETH 506 GRANITE ST 435 GRANITE ST 620 ASHLAND CREEK DR ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2011-00696 391E17AA 1132 PA-2011-00696 391E17AA 1600 PA-2011-00696 391El7AA 1100 NELSON GORDON 0/LESLEY W NIX ZAN E PITBLADDO RICHARD SR 612 ASHLAND CREEK RD 512 GRANITE ST 6949 BENT GRASS DR ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 NAPLES, FL 34113 PA-2011-00696 391E17AA 1140 PA-2011-00696 391E17AA 1104 PA-2011-00696 391 E17AA 2000 RUTTER TIMOTHY J/JOANNE M SALNERS EDWARD A JR SANTEE MARY ANN 516 GRANITE ST PO BOX 781 508 GRANITE ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 HATBORO, PA 19040 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2011-00696 391E17AA 1128 PA-2011-00696 391E17AA 1200 636 ASHLAND CREEK SHAHIN HABIB M TRUSTEE ET AL STAMPER VIOLA E 6/22/11 NOC PO BOX 111 524 GRANITE ST 20 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 r i i i 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 June 22, 2011 1 caused to be mailed, by regular mail, in a sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid, a copy of the attached planning action notice to each person listed on the attached mailing list at such addresses as set forth on this list under each person's name for Planning Action #2011-00696, 636 Ashland Creek Road. Signature of Employee I i I i Document4 6/2112011 1 I Peter L. Cipes Ashland,, Ot-e on * (547) 488- 7096 * petei-c@ 7it7 f,rte# May 17, 2011 NARRATIVE AND FINDINGS OF FACT TO ACCOMPANY PLANNING APPLICATION SUBMITTAL FOR 636 ASHLAND CREEK DRIVE, ASHLAND, OREGON. Project Info: OWNER: Habib Shahin PROJECT ADDRESS: 636 Ashland Creek Dr. APN: 39 IE 17AA Tax Lot# 1128 MAY Zoning: RR- .5 Description of Project: This is a proposal for construction of one single family home on an existing lot. The lot is considered "Hillside Land" and the requirements governing Hillside Development as well as the requirements of the RR- .5 Zone have been carefully considered in the design and preparation of the attached Site Plan and Elevations. Floor plans have also been provided in order to assist the Planners and others in reviewing the proposal. Please carefully review the attached plans and the content of this narrative. As per AMC 18.62.080 please also find attached a Geotechnical Report and Plans by Galli Group which addresses all geotechnical requirements including soils, retaining walls and storm water management, as required, and a Landscape Plan by Covey Pardee which includes all proposed landscaping as well as an existing tree inventory, trees to be removed, and tree protection plan for trees to remain on the site and those in close proximity to the site. Most of the necessary information for planning purposes is contained on the attached Site Plan and Elevations, and the plans and narratives by Galli Group and Covey Pardee. Following is a written narrative and findings of fact. Brief Explanation of Site-Specific Design Process: This is an especially tricky site which sits at the bottom of a pre-existing, steep flag drive. Because access can only be via the flag drive, and because the flag drive is already built and paved nearly all the way to the end of the `flag pole', the primary design consideration is access. The paving of the flag drive will need to be extended down into the parking and turn-around area, and because the proposed new paved portion of the drive must be limited to a slope of 15 percent (max), this factor alone controls the elevation of the main level of the proposed home. Because of the existing topography of the site, the driveway and turnaround area will require structural fill supported by a 7 ft high (max) stacked block, engineered retaining wall. There is a second 7 ft. high wall proposed south and east of the primary wall which supports the driveway. The purpose of the second wall is two-fold: it supports fill to the level of the base of the first wall, limiting the primary wall's height to 7 ft., and also creates some useable gently sloping yard area which is level with and accessible from the lower level of the home. The owner has stipulated that there must be at least one bedroom, kitchen and living area on the same level as the garage in order to accommodate possible future accessibility for the occupants. A look at the floor plans (attached) will show what we have done to accomplish this. Below, at the lower level, there are three additional proposed bedrooms, two bathrooms and a family room. Each level includes some outdoor deck space, some of which at the main level acts as a roof over portions of the lower level. The total conditioned living space is approximately 3,475 square feet. There will also be a partial daylight basement storage area of approximately 16 x 20 feet beneath the Southeast corner of the lower level in the "crawl space" which, due to the side slope of the site will have standing headroom at that location. Every attempt has been made to avoid long or tall continuous massing along the downhill (South) elevation, as per hillside requirements. The lot slopes down to the South and also slopes rather drastically to the East making it very difficult to meet the 20ft maximum wall height criterion along the entire downhill (South) elevation. Therefore we are requesting an administrative variance for two small portions of "wall" that exceed the 20ft limit by a small amount (less than 1%). See South Elevation for specific locations and see below for Administrative Variance Findings. Lot Coverage & Undisturbed Area: There are some rather extraordinary pre-existing circumstances regarding this site which make the design process even more difficult than is usual for hillside lands. Most notable are two things: first, there is an easement along the east boundary of the site which is used as a paved access road for some neighboring lots. Unfortunately, this existing road cannot be used as access by the subject lot due to the conditions of approval of the original subdivision. The planners have previously acknowledged that although the paving of this road must be included in lot coverage calculations, they are willing to support a total lot coverage of 32% (max) which is higher than the normal 20% for this zoning and takes all factors, including bonuses, into account. In order to approve increased coverage we are asking that the Staff Advisor amend the original subdivision approval to re-allocate some of the open space of the subdivision in order to increase the allowable coverage on the subject lot to 31.5% (see below for further details). The second item regards the existing flag drive. During the pre-app conference the planners determined that the flag pole portion of the lot should be excluded from the lot's total square footage. Therefore, the resultant net lot area is less than 1/2 acre and the undisturbed area criterion does not apply. Hillside Building Design Criteria: Great care has been taken to meet the intent of the building design criteria as found in 18.62.080, Development Standards for Hillside Lands. The proposed residence will be located on land with slope less than 35%, on an existing parcel of less than 1/2 acre, with an existing paved flag drive for access. The flag drive will need to be extended a short distance (less than 40 feet) to provide vehicular access to the garage, parking and turn around area, and this portion of the flag drive shall be no steeper than 15%. A ��`AY °' geotechnical study, as required, is included. The study and related plans were completed by the Galli Group, a licensed geotechnical firm. All grading and erosion control measures are specified in the geotechnical report and plans. Since the parcel has a net lot area of less than 1/2 acre it is not required to meet the "retention in natural state" provision of the ordinance, however great effort will be made to minimize the unnecessary disruption of those areas of the site which are to remain unchanged by the new home and related landscaping and driveway areas. All cuts and fills have been carefully planned so that there are no exposed slopes greater than seven feet in height, and all exposed areas will be retained with stacked block (details and specs in geotech package). There are no cuts of over 15 feet or fill of over 20 feet planned in the project. Minor areas of fill will be revegetated as required, as shown on the Landscape Plans provided by Covey Pardee, included. Extensive erosion control measures are outlined in the geotech report and these plans and recommendations will be adhered to during and after construction to ensure long-term slope stability. No terracing is planned except as required to build up and retain the proposed parking and turnaround area. This is necessary due to the unusual nature of the site and the required use of the existing flag drive which controls the elevation of the main level of the home. The Galli Group will make periodic site visits during construction to ensure that all requirements are being fully adhered to and will make a final inspection report upon the completion of the project. Because the project will add less than 5,000 square feet of impervious surface area to the site there is no requirement for improvements to the storm water system, however extensive storm water calculations have been done by the Galli Group consultants in their report. They have also provided a design for managing storm water onsite which utilizes existing drainage ways along with a tight line pipe system discharged via a disbursement pipe. See their report and plans for full details. All tree conservation, protection and removal plans have been thoughtfully designed by Covey Pardee, Landscape Architects, and is included here. Only trees which are in or very close to the proposed building footprint, and those which are unhealthy or dangerous are slated for removal, and for each tree removed a new tree will be planted. Please see the Landscape Plans for all details. The building design plans, included, show clearly that the following has been complied with: Total building height is less than 35 feet, the building has been cut into the hillside as much as is possible given the constraint created by the required use of the existing flag drive and footings will step down the hill. Due to the side slope (East-West slope) of the site, and because the area required for the driveway and parking areas must lie to the North of the home, it is extremely difficult to fully meet the required 20 foot maximum height on the downhill elevation. We are asking for an administrative variance to this requirement for the two small areas which exceed 20 feet in height, namely the railing of the deck at the Southwest corner (outside of dining room) and a portion of the open beam roof support at the Southeast corner. These two areas can be clearly seen in the South Elevation which also shows a dashed line which represents the 20 foot height above existing grade along the downhill side of the home. See later, in findings, for more regarding the ............ ........... ... ..... requested administrative variance. The proposed home will have no continuous horizontal planes which exceed 36 feet in length and this can be clearly seen on the attached Floor Plans and Elevations. Roof areas have been used to break up mass and are oriented more or less with the slope of the site. Roofs at the lower leu�e�`h4y been I partially used to provide decks (outdoor space) for the main level. There are no deck supports which exceed 12 feet in height along the downhill side of the building. Proposed colors of the exterior materials are light beige for walls and gray for the roof and should fit nicely into their surroundings. Textures have also been varied in order to further break up the visual massing of the home. All foundations, gravity loads and lateral loads will be designed by a licensed structural engineer and will be incorporated into the final building plan set. Utilities: All utilities have been installed to the northern edge of the property (down the flag drive) and are stubbed out and ready for connection and use. Sewage will be required to be pumped up (beneath the flag drive) to the sewer main at the end of Ashland Creek Drive. Parking: As shown on the plan(s), we have provided three full parking spaces with turnaround/ back-up space as required, as follows: Two spaces are in the garage and one is at the end of the driveway/parking area. Maximum Building Height & Solar Setback: As shown by measuring the height of the proposed building above average grade at three different locations along the tallest east/west roof peak, at it's tallest point (worst case scenario) the building's height is 34'-6". The average slope, as measured per the SSB ordinance, is .22 and the lot's average N/S dimension is 73 ft. Using Formula 1, we find that Solar Setback Standard A applies, as follows: H-6/.445+S=SSB, or 28.5/.665=42.9 ft. required Solar Setback. A quick dimensioning of the site plan shows that about 62 ft is provided. Therefore meeting the SSB requirements will be no problem. FINDINGS OF FACT FOR PHYSICAL & ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS: A Physical Constraints Review Permit shall be issued by the Staff Advisor when the applicant demonstrates the following: 1. Through the application of the development standards in this chapter, the potential impacts to the property and nearby areas have been considered, and adverse impacts have been minimized. In the design and preparation of plans for the proposed residence every effort has been made to discover and utilize the method of least impact for the subject site and surrounding area. The applicant is proposing to construct a moderate sized single family dwelling which fits within the approved building envelope, with the minimum amount of paving and grading necessary to achieve said dwelling. 2. That the applicant has considered the potential hazards that the development may create and implemented measures to mitigate the potential hazards caused by the development. The applicant has considered all potential hazards and has plans to mitigate each, including but not limited to tree protection and removal, slope stability and storm water runoff. All such MAY A 5 l,,, measures can be found in the GeoTech report and Plans and the Landscape Plans included herewith. 3. That the applicant has taken all reasonable steps to reduce the adverse impact on the environment. Irreversible actions shall be considered more seriously than reversible actions. The Staff Advisor or Planning Commission shall consider the existing development of the surrounding area, and the maximum permitted development permitted by the Land Use Ordinance (ORD 2808, 1997; ORD 2834, 1998; ORD 2951, 2008). This proposal along with all the included materials specifies all reasonable steps toward minimizing adverse impacts on the environment. The proposal is for a single family dwelling of very similar size and scope to those on the adjoining and surrounding lots and which meets or exceeds all applicable development standards, except as listed directly below. FINDINGS OF FACT FOR AN ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCE TO THE 20 FT MAXIMUM HEIGHT ON DOWNHILL ELEVATION PROVISION OF THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR HILLSIDE LANDS: A Variance under this section is not subject to the variance requirements of Section 18.100 and may be granted with respect to the development standards for Hillside Lands if all of the following circumstances are found to exist: 1. There is demonstrable difficulty in the meeting the specific requirements of this chapter due to a unique or unusual aspect of the site or proposed use of the site. There are unique and demonstrable aspects of the site and approved building envelope which make it very difficult to fully meet the 20 foot maximum height on walls along the downhill elevation portion of the Development Standards for Hillside Lands, while still constructing a home of reasonable size and shape. Most notable is the East/West slope of the site, which is approximately 8 feet from the Southwest building corner to the Southeast building corner. Please refer to the South Elevation on Sheet 5 of the Preliminary Design Set which clearly shows both the side slope and the very small portions of the downhill elevation which exceed the 20 foot height from natural grade. There are two specific building elements here to discuss. First is the railing of the deck on the Main Level outside of the Dining Room. This railing is less than 1 foot above the 20 foot line, in our opinion a negligible amount. The second element is the line of the eave of the roof covering the Lower Level deck. This eave starts out to the West far below the 20 foot line, but as it travels East the 20 foot line crosses it so that at its Southeast corner it is above the line by about 18", or less than 1% of 20 feet. 2. The variance will result in equal or greater protection of the resources protected under this chapter. Granting a variance for the two incidental and extremely small areas in question (stated above and shown on the South Elevation) will have no noticeable or meaningful impact on any of the resources protected under this chapter. 3. The variance is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty. The two very small areas (stated above and shown on the South Elevation) which exceed MAY 5 i i i I 20 feet in height from natural grade are the minimum required to alleviate the difficulty of the East/West slope of the site. 4. The variance is consistent with the stated Purpose and Intent of the Physical and Environmental Constraints Chapter and Section 18.62.080. Because the two areas in question are extremely small and only exceed the stated 20 foot limit by less than 1%, the granting of a variance for these two areas will have a negligible impact on the Purpose or Intent of the stated Chapter and Section. FINDINGS OF FACT FOR ALLOWING AN INCREASED LOT COVERAGE OF 31.5% A modification of the subdivision approval to allocate a portion of the subdivision's open space to increased coverage on an individual lot may be issued by the Staff Advisor when the applicant shows that the following criteria have been met: 1. That the development meets all applicable ordinance requirements of the City of Ashland. In this case "the development" refers to the entire subdivision ("Lithia Creek Estates") which was approved and platted in 1999 under the "Performance Standards Options". As this subdivision is approved and nearly "built out", we must assume that all applicable City ordinances have been met. The entire subdivision, as approved, consists of 28 units on 24 lots, all on 25.6 acres with over 15 acres of open space retained. This large amount of open space was required in great part to protect steep hillside lands that are part of the total acreage. As part of the approval, and in order to further protect the natural surroundings and the neighboring properties, the subject lot (Lot 20, Lithia Creek Estates) was required to use only the (then) new Lithia Creek Drive for access. This access required the construction of the flag drive which serves Lot 20 and other lots in the subdivision. Also as part of the original approval it was recognized that any additional use of the existing paved drive from Granite Street, a portion of which lies on Lot 20, could be a detriment to neighboring parcels due to increased vehicular traffic, and was therefore prohibited. This action placed two very interesting and somewhat unique burdens on Lot 20, which are exclusive to Lot 20. First, although the existing paved drive that runs across Lot 20 cannot be used as access by the subdivision it can also not be removed as such removal would violate the legal rights of others (who hold access easements), therefore the coverage of the paved road must remain and be a part of the total coverage calculation for Lot 20. This coverage is 1,507 square feet, or nearly 7.5% of the net lot area of Lot 20. Second, because Lot 20 is at the very end of the flag drive a vehicular turnaround area is required. This turnaround area, which is not required for any of the other lots which use the flag drive as access (because they back right out onto the flag drive) will require approximately 750 square feet of additional paving, or the equivalent of about 4% of additional lot coverage. We can therefore calculate that the special coverage burden of Lot 20 is 11.5% of the net lot area. When the coverage of the proposed residence is added, the total proposed coverage is 31.5% or exactly equal to the normal maximum allowable lot coverage of 20%plus the special coverage of 11.5% as explained above. Therefore the applicant's request for a modification of the subdivision approval to allocate a portion of the subdivision's open space to increased coverage on lot 20 is entirely reasonfe ndt ;w .r 4 should be granted. As a side note, the total additional coverage requested is equal to about 0.35% of the subdivision's total open space, an extremely small amount. 2. The building elevations and exterior materials are in conformance with the purpose and intent of 18.88.030 and the approved outline plan. REQUEST FOR ACTION: The applicant respectfully requests that the City of Ashland Planning Staff take the following actions: 1) Issue a Physical Constraints Review Permit. 2) Approve the Administrative Variance. 3)Approve increased lot coverage of 31.5%. Conclusion: Although every effort has been made to provide complete and accurate information in this narrative, findings and the attached preliminary plans, we understand that there may be issues which have been unintentionally omitted, or a need for more information regarding specific aspects of the proposal. Please contact us if anything further is required. Finally, we ask that staff carefully review this submittal and issue the requested approvals in a timely manner. SI rely, Pet pes, for Habib Shahin MAY 2 5 2O" i i i i i I i i i -.•��',,�":�^ �,y�. >.~�u,w--.„..�, �«„gym a ...�...,,„„, �, h r �z x � �z x h' r r o � < v � 1 s Vill e � �g i v I aa vx Y 1� i 1R T � Fi ! x ° z r E P k �y vw 1 ga ME .?� ., �.;k�.. x '.'�. x. A, x.. ,.. �",x, • i" Pill Ell I Alcamo, vWTUR f �{ �1 I� Z z r � 4 t. via� y C/ 4 i god MAY 2 5 2011 THI 6AW 6HOUP Geotechnical Consulting HILLSIDE LAND DEVELOPMENT, GEOLOGIC I3AZARDS AND GEOTECIINICAL DESIGN REPORT 636 ASHLAND CREEK DRIVE LOT 20, LITIIIA CREEK ESTATES ASHLAND, OREGON For: Habib Shahin P.O. Box 1 l 1 Ashland, Oregon 97520 By; THE GALLI GROUP 612 NW Third Street Grants Pass, OR 97526 (541) 955-1611 02-3455-03 May 3, 2011 i 'TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................................1 2.0 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION .........................................................................................1 3.0 HILLSIDE LANDS DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATIONS......................................................2 3.1 IMPACT TO NATURAL SLOPES...........................................................................................2 3.2 LEAST DAMAGING ALTERNATIVE....................................................................................2 3.3 SITE FEATURES AND DISTURBANCE................................................................................3 3.4 CUT AND FILL SLOPES .........................................................................................................4 3.5 SURFACE WATER RUNOFF..................................................................................................4 3.6 EROSION CONTROL...............................................................................................................7 4.0 GEOTECHNICAL ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION ................................................................7 4.1 SOIL...........................................................................................................................................8 4.2 GROUNDWATER ...........................................................................................................I........8 5.0 GEOLOGY AND SEISMICITY....................................................................................................8 5.1 REGIONAL GEOLOGIC SETTING.........................................................................................8 5.2 TECTONIC SETTING ..............................................................................................................9 5.3 GEOLOGIC AND SEISMIC INDUCED HAZARDS FOR THE PROJECT SITE..................9 5.4 SLOPE STABILITY REVIEW................................................................................................11 6.0 CONCLUSIONS ..........................................................................................................................11 7.0 GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS...............................................................................12 7.1 SITE PREPARATION.............................................................................................................12 7.1.1 Clearing, Grubbing and Stripping ........................................................................12 7.1.2 Onsite Uncontrolled Fill Treatment......................................................................12 7.1.3 Subgrade Proofrol ling...........................................................................................13 7.1.4 Site Excavations ...................................................................................................14 7.2 FILL AND COMPACTION RECOMMENDATIONS...........................................................14 7.2.1 Utility Trench Backfill .........................................................................................16 7.2.2 Non-Structural Fill................................................................................................17 7.3 CUT AND FILL SLOPES .......................................................................................................17 7.3.1 Cut Sl opes.............................................................................................................17 7.3.2 Fill Slopes.............................................................................................................18 7.4 FOUNDATIONS .....................................................................................................................19 7.5 SLAB-ON-GRADE FLOORS .................................................................................................22 7.6 LATERAL LOAD RESISTANCE..........................................................................................23 7.7 LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES ..........................................................................................23 7.7.1 Conventional Cantilever Walls.............................................................................23 7.7.2 Mechanically Stabilized Earth(MSE)Retaining Walls.......................................24 7.8 FOUNDATION, WALL DRAINS AND FLOOR SUBDRAINS ...........................................25 7.9 SITE DRAINAGE....................................................................................................................27 8.0 PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS.......................................................................................28 8.1 PAVEMENT DESIGN ............................................................................................................28 9.0 EROSION CONTROL RECOMMENDATIONS........................................................................31 10.0 ADDITIONAL SERVICES AND LIMITATIONS....................................................................34 10.1 ADDITIONAL SERVICES ...................................................................................................34 10.2 LIMITATIONS......................................................................................................................35 FIGURES: Figure 1: Vicinity Map Figure 2: Tax Lot Map Figure 3: Site Plan Figure 4: Fill on Steep Slope Cross Section Figure 5: Retaining Wall Drainage Cross Section Figure 6: Typical Foundation Drain Figure 7: Floor Subdrain Detail APPENDIX A: Erosion Control Inspection Letter& Sketch APPENDIX B: Full-Size Plan Sheets (Reduced 11 x 17) FULL-SIZE PLAN SHEETS (Detached): G1.1 Revised Grading & Site Plan G1.2 Typical MSE Wall Cross-Section&Details G1.3 Typical MSE Wall Construction Details G1.4 Erosion Control &Drainage Plan 3455rpt-Lot 20,Lithia Creek Estates,Revised Steep Slope May 3.2011 The Galli Group HILLSIDE LAND DEVELOPMENT, GEOLOGIC HAZARDS AND GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN REPORT 636 ASHLAND CREEK DRIVE LOT 20, LITHIA CREEK ESTATES ASHLAND, OREGON 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report is intended to provide soils, geologic and hydrologic information, calculations and recommendations for development of the residential lot at 636 Ashland Creek Drive in Ashland, Oregon. The parcel has slopes in excess of 25% and is in an area which is subject to the Development Standards for Hillside Lands in the Physical and Environmental Constraints chapter of the Ashland Development Code. The data, recommendations and conclusions contained in this report are intended to meet the requirements of Section 18.62.080, Development Standards for Hillside Lands. 2.0 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION The subject site is located in the foothills to the west of Ashland, Oregon. The site is generally identified as Lot No. 20 within the Lithia Creels Estates Subdivision. Please see Figure 1, Vicinity Map and Figure 2, Tax Lot Map, for additional site location details. This flag-shaped parcel consists of a residential lot of moderate to steep slopes, which is bordered on all sides by private property. Access to the property can be obtained from Ashland Creek Drive (via the flag portion of the property) or from Granite Street below. This lot is generally covered with dense, native grasses and a few scattered oak and evergreen trees along the lower portions of the parcel and along the property lines. Existing native slopes range from approximately 15%to 45% near the southwest corner of the lot. The southern and eastern edges of the parcel are occupied by private shared driveways (off Granite Street) which "serve"the adjacent property owners. The project consists of constructing a new single-family residence on the subject lot. We understand the two-story home's construction will consist of conventional wood-frame construction with a framed-floor over a daylight basement level with a variable height crawl- space and/or a slab-on-grade floor. Other development will consist of an attached 2-car garage, an access driveway (off Ashland Creek Drive at the end of a shared driveway), parking areas, decks, patios, walkways, landscape retaining walls and landscaping. Please see the Site Plan, Figure 3, at the end of this report for more specific locations of the proposed home and its associated landscape retaining walls. See plan sheets prepared by Peter Cipes Building Design for additional details. 02-3455-03 Page 2 3.0 HILLSIDE LANDS DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATIONS The purpose of providing Hillside Lands Development reports for residential projects is to "protect the natural and topographic character and identity of these areas"which help create the atmosphere which is the City of Ashland. This atmosphere includes the shape and configuration of the surrounding hills and vegetation. The Development Standards are also intended to: 1) minimize erosion, 2) identify slope instability areas and geologic hazards 3) and to minimize other potentially damaging effects of hillside development. The following items should be adequately addressed to have a properly designed and constructed project. 3.1 IMPACT TO NATURAL SLOPES Natural slopes are to be maintained in as natural a state as possible. This assumes that some change will be necessary to accommodate the proposed development. Based on our understanding of the project and our discussions with the home designer, it appears the proposed development of this lot makes a reasonable effort to meet these criteria of the code. The new grading proposed will not significantly alter the shape or visual impact of this area of the subdivision. We understand that the majority of the excavations will be accomplished to embed the footings into the existing slope, to remove and densify the existing uncontrolled fill materials on the lot and some minor fill will be placed behind new retaining walls to create a relatively flat ground surfaces below the driveway and alongside the home. The lower daylight basement level could be embedded into the hillside by as much as 4 to 6 feet and will use stepped foundation levels to reduce the "effective visual bulls" of the proposed home. The embedment of the basement level into the hill will make this home less obtrusive on this hillside. The cuts and fills proposed by the designer for the new home are generally required in order to properly develop the subject lot and to provide reasonable vehicular access for the proposed home. The proposed engineered landscape retaining walls will also create some relatively flat yard areas alongside the proposed home. 3.2 LEAST DAMAGING ALTERNATIVE In our professional opinion, the cuts and fills proposed for the home and its retaining walls (both landscape and interior walls) will have minimal to no impact on this or adjacent lots. When constructed properly, this project will not create a significant impact on viewscapes, public safety, slope stability or site erosion at the site. The existing uncontrolled fill soils across the upper portion of the lot can and must be incorporated as structural fill behind the proposed MSE retaining walls. We recommend the owner limit the placement of any additional fills on the subject lot until the construction of the home and its associated retaining walls begins. The surficial, native, silty Sands (Decomposed Granite) and the underlying weathered Granite is a very stable unit. Therefore, this regrading of the lot will not adversely affect slope 3455rpt-Lot 20, Lithia Creek Estates,Revised Steep Slope May 3.2011 The Galli Group 02-3455-03 Page 3 stability(as long as the home and retaining walls are properly constructed according to our recommendations). Construction erosion control and permanent landscaping will adequately control short-term and long-term erosion at the site. Therefore, impacts to the surrounding residences will be low. In order to match the existing grades at the end of the existing shared flag driveway and to provide a turn-around in front of a new garage for the proposed home, fill depths (above the existing conditions) ranging between 2 to 7 feet will be required in the driveway turn-around area. In our opinion, the house as it is planned is reasonable and the most logical method for developing this lot. 3.3 SITE FEATURES AND DISTURBANCE While the access driveway and the cuts and fills for the project will alter the site somewhat, they will not create a change in the drainage or other natural landforms. Most surface flow and the subsurface flow (which is minimal at this site)will continue to transit the site with the surface flow moving downslope to the roadside ditches along the shared driveway below. The natural surface drainage, which flows towards Granite Street, will still flow in that direction. The subsurface flow is almost non-existent in the shallow soil zones that will be penetrated by the structure, its retaining walls and the driveway fills. Therefore, this project development will not intercept or cut off surface or groundwater that is currently directly supplying natural streams, wetlands, riparian habitat, water supply wells or agricultural lands. The retaining walls at various locations on the site will be visible on the site but will not alter the shape of this slope to any significant degree. Landscaping and gardens planted below and between the retaining walls will tend to screen these walls with vegetation. We understand that the majority of the existing trees at the site will be left undisturbed by the proposed residential development. The only tree removal required for site development will be for any trees located within and near the footprint of the existing home. Please refer to the Landscape Plans for details regarding tree removal. Specific items of concern for development of lands that are not features on this site are: natural drainage ways, wetlands, mapped landslide areas, significant trees or other special vegetation, floodplain or floodway corridors, special riparian preserves, streams or rivers, other"jurisdictional waters", swales, ponds, seeps, springs, specific rock outcroppings, irrigation canals or other site constraints. No native streams or canals are fed directly by runoff from this project. Therefore, overall water flow off the site will not be altered. Interception of the runoff will be minimal and should not adversely affect parcels upstream or downstream of the site. The only site features that will be disturbed are 1) removal of the existing vegetation within the proposed building footprint and 2) disturbance of the granitic soils which can be very erosive if disturbed and left unprotected. Both of these issues will be handled in a manner consistent with the intent of the Ashland Development Code and will not significantly adversely affect this or other parcels. 3455rpt-Lot 20,Lithia Creek Estates, Revised Steep Slope May 3.2011 The Galli Group 02-3455-03 Page 4 3.4 CUT AND FILL SLOPES The cut and fill slope angles to be used on this site will be consistent with stable slope angles for the subsurface conditions encountered during construction. These are provided later in the Geotechnical Recommendations section of this report. The disturbed slope areas will be protected from erosion as prescribed and presented on the Erosion Control Plan and in the text of this report. All exposed cuts will be far less than the maximum of 15 feet. All permanent cuts should all be less than three (3) feet and will not require terracing. Exterior cut slopes will generally only be utilized to "blend"the existing native and manmade slopes into the proposed site grades. Fill slopes will be small (less than 3 to 4 feet) and will generally have slope angles that are "blended in"to the natural slopes on the site. The majority of the fill proposed for the project will be behind the properly designed and engineered retaining walls. In no case will total fill height be close to the 20-foot maximum. We understand that the designer and builder plans on utilizing Mechanically Stabilized Earth(MSE) retaining walls in order to provide a relatively flat lower yard area and for the upper driveway turn-around area. Our firm has provided design cross-sections and details for a tiered set of Versa-Lok®retaining walls at the site. The MSE wall heights are planned to range from approximately 1 to 7 feet in height (maximum height of 7-foot tall walls separated by a relatively level bench). Temporary cut slopes for the daylight basement will be supported fully by backfilled basement walls (reinforced masonry or concrete retaining walls). All cut and fill slopes should also be protected from erosion as specified in the Development Standards and as detailed later in this report. 3.5 SURFACE WATER RUNOFF Based on our observations at the site, it appears that surface water runoff is only present during the heavy rainfall events which can occur in Ashland. Relatively shallow depressions on the slope will tend to only have surface flow in large storms (greater than 0.25 inches of precipitation). Water seepage and/or small surface flows are only present during very wet weather. There are no areas of the site which would be considered to be "intermittent streams" or "creeks". No streams or canals are fed by runoff from this project (i.e., runoff indirectly finds its way to Lithia Creek). There also are no areas observed which pond large amounts of surface water during heavy rainfall events. These sources of water are very small and do not provide a water supply for agriculture and/or domestic water wells. Almost all surface water runoff moves downslope across the lower properties and ultimately is intercepted by ditch lines along the shared access driveway below. Lithia Creek is the ultimate end for most of the current site runoff. Therefore, overall water flow to distant Lithia Creek will not be altered. Interception of the runoff should not adversely affect parcels upstream or downstream of the site. Runoff will be somewhat quicker during storms due to an increase in"impermeable" surface. 3455rpt-Lot 20,Lithia Creek Estates, Revised Steep Slope May 3.2011 The Galli Group 02-3455-03 Page 5 Stormwater Detention. Based on our review of comments from the City of Ashland engineering department, we understand that a project does not require improvements to the stormwater system or stormwater detention if the project impervious area is increased less than 5,000 square feet (sf). Based on the provided site plan and layout, our firm calculated a total of 4,885 sf of new impervious area due to the proposed roof area, access driveway, sidewalks and turn-around area. The proposed impervious area increase is less than 5,000 sf and therefore, the project does not require improvements to the stormwater system or onsite detention. Storm Water Runoff. In order to evaluate and quantify the impact that the completed residential project will have on the existing drainage culverts below the existing lot, The Galli Group conducted post-development hydrologic calculations utilizing the Rational Formula. The rainfall intensity for 25-year, 6-hour storm (03. Inches per hour) for the Ashland area was obtained from the City of Ashland's Stormwater Master Plan(June 2000). Maximum runoff generally occurs when a drainage basin has experienced several rainfall events in the previous days. These wet antecedent conditions over the basin cause a larger percentage of the rainfall of any subsequent storm to leave the basin as surface water runoff, rather than infiltrating into the ground or providing a source for surface and/or soil pore storage. The relatively steep gradient of the existing parcel also decreases the amount of surface water infiltration due to relatively quick surface water runoff. Typical runoff coefficients for steep and grass vegetated hillsides range from 0.15 to 0.20. With very wet antecedent conditions, runoff coefficients in steep basins with clayey and silty soils should be on the order of 0.25 to 0.5. For this basin study we have assumed a runoff coefficient of 0.40 would be appropriate for reasonably wet antecedent conditions in the winter months. A runoff coefficient of 1.0 was utilized for all areas occupied by the paved driveway, the proposed home and sidewalks. The construction of new impervious areas covers approximately 13.6% (4,885 sf) of the total drainage basin(s) area. Utilizing the Rational Formula(Q =CiA), we have computed the post-development flow (25-year, 6-hour storm). Based on typical engineering guidelines and calculations,the "drainage basins" across the project have the calculated post-development flows as follows: Post- Development Flow (efs) East Basin 0.085 West Basin 0.049 Project Total 0.134 3455rpt-Lot 20,Lithia Creek Estates,Revised Steep Slope May 3.2011 The Galli Group 02-3455-03 Page 6 As shown in the table above, due to the very small drainage basins areas across this existing parcel,the volumes of site runoff are extremely low for the design storm. Existing Culvert Flow Evaluation. The stormwater runoff from the existing site is currently conveyed offsite via two existing stormwater culverts beneath the private driveway south of the parcel. These existing culverts currently collect all surface water runoff from the site and discharge the runoff towards distant Lithia Creek. After the proposed home is completed, all surface water runoff will continue to discharge towards these existing culverts. During our Senior Engineering Geologist's site visit,the existing culverts were measured for size, slope and material type. The site runoff across the parcel is generally split into two drainage basins which drain towards each existing culvert. The east drainage basin drains towards an existing 8-inch diameter, smooth steel culvert. The west drainage basin for the project drains towards an existing 12-inch diameter, Corrugated Plastic Pipe (CPP). Both of these culverts were evaluated and the maximum flow capacity was calculated for each culvert. The calculated flow volume within the existing culverts has been decreased by 50%to account for typical entrance losses which are experienced at the culvert inlet. Using the Manning's Equation, we have computed the maximum capacity flow for each of the existing culverts which collect and discharge site runoff from the parcel. 50% Flow Percent Excess Full Capacity Capacity Due to Flow Capacity Flow (cfs) Entrance Losses Above 6-hr,25-yr cfs Storm Flow 8-inch Steel 1.56 0.78 900% (East Basin) 12-inch CPP 2.58 1.29 2600% (West Basin) Based on our engineering calculations and assumptions,the existing culverts are much larger than needed to pass the surface runoff flows (25-year, 6 hour storm) after the construction of the proposed home on the parcel. Stormwater Quality. The construction of the home and associated driveway pavements could potentially impact the quality of the surface runoff from this project. Surface runoff from the driveway and roof runoff could potentially contain various stormwater pollutants which include nutrients, oil, grease, suspended soils, sediment and heavy metals. Based on the site configuration, all of the surface runoff from the project site will be directed into the two existing culverts below the property(beneath private shared driveways). In all cases, the point source discharge locations from the roof downspouts or driveway catch basins will be routed to run across 50 to 100 feet of native slopes or vegetated ditches which will naturally filter the stormwater pollutants from the surface runoff. I 3455rpt-Lot 20, Lithia Creek Estates, Revised Steep Slope May 3.2011 The Galli Group i 02-3455-03 Page 7 The main area of concern regarding the home is the control and dispersion of surface water from impermeable roofs and the driveway turn-around. The following paragraphs provide specific Best Management Practices (BMPs) and recommendations which will be incorporated into the drainage plan (Sheet G1.4) for the proposed home, • Roof downspouts should be directed to splash blocks alongside the home or into a tightline pipe which will redirect surface runoff around the home and discharge onto the native slopes. The splash blocks should be situated with at least 50 feet of a vegetated flow path above any drainage swales and/or culverts. • Individual roof downspouts should be limited to roof drainage areas of 1,000 square feet or less. • The roof downspouts and area catch basins may be connected to a tightline drainage system which utilizes a dispersion system which is installed at the pipe outlet. The drainage system outlet should be constructed to evenly distribute the surface runoff as sheetflow across the native slopes and to minimize erosion at the outlet. The dispersion system will be installed with a minimum of 50 feet of vegetated flow path from any wetlands, seasonal drainage swales and/or ponds. • All surface water flow should be discharged over well vegetated areas (i.e. not over bare soil areas). The drainage plan (Sheet GI A)will convey the stormwater runoff onto erosion protected areas, settling ponds and dispersion systems that will help remove sediment and pollutants prior to leaving the site, 3.6 EROSION CONTROL As prescribed in the Development Standards, erosion control for development projects must be instituted to protect disturbed areas from erosion and to prevent or significantly reduce offsite migration of suspended solids in runoff. Erosion control measures should be employed during and throughout the construction process that should filter out and prevent the offsite migration of soil fines. Long-term erosion control measures should be incorporated into the site landscaping at the end of the construction process to stabilize any disturbed surface soils and to promote re-vegetation of all exposed soil areas. Specific erosion control recommendations as well as a Drainage and Erosion Control Plan (Sheet G1.4) are included in the associated full-sized plan sheets for this project. The landscape plan for permanent landscaping, which is a large part of the permanent erosion control, will be prepared by others. 4.0 GEOTECHNICAL ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION We have observed and reviewed steep cut slopes, excavations on this and nearby lots, undisturbed slopes and other soil constituents on this and numerous adjacent projects in the Ashland and southern Oregon area over the past several years. These soils are similar to and are identical to those observed and encountered on other projects in this area of Ashland. We 3455rpt-Lot 20,Lithia Creek Estates, Revised Steep Slope May 3.2011 The Galli Group 02-3455-03 Page 8 have evaluated numerous cut slopes, fill slopes, swale areas, small slope failures, dense weathered rock formations and other items in this area. In our professional opinion, the subsurface conditions and engineering properties of the soils and the underlying weathered rock on this parcel are suitable for the proposed development. If constructed properly, this project will not cause stability or erosion problems on this or adjacent parcels, provided the recommendations of this report are incorporated in final design and construction of the residence and its site improvements. 4.1 SOIL Undisturbed portions of the lot are generally covered with a relatively thin layer of native, sandy Silt to silty Sand soil. Based on our observations at the site, this surficial soil layer appears to vary from 1 to 4 feet in depth. The surficial Silt appears to be underlain by a silty Sand which transitions into the deeper medium to coarse Sands (Decomposed Granite). These coarse Sand materials are generally dry to moist in nature and tend to break out in chunks from fine gravel to 4 or 8-inch size. We understand that during 2006, a large amount of Decomposed Granite soils were imported and stockpiled across the upper portion of the site immediately below the existing flag driveway access to the site. These imported soils generally consist of silty Sand materials with occasional pieces of construction debris such as Asphaltic Concrete (AC) or concrete blocks. Based on our observations at the site, we estimate that uncontrolled fill depths ranging from approximately 7 to 17 feet deep are expected across the site. The uncontrolled fill soils will need to be addressed as part of the construction process in order to minimize the potential for settlement, erosion or slope instability after the completion of the residential proj ect. 4.2 GROUNDWATER Based on surficial observations at the site, groundwater seepage appears to be very low. The underlying dense soil zone can cause perched groundwater at a shallow depth during very wet weather(due to infiltration of surface water through the upper loose soils). Given the steepness of the lot,which promotes rapid surface runoff, large amounts of groundwater are not anticipated. The regional drinking groundwater is typically very deep with wells encountering the water in fractures of the granite rock commonly known as "tombstone granite". 5.0 GEOLOGY AND SEISMICITY 5.1 REGIONAL GEOLOGIC SETTING The project area is located in the southwestern portion of Ashland, Oregon, and is within Oregon's Klamath Mountain Geologic province. 3455rpt-Lot 20, Lithia Creek Estates,Revised Steep Slope May 3.2011 The Galli Group 02-3455-03 f Page 9 Cretaceous and Jurassic-age granitic rocks (KJg) comprise the bedrock unit at the project site. These intrusive units, part of the regionally extensive Mount Ashland pluton; are described as: "Mostly tonalite and quartz diorite but including lesser amounts of other granitoid rocks. ... plutons range in age from 143 to 166 Ma(Hotz, 1971)" (Walker and MacLeod, 1991). Uplift and faulting within the region(and subsequent"un-roofing" of the pluton) was completed by late Miocene (Orr and Orr, 1999). No active faults are known to traverse the site location, or were observed during review of aerial photographs for this project. No Quaternary faults are shown in the project area on Earthquake Hazards Maps for Oregon, (Madin, 1996), or the USGS Quaternary Faults and Folds database (USGS, 2006). 5.2 TECTONIC SETTING The project site is in regional proximity to several zones of active seismicity. The region is affected by the Cascadia Subduction Zone, which is an active subduction zone off the Oregon coast considered capable of Magnitude 8.0 or greater earthquakes. The offshore expression of the subduction zone at the base of the continental slope is approximately 160 kilometers from the project site. Average recurrence intervals for such great earthquakes, as determined by recent investigations, range between 300-600 years. The last "great" earthquake was interpreted to be approximately 300 years ago. Relatively deep focus intraplate (depths of 40-60 km within the subducted Juan de Fuca or Gorda plate) earthquakes of Magnitude 7.0 are considered possible within the subducted plate beneath western Oregon and Washington. The recurrence interval is not established, but the devastating earthquakes in Puget Sound(M7.1, 1949; M6.5, 1965; and M6.8, 2001) occurred in this seismic zone. Based on the historic seismic record, intraplate earthquakes are considered rare in Oregon. Relatively shallow crustal earthquakes up to Magnitude 6.5 can occur in the upper plate at depths of 5 to 25 km. This zone generally produces most of the earthquakes in western Oregon, as well as the project area. The M5.9 and M6.0, September 1993 Klamath Falls earthquakes were within a 50-mile radius of the site. Mercalli intensities in Medford and Ashland were generally in the IV to V range. The project region typically experiences earthquakes every one to two decades (ANSS, 2006). 5.3 GEOLOGIC AND SEISMIC INDUCED HAZARDS FOR THE PROJECT SITE Liquefaction. The site is underlain by very shallow(less than 5 feet) deposits of silty sand to silty sand with gravel granitic colluvium. Underlying the colluvial deposits is weathered granite bedrock. Given these field conditions, liquefaction is not considered a hazard at the site. The project site is in Zone D (Lowest Hazard) as shown on the "Relative Earthquake Hazard Map", (Madin and Wang, 2000). 3455rpt-Lot 20,Lithia Creek Estates, Revised Steep Slope May 3. 2011 The Galli Group 02-3455-03 Page 10 Landslides/Slope Instability. No recent or active slope instability was observed at the project site at the time of our site visit. No mapped instability within the project area is shown on published geologic maps of the area. The site is located on a south-facing slope. The slope ranges from 18 to 20% near the downhill end of the parcel, 20 to 23%near the central portion of the parcel, and 25 to 28% at the upper end of the parcel. Fills of up to 7 feet behind individual Versa-Lok retaining walls (majority of fill has already been placed and will be reworked as part of construction) are anticipated in the upper portion of the site above the proposed home and small cuts of 1 to 3 feet may be made at the uphill end of the project. Existing cuts on roadways leading to the site (Ashland Creels Drive) were completed by the mid-1980's, and are standing at 1/3:1 (H to V) with only minor ravel observed. These cuts range from 10 feet to nearly 25 feet in height. Two prominent joint sets were recorded at the road cuts: N30W; 70NE and N65E; 70N. Joint spacing was typically 2 to 10 feet. Any proposed cut or fill slopes must be constructed according to design recommendations provided in this report. Review of site topography indicates rapidly moving landslides generated from offsite source areas should not impact the site. A significant debris flow occurred during the 1997 New Year's Day flood, and was confined to the prominent drainage immediately to the west and below the site. The project site is in Zone D (Lowest Hazard) as shown on the "Relative Earthquake Hazard Map",which considers the possibility of earthquake-induced landsliding(Madin and Wang, 2000). Ground Rupture. No Quaternary or active faults cut the project site. Risk from ground rupture at the site is considered to be low. Amplification or Resonance. The project area should not experience unusually high amplification or resonance that would produce unexpectedly severe ground shaking during a seismic event. The project site is anticipated to experience a 0.24g peals ground acceleration on bedrock, with a 2%probability of being exceeded in a 50-year period(USGS, 2006). The IBC Soil Profile established for this report should adequately compensate for amplification of seismic waves related to site soil conditions. The project site is in Zone D (Lowest Hazard) as shown on the "Relative Earthquake Hazard Map", which considers the effects of ground shaking amplification, (Madin and Wang, 2000). Tsunami/Seiche. The site is located approximately 80 feet in elevation above Lithia Creek which is located less than 500 feet to the east. The site is not within the mapped inundation zone as shown on the "Hosler Dam Failure Study"map (City of Ashland, 2002). i 3455rpt-Lot 20,Lithia Creek Estates, Revised Steep Slope May 3.2011 The Galli Group 02-3455-03 Page 11 Ground Shaking. Project structures, retaining walls, and fills should be designed according to IBC methodology (IBC 2009 or OSSC 2010). A Site Class of C should be used for the site. We recommend all structures, foundations, retaining walls and fills be designed to withstand a horizontal acceleration component of at least 0.1692. (2/3rds of 2,500-year earthquake), in addition to typical other dead and live loads, surcharge loads and static earth pressure loads. This should provide adequate strength for protection of egress during a seismic event. Please note,this does not mean that some damage would not occur as a result of such an event. In our professional opinion, based upon published information and site data, seismically- induced hazards, other than those created by the peak horizontal ground acceleration listed above, should be low and should not adversely impact the project or adjacent properties in a significant manner. 5.4 SLOPE STABILITY REVIEW We have reviewed overall slope stability concerns for this project. Based on our review, we find there to be no concern for short or long-term instability due to this project. The underlying massive, dense granite and granite rock formation which makes up the site, is stable. Failures in this formation are generally only found where steep manmade cuts collapse along bedding or fracture planes. The proposed site changes are relatively small for the overall slope area. Cuts for the basement areas will be supported by the concrete or CMU block retaining walls. Fills for yard and driveway areas (including the existing uncontrolled fill soils) on these slopes will be retained by engineered Versa-Lok®retaining walls. Therefore, in our professional opinion, this residential development will not decrease the stability of this or adjacent sites. 6.0 CONCLUSIONS In our professional opinion, based on our geotechnical and geologic field observations and office and literature review, the soil/rock conditions at the site are suitable for the proposed home and its associated site improvements; provided the recommendations contained in this report are followed during design and construction of the project. We anticipate that the single family residential structure will be supported on reinforced concrete continuous spread footings founded on the dense, native Decomposed Granite soils or the underlying weathered granite. The proposed cut and fill slopes will be stable (if graded and constructed as recommended below) and structural fills constructed of Decomposed Granite soils and/or imported jaw-run shale and crushed rock will be stable. In no case should loose or uncompacted fills be placed on this lot. The existing onsite fills must be 3455rpt-Lot 20,Lithia Creek Estates,Revised Steep Slope May 3.2011 The Galli Group 02-3455-03 Page 12 over-excavated and compacted as structural fill behind the proposed MSE retaining walls on this project. 7.0 GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS The following sections provide detailed geotechnical recommendations for the design and construction of the planned project. 7.1 SITE PREPARATION 7.1.1 Clearing, Grubbing and Stripping All areas proposed for structures, retaining walls, access driveways and parking areas, as well as areas designated for fill placement should be cleared and grubbed of trees, stumps and large roots, cleared of all grass, sod, uncontrolled fill and other debris and/or deleterious materials. These materials should be wasted outside of structure, retaining wall or driveway boundaries or used in landscape areas. The site areas required for asphalt, structures and fills should be stripped of sod and organic topsoil. It appears that a stripping depth of 2 to 4 inches would be adequate across much of the site. Additional stripping or over-excavation may be required to remove the deeper root zones or root balls beneath larger bushes and/or trees. Undocumented fill (with some construction debris) is present across the upper portion of the site. We anticipate that uncontrolled nil depths will range from 7 to 18 feet. If this uncontrolled fill is left in-place beneath buildings, behind MSE walls or beneath driveway pavements,there is a significant risk of future surface subsidence and settlement of foundations or pavements placed over this loose material. We recommend these materials either be removed from the site and/or reutilized as part of the site grading (see section below regarding Onsite Fill Treatment). The stripped materials should be hauled from the site or stockpiled for use in landscape areas only. This material should not be used in structural fill,trench bacicfill, retaining wall bacicfill or in fill slopes on this project. The very clayey and silty surficial soils with organics will be difficult to compact and will have low strength. It is recommended that the finished stripping of the site and bacicfill and compaction of depressions below finish subgrade be observed by our representative prior to construction at the site. 7.1.2 Onsite Uncontrolled Fill Treatment Due to the presence of stockpiled fill materials on the upper portion of the lot (beneath the proposed driveway access and turn-around area),proper subgrade preparation in this area will 3455rpt-Lot 20,Lithia Creek Estates,Revised Steep Slope May 3.2011 The Galli Group 02-3455-03 Page 13 be critical to limit future settlement beneath structures and pavements. In general, to minimize the possibility of settlement and subsidence, we strongly recommend that all undocumented fill be removed from beneath any structures such as the home, driveway and retaining walls. We recommend the uncontrolled fill be removed down to firm undisturbed native soil prior to placement of structural fill as described later in this report. In this manner, large amounts of settlement and subsidence could be minimized and the home and its associated driveway access be founded entirely on compacted structural fill. For best long-term performance and in areas where settlement is not acceptable (i.e., structures, critical drainage areas and beneath gravity flow utilities), all of the undocumented fill should be removed and replaced (or reused when the material is acceptable) as structural fill. The existing stockpiled fill materials (consisting of imported Decomposed Granite soils with some construction debris) may be left onsite and reutilized as general structural fill for this project(if feasible). The onsite materials re-utilized as structural fill should be compacted with a large, vibratory sheepsfoot roller to at least 98% of the maximum dry density as determined by laboratory procedure ASTM D-698 (Standard Proctor). Based on our observations at the site, it appears that the existing fill materials may be reused (minus the large construction debris and organics). In order to provide a uniform subgrade for the proposed foundations beneath the proposed home, driveway and MSE retaining walls, we recommend"capping"the recompacted fill material with 8 to 12 inches of jaw-run"shale" or 1-inch minus crushed rock. This operation should be observed and verified by the Geotechnical Engineer or his representative. 7.1.3 Subgrade Proofrolling The exposed native subgrade throughout the site which will support structures, retaining walls,parking areas, walkways or structural fill beneath these items should be proofrolled under the observation of the Geotechnical Engineer or his representative. The proofrolling of other areas may be accomplished with a loaded 10-yard dump truck, water truck or large heavy roller(no vibration). Proofrolling should not be attempted in wet weather and should be discontinued if it appears the operation is pumping moisture up to the surface or otherwise disturbing the in-place soils. Where soils are disturbed or do not demonstrate a firm, unyielding condition when proofrolled,the soil should be removed and replaced with imported granular fill. This operation should be viewed by the Geotechnical Engineer(or his representative)to verify proper compaction has been achieved. The surficial soils are susceptible to disturbance by construction traffic. Care must be taken during construction to ensure that standing water is not left in excavations and allowed to soften the subgrade soils prior to crushed rock placement. Exposed subgrades should be protected by a layer of compacted crushed rock or jaw-run "shale" soon after excavation. 3455rpt- Lot 20, Lithia Creek Estates, Revised Steep Slope May 3.2011 The Galli Group I 02-3455-03 Page 14 7.1.4 Site Excavations During the construction of the project, we estimate utility excavations up to 5 feet and cuts up to 8 feet may be required for construction of subject home. The bottom of the deeper excavations may encounter the underlying weathered, Granite bedrock beneath the surficial silty Sand (Decomposed Granite) soils. Our experience with Decomposed Granite soils is such that small to medium-sized backhoes and excavators should be able to excavate native soils with easy to moderate effort. Based on our experience in the area, site excavations less than 8 feet will most likely not encounter hard rock units, which would require the use of a hydraulic hoe-ram and/or blasting. In our opinion, larger trackhoes (with narrow buckets and rock teeth) and dozers with rippers should be able to excavate the Granite rock unit to deeper depths. Excavations deeper than 4 feet will require the use of temporary shoring,trench boxes and/or temporary cut slopes. During dry weather, temporary cut slopes through the native Sand units should be cut at no steeper than 1H:IV. Based on our review of Oregon's Occupational Safety& Health Administration (OHSA) guidelines; in our professional opinion the site soils should be classified as Type B soils. The contractor must be prepared to flatten any temporary slopes (1.5H:1 V or flatter) during wet weather and for slopes which have seepage emerging out of the cut slope. Care must be taken to protect workmen at all times. Please note, that while we have commented on the anticipated stability of the soil units in trenches, we are not responsible for job site safety. The contractor is at all times responsible for job site safety, including excavation safety. All local, state and federal safety regulations must be adhered to. 7.2 FILL AND COMPACTION RECOMMENDATIONS Structural Fill Materials. Ideally, and particularly for wet weather construction, structural fill should consist of a free-draining granular material (non-expansive) with a maximum particle size of six inches. The material should be reasonably well-graded with less than 5 percent fines (silt and clay size passing the No. 200 mesh sieve). During dry weather, any organic-free,non-expansive, compactable granular material, free of debris and other deleterious materials, meeting the maximum size criteria, is acceptable for this purpose. During dry weather, the excavated weathered granitic materials on this lot (including the onsite uncontrolled fill soils) should work well where fill is required. The more silty and clayey portions of these soils will be extremely difficult to compact and moisture condition in wet weather and proper moisture content of these soils is critical to compaction. We recommend all fills placed on the lot be compacted as structural fill to minimize erosion and sloughing of loose granite soils. Locally available crushed rock and good quality jaw-run or crushed "shale"have performed well for most applications of structural fill. All import materials proposed for structural fill should be sampled and approved by our representative prior to placement at the site. The locally available crushed rock and jaw-run"shale" are typically acceptable for this purpose. 3455rpt-Lot 20, Lithia Creek Estates,Revised Steep Slope May 3.2011 The Galli Group 02-3455-03 Page 15 Crushed rock and crushed shale would provide better subgrade (subbase) support in asphalt areas than the excavated Decomposed Granite materials. However, the granite would be acceptable as structural fill in embankments, behind retaining walls (outside the clean drainage section) and beneath driveways, decks and parking areas. Structural Fill Placement. Structural fill should be placed in horizontal lifts not exceeding 8 inches loose thickness (less, if necessary to obtain prope r compaction) for heavy compaction equipment and four inches or less for light and hand-operated equipment. Each lift should be compacted to a minimum of 98 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM Test Method D-698 (Standard Proctor). We strongly recommend utilizing a segmented pad or sheepsfoot roller when compacting the onsite, clayey or silty Sand materials. A smooth drum roller may be utilized when compacting materials such as imported crushed rock or jaw-run"shale". To facilitate the earthwork and compaction process, the earthwork contractor should place and compact fill materials at or slightly above their optimum moisture content. If fill soils are on the wet side of optimum, they can be dried by continuous windrowing and aeration or by intermixing lime or Portland cement (Portland cement works very well with decomposed granite)to absorb excess moisture and improve soil properties. Alternatively, if materials become very dry during the summer months, a water truck should be available to help keep the moisture content at or near optimum during compaction operations. Structural fill placed beneath footings or other structural elements must extend beyond all sides of such elements a distance equal to at least V2 the total depth of the structural fill beneath the structural element in question for vertical support (i.e., if there is 2 feet of fill beneath the footing, the fill must extend 1-foot past all edges of the footing). To facilitate the earthwork and compaction process, the earthwork contractor should place and compact fill materials at or slightly above their optimum moisture content. If fill soils are on the wet side of optimum, they can be dried by continuous windrowing and aeration or by intermixing lime or Portland Cement to absorb excess moisture and improve soil properties. If soils become dry during the summer months, a water truck should be available to help keep the moisture content at or near optimum during compaction operations. Fill Placement Observation and Testing Methods. The required construction monitoring of the structural fill utilizing standard nuclear density gauge testing and standard laboratory compaction curves (ASTM D-698 specified) is not applicable to larger jaw-run"shale" or larger crushed rock. The high percentage of rock particles greater than 3/4's of an inch in these materials causes laboratory and field density test results to be erratic and does not provide an adequate representation of the density achieved. Therefore, construction specifications for this type of material typically specify method of placement and compaction coupled with visual observation during the placement and compaction operations. 3455rpt-Lot 20, Lithia Creek Estates, Revised Steep Slope May 3. 2011 The Galli Group 02-3455-03 Page 16 For these larger rock materials, we recommend the 8-inch lift be compacted by a minimum of three (3) passes with a heavy vibratory roller. One "pass" is defined as the roller moving across an area once in both directions. The placement and compaction should be observed by our representative. After compaction, as specified above, is completed the entire area should be proofrolled with a loaded dump truck to verify density has been achieved. All areas which exhibit movement or compression of the rock material under proofrolling should be reworked or removed and replaced as specified above. Field density testing by nuclear methods would be adequate for verifying compaction of 2- inch to 3/4-inch minus crushed base rock, Decomposed Granite and other materials 2 inches or smaller in size. Therefore, typical specifications would suffice. We recommend all structural fill placement and compaction be tested for density compliance or be observed during placement (as for coarser material such as 4" or 6"minus rock)by our representative prior to covering individual lifts. 7.2.1 Utility Trench Backfill Utility lines of various types and sizes will be buried across the site and down the slope. Most shallow trenches less than 4 feet deep across the site should stand with only small amounts of sloughing. Please note the project engineer is not responsible for job site safety. Safety of open excavations is the ongoing responsibility of the contractor at all times. All applicable safety requirements must be strictly observed. Following excavation for site utilities the trenches should be backfilled and compacted properly to prevent subsidence of the surface, damage to the utility lines (or overlying pavement section), or excess surface erosion. We strongly recommend that all utility trench backfill be placed and compacted in the same manner as described for structural fill above. Trench backfill beneath structures should be placed and compacted in accordance with the section on Structural Fill, earlier in this report. Trench backfill beneath driveways but not under structures should be compacted to at least 98 percent of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM Test Method D-698 (Standard Proctor) for the upper 36 inches. Below 36 inches the trench backfill should be compacted to between 93 and 95 percent of the maximum dry density. Due to the difficulty of compacting Decomposed Granite soil when wet, we recommend these soils not be used as trench backfill beneath structures or driveway areas during the "wet" periods of the year. Trench backfill in landscape areas that are not part of a cut or fill slope, or on a steep slope (> 20%), may be compacted to between 90 and 95 percent of the maximum dry density. Granular import may be used as trench backfill. However, these materials must meet the manufacturers recommendations if used in the pipe zone area and should be inspected by our representative prior to usage at the site. Pulverized granite available at the site should work well for trench backfill and pipe zone material (keep large chunks away from the pipe), when compacted in thin lifts and during dry weather. i i 3455rpt-Lot 20,Lithia Creek Estates,Revised Steep Slope May 3.2011 The Galli Group i 02-3455-03 Page 17 Water Conveyance. Clean granular fill material, such as crushed rock or pea-gravel, and even the coarser granite, when used as trench backfill,will tend to collect and convey water. On sloping sites where trenches run up and down the slope it is recommended these porous materials have the potential flow line through this porous backfill broken up with periodic "checkdams" across the trenches. The checkdams may consist of lean mix concrete or compacted clayey silt soils. If the check dams are not placed across trenches on sloping sites, water may be channeled into lower areas, causing significant damage due to flooding, erosion or surface slumps. We recommend these periodic checkdams be used on sloping driveways and sites if granular materials are used for trench backfill. For this site, it appears a spacing of 50-feet or less would be prudent. Alternately, a less permeable trench backfill could be used to decrease water collection or conveyance. Backfill such as very silty or clayey Decomposed Granite soils, sand/cement slurry or other materials with low permeability, would work well. Utility Lines in Slopes. In locations in which storm drain or other utility lines will run downslope; if possible, we recommend locating these utility lines in native soil areas (i.e., not in the face of the fill or cut slopes). Our experience with utility lines which tend to run down these fill slopes is that the trench areas tend to experience larger amounts of erosion and slope failures. If a utility line must be located in the face of a cut or fill slope, it is prudent to utilize a lean cement-sand slurry for backfill the utility line to reduce the likelihood of future erosion and instability along the trench line. 7.2.2 Non-Structural Fill The organic silt unit and thin underlying sandy silt encountered onsite, any waste soil, organic strippings or other deleterious soil would be considered non-structural fill. These materials many times make excellent landscape soils. This material may be placed in landscape areas and waste soil areas. It should not be placed as part of a structural fill slope. It is recommended that when these soils are used they be given a moderate level of compaction (at least 90 percent) to help seal them from surface water. They should also not be placed on steep slopes or with slopes steeper than 3H:1V. 7.3 CUT AND FILL SLOPES Cut and fill slopes will be required for the building pad and retaining wall construction. These should be designed and constructed as described below. Please see Sheet G1.1, Revised Grading and Site Plan, for a conceptual idea of the proposed grading details. These should be designed and constructed as recommended below. 7.3.1 Cut Slopes All permanent cut slopes should be constructed at no steeper than 2H:IV in the upper sandy Silt or silty Sand soils and 1.5H:1V in the denser underlying weathered Granite. 3455rpt-Lot 20, Lithia Creek Estates,Revised Steep Slope May 3.2011 The Galli Group l i 02-3455-03 Page 18 Some sloughing and/or raveling of the slope surface could be expected in wet weather and extremely dry weather until they become fully vegetated. However, slope movements or landslides should not be a concern. Provisions should be made such that access to periodically clear away raveled material is readily available at the toe of the small cut slopes. All exposed soils on these cut slopes must be protected with permanent erosion control measures. At this time, we understand no permanent and unretained cuts over 3 feet high are planned. Temporary cut slopes of 1H:1 V may be constructed during the construction of basement areas. However, we strongly recommend our firm be retained during excavation to verify that adverse bedding planes or loose soil zones are not exposed on the face of these cuts. If adverse bedding planes or loose zones are encountered, the contractor should be prepared to provide temporary shoring or slope back excavation to flatter slopes. Periodic monitoring and observation of cut slopes is recommended during construction of the daylight basement retaining wall to verify that the cut slopes do not degrade to cause sloughing or have blocks fall out of the face of the slope. We recommend our representative review these slopes on a weekly basis. "Temporary" cut slopes must be backfilled with granular material once the retaining wall is completed. 7.3.2 Fill Slopes Fill slopes may be constructed of compacted native granite materials. We recommend maximum slope angles of fill be 2H:1 V for compacted granite (sandy) materials. All materials should be placed and compacted as structural fill, described above. We recommend, in order to decrease sloughing and erosion of the fill slope,that all fills be over built and the face cut back to a compacted fill face. It is critical to decrease long-term settlements beneath the driveway and parking (if these are to be placed over new fill)that these fills be placed and compacted properly). It is also critical to decrease the risk of future instability that these fills be placed and compacted properly. We recommend periodic density testing of all fills as they are being built. Density testing only on the top lift is not adequate. All fills placed on this sloping site must incorporate additional precautionary measures. To assure that these fills remain in place or do not fail due to hydrostatic pressure of trapped water,we recommend the following: Key Trench. The toe of all fills placed on slopes must be keyed into the slope by use of a key trench. The depth of embedment should be 2 feet into the undisturbed, native soils for fill slopes up to 10 feet high, and 3 feet for fill slopes from 10 to 15 feet in height. The key trench should be wide enough to accommodate excavation and compaction equipment(8 to 10 feet minimum) and have the base flat or sloped back into the hillside somewhat (see Figure 4). This key trench should also run parallel to the slope contour lines. 3455rpt-Lot 20,Lithia Creek Estates, Revised Steep Slope May 3.2011 The Galli Group 02-3455-03 Page 19 Benching. The underlying native slope should be benched into flat benches up the slope prior to placement of the fill slope. These benches should be flat or tipped back slightly into the hillside and run parallel to the contour lines. Please see Figure 4,"for graphic representation of these details. Drainage. All noticeable seepage or wet zones observed during the keying and benching excavation process (or other areas which may seep during wet weather) should be provided with subdrains. At the discretion of the geotechnical engineer, at a minimum,the key trench may require a subdrain section. Where wet conditions exist the benches may also require subdrain sections to remove subsurface flow from behind the new fill. Please note that fills placed on slopes typically have a much lower lateral permeability than the native soils. Therefore, seepage through the native soil can become trapped behind these fills causing fill slope stability problems, if proper subdrains are not installed. At least one of these drainage sections should be installed in the general fill area behind the proposed Versa Lok®retaining walls for the site. Benches, keyways, drainage and compaction of the fill slopes must also be observed and tested by our representative. 7.4 FOUNDATIONS The proposed two-story, wood-frame home may be supported on reinforced concrete spread footings and/or retaining walls founded in the dense, undisturbed, native Decomposed Granite soils. We understand the designer and builder is planning to situate the proposed building on a partial daylight basement level which is partially embedded in the hillside. Pony walls or retaining walls will be utilized to extend stem walls to the required floor heights. At this time, we anticipate concrete stem walls and retaining walls ranging from 2 to 6 feet in height may be utilized to create daylight basement level of the home on this relatively steep hillside. We recommend the following for conventional spread footings on this site: • Footings should be poured neat against undisturbed, dense, Decomposed Granite soil or weathered granitic rock. We recommend the footing excavations penetrate the loose topsoil and all uncontrolled fill zones in order to minimize settlement. • All loose or uncontrolled fill soils should be removed from beneath the footings prior to placement of structural fill or reinforcing steel and concrete. Structural fill (such as crushed rock or Decomposed Granite) should then be placed and compacted in accordance with sections for structural fill in this report. • Footing areas may then be brought to grade by replacing excavated soil with structural fill which is placed and compacted in accordance with sections for structural fill in this report. Structural fill should be placed and compacted with a large vibratory roller to at least 98% of the maximum dry density as determined by laboratory procedure ASTM D-698 (Standard Proctor). 3455rpt-Lot 20, Lithia Creek Estates, Revised Steep Slope May 3.2011 The Galli Group I 02-3455-03 Page 20 • The'width of structural fill placed beneath footings should extend outward from all sides of the footing a horizontal distance equivalent to at least one half the depth of the fill placed (i.e., for 4 feet of fill beneath the footings, extend fill past all edges of footing at least 2 feet). • Footings founded on the upper, medium dense to dense, Decomposed Granite soils or on properly compacted structural fill may be designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf). A one-third increase in the above allowable bearing pressures may be used when considering short-term transitory wind and seismic loads. • If footing excavations occur during the wet winter and spring months, it would be prudent to protect the subgrade soils by placing at least 12 inches of 3/4-inch minus crushed rock structural fill over firm, undisturbed subgrade soils. In this manner, the footing subgrade would be protected from wet weather during rebar and form placement, which will decrease possible future settlements. Crushed rock fill should be placed and compacted in accordance with sections for structural fill in this report. • Foundations which run up and down slope must be stepped such that all areas of the footing bear on a level subgrade cut into the native soils as described above. In no case should footings be poured on a sloping subgrade. • We recommend minimum lateral dimensions be 16 inches for continuous footings and 24 inches for isolated piers. • In order to provide lateral support for foundations, we recommend that exterior footings founded on the down slope edge of the home (south edge of the home) be embedded into native soils a minimum of 2 feet. Footings which run up and down the slope should have a minimum embedment of 18 inches below the nearest outside grade to protect against frost heave and provide lateral resistance. General Recommendations. Care should be taken when excavating for the footings and when placing reinforcing steel so as not to disturb the subgrade soils. This is particularly important during wet weather. Disturbed subgrade soils beneath footings or other portions of the foundations can increase settlement significantly. Therefore, all loose, disturbed, soft or saturated soils should be removed and replaced or redensified prior to placing concrete. If footings are excavated during wet weather, we recommend the subgrade be immediately protected by a layer of compacted crushed rock or lean concrete. All excavations to footing subgrade and all structural fill placement should either be tested or observed by our representative prior to covering with additional lifts. Deck Footings. Deck footings or posts that support roof overhangs which will be located on slopes on the downslope edge of the home should be founded on drilled piers that penetrate at least three (3) feet into the undisturbed native soil. These piers should be at least 24 inches in diameter for roof support and at least 18 inches in diameter for deck support. Refer to your structural engineer for revised deck pier sizes and typical steel reinforcement for the drilled pier foundations. 3455rpt-Lot 20,Lithia Creek Estates,Revised Steep Slope May 3. 2011 The Galli Group 02-3455-03 Page 21 Settlements. For properly constructed foundations founded beneath the surficial topsoil and on the medium dense Decomposed Granite soils, we anticipate total and differential settlement to be less than 1-inch and 11/2-inch, respectively. Seismic loading may cause some additional settlement, however, we estimate this to be less than %2-inch. Footings constructed on top of the loose fills or disturbed soils could experience significantly more settlement (greater than 1-inch). We recommend structural elements such as floor slabs, stem walls and footings all be tied together structurally in order to minimize the possibility of future settlement cracks. In this manner, differential settlements (which show up as cracks and separations) between various structural elements will be less evident during future months. Seismic Considerations. The foundations may be subjected to loads from severe ground shaking in a seismic event. This would increase the overall loading on the subgrade soils. For the soils anticipated, this additional loading should not cause any significant adverse affects due to bearing capacity failure as long as footings are designed and constructed per this report. Anticipated maximum ground accelerations and earthquake design are based upon established values and methods set forth in the 2009 International Building Code (IBC) and the 2010 Oregon Structural Specialty Code (OSSC). As determined from Table 1615.5.2 of the 2009 IBC,the structure should be designed for Site Class C. Mapped maximum considered earthquake spectral response acceleration at short periods (Ss) from Figure 1613.5(1): Ss= 0.568g. Mapped maximum considered earthquake spectral response acceleration at 1-second period (S I) from Figure 1613.5(2): S, = 0.250g. This should provide adequate strength for protection of egress during a seismic event. Please note this does not mean that damage would not occur as a result of such an event. Drainage. We recommend all footings be installed with a footing drain to intercept groundwater seepage. Footing drains consisting of a rigid, smooth-wall perforated pipe surrounded by drain rock (sides and above), all wrapped in a non-woven geotextile fabric and should be placed adjacent to the footings. This drain should be at least 6 inches below the low point of the crawl-space. The lot should be final graded so as to channel all surface water back away from the structure. Such runoff should be collected in erosion-protected surface swales or catch basins and conducted to acceptable discharge location. Construction Services. Due to the uncertainty of the anticipated subgrade conditions beneath the uncontrolled fill areas, we recommend several site visits by our firm be scheduled during the construction process (especially during the uncontrolled fill over-excavation and during subgrade preparation). Our firm would also then be able to observe the subgrade conditions beneath the structures and provide additional geotechnical recommendations. We 3455rpt-Lot 20, Lithia Creek Estates, Revised Steep Slope May 3.2011 The Galli Group i 02-3455-03 Page 22 also recommend our firm be contacted to observe the over-excavation and/or footing subgrades prior to fill placement (if needed). 7.5 SLAB-ON-GRADE FLOORS Slab-on-grade floors could potentially be utilized in the garage (could possibly be a suspended garage floor slab) and possibly for portions of the daylight basement level. Based on our site observations, the proposed garage area is currently underlain by undocumented fill soils of various depths. It is strongly recommended to remove all uncontrolled fill soils from beneath concrete floor slab areas and place structural fill as recommended above in the section on Onsite Uncontrolled Fill Treatment. Properly compacted and prepared structural fill over a compacted and densified Decomposed Granite subgrade would be adequate for support of concrete slabs-on-grade. We recommend densifiying the subgrade soils to at least 98% of the maximum laboratory dry density(ASTM D-698). The subgrade soils should be cleaned of loose material prior to placement of structural fill or underslab rock. The subgrade soils should be proofrolled with a loaded dump truck or other heavily loaded rubber-tired vehicle. If proofrolling appears to begin pumping of the subgrade a lighter vehicle should be used or proofrolling should be discontinued. The loose and or unstable areas revealed during proofrolling should be removed and replaced with crushed rock structural fill. The contractor must be very careful not to disturb the subgrade. The following recommendations are provided for structural slabs constructed on properly prepared subgrade soils or properly compacted structural fill: 1. A filter fabric between the sandy soils and the drain rock will help protect the drainage layer from plugging over time (this is especially needed where the drain rock layer is embedded below the exterior grades). 2. A six-inch layer of clean (less than 2%passing the No. 200 sieve) crushed rock(%2"to 3/4" clean crushed rock works well) should be placed over the structural fill to provide a positive capillary moisture break and uniform slab support. The capillary break is especially helpful in areas with floors that will not"breathe" (such as tile or linoleum). Note: This drain rock layer should be increased to 10 inches and underslab drains installed as described later in this report when the slab is embedded as a daylight basement level. The zone should also be drained by a subdrain system as described later in this report. I 3. An impermeable membrane, such as 6-mil (10-mil works even better) plastic sheeting, should be placed over the crushed rock layer to further retard the upward migration of moisture vapor into and through the concrete slab. 4. In order to protect the membrane, one to two inches of clean sand could be placed on top of the membrane. The sand should be moistened slightly prior to placing concrete. I i 3455rpt-Lot 20,Lithia Creek Estates,Revised Steep Slope May 3.2011 The Galli Group I 02-3455-03 Page 23 We recommend that the contractor use deformed reinforcing steel for slab reinforcement rather than welded wire fabric. A minimum reinforcement scheme would,be#3 or#4 bars, 18 inches on center, both ways. Fibermesh may be used to help decrease drying shrinkage cracks, however it is not a replacement for structural reinforcing. All slabs will crack, therefore jointing at 8 to 10 foot intervals or less, both ways, will significantly decrease random cracking in the open areas. Refer to your structural designer for detailed slab reinforcement and jointing that will provide the desired performance over the life of the proj ect. Exterior Flatwork. We recommend all concrete flatwork be reinforced with deformed rebar. This helps decrease cracking and minimizes vertical offset or lateral separation at cracks. A minimum reinforcement pattern would be No. 3 bars at 18-inch centers, both ways. Jointing at 8 foot (or less) intervals also helps decrease random cracking in the "field" of concrete pours. Increasing the cement content in order to decrease the water/cement ratio and including 5% entrained air will decrease drying shrinkage and increase surface toughness. 7.6 LATERAL LOAD RESISTANCE Lateral loads exerted upon the structure can be resisted by passive pressure acting on buried portions of the foundation and other buried structures, and by friction between the bottom of concrete elements of the foundations and the underlying soil/rock. We recommend the use of passive equivalent fluid pressures of the following values for portions of the structure and foundations embedded into the native soils or structural fill utilizing the onsite materials. • Medium dense, clayey to silty Sands 350 pcf We also recommend that the first one-foot below the ground surface (in the soil) be ignored when computing the passive resistance. A coefficient of friction of 0.40 can be used for elements poured neat against structural fill or granite soil. This should be reduced to 0.2 where areas are underlain by plastic sheeting vapor barrier. 7.7 LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES 7.7.1 Conventional Cantilever Walls Lateral earth pressures will be imposed on all below ground and bacicfilled structures or walls, including foundations which do not have uniform heights of fill on both sides. It is possible that unrestrained and restrained walls may be constructed for the project. The following recommendations are provided for design and construction of reinforced concrete or CMU block retaining walls: • We recommend walls which are free to rotate at the top (unrestrained) when bacicfilled, be designed for an equivalent fluid pressure of 40 pcf. • Walls that are fixed at the top (restrained) should be designed for an equivalent fluid pressure of 60 pcf. I 3455rpt-Lot 20,Lithia Creek Estates, Revised Steep Slope May 3. 2011 The Galli Group I 02-3455-03 Page 24 _f fi • A soil unit weight of 125 psf should be used for design. • These values are for properly compacted, free draining, (Please seeTigure'5)non- expansive, granular soils, free of organics and other debris or for imported granular backfill. The onsite organic topsoil and silt soils should not be used for wall backfill materials. The excavated, coarser Decomposed Granite material may be used provided that a full drainage zone is placed on the back of the wall. Imported jaw-run "shale" also works well. • These design values assume the wall or structure is fully drained,has a flat backfill and has no surcharge loads from traffic or other structures. The structural designer should include surcharge loading from traffic, building loads, and sloped backfill. • We recommend designing retaining walls to resist seismic loading. A peals horizontal ground acceleration of 0.24g for a 2% chance of occurrence in any 50-year perio d (2500 year) is given by the U.S. Geological Survey's "Interpolated Probabilistic Ground Motion Values-Conterminous 48 States" (USGS, 2002). Therefore, a peals horizontal acceleration of 0.16g (2/3rds of 2500 year earthquake) should be applied to the mass of an enlarged active wedge of soil behind.the walls and utilized in a pseudo-static analysis. The wedge length back from the wall along the ground surface may be taken as 0.8H, where H is the height of the wall. This relates to a uniform load on the back of the wall equal to approximately 10 psf for each foot of backfill behind the wall, for walls up to 10 feet tall (i.e., for a 10-foot tall wall, utilize a uniform load of 100 psf). This load is in addition to the static active or at-rest loads given above. • The backfill should be placed in lifts at near the optimum moisture content and compacted to between 93 and 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by laboratory procedure ASTM D-698 (Standard Proctor). Loosely placed backfill will exert greater pressures on the wall than the pressures provided above and must be avoided. • To prevent damage to the wall, backfill and compaction against walls or embedded I structures should be accomplished with lighter hand-operated equipment within a I distance of 1/2 h to 1/3 h (h being the vertical distance from the level being compacted down to the surface on the opposite side of the wall). Outside this distance, normal compaction equipment may be used. While proper compaction of wall backfill is critical to the proper performance of the walls, care should be taken to not over-compact the backfill materials. Over-compaction can induce greater lateral loads on the wall or structure than the design pressures given above. 7.7.2 Mechanically Stabilized Earth (MSE)Retaining Walls The following section provides general recommendations for design and construction of Mechanically Stabilized Earth (MSE) wall systems such as Versa-Lok, Keystone or Ultra Block. Our firm has provided design recommendations and typical cross-sections for a series of tiered Versa-Lok retaining walls which will be constructed below the proposed residence 3455rpt-Lot 20,Lithia Creek Estates,Revised Steep Slope May 3.2011 The Galli Group I 02-3455-03 Page 25 and the upper driveway area. Please seethe blueprint plans for this project, G1.1 through G1.3. Soil Strengths. Based on our site visits, it appears that the surficial soils will tend to consist of a silty, clayey Sand (Decomposed Granite). Based on our experience with soils in this area, we utilized the following soil parameters for design of the project. Silty, Clayey Sand Friction Angle= 30° Cohesion= 0 psf Unit Weight= 125 pcf It should be noted that the Decomposed Granite materials and the more highly weathered saprolitic soils overlying these tend to vary a great deal across a project. We have used the values above for the Versa-Lok retaining wall design aspect of the project. However, the soils conditions exposed during construction should be observed at the site by our personnel to confirm the soils are as anticipated during the design phase. Wall Loading Considerations. All retaining structures are acted upon by lateral earth pressures from the wall backfill, surcharge loads from sloping backfill, vehicles, structures and dynamic loads during seismic events. We recommend these walls be designed for a peak horizontal ground acceleration of at least 0.16g. Surcharge loads due to traffic was generally modeled as a 200-pound per square foot load on the surface behind the wall. Where heavy truck traffic could apply very heavy tire loads (immediately adjacent to the wall) some form of rigid top course or curb must be used to maintain the integrity of the walls. Any walls that have a sloping backfill behind the wall or footings for the adjacent home must also be designed for these added loads. The static lateral earth pressure exerted on the wall is highly dependent upon compaction of the backfill materials. Looser backfill will exert greater pressures. They are also more susceptible to a decrease in shear strength during wet weather. Therefore,proper compaction (at least 95%per ASTM D-698) must be accomplished during construction for the above- listed soil strength parameters to be valid. All of the design recommendations assume the following: • The wall and backfill are placed on level benches with proper toe embedments on the downslope side. • All walls are fully drained and at least one of the benches cut into the slope to facilitate backfill are fully drained as shown on our Fill on Slope Cross-Section(See Figure 4). i 7.8 FOUNDATION, WALL DRAINS AND FLOOR SUBDRAINS All exterior foundations and embedded structures must have proper drainage to function properly. i 3455rpt-Lot 20, Lithia Creek Estates,Revised Steep Slope May 3.2011 The Galli Group i 02-3455-03 Page 26 Footing Drains. Drainage should consist of a rigid, smooth interior perforated drainpipe (capable of being cleaned by a roto-rooter type apparatus), typically resting adjacent to the footing near the base of the footing,provided this level is below the drain rock layer under any floor slabs and at least 6 inches below the low point of the crawl-space. The perforated pipe should be surrounded by a minimum of 8 inches of clean drain rock or pea gravel. The drain rock envelope should be wrapped in a non-woven geotextile designed as a filter fabric (AMOCO 4546 or equivalent). We recommend the fabric be covered with a 2-inch layer of sand, to protect it against damage during backfilling operations and potential partial plugging from soil fines,prior to backfilling please see Figure 6 typical footing drain details. Wall Drains. Wall drains should also have a minimum 12-inch wide drainage zone of drain rock wrapped in non-woven filter fabric immediately behind the wall extending up from the drainage section to within 12 to 18 inches of the surface. A preformed, fabric-wrapped, polymer sheet drain, such as Linq Drain or Enkamat may be used in lieu of the vertical drainage zone, provided this is backfilled with clean, free-draining material. Exterior wall drains,which will not be sealed on top by asphalt or concrete, should have the upper 12 to 18 inches backfilled with compacted onsite silt and clay soils to minimize intrusion of surface waters into the wall drain system. Please see Figure 5 for details of wall drainage methods. Note: Walls that are part of a basement or daylight basement and that must remain reasonably dry, must have additional waterproofing. We recommend a rolled or troweled on bitumen-base sealer(seal coats that do not harden are less likely to crack and allow moisture into the wall) on the exterior, covered by plastic sheeting or the polymer sheet drain, backfilled with free draining granular materials. While applying the sealer to the entire wall is important, attaining a good seal in the lower two feet of the wall, as well as at the wall to footing/floor interface, is critical. Floor Subdrains. Where the drain rock layer below slabs will be lower than the adjacent exterior grades, water will tend to accumulate in this low area. This is especially true with daylight basements. One method to drain this water is to include a series of subdrains at the bottom of the drain rock layer beneath the slab. The drain rock section should be thickened to at least 10 to 12 inches for such basement areas. The subdrain lines typically consist of 3 or 4-inch smooth interior, solid wall, perforated pipe at spacing of 15 feet (or less) across the structure (and around the interior perimeter). The perforated pipe is placed in a deepened zone of the drain layer as shown on Figure 7. The pipes are sloped to drain and collected by a tightline which leads to the stormwater disposal system. We recommend we be allowed to review the subdrain system design prior to construction bidding. All foundation drains and subdrains should be connected to a tightline that discharges at an approved stormwater disposal location. We strongly recommend against connecting roof downspouts or surface area drains to foundation,wall, or floor subdrain systems. We recommend cleanouts be placed periodically by the designer to facilitate cleaning and maintenance of all drainage systems. 3455rpt-Lot 20,Lithia Creek Estates, Revised Steep Slope May 3. 2011 The Galli Group 02-3455-03 Page 27 7.9 SITE DRAINAGE For Buildings. Final grading should be such that the ground surface promotes rapid positive drainage away from all structures for a horizontal distance of at least 8 feet (typical code requirements are at least 6 inches of fall in 8 feet). This water should be channeled to surface drains or swales for proper disposal. The landscaping around the home should be finish graded such that they drain internally to small catch basins which discharge through curbs, into the gutter or roadside ditches or into other approved public drainage easements. All downspouts must be connected to a sealed tightline system which discharges to an acceptable disposal location. Crawl-Space Drainage. Any areas beneath the home that have a crawl-space should be sloped slightly and smoothed out such that any seepage entering beneath the homes will flow to one or more low point drains. There should be no low areas that allow puddling of water. These low areas or points should discharge through the foundations to the water disposal system. Upslope of Home. The area immediately upslope of daylight basement will typically be a collection point for runoff from the slope above. Therefore, we recommend the area above the home and the associated MSE retaining walls be shaped to direct surface runoff towards several catch basins located to collect the runoff. We anticipate that the builder will incorporate a large catch basin near the southeast corner of the driveway turn-around area (Please see Sheet G1.4, Erosion Control Plan). The catch basins should have sediment traps which may have to be cleaned several times the first year,until vegetation becomes established on any disturbed soil slopes above. Where grades allow this area to be sloped away from the houses, a shallow swale should be graded into the yard, back away from the basement wall, to facilitate rapid runoff. This Swale also will most likely require periodic catch basins. Drainage of this area upslope of the basement walls is a very important part of the site drainage. Without such surface collection of runoff the wall and floor subdrain systems on this side of the residences may become overwhelmed, resulting in damp or wet floors or walls and possible seepage into areas of the daylight basement. Providing some form of surface seal, such as an asphalt or concrete V-ditch in the base of the swale upslope (where slopes are steep) of the houses, will help inhibit water infiltration into the wall drainage system. Surface Areas. Any surface and subsurface water flows should be intercepted by swales and/or catch basins and conveyed through tight lines to acceptable discharge locations. Areas such as driveways and roadways must have the surface water collected in the storm drain systems and conveyed to an acceptable disposal location. We recommend all hard surfaces be sloped and shaped to channel water towards catch basins or lined ditches. 3455rpt-Lot 20,Lithia Creek Estates, Revised Steep Slope May 3.2011 The Galli Group 02-3455-03 Page 28 Care must also be taken to channel the runoff from the lot area away from the parcel below and into a catch basin system. Any swales in these granite soils should be lined with 4 to 6- inch-minus crushed rock over a geotextile filter fabric, or have a staked-down polymer-net reinforced erosion control mat to minimize erosion and scour. All cut and fill areas must be sloped to promote surface flow back away from the top edge. In no case should surface water runoff be allowed to flow over the top edge and down the face of any fill slopes. Care must be taken to "channel"this surface water into catch basins or surface swales which discharge at an acceptable location. 8.0 PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS The site is underlain by a unit of medium dense to dense, clayey Sand (Decomposed Granite). This should make up the access driveway subgrade for much of the project. 8.1 PAVEMENT DESIGN The successful performance of pavement structures is a function of subgrade material properties,traffic conditions, drainage conditions, the pavement material properties and design, careful construction, and ongoing maintenance. These elements are discussed briefly below. Subgrade Soil. Subgrade soils are typically evaluated with the California Bearing Ratio (CBR)test or by R-value testing. These tests are used to quantify the resistance to shearing of the subgrade soil compared with crushed stone. The typical tested values for the onsite clayey Sand (DG) indicate modest subgrade support for pavement structures. We recommend the roadway be designed for a subgrade soil with an R-value of 30 (CBR=12-15) unless the roadway section base rock sits on hard, native fractured rock. We recommend use of a woven, geotextile support fabric be considered for use beneath all roadways over clayey soils,particularly if the roadway construction will not be started and completed during the dry summer months. k We have evaluated pavement section design using a Traffic Index (TI) of 5.5 for the proposed driveway. Based on this TI and an R-value of 30, we have computed asphalt design sections (utilizing the California Design Method) with the following results: Driveway Access (TI=5.5)* 2'/2"Asphaltic Concrete 10"Aggregate Base Rock(1"Minus Crushed Rock) Woven Geotextile Support Fabric (AMOCO 2006 or equivalent). For better long-term performance of the entrance driveway, we recommend increasing the base thickness in the area identified above to 12 inches. 3455rpt-Lot 20,Lithia Creek Estates, Revised Steep Slope May 3. 2011 The Galli Group 02-3455-03 Page 29 *Note: This pavement section is not designed for repeated heavy truck or construction traffic, which may damage this section. Portland Cement Concrete Pavement. In many cases homeowners like a concrete parking area and in some instances a concrete driveway. While these tend to be more expensive than asphaltic concrete paving, they can be smoother, have more durable surfaces and if constructed properly will typically have a longer design life. Residential driveways and parking areas typically perform well when constructed of 4 inches of reinforced concrete over a dense stable base. A 6-inch lift of 3/4-inch minus crushed rock over properly compacted structural fill or the densified Decomposed Granite subgrade would provide good support for these pavements. The subgrade must be firm and unyielding to minimize cracking of the concrete pavements. Reinforcing should be at least No. 3 bars at 18-inch centers, both ways,held in place on rebar chairs to be at the mid-height of the slab. The concrete should be a 3,500 psi mix with 5% entrained air, placed at a 6-inch slump (or less). Excessive wetting of the surface during finishing should be avoided in order to maintain a durable surface. The concrete should also not be allowed to freeze for the first 72 hours. Subgrade Preparation. Following preparation of the working surface and prior to placing aggregate base for the pavement section, the working surface should be proofrolled using a loaded dump truck to verify that adequate subgrade support is present. Where deformation of the subgrade occurs during proofrolling, often the fabric and subgrade has been damaged, and the area should be over-excavated and replaced with imported granular fill with less than 5 percent passing the number 200 sieve. In areas of repeated heavy construction traffic,to minimize loss of rock and minimize soft pumpy areas (which would need to be repaired prior to placement of the base rock), a geotextile support fabric (such as Mirafi 600X or AMCO 2006) designed for use under compacted rock (see above) could be placed over the prepared subgrade. The geotextile would also typically provide some additional pavement life for the project. We recommend that the finished subgrade be viewed and that base rock be tested for density and stability by our representative prior to placement of asphalt at the site. Materials. Site preparation, construction materials, and construction technique all play a critical role in the performance of the completed project. All materials used and construction techniques applied at the site must result in conditions as assumed for design of the pavement sections. We recommend materials used in the pavement support sections be as follows: i I' I 3455rpt-Lot 20,Lithia Creek Estates,Revised Steep Slope May 3.2011 The Galli Group 02-3455-03 Page 30 Aggregate Base Rock ® Well-graded, crushed, angular hard rock • Minimum: R=80 ® Maximum passing No. 200 sieve=7% ® 3/4" or 1"minus material ® Compacted to 98% of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D-698. Asphaltic concrete should be designed by the batch plants and placed by the contractor in accordance with applicable ODOT and Asphalt Institute standards. Asphalt mix design, aggregate type and gradation, bitumen type and percentage and proper placement and compaction at the job site are critical to the long-term performance of the pavement sections. The asphaltic concrete mix design should provide a compacted asphalt section that is stiff enough(excessive bitumen content will cause bleeding and deformation)to resist pushing and rutting in concentrated traffic areas during hot weather. It should also be flexible enough to prevent fatigue cracking due to the high loading repetitions. Densification of the asphalt must be accomplished while the asphalt is still hot per Asphalt Institute standards to have the desired design life. Inclement Weather Construction. Generally, the best performance of a pavement structure will occur when the subgrade is prepared under dry weather conditions. However, if construction is necessary during wet weather, the site subgrade is likely to become spongy and too wet to achieve adequate compaction. Under those conditions, we recommend providing a working surface constructed from geotextile fabric and jaw-run"shale". The fabric should be a woven geotextile support fabric equivalent to Miraf. 600X, capable of providing both separation and some support for aggregate placed over potentially weak subgrades. Placement should be according to the manufacturers instructions. A layer consisting of a minimum of 12 inches of 4-inch minus jaw-run "shale" should then be placed over the fabric (exercising care not to damage the fabric), and should provide a reasonable wet-weather construction roadway. Should repeated heavy construction traffic be planned,the shale layer may need to be increased to 16" or 18" thickness. The aggregate or other granular material should be end-dumped and then pushed onto the fabric utilizing track- mounted equipment. Compaction of the first 12 inches is not necessary since the risk of damage to the fabric is great. If numerous loaded trucks are anticipated, additional subbase may be required with the upper six inches compacted prior to allowing loaded truck traffic onto the surface. Drainage. Adequate provision should be made to direct surface water away from the pavement section and subgrade. Ponded water adjacent to the roadway can saturate the subbase resulting in loss of support. Excessive landscape watering can also saturate the subbase and decrease pavement life. Deep curbs, drip irrigation and/or use of dry-land plants will mitigate these affects. Proper site grading, drainage ditches lined with rock and catch basins to adequately drain this area will help the long-term performance of the pavement j areas. i 3455rpt-Lot 20, Lithia Creek Estates,Revised Steep Slope May 3. 2011 The Galli Group i 02-3455-03 Page 31 Maintenance. The recommend pavement section has been designed for 20-year life span under the anticipated light residential traffic conditions. Pavement life can be extended by providing proper maintenance and overlays as needed. Cracks in the pavement should be filled to prevent intrusion of surface water into the subbase rock layer. An overlay of approximately 1 to 2 inches after 20 years would typically be expected to provide an estimated additional 10 or more years of pavement life. 9.0 EROSION CONTROL RECOMMENDATIONS A recent site visit was accomplished (as requested by the City of Ashland) in order to verify that the existing temporary erosion control measures are functioning properly in controlling site runoff from the existing uncontrolled fill slopes. On April 1St, 2011, our Senior Engineering Geologist, Mr. Edward Busby, C.E.G., made a cursory visit to the site to observe the existing erosion control measures. At the time of our site visit, no depositional fans of sand or silt were noted below the silt fence and hay bales which circle the low end of the uncontrolled fill slopes. The temporary erosion control measures appear to be working well at checking offsite erosion and the existing slopes appear stable in their existing condition. A copy of our Senior Engineering Geologist's inspection comments and sketch is included in Appendix A at the end of this report. The following are general comments which should be incorporated into erosion control at the site. These are generally included in the Erosion Control Plan shown on Sheet Gl A (full-size plans associated with report). General. The basic purpose of any erosion control plan is to decrease erosion and prevent off-site migration of soil fines. In this manner, the amount of suspended solids in site runoff can be reduced to acceptable levels. This is typically accomplished by 1) slowing down surface water runoff by means of vegetation, hay bales and rock coverings or checkdams, 2) holding the soil in place by a covering of grass or other material and 3) by limiting the amount of water which can flow through any area of the project. For this site we recommend all exposed soil areas be regraded such that surface water moves as sheet flow rather than concentrated flow (unless the concentrated flow is in a rock-lined or concrete-lined ditch). The flattened regraded areas should have the backfill soil compacted and the surface scarified to a depth of 1/2 inch in areas to receive hydro-mulch seed. The area should then be planted with a grass mix with wildflower seed (optional) added. Hydroseeding with the seed, a mulch and fertilizer added to a water borne slurry should help the seed root and grow well the first year. Other additives to help the soil remain in place will be required on the steeper cut slope areas of the parcel. Surface Water Control. Site soils are susceptible to erosion, especially when disturbed and left unprotected. The site grades are such that erosion during construction could be moderate to large if left unattended. Therefore, it is imperative to grade the site in such a manner that stormwater will not collect and flow offsite over disturbed soil, or over the crest and down 3455rpt-Lot 20, Lithia Creek Estates,Revised Steep Slope May 3.2011 The Galli Group i I 02-3455-03 Page 32 the fill slopes. The building pad, driveway cut and fill should be graded such that all surface water collects and flows away in protected ditches or swales away from the edge of fills. In no case should surface water be allowed to flow over the crest and down the face of fill slopes. Runoff should be directed to collection points where small settling basins (generally consisting of silt fencing and hay bales) can filter out sand and silt before runoff flows offsite or into nearby drainage ways. Flowing water in Swale or ditch areas will tend to cause considerable erosion of the inverts unless these are protected by filter fabric and angular rock coverings. Hay bale check dams (staked in place) or crushed rock checkdams placed periodically across the ditches are recommended to help decrease the flow velocity and help filter out sand and silt fines. A silt fence along the low side of all disturbed areas of the site will be required to minimize offsite migration of soil fines. Stormwater. Should not be allowed to pond within roadway areas or on the building pads or allowed to collect and run uncontrolled down fill slopes. All pathways of exit from the site for the site runoff should be protected from silt and sand migration by hay bale and silt fence enclosures. Please see Sheet G1.4, Grading and Erosion Control Plan, in the full-size plans associated with this project for specific erosion control details. Please note that some of the erosion control items will have to be placed at low points selected during construction. Additional ones should be used as needed to mitigate erosion and offsite migration of soil fines. Care should be taken when constructing the erosion control measures at the site. Many times hay bales and silt fences are installed in such a way that after a few storms, surface flow laden with silt and sand, flows beneath or around the enclosures. Therefore, installation must make sure that the bottom of the silt fence is embedded at least four inches into the ground. Hay bales must be placed tight against each other and against the ground and staked in place. Rock lining in ditches should be smoothed over to make sure voids that expose the underlying soils are not present. Filter fabric laid beneath the rock lining will provide even better protection. Shale checkdams across the ditches should have a shallow low point in the center to concentrate flow into the center of the ditches. Silt Fences. A silt fence along the low side of all disturbed areas of the site will be required to minimize offsite migration of soil fines. All pathways of exit from the site for the site runoff should be protected from silt and sand migration by hay bale and silt fence enclosures. We recommend installing the silt fence along the low end of the project prior to beginning any earthwork or grading on the subject site. Settling Basins and Hay Bales. The runoff from the site, driveway and backfilled trenches will inevitably be carrying silt and sand particles. Therefore, we recommend small settling basins be installed below the site at the discharge end of all graded areas, ditches and swale areas. These should be placed to remove silt and sand prior to the runoff entering other conveyance systems such as the City of Ashland storm drain system. 3455rpt-Lot 20,Lithia Creek Estates, Revised Steep Slope May 3.2011 The Galli Group 02-3455-03 Page 33 Siltation ponds or settling ponds (at settling basins) must be large enough to not overflow during storms until the silt and sand has settled out. Excess capacity must be planned into all settling basins to accommodate for the siltation caused by sediment carried into the pond areas. An adequate number of hay bale lines and silt fence runs must be installed across such flow areas to effectively filter out and hold back the sediment generated by surface flows. All concentrated water flow must be occurring through planned ditches and outlets such that it does not cause erosion, offsite movement of sediment and siltation of the storm drains. Driveway Entrance Protection. We also recommend the driveway entrance to the site be covered with "shale" or crushed rock, to decrease mud tracking onto the City of Ashland streets. If this driveway rock base becomes covered with mud; additional clean shale or crushed rock must be placed. Seed,Fertilizer and Mulch. In accordance with our discussions with agricultural extension agents, we recommend a seed mix of the following combination be applied at a rate of 10 pounds per 1,000 square feet for broadcast spreading and 200 pounds per acre for hydroseeding methods. Annual Ryegrass 25% Perennial Ryegrass 25% Creeping Fescue 25% Hard Fescue 25% Wildflower Mix as Desired The grass seed should be a minimum of 80%pure live seed with not more than 1.0% weed seed. The project landscape architect should be contacted for advice on the plant or seed types. We recommend the seed be placed in combination with an Ammonium Phosphate Sulfate fertilizer containing a minimum of 16% nitrogen, 20 % available phosphoric acids and 15% sulfur. The fertilizer should be dry and free-flowing. It should be applied at a uniform rate of 500 pounds per acre. Mulch consisting of either straw, wood cellulose fiber or other similar materials should be used. The mulch should be applied with the slurry at a rate of approximately 2,000 pounds per acre. The seeded areas must be covered with a 2-inch thick layer of straw or another acceptable mulch to aid in the germination and to minimize erosion of the site soils. i Please note that other seed mixes, fertilizers and mulch materials are acceptable for erosion control at the site. Generally accepted erosion control mixes placed by hydroseeding companies or seed mixes provided for erosion control by local seed stores should be acceptable for use at the site. We recommend the grass and plant mix be used that satisfies City of Ashland fire control and historic view criteria. I 3455rpt-Lot 20,Lithia Creek Estates, Revised Steep Slope May 3.2011 The Galli Group 02-3455-03 Page 34 Bonded Fiber Matrix. Any steep cut slopes (1.5H:1V or greater) in the granite should be vegetated by use of a"Bonded Fiber Matrix" (BFM) in the hydroseed mix. This has a tacquifier in it to hold the fibers and mulch together and on the slope until the seed can germinate and grow through this covering. The BFM coating has been utilized on very tall steep granitic slopes in southern Oregon with very good results. For best results, the seed, fertilizer and mulch are applied with half of the BFM. Then, when dry,the rest of the BFM is applied over the top. Erosion Control Netting. As prescribed by the Development Standards,paragraph 18.02.080.13, Hillside Grading and Erosion Control, all cut and fill slopes (not consisting of rock fill)must be covered and protected with erosion control netting or blankets, installed per manufacturers recommendations and re-vegetated. The netting must be securely staked to the slopes to insure full contact with the soil surface. These areas must also be re-vegetated with appropriate vegetation and irrigation as required. A landscape plan to provide such revegetation will be provided by others. Maintenance. Please note that all erosion control measures must be monitored and repaired periodically. The Erosion Control Plan must also have its recommendations augmented with additional measures if conditions warrant such additions. We recommend the site be observed after heavy rainfall events. Changes and repairs should be affected at that time where needed. When permanent landscaping and hydroseeding has effectively stopped erosion, the hay bales, silt fences and settling ponds may be removed. Areas disturbed by this removal should be hydroseeded, mulched or otherwise protected from erosion. Timing. We recommend that the seeding be accomplished early in the fall to allow for germination and rooting of the grass and wildflowers. The hay bales and settling basins should be placed prior to seeding to minimize disturbance of the site after seeding. It is generally thought that the seeding should be accomplished by September 15th to allow the seed time to germinate and prosper prior to the heavier winter rains. If placed during or prior to the hot summer months, some method of watering must be included to promote initial germination and growth. The hay bales, ditch protection, silt fences and settling ponds must be placed prior to or during grading as soon as is practical. This will help protect the site from erosion during summer storms. All erosion control measures shall be installed and functional by October 31St"per the city of Ashland guidelines. 10.0 ADDITIONAL SERVICES AND LIMITATIONS 10.1 ADDITIONAL SERVICES Additional services by the project engineer are recommended to help verify that design recommendations are correctly interpreted in final project design and to help monitor compliance with project specifications during the construction process. For this project, we anticipate additional services could include the following: I 3455rpt-Lot 20,Lithia Creek Estates,Revised Steep Slope May 3.2011 The Galli Group i i 02-3455-03 Page 35 1) Review of final construction plans and specifications for compliance with geotechnical recommendations. 2) Possible project team meetings and/or phone discussions to clarify issues and proceed smoothly into and through the construction process. 3) Observation and testing of structural fill placement, retaining wall backfill, driveway subgrades, cut slopes and fabric and base rock placement and compaction. 4) Observation of any key trenches, benches and drainage sections required for slope and MSE retaining wall fills. Review for possible subdrains beneath fills on slopes. 5) Observations of completed driveway, footing or basement excavations and observation and testing of structural fill placement and compaction. 6) Periodic observation of wall, foundation and floor drain installations. 7) Periodic reports, as requested by the client and/or required by the building department. We would provide these additional services on a time-and-expense basis in accordance with our Fee Schedule and the terms and conditions already in place for this project. Please note that if we are not retained to provide these additional services we cannot be held responsible for decisions made by others during construction. 10.2 LIMITATIONS The analyses, conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are based on site conditions and development plans as they existed at the time of the study, and assume soils and groundwater conditions exposed at the site and in the area are representative of soils and groundwater conditions throughout the site. If during construction, subsurface conditions or assumed design information is found to be different, we should be advised at once so that we can review this report and reconsider our recommendations in light of the changed conditions. If there is a significant lapse of time between submission of this report and the start of work at the site, if the project is moved, or if conditions have changed due to acts of God or construction at or adjacent to the site, it is recommended that this report be reviewed in light of the changed conditions and/or time lapse. This report was prepared for the use of Habib Shahin and his team in the design and construction of the subject single-family residence. It should be made available to others for information and factual data only. This report should not be used for contractual purposes as a warranty of site subsurface conditions. It should also not be used at other sites or for projects other than the one intended. it 3455rpt-Lot 20, Lithia Creek Estates, Revised Steep Slope May 3. 2011 The Galli Group i 02-3455-03 Page 36 We have performed these services in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering and engineering geology practices in southern Oregon at the time the study was accomplished. No other warranties, either expressed or implied, are provided. THE GALLI GROUPr GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTING ;' ; PQ4� Paul A. Sellke, P.E., G.E. Senior Geotechnical Engineer GON eD G.GU 9Y Ed Busby, C.E.G. Senior Engineering Geologist �+ E916 (V 3455rpt-Lot 20, Lithia Creek Estates, Revised Steep Slope May )3.2011 The Galli Group 02-3455-03 Page 37 REFERENCES: ANSS; 2006; Council of National Seismic System; web-page composite seismic database; http://qual,,e.geo.berkeley.edu/cnss/ City of Ashland; 2002; Hosler Dam Failure Study; Inundation Path& FEMA Floodplain Map; scale 1"=350 feet. IBC; 2009; International Building Code; Vol ll; International Conference of Building Officials. i Madin, I.P. and Mabey, M.A.; 1996; Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Resources; GMS-100,'Geological Map Series; Earthquake Hazard Maps of Oregon. Madin, I.P. and Wang, Zhenming; 1999; DOGAMI; Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Resources IMS-9, Interpretive Map Series; Relative Earthquake Hazard Maps for selected urban areas in western Oregon (Ashland, Cottage Grove, Grants Pass, Roseburg, Sutherlin-Oakland). Orr, E.L. and Orr, W.N.; 1999; Geology of Oregon; 5`h edition; Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company; 253 pagers. United States Geological Survey; 2002; Interpolated Probabilistic Ground Motion Values- Conterminous 48 States; http://earthqualce.usgs.go/hazmaps/ j United States Geological Survey; 2005; Quaternary Fault and Fold Database for the United States; Medford 1 x 2 degree sheet. http://geohazards, cr. usgs.gov/gfaults/or/bla/index.html f Walker, G.W. & MacLeod, N.S.; 1991; Geologic Map of Oregon; U.S. Geological Survey; 1:500,00 i i I i I� i i 3455rpt-Lot 20,Lithia Creek Estates, Revised Steep Slope May 3.2011 The Galli Group Iiir t I � o�I 4� 0 -2040,;r<:�_.. { ' AL SCD"' FET I �— NO i TI-I lI X, 1 t IN r It IF � � � 1hT {r ?tf�'�y. >� . T t t�X, I "�X�. / v 1. N "Y�L�k(�1 Ix �V 1 n l!i`..• t ', �.r II q .. X � ItN is � I�� ' y Ip X' X� � •';) � Nnl�i�±.r ( 3 S P } d�x t4 � �f •�� I �a,�t ,�,. �� , ;? .;a?lA1�lt#4t h•`c��lt�; l, {ri I�� ,�fir. ,� J,: tk fff j ryry iii 7 S j ! n�3, p '( � (�J �� , t fit 8& I►1� 7 d 1 N { ♦ i r i vit t��.1�'`�t V1��11° t i�r, ttt 3 � jb i it "`�` ,;✓rU Ij I PROJECT !:' I RI U}YQir Ski. { �:� t t �� ":i � ?;zz+ t� I , r IQ LOCATION �j r t ! {t�"�r." r y I f I I r" } r41 P! r f y!J -� gr a7)'�X �'/ fit' Hof firlini'r � - f ' ,�' t 1 } t 1 � I I��,,, Iii ;/?�1+�(�III. Iti �� ,� ,•" ��J. X., it ' # : h� � �X ;�'� � r,• Ct e t � ( a , 'i XX ifI 1 � r/X .l � ��. �7 I��X ��I��Ih, ti�f .,��Jt� s .��, (� ptr e t i t ✓ 13 l p ] N\ 2 �i � J �l � 'A �t ° '..'4.: � r�. ;i� A X ._.d. t r f 'E (� �.'�� I y}, �� •� ,� �` �i9 r� r DATE: MARCH 2011 FIGURE: THE GALLI GROUP VICINITY MAP JOB NO: 02-3455-01 GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTING REV: 3/22/2011 9:11 AM 612 NW 3rd Street LITHIA CREEK ESTATES, LOT 20 PREPARED BY: MG3 Grants Pass, OR 97526 ASHLAND, OREGON 3455 Lithia Creek-Lot 20-VICINITY,dwg i i i �h 0.25 AG v a 65 , 16 10 00 1� I ORTH 0 50 100 S ALE IN FEET 1127 00 15 , 23 ~' 0025 Ac 15 .25 S , E . COR . 30. 39 �5 '�6 o V.479 , P , 132 58 . 5 M L _ 1 19 ' 25 �1 1129 0.28 ACO �g 13 ' 22 1140 PROJECT SITE SW COR , J, PT , LOT 21 / �, 66-07113 21 L I T I A PARK pp "off V I L LADE �� P A .D. ,I LJIA 41 .18' IV 1 40 NW COR. PK NAIL V .342, P .253 IN GRANITE �. BOULDER PT.Pc1.a 0.35 �C. N80-38-OAE 11 0 NW COR 41 Ac �y T 1 V.318 , P .497 l 26 37 3 , 1106 r 6, 0.40 AC. DATE: MARCH 2011 FIGURE: THE GALLI GROUP TAX LOT MAP JOB NO: 02-3455-01 GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTING REV: 3/22/2011 9:16 AM 612 NW 3rd Street LITHIA CREEK ESTATES, LOT 20 SCALE: MG3 2 Grants Pass, OR 97526 ASHLAND, OREGON 3455Lithia Creek-Lot 20-TAXLOT,dwg a LO s I Q ¢ Q� o w CD a > a o��c� UZ h Z Litz I Sao o — z Q Cf cc aZ Y w U V O Q Q a a w >U p tq o o z w z is �co ". a-CO a 0a LLJ i o W O CAS ci uj Q �l S � U Q L1.P g k, J he � .2 �J I I F I rc o „I d" 8 ata ,.X, SRI o � zo° / J � �r roW ��ds C7LL °t° O> ti U N r OU 1 z w > Z:. _ tv- m00 [ CL W I Zy O o o i 0O S !r M00 i O� rnL c:rW Qcop,'_ ,ten m 6Zi9 JZ p[ SVi ®��j O VyZQ � W W _ UU w�Zp I - - � Z fLp_ JO �L (h w f i a ww OOa z�'w° �0- zNZ^ oo o ®z �-O �� J0 w LU wQW YocFO zzJ3c � �L9 z o O WW CO C O : z ve A t - Q° 0 ._ems� w w i 0 y z Q) LLI c�Ewma [ '.= �J°z N-!cnwWO V'✓mi ±z0 'w �rcm m - z. Uo waw>JT U� Obi¢= QOW� L� J QFQ NQ 4° 1 �3� clFVtxf� o� .� QE U PC°®J� __ Z W._ Z°Q I h2 UQ II :Z QaNW CL I t -- Q W d'O} moQ •aQ i o my) mop QW o�}� m° wZ Vj V?Z O� W w U� wz°dQ- EE- a �.a t i to z i Q Wiz U V)�QV m cq LD O Z Q�Q d 0�S��Q �~ aVM 3 i i E r E I QV1wxzVj n C E i Cn FF � N ; ( w f cam°z z� (fl >xt ° -Q °.Q t'% j o x z c� © qL E- J 0 W �Z-m O°Z O V➢ o S J 0 9 rOONF J jom� wt-L) J O Z Z= JZ i-W QO r m Q g 0 : ®�° Z m?r w U w Q Z K V z SU g 4 i-CCO WO O W BOO Z V SO Q O d _ tl o : c, J W tri w O j 1- a,m0 w��'O �a wJ U''o Jm cnSo o �a U:a:Wj \ YOw In ¢< xJJ�Z �oz QW ao �- o ¢z.-�� J.ca �� /A/rA max° wiz QUJ� z x�3 U� r- ° �v} N�o� i In in ®cFi a Jz� xooNV�z � In ww c w0 aw c z oO�nUZw 00 ° Q N wLBwU p w Q Z ° �� =In 2- In ®afvi2 w^a'sU vw aZ in0 wcna p"�vpw z Z� cn _- n_,w,mow ZJ �- G:w }-v ._, w.p � PEI wQ n\ \ /\ wg-JQ �- 1.0 c C7wn U¢ rLw \ \ zcvt®wam WJO° �� N F 3m o a z U-Yzl pJ // -"¢n Q(nc cO O¢ Qm Lou NF- ur\/\,, c JV•�wz J >cea-o c�0 gU W= �w �c � �C� 3. Y¢ P�\ O w-¢a'•-¢ w O L.}>Y �ZtO ¢ � U E_ _ z w Wv Vl 0..z �d].f� J(n' V1hU �O _�Zg O¢d�-Q ao •¢�� ° Or0 gQ.� OwwQ �?Q ,', �_azU \\\/!� ¢w�F,c;z ccoaz�c z vow wa o�>¢p�w e- ° a, -� «o �.io z m zJwzv}� zap vaoU°2d a v)01 In mL WwanWa r Z qO� J W \� wQxcw U >YNO'c JZ�x Ch U ID ¢tea-a -U wQ �'= i o �cz [�� m; p Uoo }i » , Cl r c c o^ \ Oa g° \ ✓r Z ®w wa wOwz z>}}=-� i NO U 3�J-°rrc-rZO��Y °w6oe,aUw_4¢zQQcZ m oQ�5W �-a c¢v W v Z ® wa�oW=>O r_ wwi Q-:.w�Y 4ry fi ry ADO J J°m° J ¢ ¢ cnwVlFn ? zZZ N cy In o s�N� ��wa3z� cn Z Z S VI o� JN i- C�'✓ \. z� N Z � W Q J � U w C Y W U \ ;: N O >N (D o ;D V) w 0. O ,� v ~ om© 3oz ¢n WJ Jib a <o m�z 3w° cQCxO gw 0.5 c i-' o� mJw EL Cn e Q'N oJ- ow Q Q W zg-�en c cGa® Q ..a-zvw v}co a o U.D N IY L7 SY F p c V)VL °LJ Z N?1- O N H �QZ OOecaC =mow zZw ec n UU>¢ -co ZInN v >< w m o- 0 z FLOOR JOIST WATERPROOFING ON OUTSIDE OF STEM WALL WILL REDUCE SEEPAGE INTO CRAWL SPACE CRAWL SPACE \ SLOPE (6" IN 8 FEET) /./// r, /\ // 2" CLEAN SAND AROUND THE FABRIC PROTECTS IT FILL JOINT FULL ON DURING BACKFILL OPERATIONS ANGLE TO PREVENT WATER INTRUSION CLEAN 1"-112" WASHED DRAIN AT JOINT ROCK AT LEAST 8" AROUND THE PIPE ON ALL SIDES (NOT BELOW THE PIPE) .ry NON—WOVEN GEOTEXTILE TYPICAL FOOTING 00000 : 00 :. a FILTER FABRIC SUCH AS o o 0000 I AMOCO 4546 (5 OZ. PER 0000 0oo SQUARE FOOT FABRIC — \� ��r,�/ .,\ / • . OVERLAP AND SECURE NX \ y\ NATIVE SOIL BELOW FOOTING \\t\, 4" DIAMETER RIGID, SMOOTH WALL, PERFORATED PIPE SLOPED FOR POSITIVE DRAINAGE AND WITH CLEAN—OUTS AT BOTH ENDS FOR LONG—TERM MAINTENANCE — ORIENT PERFORATIONS FACING DOWN FOR ILLUSTRATION PURPOSES ONLY NOT TO SCALE j THE GALLI GROUP TYPICAL FOUNDATION DRAIN DATE: MARCH 2011 FIGURE: GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTING WITH CRAWL SPACE JOB NO: 02-3455-01 REV: 3/22/2011 9:59 AM 612 NW 3rd Street LITHIA CREEK ESTATES, LOT 20 PREPARED BY: MG3 Grants Pass, OR 97526 ASHLAND, OREGON 3455 Lithia Greek-Lot 20-FOUND.dwo 6—MIL. CONCRETE SLAB MEMBRANE (MINIMUM) PERFORATED PIPE CLEAN BEDDING SAND FILTER FABRIC MAY BE REQUIRED CLEAN DRAIN ROCK y C7 Co h o n n o c�v p O cv�c °C G C) � �. o<0� C� 7 �, � 0 ° o 0 « r � o 0 o, 7 O o Q� o 0 p 0 o O � 00 . c <7 Cr U � < t C :: C U � > o r a c c, 7 o d [ � ? 0 ' 0 0. o n o 0 e a o 0 p o . . e o a o o .0 L ° p 0 'Vo o ' 0 a 0 v ° G 0 °ov. �.7c'e 7 0 4 �0�'op0. 'oaCv�.o v ev op 7a.0.0°1• °°U o ov D a' �° '�v°o. ° c . a°v o a a . o A U A v 0 A 0 0'o'0 o 0 ° o e v p pvp n n o o 0 0. n0 7 0. n O Q O o 0 . .n v a !A`3�p �Oa� :au� �ev�oa oU^� Un n 9 bva� °p ° .voC,• e°�� Qn VUoUeov ,° . ;.. \ " o /,, / // ;\' /\ \NATIVE SOIL, STRUCTURAL FILL (THICKNESS VARIES) OR NATIVE SOIL NOTES: (1) MAXIMUM SPACING IS 15 FEET (2) ORIENT PERFORATIONS TO BOTTOM (3) DO NOT DRIVE OVER DRAIN LINES (4) DRAIN ROCK AND STRUCTURAL FILL TO MEET SPECS, IN REPORT BODY — SLOPE PIPE TO DRAIN (5) MAY REQUIRE FILTER FABRIC ON NATIVE SUBGRADE OR IF STRUCTURAL FILL IS VERY SILTY OR SANDY FOR ILLUSTRATION PURPOSES ONLY NOT TO SCALE DATE: MARCH 2011 FIGURE: THE GALLI GROUP FLOOR SUBDRAIN DETAIL JOB NO: 02-3455-01 GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTING REV: 3/22/2011 10:01 AM 612 NW 3rd Street LITHIA CREEK ESTATES, LOT 20 PREPARED BY: MG3 Grants Pass, OR 97526 ASHLAND, OREGON 3455Li lhia Creek-Lot 20-SUBDRAIN.dwg 7 I APPENDIX A EROSION CONTROL INSPECTION ANDSKETCH fi 02-3455-03 April 19 2011 Geotechnical Consulting Mr. Habib Shahin P.O. Box 111 Ashland, Oregon 97520 Subject: EROSION CONTROL INSPEC'T'ION LOT 20,LITHIA CREEK ESTATES 636 ASHLAND CREEK DRIVE ASHLAND, OREGON Arrived at site 9:30 AM. Walked property and recorded notes regarding condition of existing erosion control features, and general fill conditions at the site. Numerous photos of the site were taken. Straw hay-bales remain onsite, although several are very weathered and decomposing. Silt fence remains along toe of large fill, but has fallen over in several places. No obvious erosion of the main fill (at north edge of property)was observed. Similarly, no obvious erosion or movement off site of project's fill or surficial soils was noted. Erosion control measures appear to have performed as expected, although several areas need to be restored and properly maintained. Large fill area is comprised primarily of decomposed granite soil with variable amounts of concrete pieces (some as large as 8"xl8"x18"), AC pieces typically less than 12 inches in diameter, and various amounts of 3/"-0 crushed rock and aggregate. Heights of fill were recorded and are shown on accompanying sketch map of site. Native slope is estimated (from the topography map)to be approximately 20%to 25%beneath the large fill. Two culvert areas at south edge of property were inspected and their slopes measured with clinometers. The 8" steel pipe had an approximate slope of 2-3 degrees. The 12-inch corrugated plastic pipe had a slope of approximately 1-2 degrees. Edward Busby, C.E.G. Senior Engineering Geologist 612 NW Third Street,Grants Pass,Oregon 97526®Phone(541)955-1611 e Fax(541)955-8150 I i i r' i If A 41 p , APPENDIX B FULL-SIZE PLAN SHEETS Reduced (11X17) wasp£« NO!DDUO`ONHIHSV .� OZ 1®l`S31d1S3 N3380`dlHill >trrds tl�nda rvow � `nests �'w;a n sda a3r�° .� o.=M =s fVH—!d 3115 ®!�I`d '- e�w A9 aaaYd_ad � �anox�ta�d�aHa q�� ,/u �a ^ g��g r� �ossve-zo oa eor DNI(I V®� ODSI! 33 1 �f 4LOZ AtlW 3LYC 5w e�� LLg V. -M E 15 tj MH LLw�o�6 oJm 3 $ ��6 $off �I awz i Nod wok � m HE, R P nlig wo m e x tJ L/ I - ------- >9 _ tee. z 1 CN O i NOE)3HO'(]NVlHsv C\j Oz ial,SgIVIS3>133HO VIHIII 7s S-lIViDC](INV NOIIO�IS ZON -SSOtJO'11VM ASIVY IVOWA I WE"a Oil X X tok du g LLJ cn o 5 ms q H. =mss U Hof UP Rfl�-m A < 9P T II guig Li W Ln a Kl- '9 Ld J PH a o ja 0 y =c< IL Kd' cn 'A. CD —ml�—'=TT un < cn C) ado LLJ LLJ NOrDHO ONYIHSH (Y) Oe 101`S3_LViS3)13380 V1Hlll ° .. t°wd:Ae aaavdaaa ,�. manoa�tlmv��t S11V13G NOIlonHiSNOO s- "�° TIVM 3SW 1VO1d U w -- 440ZAbW:31tl0 J ° K D ° w z z I- In Z E �m ZJ m X txli w w o Z u-i� N a z o n J o xm >Za�¢�'" A oaf O LLo� o 0 a ww OHIO! m — ✓� z z Q z N 0 zwwwa cg V cz �3 NNn W�`i'a�`vF-iH oo °Z<p:� Z w W a 00Jc s° aa ¢tij p3Aa¢ 06 �Nzz a Q w zm Nw zUz Zp w N 5' oco m N w iris O rn N by ��jwa L u U Ul Kt`O OYN��Q W d 03aQ� II W Vl Q EQ ww W OCU4U '�` o Iw-z0 °inU �a WL`FQ�O OQ NQ �°�} lwx°v%°gyp oa`nac W r L�J c� �' C o W�Q0 zjQCWj�w;m W oI rT w>o- l wcO �a w°aUzw'o�TWanmo U roc oH,oM i�a a r zd=wa wJ°oU=�o�i�oH`z°aJs�„a U�z°I w°Z o�zZJ�oU'FQAo-CwQCWCQ uF aC v za O¢rwaw wc¢wcyw z o i z omz3mcc1cIw�U Ua-hzzc�coo,°IWU o J &xM-w5°Cc°x °mp J50 z°z- A N81 UP soil JoU o¢ u o°o o Q° Ox, Ed > o1<00wz'a, W,Oz s°w AN , �z c�zawc.>¢zz¢ ¢?z��a�z°r cna W w�'z wwwz ag W z5" G§ g h R � gy e W �„�°o�o= Y ��-rr wi�S mm+ 5� c a 4gYk J W? �o j w ;a S ss'sb ^s oao s€ale . . . Z O ply I— O $ p A o €50 `_ y3e�`3s w�ss.oLUOnors'+.3a "s NOE)3HO'C1N'v9HSV OZ iO-1'SRLV-LS3 N33 Uf�11— 80 VlHirl NVId 3!DVNfVHCI (INV 7�—�Or 10HINOO NOISOIJ3 U HIM Hl -5 Sal tw,�ff �'-fl a .5 22 g. � ,! I E MPH 1�- 0!" 6 EO -2s ! n ig. o� 2* x Of H I ai -�,',-F� g� � H ,*l. R� 0, Ejj mgr I I H i soo �jgl -Of ll.0 z8 his! f- j6 , ' mzti 12 a n 8H Pi R g.e� Boa u I 'z -H ,Rl E ,-H 98 IN ti 5p H 2 trg H �Sg :H.-Ng E Z,. H-1 8 M n° -M �-9§ H. DO HN \ �a 12 Ut a P-H HIM it J, ;P /91mg ga M. 19 11"Hi W! flu j M His H� M2 Z5 H-MA His- May 5, 2011 Architectural Control Committee Response to Shahin Building Proposal On April 5, 2011, Peter Cipes, a Building Designer, submitted preliminary plans on behalf of Mr. Habib Shahin to build a home on Lot 21 of the Lithia Creek Estates Development. The lot is located at 636 Ashland Creek Drive. The preliminary plans are attached for the record as Exhibit 1. On April 20 he followed up with submission of details concerning external materials and colors. That email is attached as Exhibit 2. The Committee considered the request for tentative approval to be complete concurrent with the second submission. In accordance with Sections L and M of the Declaration of the Development,the Architectural Control Committee (Nort Croft, Richard Le Vitt and Tysen Mueller) has met and discussed the plans. The Committee's findings have been presented to the Homeowners' Association Board of Directors (Jim Carter, President; Gordon/Lesley Nelson, Treasurers;Nort Croft, Secretary). The Board concurs with the decisions detailed below. Regarding external materials and colors, harmony of external design with existing structures, and location with respect to topography and finish grade elevation, the plans are approved. Overall approval to proceed and complete this project is subject to the following conditions: 1. As required by Section M of the Declaration, construction of the residence and any other permitted improvements, including initial landscaping required by the City of Ashland prior to their final sign-off and issuance of a certificate of occupancy, shall be completed within two years of the City's issuance of building permits. Should construction extend beyond the limit, a monthly penalty of$1000, continuing until completion and issuance of a certificate of occupancy, may be imposed by the Homeowners' Association. 2. Construction of this home shall comply with all aspects of the City of Ashland's Development Standards for Hillside Lands. Due to the existence of a substantial quantity of fill dirt on the property, of particular concern are the sections dealing with certification by a geotechnical engineer currently licensed in the State of Oregon of the site's stability for all improvements. 3. With respect to quality of workmanship, as stated in Section L of the Declaration, home construction shall be performed in a good and workmanlike manner, in compliance with all applicable building codes and standards, and commensurate with the quality and finish of other homes within the Development. 4. Access to the construction lot is via a flag drive to which Mr. Shahin, the Le Vitts and the Clintons have mutual access. In order to provide access for all concerned, it is requested that Mr. Shahin construct temporary parking spaces for construction vehicles on his property. During construction, no parking of construction vehicles shall be allowed on the flag drive or in the neighbors' private driveways. Heavy construction vehicles shall not use the private driveways for turn-around. Costs incurred for the repair of any damage to private driveways by construction vehicles shall be reimbursed by Mr. Shahin. Should it be necessary to close temporarily the flag drive during construction, Mr. Shahin shall provide adequate notice to the affected neighbors, and duration and extent of the closure shall be minimized to the least extent reasonably possible. Following construction, Mr. Shahin shall restore the drive to its pre-construction condition. 5. Any changes to the building plans shall be submitted to the Architectural Control Committee for review and approval, including the final plans to be submitted to the City for approval. The Committee looks forward to the successful completion of the proposed project, and the addition of a beautiful property to those of all members of the community. May 5, 2011 Architectural Control Committee Response to Shahin Building Proposal On April 5, 2011, Peter Cipes, a Building Designer, submitted preliminary plans on behalf of Mr. Habib Shahin to build a home on Lot 21 of the Lithia Creek Estates Development. The lot is located at 636 Ashland Creek Drive. The preliminary plans are attached for the record as Exhibit 1. On April 20 he followed up with submission of details concerning external materials and colors. That email is attached as Exhibit 2. The Committee considered the request for tentative approval to be complete concurrent with the second submission. In accordance with Sections L and M of the Declaration of the Development,the Architectural Control Committee (Nort Croft, Richard Le Vitt and Tysen Mueller)has met and discussed the plans. The Committee's findings have been presented to the Homeowners' Association Board of Directors (Jim Carter, President; Gordon/Lesley Nelson, Treasurers;Nort Croft, Secretary). The Board concurs with the decisions detailed below. Regarding external materials and colors, harmony of external design with existing structures, and location with respect to topography and finish grade elevation,the plans are approved. Overall approval to proceed and complete this project is subject to the following conditions: 1. As required by Section M of the Declaration, construction of the residence and any other permitted improvements, including initial landscaping required by the City of Ashland prior to their final sign-off and issuance of a certificate of occupancy, shall be completed within two years of the City's issuance of building permits. Should construction extend beyond the limit, a monthly penalty of$1000, continuing until completion and issuance of a certificate of occupancy, may be imposed by the Homeowners' Association. 2. Construction of this home shall comply with all aspects of the City of Ashland's Development Standards for Hillside Lands. Due to the existence of a substantial quantity of fill dirt.on the property, of particular concern are the sections dealing with certification by a geotechnical engineer currently licensed in the State of Oregon of the site's stability for all improvements. 3. With respect to quality of workmanship, as stated in Section L of the Declaration, home construction shall be performed in a good and workmanlike manner, in compliance with all applicable building codes and standards, and commensurate with the quality and finish of other homes within the Development. 4. Access to the construction lot is via a flag drive to which Mr. Shahin, the Le Vitts and the Clintons have mutual access. In order to provide access for all concerned, it is requested that Mr. Shahin construct temporary parking spaces for construction vehicles on his property. During construction, no parking of construction vehicles shall be allowed on the flag drive or in the neighbors' private driveways. Heavy construction vehicles shall not use the private driveways for turn-around. Costs incurred for the repair of any damage to private driveways by construction vehicles shall be reimbursed by Mr. Shahin. Should it be necessary to close temporarily the flag drive during construction, Mr. Shahin shall provide adequate notice to the affected neighbors, and duration and extent of the closure shall be minimized to the least extent reasonably possible. Following construction, Mr. Shahin shall restore the drive to its pre-construction condition. 5. Any changes to the building plans shall be submitted to the Architectural Control Committee for review and approval, including the final plans to be submitted to the City for approval. The Committee looks forward to the successful completion of the proposed project, and the addition of a beautiful property to those of all members of the community. I i i i I i I Wk.,JG PERMIT APPLICATION Planning Division 51 Winburn Way,Ashland OR 97520 r CITY o r FILE#_ °�% � ,✓� ASHLAND 541-488-5305 Fax 541-488-6006 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Pursuing LEED®Certification? ❑YES ❑ NO Street Address 63 , 0 f� G /Ak-A _ 2® Ultk)k Q,, Assessor's Map No.391 E 0 4A Tax Lot(s) 11 7 Zoning ° > S Comp Plan Designation APPLICANT Name W Phone E-Mail Address City Zip PROPERTY OWNER Name Phone �' `��78 " E-Mail h4tk�AwL4D Address 'd' j City Zip A4-51) CCA SURVEYOR ENGINEER ARCHITECT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT.OTHER �t Title` M W Name VG � C.1l C Phone t l' _' ) Mail ( ��A Cr Address _3) City Zip 1� a li�� ftQ1 1)M rt Plone E-Mail Address City Zip I hereby certify that the statements and information contained in this application,including the enclosed drawings and the required findings of fact,are in all respects, true and correct. I understand that all property pins must be shown on the drawings and visible upon the site inspection. In the event the pins are not shown or their location found to be incorrect, the owner assumes full responsibility. 1 further understand that if this request is subsequently contested, the burden will be on me to establish: 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 of fact 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 also possibly in my structures being built in reliance thereon being required to be removed at my expense. If I have any doubts,I am advised to seek competent professional advice and assistance. Applicant's Signature Date As own r o the pr p y in in ' requ 1 have d a ;;Qate omplete application and its consequences to me as a property owner 7 roperty Owner' Si ature(require [To be completed by City StaM Date Received Zoning Permit Type Filing Fee i OVER 0 VIII i ZONING PERMIT SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS ❑ APPLICATION FORM must be completed and signed by both applicant and property owner. ❑ FINDINGS OF FACT—Respond to the appropriate zoning requirements in the form of factual statements or findings of fact and supported by evidence. List the findings criteria and the evidence that supports it. Include information necessary to address all issues detailed in the Pre-Application Comment document. ❑ 2 SETS OF SCALED PLANS no larger than 11"x17". Include site plan, building elevations, parking and landscape details. (Optional—1 additional large set of plans, 2'x3', to use in meetings) ❑ FEE (Check, Charge or Cash) ❑ LEED®CERTIFICATION (optional)—Applicant's wishing to receive priority planning action processing shall provide the following documentation with the application demonstrating the completion of the following steps: • Hiring and retaining a LEED®Accredited Professional as part of the project team throughout design and construction of the project; and • The LEED®checklist indicating the credits that will be pursued. NOTE: • Applications are accepted on a first come,first served basis. • Applications will not be accepted without a complete application form signed by the applicant(s)AND property owner(s), all required materials and full payment. • All applications received are reviewed for completeness by staff within 30 days from application date in accordance with ORS 227.178. • The first fifteen COMPLETE applications submitted are processed at the next available Planning Commission meeting. (Planning Commission meetings include the Hearings Board,which meets at 1:30 pm,or the full Planning Commission,which meets at 7:00 pm on the second Tuesday of each month. Meetings are held at the City Council Chambers at 1175 East Main St). • A notice of the project request will be sent to neighboring properties for their comments or concerns. • If applicable,the application will also be reviewed by the Tree and/or Historic Commissions. i i I i I n x z Job Address: 636 ASHLAND CREEK DR Contractor: ASHLAND OR 97520 Address: C A Owner's Name: SHAHIN HABIB/M SORIANO 0 Phone: P Customer#: 06227 N State Lic No: P SHAHIN HABIB/M SORIANO T'', City Lic No: L Applicant: PO BOX 111 R Address: ASHLAND OR 97520 A Ci c Sub-Contractor: A Phone: :�. Address: N Applied: 05/25/2011 0 T Issued: 05/25/2011 Expires: 11/21/2011 R' Phone: State Lic No: Maplot: City Lic No: DESCRIPTION: P & E for Hillside Development,tree removal F 7777 - VALUATION Occupancy Type Construction Units Rate Amt Actual Amt Constuction Description Total for Valuation: MECHANICAL i I I ELECTRICAL STRUCTURAL' PERMIT FEE DETAIL, Fee Description Amount Fee Description Amount Type 1 938.00 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL i COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tel: 541-488-5305 20 East Main St. Fax: 541-488-5311 Ashland, OR 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us Inspection Request Line: 541-552-2080 I T Y OF