HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-289 Findings - Verde Village (1)
BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ASHLAND, JACKSON COUNTY, OREGON
December 18, 2007
IN THE MATTER OF AN ORDINANCE DECLARING THE APPROVAL OF THE
VERDE VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, INCLUDING A REAL
PROPERTY EXCHANGE AND APPROVAL OF PLANNING ACTION #2006-01663,
INCLUDING A REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION OF A TOTAL OF 11.64-ACRE SITE
(IN THREE PARTS) LOCATED AT 87 W. NEVADA ST AND 811 HELMAN STREET
REQUEST FOR A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AND ZONING MAP CHANGE
JACKSON COUNTY ZONING RR-5 (RURAL RESIDENTIAL) TO R-l (SINGLE-
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) AND R-I-3.5 (SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL).
THE PROPOSAL INCLUDES A REQUEST FOR OUTLINE PLAN APPROVAL
UNDER THE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OPTIONS CHAPTER 18.88 TO
DEVELOP THE PROPERTY AS A 68-UNIT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
EXCEPTIONS TO THE STREET STANDARDS ARE REQUESTED FOR
NOT LOCATING A STREET ADJACENT TO NATURAL FEATURES AND
TO USE A PRIVATE DRIVE TO ACCESS THE COTTAGES RATHER THAN
THE REQUIRED PUBLIC STREET. A PHYSICAL CONSTRAINTS REVIEW
PERMIT IS REQUESTED TO LOCATE A MULTI-USE PATH IN THE ASHLAND
CREEK RIPARIAN PRESERV A nON AREA. A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT IS
REQUESTED TO REMOVE A 25-INCH DIAMETER AT BREAST HEIGHT OAK
TREE. APPLICANT: Greg and Valri Williams
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)FINDINGS OF FACT,
)CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
)AND ORDER
)
)
)
)
)
)
I. NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS
This matter comes before the City Council for the City of Ashland for a de novo hearing on a request for
an Ordinance declaring the approval of a Development Agreement, land exchange and associated
planning actions as identified in P A #2006-01663.
Now, Therefore, the City Council of the City of Ashland makes the following Findings of Fact,
Conclusions of Law and Order.
II. FINDINGS OF FACT:
1) Tax lots 700,800 and 900 of39 IE 04BB and tax lots 800 and 1100 of39 IE 04B are located at 87
W. Nevada St. and 811 Helman St. Tax lot 200 of 39 IE 04BB is City of Ashland property and is
commonly referred to as the Dog Park. Tax lots 700 and 800 of 39 IE 04BB are located outside of the
Ashland city limits and are Jackson County zoning Rural Residential (RR-5). Tax lots 800 and 1100 of39
IE 04B and tax lot 900 of 39 IE 04BB are partially located in the Ashland city limits. The portions of 39
IE 04B 800 and 1100 and tax lot 900 of 39 IE 04BB in the Ashland city limits are zoned Single Family
Residential (R-1-5) and the portions of the same tax lots outside the Ashland city limits is Jackson County
zoning Rural Residential (RR-5).
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663
Page 1
2) The applicant is requesting an Annexation for an 11.64 acre site located at 87 W. Nevada St. and 811
Helman St. The application includes a request for a Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map change
from Jackson County zoning RR-S (Rural Residential) to City of Ashland zoning R-1-3.5 (Suburban
Residential) and R-l (Single-Family Residential). The application includes a request for Outline Plan
approval for a 68-unit residential development under the Performance Standards Options Chapter 18.88.
The application includes two requests for Exceptions to the Street Standards for not locating a street
adjacent to natural features and to use a private drive to access the cottages rather than the required public
street. A Physical Constraints Review Permit is requested to locate a multi-use path in the Ashland
Creek Riparian Preservation Area. A Tree Removal Permit is requested to remove a 2S-inch diameter at
breast height Oak tree. The application includes a request for a land exchange with the City of Ashland.
Site improvements are outlined on the plans on file at the Department of Community Development.
3) The criteria for an Annexation are described in 18.106.030 as follows:
A. The land is within the City's Urban Growth Boundary.
B. The proposed zoning for the annexed area is in conformance with the designation
indicated on the Comprehensive Plan Map, and the project, if proposed concurrently with
the annexation, is an allowed use within the proposed zoning.
C. The land is currently contiguous with the present City limits.
D. Adequate City facilities for the provision of water to the site as determined by the Public
Works Department; the transport of sewage from the site to the waste water treatment
plant as determined by the Public Works Department; the provision of electricity to the
site as determined by the Electric Department; urban storm drainage as determined by the
Public Works Department can and will be provided to and through the subject property.
Unless the City has declared a moratorium based upon a shortage of water, sewer, or
electricity, it is recognized that adequate capacity exists system-wide for these facilities.
E. Adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property. For
the purposes of this section "adequate transportation" for annexations consists of
vehicular, bicycle, pedestrian and transit transportation meeting the following standards:
1. For vehicular transportation a 20' wide paved access exists, or can and will be
constructed, along the full frontage of the project site to the nearest fully improved
collector or arterial street. All streets adjacent to the annexed area shall be
improved, at a minimum, to a half-street standard with a minimum 20' driving
surface. The City may, after assessing the impact of the development, require the
full improvement of streets adjacent to the annexed area. All streets located within
annexed areas shall be fully improved to city standards. Where future street
dedications are indicated on the City's Street Dedication Map or required by the
City, provisions shall be made for the dedication and improvement of these streets
and included with the application for annexation.
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663
Page 2
2. For bicycle transportation safe and accessible bicycle facilities exist, or can and
will be constructed. Should the annexation be adjacent to an arterial street, bike
lanes shall be provided on or adjacent to the arterial street. Likely bicycle
destinations from the project site shall be determined and safe and accessible
bicycle facilities serving those destinations shall be indicated.
3. For pedestrian transportation safe and accessible pedestrian facilities exist, or can
and will be constructed. Full sidewalk improvements shall be provided on one
side adjacent to the annexation for all streets adjacent to the proposed annexed
area. Sidewalks shall be provided as required by ordinance on all streets within
the annexed area. Where the project site is within a quarter of a mile of an existing
sidewalk system, the sidewalks from the project site shall be constructed to extend
and connect to the existing system. Likely pedestrian destinations from the project
site shall be determined and the safe and accessible pedestrian facilities serving
those destinations shall be indicated.
4. For transit transportation, should transit service be available to the site, or be
likely to be extended to the site in the future based on information from the local
public transit provider, provisions shall be made for the construction of adequate
transit facilities, such as bus shelters and bus turn-out lanes. All required
transportation improvements shall be constructed and installed prior to the
issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any new structures on the annexed
property.
F. For all residential annexations, a plan shall be provided demonstrating that the
development of the entire property will ultimately occur at a minimum density of 90% of
the base density for the zone, unless reductions in the total number of units is necessary to
accommodate significant natural features, topography, access limitations, or similar
physical constraints. The owner or owners of the property shall sign an agreement, to be
recorded with the county clerk after approval of the annexation, ensuring that future
development will occur in accord with the minimum density indicated in the development
plan. For purposes of computing maximum density, portions of the annexed area
containing undevelopable areas such as wetlands, floodplain corridor lands, or slopes
greater than 35%, shall not be included.
G. For all annexations with a density or potential density of four residential units or greater
and involving residential zoned lands, or commercial, employment or industrial lands
with a Residential Overlay (R-Overlay):
1. 35% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below
120% of median income; or
2. 25% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below
100% of median income; or
3. 20% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below
80% of median income; or
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663
Page 3
4. 15% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below
60% of median income; or
5. Title to a sufficient amount of buildable land for development is transferred to a
non-profit (IRC 501 (3)( c)) affordable housing developer or comparable
Development Corporation for the purpose of complying with subsection 2 above.
The land shall be located within the project and all needed public facilities shall
be extended to the area or areas proposed for transfer. Ownership of the land shall
be transferred to the affordable housing developer or Development Corporation
prior to commencement of the project.
The total number of affordable units described in this section G shall be determined by rounding
down fractional answers to the nearest whole unit. A deed restriction, or similar legal instrument,
shall be used to guarantee compliance with affordable criteria for a period of not less than 60
years. Properties providing affordable units as part of the annexation process shall qualify for a
maximum density bonus of 25 percent.
H. One or more of the following standards are met:
1. The proposed area for annexation is to be residentially zoned, and there is less
than a five-year supply of vacant and redevelopable land in the proposed land use
classification within the current city limits. "Redevelopable land" means land
zoned for residential use on which development has already occurred but on
which, due to present or expected market forces, there exists the likelihood that
existing development will be converted to more intensive residential uses during
the planning period. The five- year supply shall be determined from vacant and
redevelopable land inventories and by the methodology for land need projections
from the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan; or
2. The proposed lot or lots will be zoned E-l or C-l under the Comprehensive Plan,
and that the applicant will obtain Site Review approval for an outright permitted
use, or special permitted use concurrent with the annexation request; or
3. A current or probable public health hazard exists due to lack of full City sanitary
sewer or water services; or
4. Existing development in the proposed annexation has inadequate water or sanitary
sewer service; or the service will become inadequate within one year; or
5. The area proposed for annexation has existing City of Ashland water or sanitary
sewer service extended, connected, and in use, and a signed "consent to
annexation" agreement has been filed and accepted by the City of Ashland; or
6. The lot or lots proposed for annexation are an "island" completely surrounded by
lands within the city limits.
4) The criteria for a Comprehensive Plan Map Change and Zone Change are described in
18.108.060.B as follows:
1. Zone changes, zoning map amendments and comprehensive plan map changes subject to
the Type III procedure as described in subsection A of this section may be approved if in
compliance with the comprehensive plan and the application demonstrates that:
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663
Page 4
a. The change implements a public need, other than the provision of affordable
housing, supported by the Comprehensive Plan; or
b. A substantial change in circumstances has occurred since the existing zoning or
Plan designation was proposed, necessitating the need to adjust to the changed
circumstances; or
c. Circumstances relating to the general public welfare exist that require such an
action; or
d. Proposed increases in residential zoning density resulting from a change from one
zoning district to another zoning district, will provide one of the following:
1. 35% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or
below 120% of median income; or
2. 25% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or
below 100% of median income; or
3. 20% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or
below 80% of median income; or
4. 15% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or
below 60% of median income; or
5. Title to a sufficient amount of buildable land for development is
transferred to a non-profit (IRC 501(3)(c)) affordable housing developer or
comparable Development Corporation for the purpose of complying with
subsection 2 above. The land shall be located within the project and all needed
public facilities shall be extended to the area or areas proposed for transfer.
Ownership of the land shall be transferred to the affordable housing developer
or Development Corporation prior to commencement of the project; or
e. Increases in residential zoning density of four units or greater on commercial,
employment or industrial zoned lands (i.e. Residential Overlay), will not negatively
impact the City of Ashland's commercial and industrial land supply as required in the
Comprehensive Plan, and will provide one of the following:
1. 35% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or
below 120% of median income; or
2. 25% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or
below 100% of median income; or
3. 20% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or
below 80% of median income; or
4. 15% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or
below 60% of median income; or
5. Title to a sufficient amount of buildable land for development is
transferred to a non-profit (IRC 501(3)(c)) affordable housing developer or
comparable Development Corporation for the purpose of complying with
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663
Page 5
subsection 2 above. The land shall be located within the project and all needed
public facilities shall be extended to the area or areas proposed for dedication.
Ownership of the land and/or air space shall be transferred to the affordable
housing developer or Development Corporation prior to commencement of the
project.
The total number of affordable units described in sections D or E shall be
determined by rounding down fractional answers to the nearest whole unit. A
deed restriction, or similar legal instrument, shall be used to guarantee
compliance with affordable criteria for a period of not less than 60 years.
Sections D and E do not apply to council initiated actions.
5) The criteria for Outline Plan approval are described in 18.88.030.A.4 as follows:
The Planning Commission shall approve the outline plan when it finds the following criteria
have been met:
a. That the development meets all applicable ordinance requirements of the City of Ashland.
b. That adequate key City facilities can be provided including water, sewer, paved access to
and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, police and fire protection
and adequate transportation; and that the development will not cause a City facility to
operate beyond capacity.
c. That the existing and natural features of the land; such as wetlands, floodplain corridors,
ponds, large trees, rock outcroppings, etc., have been identified in the plan of the
development and significant features have been included in the open space, common
areas, and unbuildable areas.
d. That the development of the land will not prevent adjacent land from being developed for
the uses shown in the Comprehensive Plan.
e. That there are adequate provisions for the maintenance of open space and common areas,
if required or provided, and that if developments are done in phases that the early phases
have the same or higher ratio of amenities as proposed in the entire project.
f. That the proposed density meets the base and bonus density standards established under
this Chapter.
g. The development complies with the Street Standards.
6) The criteria for an Exception to the Street Standards are described in 18.88.050.F as follows:
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663
Page 6
An exception to the Street Standards is not subject to the Variance requirements of section
18.100 and may be granted with respect to the Street Standards in 18.88.050 if all of the
following circumstances are found to exist:
A. There is demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements of this chapter due
to a unique or unusual aspect of the site or proposed use of the site.
B. The variance will result in equal or superior transportation facilities and connectivity;
C. The variance is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty; and
D. The variance is consistent with the stated Purpose and Intent of the Performance
Standards Options Chapter.
7) The criteria for a Physical Constraints Review Permit are described in 18.62.040.1 as follows:
1. Through the application of the development standards of this chapter, the potential
impacts to the property and nearby areas have been considered, and adverse impacts have
been minimized.
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.
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.
8) The criteria for a Tree Removal Permit are described in 18.61.080 as follows:
An applicant for a Tree Removal-Staff Permit shall demonstrate that the following criteria are
satisfied. The Staff Advisor may require an arborist's report to substantiate the criteria for a
permit.
A. Hazard Tree: The Staff Advisor shall issue a tree removal permit for a hazard tree if the
applicant demonstrates that a tree is a hazard and warrants removal.
1. A hazard tree is a tree that is physically damaged to the degree that it is clear that it is likely
to fall and injure persons or property. A hazard tree may also include a tree that is located within
public rights of way and is causing damage to existing public or private facilities or services and
such facilities or services cannot be relocated or the damage alleviated. The applicant must
demonstrate that the condition or location of the tree presents a clear public safety hazard or a
foreseeable danger of property damage to an existing structure and such hazard or danger cannot
reasonably be alleviated by treatment or pruning.
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663
Page 7
2. The City may require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each hazard tree pursuant
to AMC 18.61.084. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit.
B. Tree that is Not a Hazard: The City shall issue a tree removal permit for a tree that is not a
hazard if the applicant demonstrates all of the following:
1. The tree is proposed for removal in order to permit the application to be consistent with
other applicable Ashland Land Use Ordinance requirements and standards. (e.g. other applicable
Site Design and Use Standards). The Staff Advisor may require the building footprint ofthe
development to be staked to allow for accurate verification of the permit application; and
2. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability,
flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks; and
3. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes,
canopies, and species diversity within 200 feet of the subject property.
The City shall grant an exception to this criterion when alternatives to the tree removal have been
considered and no reasonable alternative exists to allow the property to be used as permitted in
the zone. Nothing in this section shall require that the residential density be reduced below the
permitted density allowed by the zone. In making this determination, the City may consider
alternative site plans or placement of structures or alternate landscaping designs that would
lessen the impact on trees, so long as the alternatives continue to comply with other provisions of
the Ashland Land Use Ordinance.
4. The City shall require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each tree granted approval
pursuant to AMC 18.61.084. Such mitigation requirements shall be.a condition of approval of the
permit.
9) The City Council, following proper public notice, held public hearings on November 6, 2007 and
November 20,2007 at which time testimony was received and exhibits were presented. The City Council
approved the application subject to conditions pertaining to the appropriate development ofthe site.
Now, Therefore, the City Council of the City of Ashland makes the following Findings of Fact,
Conclusions of Law and Order.
III. FINDINGS APPLYING APPLICABLE CODE CRITERIA AND MINIMUM STANDARDS
FOR ELIGIBILITY FOR ANNEXATION
3.1 The City Council finds that it has received all information necessary to make a decision
based on the Staff Report, public hearing testimony and the exhibits received.
3.2 The City Council finds that the proposal to annex an 11.64 acre site located at 87 W.
Nevada St. and 811 Helman St. meets all applicable criteria for an Annexation. The City Council
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663
Page 8
finds that the proposal to change the Ashland Comprehensive Plan Map from a Single-Family
Residential designation to a Suburban Residential designation for the cottage and town home
portion of the development meets all applicable criteria for a Comprehensive Plan change. The
City Council finds the proposal to develop a 68-unit single-family residential subdivision meets all
applicable criteria for an Outline Plan approval described in the Performance Standards Options
Chapter 18.88. The City Council finds and that the proposed location the multi-use path adjacent to
the natural feature rather than a public street, and the proposed use of a private drive to access the
cottages rather than the required public street meet all applicable criteria for Exceptions to the Street
Standards. The City Council finds the request to locate a multi-use path in the Ashland Creek
Riparian Preservation Area meets all applicable criteria for a Physical Constraints Review
Permit. The City Council finds the request to remove a 2S-inch diameter at breast height Oak
tree meets all applicable criteria for a Tree Removal Permit.
3.3 The City Council finds that the proposal to annex 11.64 acres meets all applicable criteria for
an Annexation.
The site is comprised of five parcels and all of the parcels are located in the Ashland Urban Growth
Boundary. In addition, the land is currently contiguous with the present city limits. The west part
of the development is contiguous to the city limits on all sides. The east part of the development is
contiguous to the city limits on the west and south.
The Annexation approval criteria require the proposed zoning for the annexed area to be in
conformance with the designation indicated on the Comprehensive Plan Map. The entire site is
designated as Single-Family Residential on the Ashland Comprehensive Plan Map. The proposal
includes a Comprehensive Plan Map Change for approximately 42 percent of the site, for the
cottage and town home portion of the development, to modify the Single-Family Residential (R-
1) designation in the Ashland Comprehensive Plan Map to the Suburban Residential (R-1-3.S)
designation. The request for the Comprehensive Plan Map Change is discussed in the following
section. Therefore, the ability of the cottage and town home portion of the development to meet
this criterion is dependent on the approval of the Comprehensive Plan Map Change. The
remainder of the site, the single-family portion of the development, would remain in the Single-
Family designation. Therefore, the single-family portion of the development is in conformance
with the Comprehensive Plan Map, and satisfies this Annexation criterion.
The proposed uses included in the Annexation are required to be allowed uses in the zoning
districts. Phase I, or the R-1-3.S portion of the project to the west of Almeda Dr. and Canine
Way includes single-family and multi-family dwellings. Single-family and multi-family
dwellings are permitted uses in the R-1.3.S zoning district. Phase II, or the R-1-S portion of the
project to the east of Almeda Dr. and Canine Way includes single-family dwellings and duplexes.
Single-family dwellings, and duplexes on corner lots are permitted uses in the R-1 zoning
district.
Adequate city facilities to provide water to the site, to transport sewage from the site, to carry storm
drainage to and through the site and to provide electricity to the' site are included in the preliminary
utility plan and utility power plan. Eight-inch water lines will be installed to serve the development
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663
Page 9
with connections to the existing system in Nevada and Almeda streets. Two existing 12-inch and
18-inch sanitary sewer lines run through the property and are retained in Almeda Dr. Eight-inch
lines will be installed in Sander Way, Canine Way and the cottage driveway to serve the
development with connections to the existing lines. Storm drainage is directed to two locations.
The southwesterly area of the project is directed to the City's existing demonstration wetlands
located north of the project using standard underground pipes. The northeasterly are of the project
is directed and treated through a combination of a pipe system and a newly built system of swales
and sediment ponds to Ashland Creek. Electric utilities will run through the site from the existing
system across Nevada St. The utility power plan delineates the location of new lines, equipment
and street lights.
Adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property. A Traffic
Impact Study was prepared for the project and has been included with the application. The study
projects that the intersection of Helman, Nevada and Almeda, and the intersection of Oak and
Nevada will continue to operate at acceptable levels with build out of the proposed project.
Outside of the Exceptions to the Street Standards requested in the application, the proposed streets
meet the requirements of the Street Standards. The new streets are connected to Nevada Street
which is a Neighborhood Collector. The Nevada St. frontage of the site will be improved with a
parkrow and sidewalk. Sidewalks will be installed on all of the new streets running through the
site. The new intersection of Helman St., Almeda Dr. and Nevada St. will be an important
pedestrian crossing point for residents of the development and for visitors of the Dog Park and Bear
Creek Greenway. Bicycle lanes are not required because none of the adjacent or new streets are
classified arterials. The application findings state that transit service is not planned to the site.
The Annexation approval criteria require that where the project site is within a quarter of a mile of
an existing sidewalk system, the sidewalks from the project site shall be constructed to extend and
connect to the existing system. The Oak St. sidewalk system is approximately 450 feet away or less
than 1/10 of a mile away from the project boundary. Sidewalks are in place on Oak St. from Nevada
St. to the downtown. As also required by the Annexation approval criteria, the proposal includes
the installation of a city standard parkrow and sidewalk on the Nevada St. frontage of the site. This
will result in a gap in the sidewalk network on the north side of Nevada St. from the project site to
Oak St. The City Council finds installation of the sidewalk on the north side of Nevada St. from
the site to Oak St. is required to meet the Annexation approval criteria.
The "Revisions to Area and Density Tables" submittal dated July 20, 2007 included in the
application includes a table demonstrating that the 90% density is achieved in each housing type
and for the project as a whole.
The application satisfies the annexation affordable housing requirement by providing title to a
sufficient amount of buildable land to a non-profit to develop 25% of the base density to buyers or
renters at or below 100% of median income (base density of 58 units * .25 = 14.5 units). The
application includes 15 affordable housing units in a town home format in the northwest portion of
the site. The project description states that the land will be donated to Rogue Valley Community
Development Corporation (RVCDC) to develop as 15 affordable units for the range of 80 to 100
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663
Page 10
percent of median income.
The western portion of the project is an island surrounded by lands within the city limits, and
therefore satisfies Section 18.106.030.H.6 of the Annexation approval standards. This part of the
annexation shall occur first and shall be reflected in an Ordinance approving the annexation and
withdrawal from the Fire District.
The eastern portion of the project must also meet one of the six standards in Section 18.1 06.030.H.
Currently, the eastern portion of the project is adjacent to and in the city limits on two sides, to the
south and west. The application states that Phase I of the project will be development of the
western portion of the project and the dedication of the property adjacent to Ashland Creek to the
city for parks purposes. The second part of the annexation is an annexation of the dedicated City
property pursuant to ALVa 18.1 06.040, including annexation to the boundaries of Ashland Creek
as permitted by ORS 222. This annexation shall also be reflected in an Ordinance. Finally, as a
result of the land dedication and annexation of the approximately 2.78 acres of new City property
contiguous to the dog park and located along Ashland Creek in Phase I, the eastern portion of the
property will be an island completely surrounded by lands within the city limits, and therefore
"through the imposition of conditions", authorized by ALVa 18.106.030 (concerning timing) also
complies with ALVa 18.106.030.H.6. This part of the annexation shall occur third and shall be
reflected in an Ordinance approving the annexation and withdrawal from the Fire District.
3.4 The City Council finds that the request for an Ashland Comprehensive Plan Map change
from a Single-Family Residential designation to a Suburban Residential designation for the cottage
and town home portion of the development meets all applicable criteria for a Comprehensive Plan
Map change.
The application includes a request for a Comprehensive Plan Map Change for approximately
4.35 acres or 42 percent of the site to modify the Single-Family Residential (R-1) designation in
the Ashland Comprehensive Plan Map to the Suburban Residential (R-1-3.5) designation. The
location of the Comprehensive Plan Map Change is for Phase I, or the cottage and town home
portion ofthe project to the west of Almeda Dr. and Canine Way. The remainder ofthe site
would remain in the Single-Family designation.
The approval criteria for a Comprehensive Plan Map Change require that the proposed change
meet one of five factors and be in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. The City Council
finds that the change to the Suburban Residential Family designation for Phase I of the project
(i.e. cottages and town homes) enables a minimum of 53 of the 68 units in the development to be
constructed at an energy and water conserving performance standard. Additionally, the
Suburban-Residential designation and subsequent R-1-3.5 zoning allows flexibility with the
housing types and site design that is well-suited for the cottage and town home areas of the
development. The cottage and town homes include attached dwellings that are grouped in
clusters around open space. The flexibility in building placement and site design allows all of the
proposed buildings to be located on an east-west axis for a true South building orientation so that
the optimum solar efficiency is gained for both solar collection devices and for passive solar
gain. Finally, the total number of units in the proposed development is comparable to the site
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663
Page 11
being developed as a Single-Family Residential development with R-1-5 zoning and the density
bonuses permitted in Chapter 18.88 Performance Standard Options. For example, a project could
be developed under the R-1-5 zoning and used a density bonus for conservation housing and
affordable housing. In this case, the base density of the subject properties developed at a R-1-5
density is 46.67 units (10.37 Ac * 4.5 du/ac = 46.67 units). A 40% density bonus with a 15%
density bonus for conservation housing and a 25% bonus for affordable housing would allow 65
units (46.67 units * 1.40 = 65.34 units). In comparison, the proposed number of units in the
development is 68 units.
The energy and water conservation housing provided by the development will address a public
need for energy and water conservation in new homes that is supported by the Ashland
Comprehensive Plan. The Ashland Comprehensive Plan includes the following goals and
policies concerning energy and water conservation in Chapter XI: Energy.
The City shall strive, in every appropriate way, to reduce energy consumption within the
community. Water conservation and air quality enhancement should also be promoted.
Programs should emphasize greater efficiency in end use, rather than sacrifices in living
standards. In general, policies that effect change through a combination of economic
incentives and public education shall be considered more appropriate than policies
involving strict legal requirements or mandates. The City shall give due attention to
energy and resource conservation and air quality enhancement in all planning actions
and all city activities.
Policy 3) New Housing
C) New homes and apartments are being built which do not utilize the latest
technological advances in water consuming devices. The City shall use any legal means
to insure that only water conserving equipment be installed in new construction. This
should be done to accommodate growth with lesser incremental water demand and also
to eliminate the need to return to these homes later to retrofit them with water conserving
devices.
D) Passive solar design and sun tempering are very cost effective in new home
construction. They shall be encourage in new housing development and individual
houses.
E) The City shall address overall energy usage of new developments instead of just
looking at houses on an individual bases. Areas to be considered could be transportation
energy, recycling, composting, communal gardens, water usage and solar access
protection.
G) Appliance efficiency shall be encouraged in new housing. This could be done
through existing programs (i.e. Super Good Cents), by codes, by education or by
incentive programs (i.e. density bonuses). Also of these options shall be considered in
trying to achieve this goal.
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663
Page 12
Policy 8) Future Considerations
B) The future will be quite dynamic and volatile in the energy arena. The City needs to
actively keep abreast of new advances in technology and embrace and encourage ones
which can benefit water conservation, air quality, energy conservation or production.
The City Council finds that the energy and water conservation performance standard as outline in
Exhibit K-3 of Book III: Narrative, July 8, 2007, states that the units in the development will be
designed to use 50% less energy than a typical code compliant home. Energy efficiency features
included in the project performance standard are solar orientation, roofs designed for solar hot
water collection systems, passive solar heating, integrated thermal mass, high efficiency heat
source, improved thermal envelope (insulation), heat recovery ventilation, fluorescent or compact
fluorescent lighting, energy efficient appliances, photovoltaic electric systems and night flush
cooling. In addition, the goal of the development is to use approximately 50% less potable water
than a typical code compliant development. Water efficiency features included in the project
performance standard are water efficient toilets, showerheads and faucets, rainwater capture,
water and energy efficient washers, drought resistant plantings and water efficient irrigation.
In regards to transportation facilities and amendments to an acknowledged comprehensive plan,
Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 660-012-00060 requires local governments to address
amendments that would "significantly affect an existing or planned transportation facility." The
original proposal was reviewed by the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) in
November 2006 and they commented that "ODOT Development Review is generally satisfied no
adverse impacts to state facilities will occur as a result of the proposed land use amendments"
(see page 494 of the record). The revised proposal was reviewed by ODOT in October 2007 and
they had no comment (see page 17 of the record).
The City Council finds the proposed Ashland Comprehensive Plan Map change from a Single-
Family Residential designation to a Suburban Residential designation for the cottage and town
home portion of the development will not significantly affect an existing or planned transportation
facility as defined in OAR 660-12-0060(1). As stated earlier, the total number of units in the
proposed development is comparable to the site being developed under the current
Comprehensive Plan designation of Single-Family Residential. Chapter 18.88 Performance
Standards Options permits density bonuses for conservation housing, common open space, major
recreational facilities and affordable housing. Using the density bonus provision, the subject
property could be developed at a density close to the proposed 68 units under the current Single-
Family Residential designation. In this case, the base density ofthe subject properties developed
at a R-1-5 density is 46.67 units (10.37 Ac * 4.5 dulac = 46.67 units). A 40% density bonus with
a 15% density bonus for conservation housing and a 25% bonus for affordable housing would
allow 65 units (46.67 units * 1.40 = 65 .34 units). As a result, three additional units result from
the Comprehensive Plan Map change from the current Single-Family Residential designation to
the proposed Suburban Residential Designation. Three units generate an average of thirty motor
vehicle trips per day according to the ITE, Trip Generation Model, 7th addition. Thirty additional
trips will not significantly affect the surrounding street network including Nevada St., Helman St.
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663
Page 13
and Oak St.
The following discussion addresses the requirements of OAR 660-12-0060(1) and the OAR text is
in italics.
(1) Where an amendment to afunctional plan, an acknowledged comprehensive plan, or a land
use regulation would significantly affect an existing or planned transportation facility, the local
government shall put in place measures as provided in section (2) of this rule to assure that
allowed land uses are consistent with the identified function, capacity, and performance
standards (e.g. level of service, volume to capacity ratio, etc.) of the facility. A plan or land use
regulation amendment significantly affects a transportation facility if it would:
(a) Change the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility
(exclusive of correction of map errors in an adopted plan),.
According to the Traffic Impact Study submitted with the application, the proposed development
will generate 730 trips per day. While the Comprehensive Plan Map change results in a few
more residential units as compared to development of the subject site under the current
Comprehensive Plan Map designation, even considering the total traffic impact from the
proposed development does not change the functional classification of the street network in the
vicinity including Nevada St., Helman St. and Oak St.
The streets most likely to be impacted by motor vehicle traffic generated by the development are
Nevada St., Helman St., and Oak St. Nevada St is identified in a Neighborhood Collector, and
Helman St. and Oak St. are identified as Avenues in the Ashland Transportation System Plan.
The Transportation Element of the Ashland Comprehensive Plan, the Ashland Transportation
System Plan and the Ashland Street Standards provide street classification guidelines. The
function of a Neighborhood Collector such as Nevada St. is to distribute traffic from Boulevards
or A ven~s to neighborhood streets and vice versa, and the average traffic volumes of a
Neighborhood Collector is 1,500 to 5,000 motor vehicle trips per day. The function of an
Avenue such as Helman St. and Oak St. is to provide concentrated pedestrian, bicycle and motor
vehicle access from Boulevards to neighborhoods and neighborhood activity centers and vice
versa, and the average traffic volumes of an Avenue is 3,000 to 10,000 motor vehicle trips per
day.
Traffic counts for Nevada St. are approximately 1,400 trips per day (2002), Helman St. are
approximately 1,450 trips per day (2004) and for Oak St. are approximately 3,500 trips per day
(2004). The Traffic Impact Study included in the application projects that approximately 47% of
the peak PM hour traffic will use Helman St., 38% will go west on Nevada towards Oak St. and
15% of the traffic will go east on Nevada. All ofthe trips generated by the proposed by the
development could be added to Nevada St., Helman St. or Oak St., and all ofthe streets would be
well within the range of average traffic volumes identified in the Ashland street classification
guidelines. Additionally, Nevada St. will continue to function as a Neighborhood Collector
distributing traffic from the adjacent neighborhoods to the larger A venue streets in the
neighborhood including Helman St. and Oak St. Helman St. and Oak St. will continue to operate
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663
Page 14
as Avenue streets taking traffic to the Boulevards in the city limits such as N. Main St., Lithia
Way and E. Main St.
(b) Change standards implementing afunctional classification system; or
The proposed Comprehensive Plan Map change does not include a modification of the Ashland
street classification guidelines.
(c) As measured at the end of the planning period identified in the adopted transportation system
plan:
(A) Allow land uses or levels of development that would result in types or levels of travel or
access that are inconsistent with the functional classification of an existing or planned
transportation facility;
The Comprehensive Plan Map change results in the addition of a few more residential units as
compared to development of the subject site under the current Comprehensive Plan Map
designation. The approximately 30 additional motor vehicle trips resulting from three additional
units allowed by the Comprehensive Plan Map change will be the type of travel and level of
travel that is consistent with the functional classification of the surrounding street network
including Nevada St., Helman St. and Oak St.
(B) Reduce the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility below the minimum
acceptable performance standard identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan; or
The Ashland Transportation System Plan identifies the minimum acceptable performance
standard for intersections as a LOS D. The Traffic Impact Study included in the application
projects of LOS B for the intersections of Helman St./Almeda Dr./Nevada St. and of Nevada St.
and Oak St. in 2010 with build out of the project and incorporating an annual average traffic
growth rate.
(C) Worsen the performance of an existing or planned transportationfacility that is otherwise
projected to perform below the minimum acceptable performance standard identified in the TSP
or comprehensive plan.
The Ashland Transportation System Plan does not identify existing or planned transportation
facilities in the vicinity that will have insufficient capacity at the end of the 20-year planning
period of 20 17.
3.5 The City Council finds the proposal to develop a 68-unit single-family residential
subdivision meets all applicable criteria for an Outline Plan approval described in the Performance
Standards Options Chapter 18.88.
The site is the located at a northernmost section of the Ashland Urban Growth Boundary and
there are no other undeveloped parcels located in the immediate vicinity. Therefore, the
development ofthe subject site will not prevent adjacent land from being developed for the uses
in the Comprehensive Plan.
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663
Page 15
Adequate key city facilities and utilities are available and can be provided, and were discussed
previously under the Annexation section. Outside of the Exceptions to the Street Standards
requested in the application, the proposed streets meet the requirements of the Street Standards.
A multi-use path for pedestrians and bicyclists is proposed in the Ashland Creek riparian corridor
connecting Nevada St. to the north end of Canine Way. The proposed multi-use path weaves
above and below the biologically determined riparian zone and the top of the uppermost slope
grade break. A second multi-use path is proposed between units 64 and 65 in the northwest
comer of the project. The path would connect Almeda Dr. directly to the Bear Creek Greenway
path connection. The subject section of Ashland Creek Corridor is identified for open space in
the Long Term Plan on the Parks, Trails and Open Space Program fro 2002-2012. Additionally,
the connection from Almeda Dr. to the Bear Creek Greenway path is also identified as a
proposed greenway connection on the Parks, Trail and Open Space Program for 2002-2012.
A total of 127 off-street parking spaces and 68 on-street parking spaces are required for the
proposed development of 68 units. The proposal meets the parking requirements. There are 114
off-street parking spaces proposed in a combination of garages and surface parking areas. The
remaining required 13 off-street parking spaces are satisfied by 17 on-street spaces which is the
equivalent to 13 off-street parking credits. There are 85 on-street spaces available which results in
the 17 on-street spaces that can be used towards the off-street parking credits.
The proposed density of 68 units meets the base and bonus density standards of the Performance
Standards Options Chapter 18.88. The base density of the property is 58.15 units. The project
qualifies for a density bonus of 22% for the 15 affordable housing units that are provided (15
affordable units/68 units = .22). Therefore the permitted density with the affordable housing
density bonus is 70 units (58.15 units * 1.22 = 70.94 units).
With one exception, the proposed building setbacks meet the requirements of the Performance
Standards Options Chapter 18.88. The front yards of the R-I-5 portion of the development
meet the required 15 feet to the building and 20 feet to garages, and the setbacks along the
perimeter of the development meet the required side and rear yards. The front yards of the R-l-
3.5 portion of the development (cottages and town homes) do not meet the front yard
requirements along Almeda Dr. and Canine Way. Fifteen feet is shown and 20 feet is required
for front yards in the R-I-3.5 zoning district. As a result, a condition has been added that the
buildings delineated in the Final Plan meet the required front yard for the R-I-3.5 zoning district.
The heights of the proposed buildings and minimum width between buildings appear to be met,
and will be verified at the Final Plan and building permit submittals. It is not clear the
application if the proposed units meet the Solar Setback requirements of Chapter 18.68 as is
required in the Performance Standards Options Chapter 18.88.070.E. A condition has been
added requiring the Final Plan application address the Solar Setback requirements.
The entire subdivision is required to provide a minimum of five percent of the lot area in open
space for Outline Plan approval under the Performance Standards Options. A total of 21 ,688
square feet is required in open space, and the proposal includes 25, 230 square feet identified as
common open space areas. With the exception of the four standard single-family lots in the
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663
Page 16
subdivision, the units also have a private yard space identified for each unit. Since the common
open space provides an additional 3,542 square feet in open space beyond the requirements, the
application meets the open space acreage requirements.
The Outline Plan approval criteria require that there are adequate provisions for the maintenance of
open space and common areas, and that if the development is done in phases that the early phases
have the same or higher ratio of amenities as proposed in the entire project. The application
findings state that the development will be done as three separate entities for the cottages, town
homes and single-family/duplex groups. The proposal is to have a Planned Unit Development for
each of the three groups and provide CC&R's detailing specific maintenance responsibilities for
each community. Phase I will include the development of the cottages and town homes.
Approximately 55% of the open space is included in Phase 1. Therefore, the same or higher ratio
of common open space would occur in the first phase of the project than in Phase II, and the
approval criterion is satisfied.
The City Council finds the significant natural features of the site are the wetland in the northern
portion of the site, two trees located outside of the riparian corridor, the Ashland Creek floodplain
corridor and Ashland Creek riparian corridor. Three ofthe significant natural features - the
wetland, floodplain corridor and riparian corridor - are located in a separate parcel that is proposed
to be dedicated to the city for parks purposes as part of the land exchange. As a result, the City
Council finds the wetland, floodplain corridor and riparian corridor are included in open space that
is an unbuildable area. The two significant trees are a 19-inch diameter at breast height (dbh)
Oregon Ash (tree 20 on the Tree Survey and Protection Plan, T-l, June 8,2007) and a 39-inch dbh
California Black Oak (tree 21 on T -1). The two significant trees are located near units 28 and 31.
The City Council finds the trees are included in the common area of the subdivision, and the
common are is unbuildable.
3.6 The City Council finds and that the proposed location of the multi-use path adjacent to the
natural feature rather than a public street, and the proposed use of a private drive to access the
cottages rather than the required public street meet all applicable criteria for an Exception to the
Street Standards.
An Exception to the Street Standards is requested to locate a multi-use path in the Ashland Creek
riparian co~dor rather than locating a street adjacent to natural features as is required. The
proposed multi-use path weaves above and below the biologically determined riparian zone and the
uppermost top of the slope grade break.
The Preserving Natural Features of the Street Standards is as follows.
"Streets shall be located in a manner which preserves natural features to the greatest extent
feasible. Whenever possible, street alignments shall follow natural contours and features so
that visual and physical access to the natural feature is possible. Streets shall be situated
between natural features, such as creeks, mature trees, drainages, open spaces and individual
parcels in order to appropriately incorporate such significant neighborhood features."
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663
Page 17
The City Council finds there are several unusual aspects of the site that make it difficult to locate
a street adjacent to Ashland Creek. First, there are two existing main sanitary sewer lines that
bisect the site (see Exhibit E-E, Preliminary Utility Plan). The application includes a
Geotechnical Investigation (see Appendix D, Geotechnical Investigation) which identifies
"relatively hard bedrock" comprised of sedimentary rock including siltstone, sandstone and
conglomerate at shallow depths throughout the site. As a result, the application identifies the
relocation of the main sanitary sewer lines as impractical. The new main street into the
development from Nevada St., Almeda Dr., is located over the existing main sanitary sewer lines
so the lines can be accessed and do not have to be moved. The second unusual aspect of the site
is the location of Ashland Creek is approximately 200 feet east of the existing intersection of
Helman St. and Nevada St. The project traffic engineer recommended that the main access to the
site be located opposite of the Helman St. and Nevada St. intersection. Locating a secondary
street access to the development from Nevada St. and adjacent to Ashland Creek poses safety
issues in terms ofthe close proximity to the Helman St., Nevada St. and Almeda Dr. intersection.
The final unusual aspect of the site is the relatively narrow area from the new Almeda Dr. to
Ashland Creek. The City Council agrees the existing sanitary sewer lines, the need to align the
new street with the existing intersection of Nevada and Helman streets and the narrowness of the
area from the new Almeda Dr. to Ashland Creek are significant constraints in the development of
the new street network that create a demonstrable difficulty in meeting the Street Standard on
Preserving Natural Features.
The City Council finds that the multi-use path achieves a similar buffering effect as a street to the
Ashland Creek riparian corridor. The multi-use path will provide visual and physical access to
the riparian corridor. Although the multi-use path is largely located in the riparian corridor, it is
situated at the western edge of the corridor, and will be located between the individual parcels
and the riparian zone. The City Council finds that the multi-use path is an equally valuable
transportation facility as compared to a city street because it provides a connection to the existing
Bear Creek Greenway, thereby increasing the reach ofthis pedestrian and bicycle off-road
transportation system. The City Council finds that by providing a transportation facility in the
form of a multi-use path that the proposed exception is the minimum variance necessary to
address the site constraints. The City Council finds that Exception to the Street Standards to use
the proposed multi-use path rather than a public street to protect and provide access to the
Ashland Creek riparian corridor uses the natural features of the landscape to the greatest
advantage and will improve the quality of life of the residents of the development as outlined in
the Purpose and Intent of Chapter 18.88 Performance Standards Options.
An Exception to the Street Standards is requested to use a private drive to access the 24 cottages
rather than the required public street. The proposed private drive is a looped system that is
approximately 300 feet in length and is connected at both ends to Almeda Dr. The proposed private
drive is 20 feet in width, includes 26 head-in parking spaces and has a sidewalk system adjacent to
the curb. In contrast, a public street would be required to be 22 feet in width with parkrows and
sidewalks on both sides. Additionally, a 22-feet wide public street would allow parallel parking on
one side of the street.
The City Council finds there is demonstrable difficulty in providing a public street and the
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663
Page 18
required off-street parking given the geographic layout of the corner of the property that is
proposed for the cottages. A public street does not allow head-in parking adjacent to the street,
and the proposal is to allow 26 head-in parking spaces adjacent to the private drive. In addition,
by consolidating most of the cottage parking adjacent to the private drive, it allows more of the
land area to be used as open space for the cottages rather than to be used for surface parking. In
addition, fewer parallel parking spaces would fit on one side of the public street of the length
proposed compared to the number of spaces that can be achieved with head-in parking.
Residents and visitors will have no reason to travel on this short drive other than to visit the
cottage development. As a result, motor vehicles, bicyclists and pedestrians traveling through the
development will use Almeda Dr. In terms of sidewalks, pedestrians will have little reason to
travel on the cottage drive unless visiting one ofthe cottages because Almeda Dr. provides a
more direct route for moving through the neighborhood. The City Council concurs that a private
street is a better fit for the cottage development than a public street because the cottages will
function as a multi-family development with a shared surface parking area that is accessed by a
driveway.
The City Council finds that Exception to the Street Standards to use a private drive to access
the 24 cottages rather than the required public street will provide for more efficient land use as
outlined in the Purpose and Intent of Chapter 18.88 Performance Standards Options.
3.7 The City Council finds the request to locate a multi-use path in the Ashland Creek Riparian
Preservation Area meets all applicable criteria for a Physical Constraints Review Permit with the
attached conditions of approval. The applicants propose to construct a multi-use path located in the
Ashland Creek riparian corridor that would connect Nevada St. to the Bear Creek Greenway
connection located in the Dog Park. The proposed multi-use path weaves above and below the
biologically determined riparian zone and the uppermost top of the slope grade break. The multi-
use path itself and the disturbance created by the construction is located largely inside of the
biologically determined riparian zone.
The City Council finds that the multi-use path in the Ashland Creek riparian corridor itself is a
benefit to the general community and that there should be a balance of the environmental resource
protection issues and the parks and open space issues.
The City Council finds that the multi-use path is located along the upper edge of the riparian
corridor in an effort to minimize adverse impacts to Ashland Creek and in an effort to retain the
general topography of the riparian corridor. The proposed multi-use path, is except for the first
50 feet, is located outside of the 1 DO-year flood plain for As.bland Creek. The section of path in
the flood plain is at grade and will not create a potential flooding hazard.
The City Council finds the applicant has not addressed the reasonable steps necessary to reduce
the adverse impact on the Ashland Creek riparian corridor including the irreversible actions
caused by the construction of the multi-use path in the riparian corridor. A mitigation plan is
required as a condition of approval at the Final Plan application. The mitigation plan requires an
assessment of the Ashland Creek riparian corridor functions, an assessment of the impact of the
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663
Page 19
path construction on the resource functions and mitigation measures to offset those adverse
impacts.
3.8 The City Council finds the request to remove a 25-inch diameter at breast height Oak tree
meets all applicable criteria for a Tree Removal Permit.
One of the eight trees identified for removal requires a Tree Removal Permit due to the size of
the tree being 18 inches diameter at breast height or greater. A Tree Removal Permit is requested
to remove a 25-inch diameter at breast height Oak tree (tree 39, Tree Survey and Protection Plan,
T -1, June 8, 2007). The tree is an Oregon White Oak and located between proposed units 33 and
34.
The Oregon White Oak identified for removal is described as stressed because of heavy
infestation of mistletoe and as having numerous dead limbs through the crown. Additionally, the
arborist predicts that the disruption to the root system due to nearby structures would cause
further decline in the tree. The Tree Commission reviewed the proposed tree removal in
November 2006, and recommended approval of the plan.
3.9 The proposal includes a real property exchange with the City of Ashland. The proposal is
to exchange approximately 2.78 acres adjacent to Ashland Creek to the City for parks purposes in
exchange for approximately 1.54 acres of the City Dog Park in the area of the access and to the
south of the existing parking area. The Land Exchange is addressed in separate findings
attached to the Ordinance approving the Development Agreement.
IV. ORDER
In sum, the City Council concludes that the requested Ordinance declaring the approval of a Development
Agreement, and all associated planning actions contained in Planning Action 2006-01663, including the
Development Agreement, Annexation, (in three parts), Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map change from
Jackson County zoning RR-5 (Rural Residential) to City of Ashland zoning R-I-3.5 (Suburban Residential) and R-
1 (Single-Family Residential), request for Outline Plan approval for a 68-unit residential development under the
Performance Standards Options Chapter 18.88, requests for Exception to the Street Standards for not locating a
street adjacent to natural features and to use a private drive to access the cottages rather than the required public
street, request for a Physical Constraints Review Permit to locate a multi-use path in the Ashland Creek Riparian
Preservation Area, and request for a Tree Removal Permit to remove a 25-inch diameter at breast height Oak
tree are consistent with or comply with applicable criterion and minimum standards in the City's comprehensive
Plan and applicable land development code, including minimum requirements for annexation eligibility, and are
supported by evidence contained within the whole record
Accordingly, based on the above Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, and based upon the evidence in the
whole record, the City Council hereby declares approval of the Development Agreement and APPROVES
Planning Action #2006-01663 subject to strict compliance with the conditions of approval, set forth herein as
well as those requirements conditions and restrictions set forth in the accompanying Verde Village Development
Agreement and Land Exchange Order. Further, if anyone or more of the conditions below are found to be
invalid, for any reason whatsoever, then Planning Action #2006-01663 is denied. The following are the conditions
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663
Page 20
and they are attached to the approval:
1) That all proposals of the applicant are conditions of approval unless otherwise modified here.
2) That Site Review approval shall be obtained for the cottages, town homes and duplexes prior to
any site work, issuance of an excavation permit or issuance of a building permit.
3) That the applicants shall execute a document as consistent with ALVa 18.68.150 agreeing to
participate in their fair share costs associated with a future Local Improvement District for
improvements to Helman Street and to not remonstrate against such District prior to signature of
the final subdivision survey plat. Nothing in this condition is intended to prohibit an
owner/developer, their successors or assigns from exercising their rights to freedom of speech
and expression by orally objecting or participating in the LID hearing or to take advantage of any
protection afforded any party by city ordinances and resolutions.
4) That all easement for sewer, water, electric and streets shall be indicated on the Final Plan
application as required by the City of Ashland.
5) The Final Plan application shall identify the sanitary sewer pressure line easement, and buildings
shall not be located in the easement.
6) That the preliminary engineering for utility improvements shall be submitted with the Final Plan
application. The utility plan shall include the location of connections to all public facilities in
and adjacent to the development, including the locations of water lines and meter sizes, fire
hydrants, sewer mains and services, manholes and clean-outs, storm drainage pipes and catch
basins. Any required private or public utility easements shall be delineated on the utility plan.
7) That the preliminary engineering for storm drainage collection and treatment shall be submitted
with the Final Plan application. The permanertt maintenance of on and off site storm water bio-
engineered swales and wetland systems must be addressed through the obligations of the
homeowners' association and approved by the Public Works Department and Building Division.
8) That the applicants shall submit an electric distribution plan with the Final Plan application
including load calculations and locations of all primary and secondary services including
transformers, cabinets, meters and all other necessary equipment. This plan shall be reviewed
and approved by the Electric Department prior to submission of the Final Plan application.
Transformers and cabinets shall be located in areas least visible from streets, while considering
the access needs of the Electric Department.
9) That the required pedestrian-scaled streetlight shall consist ofthe City of Ashland's residential
streetlight standard, and shall be included in the utility plan and engineered construction
drawings for the street improvements.
10) The preliminary engineering for proposed street improvements shall be provided at Final Plan
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663
Page 21
application. Street improvements shall be consistent with City of Ashland Street Standards. The
sidewalk improvement on Nevada St. shall be a minimum of six feet in width in accordance with
the Ashland Street Standards.
11) The preliminary engineering for the Final Plan application shall address the treatment of the
pedestrian crossing at the new intersection of Helman St., Almeda Dr. and Nevada S1. Pedestrian
safety and refugee shall be addressed in the intersection design.
12) The Final Plan application shall include revised on-street parking placement so that parking spaces
are not counted that are within 20 feet measured along the curb of any comer or intersection of an
alley or street in accordance with 18.92.025.D.
13) The preliminary engineering shall include details for the multi-use path improvements. The
multi-use paths shall be paved with concrete, asphalt or a comparable all-weather surfacing.
Two to four foot wide gravel or planted strips are required on both sides of the multi-use paths in
accordance with the Ashland Street Standards. Fencing or retaining walls shall be located two to
four feet from the improved edges of the path to provide clear distance on both sides of the path
for safe operation. The clear distance areas shall be graded to the same slope as the improved
path to allow recovery room for pedestrians and bicyclists. The clear distance areas shall be
limited to gravel or landscape materials, and vegetation in excess of six inches in height shall not
be placed in the clear distance areas.
14) The preliminary engineering shall address the transition from Almeda Dr. to the multi-use path,
from Canine Way to the multi-use path and from Nevada St. to the multi-use path. Specifically,
the preliminary engineering shall address bicycle access from the street grade and provide
sufficient turning radius for bicycle navigation.
15) The Final Plan application shall include a mitigation plan prepared by a riparian biologist or a
natural resource professional with training and experience in biology, ecology or related fields for
the impact of the construction of the multi-use path in the riparian corridor and to address the 10-
foot wide riparian corridor buffer. The riparian corridor buffer is the setback between the new
eastern property line adjacent to the Ashland Creek riparian corridor and the single family homes
and yards for units 68, and 25 -39, and is delineated as common area in the application materials.
Disturbed areas from the multi-use path construction shall be re-vegetated and an additional area
restored and enhanced with local source native plant material including ground cover, shrubs and
trees at a 1: 1.5 ratio, erosion control material shall be applied (e.g. mulch, hay, jute-netting, or
comparable) and temporary irrigation facilities installed. The mitigation plan shall include but not
be limited to a statement of objectives, measurable standards of mitigation, an assessment of
riparian corridor functions and values, a statement and detail plan of the location, elevation and
hydrology of the mitigation area, a planting plan and schedule, a monitoring and maintenance plan,
a contingency plan and performance guarantees. The applicants shall install the mitigation
measures in the approved mitigation plan in conjunction with the multi-use path installation.
16) That the multi-use paths shall be constructed by the applicants as part of the required subdivision
improvements.
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663
Page 22
17) That the Final Plan application shall demonstrate that the driveway curb cuts for units 45 and 46
are spaced at least 24- feet apart as measured between the outside edges of the apron wings of the
driveway approaches in accordance with the Ashland Street Standards.
18) That the Final Plan application shall delineate vision clearance areas at the intersections of streets
and alleys throughout the project in accordance with 18.92.070.D. Structures, signs and
vegetation in excess of two and one-half feet in height shall not be placed in the vision clearance
areas. Building envelopes shall be modified accordingly on the Final Plan submittals.
19) That the street names shall be reviewed and approved by Ashland Engineering for compliance
with the City's resolution for street naming prior to submission of the Final Plan application.
20) That a size and species specific landscaping plan for the parkrows, common areas and open
spaces shall be provided at the time of the Final Plan application.
21) That a draft copy of the CC&R's for the homeowners association(s) shall be provided at the time
of Final Plan application. Lots 65 - 68 shall be included in a homeowners association and subject
to all subdivision requirements. CC&R's shall describe responsibility for the maintenance of all
common area and open space improvements, parkrows and street trees. CC&R's shall provide
reciprocal easements for residents of the various homeowners associations (i.e. cottages, town
homes and single-family residential) to access and use all ofthe project open spaces. CC&R's
shall note that any deviation from the Tree Protection Plan must receive written approval from
the City of Ashland Planning Department. That the CC&R's identify the units are which are
subject to the City's Affordable Housing requirements and terms of affordability.
22) That the Final Plan application shall include lot coverage calculations in square footage and
percentage for each development area (i.e. cottages, town homes and single-family/duplex areas).
Any area other than landscaping such as structures, driveways, patios and pervious paving that does
not allow normal water infiltration shall be included as lot coverage.
23) The buildings in the R-1-3.5 zoning district (cottages and town homes) shall meet the required
front yard for the R-1-3.5 zoning district in the Final Plan application.
24) The width between buildings requirement of 18.88.070.D shall be met and identified in the Final
Plan application.
25) That the Final Plan application shall demonstrate all new structures comply with the Solar
Setback A, or that each home shall receive an equivalent certification by the project architects
and mechanical engineers that the shadow height on southern facing exposures will not exceed
that allowed under Solar Setback A in accordance with Chapter 18.70 of the Ashland Land Use
Ordinance.
26) That 53 residential units in the subdivision, including the cottages, duplexes and single-family
units, shall meet the application "Net Zero Energy" Performance Standard as outlined in Exhibit
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663
Page 23
K-3 ofthe Revised Outline Plan, Book III - Narrative revised October 24,2007. The Final Plan
application shall include systems for measuring and monitoring compliance of the development
with the Performance Standard that is administered by the applicants and verified by the city.
27) That a minimum of 53 of the residential units shall qualify in the City of Ashland Earth
Advantage program. The applicants shall meet with the Ashland Conservation Division
regarding eligible site activities prior to issuance of an excavation permit. The required Earth
Advantage documentation shall be submitted with each building permit application.
28) That the hydrant placement and fire apparatus access requirements shall be met and addressed in
the Final Plan application.
29) That the Final Plan application shall address mitigation for the removal of the 25-inch dbh Oak
tree (tree 39 on Tree Survey and Protection Plan, T-1, June 8, 2007). Mitigation shall meet the
requirements of Ashland Land Use Ordinance 18.61.084.
30) That a Verification Permit in accordance with 18.61.042.B shall be applied for and approved by
the Ashland Planning Division prior to removal of the approved Oak tree(tree 39 on Tree Survey
and Protection Plan, T -1, June 8, 2007) and prior to site work, storage of materials and/or the
issuance of an excavation or building permit. The Verification Permit is to inspect the tree to be
removed and the installation of the tree protection fencing. The tree protection for the trees to be
preserved shall be installed according to the approved Tree Protection Plan prior to site work or
storage of materials. Tree protection fencing shall be chain link fencing a minimum of six feet
tall and installed in accordance with 18.61.200.8.
31) That a grading plan addressing preliminary finished grade (i.e. existing contours and proposed
contours) and areas of cut and fill shall be submitted with the Final Plan application.
32) That public easements shall be identified on the final survey plat for all multi-use pathways. The
project CC&R's shall note that the pathways are for public use and shall not be obstructed or
through access restricted unless authorized by the City of Ashland and Ashland Parks
Department.
33) That a deed restriction shall be recorded for the town home portion ofthe development
specifying the land is required to be developed as affordable units in accordance with
18.06.030.G(5) and in conformance with the approval ofPA 2006-01663. The deed restriction
shall require the affordable units to remain affordable per Resolution 2006-13 for a 60 year
period from initial occupancy. The town home area shall be serviced with all needed public
facilities. The deed restricted land shall be dedicated to a non-profit (IRC 501(3)(c)) affordable
housing developer or comparable Development Corporation with proof of the dedication and
deed restriction being presented to the City of Ashland Housing Program Specialist prior to
issuance of a building permit for the development of the first market rate residential unit.
34) That the applicant agrees to construct the project in accordance with the approved plan and City
ordinances and waives the right to file a claim under Oregon Statewide Measure 37. The signed
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663
Page 24
waiver shall be submitted to the City of Ashland Legal Department for review and approval prior
to signature of the survey plat or adoption of a resolution or ordinance formally annexing the
property, whichever is first.
35) That a final boundary description and map shall be prepared in accordance with ORS 308.225. A
registered land surveyor shall prepare the description and map. The boundaries shall be surveyed
and monuments established as required by statute subsequent to Council approval of the
proposed annexation.
36) That the land dedicated to the city for parks purposes adjacent to Ashland Creek shall be annexed
prior to the annexation ofthe Phase II area of the project (single-family development).
37) That the Sander Way sidewalks shall provide public access either by being included in the street
right-of-way or having a public pedestrian easement as required by the Ashland Engineering
Division. The Final Plan submittals shall be modified accordingly.
38) That a minimum of five feet shall be maintained between the northern pavement edge of the
multi-use path and the wetland. The Final Plan application shall address the full width of the path
improvement including the base materials and methods to protect the wetland during
construction (i.e. sediment fencing).
39) That a sidewalk meeting the requirements ofthe Ashland Street Standards shall be installed on
the north side of Nevada St. from the eastern project boundary to the intersection of Nevada S. to
Oak St. Sidewalk design shall be at the discretion of the Staff Advisor in order to address site
constraints such as grade and right-of-way width. These sidewalk improvements shall be
included in the preliminary street improvement plan included with the Final Plan application.
40) That the Final Plan submittal shall address the usability, including Verde Village community
access, of the private open spaces. Usability shall be specifically addressed for the two small
open spaces in the town home area (550 sf and 700 sf), one small open space in the cottage area
(1,300 sf) and the one small open space adjacent to the alley 1,310 sf). Layout and landscaping
ofthe open spaces as well as any improvements such as play equipment shall be detailed in the
Final Plan submittals.
41) That adjustments to the width and location of the multi-use path in and adjacent to the Ashland
Creek riparian corridor shall not affect the width or location of the 10- foot wide setback or
riparian corridor buffer between the new eastern property line adjacent to the Ashland Creek
riparian corridor and the single family homes and yards for units 68, and 25-39 that is delineated
as common area in the application materials. The 10-foot wide setback or riparian corridor shall
be located and sized as shown on plans S-1 dated June 8, 2007, S-4 dated June 8, 2007 and P-2
dated July 17 from the application.
42) That the land being dedicated for affordable housing shall be dedicated to the City of Ashland if
it is not fully developed as affordable housing in accordance with the approval of P A 2006-01663
within five years of this approval.
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663
Page 25
43) That the 15 affordable residential units in the subdivision (i.e. town homes) shall meet the
application "Net Zero Energy" Performance Standard as outlined in Exhibit K-3 ofthe Revised
Outline Plan, Book III - Narrative revised October 24,2007, except that the photovoltaic (PV)
system is not required to be installed in the affordable units. The affordable unit shall be
constructed with the appropriate infrastructure (e.g. wiring, conduit, roof structure) so that a
photovoltaic (PV) system can be installed at a later date.
44) That "Net Zero Energy" Performance Standard as outlined in Exhibit K-3 ofthe Revised Outline
Plan, Book III-Narrative revised October 24, 2007 shall be revised as follows.
· That all dishwasher and washing machines shall qualify for the State of Oregon
tax credit and be selected from the list of qualified machines maintained by the
Oregon Department of Energy.
· That each home that would be built to the standards encompassed in the
applicant's Exhibit K shall be provided with a Photovoltaic (PV) system that is
either 3kW's in size or produces 1.5 Kwh's/Sq. Ft.lYr. whichever is less, and also
be provided with enough available south facing unshaded roof space to double the
size of the PV system.
· That the homes will meet a minimum requirement of R-49 attic insulation for flat
ceilings.
· That the passive solar homes shall meet the State of Oregon's minimum
requirements for the passive solar home tax credit.
Ashland City Council Approval
Date
Signature authorized and approved by the full Council this .L%.- day of ~ , 2012'7
Date: IJ..-J~- Or
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663
Page 26