HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-01-04 Historic MIN
ASHLAND HISTORIC COMMISSION
Minutes
January 4, 2006
Community Development/Engineering Services Building – 51 Winburn Way – Siskiyou Room
Historic Commissioners Present: Dale Shostrom, Keith Swink, Sam Whitford, Terry Skibby, Jay Leighton,
Allen Crutcher, Tom Giordano, and Henry Baker, Rob Saladoff
Absent Members: None
Council Liaison: Jack Hardesty - Absent
High School Liaison: None Appointed
SOU Liaison: None Appointed
Staff Present: Maria Harris, Senior Planner, Billie Boswell, Administration
CALL TO ORDER – REGULAR MEETING
At 7:08, Chairman Dale Shostrom called the regular meeting to order.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Chairman Shostrom asked the voting results on Planning Action #2005-01674, 11 First Street, be changed to
reflect he voted against recommending approval of the project. Ms. Leighton made a motion to approve the
minutes as amended and was seconded by Chairman Shostrom. The motion was passed unanimously.
PUBLIC FORUM: No speakers
PUBLIC HEARING
Planning Action 2005-02105
Site Review
Urban Development Services, LLC/SERA Architects
145 E. Main Street
Chairman Shostrom read the description of the project and verified there were no conflict of interest issues.
Ms. Harris reviewed the staff report pointing out that the three-story, mixed-use building is comprised of
commercial space on the ground floor and two residential condominiums on the second and third floors. The
proposed building is described as modern yet architectural style with a Lithia Way façade of brick, concrete and
steel. The rear façade on Will Dodge Way is primarily cement plaster. The building will have aluminum clad
windows and steel mesh screens and railings. The applicant incorporated the recommendations made by the
Historic Commission during the Pre-Application review such as a more prominent base and pedestrian-friendly
detailing on the rear elevation. Although the project could be reviewed administratively, Staff scheduled the
review for a public hearing due to the high level of interest from the community as well as from the Historic
Commission for new buildings in the Downtown Historic District.
Ms. Harris pointed out that the maximum building height in the C-1-D zoning district is 40 feet. The application
appears to use an incorrect finished ground level on the sides of the building resulting in the building height
being four to ten inches higher than the 40-foot maximum. It had been pointed out to the applicant that a
Conditional Use Permit could be applied for to exceed the maximum height.
Another concern of Staff was that the proposed sidewalk adjacent to Lithia Way does not meet the standard of
six to ten feet in width. The application proposes a four foot wide sidewalk between the tree well and the front of
Ashland Historic Commission Minutes 1
4/12/2022
the building. In staff’s opinion, an eight foot wide sidewalk should be required to provide a better pedestrian
buffer due to the height of the building and high traffic flow on the arterial street.
There was also a recommendation of Staff that the application be continued pending submittal and approval of a
preliminary electric layout plan. The current plan shows a transformer located across the alley from the subject
property.
Mr. Crutcher asked if the tree “well” was required. Ms. Harris confirmed the street design standards required it.
Mr. Giordano asked if parking could be eliminated along Lithia Way. Ms. Harris said Lithia Way was the
jurisdiction of ODOT, plus proposed parking spaces would be lost. There were no further questions of staff.
Mark Knox of Urban Development Services, 320 E. Main St. #202, responded to the issues raised by staff.
They were working with the Electric Department to combine electrical services with the proposed affordable
housing project across the alley. He felt the methodology they used to calculate the building height was
accurate even though it differed from Ms. Harris’ calculations. Addressing the sidewalk width issue, Mr. Knox
pointed out that the tree well was specifically placed in front of the recessed alcove of the building to maintain a
wider walkway.
Mr. Giordano stated he preferred to keep the buildings flush to maintain the historical look of a downtown
district, but felt the narrow width of the sidewalk was an important issue not only for this building but for future
buildings proposed. Discussion followed regarding several options.
Mr. Flenders reviewed the architectural details that were added or changed as requested by the Historic
Commission in their Pre-Application comments. Samples of the brick and the wire mesh were viewed. Mr.
Whitford questioned the use of windows on the side of the building and what would happen to them if another
building were built adjoining this one. Mr. Flenders said an agreement would be made to remove and close in
the windows if the situation arose.
Mr. Baker requested the applicant allow archeologists the opportunity to test the site prior to start of construction
due to a high probability of an aboriginal settlement of significance in that area. Mr. Knox felt confident the
owner would allow testing to be done between approval of the planning action and issuance of the building
permit.
Ms. Harris stated the staff’s concerns were not addressed. Decisions on this project could not be predicated on
the possibility of future plans for another project at the City parking lot when nothing had been submitted for
review. She also stated the building height calculations using just the average grade on Lithia Way and the
alley make the building height over the 40 foot maximum.
Mr. Knox suggested they pivot and square up the front of the building from the Mojo building side that would
provide the 8 feet of straight sidewalk at the tree well and continue to widen up to 12 feet at the other end of the
building.
There being no further questions of the applicant and no one in the audience wishing to speak, the public
meeting was closed.
Chairman Shostrom moved to recommend approval of the application with the following conditions:
Pivot the building at Mojo’s, for all three stories, squaring the building to increase the sidewalk width (not
including the parkrow width) so it is 8 feet from the curb at the west end and 12 feet at the east end,
while maintaining all the same design elements with no change to the façade in design or elevation.
Recommend moving the street tree to the east to provide wider walking path.
Ashland Historic Commission Minutes 2
4/12/2022
Submit scaled drawings to the full Historic Commission of the architectural details and materials for all
exterior components including cornices, steel elements, mesh samples, reveals, and color palette prior
to submittal of the building permit.
Allow archeological study to be done on the site during the time period between approval of the planning
action and prior to issuance of the building permit.
Mr. Baker seconded the motion and all the Commissioners, except Mr. Giordano who was not present at
this point of the meeting, approved it unanimously.
DISCUSSION ITEMS
160 Helman Street
James Batzer, Mark Knox
Pre-Application comments on proposal for a Mixed-Use Development
Mr. Knox reviewed some of the changes they had redesigned in response to suggestions made by the Historic
Commission at the September 7, 2005 meeting. He was interested in additional feedback from the
Commission on general design and esthetics. Mr. Batzer explained his intention to create a “village” where
residents work and live within walking distance of the downtown.
Chairman Shostrom and Ms. Leighton still feel the buildings are too tall. Mr. Whitford and Ms. Leighton liked the
lowered center section. Several Commissioners expressed dislike of the craftsman detailing on the larger corner
buildings. Mr. Crutcher felt the rear façade needed more detail since it was so visible from Van Ness Street.
Ms. Leighton suggested cascading the building back from the street to give the look of one or one and half
stories along Helman Street. The majority of the Commissioners felt the corner building is too big and chopped
up. Mr. Giordano and Mr. Swink stated the design lacked scale particularly in the small four foot balconies and
the entries. The Commissioners suggested using recesses instead of projections to add interest to façade. The
large building nearest the alley needs to be softened.
OLD BUSINESS
A. Review Board – Following is the month’s schedule for the Review Board, which meets every Thursday from
3:00 to at least 3:30 p.m. in the Planning Department:
th
January 5 Terry, Jay, Keith
th
January 12 Terry, Dale, Henry
th
January 19 Terry, Dale, Jay?
th
January 26 Terry, Sam, Tom
nd
February 2 Terry, Rob, Sam
th
February 9 Terry, Keith, Allen
B. Project Assignments for Planning Actions
PA #2000-120 485 “A” Street (Steve Hoxmeier) Shostrom
PA #2004-026 81 Central Avenue (Wes & Lucinda Vail) Giordano
PA #2004-102 832 “A” Street (Ilene Rubenstein) Saladoff
PA #2004-110 150 Church St (Robert M. Saladoff) Whitford
PA #2004-138 234 Vista St (Sid & Karen DeBoer) Saladoff
Ashland Historic Commission Minutes 3
4/12/2022
PA #2004-154 180 Lithia Way (Archerd & Dresner) Leighton
PA-#2004-160 685 A Street (William Reeves) Swink
PL#2005-00869 249 Hillcrest Drive (Russell & JoAnn Manzone) Swink
PL#2005-01043 70 Water Street (Ashland Creek Holdings, LLC) Leighton
PL#2005-01226 820 “C” Street (Randy & Helen Ellison) Shostrom
PL#2005-01674 11 First Street (Ron Yamaoka) Skibby
PL#2005-02105 145 East Main St (Urban Development Services/SERA Arch) Crutcher
C. City Design Review Process Memo – Tom Giordano reviewed the memo he drafted for the City Council
to recommend the Council create a Commission to do design review on projects outside the historic
districts. Ms. Leighton moved to approve submittal of the letter amended to eliminate any reference of
the existing Historic Commission expanding their role to do it.
D. Co-Sponsorship with Conservation Commission for Fall Workshop – No Report
E. Lithia Springs National Register Nomination – No Report
F. Multiple Listing Survey for National Register of Historic Places – No Report
G. Single Family Residential Design Standards – No Report
H. Brown Bag Meeting – No Report
NEW BUSINESS –
A. Mr. Swink stated he was still researching availability of a DVD projector to show the “Blue Vinyl” movie
during the Historic Preservation Week.
B. Changes to Oregon’s Special Assessment Program – No discussion
ANNOUNCEMENTS
The next Historic Commission meeting will be on February 8, 2006 at 7:00 pm in the Siskiyou Room.
ADJOURNMENT
With a motion by Shostrom and a second by Leighton, it was the unanimous decision of the Commission to
adjourn the meeting at 11:00 p.m.
Ashland Historic Commission Minutes 4
4/12/2022