HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-05-04 Historic PACKET
HISTORIC COMMISSIONELECTRONICMEETING
AGENDA
May 4, 20226PM
I.6:00PM -REGULAR MEETING –CALL TO ORDER
II.(6:05) APPROVAL OF MINUTES(5 min)
Historic Commission electronic meeting ofApril 6,2022
III.(6:10) PUBLIC FORUM(15 min)
IV.(6:25) PLANNING ACTION REVIEW(0 min)
Nothing to review
V.(6:25) DISCUSSION ITEMS
Historic Preservation Week –PastForward(15 min)
Update on the Status of MAPS (Marking Ashland Places) (15 min)
Review meeting times for the regular monthly meetings of the Historic Commission (10min)
VI.(7:25)LIAISON REPORTS(5 min)
Council report (Moran)
Staff report (Goldman)
VII.ADJOURNMENT
UPCOMING EVENTS
Tues., May 17,2022: 12:30 pm.HistoricPreservation Awards at Pioneer Hall
Tues., May 17,2022: 6:00pm. Historic Commission Annual Report to City Council
Wed., June 8, 20226:00 pm (or TBD) Historic Commission regular meeting
“In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please
contact the Community Development office at 541-488-5305 (TTY phone is 1-800-735-9200), or by email at
planning@ashland.or.us. Notification 72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to
ensure accessibility to the meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title 1).”
ASHLAND HISTORIC COMMISSION
ELECTRONIC MEETING
DRAFT Meeting Minutes
April 6, 2022
Community Development/Engineering Services Building –Electronic Meeting
CALL TO ORDER:
Hovenkampcalled the electronic meeting to order at6:00pm.
Commissioners Present:Council Liaison:
ShostromShaun Moran
WhitfordStaff Present:
EmeryBrandon Goldman; PlanningManager
HovenkampRegan Trapp; Permit Technician II
Swink
Von Chamier
Commissioners Absent:Skibby
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Shostrom/Emery m/sto approve minutesforMarch 2,2022.Voice vote. ALL AYES.Motion passed.
PUBLIC FORUM:
Elk’s building mural project - Peter Finkle and John Pugh
John Pugh(local muralist)presented hisideasregarding the muralto the Commission. John showed the
Commission some of his work that he has done in many places. He likes to create illusions with his art to create the
human experience. Theproposalencompasses the original Chautauqua Dome, painted blue with Native American
vibe and the idea that Ashlandrepresents a spiritual energy. The name of the painting is called “Enchantment” which
depicts and tells the story of Ashland. There is no time frame on this projectyet becausehe wants to make sure that
everyone is on the same pageand approves of the design. He will be working with the Elks to raise money for the
entire project.
Commission feedback:
This is creating interest with the 3D design and allows it to feel more real.
Loves the whimsical way of the design on one of the most historic buildings in Ashland.
Work is spectacular and will be a nice addition to downtown. Wonderful to have indigenous representation.
This type of mural will stand out and looks very provocative and fun.
It’s a prominent location and will dominate the whole street scene.
The mural will engage people to ask questions about the community and invite visitors to see what Ashland
has to offer.
COUNCIL LIAISON REPORT:
Councilor Moran gave the liaison report. Items discussed were:
New City Manager Joe Lessard - Making necessarypersonnelhires and dealing with fiscal issues.
New Assistant City Manager Sabrina Cotta welcomed.
Departments within the general fund will have to cut 5-10%.
Council working with SOU on community survey regarding City services.
PLANNING ACTION REVIEW
PLANNINGACTION:PA-T2-2022-00037
SUBJECTPROPERTY:165Water Street, 160HelmanStreetand95VanNess
(cornerofVanNess & Water Streets)
APPLICANT:RoguePlanning & DevelopmentServices,LLC,agent for
OWNERS:MagnoliaInvestmentGroup,LLCandGilLivni
DESCRIPTION:A request for aneight-lotcommercialsubdivision to construct a phasedmixed-usedevelopmentfor
thethreepropertiesatthecornerofVanNessandWaterStreetsincluding95VanNess Street, 165WaterStreetand
160Helman Street. Theapplicant’sPhase I requestsSiteDesignReviewapprovalforfivemixed-usebuildings
consistingoftwogroundfloorcommercialspaceswithtworesidentialunitsaboveineachbuilding,aswellas
associatedsurfaceparking,utilityinfrastructureandstreetimprovements.Theremainingthreebuildingsiteswould
bedevelopedin a laterphase.Theapplicationalsoincludes a request for a Physical & Environmental(P&E)
ConstraintsReviewPermitbecause the proposalincludesdevelopmentonsevereconstraintslandswithslopes
greaterthan35percentandonfloodplaincorridorlands; a request for anException to theDevelopmentStandards
forHillsideLands; a requestfor a TreeRemovalPermit to remove20treeson the subjectpropertiesandwithinthe
adjacentrights-of-way; a request for anException to theSiteDevelopmentandDesignStandards to allow3,087
squarefeetofplazaspacewhere the standardsrequire5,624squarefeet;and a request for anException to Street
Standards to allowparkingbayswithstreettreesinbump-outsalongVanNessAvenueratherthanstandardpark
rowplantingstrips.COMPREHENSIVEPLANDESIGNATION:Employment;ZONING:E-1;ASSESSOR’S
MAP:391E04CC;TAXLOTS#:2000,2100 & 7100
Hovenkamp disclosed that she had ex-parte contact with Mr. Brouillard, a neighbor who submitted his comments to
the Commission via email. Hovenkamp expressed that this would have no impact on her decision moving forward.
Von Chamier recused herself from the meeting as she is working with the applicants on this project.
Severson gave the updated staff report for PA-T1-2022-00037.These include the latest revisions submitted to
Planning.
Hovenkamp opened the public hearing to the applicants.
Applicants present:
Amy Gunter –Rogue Planning and Development
Gil Livni –Owner
Amy Gunter addressed the Commission regarding the revisions since the last meeting. She stated that this is an
eight-lotsubdivision reduced to six lots with eight condo buildings. A solar setback waiver is no longer required, and
lot consolidation eliminates frontage issue for previously proposed lot 5. Detail site design review plaza area
exceeds minimum area and no longer seeks an exception. Looking into public alley to possibly be named “factory
alley.”
Seepresentation– Attachment A
The Commission had comments and questions for the applicant’s regarding the following:
How much lower overall can the 3-storybuilding be?
o Gunter-Height will be reduced by 2 ft. all buildings along Helman average 36.5 – 38.5 ft tall. They
could bring the decks in a bit to create less massing.
How do we understand transition zone compliance? Does one take precedence over the other?
o Severson-Transition between R3 and Employment zoningis findinga balance between the two
and still finding ways to respond to the transition while allowing development to happen.
There is nothing in the code to help out the residences on the west side regarding solar.
Public Testimony and commentssubmitted:
Eric Bonetti–Ashland resident(see attached photos–Attachment B)Ownsadjacent property at 105 Water
Street.
Mr. Bonetti presented photos of the area and spoke about how much he enjoys the Railroad District. He said that
this project is a good opportunity to clean up the area, bring jobs and new residents to the area.He spoke about
several buildings in the area that are similar in detailing and materialsand feels the designs submitted are
appropriate for the area.
Cat Gould –See comment attached(Attachment C)
Mark Brouillard –See comment attached (Attachment D)
Amy Gunter stated that It’s critical that property owners pay attention to what they are buying into when they
purchaseproperties near transitionalzones.
Hovenkamp opened to the Commission to comments.
The Commission deliberatedthe following before rendering their decision:
The business of the City is to create tax lots and to make revenue –In that way, the rules are stacked
against the residents and in favor of the developer. Incongruity in building height between commercial and
residential zones.
The transitionalzone was added to realize that there does need to be a balance between the two zones.
How can you adjust to make it more compatible?
Balancing design standards and zoning standards.
Commission should be forthright and compelling about their recommendations.
Mostbuildings in the area stand alone and these proposed buildings stand together and will look like three
big apartment buildings.
Do the changes that the applicant made conform to the recommendations?
Shostrom/Whitford m/s to deny PA-T1-2022-00037until recommendations below have been met. Voice vote.
ALL AYES. Motion passed.
Recommendation:
The HistoricCommissionwould like to thank the applicants for the proposed building design modifications since the
Commission reviewed the project last month. The Commission finds that most of the incremental changes are effective in
that they address some of the Commission’s concerns regarding the building façades and pedestrian amenities, but these
revisions fall short in focusing on the major issues identified in the March meeting, which had to do with the height, scale,
and massing of the buildings as they relate to the Historic District Design Standards (AMC 18.4.2.050.B.2-B.4.)
This massive development of eight nearly identical “cookie cutter” designs has no precedent in Ashland or its historic
districts. The Commission cannot support approval of a project that has demonstrated such disregard in their attempt to
comply with our historic standards and the scale of our city andneighborhoods. In particular, the three buildings facing
Helman Street with a height of up to 40 feet and three stories will overwhelm the mostly single-story historic residences
across the street.
These proposed buildings fail to achieve an appropriate scale and façade compatibility to the adjacent historic streetscape.
Additionally, the zero setback to the sidewalk exacerbates the building mass and scale that will overwhelm the adjacent
pedestrian traffic. By comparison, the Plaza Inn & Suites hotel on the same side of Helman Street, nearer to downtown, has
15-to 20-foot setbacks and is only two-stories in height.
In the Historic Commission’s view, the building architecture and landscape design on this project is very attractive and high
quality, but, the buildings are just not compatible with the scale of the historic district residences in the impact area, across
Helman Street. For these reasons, the Commission cannot support moving this application forward.
With that in mind the Historic Commission voted unanimously to recommend that the project be denied.
PLANNING ACTION:PA-T1-2022-00179
SUBJECT PROPERTY:247 Seventh Street
OWNER:Bar-Gem Vineyards, LLC
APPLICANT:Rogue Planning & Development Services, LLC
DESCRIPTION:A request for a Conditional Use Permit to expand an existing non-conforming structure by
approximately 30 square feet. The existing building was constructed prior to current regulations and encroaches into
a six-foot side yard setback. In the area of this encroachment there is a small bathroom, and the applicant is
requesting to enlarge it to increase the floor area and headroom. The proposed addition is approximately 29.75
square feet, of which approximately 19.2 square feet encroach into the setback.COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
DESIGNATION: Low-Density Multi-Family Residential; ZONING: R-2;MAP: 39 1E 09BA; TAX LOT #: 2800
There was no conflict of interest or ex-parte contact indicated by the Commission.
Seversongave the staff report for PA-T1-2022-00179
Hovenkamp opened the public hearing to the applicants.
Applicants present:
Amy Gunter –Rogue Planning and Development
Jean and John MacConaghy –Owners
Carlos Delgado -Architect
Amy Gunter addressed the Commission regarding the project.
See presentation -Attachment E
There were no questions from the Commission.
Whitford/Swink m/s to approve PA-T1-2022-00179as submitted. Voice vote. ALL AYES. Motion passed.
PRE –APP REVIEW
160 Lithia Way:Pre-application submittal
See presentation -Attachment F
Applicants present:
Raymond Kistler –KSW Architects
Tom Lamore –KSW Architects
Amy Gunter –Rogue Planning and Development
Guidance to applicants:
Appreciate the idea of eliminating the juliet balconies.
Good design
There is a hole in that side of thestreetthat needs to be filled and it works well with the neighborhood.
485 A Street:Pre-application submittal
Applicantspresent:
Steve Hoxmeier -Applicant and Owner
Steve Hoxmeier spoke about his project. He stated that he would be extending towards A’ Streetusing the same
materials and design to match with the building. There will be more focus on the commercial frontage of the building.
Goldman noted that the drawings would need to be submitted by a design professional once a formal planning
application is submitted.
Guidance to applicant:
Scaled drawings showing windows on lower level and detail in the gable ends.
More detailed drawings submitted by a design professional.
Show on site plan what the plan for phase 3 would be.
Show existingand changes inelevation.
DISCUSSION ITEMS
Historic Preservation Week –PastForward
th
Historic Preservation Awards scheduled for Tues, May 17@12:30
2022 nominations - Decide on winners
HPW Addition Winner:542 Siskiyou
Commissioner assigned:Whitford
HPW Addition Winner: 73 Pine
Commissioner assigned:Shostrom
HPW MU-Commercial Winner:185-199 Lithia Way
Commissioner assigned:Von Chamier
HPW Individual Winner: 175 Church
Commissioner assigned:Swink
HPW Civic Winner: MAPS Project
Commissioner assigned:Hovenkamp
Wildfire Mitigation Construction Standards (R327.4)
Goldman briefly discussed the standards with the Commission to make sure that they were familiar with it. He went
on to say that if there were any questions of the Commission regarding these standards that he would direct them to
the City of Ashland building official.
ADJOURNMENT
Next meeting is scheduled forMay 4,2022, at 6:00pmvia Zoom.
There being no other items to discuss, the meeting adjournedat9:30pm
Respectfully submitted by Regan Trapp
of
to
as
thethe
-
this
end
here
Ness
large
(AMC
by
side
one
seemed
material
two
and
that
Van
remaining
the
of
the
other
monotony
asks
the
identical,
buildings
ceilings
with
across
mitigated
the
the
landscaping
least
variety
be
on
repetitious
at
foot
nearly
lower,
and
scale
-
three
on
relieve
of
11
too
.
the
to
Commission
would
e
three
were
.
greater
out
streetscape
(i
are
of
designs
for
a
stories
residences
The
are
there
4
stories
of
The
.
#
the
Helman
.
stories
of
from
designs
to
massing
Ashland
andon
residential
Street
3
in
the
#
number
buildings
district
and
,
1
number
benefit
#
relative
the
individual
historic
taller
Helman
buildings
scale
historic
the
however
as
precedent
and/or
would
a
the
.
story,
of
-
Buildings
in
if
reducing
character
across
height,
for
corner
height
degree,
single
and
designs
side)
height
historicalthein
view,
a
a
by
Ness
no
streetscape
Street
tothe
Commission Recommendation
the
buildings
thatnot
is
potentially
height
is
Van
(side
in
this
that
variations
and
Street
there
the
Helman
there
changing
Commission's
concerns
that
residential
at
issue),
together
mitigate
greater
along
that
Helman
the
believes
difference
hasaround
an
to
finds
In
look
and
is
fact
.
historic
to
)
4
historic
help
the
#
proposed
)
height
significant
"cascade"
constructed
the
story
4
finishes,
and
-
-
and
.
and
Commission
Commission
2
to
.
Commission
the
1
revisited
B
half
and
.
-
when
(#
could
being
a
be
Street-
.
050
change
.
2
Historicpresent
Historic
and
.
excellent,
Historic
Magnolia Terrace Last Month’s Historic
-
4
.
ThebuildingsareemphasizesHelmanThe 18 onedesignsexcessivebuildingsbuildingsgradeAvenueThetreatmentthey
a
in
to
the
the
still
band
for
are
relative
revised
area
down
where
from
conditions,
The
.
issue
linesintersections
development
sloped
floor
feet
-
.
.
March
all
of
buildings
in
reduced
.
that
steeply
ground
.
frontage
propertysquare
requested
Eight
provided
background
requested
been
.
addition
hearing
the
774
,
north
the
street
has
8
of
the
longer
narrow,
efficiently
longer
concludes
and
no
materials
over
condominiums
nothat
the
combined
and
TIA
is
are
as
totaling
to
percent
identified
Commission
been
The
subdivision
revised
place,
65
safely
locations
.
in
areas
conditions
speak
the
have
line
exception
in
5
to
Planning
Exceptions
constructedpreviously
&
provide
An
operate
plaza
a
provided
proposed
4
.
the
be
to
to
queueing
the
property
detailed
Access
Lots
been
provided
development
would
during
distinct
required
and
has
alters
eliminates
Solar
the
is
projected
3
clearly
they
.
through
been
four
increase
&
andare
reconfigured
feet
.(TIA)
1
with
site
but
5
has
more
considered
the
LotsLot
createdidentify
been
of
square
lots
been
configuration
configuration
.
be
Analysis
report
buildings,
driveways
locations,
has
substantially
standards
581
lot
lot
to
,
has
eight
5
uses
middle
site
previous
proposed
not
provided
of
lots
same
Impact
all
the
The
will
of
space
proposedbuilding
mobility
the
.
resultant
resultant
that
in
geotechnical
proposed
the
Traffic
-
here
ThetoTheEachPlazamaterialsminimumAmeettrafficandAthrough
previouslycommercial
••••••
number
Magnolia Terrace Changes to the Proposal Since March
lots
Theoriginallysixproposed
to
the
that,
their
sight
done
in
be
material
Standards
treatment
to
losing
making
noting
adjustments.
and
”
”
.
developing
in
not
still
needs
material
Areas
Tuesday
while
Commission
property
enough
and
while
more
Development
appropriate
next
far
area
architectural
and
or
subject
Planning
Transitional
context
District
gone
“
hearing
the
overlays,
to
the
to
not
architectural
or
the
transitional
or
aid
Historic
placement,
have
compatibility
the
speaks
zones
the
will
neighborhood
applicable
with
to
here
scale,
reconvene
which
address
placement,
1
.
the
between
B to
.
historic
regard
”
height,
.
revisions
scale,
050
when
.
the
2
with
.
requirements
compatibility
to
zone
4
.
boundary
or
recommendations
design
18
height,
massing,
the
adjustments
revisions
the
address
at
respond
AMC
form,
to
standards
massing,
consideration
Employment
apply
better
Commissionproposed
located
key
the
to
to
appropriate
form,
building
“
of
”
the
assessment,
“
the
considered
how
of
underlying
the
is
Historic
projectsbe
vision
staff’s
building
the
Magnolia Terrace
erhaps
For
Phere“tomayof Innecessarywith treatment theThereview
-
of
Van
floor
three
rights
feet
building
includes
the
floodplain
along
associated
for
ground
on
.
three
as
square
outs
adjacent
-
.
and
two
proposal
well
087
Street
,
of
3
bumpthe
within
as
in
remaining
percent
noticing)
development
and
allow
Helman
35
trees
The
to
.
because
use
after
-
consisting
building,
.
160
than
property
street
;
and
Lands
.
mixed
each
Permit
the
feet
received
with
in
greater
buildings
Standards
strips
on
Street
phasedHillside
bays
improvements
Review
use
square
-
a
above
trees
slopes
(request
for
Water
Design
4
planting
624
#
the
,
street
with
mixedunits
5
.
parking
165
of
row
and
and
construct
and
20
five
3
lands
#
allow
Constraints
phase
to
park
Standards
all
require
Street,
for
to
Lots
residential
later
(P&E)
a
Ness
for
in
remove
two
standard
Development
constraints
infrastructure
Van
to
standards
approval
Subdivision
Standards
with
than
95
Development
the
Site
utility
severe
Permit
the
developedthe
Exceptions
Street
Review
rather
.
on
whereto
spaces
Environmental
be
to
to
including
&
commercial
parking,
lands
.
Access
space
lot
Avenue
Design
Removal
would
-
way
-
Magnolia Terrace Proposal
EightpropertiesSitecommercialsurfacesitesExceptionplazaExceptionNessPhysicaldevelopmentcorridorExceptionsSolarTreeof
2
-
Overlay)
-
R
1 (R
-
E
1
-
M
Subject
Properties
1
-
Zoning
C
–
3
-
R
Magnolia Terrace Vicinity Map
Outside the Districts
Railroad
Subject
Properties
Historic Context
–
Downtown
Academy
Skidmore
Magnolia Terrace Vicinity Map
Helman Streetscape
160 Helman Street
-
Magnolia Terrace 2006 Approval
is
in
of
to
the
true,
zone
not
height
that
1
edge
-
building
is
following
First,E
the
of
holds
feet
the
.
it
pursuant
5
the
the
.
.
at
this
type
050
in
39
.
for
If
property
2
area
..
make
4
the
The
.
to
vicinity”
This
directly
.
18
”
not
Drive
.
be
criteria
wellthe
“Dwellings
standards
feet
AMC
the
as
in
2
building
Creek
-
would
that
ofOverlay
30
R
a
meet
to
be
.
Clear
setback
10to
.states
not
a
buildings
building
held
B
is
Having
the
’ Letter)
.
be
Residential
for
and
which.
does
have
requirements
,
6
well
13
.
”
9height
A.
.
:
.
Avenue
B
3
.
“historic
.
…
as
B
also
suited
should
,
18
130
8
basic
.
should.
050
.
3
the
Ness
B
.
It
project
2
and
.
,
2
.
the
)
4
.7
better
.
.
maximum
themeetings
18
Van
B
is
setbacks
opinion,
than18
Brouillards
,010
feet
chapter
.
6
the
95
.
meet
with
13
that
our
30
B
.
AMC
,
3
See
AMC
.
is
taller
5proper
in
not
.
.
now
to
impartial
one
18
B
,
do
is
with
the
overlay,
(again)
the
4
zone
.
fit
which
have
B
for
,
build
to
3
need
not
.
(Figure
buildings,
is
accordingDistrict
to
B
.
overlay
buildings
-
district,considerable
concerns
also
does
R
The
that
050
topic
.
the
be
overlay
.
2
.
the
2
suggestion
otherHistoric
wanting
also
.
4
would
.
B
historic
to
main
.
will
It
18
our
the
are
believe
:
.
the
opinion
the
050
.
are
original
2
of
with
they.
also
limited
residential
sidewalk
Magnolia Terrace Neighbors’ Concerns (
4
our
.
“OurlimitthatHereInbuildings18sectionsWearetheandplannedtheAgain,
Employment zone’s vision for the property with
balance the
is an attempt to
the site’s physical constraints. We look forward to the Historic Commission’s
context and
Magnolia Terrace
In staff’s view, the proposal the historic comments as to whether they believe the balance achieved is the correct one in terms of the Historic District Development Standards, including
any comments the Commission may have with regard to the use of similar building designs.
Eight lot subdivision reduced to six lots with eight condominium buildingsLot consolidation eliminates frontage issue for previously proposed Lot 5Solar Setback Waivers no longer requiredDetail
Site Design Review Plaza Area exceeds minimum areaHistoric District Design Compliance and Modifications
•••••
TO PROPOSAL
OVERALL MODIFICATIONS
Eric Bonetti Public Comment – Historic Commission 4/6/2022
Photos presented during oral testimony:
Eric Bonetti Public Comment – Historic Commission 4/6/2022
Photos presented during oral testimony
Eric Bonetti Public Comment – Historic Commission 4/6/2022
Photos presented during oral testimony
Eric Bonetti Public Comment – Historic Commission 4/6/2022
Photos presented during oral testimony
Eric Bonetti Public Comment – Historic Commission 4/6/2022
Photos presented during oral testimony
Eric Bonetti Public Comment – Historic Commission 4/6/2022
Photos presented during oral testimony
Eric Bonetti Public Comment – Historic Commission 4/6/2022
Photos presented during oral testimony
Eric Bonetti Public Comment – Historic Commission 4/6/2022
Photos presented during oral testimony
Eric Bonetti Public Comment – Historic Commission 4/6/2022
Photos presented during oral testimony
From:Cat gould
To:Planning Commission - Public Testimony
Subject:4/12/22 PC hearing testimony
Date:Monday, April 04, 2022 3:51:21 PM
\[EXTERNAL SENDER\]
Dear commissioners,
I live very close to this proposed development and feel for the following reasons it is not a
good fit for our neighbourhood in the Skidmore historic district, nor responsible
development for Ashland as a whole. The design has not made any attempt to blend into
the historic nature of our modest neighbourhood. Nor takes into account the necessity to
curtail energy consumption in every household.
PLANNING ACTION: PA-T2-2022-00037
SUBJECT PROPERTY:165 Water Street, 160 Helman Street and 95 Van Ness (corner of
Van Ness &
Water Streets)
Sincerely,
Cat Gould
114 Van Ness Ave, Ashland, OR 97520
Sustainability and Affordability
Ashland does not need more unaffordable housing that demands huge energy consumption
to keep cool in summer and warm in winter due to the high ceilings and exposure. What are
the projected energy costs to keep these large high ceilinged apartments comfortable?
Ashland needs housing for lower income workers that we rely on to work in our
restaurants/schools/and retail stores. Many employees of the Ashland City administration
can't even afford to live here.
Energy costs are skyrocketing and this is not just pocket book costs, it is costs paid out in
climate chaos on the poorest of the world who do not have the freedom to simply pay more
to live elsewhere. It is irresponsible to be building anything less than energy efficient
Energy consumption is reduced by 1% for each 10 cm of ceiling height reduction.
housing.
Parking
Most houses in the area already use street parking which is strained during high season,
this can not have been assessed by the traffic analysis due to lack of high season for the
past 2 years.
Flood Plain
While we are in a drought cycle now we all know that this will be over at some point and the
unpredictable natureof climate chaos that we have unalterably entered will continue. I have
Received 4.4.2022
to wonder why Gil Livni, who only recently lost his entire development to climate chaos and
had to completely rebuild after the Almeda fire, would once again throw his buildings in the
path of zoned "extreme or severe risk" of flooding.
This land has Severe Constraints meaning "development of this land is discouraged"
Application itself explains "the embankment was likely first created by Ashland Creek" .
Shading caused by mass of structure on neighborhood and traffic
The following image was taken off google earth and you can see where the 28 foot pole
reaches (yellow). At a proposed average height of 40 feet the development will be
approximately 40% taller than the existing pole. I have conservatively projected in orange
the extent of the shadow that will be cast from this building on the homes and intersection.
This intersection and the steep downhill slope of Van Ness Ave to Water st is in heavy use
throughout the year by commuters, school traffic, recology vehicles, delivery trucks and the
official bike corridor from the greenway and will be extremely icy throughout winter due to
this shading from the building.
Received 4.4.2022
From:City of Ashland, Oregon
To:planning;Regan Trapp
Subject:Historic Commission Contact Form Submitted
Date:Monday, April 04, 2022 6:31:16 AM
\[EXTERNAL SENDER\]
*** FORM FIELD DATA***
Full Name: Mark Brouillard
Phone:206 661 7085
Email:Mtbrouillard@msn.com
Subject:PA-T2-2022--00037
Message:To whom it may concern: I am unable to be at this week's meeting but wanted
to follow-up from the last meeting. First, as a point of reference we have heard about the
photo showing Ashland Iron Works and its supposed 40 foot height. That height was on
the Water Strret frontage. Second, I implore you to revisit the Helman Street side. Stand
in front of 173 Helman. Look at the subject property and notice a lamp post next to the
gate. The propsed Buildings would be 8+ feet taller than that. Third, it seems like a
rather flippant response to the Commisiins asking for different heights on the Helman
Street side. Two deck/balcony changes and that is considered an elevation change?
Fourth, this project still doesn't meet the AMC criteria I laid out in the last meeting.
Setbacks, scale, massing, height are not even close to the homes in the on or across the
street. Fifth, buildings are.still cookie cutter and don't follow the AMC which states
different buildings and residential accommodation (have AMC at home, currently on an
airplane). All we are asking for is something reasonable on the Helman Street side.
Buildings taller than a telephone poll is not reasonable. No setbacks; again revisit the site
and look at it from the sidewalk on the east side of Helman. Walk from Central towards
Van Ness and invision a monolithic building with zero setback. It will block the openess
of the street and any view that there once was. Doesn't seem like any equity; social,
mental health, economic, or justice. This is a David versus Goliath moment that you as
the historic commission have a lot of say in. Respectfully, Mark and Donna Brouillard
159 Helman Street
Attachment 1 file:
Attachment 2 file:
Attachment 3 file:
*** USER INFORMATION ***
SubscriberID:-1
SubscriberUserName:
SubscriberEmail:
RemoteAddress:66.241.70.76
RemoteHost:66.241.70.76
RemoteUser:
Received 4.4.2022
Marking Ashland Places
GoldenConnections Installation 4/23/2022
The Ashland Public Arts Commission will be holding a dedication ceremony for its
newest installation, “Golden Connections” on Saturday, April 23rd at 12:00pm at
Ashland Railroad Park.
Golden Connections was created by artists Jennifer Corio and David Frei of Cobalt
Designworks. It represents the transformative period in Ashland’s history when the city
was chosen by the Southern Pacific Railroad to be the main stop between Portland and
San Francisco. The golden spike in this sculpture symbolizes the final connection for
Southern Pacific's complete rail service around the nation in 1887.
This connection fostered growth, prosperity and cultural connections in Ashland that
remain impactful to this day. Golden Connections is also an offering of gratitude and a
plea for forgiveness to the Chinese workers who faced discrimination and very difficult
conditions while building these tracks.
This sculpture’s placement in Ashland’s Railroad District serves as a historic marker
and wayfinding point to provide a connection from Ashland’s history to its landscape
today. In addition to Golden Connections, five bronze medallions will soon be installed
throughout the Railroad District commemorating historic sites.
After years of planning, the “Marking Ashland Places” project for Ashland’s Railroad
District is in its final stages. The Public Arts Commission and Historic Commission have
partnered on this project for several years with the purpose of providing a connection to
the history of Ashland on today’s landscape using site markers and artwork honoring
specific places, events, and people throughout Ashland’s 4 Historic Districts.
of
will
andend
and
wings
historic
Povey
beveled
Tuesday
wainscot
walls
each
the
athe floor ispm
and
on
Street
in
andby
“Distinguishedceremony
commitment
and
with
lower
4:00
furthering
View
Way,
The
to
the
the
in
the
vestibule
faced
windows
Ashland
transom
executed
a
a.m.
plastered
cover
of
are
Winburn
was
with
present
8:30
Mountain are
that
resources.
smaller
73
recognize
contractors
th
chapel,
side
walls
at
will
at
18
doors
toa
chapel
and
were
ceiling
sheets
East
cultural
the
as
May
Interior
in
bronze
Tours)
cove
located
our
the
includes
Awards”
marble
leaf
designers,
-and
on
center.
Mausoleum
Hall,
Portland,
window
white
the
interior
of
Guided
walls
Wednesday
-
protecting
double
glass
from
architects,
Pioneer
TheLocated
Preservation
has
12:30PM.
and
(Self
Alaskan
uppermarble.
at
Memorial
at
in
Company
Avenue.
stained
The
wings.
lights.project
\[Email address\]
citizens,
\[Web address\]
place
17th,
building
matched
the
large
Ashland Historic Preservation Awards Ceremony The Ashland Historic CommissionArchitecturallocalpreservationtakeMay AshlandCemetery Theglasswhichofcrypts.sheathedABrothersofNormal Email:
Web:
2022
st
21
-
Staff:
Bill Emery
Keith Swink
Terry Skibby
Regan Trapp
Sam Whitford
Dale Shostom
th
Brandon Goldman
Piper Von Chamier
Beverly Hovenkamp
Week
May 15
Ashland Historic Commission
Historic Preservation
67 E. Main on the corner of Oak and E. Main, which is now the location of Wells Fargo Bank