Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-09-09 Croman Advisory_PACKET CROMAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE AGENDA September 9, 2009 5:00 p.m. – 6:30 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER:5:00 PM, Siskiyou Room, Community Development & Engineering Services Building, 51 Winburn Way II. APPROVAL OF JULY 15, 2009 CROMAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES III. REVIEW AND DISCUSSION OF PRELIMINARY CROMAN MILL ZONING DISTRICT CHAPTER AND LAND USE MATRIX IV. MAP UPDATE V. REVIEW AND DISCUSSION OF PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION ITEMS FROM AUGUST 25, 2009 STUDY SESSION VI. REVIEW NEXT STEPS VII. SCHEDULE NEXT MEETING DATE VIII. ADJOURNMENT 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 number is 1-800-735-2900). Notification 72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting (28 CFR 35.102- 35.104 ADA Title1). CROMAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES JULY 15, 2009 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 5:00 p.m. in the Siskiyou Room, 51 Winburn Way. Committee Members Present: Staff Present: Alan DeBoer (attending for R. Hendrickson),Airport Commissioner Bill Molnar, Community Development Director Eric Navickas, City Councilor Maria Harris, Planning Manager Russ Chapman, Conservation Commissioner Brandon Goldman, Senior Planner Keith Swink, Historic Commissioner Graham Lewis, Housing Commissioner Jim Lewis, Parks & Recreation Commissioner Larry Blake, Planning Commissioner Matt Warshawsky, Transportation Commissioner Zane Jones, Tree Commissioner Pam Hammond, Chamber of Commerce Representative Rylan Heyerman, Neighborhood Representative Mary Kay Michelsen, Neighborhood Representative Paul Steinle, SOU Representative Absent Members: Richard Hendrickson, Airport Commissioner David Wilkerson, Public Arts Commissioner Ben Bellinson, Neighborhood Representative INTRODUCTIONS & SELECTION OF CHAIR / VICE CHAIR Community Development Director Bill Molnar welcomed everyone and the members took turns introducing themselves. The selection of the Committee Chair and Vice Chair was moved to the end of the agenda. CROMAN MILL SITE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN / REVIEW OF LAND USE AND STREET FRAMEWORK REFINEMENTS Planning Manager Maria Harris explained the Plan Overview and Land Use/Street Framework Refinements would be combined in a single staff presentation. She explained the presentation would cover: 1) Background on future employment centers in Ashland, 2) Plan development and implementation strategy process, 3) Overview of the Croman Mill Site Redevelopment Plan, and 4) Review of the latest refinements to the land use and street framework plans. Future Employment Centers in Ashland Mr. Molnar presented the segment addressing the future employment centers in Ashland. He familiarized the Advisory Committee with the inventory of employment lands within the City and the types of developments that are influenced by the zoning code and specific design standards. Following this segment, a discussion of the current M-1 Industrial zoning of the majority of the Croman Mill site took place. Comment was made questioning if residential was prohibited in the M-1 or E-1 zones, and Mr. Molnar clarified residential has been allowed in these zones through the addition of residential zoning overlays. It was also questioned if the City had to maintain a certain supply of employment lands under State law. Mr. Molnar explained the Statewide Planning Goal requirements and indicated the Economic Opportunity Overlay (EOA) identified a need for 160 to 170 acres to meet the City’s employment projections for the next 20 to 50 years. Staff also clarified whether the zoning of the site was on the table for potential change and stated the proposed zoning adjustments would be covered in tonight’s presentation. Croman Advisory Committee July 15, 2009 Page 1 of 3 Plan Development / Overview of Plan Ms. Harris presented the planning and public review process that led to the development of the Plan. She discussed the series of public workshops that were held in which concerns were identified and alternative plans were presented and evaluated. Mr. Molnar provided examples of employment density, noting that the long term viability of transit will require higher employment densities. As examples in the presentation he cited Modern Fan as employing approximately 10 people on a 1-acre property, and Blackstone Audio which employs 120 employees on 2-acres. Ms. Harris spoke of the proposed Neighborhood Center in the location of the existing ODOT yard, and identified a number of its elements, including: openspace, daylighting of Hamilton Creek, a transit plaza, and the pedestrian and bicycle framework. Comment was made questioning the realignment of Tolman Creek Road and the signature street cross section. Ms. Harris explained minimizing the impacts to Tolman Creek Rd. and the route to Bellview School was identified early on as a concern and lead to the idea of building the boulevard through the Croman property to direct that traffic to the site and keep Tolman Creek Rd. as the smaller collector street. Ms. Harris provided the group with a description of the cross section of the signature street, and in response to whether anyone had looked at the traffic on Siskiyou between Crowson and Walker, she clarified a traffic impact analysis was completed with the Plan, and the intersections that needed work are shown on the Plan map (Tolman Creek Rd. and Ashland St., Tolman Creek Rd. and the new street, and the new street and Siskiyou Blvd.) Comment was made questioning the height restrictions in the Airport Overlay Zone. Mr. Molnar clarified the Croman site is 100 ft. above the airport approach zone. He stated the City’s Public Works Department had initially indicated multi-story buildings are feasible for this site and provide accommodations for the airport, such as lights. He added the Public Works and Community Development Departments would be working together to finalize this possibility. Review of Land Use and Street Framework Refinements Staff presented the proposed land use and street framework adjustments and then opened the floor to questions from the group. GROUP DISCUSSION Comment was made questioning whether the existing Mistletoe Rd. and Siskiyou Blvd. intersection should go away or be realigned. Mr. Molnar clarified that ODOT had expressed concerns in the past regarding this intersection and that this is an area that would be looked at further. Senior Planner Brandon Goldman provided clarification on the 25% reduction for public improvements and explained the standard deduction taken from the gross acreage to allow for the development of streets and utilities. Staff also provided clarification on the proposed Plexis facility, which would be located in the northern part of the Croman property. It was noted that there have been preliminary discussions about the possibility of Plexis taking access from Mistletoe Rd, should they want to build their facility prior to the larger street being built. Comment was made that Plexis had previously talked about the importance of openspace in their vision for their business. Ms. Harris noted that once a fairly high-end building is built, there will be a desire to have similar buildings and uses surrounding it. Mr. Molnar added that Plexis has discussed the possibility of having restrictions on the property surrounding their potential site that would insure a similar level of building and site development. Concern was expressed that they may be creating a situation where the developer will have to apply for an exception to the Street Standards to build in the area next to Hamilton Creek, and suggestion was made for this area to be possibly be openspace. Staff noted the Street Standards require new streets to run along natural features to provide visual access, such as Winburn Way along Ashland Creek. Comment was made questioning if the area next to Hamilton Creek was dedicated as open space, how would this impact lands for job creation? Mr. Molnar said this would have to be looked at in terms of potentially increasing the business floor area somewhere else on the site. Comment was made that in order to turn that area into openspace, it would need to be purchased. Ms. Harris concurred and clarified this area is not owned by the Croman property owners. Statement was made noting that the path along Hamilton Creek is identified as part of the Trails Master Plan. The Neighborhood Center was briefly discussed and it was questioned if there is anything the group needs to know about ODOT’s future plans. Staff clarified the City has had discussions with ODOT and they have indicated they are open to moving Croman Advisory Committee July 15, 2009 Page 2 of 3 their operations due to some incompatibilities with the surrounding residential neighborhood. Mr. Molnar added ODOT has asked for the City’s help in finding another location. Support was voiced for the new permutation of the Plan. Since this area is focused on jobs and will have to be served by trucks, suggestion was made for the on-street parking to be backed away from the corners so that trucks will be able to make the turning radius. Comment was made questioning if the 10-story buildings were still on the table for consideration, and staff clarified that they have not yet gotten to this element; however they have received concerns regarding the potential height of the buildings. Comment was made questioning the need for a parking garage and noting the problems with the unused structures in Medford. A discussion followed regarding moving the parking garage and making it more of a flexible location. Comment was made that the revised Plan was an improvement and locating the parking structure off of the main street looks to be an effort to create a streetscape on the main boulevard. Additional comment was made that this situation is not comparable to Medford. Suggestion was made for the bulk of the parking structure to be reduced by putting it partially below grade with potential access from the top and bottom utilizing grade changes on site. It was noted that the Plan is looking to create 2,000 to 3,000 new jobs and questioned if there is enough land for 2,000 additional residents within the City’s UGB. Mr. Molnar clarified that yes, there is enough land; and Ms. Harris noted that the full build-out of the Plan would take some time. Opinion was voiced that the central boulevard should not run through the industrial area and that the industrial area should be preserved as a 20-acre site for a large user. Opposing comment was made that smaller, light industrial uses are more typical of Ashland and anyone wanting a 20-acre site would likely go to Medford or White City due to cost. Concern wad expressed with straightening out the intersection with Siskiyou Blvd and trucks using Tolman Creek Rd. instead. The Committee concluded their deliberations by holding a brief discussion regarding the existing trailer park off Crowson Rd. Comment was made that this area has historic significance and value as affordable housing and suggestion was made to bring this into a zoning that allows for it to remain. SELECTION OF CHAIR / VICE CHAIR The selection of the Committee Chair and Committee Vice Chair was discussed, and staff asked for volunteers. Matt Warshawsky volunteered to serve as Chair, and Graham Lewis volunteer for Vice Char. SCHEDULE NEXT MEETING DATE Staff suggested the potential dates of August 12, 20 and 26 for the next Croman Advisory Committee meeting. Matt th Warshawsky noted the Transportation Commission is meeting on the 20, and Russ Chapman stated the Conservation th Commission meets on the 26. Mr. Molnar asked what days and times worked best for people and there seemed to be general consensus that Wednesdays work well. Most of the group indicated the August 12 date would work for them. Chapman indicated that he would be out of town on this date but encouraged the group to not let that hold them up. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 6:45 p.m. Croman Advisory Committee July 15, 2009 Page 3 of 3 Memo DATE: September 2, 2009 TO: Croman Advisory Committee (CAC) FROM: Maria Harris, Planning Manager RE: Draft Croman Mill Zoning Chapter and Land Use Matrix The draft of Chapter 18.53 Croman Mill (CM), the Croman Mill District Land Use Matrix and several plan maps are attached. The draft of Chapter 18.53 creates a new zoning district to implement the Croman Mill Site Redevelopment Plan and the new chapter would be added to the Ashland Land Use Ordinance. The Land Use Matrix describes the land uses that are permitted in the Croman Mill District. The five columns in the matrix correspond to the zoning overlays included in the plan area as shown on the Croman Mill Land Use Designations Map – Neighborhood Center (NC), Mixed (MU), Office Employment (OE), Compatible Industrial (CI) and Open Space/Conservation Areas (OS). At the September 9 meeting, Staff will provide an overview of the draft Chapter 18.53 Croman Mill (CM) and the Croman Mill District Land Use Matrix, and will be asking for the CAC’s feedback on the draft ordinance and matrix. Two questions to consider are: 1) Should there be less/more flexibility in the process to the amend the plan after the plan is adopted and implemented? (see section 18.53.030.A); and 2) Given the overall objectives of the Croman Mill Site Redevelopment Plan, should uses be added/subtracted to the Land Use Matrix? Attachments: Draft Chapter 18.53 Croman Mill District Land Use Matrix Croman Mill Land Use Designations Map Pedestrian and Bicycle Framework Map Croman Mill Transit Framework Map Required On Street Parking Map CHAPTER 18.53 CM CROMAN MILL SECTIONS: 18.53.010 Purpose 18.53.020 Definitions 18.53.030 General Requirements 18.53.040 Croman Mill District Plan Development Standards 18.53.050 Croman Mill District Plan – Land Use Matrix SECTION 18.53.010 Purpose The purpose of this section is to implement the Croman Mill Site Redevelopment Plan. The district is designed to provide an environment suitable for employment, recreation, and living. The CM zoning district is a blueprint for promoting family-wage jobs, mixed-use developments, neighborhoods-orientedbusinesses and community services adjacent to transit in a manner which enhances property values, preserves open spaces and significant natural features and reduces energy consumption. SECTION 18.53.020 Definitions SECTION 18.53.030 General Requirements A. Conformance with the Croman Mill District Plan Land uses and development, including buildings, parking areas, streets, bicycle and pedestrian access ways, multi-use paths and open spaces shall be located in accordance with those shown on the Croman Mill District Plan maps adopted by ordinance number (Month Year). B. Major and minor amendments to the Croman Mill District Plan shall comply with the following procedures: 1.Major and Minor Amendments. a. Major amendments are those which result in any of the following: (1) A change in land use. (2) A change in the street layout plan that requires a street or transportation facility to be eliminated or located in a manner inconsistent with the Croman Mill District Plan. (3) A change in the Croman Mill Design Standards. (4) A reduction in planned density of employees per acre. (5) A change not specifically listed under the major and minor amendment definitions. b. Minor amendments are those which result in any of the following: (1) Changes related to street trees, street furniture, fencing, or signage. (2) A change in the Plan layout that requires a street, access way, multi-use path or other transportation facility to be shifted more than 25 feet in any direction, as long as the change maintains the connectivity established by the Croman Mill District Plan. 2. Major Amendment Type II – Approval Procedure A major amendment to the Croman Mill District Plan is subject to a public hearing and decision under a Type II Procedure. A major amendment may be approved upon the hearing authority finding that: a. The proposed modification maintains the connectivity established by the district plan; b. The proposed modification furthers the design, circulation and access concepts advocated by the district plan; c. The proposed modification will not adversely affect the purpose and objectives of the district plan; and d. The proposed modification is necessary to adjust to physical constraints evident on the property, or to protect significant natural features such as trees, rock outcroppings, wetlands, or similar natural features, or to adjust to existing property lines between project boundaries. 3.Minor Amendment Type I Procedure A minor amendment to the Croman Mill District Plan is subject to an administrative decision under the Type Procedure. A minor amendment may be approved upon finding that granting the approval will result in a development design that equally or better achieves the stated purpose and objectives of the district plan. SECTION 18.53.040 Croman Mill District Plan Development Standards A. Ashland Local Street Standards The design and construction of streets and public improvements shall be in accordance with Ashland’s Local Street Standards, except as otherwise permitted for the following facilities within the Croman Mill District: a. Central Boulevard b. Tolman Creek Road Realignment c. Local Streets d. Protected Bikeway and Pedestrian Path e. Central Bike Path f. Multi-use Path g. Access ways B. Site Design and Use Standards – Croman Mill District New development shall be designed and constructed consistent with Ashland’s Site Design and Use Standards, Section VIII – Croman Mill District Standards. SECTION 18.53.050 Croman Mill District Plan – Land Use Matrix (Insert) Croman Mill District Land Use NCMUOECIOS Residential Residential uses in conjuntion with commercial cc Short-term Employee Housing in conjuntion with permitted use cc Commercial stores, restaurants, and shops less than 10,000 sq.ft. GG stores, restaurants, and shops less than (TBD) sq.ft. cc professional, financial, business, and medical offices GG administrative or research and development establishments GGG office in conjunction with a permitted industrial use G child or day care centers G fitness, recreational sports, gym or athletic club G ancillary employee services in conjunction with permitted use ccc (eg. employee child care, cafeteria, fitness area) kennels (indoor) and veterinary clinics cc temporary uses Industrial manufacturing, assembly, fabrication, or packaging G manufacture of food products without rendering fats or oils G manufacture or assembly in conjunction with permitted office c employment use manufacture or assembly contiguous to a retail outlet, provided such GG area occupies less than 600 sq.ft. rail freight loading dock facilities G rail or rapid transit passanger facilities G warehouse and similar storage facilities in conjunction with permitted c industrial use warehouse and similar storage facilities in conjunction with permitted cc office use wireless communication facilities attached to an existing structure GG pursuant to 18.72.180 freestanding wireless communication support structures pursuant to 18.72.180 Public & Institutional public and quasi-public utility service buildings without outside storage cccc public service or community buildings c GGGG private school , college, trade school, technical school or similar school electrical substations Conditional Use GPermitted Use c Special Permitted Use NC = Neighborhgood Center CI = Compatible Industrial MU = Mixed Use OS = Openspace OE = Office/Employment DRAFT 7-28-09 Croman Mill Land Use Designations existing employment existing industrial compatible industrial mixed neighborhood center office employment openspace/conservation areas P Draft 7-22-09 Feet 05001,0001,5002,000250 Pedestrian and Bicycle Framework bike/pedestrian accessway central bike path multiuse path protected pedestrian/bike way openspace/conservation areas ² Feet 6/8/2009 G:\\comm-dev\\planning\\LongRange\\Croman\\Croman Maps 05001,0001,5002,000250 Croman_bike-ped_framework_map.pdf Croman Mill Transit Framework proposed bus route proposed rapid transit proposed rail spur TC potential bus stops P Draft-7/22/2009 Feet 05001,0001,5002,000250 Required On Street Parking Required On Street Parking On Street Parking Required openspace/conservation areas Feet 6/8/2009 G:\\comm-dev\\planning\\LongRange\\Croman\\Croman Maps 05001,0001,5002,000250 Croman_required_parking.pdf ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MINUTES AUGUST 25, 2009 CALL TO ORDER Chair Pam Marsh called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street. Planning Commissioners Present: Staff Present: Larry Blake Bill Molnar, Community Development Director Michael Dawkins Maria Harris, Planning Manager David Dotterrer Brandon Goldman, Senior Planner Pam Marsh April Lucas, Administrative Assistant Debbie Miller Mike Morris John Rinaldi, Jr. Absent Members:Council Liaison: Tom Dimitre Eric Navickas Melanie Mindlin JOINT DISCUSSION WITH ASHLAND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION A.Commissioner Roles related to the Transportation System Plan. Transportation Commissioners Present: Public Works Staff Present: Thomas Burnham Mike Faught, Public Works Director Julia Sommer Colin Swales Matt Warshawsky Absent Members:Council Liaison: John Gaffey David Chapman Eric Heesacker Brent Thompson David Young Following brief introductions by the Planning and Transportation commissioners, Marsh explained the two commissions would be working together on the upcoming Transportation System Plan (TSP) update and the purpose of this joint meeting is to receive input on where they are at in the process and to talk about how the two commissions will work together. Public Works Director Mike Faught provided an update on the TSP process. He explained the City has been awarded a $150,000 grant (which is less than the $350,000 applied for) to update the City’s Transportation System Plan. He stated the next step is for the City to finalize the Request for Proposals (RFP) with the State, and then the State will issue the RFP and provide the City with a list of consultants to choose from. He stated this is a TGM or Transportation Growth Management grant and the project will span the next two years. Mr. Faught stated the Transportation Commission will be the primary commission to process the TSP update; however, staff has proposed 8 joint meetings with the Transportation Commission, the Planning Commission and the project consultant. Mr. Faught clarified that while the City only received a portion of the grant amount requested, this project is a priority for the City and was funded 100% in the current year’s budget. He stated the remaining $200,000 needed to complete the project will be paid for through the City’s Transportation SDCs. Planning Commission Study Session August 25, 2009 Page 1 of 5 Mr. Faught reviewed the following elements of the draft RFP and received input from the commissioners: Pedestrian Node Alternatives Analysis Mr. Faught noted this element was originally prepared as a separate TGM grant proposal by the Planning Staff and was later incorporated into the current grant request. Planning Manager Maria Harris stated the three nodes identified for analysis are: 1) Bridge St. and Siskiyou Blvd, 2) Walker Ave. and Ashland St., and 3) East Main and North Mountain Ave. She explained that in Ashland, the historic sections of the streets tend to be more multi-modal and pedestrian oriented, and these three intersections represent where these “complete streets” meet the more auto-oriented streets. She stated the idea is to look at these locations and determine how to make them more pedestrian oriented as a way to set the tone for the rest of the development in the area. She added all three of these intersections were identified because of the large amount of redevelopment potential in the surrounding areas. Marsh requested the Tolman Creek/Ashland Ave. intersection also be addressed in terms of pedestrian access and movement. Access Management and Spacing Mr. Faught explained the focus on access management will apply primarily to the arterials and arterial collectors, but they will also evaluate the entire City. When asked whether this item would just address the access management of vehicles, Mr. Faught commented that driveways on collector streets create issues for all modes of transportation. He cited the issues on North Main St. and stated the numerous driveways create hazards for vehicles, pedestrians, and bicyclists; and stated he would like to minimize the number of these access points. Sommer noted the intersection of N. Main/Hersey/Wimer is one of the City’s worst intersections for accidents. Councilor Chapman arrived at 7:30 p.m. Parking Plan Mr. Faught stated this element will focus primarily on the downtown area and the results will be incorporated into the larger parking plan, which is a separate project. Sommer suggested this element be done towards the end of the update process so that it can incorporate any transportation ideas that come up (mass transit, street cars, etc). She added if the other elements move forward, parking may become less of an issue. Dotterrer noted the issues the Planning Commission has had with parking in the Railroad District and asked that this area be included in the analysis. Swales questioned why the Park and Ride is not mentioned in the draft RFP. He also noted previous studies that addressed downtown parking that were never adopted by the City. Mr. Faught clarified these documents are referenced in the RFP and the consultants will be required to pull that information together. Passenger Rail System Mr. Faught stated the City has a rail line that is not currently in use and the idea is to evaluate whether a passenger rail system is a possibility. Burnham asked the consultant to determine whether this is a viable option for a community of our size. He added he does not support the consultant spending time on this item if it is not viable. Sommer stated this element, as well as the freight element, are regional issues and it would be a waste of the consultant’s time to look into this if the scope is limited to Ashland. Mr. Faught clarified the City’s TSP will have to fit in with the regional plan, and if the City truly wants to be multi- modal, they need to evaluate all modes of transportation. Swales commented that researching these items provides the possibility for them in the future, and urged the commissioners to not foreclose on these options now. Dotterrer agreed and stated even if the consultant determines these are not viable, the study will tell them what needs to happen for them Planning Commission Study Session August 25, 2009 Page 2 of 5 to become viable. He added this is good information to have. Community Development Director Bill Molnar commented that as land use planners, they have the opportunity to create placeholders for these types of systems, even if they don’t occur until well into the future. Bike Routes/Boulevards Mr. Faught stated they want the consultant to look system wide and would like to see a comprehensive bike system for Ashland. Burnham noted the need to provide bicycle access to important places within the City. Sommer questioned if this plan would include ODOT territory (North Main Street and Siskiyou). Mr. Faught clarified that it would, and stated the City will need to partner with ODOT and share the input that is gathered. Dawkins questioned whether skateboards are allowed on bikepaths. Warshawsky stated skateboarders are allowed on the bikepaths if they are wearing helmets, but they do not have to wear helmets if they are on the sidewalk. Councilor Chapman stated the bigger problem is downtown because skateboarders are not allowed anywhere. Warshawsky added they are also not allowed on streets with speed limits over 25 mph. Dawkins stated it is counterproductive for the City to have laws that discourage skateboarders from using the bikepaths. Mr. Faught stated the City will ask the consultant to read through the Municipal Code and look for these types of conflicts. Multi-Use Trails Mr. Faught clarified this item will evaluate multi-use trails for the entire City, not just Parks property. He added he believes this plan should include the Parks Trail Master Plan. Mr. Molnar voiced his support for incorporating the Parks Trail Master Plan. Councilor Chapman noted they may need to address equestrian if they incorporate the Parks Trail plan because it allows for this. Marsh noted the importance of having connections through developments to the existing paths for pedestrians and bicyclists. Green Street Standard Specifications Mr. Faught stated this is an important component of the TSP and explained this is a storm water design that treats the water through the use of bioswales. Mr. Molnar noted the housing project on Clay Street that incorporates a bioswale and voiced his support for the City to have a standard that can be applied to developments. Freight Burnham questioned how involved they want to get into freight rail if there is no benefit to the City. Warshawsky commented that Ashland has an obligation to their neighbors to not block this off. Council Chapman added the freight study will not just evaluate trains. Safe Routes to Schools Burnham suggested the consultant meet with RVTD on this element, since they are already working on this. Sommer commented that if they accomplish some of the other elements already mentioned, this will create safer routes to schools. Capital Improvement Project List Mr. Faught clarified the final product will include a capital improvement project list with all the costs identified and separated out. Shared Roads Swales shared his experience with shared roads in the UK. He stated this concept has been proven to reduce the amount of conflicts and accidents and stated there are parts of Ashland where he thinks this could be very useful, including the downtown core and some of the more rural streets. He encouraged any of the commissioners to contact him if they are interested in obtaining more information. Dawkins voiced his support for this concept. Planning Commission Study Session August 25, 2009 Page 3 of 5 Tom Burnham left the meeting at 8:10 p.m. Road Diet Mr. Faught clarified this concept involves reducing the number of lanes. Marsh questioned if this concept is broad enough to include general arterial design. Sommer questioned if street landscaping comes into play in this element. Mr. Faught clarified ultimately the street design will include a landscaping element. Off-Set Intersection Realignment Plan Mr. Faught stated there are several of these intersections in town and the goal is to come up with a plan so when development proposals come forward these areas can be fixed. He cited Hersey/Laurel, Hersey/Wimer, and Orange/Laurel as examples of off-set intersection. He stated the final plan will identify the realignment issues and protect the right of ways. Mr. Faught concluded his presentation and asked if the commissioners had any other questions or comments. Dotterrer stated he did not see land use coordination listed in the RFP and urged them to select a consultant team that has this experience. Marsh commented on how the two commissions will work together throughout this process and suggested each commission select a formal liaison in order to keep each group aware of what the other is doing. She suggested the liaisons receive the other Commission’s agendas and minutes, and attend meetings as needed. Councilor Navickas voiced concern that the draft RFP does not have enough integration with planning, and stated he would like to see one of the main points listed in the document focused on land use planning. Mr. Faught thanked the group for their comments and stated if they have further input to email it to him within the next few days so it can be incorporated into the RFP narrative. OTHER BUSINESS Marsh stated she would like to add the following items to the meeting agenda: 1) Selection of Transportation Commission liaison, and 2) Update on the Mayor’s Brown Bag Meetings with Commission Chairs. A.Selection of Transportation Commission Liaison It was noted that Commissioner Blake has been attending the Transportation Commission meetings as an ex officio member for Southern Oregon University. The Planning Commission voiced approval for Blake to serve as the Planning Commission Liaison to the Transportation Commission. DISCUSSION ITEMS A.Croman Mill Site Redevelopment Plan Marsh noted this item was presented at the last meeting, but the group did not have time for discussion. She noted the th September 29 Study Session would be devoted to discussing the Croman Mill Site Redevelopment Plan and asked the commissioners to share what items they want discussed at that meeting. Mr. Molnar provided a brief overview of the draft AMC 18.53 language that was included in the meeting packet. He commented on how the Croman Master Plan would be added to the City’s Site Design and Use Standards, and explained the AMC language would be more succinct, while the Site Design and Use Standards would be a more user-friendly guide with graphics, maps, etc. Planning Manager Maria Harris commented on the draft Land Uses matrix and explained this was developed from the draft Plan prepared by Crandall and Arambula. She stated there were some uses identified in the consultant’s draft that staff did not include in the matrix, including: theaters, nightclubs and bars, and hotels and motels. Mr. Harris stated staff did not believe these uses were appropriate for this end of town, and noted the concerns raised previously by Dawkins about uses that compete with the downtown core. Ms. Harris continued that crematoriums, public utility yards, churches, and broadcasting and Planning Commission Study Session August 25, 2009 Page 4 of 5 radio stations were also left off the permitted uses list. Dotterrer questioned the reasoning behind leaving radio stations off and stated a production studio could be compatible in an area like this. Ms. Harris added the manufacture of food products in the office zone was not included, since this is allowed in the industrial zone. She stated building material sale yards were also not included, and recycling centers/sorting yards were also omitted. Senior Planner Brandon Goldman explained that he had conducted some research into sorting yards and contacted six other recycling centers throughout the state to determine approximate job densities. He stated there was a mix of both indoor and outdoor facilities and explained the average number of employees per acre was 4, and the majority of the facilities had outdoor storage of materials which is avoided in the current plan. Ms. Harris added because of the low employment densities, this use is not included in the Plan at this point. She noted the target in the Plan is 25 jobs per acre for the industrial area. Marsh requested staff provide a brief review of available industrial lands within the City at the September meeting. Marsh asked the commissioners to share the issues they would like discussed at the September Study Session. Rinaldi stated the Plan will need to be flexible, adaptable, and seem friendly to developers and potential buyers in terms of conveying some certainty. He asked that the issue of how the amendment procedure is laid out be added to their list of discussion items. Miller voiced her concerns with the road layout where the new road meets Tolman Creek Rd. She stated this is not a smooth flow and in order to continue on Tolman Creek you will have to turn in and then turn back out. She added the current layout seems to isolate the subdivisions and asked that this be added to their discussion list. Marsh requested the issue of street orientation for solar, and the balance of uses be discussed. Miller questioned if the existing trailer park could be maintained as rural and not annexed. Rinaldi commented on possibly included uses that would utilize this area in the evenings, but not detract from the downtown. Marsh asked the commissioners to email staff if any other issues come up that they would like discussed at the Study Session. OTHER BUSINESS (Cont.) B.Update on Mayor’s Brown Bag Meetings with Commission Chairs Marsh explained Mayor Stromberg has been holding monthly brown bag meetings with the various commission chairs. She stated this is an opportunity for the chairs to get together and hear what the other commissions are working on. Marsh noted some of the information shared at the last meeting, including the Airport Commission’s concerns with the Croman Master Plan and the FAA approvals of development on that site, and that the Conservation Commission is looking at green buildings. Marsh noted they may want to talk during their retreat about possibly having formal liaisons to some of these commissions since there is a lot of overlap on what the groups are working on. She stated if the Commission has any issues they want shared during these meeting to let her know, and added if she is not able to attend one of these meetings she may call on a member to serve in her absence. In response to a concern expressed by Councilor Navickas, Mr. Molnar commented briefly on the purpose of the Croman Advisory Committee. He stated the idea is to keep the other advisory commissions apprised of what is happening, to be open to their input, and provide a mechanism for those who were interested in the beginning to stay involved. Overall, he hopes this will lead to a better plan. Ms. Harris noted the first meeting of the Croman Advisory Committee was more of a briefing. She stated the group is scheduled to meet again before the Planning Commission’s September Study Session, so the Commission will be able to hear their input when they discuss this issue next. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 9:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, April Lucas, Administrative Assistant Planning Commission Study Session August 25, 2009 Page 5 of 5