HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-05-13_Planning MIN
Planning CommissionMinutes
Note: Anyone wishing to speak at any Planning Commission meeting is encouraged to do so. If you wish to speak, please rise and, after you
have been recognized by the Chair, give your name and complete address for the record. You will then be allowed to speak. Please note the
public testimony may be limited by the Chair.
May 13, 2025
REGULAR MEETING
Minutes
I.CALL TO ORDER:
Chair Verner called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. at the Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 E.
Main Street. Commissioner Perkinson attended the meeting via Zoom.
Commissioners Present: Staff Present:
Lisa Verner Brandon Goldman, Community Development Director
Eric Herron Derek Severson, Planning Manager
Gregory Perkinson Aaron Anderson, Senior Planner
Russell Phillips
Susan MacCracken Jain
John Maher
Absent Members: Council Liaison:
Kerry KenCairn None
II.ANNOUNCEMENTS
1.Staff Announcements:
Community Development Director Brandon Goldman made the following announcements:
The Commission will have a Special Meeting on May 27, 2025 to review an update to
Walkable Design Standards, an update to the Transportation System Plan, and the City’s
Economic Opportunity Analysis.
Planning Manager Derek Severson noted upcoming events by the Historic Preservation
Advisory Committee for Historic Preservation Week.
2.Advisory Committee Liaison Reports – None
III.CONSENT AGENDA
A.Approval of Minutes
1.April 22, 2025 Study Session
2.April 22, 2025 Special Meeting
Chair Verner stated that the April 22, 2025 Study Session was mistakenly dated as February 25, 2025.
Commissioners Herron/MacCracken Jain m/s to approve the consent agenda with the
Page 1 of 4
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please email
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).
Planning CommissionMinutes
amendment from Chair Verner correcting the date on the April 22, 2025 Study Session, which had
mistakenly been listed as February 25, 2025. Voice Vote: All AYES. Motion passed 6-0.
IV.PUBLIC FORUM – None
V.TYPE III PUBLIC HEARING – CONTINUED
PLANNING ACTION: PA-T3-2024-00011
SUBJECT PROPERTY: 1511 Highway 99 North
APPLICANT/OWNER: Casita Developments, LLC
Kendrick Enterprises LLC (Robert Kendrick)
Linda Zare, Property Owner
DESCRIPTION: A request for the Annexation of 8.62 acres located at 1511 Highway 99
North into the City of Ashland, along with 6.6 acres of adjacent Oregon Department of
Transportation state highway right-of-way and 7.68 acres of California Oregon &
Pacific/Gennesse-Wyoming Railroad Company railroad property. The property is currently
located in Jackson County and zoned Rural Residential (RR-5); with Annexation the property
would be brought into the City as Low Density, Multi-Family Residential (R-2). Concurrent with
Annexation, the application also requests: a Property Line Adjustment to adjust the boundary
between Lots 1700 and #1702 (only Tax Lot #1702 is proposed to be annexed); Outline & Final
Plan subdivision approval to create nine lots; Site Design Review to construct 210 apartments
in ten buildings including at 24 affordable units; an Exception to the Site Development and
Design Standards; an Exception to the Street Design Standards; and Tree Removal Permits to
remove two trees greater than six-inches in diameter at breast height.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Multi-Family Residential; ZONING: Existing – County
RR-5 Rural Residential, Proposed – City R-2 Low Density Multi-Family Residential; ASSESSOR’S
MAP: 38 1E 32; TAX LOT #’s: 1702 (boundary adjusted with 1700)
Ex Parte Contact
Commissioner Herron disclosed a site visit. No ex parte contact or other site visits were disclosed.
Staff Presentation
Senior Planner Aaron Anderson gave a brief background on this project, detailing how similar
projects had been submitted by the applicant back in 2020 and 2022. Both applications were
approved by the City Council and were subsequently appealed to the Land Use Board of Appeals
(LUBA) where these appeals were upheld, with the 2022 application being remanded to the City
before being withdrawn by the applicant. Mr. Anderson outlined the approval criteria for this project,
including the requested exceptions to Site Development and Design Standards and to Street Design
Standards. Included in the presentation were details on the distribution and number of affordable
Page 2 of 4
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please email
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).
Planning CommissionMinutes
housing units proposed, and included a slide that was provided by the applicant showing the exact
number of affordable units that were proposed for each building (see attachment #1). Staff
recommend that the Planning Commission make a favorable recommendation to the City Council
with regard to the Annexation, and conditionally approve Outline & Final Plan approval for the PSO
subdivision, and Site Design Review.
Questions of Staff
Commissioner Phillips requested clarification on the fire access road width proposed by the
applicant. Mr. Anderson responded that the current proposal relied heavily on the 2022 approval,
and that he had consulted with Fire Marshall Mark Shay and found that the proposed fire access
road width was insufficient. Therefore staff would be suggesting a condition of approval requiring
that fire access roads be a minimum of 26ft wide from the proposed 24ft width.
Applicant Presentation
Applicant Robert Kendrick spoke briefly to the scope of the project, detailed how the application
complied with requisite City guidelines. He emphasized the difficulty of both financing and spreading
affordable units equally throughout the development with current City ordinances. Mr. Kendrick
explained how physical constraints required the exception to Street Standards, and also detailed
how the proposed annexation would not be recorded before the Property Line Adjustment (PLA) was
approved by Jackson County.
Questions of the Applicant
Commissioner MacCracken Jain requested clarification regarding the proposed distribution of
affordable units relative to the applicant’s financing and dept coverage ratio, and expressed
concern that the language could allow the applicant to circumvent the standard. Mr. Anderson
clarified that the affordable units would be deed restricted with the distribution.
Commissioner Phillips asked if any compliance issues are anticipated regarding the completion of
conditions of approval 3-7, which are required to be completed before the application is reviewed by
the Council. Mr. Kendrick responded that complying with those conditions should not be an issue.
Commissioner Phillips asked how parking spaces would be allocated if there are more units
proposed than parking spaces. Mr. Kendrick emphasized the difficulty in answer that question
considering applications must comply with the state Climate Friendly and Equitable Communities
(CFEC) guidelines which discourage car use. He stated that the application encourages other modes
of transportation through transit improvements, bicycle parking, and a bus pass program provided
to all residents.
Commissioners Herron and Phillips questioned the need to delay recording the annexation until the
Page 3 of 4
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please email
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).
Planning CommissionMinutes
PLA could be recorded and approved. Mr. Kendrick responded that this would be to provide
adequate time for the County to complete its review and approve the PLA request. Mr. Goldman
added that the normal 120 planning action shot-clock time limitation does not apply to annexation
requests as they are processed as Type III actions, and as such the County would likely review and
approve PLA request before this item goes to the Council on August 5, 2025.
Public Comments
Echo Fields/Ms. Fields expressed appreciation and general support for the application.
The Public Hearing and Public Record were closed at 8:05 p.m.
Discussion and Decision
Mr. Anderson noted that Chair Verner had submitted largely non-substantive changes to the
proposed findings which would be incorporated into the final document. He added that there should
be an added condition relating to the Anderson Autobody shop on an adjacent property that
extends into the right-of-way further than is shown on the civil engineering drawings in the
submittal. Chair Verner also noted that fire access drives C and D require a condition extending their
width from 24ft to 26ft.
Commissioners Phillips/Perkinson m/s to recommend City Council approval of the annexation
with the conditions recommended by staff, as well the following added conditions of approval:
Prior to any work within the right-of-way, the civils plans shall be updated to show the
actual property line of Anderson Auto and how the proposed frontage improvements do
not conflict with the existing parking area.
Prior to any site work the final construction drawings shall show fire drives C and D to be
26ft-wide instead of 24ft.
Prior to first reading of the ordinance for annexation the applicant shall demonstrate that
the Property Line Adjustment has been approved by Jackson County.
That condition of approval 6 be amended to include the specific details presented by the
applicant regarding the number of affordable units in each building.
Roll Call Vote: All AYES. Motion passed 6-0.
VI.OPEN DISCUSSION - None
IV.ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 8:15 p.m.
Submitted by,
Michael Sullivan, Executive Assistant
Page 4 of 4
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please email
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).
Annexations require that at least 25 percent of the base
and related site improvements
Base Density: 8.53 x 13.5 = 115.15
50 + (160 * 0.75) = 170
This is a provision to allow certain properties to annex even if their development is not consistent
bƚƷ ğƦƦƌźĭğĬƌĻ źƓ ƷŷĻ ƦƩĻƭĻƓƷ ĭğƭĻ ğƭ ƷŷĻ ğƦƦƌźĭğƷźƚƓ źƭ ĭƚƓƭźƭƷĻƓƷ
That the development of the annexed area will ultimately occur at a minimum density of 90
That the annexation proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designations.
That adequate transportation can and will be provided to serve the annexed area.
Exceptions and Variances to the Annexation Approval Criteria and Standards
That adequate City facilities are available as determined by Public Works.
calculated and meet all the other requirements for affordable units.
That the annexed area is contiguous with the city limits.
percent of the base density for the zone.
with the Comprehensive Plan. (
.)
ǞźƷŷ ƷŷĻ /ƚƒƦƩĻŷĻƓƭźǝĻ tƌğƓ
H.
D.
A.
B.C.
E.
F.
I.
This is a provision to allow certain properties to annex even if their development is not consistent
bƚƷ ğƦƦƌźĭğĬƌĻ źƓ ƷŷĻ ƦƩĻƭĻƓƷ ĭğƭĻ ğƭ ƷŷĻ ğƦƦƌźĭğƷźƚƓ źƭ ĭƚƓƭźƭƷĻƓƷ
That the development of the annexed area will ultimately occur at a minimum density of 90
That the annexation proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designations.
That adequate transportation can and will be provided to serve the annexed area.
Exceptions and Variances to the Annexation Approval Criteria and Standards
That adequate City facilities are available as determined by Public Works.
calculated and meet all the other requirements for affordable units.
That the annexed area is contiguous with the city limits.
percent of the base density for the zone.
with the Comprehensive Plan. (
.)
ǞźƷŷ ƷŷĻ /ƚƒƦƩĻŷĻƓƭźǝĻ tƌğƓ
H.
D.
A.
B.C.
E.
F.
I.
This is a provision to allow certain properties to annex even if their development is not consistent
bƚƷ ğƦƦƌźĭğĬƌĻ źƓ ƷŷĻ ƦƩĻƭĻƓƷ ĭğƭĻ ğƭ ƷŷĻ ğƦƦƌźĭğƷźƚƓ źƭ ĭƚƓƭźƭƷĻƓƷ
That the development of the annexed area will ultimately occur at a minimum density of 90
That the annexation proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designations.
That adequate transportation can and will be provided to serve the annexed area.
Exceptions and Variances to the Annexation Approval Criteria and Standards
That adequate City facilities are available as determined by Public Works.
calculated and meet all the other requirements for affordable units.
That the annexed area is contiguous with the city limits.
percent of the base density for the zone.
with the Comprehensive Plan. (
.)
ǞźƷŷ ƷŷĻ /ƚƒƦƩĻŷĻƓƭźǝĻ tƌğƓ
H.
D.
A.
B.C.
E.
F.
I.
The natural features, such as wetlands, floodplain corridors, ponds, large trees, are included in
The approval criteria for outline plan include eight items which are summarized as follows:
The development of the land will not prevent adjacent land from being developed.
The development meets all applicable ordinance requirements of the city.
The proposed development meets the common open space standards.
storm drainage, police & fire protection, and adequate transportation
The proposed density meets the base and bonus density standards.
The development complies with the street standards.
unbuildable areas.
1)2)4)5)7)8)9)
circumstances in either subsection B.1.a or b, below,