Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-08-06 Historic MIN HPAC Committee Minutes Note: Anyone who wishes to speak at any HPAC 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. Times noted for each item are approximate… August 6, 2025 Minutes TOUR OF PIONEER HALL HPAC members Scharen, Emery and Whitford met on-site at Pioneer Hall (73 Winburn Way) at 3:45 for a brief walk through of the completed Pioneer Hall project with Community Development and Public Works staff. Members then proceeded next door to the Community Center to see the status of the work there; it was noted that the current schedule has the Community Center to be completed in approximately two months. CALL TO ORDER: Chair Scharen called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. Scharen, Whitford, and Emery were present in person, while Repp and Bonetti were in attendance via Zoom. DeLaunay arrived late. Skibby was absent. New member candidate Jed Prest was also in attendance and was introduced to HPAC members. READING OF LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Scharen read the land acknowledgement. APPROVAL OF AGENDA The agenda was approved without amendments. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Emery/Whitford m/s to approve the minutes of July 2, 2025 as presented. Voice vote: All AYES. Motion passed. PUBLIC FORUM There was no one in the audience wishing to speak. LIASON REPORTS Council Liaison Jeff Dahle was absent so no report was given. Community Development Staff Liaison Derek Severson provided a handout from Restore Oregon speaking to preservation wins and losses in the recent legislative session and noted that staff would be preparing a detailed legislative update for the Planning Commission and Council later this month and would provide further updates at that time. SERJAC Liaison Victoria Sage questioned the history of the City’s acquiring Pioneer Hall and the Page 1 of 4 HPAC Committee Minutes Community Center. She was advised that this might be best pursued via a records request to the City Recorder. Repp left the meeting via zoom. LAND USE ITEM REVIEW PLANNING ACTION: PA-T1-2025-00272 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 40 Granite Street APPLICANT/OWNER: Rogue Planning as agent for owners Mardene Mary Mastain Trust & Robin Janeen Donaldson Trust DESCRIPTION: A request for Site Design Review and Conditional Use Permit (CUP) approval to make exterior modifications to legal non-conforming eight-unit apartment building at 40 Granite Street, including the addition of porches, decks and a small second-story bathroom addition which expand the existing non-conforming front setback. The application also requests an Exception to the Site Design and Use Standards to allow four-foot walkways on site where five feet is the minimum width allowed under AMC 18.4.3.090.B.4.c. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single Family Residential; ZONING: R-1-7.5; MAP: 39-1E-09-BB; TAX LOT: 8200 Severson presented a brief staff report identifying issues staff had identified as in need of further discussion including whether corbels are to be retained, the need for further detail on mechanical equipment installations, the need for further detail on the proposed window replacements, and HPAC advice relative to the small second story addition and the proposed porches and decks. Applicants Mardi Mastain, Robin Donaldson and their land use consultant Amy Gunter of Rogue Planning presented project details to HPAC including proposed revisions to the color selections, proposed changes to the porch treatment, details on the proposed window replacements and details of the proposed mechanical equipment installations. Bonetti exited the Zoom meeting and arrived in person. HPAC members discussed the proposal noting:  Colors: Applicant provided new color swatches from Miller Paint which were generally “warm, rich earth tones”, noting that the Historic Brief on exterior materials included in the packet explains that, “Craftsman houses were usually painted in warm, rich earth tones. Wood siding or shingles were often stained dark brown or green. Trim was lighter, often ivory, tan or cream. Window sashes varied greatly, and were red, black or the trim color.” HPAC members generally indicated that the applicants were on the right track with regard to color selection.  Exterior Materials: Emery noted that the siding is called “Cottage Lap” siding, and that it is common enough that local mills should have the necessary blades for milling. It was clarified that the cedar shakes and cottage lap siding were only being replaced where disturbed and would be done in a manner to preserve the existing irregular pattern of the shakes. All corbels Page 2 of 4 HPAC Committee Minutes are to be retained, and matching corbel details included on the small porch addition.  Mechanical Equipment: The applicants provided an exhibit illustrating that ductless mini-split units for each apartment would be placed on the individual porches/decks and screened by the railing, or placed under the decks, to minimize visual impacts. Exterior “line sets’ are to be routed within the walls and will not be visible on the exterior.  Addition: HPAC members suggested that the porch addition to be modified to better reflect/retain the existing gable and returns. Applicants presented an option reflecting a more gabled treatment.  Decks/Porches: Committee members indicated that while the decks and porches were not historic as proposed, they were well-designed and were an absolute necessity for the livability of these apartments. Some Committee members expressed a preference that the upper deck along the façade be removed and replaced with shed roof sections on either side of the porch addition, however this was left as a recommendation that was not conditioned.  Windows: The applicants noted that the proposed windows will be almond or putty-colored vinyl and would be single-hung with a fixed upper and movable lower section and would comply with the egress requirements under Building Codes. HPAC members indicated that vinyl windows could be acceptable is installed as “sash replacements” or “bucked-in” so that the windows would be in-set rather than flush with the face of the siding. The applicants indicated that they were using 2x6 framing, and that the contractor had already been instructed to install the windows in-set as described.  Concrete Posts at Sidewalk: HPAC members suggested trying to incorporate the two concrete pillars at the sidewalk into the site planning for the project.  Garage: Applicants noted that the garage was non-conforming and would ultimately be reconstructed within the existing three-dimensional footprint with doors to mimic a carriage house and the addition of a trash enclosure. Existing zinc siding will be kept for future use. Members indicated that the applicant had expressed general agreement with the recommendations provided and that they were supportive of the project and recommended that it be approved subject to the details discussed. They thanked the applicants for the care being taken with the project. Bonetti left the meeting. DISCUSSION ITEMS Review Board Assignments – Members volunteered for Review Board assignments in August and September. Attendance Report – Severson presented the attendance report and noted that Bonetti had submitted his resignation to the Mayor effective following this meeting. Severson indicated he would try to determine Skibby’s status, and that he would work on some targeted recruitment outreach to selected professions to address remaining vacancies. Celebrating 100 Years of the Ashland Springs –Scharen discussed the letter she and Repp had drafted Page 3 of 4 HPAC Committee Minutes to the Ashland Springs. HPAC members present approved signing and mailing the letter. REVIEW BOARD ITEMS 165 Gresham Street – The proposal was a small, detached addition with deck at the rear of the property along the alley. It was noted that the addition would not be visible from the street and would be largely screened by vegetation. HPAC members indicated they had no concerns with the proposal given its placement and screening. 223 Maple Street – The proposal was to replace stairs, handrails and the footer supporting the existing porch. Members indicated they had no issues with the proposal. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 5:50 p.m. Page 4 of 4