HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-06-11 Hearings Board MINASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
HEARINGS BOARD
MINUTES
JUNE 11, 1996
CALLTO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 1:40 p.m. by Jenifer Carr. Other Commissioners present were
Giordano and Finkle. Staff present were Molnar, Knox, and Yates.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Giordano moved to approve the Minutes of the May 14, 1996 meeting, Finkle seconded the motion and
the Minutes were approved.
TYPE II PUBLIC HEARINGS
PLANNING ACTION 96-072
REQUEST FOR A SITE REVIEW TO CONSTRUCT A FIVE-UNIT CONDOMINIUM PROJECT
LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF EUREKA STREET
PARKING WILL BE ACCESSED FROM THE REAR ALLEY
APPLICANT: A.P. GROUP
Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts
Site visits were made by all.
STAFF REPORT
The proposal is to construct five condominiums on the property between Eureka and C Streets. The
required parking is proposed to be located off the alley to the rear of the project. Paved access to the
project has been proposed to be via the back alley with the alley being fully paved. Presently the alley
is blocked from vehicular access about 75 feet short of C Street. Eureka and C are unpaved, but each of
the five owners would be required to sign in favor of paving these streets. Currently there is no water
or storm drain so the developer will have to extend services to the development. Staff has
recommended approval with the seven attached conditions with a suggested eighth condition that prior
to issuance of a building permit the City receives a copy of the CC&R's describing maintenance of the
landscaping. The Tree Commission's comments are made part of the record.
Molnar said only about 25 to 30 percent of the neighbors have signed in favor of future street
improvements to Eureka. The applicant asked for the paved improvement through the alley. Based on
Site Design requirements with paved parking off the rear, Staff felt the improvements of the entire alley
would accommodate most of the traffic.
Molnar explained that concerns have been raised by the neighbors that residents of units one and two
may decide to park on Eureka because it is more convenient than the provided parking off the alley.
Staff believes parking on Eureka may occur during the day but at night the cars will be parked in the
rear. Eureka will probably be graded out, thereby accommodating a couple of parking spaces. The
right-of-way on Eureka is 50 feet and can easily accommodate curbs, gutters, parking bays, sidewalks,
etc. at some time in the future.
Finkle asked why C Street in addition to Eureka Street be included in what the project signs on. Molnar
said C Street was not specifically eliminated from consideration and could be discussed.
Carr wondered about the 75 feet of the alley that is not open. Molnar explained the alley was blocked
and the City proceeded in notifying the neighbors that the obstructions would need to be removed. The
neighbors responded that this Issue had been discussed in 1977 and through looking at old documents,
B. D. Greene requested the alley be open for access for parking at a project. The neighbors asked that
the last 75 feet that he would not need for access be kept closed because a garden area was occupying
that space. The Council approved it but the alley has not been vacated. This will be scheduled on the
next available Council agenda item for review. Carr said the Certificate of Occupancy could not be
issued if the alley has not been opened up and it does not seem fair the applicant would be penalized if
there is not cooperation with the request. Knox said if the applicant could not get the alley open, it
would require pushing everything forward to get enough back-up space. Molnar said some possible
rewording could be done on Condition 3.
PUBLIC HEARING
PETER CIPES, A. P. Group, said his findings and drawings support his application. He would have
preferred units one and two to park off Eureka with the rest of the parking off the alley, but has yielded
to Staff's recommendation·
Carr hoped Cipes understood that the opening up of the alley was in the hands of the Council not the
Planning Commission· Cipes is hopeful it will be approved because he does not want to have five
finished units and no one able to occupy them because of access.
DIANNE ELLIS, 1023 East Main Street, #1, explained she is gardening the alley portion. She read a
letter from the neighborhood into the record expressing safety and traffic concerns about improvement
of the alley. If the alley is open it will create a through street. She gave the Commissioners minutes
from the City Council in 1977. She would not object to opening the alley for pedestrians. She would
not object to giving Cipes property for a turnaround. Giordano feels this street is being portrayed as a
major thoroughfare and he has never seen that many cars on that portion of C Street. It would seem if
the alley was paved it would cut down on dirt and dust. Ellis agreed it would be an improvement if the
alley was paved.
ROBERT ELLIS, 1023 East Main Street, #1, is concerned about safety in the alley. Young drivers use
the alley as a speedway· This is not a normal alley situation. Ellis explained that even if the alley is
paved, higher speeding cars will occur.
DIANE SLY, 117 Eighth Street, said she is worried about traffic accidents in that area. She has been
watching the increased traffic on Eighth Street because of the coffee shop. She has a strong feeling
some people are going to want to turn right on C and continue down the alley and go down Emerick to
get to East Main again. She supports making the alley accessible up to the point of the development
and then having it blocked off. The one short section of C Street is the only access for some.
Rebuttal
Cipes would be in favor of speed bumps to slow traffic in the alley. In addition he would be willing to
using signage such as "SLOW, Children at Play" in the alley.
Giordano thought it is almost essential the neighbors have a paved alley·
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
HEARINGS BOARD
MINUTES
JUNE 11, 1996
Molnar mentioned the policy of the Public Works Director in the past has discouraged the use of speed
bumps in alleys for liability raasons. There may be some other ways to slow traffic in addition to
signage. Giordano suggested a paved entrance at both ends of the alley with textured concrete to slow
or discourage traffic. Finkle thought narrowing of the alley at C Street to the width of one car would
slow traffic.
Carr read comments from Julie Bums, 835 Fox Street, Herbert and Ines Finkel, 1031 East Main Street.
HERBERT FINKEL noted that the alley is an extension of C Street and that makes it an unusual situation.
COMMISSIONERS DISCUSSION AND MOTION
Giordano did not think there is a sufficient amount traffic to warrant the concern by the neighbors.
can see the advantage to using the alley for access. He agrees there needs to be a traffic calming
device at C and the alley.
He
Finkle can see from the neighbors' testimony that there is a potential problem with people driving
straight through the alley from C. He would prefer to have the alley go through but implement some
measures for traffic calming.
Carr explained that since the opening of the alley is not within the purview of the Planning Commission,
the alley should be paved as per Condition 3.
Molnar said Condition 3 could be reworded to state that the applicant be responsible for the entire
improvement of the alley. If the Council so chooses to put up bollards to keep the last part open, an
improved surface would still work well for bicyclists and pedestrians even if the alley narrowed to six or
eight feet.
Molnar wondered how the Commission would feel if the Council chose not to open the alley whether or
not the project should be approved.
Cipes said he would prefer not to be held up another month and even if the alley could not be opened,
he still has legal access to the project.
Finkle moved to approve PA96-072 with access either (1) solely from Emerick Street or (2) with the alley
having full access from both Emerick Street if the intersection of the alley with C Street incorporates
strong calming measures such as a single lane entrance, speed bumps, or other equally effective
measures. In addition, signage will be required. Add Condition 8 that prior to issue of a building permit,
a copy of the CC&R's be provided describing assessments for the maintenance of landscaping and
required parking areas. Also that the applicant sign in favor of street improvements of C Street if the
alley goes through. Giordano seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.
TYPE I PLANNING ACTIONS
PLANNING ACTION 96-058
REQUEST FOR SITE REVIEW APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A FOUR-PLEX LOCATED OFF THE
ALLEY AT 264 VAN NESS AVENUE.
APPLICANT: DENNIS HOFER
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
HEARINGS BOARD
MINUTES
JUNE 11, 1996
This action was approved.
PLANNING ACTION 96-059
REQUEST FOR A MINOR LAND PARTITION TO DIVIDE THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 702 CLAY
STREET INTO TWO LOTS WITH THE REAR PARCEL BEING A FLAG LOT. A 31 FOOT WIDE
DRIVEWAY EASEMENT PRESENTLY EXISTS FROM CLAY STREET; A 15 FOOT WIDE DRIVE WILL
BE LOCATED WITHIN THIS EASEMENT TO ALLOW ACCESS TO THE NEW LOT.
APPLICANT: DOUG NEUMAN
This action has been postponed.
PLANNING ACTION 96-066
REQUEST FOR A SITE REVIEW & CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONVERT AN EXISTING
ACCESSORY BUILDING INTO AN APARTMENT LOCATED AT 263 AVERY STREET.
APPLICANT: BILL AND CATE YOCUM
This action was approved.
PLANNING ACTION 96-069
REQUEST FOR A MINOR LAND PARTITION TO DIVIDE THE PROPERTY INTO TWO LOTS
LOCATED AT 1330 IOWA STREET. THE APPLICANTS PROPOSE A FIFTEEN FOOT EASEMENT
FOR MUTUAL ACCESS (FLAG DRIVE) OFF BRIDGE STREET.
JOHN J. FOX III AND CAROL S. FOX
This action was approved.
PLANNING ACTION 96-071
REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING NON-
CONFORMING STRUCTURE LOCATED AT 248 EIGHTH STREET. THE APPLICANTS PROPOSE AN
88 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION ON THE MAIN FLOOR AND A 728 SQUARE FOOT UPPER FLOOR
ADDITION,
APPLICANT: JANET LARMORE AND TOM STRONG
This action was approved.
PLANNING ACTION 96-073
REQUEST FOR A MINOR LAND PARTITION TO DIVIDE THE PROPERTY INTO TWO PARCELS
LOCATED AT 300 GRANDVIEW DRIVE. THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY OFF OF GRANDVIEW WILL BE
USED TO ACCESS THE NEW LOT. THE PROPOSAL ALSO INCLUDES A BOUNDARY LINE
ADJUSTMENT ON THE EAST PROPERTY LINE.
APPLICANT: ALAN AND MYRA ERWlN
This action was approved.
PLANNING ACTION 96-074
REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A CHANGE OF OWNERSHIP OF A
TRAVELLER'S ACCOMMODATION LOCATED AT 2190 SISKIYOU BOULEVARD.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
HEARINGS BOARD
MINUTES
JUNE 11, 1996
APPLICANT: VERA HELNY AND INGRID AUGUSTA FORSMARK
This action was approved.
PLANNING ACTION 96-075
REQUEST FOR A SITE REVIEW TO CONSTRUCT A NEW MUSIC BUILDING AT THE NORTH END
OF BRISCOE SCHOOL, OFF MANZANITA STREET, LOCATED AT 265 NORTH MAIN STREET.
ALSO REQUESTED IS A VARIANCE TO REDUCE THE SIDE YARD SETBACK ALONG MANZANITA
STREET FROM 10 FEET TO $ FEET, AND TO AM.OW A ROOF PROJECTION AT THE DOOR TO
EXTEND WITHIN TWO FEET OF THE STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY.
APPLICANT: ASHLAND SCHOOL DISTRICT (BRISCOE SCHOOL)
This action was approved.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was approved at 3:20 p.m.
ASHLAND '"PLANNING COMMISSION
HEARINGS BOARD
MINUTES
,JUNE 11~ 1g~6