Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-12-10 Planning MINASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES DECEMBER 10, 1996 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Barbara Jarvis at 7:05 p.m. Other Commissioners present were Carr, Finkle, Hearn, Gardiner, Howe, and Armitage. Giordano arrived at 7:15 p.m. Staff present were McLaughlin, Moinar, Harris, and Yates. APPROVAL OF MINUTES AND FINDINGS Molnar will correct 2.5 in the Findings for PA96-130, add "finds'. Howe moved to approve the Minutes and Findings (PA96-130), Carr seconded the motion and it carried. Jarvis abstained because she was absent from the last meeting. PUBLIC FORUM No one came forth to speak. TYPE II PUBLIC HEARINGS PLANNING ACTION 96-106 REQUEST FOR A SITE REVIEW TO CONSTRUCT A TWO-STORY, MIXED-USE BUILDING WITH APPROXIMATELY 10,515 SQUARE FEET OF FLOOR SPACE, TO BE LOCATED AT THE CORNER OF SISKIYOU BOULEVARD AND HIGHWAY 66. FOUR APARTMENTS WILL OCCUPY THE SECOND FLOOR OF THE BUILDING. APPLICANT: BATZER CONSTRUCTION Site Visit or Ex Parte Contacts -~_,arr had another site visit and she noticed the difference in the elevation between the sidewalk and the land ungraded and excavated did not seem great. --,Site visits were made by all. -,Jarvis had a site visit and listened to the tapes from the last meeting and will be participating tonight. STAFF REPORT This action has been carried over from last month. The main issue was the proposal for a decorative wall to be constructed alongside the sidewalk on the Hwy. 66 side. There has been a revision made by the applicant and placed in the packet. The wall is broken into four 30 foot sections with the first 30 foot section (closest to Walker) having a maximum height of five feet down to four feet. The applicant has also proposed construction of a covered bus/bicycle shelter measuring 10 feet wide and 20 feet long. The cover will be similar to the awnings on the building. The applicant made slight changes to the colors that range from grayish tone to smokey blue for the canopies. Staff feels the changes are an improvement over what was originally proposed. Condition 12 has been altered allowing for an easement. Condition 13 has been added that the bike rack design be reviewed by the Bicycle Commission and Staff Advisor because it is a cylindrical design. Molnar noted a correction in the Findings under Section 2.5, add the word "Commission". The last sentence of 2.3 regarding the public sidewalk would be more appropriate placed in Section 2.6. Howe said Section 2.4 Should read "the Commission finds". PUBUC HEARING CHARLES BECK talked about the site plan alterations. He said the building is not particularly tall and the purpose of the wall is to soften the side of the building on Ashland Street and break the horizontal line with some form of landscaping. The wall has been lowered and articulated. The higher portion of the wall is where the windows occur. Carr asked if this would be a one or two-story building. Beck said it would be a two story building. McLaughlin said if the second floor is approved but not built the applicant would not require Planning Commission review. Giordano asked if plant material will grow and survive in the landscape area. Beck said small plant material will survive. Armitage thanked Beck for the bus shelter and the change of building colors. COMMISSIONERS DISCUSSION AND MOTION Giordano said he will probably vote in favor of the project because of the bus shelter. He feels a lot more could be done with the building and the building could have been stepped down to accommodate the street level. Carr moved to approve Planning Action 96-106 and the attached Findings. Armitage seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. TYPE III PLANNING ACTION PLANNING ACTION 96-136 ADOPTION OF TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN APPLICANT: CITY OF ASHLAND McLaughlin gave a short presentation. Harris talked about the most recent changes to the element. Staff recommends approval along with the Staff modifications as in the memo dated December 6, 1996. Harris explained that the Chamber of Commerce raised concerns before the public hearing on November 12, 1996. Their concerns were downtown parking, multi-modal philosophy of the plan, and not enough opportunity to talk about the plan. TPAC had a hearing on December 4, 1996 and took public comment on the plan. TPAC met on November 22nd and December 6th to go over the issues that had come up in the community. That series of meetings led to the material contained in the December 6th memo. Harris highlighted the changes: Clarification of modal equity on page 1. Added a section on freeway access on page 3. Added a new policy to street system section on page 5 matching the Ashland Downtown Plan with the Transportation Element to address the parking issues. Added the words "where appropriate" on page 6, Policy 2 making it consistent with the economic element. ASHLANO PLANNING COIlMISSION REGULAR MEETING DECEiIIBER 10, 190~ illNiJl-cS 2 McLaughlin addressed a petition from some Chamber members asking that the Economic Element in the Transportation Element be linked. He believes they are already linked and there is not a need to expressly state that. Howe wondered if there could be a policy saying everyone in town should be within a certain distance to a food store. McLaughlin said allowing mixed use within residential areas would give the opportunity for a food store. Carr made a trip to The Phoenix, owned by Suzanne McQueen, and she was hoping there would be some realization that there has to be adequate parking provided when there is no place else to go. A rule inflexibly applied is worse than no rule at all. McLaughlin said The Phoenix is the only business that has raised an issue with parking. PUBLIC HEARING DENNIS SWEET, 1645 Highway 66, stated he does not have a problem with multi-modes of transportation and he does not question the need for bike lane improvement. He is concerned that the plan appears to be divisive by pitting one transportation mode against another. He would like to see a · lot of the language toned down so the automobile is not constantly being beat up. He does not feel the plan has addressed the increase in population. We may ultimately be able to reduce the number of miles travelled per capita but we will still be travelling more miles in all forms. Most miles will be in the automobile. If we are able to shift two to three percent from auto to alternate modes, that would help greatly but it will only take the number of miles travelled in the automobile from 97 percent to 94 percent. The demand will still be there for increased roads, etc. If there are not safe, convenient, economical alternative modes, people won't use them. Sweet said he found a caption on page 7 of the plan offensive: "Ashland Street is an intimidating barrier to some pedestrians." Downtown parking is insufficient. With regard to Highway 66, the last design presented with three lanes from Highway 66 from Siskiyou Boulevard to the overpass needs to be reviewed again. The only piece of hard data he could find in the plan is that one percent of ridership is on mass transit. Projections of other modes are not made. JOHN SCHWEIGER, 400 Ashland Street, said he operates a business downtown and the Ashland Street Cinema. He supported Sweet's comments. He is concerned about the possible lane reduction on Highway 66. ZACH BROMBACHER, 1370 Tolman Creek Road, stated he favored the main concept of the plan. He is concerned about narrowing of street widths. He agrees with Sweet regarding Highway 66. Bike paths, sidewalks, and streets are trying to be accommodated on Highway 66 but there is not enough room because of planning in prior years. He does not like trying to cram everything into a small area. He is concerned about large cars and trucks on narrow streets. Finkle said the committee desires to maintain the ability of trucks to move throughout the community. The major streets need to continue to allow smooth travel for trucks. The residential areas can be ASHLAND PLANNING COMM~SION REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 10, 1906 MINUTES 3 narrow to slow automobile traffic. The committee had input from the Fire Department. BRYAN NORTON, 46 Lincoln Street, said he has been riding his bike to Medford every working day because he believes the bike is a viable means of transportation within the valley. He believes there is adequate parking in the downtown. If streets are built narrower and bikes are expected to merge in traffic, signs should be provided "Bikes in Roads". He questioned the school bus system because he sees many parents driving their kids to school. JOHN GAFFEY, 637 Oak Street, noted on page 12, 'commercial buildings should be oriented to the street', encourages commercial development to turn its back on creeks and rivers. Take advantage of natural amenities. Are boulevards a good place for bikes? Bicyclists need to be safe in traffic. MICHAEL GIBBS, 536 Ashland Street, President of the Chamber of Commerce, stated the work the Chamber has done with the Transportation plan has been working towards providing more parking facilities downtown. The Chamber is not opposed to the changes in the plan, however, the Commission may want to leave as many escape routes'for change in the plan as possible for the future. Jarvis said the Transportation Plan refers and incorporates the Downtown Plan which discusses additional parking in the downtown, for example with a parking structure. Carr wondered if the Transportation Element is somewhat unrealistic. It is difficult to legislate human behavior. It will be very difficult to get people out of their automobiles to use other modes of transportation. Parking has to be available in the downtown. Armitage feels the plan encourages us to be aware of other modes of transportation in our lives, and as a member of the Commission while discussing planning actions. Hearn thinks it is important to remember there is a state mandate. We cannot completely ignore what the state has asked us to do. SCHWEIGER wondered how much thought has been put toward the aging population. Jarvis responded that she has considered the older segment of the population at every TPAC meeting. This plan is opening up for the first time, an opportunity to look at other ways to get around. GAFFEY would like to see bicycle lanes provided on boulevards. On page 12, "signal triggering devices that can be activated by bicycles should be designated on the roadway'; he thinks that statement could use further discussion. On page 14, Avenue Section (amenities), will there be bathrooms and water fountains on streets such as Wimer and Iowa? BROMBACHER wondered if he could he 'have a wide roadway on his property. McLaughlin said probably a 36 foot street would be required in order to accept trucks. Brombacher wondered about residential streets. McLaughlin said the ordinance does not say you cannot exceed the street width, but the language in the future might limit width of certain streets. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 10, 1906 MINUTES 4 COMMISSIONERS DISCUSSION AND MOTION Howe noted that whether we have the facilities for bikes or not, the incentive for using alternative modes of trensportation will be having a desireble destination close by. The closer we make facilities that we use on a daily basis, the more likely people will stop by on their way home, ride a bike, etc. McLaughlin said there a list of changes included in the December 6, 1996 memo. If the Commission wishes to include any changes from the comments made at this meeting, those can be recommended to the Council. Armitage believes it is time to move the document forward to the Council. There has been lots of compromise and changes so far. Giordano is very supportive of the plan. He moved to recommend approval of the Trensportation Element (PA 96-136) and forward to the City Council for their review with the additions made by Staff. Gardiner seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. Finkle reiterated that though there are some clear differences in viewpoints that exist among some people who have spoken, the TPAC members have really listened and heard the comments from the community, and there has been a response to clarify the tone of the document and to recognize some differences and try to meet the needs of as many as possible through compromise. PLANNING ACTION 96-131 REQUEST FOR SITE REVIEW, OUTMNE AND FINAL PLAN APPROVAL FOR A NINE-LOT MUTLI- FAMILY SUBDIVISION UNDER THE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OPTION LOCATED AT 2300 SlSKIYOU BOULEVARD. This action will be continued to the January 14, 1997 meeting at 7:00 p.m. OTHER HEARINGS BOARD ASSIGNMENTS FOR 1997 January, February, March, and April Gardiner Jarvis Carr May, June, July, and August Giordano Howe Bass September, October, November and December Armitage Heam Finkle ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEEnNG I~=C~"-"q 10, 1986 MINUTES