HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-04-11 Planning MINASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
APRIL 11, 1995
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Barbara Jarvis at 7:05 p.m. Other
members present were Bingham, Cloer, Carr, Hibbert, Armitage, Bass and Finkle.
Giordano joined the meeting for the Type II Planning Action. Staff present were
McLaughlin, Molnar, Knox and Yates.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES AND FINDINGS
Carr moved Cloer seconded to approve the Minutes of the March 14, 1995 Regular
Meeting. The Minutes were unanimously approved. There were no Findings.
PUBLIC FORUM
No one came forth to speak.
Brent Thompson (not present) sent a real estate advertisement taken from the April 9,
1995 Medford Mail Tribune and a letter to the editor that he asked be passed around
the Commission. The articles dealt with placement of garages and pedestrian friendly
development.
TYPE III PUBLIC HEARING
PLANNING ACTION 95-021
REQUEST FOR A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AMENDMENT FROM SINGLE
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL RESERVE TO HEALTH CARE AND ZONE CHANGE FROM
RR-.5P TO HC (HEALTH CARE SERVICES) FOR 21.82 ACRES LOCATED ON THE
EAST SIDE OF NORTH MOUNTAIN AVENUE, BETWEEN INTERSTATE 5 AND
BEAR CREEK.
APPLICANT: MADELINE HILL
Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts
Finkle, Armitage, Hibbert, Carr, Bass and Jarvis had site visits.
Cloer declared an ex parte conflict and excused himself from the hearing. Cloer
referred to Bass' comments during the last meeting that at some later time a provision
be made for mixed use on the east side of Mountain Avenue. He also wondered to
what extent representatives from the Neighborhood Committee had been heard.
Bingham had a site visit and noted the native grasses.
STAFF REPORT
McLaughlin reported this is a continuation of a zone change request and a portion of
the North Mountain Neighborhood Plan that has been agreed upon throughout that
process. The applicant is moving forward with her independent portion. The City and
the neighbors are currently in mediation over the areas of disagreement which include
impacts of development to the North Mountain neighborhood. The applicant will be
participating throughout the mediation. A neighborhood plan should be coming to the
Commission in the not to distant future.
Last month, Staff proposed an option for senior housing by trying to use a senior
overlay zone as part of the Single Family Residential process. After last month's
discussion it became evident it would not be a good tool. The Health Care Services
zone seemed to be more appropriate. The HC zone was designed around a multi-
family zone (R-2 zone) but allows for mix of housing types related to senior housing in
particular. It also allows all the housing types normally found in R-2 from single family
detached to multi-family apartments. It allows for different uses that are supportive of
the HC services zone such as offices, sales and rentals.
Staff believes this is appropriate zoning for this project. The HC zone uses an existing
tool already in the zoning ordinance, ties in directly to the Site Review ordinance, and
allows for the development of a subdivision or other multi-family that can be tied into
the Performance Standards. It is in keeping with the Neighborhood Plan and there
should not be a conflict. Staff is recommending approval of the application with the
four attached Conditions.
Finkle wondered about the possible neighborhood commercial development across
the street that could be two-story. He does not want the wording in the Conditions to
prevent two-story buildings on both sides of the street. McLaughlin said the
neighborhood commercial would have the same type of Condition--whatever happens
with the neighborhood commercial must reflect the residential character of that area
too. There would not be as much concern about two-story as with the massing of the
buildings that would be out of scale with single or multi-family housing. McLaughlin
said the goal is to have the streetscape reflective of the neighborhood and buildings
that are not reflective of that (congregate care units) be buffered or set back from the
streetscape.
If this property is sold, McLaughlin clarified, a new applicant would have to go through
this process all over again. The approval of this application will be tied to the
applicant.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION "
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
APRIL 11, 1995
Jarvis noted that an addendum to the application was submitted (on purple paper).
McLaughlin read a letter from Madeline and Hunter Hill into the record.
PUBLIC HEARING
MADELINE HILL brought two representatives with her from the architectural firm in
Seattle of Dieterich Muthun.
LESLIE MOLDOW and LISA FOLKINS showed slides and gave an explanation of the
conceptual design for the project. Hill said they are trying to take what they know
about Ashland, and taking seniors into account, and not have too much walking and
not have too much building bulk. Moldow said there would be a community center
with public parking. She also noted that the hillside is very visible and that will
influence the impression of the development. Folkins said there will be narrow streets
with pedestrian friendly amenities that will connect outside the development.
Jarvis asked if there were plans for any commercial development and Hill said they are
looking at what other successful developments have built including a small clinic, a
wellness center, an exercise area and a drug store if it is appropriate.
PA'I-rY PERRIN, 604 Taylor, encouraged the Commission to give this project their
approval. The project will give great meaning to the town and seniors need it.
Seniors need a safe, pleasant place to live.
LOU NORTON, 74 Third Street, encouraged approval, the sooner the better.
JIM NORTON, 74 Third Street, echoed the prior comments. He feels Madeline Hill is
well qualified to build such a development.
MA'i-r KOCMIEROSKI, P.O. Box 175, Ashland, read a letter dated April 11, 1995
favoring the application.
LLOYD PENNINGTON, 932 Walker Avenue, has lived in Ashland for 49 years and
would not like to move from Ashland. Most younger people don't feel the urgency but
for the elderly, this is urgent. There is nothing else in Ashland that will accommodate
their needs. Pennington urged approval so the process can move forward at a more
rapid rate.
WES HOXIE, 821 Hillview Drive, was born in Ashland. This is a wonderful opportunity
for the Commission to place a little bit of heaven at this place called home.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
APRIL 11, 1995
3
JOHN HASSEN, 129 N. Oakdale, Medford, OR 97501, wants to be sure that all
evidence of need heard on March 14, 1995 both written and oral be included in the
record. On page 167 of the Land Use Ordinance, it sets for the criteria for a
comprehensive plan and zone change. Hassen referred to the criteria for a
comprehensive plan and zone change. There are four items of need, and three of the
criteria have been met, but especially in light of the testimony heard in March and
tonight, item (d) where compelling circumstances relating to the general public welfare
require such an action, the testimony has been overwhelming in support of that item of
need. Also met are (a) and (c) as the senior citizen population has increased.
Jarvis reiterated that all the testimony received previously on the senior overlay zone
be shifted and placed in the record as referring to the Health Care Services zone.
With reference to a possible berm along I-5 and planting along North Mountain, Finkle
said it appeared to be a walled-off community with two entrances. He did not think
that fit in with what has been his understanding of the discussion of an integrated
community. Does the applicant see houses facing North Mountain as part of the
overall community, or is everything facing inward? Folkins said they do not want to
face away from North Mountain. Moldow said they are conscious about creating
physical buffers so people are not residing too close to the power lines.
Carr wanted to make sure the applicant knew how concerned she is about bulk and
scale and how it will fit into the rolling topography. She would find it distressing to
have a building going "up" high on the hill. It is really important to have the building fit
in with the topography. She would like to see a more welcoming look to the
development and not so foreboding.
COMMISSIONERS DISCUSSION AND MOTION
Because of the unique nature of this project, Bass will not let the following comment
interfere his favoring of the project. From a strict planning standpoint, he does not like
to see individual parts of plans taken ahead of the whole plan.
Carr moved to recommend approval of Planning Action 95-021 with the attached
Conditions. Hibbert seconded the motion and it carried unanimously.
TYPE II PUBLIC HEARINGS
PLANNING ACTION 95-019
REQUEST FOR A MINOR LAND PARTITION, WITH BOUNDARY LINE
ADJUSTMENT, TO DIVIDE A PARCEL INTO THREE LOTS AT 115 CHURCH
-ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
APRIL 11, 1995
STREET. VEHICULAR ACCESS TO THE REAR PARCEL (FLAG LOT) WILL BE
ALONG THE EXISTING PUBLIC ALLEY. CONSEQUENTLY, A VARIANCE TO
PAVING AND SCREENING OF THE FLAG DRIVE HAS BEEN REQUESTED.
APPLICANT: LAWRENCE AND BEATRICE CARLSON
All the Commissioners had a site visit.
STAFF REPORT
Knox reported that this application was originally approved as a Type I planning
action. A neighbor called it up for a public hearing. The application involves a Minor
Land Partition, Lot Line Adjustment and Variance. The Minor Land Partition divides the
lots into two lots with vehicle access from the alley and pedestrian access along an
eight foot wide flag lot with a four foot wide walking path meandering down the eight
foot strip. The Lot Line Adjustment adds 4,000 square feet to the third lot to make it a
conforming lot. The Variance is for vehicle access from the alley. There was an
amendment to the partition ordinance that came to the Commission in November,
requiring a condition of approval when lots abut an alley, that vehicle access be from
the alley and a pedestrian access lead to the primary street. That amendment was
approved by the Commission and forwarded to the City Council. April 4, 1995, the
Council approved and it is awaiting first and second readings.
Staff received letters dealing with the cost and improvements to the alley and
additional vehicle trips. The cost of alley improvements would be borne by the
developer of the flag lot. The improvements would occur at the time of the Certificate
of Occupancy for the new home. Condition 4 requires the applicant to provide an
alley improvement plan. Staff recommended approval of this application.
Giordano asked what the standard alley width is for an alley in Ashland. Knox said
mostly 16 feet and the Fire Marshall would like a 12 foot minimum.
Armitage wondered if the entire length of the alley was proposed for paving and Knox
responded that it would not include the upper portion. That Condition can be clarified.
PUBLIC HEARING
LAWRENCE CARLSON, 109 Church Street, stated the goal in developing the new lot
is not to have a flag right next to their dining room window. By having alley access,
this will create less impact on the neighborhood in general especially in historical
terms. Secondly, they want to enlarge their own lot so they can add onto their house
or have extra yard space. Also, they wanted to get the lot next door cleaned up.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
APRIL 11, 1995
They didn't feel the flag would be good on the other side of 109 Church because there
are six large trees and shrubs. It will work well for a pedestrian path.
BEA CARLSON, 109 Church Street, said she wanted to add onto their house. Many
trees would have to be removed if there was a paved flag drive. This seemed a way
to enhance the neighborhood. They bought the land so they could enlarge their lot.
SANDY WASSERMAN, 116 Church Street (across the street), supports the application.
She believes a paved flag would detract from scenic aspect of Church. Their home is
on the historic register and several times during the season their are walking tours of
neighborhood directly looking at the layout of the neighborhood. A paved flag drive
would not only detract from the graceful historic nature of their street, but necessitate
the removal of mature trees unless it would be directly under the Carlson's window.
Further, a paved flag would create the loss of parking on the street and this is a
valuable and limited commodity. The other reason for her support is approval of this
application would not mean a change in the alley at this time. The alley would only be
improved prior to occupancy of the new home, if one is built. They agree with the
ordinance amendment allowing vehicle access on the alley. The benefits of the
Variance are greater than the alternative of creating a paved flag drive.
A letter from DAN ALTMAN was read into the record opposing the application.
JENA STURGES, 116 Nob Hill, lives directly across the alley from the applicant. She
will concur with other opponents that oppose alley access. She is concerned with the
safety of her young daughter because upgrading of alley will encourage faster traffic in
the alley. Even in the alley's poor condition, cars speed. She is also concerned about
the fire issue. No one has had a problem accessing their existing homes now. She
believes there would be less impact to have a flag drive than a number of neighbors
being affected by a flag.
Giordano wondered if Sturges knew of anyone else who had automobile access to the
alley. Sturges said everyone does. Giordano wondered if adding one more lot would
impact the existing situation adversely. Sturges is concerned that if a home or multiple
homes are built, that would mean service vehicles, visitors, etc. because this will be
the sole access.
ERIC FOGEL, 112 Nob Hill, asked with regard to the Staff Report, can it say "may"
require access, not "shall" require access. There is a decision in that statement as to
whether the alley is adequate access to the property. Also, the Staff Report says the
flag drive would be obtrusive to the neighborhood because of excessive asphalt. No
one has said this has to be an asphalt flag drive.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
APRIL 11, 1995
The mature trees that have been talked about are on the downside (between 109 and
115 Church). The neighbors believe there is adequate clearance for a flag drive on
the upside of 115 Church which would affect one house as opposed to the entire
neighborhood. The Staff Report also states that the flag drive would disrupt the
sidewalk. Presently, at 115 Church, there is no sidewalk. There is a proposal to install
a sidewalk.
The Staff Report states a hydrant is 250 feet away from the site. He believes it is more
than 250 feet and that is why it requires sprinklers. The hydrant is 380 feet away. Is
the alley adequate for servicing a sole vehicle or access to this new lot? Presently, the
alley in most sections is less than 11 feet wide. There is not adequate width (15 feet)
to meet the ordinance requirements. The bottom of the alley has an average eight to
ten degree slope and at the top a 16 to 18 degree slope which means it exceeds the
slope requirement for an alley. There is a tremendous amount of erosion at this time
and the entire alley would have to be paved in order to stop the erosion and the silt
build-up on High Street.
Safety of vehicles is another concern Fogel has. Improvement of the alley would
encourage faster traffic in the alley. There are many children that play in the alley. He
believes paving of the alley would disrupt the historic nature of the neighborhood more
than paving one flag drive. Eight out of ten houses on both sides of Church Street
have parallel driveways running next to their house. It would be disruptive to place a
house without a driveway.
Fogel does not believe the application meets the Variance criteria or the Minor Land
Partition criteria. A sole flag lot in the neighborhood would be created for only one
property in the entire neighborhood.
Giordano asked Staff if the applicant applied in a month or two from now, would a
Variance be required? Staff affirmed.
Finkle asked how the neighbors felt about paving the alley. Fogel said they all like it
the way it is--unpaved. McLaughlin said whether the improvement of the alley would
involve paving, is still in question. The Historic Commission has favored unpaved
alleys. There might be other options. Fogel also mentioned the intrusion of trees and
structures into the alley right-of-way.
SHARON FOGEL, 112 Nob Hill, stated the property can be developed without the
Variances being requested. The applicant's own personal preference for how they
want to develop the property is what is creating the need for all the Variances. In
dealing with the subdivision requirements, the application does not meet the design
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
APRIL 11, 1995
and street standards because no alleys are allowed to be unpaved where the slope
exceeds 5%. She spoke to Engineering and Fire and they both recommended paving
in order to facilitate the alley becoming the only vehicular access to that lot.
Fogel said there were no unique or unusual circumstances which require the flag lot to
be created without the usual flag drive. All the other properties in the neighborhood
have their primary access off a paved street. Engineering said paving would have to
be the whole extent of the alley. The Street Dept. only does maintenance of the alleys
when they are called.
Finkle said he keeps hearing about secondary access. He noticed when he was
walking the alley at about 5:30 or 6:00 p.m., he counted four cars in driveways in the
back off the alley and six driveways or garages that appeared to be regularly used.
That seems to Finkle like about half the houses that might use the alley for primary
access out of the 12 to 15 houses. Finkle asked if people use the street or the alley
as primary access?
McLaughlin noted that the partitions ordinance amendment will go before the Council
for a second reading on April 18th and in 30 days it will go into effect.
DENNIS JARVI, 117 High Street, thought the alley width is 11 feet. It would seem the
alley improvement should be done prior to construction of a home so trucks will not
cause dust.
JONATHON ROBERTSON, 134 Nob Hill was speaking on behalf of his father and
mother and himself. They live at top of the alley. The alley has always been quiet,
narrow and a good place to play. He did not think a fire truck would fit. At the top of
the alley there is a large growth oak tree. If the entire alley is not paved, the unpaved
area will cover the paved area with gravel. He is afraid if the alley is paved, that
Almond Street will have to be paved too. He did not think a flag drive would even be
noticed. He does not mind a house in the rear, he just does not want the alley paved.
DON PAUL, Fire Marshall, said he has two issues - water and access. The needed
width (16 feet) and surface area (12 feet improved) have not taken into account
garages that might be sitting in the right-of-way. In this case, the property owner has
the option of installing a hydrant or automatic fire sprinklers in the dwelling because of
the distance to the closest hydrant. It could be questionable if there is adequate room
in the alley.
Giordano said on paper it looks like there is adequate access. In reality, Don Paul
cannot say tonight if there is access. Paul said there needs to be some assurance
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
APRIL 11, 1995
that the surface would support fire apparatus in all kinds of weather. An engineer
could make that determination.
Finkle wondered about the best way to evaluate access. Don Paul said, with the help
of Engineering, he could go out and measure and take a Fire Truck out and see if he
had adequate access. Staff does not have the measurements of the alley, but the City
has tried to work around structures, fences, gardens, etc.
Staff Response
McLaughlin explained that the applicant could create two accesses to the property
(flag drive and alley access). Why double the amount of area in the neighborhood
given over to the automobile? Staff has encouraged the approach the applicant is
taking based on comments from the Planning Commission and working towards the
new ordinance.
Bingham said without knowing the exact width of the alley, this action will need a
continuance to provide time to obtain the alley measurements.
BEA CARLSON, in rebuttal, stated that the neighbor's junk was hauled out along the
alley in a semi-truck.
LAWRENCE CARLSON, in rebuttal said that fire access should be better for them if
they get appropriate access. He did not think deliveries would make that much
difference. It has been interesting to find out what the neighbor's concerns are.
CARR MOVED TO CONTINUE THE MEETING UNTIL '10:30 P.M. ARMITAGE
SECONDED THE MOTION AND IT WAS CARRIED.
All approved.
COMMISSIONER DISCUSSION AND MOTION
Carr moved to continue Planning Action 95-019 until May 9, 1995 to allow for a
diagnosis of the alley right-of-way. Armitage seconded the motion. The motion failed
with Carr and Finkle voting "yes" and Armitage, Hibbert, Jarvis, Cloer, Giordano, and
Bass voting "no".
Bingham moved to approve Planning Action 95-019. Giordano seconded the motion.
McLaughlin suggested wording on Condition 4: "That prior to the signature of the
survey plat creating the new flag lot, the property owners submit an alley improvement
'A~.SHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
APRIL 11, 1995
plan that identifies the improved alley width at minimum of 12', with a horizontal
clearance of 15', or as approved by the Fire Department. Plan to also identify the
proposed surface material which shall be capable of supporting a fire apparatus with a
gross vehicle weight of 44,000 lbs. Plan shall be subject to approval by the Staff
Advisor and Fire Department. Alley improvement shall be from High Street and
extending across the full frontage of the property." Bingham so amended and
Giordano seconded the amendment.
Bingham further amended the motion to include in Condition 8 that the alley
improvements be made prior to the commencement of construction. Giordano
seconded the amendment. The amended motion carried unanimously.
PLANNING ACTION 95-029
REQUEST FOR MODIFICATION OF A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED FINAL PLAN FOR
THE PROPERTY LOCATED TO THE WEST OF THE CUL-DE-SAC OF IVY LANE.
MODIFICATION INCLUDES DELETION OF ONE LOT (FROM 5 TO 4), A PARTIAL
IMPROVEMENT OF IVY LANE TO CITY STANDARDS, WITH THE REMAINING
PORTION BEING PAVED TO PRIVATE DRIVEWAY STANDARDS.
APPLICANT: RADCLIFFE WELLES
Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts
All the Commissioners had site visits.
Giordano was the agent for an applicant on this land many years ago.
believe it was a conflict of interest.
He did not
Hibbert left the meeting.
STAFF REPORT
Molnar reported there was a long history to this parcel. The most recent application
was granted in 1994 for a five lot subdivision. The request tonight is to modify that
Final Plan approval reducing the number of lots from five to four. On the north side of
the road were lots 3 and 4; 5 will be deleted. A boundary line adjustment will move
the boundary on lot 3 further to the east. The original approval required that Ivy Lane
be extended to the western boundary and be constructed as a full city street with a 36
foot wide right-of-way. The applicant has proposed to make the right-of-way
dedication at this time in conjunction with the City's transportation plan which shows a
required street dedication over to the west property line but only do a partial street
improvement at this time. Only the first 125 feet of Ivy Lane would be constructed to
city street standards.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
APRIL 11, 1995
10
Staff does not have a problem with reducing the number of lots given the sensitive
nature of the property and the slopes of the parcel. Because this portion of Ivy Lane
is on the City's transportation map, Staff feels it is necessary to get a full 20 foot wide
cut at least to the lay the foundation for a future street. The applicant would prefer
that the last 75 feet of the cut to the western property boundary and turnaround area
be deferred until the property to the west is developed. The applicant has requested
that the portion of Ivy Lane that will be constructed to a street standard (125 feet) that
the requirement for a public sidewalk be deferred and installed at a future time when
the road is completely constructed to City's standards to avoid a partial sidewalk
construction.
The Conditions of the previous applications remain in effect for the most part. The
applicant has not asked for modification of any more Conditions. Erosion control
measures are the same.
Molnar presented the following changes in Conditions that were not outlined in the
Staff Report.
Condition 6: Since there have been so many approvals on this project with various
references to Tree Management Plans, the applicant will be required to implement the
Tree Management as compiled by arborist Pete Seda. With reference to sentence in
Condition 6: "All property lines and building envelopes be established prior to tree and
brush trimming or removal."
Condition 8: Pedestrian easement should be between lots 3 and 4 since there is no
Lot 5 anymore.
Delete Condition 9.
Add Condition 16 that a sign be installed at the west boundary of the street driveway
cut indicating the intended future street extension.
Add Condition 17 that living trees to be removed for driveway, street and home
construction shall comply with the revisions of the Tree Management Plan. Trees to
be removed shall be tagged for review and written approval from the Planning
Department prior to removal.
Add Condition 18 that temporary fencing shall be installed around the dripline/root
zone of all healthy trees within 10 feet of street, driveway and building envelope
locations.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
APRIL 11, 1995
11
Add Condition 19 that Sections E, F, and H be deleted from the CC&R's. They tend
to run contrary to the Tree Management Plan.
Armitage requested the sign for the street extension be made of a substantial, long-
lasting material.
CARR MOVED TO CONTINUE THE MEETING UNTIL 11:00 P.M. CLOER
SECONDED THE MOTION AND IT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
PUBLIC HEARING
RAD WELLES, thought no purpose could be served by installing a sidewalk at this
time. Welles does not have a problem with changing the location of the pedestrian
trail between Lots 3 and 4.
PETE SEDA, arborist, would like to see this project as a role model for the City. It is
difficult to interface the forest and development. He and the applicant have not been
in agreement on the project. Unfortunately, Welles wanted Seda to cut down trees on
Lots 1-4. Seda cuts trees in pieces to avoid trees falling into good trees. He and
Welles have a difference of opinion on how the work should be done on this property.
A forestry plan does not mean anything if it is not carried out.
Armitage asked Seda if it bothered Seda that the plan may not be carried out. Seda
wondered how it can work if there is no one to oversee the work.
WELLES, rebuttal, explained that he and Mr Seda had a disagreement over his
payment schedule and Mr. Welles did not think it was a disagreement over his
protection of trees. If Seda does not want to be the arborist, Welles would go out and
hire another arborist.
Jarvis recalled from previous hearings the most critical concern raised by everyone
was that the maximum number of trees be left and there not be a view passage cut
out. She believes this has been one of the most difficult areas to develop she has
ever seen. She is again concerned with how the trees are being dealt with and
believes it is critical for the Commission to know how each site is to be developed and
exactly which trees are to be cut. Welles was not talking about clearing any lots, only
the area where a house would be placed.
Armitage noted that no trees had been cut and this appears to be a contractual
dispute between the arborist and the applicant. The applicant has not violated
anything. The tree plan is still in place. Bingham is not comfortable if a certified
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
APRIL 11, 1995
12
arborist is not on the project and felt there have been too many problems and too
many trees cut on this project.
The Commissioners continued discussing issues other than trees. Everyone favored
completing the sidewalks except Finkle and Giordano. Everyone favored deleting a
lot.
Should the street cut be continued the last 75 feet to the boundary or fall short?
Finkle understood that the applicant was requesting that a Condition be added that the
improvements would be paid for as the lots are sold. Jarvis feels if someone is going
to subdivide, then it should be paid for by the developer. Armitage wondered if the
odds of developing beyond the property are slim, therefore, developing a road with
some rather extreme cuts may not ever be needed. Giordano and Bingham agree
with Armitage.
McLaughlin explained that it would be unlikely that this would ever be improved
through an LID. If the property owner on the other side develops it would be done as
a full subdivision. Park Estates has money they have put aside for the connection
over to Morton. There has to be some way of putting cash away for the improvement.
McLaughlin would look into the best way to do this.
Cloer believes that people gradually encroach on a dedicated right-of-way by
landscaping or other possibly more serious ways. He regards making the cut all the
way to the property line as important. He would not be at all surprised to see
development to continue through.
Carr moved to continue Planning Action 95-029 until May. The Public hearing will be
continued in May. No additional notice of the action will be mailed.
OTHER
There are two meetings coming up: a joint meeting with Jackson County Planning
and the Planning Commission. There is a Study Session April 25th with Historic
Commission.
The Railroad Charrette will be April 27th.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 11:00 p.m.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
APRIL 11, 1995
13