Loading...
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