Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977-1108 ADJOURNEDMINUTES OF THE ADJOURNED MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL November 8, 1977 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE & ROLL CALL Chairman McCannon called the meeting to order in the absence of Mayor Prickerr at ?:30 p.m. on the above date in the English Lecture Hall of Ashland Senior High School. Councilmembers Phelps, Laws, Ragland, Hamilton and Drescher were present. Approximatley 70-?S audience members. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes of adjourned meetings of October 11, 1977 and October 19, 1977 were approved as presented. PUBLIC HEARING ON AREA NO. 2 Tolman Creek Road Area Craig Hoffarth, 2290 East Main, said he owned approximately 30 acres on upper Tolman Creek Road, which abuts the present City limits. It was at one time included in the UGB, but had since been excluded. He urged a trade-off of land in the Tolman Creek Road area, in place of the land along East Main Street. He proposed a maximum of two to three units per acre for the area. Vince Oredson said he o~ms approximately 20 acres in the same area which adjoins Hoffarth's land. He said the land is not under irrigation and is non-usable as is. He agreed with Hoffarth that the land (soil type 4) is more suitable for development than the land on East Main (soil type 3). He then presented some figures to the Council on costs and what would be required to supply the area with water. He stated the water would cost more in the area, but the land would be less expensive. He requested inclusion in the UGB. C. E. Johnson said the two basic questions he had :n his mind in regards to the area were: 1. A SR designation for the hillside land. 2. Drainage, water run-off, road access. He felt the area should be left out of the boundary at present, but when it was felt it was needed, have the necessary studies done and take it to the voters. Peter Zucas, representative for a property owner of land adjacent to the Oredson property requested the Council include the area in the UGB. He felt it was good property for development, would be a logical connection to the Mountain Ranch-Greenmeadows Subdivision, and could be easily serviced by the City. Ed Singmaster, 2560 Siskiyou, felt the Council would be making a mistake by not including the area south of the Boulevard and east of the present City limits in the master plan for future control. A gentleman from the addience said he supported the Council's proposed UGB map for the area due to drainage, cost of development, and density consideration~ Himes then explained that the exact lot sizes would not be known until work on the zoning map was done. He explained that the Comprehensive Plan Map only sets density ranges and maximum number of units allowed. Consideration will be taken in each area for slope, terrain etc., at the time of zoning. 'Jack Kritzer, 1370 Appleway, was also concerned about drainage. He said taere were already drainage problems from the present subdivision. Daniel Johnston, 1405 Tolman Creek Road, requested that the Council adopt, before any further action is taken for tke area, a drainage ordinance requiring the builder or developer to be responsible and bear the cost of storm drains and drainage problems. He also felt there had already been a substantial amount of development in the area, and that the outskirts of a city should be rural residential. Douglas Clark, Appleway, said he felt the area now is a beautiful scenic area which should be developed in a R-1 restrictive classification. He asked to have his name added to the petition, and submitted a letter to the Council for the record. Gordon Medaris, 2370 Morada, said that the present drainage problems are due soley to inadequate drains and catch basins put in by the City, and that the traffic on Tolman Creek Road must be controlled better if further development is allowed in the area. Fred Bennew~e~, 924 Bellview, said he ha~. not heard including the area in the UGB. He felt development should occur before extensions are made outside. any justification on of land within the City Andy Running, 1325 Greenmeadows, commended the Council and hoped they would give the highest consideration to property owner (single lot owners) requests. Siskiyou Boulevard Bob Ridinger, 2408 Siskiyou, requested that the property along Siskiyou Boulevard between Bellview and Tolman Creek Road be re-designated commercial, but if not designated commercial, then UHR. Buck Taylor, 480 Ashland, said his major concern was with the amount of R-3 multiple-family land available. He felt the percentage of R-3 land left does not take into accoun~- the land that can not be developed due to slope, o~mership, and other limiting factors. By taking away the higher density along Siskiyou Boulevard, it has eliminated even more possible multiple-family developments. Gus Johnson, 327 Bridge, said his neighborhood was proposed to go from R-1 to R-3. He felt it was not good to concentrate a large amount of high density into such a small area. He said the areas then become "central core areas", and his area would definitely suffer from much more development. Hank Hampton, 2280 Morad~, supported the higher designation along Siskiyou Boulevard to Tolman Creek Road because Siskiyou can adequately handle the traffic increases. Carol Anderson, 2300 Siskiyou, wondered ~xen the change to ULR had been made for the area. Himes and Commissioner Alderson then explained some of the reasons for the change. The property owner at 2275 Siskiyou said his lot along Siskiyou is presently divided into two different designations. He requested his entire lot be zoned R-3:1.2. 11/8/77 Pg. 2 Mvantain Avenue Area Bob Wright, 6905 Higkway 66, requested that the 300 block of Mountain Avenue be changed from ULR to UHR. He said the block is almost completely surrounded by publicly-owned property, and felt it was logical to be UHR when high density developments currently surround the properties. Phelps asked for a confirmation of the Southern Oregon State College boundary adopted by the State Board of Higher Education before the final decision was to be made. · Kathy Newcomb, 680 Beach, said her concern with UHR in the area is the street- light situation at the corner of Mountain Avenue and Siskiyou, particularly since Mountain Avenue is shown in the Comprehensive Plan as a major collector street. Lithia Mill Site There was no public comment on the area. Himes explained the reasoning behind the proposed "Parks" designation for the property. Inclusion into Urban Growth Boundary & Other Requests Bob Noel, 1330 Clay, said he owns approximately 9.7 acres in two tax lots which had just been greenbelted, but which is unfeasible to farm due to granite deposits in the soil. Water and sewer lines abut his property and City developments currently surround his land. Peggy George, 2190 Buckhorn, owner of approximately 9 acres above Hillview, also requested inclusion into the UGB. Art Phillips, Ashland and Herbert Streets, requested a SR designation for the lot he and Richard Cottle own jointly. He felt RR was too restrictive and should be zoned the same as below the ditch or else it will remain an undeveloped island with no access. Craig Martin, 608 Terrace, said he was faced with the same problem. He said he had been granted a mid.or land partition, but finalization had been held up due to right-of-way c~nflicts on Terrace. Now the property is proposed RR which would mean he could not even split his 11/2 acres into two lots~ There are homes all arou~ him which are on just as steep slopes, so he felt SR would not be out of context with the rest of the neighborhood. Laws requested consideration be given to homes which are outside the existing City limits, but inside the UGB, and that it water and sewer lines are present, a policy be adopted that the City be willing to let them hook up to City services if they agree to be annexed whenever the City feel it necessary. Other areas would not be hooked up until annexed. Bob Kagei, Ridge Road, requested a SR designation for his lot so he would have a future option of splitting his lot. Laws asked that the density question, particularly RR be put on the agenda for the December 13 meeting. Craig Hoffarth asked [limes how the maximum number of units allowed in each designation related to the amount of acres needed for future acquisition. ii/8/77 pg. 3 Himes explained that the number of acres needed for a 21,000 population was based in comparison with the existing Zoning Map, so any ~ncreases or decreases in density will affect the acreage, and should be readjusted accordingly. Hoffarth also questioned whether the possible heavy increases in traffic on lower Clay and Tolman Creek Road due to the proposed UHR designation had been taken into account. Jackie Shivers, 269 "B" Street, pointed out some conflicts in the Plan Text and Plan Map, particularly dealing with the Railroad District, and said that the UHR designation shown for the area was not what the Citizen Advisory Committee had proposed. She felt the area would deteriorate if new high density developments are allowed which would not be compatible with the older homes in the neighborhood. She also said most of the area is made up of very small lots, and people are not buying homes in the commercially zoned areas for commercial uses, but for the retention of the older homes. Jim Sims said the Historic Commission had some definite concerns for the area, and would like to talk to the Planning Commission and come back to the Council with a plan before any final decisions were made on which direction to go in the area. Don Greene, property owner on 7th and East Main, requested that his property remain UHR. He said that particular part of the area has many apartments already, and he has plans for a low income housing project which have been approved. Sims then clarified the boundaries the Historic Commission would like discussed further (per memo dated November 8, 1977) and presented a map outlining the areas of concern. It was decided to have the Historic Commission meet with the Planning Commission and report jointly to the Council at the public hearing on December 29. ADJOURNMENT: Chairman McCannon moved for adjournment to November 22, 1977, at 7:30 p.m. at the City Council Chambers. Phelps seconded and on a voice vote passed unanimoulsy. Meeting adjourned at 11:00 p.m. NA2E. FRANKLIN · City Recorder ROLAND McCANNON Acting Mayor 11/8/77 Pg. ~