HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-10-11 Hearings Board MINASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
HEARINGS BOARD
MINUTES
OCTOBER 11, 1994
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Vice Chair Steve Armitage. Other Commissioners
present were Bingham and Giordano. Staff present were Molnar, Knox, and Yates.
TYPE II PUBLIC HEARING
PLANNING ACTION 94-126
REQUEST FOR A MODIFICATION OF CONDITIONS OF A PREVIOUSLY
APPROVED MINOR LAND PARTITION FOR THE PROPERTY AT 252
STRAWBERRY LANE. THE MODIFICATION WOULD RELOCATE THE EXISTING
PUBLIC ACCESS EASEMENT ALONG THE IRRIGATION DITCH TO ALONGSIDE
THE PRIVATE DRIVEWAY LOCATED NEAR THE EASTERLY PROPERTY LINE.
APPLICANT: DIANNE DAHLE
Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts
All Commissioners had a site visit. They all noted the location of the existing and
proposed pedestrian easements.
STAFF REPORT
The description of the proposed pedestrian easement and its impacts are outlined in
the Staff Report. Staff has recommended denial of the application.
Giordano noticed a "No Trespassing" sign in the area. Knox said the sign is illegal at
this time. Staff will not do anything about the sign until a decision is made at this
hearing. Molnar thought the sign had been there for some time.
Armitage noted that the Commissioners made a site visit together before this meeting.
PUBLIC HEARING
DIANNE DAHLE, 252 Strawberry Lane, wanted to request the relocation of the
pedestrian easement because the location of the ditch path is not as clearly defined as
other areas along the ditch. They have people veer off the path constantly and come
into their yard as though they don't even know that they are trespassing. It is very
invasive to her. People use the private road all the time for walking and they don't
seem to mind. The area of detour is very small. Dahle would like more security.
Giordano wondered if when the pedestrian path was made were there any provisions
for defining the location of the path or how the path would be maintained. Molnar said
the overall responsibility of maintenance of the easement belongs to the City and the
maintenance occurs informally.
PAM BARLOW, Assistant Public Works Director, clarified that when the Open Space
plan was adopted, citizens and the City alike wanted to keep the trail system low key
and not advertise its availability to the public at large. The focus of the City has been
to acquire major land parcels at this time and as individual parcels develop, those
public easements will be formalized. The public uses the entire trail system informally
at this time. There are very few sections throughout the City that are completely
inaccessible.
PAT WARNER, 330 Patrick Lane, wondered about the liability if trails are being used
that are not public easements. Molnar said the City would take over liability because
the City required the easement.
SUZANNE PEIL, 234 Strawberry Lane, a property owner directly east of the proposed
pathway. The new path would come very near her house. If the path is moved, the
natural and scenic beauty of the area would be lost.
PAM BARLOW, representing the Bike Commission, explained that the ditch path is
extremely important for recreational use for bicyclists. It makes an efficient bike and
pedestrian connection through town. It is very important to the long-range plan as it is
now. Rees Jones of the Bike Commission reviewed the proposed path change and
felt the property owner had valid concerns, and it might be appropriate to sign the
existing path to give citizens a designated place to walk. Perhaps since the "No
Trespassing" sign is there, people come through the Dahle's property. The Bike
Commission recommend not approving this request.
WARNER, did not think the bike issue was even relevant in this case because of the
steepness and narrowness of the trail.
DAVE DAHLE, 252 Strawberry Lane, said his primary concern is with fire danger. He
explained that the fenceline is above the TID ditch. People go through fences and
over fences and end up on their property. However, gates are left unlocked. The
path is difficult to walk. There is no designation for the path.
MIKE BROOMFIELD, 220 Strawberry Lane, believes the applicant has legitimate
concerns, however, there are other considerations. There should be continuity of the
trail system. The proposal discontinues what the trail is trying to accomplish. The
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
HEARINGS BOARD
MINUTES
OCTOBER 11, 1994
new proposed trail is a flag drive that accesses to the rear piece of the property.
Bikes can access and ride along the existing trail.
Knox said in talking with Don Paul, Assistant Fire Chief, he has said the proposed
route has no more or less fire danger than the existing trail.
DAHLE, said she has seen five bicyclists in the time she has lived there. She said her
request is based on a very small area as a detour. She said it has been done in other
parts of the City and does not think it will deprive people of anything.
COMMISSIONERS DISCUSSION AND MOTION
Giordano believes the City, in future actions, needs to be clearer about who is
responsible for defining the path through signs or fences by putting the burden on the
applicant at that time. That would have solved this problem immediately. He feels
strongly about the continuity of the trail system throughout Ashland and believes it
would be a negative to reverse this. By having a designated trail, it will avoid future
conflicts. In the long run, the existing trail will benefit the community.
Bingham strongly agrees with Broomfields's comments. The existing trail is in an
appropriate place. He believes the City has the responsibility to delineate the existing
trail.
Armitage shared the same concerns about maintenance and wondered if the trail
should be posted as non-public at this time. What liability does the City want to
accept? Is the City encouraging use of private property because the trail is not
delineated? He believes the existing portion of the trail is not used because people
come upon a fence. When they come to the fence, they probably back off or go
around which takes them onto the Dahle's property. He would not favor this
application but somehow the City needs to address the issues.
Molnar can talk with Ken Mickelsen and he might have some suggestions. A sign
would be valid.
Armitage noted that there is a need to bring the existing trails maintained by the City to
the standards required of an applicant.
Bingham moved to deny PA94-126. Giordano seconded the motion and it carried
unanimously.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
HEARINGS BOARD
MINUTES
OCTOBER 1'1, 1994
3
TYPE I PLANNING ACTION
PLANNING ACTION 94-118
REQUEST FOR A MINOR LAND PARTITION TO DIVIDE A PARCEL INTO THREE
LOTS WITH THE REAR LOTS BEING ACCESSED BY A FLAG DRIVE FOR THE
PROPERTY AT 634 IOWA STREET.
APPLICANT: JAMES D. LAMB
This action was approved.
PLANNING ACTION 94-123
REQUEST FOR FINAL PLAN APPROVAL FOR PHASE I (5-LOTS) OF A
PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SUBDIVISION UNDER THE PERFORMANCE
STANDARDS OPTION LOCATED AT 200 SKYCREST DRIVE.
APPLICANT: WILEY FAMILY
This action was approved.
PLANNING ACTION 94-124
REQUEST FOR A SITE REVIEW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A COMMERCIAL
SERVICE BUILDING FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT HIGHWAY 66.
APPLICANT: MYLES COMSTOCK
This action was approved.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 3:15 p.m.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
HEARINGS BOARD
MINUTES
OCTOBER 1'1, 1994
4