HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993-04-13 Planning MINASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
APRIL 13, 1993
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Barbara Jarvis. Commissioners
present were Medinger, Thompson, Bingham, Carr, Powell, and Armitage. Staff
present were McLaughlin, Molnar and Yates.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES AND FINDINGS
The Minutes and Findings of the March 9, 1993 meeting were approved.
PUBLIC FORUM
PETER FINKLE, Transportation Advisory Committee (TPAC), reported to the
Commission that RVTD was offering reduced fare as of March 29, 1993 to riders and
that SOSC students were able to ride free. He requested a joint study session with
the Planning Commission to work on revising the Transportation Element of the
Comprehensive Plan. He would like to meet some time in the next three months.
McLaughlin said TPAC was going to be used as the citizens involvement group. The
next meeting of TPAC will be held Friday, April 16th at 8:00 a.m. at the Council
Chambers and any Planning Commission members are invited to attend.
TYPE III PLANNING ACTION
PLANNING ACTION 93-058
REQUEST FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP CHANGE FROM SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL TO OPEN SPACE FOR THE 2.32 ACRES SURROUNDING THE .30
ACRE HOME SITE.
APPLICANT: BILL AND GLORIA RICHEY
Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts
Medinger, Bingham, and Carr had site visits. Powell had a site visit and drove Jessica
Lane. Jarvis had a site visit and saw Mr. Richey. He told her where the lot was and
said he had lived on the property for 35 years. He said because the notice sent out
did not state this was to be "private" open space, the neighbors were concerned the
area would be public.
STAFF REPORT
McLaughlin stated that the access to the applicant's home is from a driveway off Carol
Street. The applicant requested that the Comp Plan be changed. This process is
allowed through State law to designate areas as open space. The Commission has
approved two of these in the past - one off Terrace Street and the other near Guthrie.
The open space becomes part of the viewspace of an area. In the past, Staff have
seen no problem approving these requests and they have recommended approval
with the attached Condition. If the property owner asks for the property to return to
single family designation, the State would require the property owner pay all back
taxes. While it remains open space, the property owner does not have to pay
property taxes. It is permissible to fence the property, add plantings and keep
livestock.
Bingham wondered what advantage this action was for the City. McLaughlin said it
maintains neighborhood livability.
Powell didn't see that the neighbors could have access or even enjoy the view
because the property is hedged off. McLaughlin said the view from Jessica Lane is
limited but there are other views from Carol and Clinton.
PUBLIC HEARING
No one came forth to speak.
Staff Comments
Medinger also wondered about Powell's comment and removal of the property from
the tax rolls. McLaughlin responded that the State Statutes lists criteria for approval
one of which is that the granting authority (City of Ashland) shall not deny the
application soley because of the potential loss in revenue which may result in granting
the application.
COMMISSIONERS DISCUSSION AND MOTION
Carr moved to approve Planning Action 93-058 with the attached Conditions. This
application does conserve and enhance the natural resources. Bingham seconded
the motion and it was carried unanimously.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
APRIL 13, 1993
TYPE II PUBLIC HEARINGS
PLANNING ACTION 93-020
REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE EXPANSION OF AN
EXISTING TRAVELLER'S ACCOMMODATION LOCATED AT 261 W. HERSEY
STREET FROM FOUR UNITS TO FIVE UNITS.
APPLICANT: AUDREY SOCHER
Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts
->Medinger had a site visit and noted the large rear yard.
--,Thompson remembered the property from the application before, and he had a site
visit.
-,Bingham also remembered the property from before, and he had a site visit and he
took note of how deep the parking spaces were.
-,Carr was also involved in the previous application and she had a site visit.
--,Powell was also involved before and she also parked in a parking place and
observed the fruit trees and the rose garden.
->Armitage had a site visit and his only concern was that there was no visible planning
action sign. He noted that many of the properties he visited had no signs.
->Jarvis had a site visit and looked at how the parking should be marked and saw the
fence and the area.
STAFF REPORT
This application was originally approved as four-unit traveller's accommodation in
1987. The lot is over a half acre with two buildings on the property. The owners
residence and two units are on Hersey Street and a carriage house with two units is
detached from the residence off the alley. The applicant is requesting to add a fifth
unit to the carriage house. The target use of the R-3 zone would permit 11
apartments. The application is well within what would be permitted.
However, this was originally approved administratively as a Type I and called up for a
public hearing by a neighbor. The concerns raised have been over increased traffic
along the alley, noise coming from the guest parking area and loss of privacy. Over
the past few years, there has been an increase in development in this area. The
applicant submitted a letter dated March 8, 1993 addressing the concerns of the
neighbor. The applicant has taken steps to try to minimize any adverse effect with an
additional unit. The main concern of the neighbor is guest parking. He has
suggested reconfiguring the parking to set it deeper into the lot, causing the carriage
house to be between the parking area and the neighbor's residence, therefore, the
noise emanating from the parking area would be deflected away from his residence.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
APRIL 13, 1993
3
Molnar added that as neighborhoods grow and change, that impacts will develop and
through the Conditional Use Permit process Conditions can be added to work at
minimizing these impacts so approvals are not done at the expense of the neighboring
residents. With this application, the number of units is still well below the target use of
the property, and Staff has recommended approval. Staff has suggested wording for
a Condition, should the Commission decide to deepen the parking--"That the depth of
the existing parking area off the alley be increased by approximately 15 feet so that it
lines up with the west building edge of the carriage house".
Exhibit P-5 (pictures of the applicant's property) and a letter from the Historic
Commission were submitted.
PUBLIC HEARING
CHRIS HEARN, Davis, Gilstrap, Harris and Balocca, 515 E. Main Street, representing
Audrey Socher, said the property is zoned for up to 12 units, making her well within
the criteria. If the parking is deepened, the applicant will have to destroy her rose
garden and Socher does not feel that by moving the parking, it will mitigate anything.
The unit being proposed is the unit formerly occupied by Socher. The parking spaces
are already very long. Will moving them really mitigate the noise? If cars are coming
and going up and down the alley, feet deeper parking will not mitigate the noise that
much. The cars will still be moving up and down the alley. All it will do is pave over a
rose garden.
Socher's traveller's accommodation is one of the few in Ashland that have complied
with Americans With Disabilities Act and has wheelchair access. The proposed
additional unit will have wheelchair access. The reports from disgruntled neighbors
are uncorroborated.
AUDREY SOCHER, 261 W. Hersey Street mentioned the handout of pictures that
show the metamorphosis of the property. She was pleased to have the Historic
Commission commend her operation. She has been in operation for five years and
the issues were not brought up by the neighbor after four years as stated in her letter.
The garbage pick-up has been within the parameters of the law. There have been no
complaints by the police of noise. People like to stay there because it is quiet.
Guests will walk whenever possible. She will feel a great loss if her rose garden has to
go under. Her guests enjoy it immensely. She said her guests have morning coffee
outside, 65 feet away from her neighbor. There are three fences between her property
and the neighbor.
TERI KOERNER, 87 3rd Street, Southern Oregon Reservation Center, speaking in
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
APRIL 13, 1993
favor of the application, stated that Arden Forest provides one of the few handicap
access facilities. The fifth unit is needed. The Sochers are sensitive to the number of
guests that stay in their dwellings. They do not add roll away beds so six people
could be in a room that really accommodates four. They accommodate people who
want quiet. It is a unique, comfortable turn-of-the century farmhouse. The yard and
the landscaping is beautiful. She does not want to see more asphalt. She could not
even see the house next door when driving down the alley. She is asking the
Commission to approve the application without further financial burden.
MARY LOU GROSS, 240 W. Hersey, lives across the street from the Sochers and the
complaining neighbor. She walks her dog along the alley three to four times a day
and is there from as early as 7:00 a.m. and as late as midnight. She is not aware of
noise. The Sochers attract quiet guests. The use is compatible. If there were ten to
twelve apartment units there would be far more traffic generated daily than with a
traveller's accommodation. The guests barely take the car out once a day. The
parking is accommodated by the Socher's spaces. The guests that visit eat breakfast
and tend to leave later than the average person leaving for work. Coffee klatches on
the deck find guests sipping coffee and reading the paper. She has witnessed this
herself and never heard any noise from it. The upgrading of the Sochers property has
instilled a new neighborhood pride. Neighbors want to fix up their properties and
there are those that want to invest in the neighborhood.
GARY BREWER, 229 W. Hersey Street, stated that the alley is the problem. The last
thing the alley needs is another parking lot. He is not complaining about garden
parties. He has a problem with doors slamming all hours of the night and morning.
Guests come in late and leave early. He is directly affected by this noise. One
bedroom in his house has been rendered worthless because of the noise. He would
like the Commission to deny the application based on the alley. Brewer referred to
PA92-034 in which the Commission designated a study be done on the alley last year
because of the increase in the parking lots on the alley. The study was never done.
He has met with Staff to achieve a balance in the neighborhood since there has been
increased development in his area. The Traffic Safety Commission was supposed to
discuss the alley and it is finally on the agenda. He would like to see this study done
before any further approvals take place. Brewer said the sounds from the Sochers
property is amplified at night. Kids use the alley at high speeds. He would be happy
to replace the applicant's rose bushes in order to deepen the parking. Or, just
reserve the parking just for handicapped.
Jarvis wondered how Brewer could tell where most of the sound comes from. Brewer
said he has no problem with the apartments because they are far enough away.
Everytime a car door slams across the alley, it sometimes rattles the windows in his
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
APRIL 13, 1993
house.
Brewer submitted the Findings from PA93-034 and an article from the Medford Mail
Tribune (Exhibits O-1&2).
HEARN, in rebuttal, said the opponent is bringing up several different issues with the
alley. This is a minimal expansion and there is no rational relationship to moving the
parking deeper and eliminating the rose garden to mitigate noise. Hearn was also not
aware of any amphitheater effect.
Staff Comments to Testimony
The criteria was mailed with the notice map and the applicant has met the criteria for
approval.
In response to Hearn's comment about moving the parking, under the CUP process,
the Commissioners are allowed to modify plans, including modifying placement of
parking on the project site to buffer adjacent uses from the possible detrimental effects
of the proposed development. A finding would have to be made.
Medinger wanted to consider the possibility of having guest parking at the Socher's
property across the street. Socher was not opposed, but the parking can be no
further than 200 feet away from the traveller's accommodation.
Medinger thought a Condition requiring upgrading the photinia would be helpful.
Socher thought another type of shrub would grow better, but she would not be
opposed to Medinger's suggestion.
Socher mentioned that her Planning Action sign was posted but blew away.
COMMISSIONERS DISCUSSION AND MOTION
Bingham asked about the Traffic Safety review of the alley. McLaughlin said Traffic
Safety will be looking at the possible closure of the alley, use of bollards in the alley
with access to only Brewers and Socher, no through traffic, and other proposals.
They think it would be most appropriate to do a study during the peak season.
There was continued discussion of possible parking across Hersey Street, however,
some of the Commissioners were not comfortable putting parking across the street,
especially if it would cause children to be crossing Hersey. Planting along the fence
was also discussed, but there was uncertainty as to how it would be maintained.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
APRIL 13, 1993
There could possibly be planting on the inside of Brewer's fence. The Commissioners
agreed that there would be little use in deepening the parking and they did not favor
turning the rose garden into more asphalt.
Thompson felt this is a case where someone moves into an area and the area
changes. This is an R-3 zone where higher density is permitted thus causing more
noise and a higher impact on surrounding neighbors. He favors the application and
so moved. Add a Condition that signs be placed in each parking space indicating a
"Quiet Zone" or quiet area just as a reminder to the guests that they are in a
neighborhood and maybe they will stop and be a little more considerate. Bingham
seconded the motion and it carried with Medinger voting "no".
PLANNING ACTION 93-031
REQUEST FOR A SITE REVIEW TO CONSTRUCT A TRI-PLEX AT THE
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 170 S. MOUNTAIN AVENUE. A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMITS ALSO REQUESTED TO ALLOW FOR THE TRI-PLEX TO BE USED AS A
TRAVELLER'S ACCOMMODATION DURING PART OF THE YEAR. ALSO, A
VARIANCE IS REQUESTED TO ALLOW A PORTION OF THE DRIVEWAY TO
HAVE A WIDTH OF APPROXIMATELY 16 FEET RATHER THAN THE REQUIRED
20 FEET.
APPLICANT: JONATHAN LANDES
Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts
Site visits were made by all. Carr, Powell, Armitage shared information at the Hearings
Board. Jarvis looked around the rear of the property and noticed the school parking
lot.
STAFF REPORT
This application was reviewed before the Hearings Board and they requested it be
brought before the full Commission. In 1990 there was an approval to move a duplex
onto the rear of the property. The proposal is to construct another separate structure
(tri-plex). The applicant is requesting that for a portion of the year, he would have the
flexibility to utilize the three units for traveller's accommodations. The target use of the
zone could accommodate seven units.
The question raised by the Hearings Board was concerning the traveller's
accommodation ordinance and the 20 year regulation. Staff's interpretation originally
was that the residence on the property is older than 20 years and that any new units
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
APRIL 13, 1993
would not a be required to be 20 years old. Included is the City Attorney's opinion
that Molnar read into the record. If the Commission chooses to follow the City
Attorney's position that the no additional units can be added unless at least one
traveller's accommodation is located in the primary residence, the traveller's
accommodation proposal cannot be approved.
Molnar explained if the Commission does not believe the 20 year rule has not been
met, the applicant would still like the Commission to review the his application,
including the tri-plex and Variance. Staff felt overall, that the findings for the Variance
are adequate. The main concern is with having 15 feet of unobstructed clearance for
fire apparatus. A Condition has been added to provide for a residential sprinkler.
As Medinger recalled when he helped in the writing of this ordinance, that this
application departs from the original concept of a traveller's accommodation 20 years
or older.
PUBLIC HEARING
JONATHAN LANDES, 170 S. Mountain Avenue said he would leave the decision of the
traveller's accommodation approval up to the Commission. There are a couple of nice
trees he wants to preserve with regards to the driveway width. Landes explained that
a before the paving of Mountain, he received a letter saying he would need to stub in
for water and sewer, which he did. When he began the process for the current
proposal, he was told he would need a fire hydrant. He was not allowed to get a
hydrant because there is a no-cut moratorium. Don Paul said he could get a
residential sprinkler.
JOHN SCHLEINING, 6191 Ventura Avenue, Central Point, wondered if Landes could
live in the tri-plex and have the house as a traveller's accommodation. McLaughlin
responded that would take another opinion from the City Attorney.
DON PAUL, Fire Department, stated that generally sprinklers are required when there
is inadequate fire flow. Hydrants are to be no more than 250 feet from the structure,
but because of a no-cut street moratorium, Landes could not do this. He
recommended a residential sprinkler system.
COMMISSIONERS DISCUSSION AND MOTION
Conditional Use Permit for the tri-plex as a traveller's accommodation.
Medinger, reiterated that he did view this application as meeting the intent of the
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
APRIL 13, 1993
8
ordinance. This seems more like student housing. Armitage agreed and felt that with
the City Attorney's position, there would be little to do but deny the traveller's
accommodation. Carr moved to deny the CUP for the traveller's accommodation
based on the City Attorney's findings. Armitage seconded motion and it carried
unanimously.
Site Review and Variance to construct tri-plex.
Medinger could see no problem approving as long as the applicant works with the Fire
Department. McLaughlin noted the Tree Commission reviewed the landscape plan.
Medinger moved to approve the application for Site Review and Variance with the
attached Conditions. Thompson seconded the motion. Add Condition nine to expand
the curb cut to 20 feet because the parking on the street is so close. Medinger
moved to amend and Thompson seconded. The motion carried unanimously.
PLANNING ACTION 93-035 IS A REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT,
SITE REVIEW AND SOLAR WAIVER TO CONVERT THE EXISTING HISTORIC
PEERLESS ROOMS BUILDING, LOCATED AT 243 FOURTH STREET, TO A
SEVEN-ROOM HOTEL. THE PROPOSAL INVOLVES THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN
800 SQUARE FOOT, TWO STORY ADDITION ONTO THE REAR OF THE
BUILDING. IN ADDITION, A PARKING VARIANCE IS REQUESTED TO REDUCE
THE REQUIRED NUMBER OF SPACES FROM EIGHT TO FOUR.
APPLICANT: CRISSY BARNETT
Site Visit and Exparte Contact
->Medinger, Thompson, Armitage, and Carr had site visits.
->Powell had a site visit and a conversation about six weeks ago with a neighbor
concerning the tree in the proposed parking area that was originally supposed
to be saved and today, during her site visit, she saw the same neighbor and he
had heard the tree was diseased and will be cut down.
->Bingham had a site visit and saw John Knight. Knight discovered Bingham was a
Planning Commissioner and Bingham discovered Knight was the contractor.
After this discovery, the two discussed the merits of various old cars.
->Jarvis had a site visit and talked with John Knight. He showed her where the
addition would go. He told her the neighbor across the alley called the action
up for a public hearing.
STAFF REPORT
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
APRIL 13, 1993
9
In one sense, this is an exciting application as it involves the restoration of a building
and yet it is difficult because there are neighborhood concerns regarding
development. There is very little to add to the applicants findings. The property is on
the National Historic Register. The proposal involves putting the building back as a
hotel use with luxury suites. Overall, there are few changes proposed other than the
addition at rear of the building of a two-story enclosed porch and part of a suite. The
addition lengthens the building and impinges on part of the view of neighbors. The
applicant has made it clear in the findings that to make this building viable
commercially, that the addition is required. This has been discussed with the applicant
and the neighbors. There are photographs on the wall showing the impact of the view
on various back yards. Overall, in terms of an addition, it is relatively small and is an
appropriate hotel use for the site. Staff recommends approval of this application. Staff
asked the Commission to consider the concerns of the neighbors as we may move on
to a railroad plan in the future that will hopefully address these concerns up front.
The ordinance encourages parking variances in the Historic District to allow for the
preservation of existing structures and allowing the property to be used to its highest
commercial use. A fifty percent variance can be granted, as the applicant is
requesting. In discussions with the neighbors and the applicant, they have requested
the alley not be paved since the hotel is within walking distance of the downtown and
paving would only encourage additional use. There is diagonal parking on Fourth
Street and while there are times when parking may go beyond the project site, Staff
believes the benefits far outweigh the detrimental effect of trying to provide more
parking spaces at the rear of the property.
A solar waiver has been requested and the property to the north has agreed to the
additional shadow. A Conditional Use Permit for a hotel is being requested and Staff
has recommended approval. The ordinance does not address the view in any
manner. Staff has recommended approval of the application with seven attached
Conditions. The Tree Commission originally wanted to retain the walnut tree but
withdrew their request at the April meeting.
The criteria of approval have been noticed and sent out with the application. A letter
from Tom Frantz was distributed to the Commissioners along with previous Historic
Commission minutes where this action was reviewed. The letter from Dave
Shallabarger was entered into the record.
PUBLIC HEARING
CRISSY BARNETT, 182 Scenic Drive, explained this structure would be the first
certified rehabilitation in Ashland. She wants to maintain the historic integrity of the
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
APRIL ~3, 1993
10
building and the Coca Cola sign. She is proposing to return the building to its original
use. She wants to balance the needs of the building to the surrounding community.
Barnett does not envision any restaurant type use.
STEVE BARNETT, 182 Scenic, stated this property is now owned by someone who is
willing and capable of restoring it. With the addition, it can be economically viable.
This is Peerless's last chance to survive--it will continue to crumble. There is a rich
history in the railroad district and the building deserves a chance to be saved.
RON THURNER, spoke on behalf of the applicant. With regard to planning action
signage, he certified that the signage was done. There should be materials in the
Planning Commissioners packets from the Historic Commission and Tree Commission.
There were an additional seven exhibits presented (K-P). McLaughlin said there were
large exhibits that Staff did not put up tonight.
Medinger discussed the window treatment and wondered if something more traditional
could be used instead of sliding windows on the screened porch. The State Historic
Preservation Office has said they do not want to emulate the existing windows on the
building. The addition should be a distinct separate design that does not mimic
anything that exists, at the same time still maintain a level of historic integrity.
Medinger dislikes the sliders and would like to see what will actually be used. Thurner
explained that as part of a certified rehabilitation, SHPO and the National Parks Service
has the final say and they have to approve for integrity in appropriateness and design.
Bingham asked if, in fact, the walnut tree was diseased. Thurner said it is diseased
with a fungus.
Thurner reported that though Staff has recommended paving of the parking lot with
materials other than asphalt or concrete, because of ADA requirements, that will
probably not work. ADA requires a smooth, skid resistant surface.
BOB SULLIVAN, 525 Sheridan Street, commented this building is comparable to the
Orth building in Jacksonville. It took him five years to sell it. If it had not sold, the
building would be in ruin. Sullivan encouraged the Commission to accept this
application without haste.
KATHY HOXMEIER, 435 B Street, had written comments opposing the application.
GARY EINHORN, 455 B Street had written comments opposing the application.
SUSAN BEARDSLEY EINHORN, 455 B Street, expressed her concerns about the
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
APRIL 13, '1993
11
impact of this building on her livability in terms of view and privacy. There will be
noise, parking, and lighting - things that are not there now. The addition encroaches
on her backyard privacy. Her front yard along B Street is a public place.
Bingham wondered if Einhorn had a solution. She suggested no windows in the back.
Powell suggested plantings and a fence to restore their privacy. Einhorn said a fence
could not be built that high, but the bamboo does help.
JEFF STRAUB, 463 B Street, stated that he plans to live in the house for a long time.
His first concern is obstruction of his view. The addition is a huge monolith. Privacy is
another concern. He lives in the back of his house which is mostly windows. He is
bothered because he was not contacted in the early stages of this planning action and
that someone took pictures from his back door without getting his permission. He has
been offended by the applicant's representative during this process. He wants to
maintain the sense of community that exists now on B Street where neighbors still talk
to one another. He suggested to Barnett that she have a one-story addition.
Jarvis wondered is Straub was really going to lose his view. Straub answered that he
would, however, he could cut down his bamboo to better see the mountains and that
should add light.
Staff Comments to Testimony
McLaughlin said a special area plan is needed for this area.
Medinger commented that this property is zoned E-1 and the owner can build to the
property line. The request is below the height limit.
BARNE-I-F apologized to Straub if his privacy was infringed upon when someone took
pictures from his home. She has put a lot of thought into this project and worked with
SHPO for the past six months to get to this design. She has kept the addition to as
minimal a size as she could and has worked not to obstruct the view. She cannot
reduce it any further. The first submittal to SHPO was without windows in the back
and SHPO rejected. Barnett explained that the luxury suite will be in the rear and the
windows overlooking the neighbors will be looking from a bathroom. She asked
Einhorn which way she would prefer the tub to face so it would interfere as little as
possible with her privacy. Carr emphasized that this room is not a public space.
Barnett said she planned to use shutters to deal with the privacy issue.
THURNER asked what kind of privacy currently exists for the neighbors. From the first
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
APRIL 13, 1993
12
floor on the alley, there is no privacy for Mr. Straub. If neighbor's privacy is to be
protected, there will be loss of view. He apologized to Straub if he offended him. He
noted that eventually Einhorn and Straub's property could be developed similarly since
they are zoned E-1.
COMMISSIONERS DISCUSSION AND MOTION
The parking Variance was agreeable. Powell wondered if it was necessary to pave all
of the parking lot according to ADA requirements. Can two spaces be of some other
material? Bingham noted that as a resident of the neighborhood, anytime there is a
problem with parking on Fourth Street, there is something going on in the Bundini
building (large building on the corner of Fourth and B and the bottom floor is used as
a dance studio and meeting room).
The Commissioners agreed that the Solar Waiver, Site Review and Conditional Use
Permit criteria were all met. The Commissioners regretted any adverse impacts but
even if there was no addition, the privacy would be impacted.
Carr moved to approve PA93-035 as per the attached conditions with possible change
to Condition 3 that one parking place be paved to ADA specifications and the other
spaces be surfaced in some other way. Armitage seconded the motion and it carried
unanimously.
CARR MOVED TO CONTINUE THE MEETING UNTIL 11:30 P.M. THE MOTION
WAS SECONDED AND APPROVED.
PLANNING ACTION 93-050
REQUEST FOR OUTLINE PLAN APPROVAL OF A 31-LOT SUBDIVISION
LOCATED AS A WESTERLY EXTENSION OF MILL POND ROAD CONNECTING
WITH FORDYCE STREET.
APPLICANT: MEDINGER SIMS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC.
Site Visits or Ex Parte Contacts
-~Medinger had a conflict of interest and abstained.
-,Thompson talked with Medinger about subdivision layouts but not pertaining to this
development. They discussed lessening front yard setbacks, one-way streets,
space for rear alleys. He made no site visit.
-->Bingham had a site visit and conversation with a neighbor, Glenn
Archaumbault about drainage.
->Carr had a site visit.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
APRIL 13, 1993
13
-->Powell had no site visit.
--*Armitage had no site visit.
--*Jarvis had a site visit.
STAFF REPORT
The proposal is for a 32 lot subdivision. The original plan was for a dead end street.
The revised plan involves the extension of Mill Pond Road and extending it to Fordyce
Street. There is a 35 percent density bonus for moderate income priced housing.
There is open space designated along the existing drainage channel which is
protected by the Physical and Environmental Constraints ordinance. Approximately
three-quarters of the open space is consumed by that channel and with a large
development perhaps the applicant could provide a larger, flatter area of open space.
Staff is asking the applicant to minimize curb cuts and consider the use of common
driveways. Also, try to de-emphasize the garage and look at the streetscape.
McLaughlin said that the sidewalks can be located on the property, leaving room for a
parkrow.
PUBLIC HEARING
LARRY MEDINGER, 295 Iowa, explained that it is going to cost more to have a neo-
traditional layout. In the first design, Medinger said the homes in the cul-de-sac are
don't have garages that give a wall effect. In neo-traditional layout, there will no
getting around the wall effect. He needs to have a minimum of a 30 foot stream
preservation. That would give 50 feet between houses. He feels the open space
layout couldn't be better.
He found the actual property described is five feet into what his neighbor, Caroline
Eidman, has considered her property. He has left 14 feet between the building
envelope and the north property line so he can give it back to her when he is in full
possession of the property. He can place the boundary on the old line. Medinger will
work on neo-traditional layouts and parkrows with the garages pushed back.
Thompson would like Medinger to investigate placement of garages off Fordyce.
CAROLINE ElDMAN, 541 Fordyce Street, said with the new survey line, it places the
property line 9 inches from her existing house. The fence that is there was repaired
11 years ago and she thinks ten years will give her standing.
TODD STURLOCK, wondered what was going to happen with the drainage ditch.
McLaughlin said part of their storm drain plan will be to improve that drainage. They
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
APRIL 13, 1993
14
will try to keep it in as natural a state as possible.
COMMISSIONERS DISCUSSION
This action will be continued next month.
Powell wondered if it would be possible to build a bridge with a deck in the flatter area.
Thompson wanted Medinger to deign the homes without placing the garages in the
front yard and to place on the side when possible.
It was moved, seconded and approved to continue to next month.
PLANNING ACTION 93-052
REQUEST FOR A SITE REVIEW AND MINOR LAND PARTITION TO CONSTRUCT
A WENDY'S RESTAURANT WITH A DRIVE-UP WINDOW TO BE LOCATED AT
1652 ASHLAND STREET (ASHLAND SHOPPING CENTER).
APPLICANT: WALT STALLCUP ENTERPRISES, INC.
Thompson, Carr and Armitage had site visit with Powell visualizing. Bingham had a
site visit and a conversation with the owner of the key shop who hoped to work out a
deal to move the key shop to another location in the center.
CARR MOVED TO CONTINUE THE MEETING UNTIL MIDNIGHT. THE MOTION
WAS SECONDED AND CARRIED.
STAFF REPORT
The Minor Land Partition is a straight-forward request and Staff recommends approval.
The request is for a Wendy's Restaurant with a drive-up window. This is one of the
first major designs that has come under the revised site review process. The
applicants have done a good job in accommodating the grade. Planters will lessen
the impact of the building being higher. There will be no additional curb cuts on
Ashland Street. The development has an excellent landscaping plan. Staff has
recommended approval of this action.
Thompson commented on the fine pedestrian oriented design, but Highway 66 is
lacking pedestrian refuges in the middle of Highway 66. How will the Highway 66
project be funded? McLaughlin said a plan will have to be in place and that is down
the line.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
APRIL 13, 1993
15
PUBLIC HEARING
CRAIG STONE, 708 Cardley Avenue, said Wait Stallcup, Wendy's owner; Dave
Richardson, architect; and Mike Rydbom, Ashland Shopping Center owner were
available to offer testimony. The applicant has no objections to the conditions. He
has tried to comply with the criteria and requests approval.
Bingham wondered where the microphone was located for the drive-up window.
Stone said it was on the back side.
DAVE RICHARDSON, Architect, 1105 Siskiyou Blvd., believes building will be nice a
addition.
Medinger mentioned the air conditioning equipment that was apparent on Taco Bell
and asked if there would be anything like that seen on this building (from Sentry
market). Richardson said there is a parapet. Stone said they are prepared to
stipulate screening as there will be air conditioning equipment on the top.
McLaughlin said this application will bring the shopping center sign into conformance.
COMMISSIONERS DISCUSSION AND MOTION
Carr thought language should be added about the vacating of the Frodsham drive-up
window. Add to Condition 14 that the drive-up window is no longer considered to be
in the drive-up window inventory. Carr moved to approve with the attached Conditions
and the above change in wording and also screen the equipment on top of the
building. Medinger seconded the motion and it carried unanimously.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 11:45 p.m.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
APRIL 13, 1993
16