Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993-06-08 Planning MINASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING JUNE 8, 1993 MINUTES CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Barbara Jarvis at 7:05 p.m. Other Commissioners present were Thompson, Armitage, Carr, Powell, Cloer, Bingham, Hibbert and Medinger. Staff present were McLaughlin, Molnar and Yates. APPROVAL OF MINUTES AND FINDINGS Powell noted a correction on page 12 under Open Space Designation. "He" is McLaughlin. Carr moved to approve as corrected. Powell seconded the motion and the Minutes were approved unanimously. Findings will be approved later in the meeting. PUBLIC FORUM No one came forth to speak. TYPE II PUBLIC HEARINGS PLANNING ACTION 93-053 REQUEST FOR SITE REVIEW AND VARIANCE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF FOUR TOWNHOUSES TO BE LOCATED AT 230 VAN NESS. AUTO AND PARKING ACCESS TO BE VIA THE ALLEY AT THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY FROM LAUREL STREET. PEDESTRIAN ACCESS TO BE PROVIDED FROM NEW TOWNHOUSES TO VAN NESS VIA FLAG DRIVE. VARIANCE REQUESTED TO NOT PAVE THE UNUSED FLAG DRIVE ACCESS. APPLICANT: DARRELL A. BOLDT AND LANA MCGRAW BOLDT Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts ->Armitage made two visits and measured the alleyway. He observed it would be difficult to get past the tree in question. ->Carr had a second site visit and reserved the same concern about the narrowness of the alley for this use. ->Powell made a second site visit. ->Cloer made a second site visit. ->Bingham made a second site visit and noted the narrowness of the alley. ->Hibbert, Medinger, and Thompson had no second site visit. ->Jarvis made a site visit. STAFF REPORT McLaughlin explained that this hearing is to decide whether or not to use the alley as access instead of the flag drive. Staff's opinion is that the flag means more asphalt and paving. The applicant has done redesign work on the elevations. Terry Skibby is here to speak on the Historic Commission's decision. Staff believes that the alley is a more appropriate use for access. McLaughlin noted the letter from Councilman Arnold dated June 2, 1993. PUBLIC HEARING DARRELL BOLDT, 1950 Tamarack, explored various options on how to approach this project. He has made further revisions to make the buildings more attractive. By paving the flag, this would push the townhouse units almost to the property line. This would also necessitate removal of the box elder tree. The entire trunk of the tree is inside the property line. Boldt showed an Alternate Plan B on an overhead and thought this plan would make the parking area more attractive. There would be six spaces with a center planter and the possibility of an on-street parking credit for the seventh space. He has made an effort to minimize the traffic impact on the neighborhood. McLaughlin said an on-street parking credit would not work. TERRY SKIBBY, 611 Beach Street, Historic Commission Liaison, said that after further review, the Commission approved this application. The Commission felt it would be best to use the alley access and not pave the flag. Paving would create a lot of pavement with much of the yard area being lost. The Historic Commission felt the redesign was more appropriate and suggested Boldt do more with the back elevation. With the alternate parking plan, the Historic Commission thought it important to go with an alternate landscape design to break up the parking. There will likely be more development in the alley and this will require more parking. Breaking up the parking area with landscaping would be an improvement. The Historic Commission has recommended that the alley be improved just to the property line. McLaughlin read a letter from Don Arbitblit into the record. JANET DUXBURY, 4343 Pioneer Road, property owner of 227 W. Hersey wondered about a similar case that came up in her neighborhood, and the City Council said the alley has to be paved to 20 feet. McLaughlin said that decision may have applied to a specific application. Recently, the Council has required an alley be paved to its full physical width. He said there is really no alley standard. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JUNE 8, 1993 McLaughlin explained further that changes are happening as applications come up that involves alleys. In the past, alleys have always required paving. In the last year an alley committee has been formed to study limitation and deferring paving of alleys. The Planning Commission could require paving at this time. Duxbury has felt like anything goes and the rules don't matter in this case. She has noticed in this application that graveling the alley is being required. However, gravel doesn't stay put and granite dust is detrimental to one's health. She is also concerned about the narrowness of the alley. Duxbury said that if the alley is to be used for access she would like to see it paved rather than graveled. A letter was submitted by VICKIE DOREMIS. McLaughlin read the letter into the record dated June 8, 1993. KATHLEEN TAYLOR, 227 Hersey, said her backyard is directly adjacent to the alley. She is concerned with traffic, noise, and safety. She does not want to see the narrow alley used for access. KATHLEEN OSTGARD, 229 W. Hersey, stated that she is opposed to using the alley for access. Parking is a problem and she said perhaps access should be from Van Ness. The alley is narrow and it is hard to turn in either direction. Cars cannot pass each other. She agrees with other neighbors in opposition. She does not think anyone is sure how wide the alley is and is particularly concerned about emergency vehicles. She would hate to see as much traffic on this alley as is on the alley between Hersey and VanNess. BOLDT rebutted that this property is zoned is R-3. He believes this is the best way to develop the property and it fits in with the neighborhood. Don Paul, Fire Department, said that the width of the alley is acceptable for access. Hibbert asked about the 20 inch cedar tree in the flag drive, and Boldt said it would have to be cut down if the flag drive was approved. In the plan, as presented, the cedar tree would be preserved. Boldt said his property had been surveyed. COMMISSIONERS DISCUSSION AND MOTION Page 4 of the Staff Report Addendum swayed Thompson to favor the application as submitted (would be 4,000 sq. ft. less paving). Add to Condition 2 that the alley should be paved, and Condition 4 that the pedestrian access be improved with an all- ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JUNE 8, 1993 weather surface, and seven parking spaces and the pedestrian way would be paved to the condominiums. Also, add a Condition that a recycling area be provided. Armitage agreed with Thompson about the paving. However, he is not convinced the alley is wide enough, which would fall under the adequate capacity criteria. He does not believe the circumstances are unique or unusual. He has envisioned this parcel to be developed with a flag drive. He has heard no testimony saying that paving the alley would be less impact to the neighbors. Carr thought variance had not been met. Powell said it bothered her not to know where the alley was located. On the other hand, the cottage that does face and access the alley could set a precedent for in-fill. Ultimately, the whole area will be better if not covering the property with asphalt. Looking down the alley, there won't be blank spaces on the back of buildings. She would favor paving the alley, if approved. Cloer thought the neighborhood would change and he felt Criteria 3 for a Variance had been addressed. He felt it was particularly important to attempt to make large developments as attractive and satisfying for living as possible. He also believes there is a new attitude that cars should be out of sight. Bingham felt if this was the only development of this type, he would probably say a flag was the most appropriate. In envisioning this area 20 years from now with apartments developing, all with flag drives, the alley seems most appropriate, if it is certain to be of adequate width. Armitage pointed out that there could be potentially many more cars if there is further development and then the alley becomes a 15 foot wide street. Bingham felt it would make more sense to condense the vehicle trips per day to the alley rather than cramming them on separate flag lots. Hibbert said the only way for acceptable development is with alley access. Medinger noted this property is R-3 and reminded the neighbors that the only way to make it less dense is to get together and change the zoning. Cloer added as another alternative, if neighbors desired, they could ask for the property to zoned private open space Jarvis thought it would be depressing to put this much asphalt on anything to make it work, however, there are still unresolved problems of driveways versus flags. Has ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JUNE 8, 1993 4 Criteria 4 been self-imposed? Partitioning was done by the applicant and now the Commission is struggling with that decision. Thompson moved to approve PA93-053 with Condition 2 "that the alley be improved to its full physical width .... "(end at shaded area). Add under Condition 3 "seven parking spaces .....". Insert "all-weather" in Condition 4 -- "include a clear all-weather pedestrian access ....". Hibbert seconded the motion. Thompson amended the motion to pave the parking spaces adjacent to the box elder with grass pavers. Hibbert seconded the amendment. Thompson believes that decisions need to be made that give the best end product. Bingham is still concerned about the alley width and he wondered what assurance he can have that this will happen. McLaughlin said the alley has been established on the assessor's plat at 16 feet. The motion carried with Powell, Hibbert, Thompson, Cloer, and Medinger voting "yes" and Armitage, Carr, Bingham, and Jarvis voting "no". Thompson left the meeting. APPROVAL OF FINDINGS The Findings of the May meeting were approved. Change the date on the Golden/Freeman Findings to April 13, 1993. PLANNING ACTION 93-069 REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION OF A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SITE REVIEW FOR A 26-UNIT CONDOMINIUM COMPLEX LOCATED AT 284 HERSEY STREET. APPLICANT: ALBERT TEITELBAUM Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts Site visits were made by all except Powell. Bingham drove by and went to Ohio Street and through the back end of the property. He noticed how the property related to Hersey Street and the railroad tracks. Hibbert had no site visit but had seen the property in the past. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JUNE 8, 1993 STAFF REPORT Molnar gave a history of this property as outlined in the Staff Report. The applicant is requesting 26 condominium units. A number of years have gone by and it might be time to take a fresh look at the project. A point of concern is the large parking area right off Hersey. It was suggested that there could be a potential for minimizing or blocking some parking area by bringing a unit up towards the street either on the east or west side still allowing for a drive. Presently, the exterior color scheme for project is light grey with white trim. Since there are several buildings involved, it would be more appropriate to have a new color scheme with the use of different colors. Additional colors tend to break up a mass. Originally this proposal was designed as an apartment complex. It would be beneficial to re-evaluate and see if features could be incorporated that would be more suitable for individual ownership, such as covered parking or deck spaces. Molnar noted the memo from the Fire Department with comments regarding the turnaround for fire apparatus. The Fire Department would like an opportunity to review the proposal again. The site review from the Tree Commission and a letter from the neighbors dated May 31, 1993 have been entered into the record. Hibbert wondered if the setbacks on units 14 and 15 could be increased because they seemed so close to the neighboring property. Molnar felt they could through decreasing the square footage of the units. PUBLIC HEARING DON RIST, represents AI Teitelbaum, the applicant. After the last extension approval for the project, the bank that was to make the loan for the project went under. About this same time, Rist mentioned to the applicant that the City was becoming active in affordable housing and he asked Teitelbaum if he would consider switching his project from an apartment complex to affordable housing. Rist then approached John Fregonese with the idea and Fregonese responded favorably. Teitelbaum, Rist and Fregonese met shortly thereafter and Teitelbaum was encouraged to do something with affordable housing and Super Good Cents. Rist understood that in the months following the discussion with Fregonese, the plan was revamped, and a unit was dropped, and an effort was made to make the units fit into affordable housing. Presently, there is a lender that is ready to commit the financing to this project and Rist is asking for an extension for the approval of this project from the Planning ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JUNE 8, 1993 6 Commission. Hibbert wondered if the setbacks along the two large south and west lines were to be increased, could the applicant reduce the size of the units and still make the project work. Rist said the project was designed by Bruce AbeIce and he could not answer that, however, he was confident that Teitelbaum would try to work with that idea. Jarvis noted that this project was first presented in 1988 and believed there are different standards such as Fire Department requirements, setbacks, colors, etc., now than when this was started in 1988. She also wondered what had been happening during the last year. Rist thought the year had been spent in revamping the plans and getting it to fit into the affordable housing structure, and obtaining financing. McLaughlin read a letter dated April 13, 1993 from Teitelbaum into the record and from Robert McWilliams, 9700 Highway 66. JAMES JEFFREY, also speaking for Mr. McWilliams, said that if units 14 and 15 (behind Jeffrey's property) and units 16, 17, and 18 (behind McWilliams' property) remain, their houses will be completely walled in like a box. Jeffrey is asking for greater setbacks on these units. He said the Tree Commission had not reviewed this project and he felt they wanted to review the screening. Jeffrey would want a six foot fence along the back and screening along the parking lot. They would also like a line of trees along their back fence lines. Staff has also mentioned placing one of the units up toward the front, however, Jeffrey is hoping that will not block his view. He would prefer the parking lot in that location. Jeffrey seemed interested in exploring some different design and setback ideas. DON PAUL, Fire Department, commented that from the time of the original application until today, the Fire Department has been working from three different versions of the Uniform Fire Code and the Uniform Building Code, and thought it would be in the Fire Department's best interest to have a complete review of this project. McLaughlin noted that the applicant is asking for an extension of a previously approved landscaping plan. DON RIST, rebuttal, stated that when the project was approved for 27 units, the project met all the criteria. He believes the applicant is trying to do something that is right for the City. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JUNE 8, 1993 COMMISSIONERS DISCUSSION AND MOTION Medinger felt this was a very large project and the amount of time it would take to redesign the project could be small compared to the result. He does not believe this would cause undue harm to the applicant. Armitage, Carr, Bingham and Powell agreed. CIoer was uncertain that if the things the Commission would like to see improved in the plans might not also move the project out of affordable housing. Hibbert's concerns mostly surrounded the setbacks and landscape buffering. Jarvis thought the Commission should consider an ordinance on requests for extensions. Carr moved to deny PA93-067. Powell seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. PLANNING ACTION 93-070 REQUEST FOR OUTLINE AND FINAL PLAN APPROVAL OF A FIVE-UNIT SUBDIVISION UNDER THE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OPTION FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1253 QUINCY STREET. APPLICANT: MICHAEL GUTMAN Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts Site visits and previous site visits were made by all. STAFF REPORT The applicant is now asking to divide the four units into their own parcels, the house onto its own parcel, and the flag and parking in common open area to be owned by the units. Under base density in R-3, the applicant would be allowed six units so the proposed five units comply. From Staff's review, this application meets all the requirements of the ordinance. If Staff were designing a new multi-family subdivision, this is probably not the way it would be done, but in this instance, the application appears to meet all requirements with the attached 5 Conditions. Cloer asked Staff if Condition 4, regarding the common wall units complying with the building code, could be met. McLaughlin responded that it could. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JUNE 8, 1993 PUBLIC HEARING MICHAEL GUTMAN, told the Commission that indeed Condition 4 could be met, but it will be cost prohibitive to him. Gutman expressed his confusion about this process and why his application for a minor land partition was not approved last month. McLaughlin explained to Gutman that the process is different for different types of land use applications. When an applicant begins a certain process, he determines what is wanted as an end product. The difficulty comes in changing to a different process after choosing one path. COMMISSIONERS DISCUSSION AND MOTION The Commissioners agreed this application met the Criteria for approval. Medinger moved to approve PA 93-070 with the attached Conditions. Carr seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. PLANNING ACTION 93-084 REQUEST FOR MODIFICATION OF A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SITE REVIEW FOR DENTAL OFFICE BUILDING AT 277 FIFTH STREET. MODIFICATION INVOLVES THE INCREASE IN THE SETBACK OF THE BUILDING FROM "A" STREET. APPLICANT: DANIEL D. JACKSON Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts Site visits were made by all. In particular, Bingham paced off the proposed changes and Jarvis looked at the options on the setbacks. STAFF REPORT This application was approved in February. The applicant is requesting to increase the setback of the main building frontage to 26 feet from A Street. Staff is concerned with the streetscape along A Street. The standard within the Site Design and Use Standards is that the building should be within 20 feet of the sidewalk. Staff believes the applicant is requesting a little too much increase and would not be as appropriate as 20 feet. Twenty feet would give a good sense of entry. The Tree Commission does not believe the evergreen tree is worth preserving. The Tree Commission site review and the Historic Commission minutes were entered into the record. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JUNE 8, 1993 PUBLIC HEARING DAN JACKSON, gave a brief history of his proposed building as outlined in the letter he submitted. He just wants to build back to where everyone else is along A Street. Hibbert inquired if there would be any new structures being built along A and Jackson thought his was the last to develop there. Jarvis noted that smaller setback gives pedestrians a more secure feeling. McLaughlin explained that the 20 foot setback has been adopted recently. Even though the Euromek building is set further back, it could redevelop and if moved out toward the sidewalk could look more commercial. Jackson was concerned about passersby being able to see his patients while he is working on them, if the building is set closer to the street. McLaughlin argued that the building may not always be a dental office. COMMISSIONERS DISCUSSION AND MOTION Jarvis and Bingham did not believe Jackson should push the building back because it will not do for A Street what was intended. The old depot is set closer. Hibbert thought the corner lot will look nice by having the building further back with plantings up front. Carr moved to approve PA93-084 with the attached Conditions. Armitage seconded the motion and it carried with Jarvis and Bingham voting "no". OTHER Legislative Issues Cloer provided a significant amount of information on the issues before the legislature. McLaughlin reported that the legislature is looking at opening up secondary lands for further development, lessening the restrictions on this development. In the past, the Commission has voiced concerns over this issue. Cloer explained that there seemed to be so many items brought up in one bill. The bill is 55 pages with 43 amendments. It appears to be a "catch-all" for everyone's concerns. Representative Nancy Peterson will be arguing against the bill on Thursday. She said she would benefit from a letter opposing the bill. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JUNE 8, 1993 10 Jarvis wondered if the Commission would like to send a letter to Nancy Peterson asking her to oppose any legislative action that would diminish the availability or viability of LCDC. Bingham thought it was difficult to look at the bill and understand it fully. It was decided to prepare a letter to Nancy Peterson from those Commissioners that wanted to voice opposition to any bill that would diminish LCDC. Joint Meeting of Council and Commission There will be a joint meeting of the City Council and the Planning Commission on June 29, 1993 at 7:30 p.m. Miscellaneous Carr wondered if there was any stipulation in the code that would force the owners of Rondo Lanes to tidy up. McLaughlin said there was not. Crosswalk Awareness Week is coming up. Please take any concerns to Traffic Safety Commission. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 11:30 p.m. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JUNE 8, 1993 11