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