Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977-1213 ADJOURNED MINUTES OF TItE ADJOURNED MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL & PLANNING COMi~!ISSION December 13, 1977 ~LEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Prickett ca.lled the meeting to order at 7'30 & ROLL CALL p.m. in the above date in the Eng].ish Lecture Ha. li of Ashland Senior High School. Present were · Councilmembers Phelps, Ragland, McCannon, Laws and Hamilton. Drescher arrived five minutes ]azer. Also present were Planning Commissioners Alderson, Pugh, Wenker, Morris, Billings and Hansen. ~,UkP CttANGES Strawberry Lane Area ... Himes e×pl~qined the area was proposed rural residential and suburban residential. He also explained most of the letters received dealt ~,ith the rural designation'which was felt to be inappropriate for the area. Su~egested alternatives were to either delete the rural resider, rial and designate the entire area suburban residential, or modify the definition of rural residential k~cCannon asked for the Planning Commission's reasoning for designating the area as they did. Laws said he had very strong feelings on increas_~g the allowable density in rural residential. Wenker and biorris said they had made rural residential one unit per acre based on the topography of the area, and access into the area. Laws said he felt the definition of rural residential should 'be loosened up to give more flexibility and tightened up where needed when it c~me to zoning. McCannon moved that the Council accept for the Strawberry Lane area ~.ne Planning Commission plan which is part rural residential and part suburt-,an resident2al, with the change the rural residential may be up to two units per acre. Second by Laws. After discussion, Laws suggested the motion be withdrawn to deal with the density question of rural residential first, ~chich would be applicable to a"l areas of the City. Laws tl~en moved that the definition of rural residential be up to three units per acre. Motion failed for lack of a second. McCannon felt t~vo units should be the limit because of the slopes in the area. McCannon then moved that rural residential be up to t~,o units per acre. Second by Phelps. Motion PASSED 5 to 1 with Phelps casting the only-NO vote. ~.,IcCannon then moved that the Strawberry Lane area be zoned as laid out. by the Planning Co~2mission. Second by Laws, who also suggested t© later require the Planning Staff to develop a long-range staged development plan for providing City services in the area. Drescher said he hoped after public testimony received that the Planning Commission would take the slope of an area into consideration to allow the maximum allowable units for the rural residential areas of similar slope as areas zoned suburban residential. Motion PASSED unanimously by roll call vote. Granite Street Area Himes explained the area was proposed suburban residential. The area primaril.¥ consists of single-family homes with some small apartment developments on Granite Street and one duplex. Under present zoning the area has t¥~o zones, ,.r.~-l'B-8 and R-3'2.4. The proposed plan ~.'ould downzone the R-3 land to R-i. Drescher said he had been contacted by some property owners in the area and he felt they had a legitimate request in keeping it a multiple-family use area. P]aelps made reference to a letter received from Carl Oates ~and agreed with h~s suggestion that uri~an low residential may encourage people to take care of the eye sore granite pit by allowing development of it in a multiple-family ~se. Mo~ris e×plained this was one of the hard areas to decide on, what ~ith the present mixed uses in the area. Drescher moved that the Granite Street a~ea be designated urban low residential. Second by Hamilton: Himes then asked for a clarification of the area. Up. on clarification Drescher said it was the pocket of ].and.presently zoned R-3'2.~-. Hamilton tlaen asked for furtF,~er definition of the pocket of land changed. Himes said it was t]~e land bordered by Nutley Street on the north, Strawberry Lane on the south,' Scenic Drive on the eazt, and Granite Street on the west. Motion PASSED unanimously by roll call vote. · H~igh 'Street - Scenic Drive Area Himes traced out the area and explained it is proposed to have two designations, urban low residential and suburban residential. The change would allow for higher density developments in new R-1 areas, and cut the density of the R-3'1.2 a~ea in half to urban low residential. The neighbors in the presently zoned R-1 areas were in opposition to the urban iow residential designation. Morris e×plained there are presently several apartment complexes on Wimer Street, and the Planning Commission had received several applications in the past for apartments on High Street and Manzanita Street. That was why they had felt an urban low designation would be compatible for the area. ]~IcCannon said he could not recall of any objections to urban low on the ]o~er side of High Street, only between High and Scenic. Laws moved that the area west of High Street, which is designated on the map as urban low residential be ct~anged to suburban residential. Second by Phelps. Clarification of the area was the area west of High, down to Granite, up to Wimer, which is presently not zoned R-3. ~.~etion PASSED unanimously by roll call vote. ~3cCannon said he favored the cha".ge back to suburban residential but felt some areas will be needed of fairly dense population, or the City ~ill be forced to expand tke Urban Grow'th Boundary. Laws then suggested to put on the agenda at a later date his request to return the area presently zoned R-3'1.2 on both sides of North Main to the railroad tracks; between Helman and Wimer Streets to its present designation of u]~ban high residential. After discussion of ~;hat procedure ~.:ould be the most appropriate, Laws then moved to put the issue on the agenda to be taken for~a~d at whatever meeting the Council finishes the agenda. Second by Ragland. Motion PASSED 4 to 2 with Phelps and Drescher casting the two NO votes. Tolman Creek Road Area Himes explained most of the area is presently R-1 and is proposed suburban residential. Most of the public testimony for the area concerned inclusion into the urban growt~ boundary of some land to the south of Tolman Creek Road, and concerns of residents of drainage problems if further development was allo~.:ed. ~4cCannon said after looking at the area he personally felt it is an area that can be made urban high residential ~'ithout hurting anyone, e×c by maybe creating some traffic problems. I-te felt the area should ~ut ~ack into the Urban Growth Boundary and considered at least partial].7~ far u~ban high residential uses. Phelps said he did not feel it was a good place for it. Tho ~,[ayor sa~d the requests regarding _inclusion of areas into the Urban Gro¥~,th Boundary would be taken up at the appropriate time; but he felt there was no controversy over the present zoning or density as shown on the map, and felt all that would be required would be a motion to accept the area as proposed ~y the Planning Commission. Ragland so moved· Second by McCannon. ?4otion PASSED unanimously by roll call vote· $iskiyou Boulevard Area (Tolman Creek Road to north City limits) · d~m~s explained the area is presently zoned R-5 1 2 but has been ~roposed to be changed to urban low residential. The Planning Commission's thinking for the reduction ~¥as an attempt to make the gate~'ay to the Ctiy more attractive and appealing. Drescher supported the feelings of the property owners that urban high is needed within the Ci. ty. Ile felt this area would best mee't the needs of the population, particularly because of it being an area where there is immedi, ate accessi.bi]ity to services. He then moved that the area from Tolm,.nn Creek to the Ash]and Shopping Center be changed to urban high residential to conform with the present zoning. Second by .McCannon for the purpose of discussion. ~.,;cCannon said he did not feel it ~'as fair to the property owners in the area to do~zone land that has been for a long time in a certain zoning area. Phelps then asked for some proof that Ashland really needs areas of high density. Drescher said he felt they were needed due to the subtratction of the Urban Growth Boundary· Phelps said putting the highest density' along a major street would be creating a corridor development. Weaker commented tl~at ~ost of the neighborhood testimony was definitely against any more .!~igh density developments in the area· The roll was then taken and Drescher's motion PASSED 4 to 2 with Ragland and Phelps casting the two NO votes. , . Bridge Street Area Mimes explained that the proposed Plan would increase the density of parts of ~..~e area which are presently zoned R-1 to urban high residential. 1,;cCa. nncn s=id that based on comments from the neighborhood requesting to stay R-i, he moved that the area between Iowa and Lee Streets, and Avery and Wightman Streets be changed to urban low residential. Second by Laws. }.iotion PASSED unanimously by roll call vote. R__i_dge Road Area Himes explained the area consisted of Ridge Road and both sides of Terrace Street. Under the proposed plan the area would have t¥.'o designations. Boti~ sides of Ridge Road are rural residential and both sides of Terrace Street are generally suburban residential. The public testimony dealt with tl-~e rural residential designation on the upper portions of Terrace Street · to the Long Way area. Laws strongly recommended a suburban residential designation for the area in terms of the neighborhood and present zoning, and to have the zoning ordinance take care of the problem areas. La~,'s then moved that the designated area (the block north of the Ditch, to the extension of Ashland Street) changed to sub-rban residential. Second by },lcCannon. ~.iotion PASSED unanimously by roll call vote. ouuth ~,Iounatin Avenue Area '~imes e×plained the request ~'as to change some homes west of the SOSC campus and ~',~ountsin Avenue and south of Siskiyou Boulevard from urban low to urban ]figh residential, ~cCannon ~,~oved that the area be changed to urban high because of being in an area with the College on both sides and because of no public teszimony objecting to the proposed change. Second by Laws. Phelps pointed out that if the land under discussion is within the SOSC boundary and is acquired and. then redisposed of, it should come out at the lowest possible usage. Laws agreed with the need for a planned future designation for the land in case of a ~eversal. ~,~otion PASSED unanimously. Southern Oregon State College Boundary The Mayor stressed working with the present SOSC boundary. He suggested meeting with the College for their input on future land acquisition and zoning of land within the boundary. In particular concern was the zoning of privately owned 'land before it would be bought by the College and pub!icily owned land which might be sold on the future. It was then decided to have the boundary issued be referred to the end of the agenda in order to get more information from the College before making a final decision. Railroad District Himes explained to the Planning Commission the Council changes made on the map from their original proposal. McCannon stated he objected very strongly to the retail commercial along '~A" Street. He felt it should be heavy commercial on bo~h sides. He t]~en moved that r. he area proposed retail commercial be changed to heavy commercial. Motion failed for lack of a second. Ragland then moved that the retail commercial line be drawn to follow up First Street, down the alley and connecting with the heavy commercial line so that the Twin Plunges site would be located in entirety in the retail commercial zone. Second by Laws. Motion PASSED unanimously. ~4orris and Wenker said their feeling in drawing the li~e as they did was to create a buffer zone between the heavy commercial area~ and the residential areas. Pugh said he felt that the Fourth and "B': Street area has much potential for future retail commercial uses. Hansen said she hated to see the area torn down because residents in the area are turning their eyes favorably towards development with a historic connotation. Phelps then moved for acceptance of the heavy commercial and retail commercial areas as on the modified map and to include all of the Twin Plunges site. Second by Ragland. Motion PASSED 5 to 1 with McCannon casting the NO vote. Hamilton then moved to take the rest of the area as shown on the pink map as urban low residential cutting it off at the back property lines of the east side of Eighth Street. Second by Laws. Motion PASSED unanimously. The ~,~ayor suggested an affirmation that from Eighth Street to Mountain Avenue remain urban high residential as proposed by the Planning Commission. Hamilton so moved. Second by Laws. Motion PASSED unanimously. .~rth of Airp~ort ,,Himes pointed out the parcel of land in question. The Mayor asked Himes ].f the area conformed with the recommended Airport Master Plan. Himes said it did. Almquist said the area should be shown as some definite zone, rather 'than just for exclusive public use. Possibly designate it rural residential .with an airport overlay plan. The Mayor pointed out the that problem was with the definition of "airport related uses". City Attorney Salter suggested showing it on the Plan t,]ap as rural residential with potential conditional uses. That would ~ive the present owner or perspective owner the option of asking the Council for a certain use. Upon request from the Council, attorney Harry Skerry said. from his clients viewpoint he felt the airport should be a part of the community for business and industrial uses, and would like as bro~d a use as possible. Phelps pointed out that only one parcel was being discussed out of several parcels in the area and he felt the other property owners should also be consulted on possible uses. Ragland then moved to postpone the issue and place it as the first item on the agenda for the next meeting. Second by Laws. Motion PASSED 4 to 2 with Drescher and Laws casting the NO votes. South of AirPort... Himes explained the property in question was located across from Oak Knoll, along East ~ain Street to Dead Indian Road. It was proposed by the Commission ~ as light industrial but the neighboring residents requested it be rural residential. McCannon said he couldn't see any better use for the area. Rgaland said he has heard the argument by pilots that having homes next to an airport is very desirable. ~orris said the Commission's reasoning in designating light industrial was because they felt allowing homes near an airport would ca~se a hardship upon 'that airpor~c. Laws said he felt no need had been demonstrated for acquisition of more light industrially zoned ]~and. The Mayor said he felt it was one of the most natural sites for industrial use with the least amount of impact to the City. Phelps said he could not see the addition of light industrial at the present time from the standpoint of safety. McCannon moved to up]~old the Planning Commission proposal of light industrial. SeconJ~ by Hamilton. Motion failed 4 to 2. Drescher then moved the area be desigr, ated highway commercial. Second by ~cCannon. Upon clarification of highway commercial uses, McCannon withdrew his second. · Ragland then moved the area ~e designated as light industrial with airport related uses only, as defined by Harry Skerry's recommendation. Second by Phelps. After discussion Ragland then amended his motion to read light industrial uses only. Second by Phelps. Motion PASSED 4 to 2 with Laws and Drescher casting the NO votes. The meeting was adjourned, with ~13 under Map Changes on the agenda remaining· ~ ~' Fr'afiklin - ~ t City Recorder Mayor