HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-06-04 Historic MINASHLAND HISTORIC COMMISSION
Minutes
June 4, 1997
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at the Ashland Community Center by Chairperson Jim
Lewis at 7:40 p.m. Members present were Jim Lewis, Terry Skibby, Vava Bailey, Dale
Shostrom, Keith Chambers, Larry Cardinale, Curt Anderson, Joyce Cowan and Carol
Abrahamson. Also present were Associate Planner Mark Knox and Secretary Sonja
Akerman. No members were absent.
INTRODUCTION OF NEW MEMBERS
Lewis introduced new members Dale Shostrom and Carol Abrahamson to the Commission.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Anderson moved and Cardinale seconded to approve the May 7, 1997 Minutes as submitted.
The motion was unanimously passed.
STAFF REPORTS
Planning Action 97-048
Conditional Use Permit
275 Lithia Way
KC Railroad Sausage Company
Knox explained this proposal is to relocate the existing food service cart, which is currently
on "A" Street, to the Rocket Photo site. The applicants intend to operate their business as
they do now, and sell sausage sandwiches year-round at this site. The cart will operate
seven days a week except for Sundays and Mondays in the winter months. All conditions
will be the same as previously approved for the current site except the last one dealing with
parking. Staff is recommending approval.
Skibby asked about the temporary designation. Knox said that because the cart is not on
a foundation, it is temporary in nature. It will be permanent, however, at that location. He
added the Conditional Use Permit runs with this application only.
Bailey asked if there would be seating available. Camilla Cassity answered Chris Briscoe,
owner of the property, has asked that they do have seating. Carol Klein, co-applicant, said
they will have a tent similar to the one they have on "A" Street They will also have
indoor/outdoor carpet and potted plants in the seating area.
Anderson asked for clarification of why this action was before the Historic Commission.
Knox said it is a Conditional Use Permit located in the Historic District and is therefore
required by ordinance to receive Historic Commission review. Lewis added it allows the
Commission to have a say on the design. Chambers noted it precludes others telling the
Commission something does nor does not have historic value. Knox declared it is necessary
to uphold the integrity of projects. Anderson said he was not asking for the merit, but
wondered about particular considerations. Knox stated considerations for this application
would be aesthetics, relationship with the street, and design of the cart.
Skibby stated this is a good location for the cart. It won't be obtrusive, yet it will be visible.
Carol Klein added it does not affect parking for Rocket Photo and the seating will be away
from the busy street.
Cardinale moved and Bailey seconded to recommend approval of this application to the
Planning Commission. The motion was unanimously passed.
Planning Action 97-053
Site Review
565 "A" Street
Shostrom Brothers, Ltd.
Shostrom stepped down and sat in the audience. Knox noted that due to the State's ethical
requirements, Shostrom would not be able to represent or discuss the merits of the
application with the Historic Commission. Knox then related this application is for approval
to construct a mixed use 3,900 square foot building on lot 4 in the Railroad Subdivision.
Parking will be in the rear. The building is symmetrical in design and is a fairly traditional
block style. The door has a colunmed entry with a porch. Side lights (long vertical windows
on either side of the door) will be along both sides of the door. The proposed building will
abut the property line to the west and Staff feels it is compatible with the new building
under construction. The two buildings will share a common wall. There will be an arbor
adjoining the two buildings screening the electric meters. The first floor will consist of a 480
square foot apartment and 1,556 square feet of general office space. The second floor will
have a 1,200 square foot apartment and 736 square feet of general office space. Knox noted
there will be a shared handicapped space with the property next door. This will allow a
larger stature tree in the parking area. Staff is recommending approval.
Skibby asked if Staff had any additional design concerns. Knox said Staff suggested the side
lights, thus adding to the invitable entry. Skibby said since the building is stucco, he was
concerned about the width of the windows and asked if there would be any relief or more
detail on the windows. Abrahamson said this is a contemporary use of windows and it is
hard to tell how they will look with a flat drawing. Knox said the windows will be bronze
or vinyl and will be inset. Lewis said Skibby is talking about the header and sill. The plans
show a sill but no header.
Cardinale asked if real or synthetic stucco would be used. In either case, he said it would
not be difficult to add more detail to the windows. Knox said he would talk to Shostrom
tomorrow to find out the details.
Ashland Historic Commission
Minutes
June 4, 1997
Page 2
Bailey said her first reaction to the design was that it is good the building would be higher
than the adjacent one. She also wondered if the windows would look better if they were
single hung rather than casement. Lewis noted that casement windows allow more
ventilation, if that is the objective.
Anderson related the glass seems over-sized to him. Abrahamson noted this is a transition
building and it has some characteristics of a true classical structure. If the Commission
could see a color elevation of the building, it would show how the windows would blend in.
Also, the finish on the stucco could make a difference. If you look at the building as
transitional, you don't need to add more traditional elements. It's alright to have the
massing of the windows. It wouldn't have been done in the past, but it's OK for the 1990s.
Stucco will soften the design. She also noted real stucco allows light to penetrate its surface,
while plastic stucco reflects the light.
Chambers said the awnings are canvas and can be removed. He wondered if it was right
to design the awnings into the building. A future owner may remove them. He declared
the building should stand in its own. He also wondered why the windows are so low. He
said he would like to see the building designed without the awnings. Knox noted the
awnings are on the south facing elevation and they provide shading protection. Cardinale
said without the awnings, it would be a very plain building.
Lewis noted the window height is fairly equal to the building next to it. He also said the
window height is an architectural design for inside light.
Knox said the Commission should make a motion with the concerns so the applicant can
work with the Review Board. Any changes should be encompassed in conditions.
Cardinale stated he has a problem with all the "options" in the application. When the
Commission sees "options", too often we get something we don't want. He said he wants
to know what will "be" before he votes to approve. There are ten different types of stucco.
He needs to know what he will be approving because he doesn't want the same stucco finish
as Taco Bell. Bailey added the options don't always work together.
Abrahamson said that historically, windows were more vertical than horizontal. This design
would be more traditional if the windows were vertical and headers were added. She
related she would like to see elevations with the windows in groups of two rather than 3.
Cardinale added if a metal roof will be used, standing seam would not be appropriate.
Lewis agreed and noted galvanized metal would have more of a patina and is more
traditional.
Chambers declared there is not just one variable, and if six or eight options are used, you
can get a very different building than what you approve. Cowan agreed and said there are
too many "ifs". Knox added there are always numerous unknowns until you actually start
construction. It is therefore important to stress all Commission concerns.
Ashland Historic Commission
Minutes
June 4, 1997
Page 3
Chambers said he thinks the proposed building works well being higher than the one to the
west. A lot would be lost if it were the same height.
As the Commission had concerns about seeing elevations without the awnings so header
trim and window proportions could be examined more thoroughly, Abrahamson said the
awnings should be done as an overlay.
Anderson said he would approve the application with recommendations. He would like to
see the windows split to single hung. Cowan said the height of the windows should be
proportionate to the top of the building. Bailey declared the height of the building is
important to her. It should be higher than the building to the west. She suggested single
or double hung windows, and also noted she would like to see elevations without the
awnings. Abrahamson said concerns of hers are the height of the building, roofing material,
type of stucco, and windows. There are many different ways to approach the window
groupings and she would like to see alternative elevations. She would also like to see a
color plan since color has such a major impact on buildings. Knox noted color plans are not
a requirement of plan submittal. Chambers agreed with Abrahamson and added he would
like to see a lintel treatment. Lewis stressed the importance of roofing material (he would
recommend galvanized), header and trim for balance and height, and the height of the
building. He said the overall building has a nice look with the pillars and cornices.
Cardinale agreed with Lewis. Skibby said he feels comfortable with the building, but would
like to see headers above the windows. He also recommends a galvanized roof.
After taking a straw poll, the Commission felt the following conditions should be added to
the Findings: 1) height should be taller than building to the west; 2) headers should be on
all windows; and 3) roof material should be galvanized.
After discussing these items in more detail, Skibby moved to recommend approval of this
planning action with the above conditions. Skibby also included the empowerment of the
Review Board to make decisions based on the conditions at the time the building permit
is submitted. Cardinale seconded the motion and it was unanimously passed.
Shostrom will also present drawings to the Review Board within the next few weeks. He
then rejoined the Commission.
BUILDING PERMITS
Permits reviewed by members of the Historic Commission and issued during the month of
May follow:
253 East Main Street
101 Scenic Drive
139 Granite Street
172 Church Street
223 Fifth Street
Johnny Kiwiseed
Matt Messner
Richard & Leslie Lovett
David Hoxie
Cooper/Silverman
Tennant Improvements
Pool
Addition/Remodel
Acces. Res. Unit
Remodel
Ashland Historic Commission
Minutes
June 4, 1997
Page 4
227 Granite Street
78 Sixth Street
35 Granite Street
40 North Main Street
220 Scenic Drive
40 North Main Street
548 Rock Street
548 North Main Street
275 East Main Street
64 North Pioneer Street
47 North Main Street
31-B Water Street
Richard Mastain
Ron & Tracy Bass
Allen Connolly
Gordon Claycomb
John Thompson
Chris McIntosh
Brent Thompson
Mountain View Retire.
Ashland Drug
Reichenshammer Const.
Plaza Cafe
Siskiyou Micro Brew
Remodel
Remodel/Addition
Replace Foundation
Enlarge Interior Window
Deck
Arbor Addition
Deck
Sign
Sign
Sign
Sign
Sign
REVIEW BOARD
Following is the schedule (until the next meeting) for the Review Board, which meets every
Thursday from 3:00 to at least 3:30 p.m. in the Planning Department:
June 5
June 12
June 19
June 26
Skibby, Bailey, Lewis and Cowan
Skibby, Lewis, Chambers and Abrahamson
Skibby, Anderson and Shostrom
Skibby, Bailey, Cowan and Abrahamson
OLD BUSINESS
Old business was not discussed.
Members will be appointed to project assignments for PA 97-048 and 97-053 at the next
meeting.
Project Assignments for Planning Actions
PA # Address [ Person(s) Assigned
96-063 62-66 East Main Street Terry Skibby
96-058 264 Van Ness Avenue Jim Lewis
96-086 685 "A" Street Curt Anderson/Jim Lewis
96-110 499 Iowa Street Joyce Cowan
96-112 249 "A" Street Jim Lewis
96-139 545 "A" Street Terry Skibby
97-014 20 South First Street Joyce Cowan
Ashland Historic Commission
Minutes
June 4, 1997
Page 5
96-143/97-030 136 North Second Street Terry Skibby
97-018 661 "B" Street Jim Lewis
97-032 174 Church Street Vava Bailey
97-039 78 Sixth Street Jim Lewis
NEW BUSINESS
The Role of the Historic Commissioner
Knox related the role of the Historic Commissioner is to guide projects which are required
for review and recommend possible alternatives for compatibility. Types of projects include
Conditional Use Permits, Site Reviews, and Variances. There are different procedures and
different criteria for these types of planning actions. The Commission will need to review,
recommend and steer the projects to protect the integrity of the Historic District in general.
Anderson said he had some ideas on how to streamline the Commission meetings: 1) have
an overall time period; 2) come to consensus on how long to meet on various projects (staff
could be time keeper); 3) have a straw poll in order to find proper time to make motion;
4) don't allow more than one conversation at a time.
Skibby said he would discourage time limits. As it is now, Commission members have to
agree if they want to extend the meeting past 10:00, then past 10:30. Meetings can go no
longer than 11:00 p.m. Anderson said he is more concerned about each agenda item.
Skibby countered the quality of the meetings would diminish. Bailey said a time check
would be a good idea. Lewis stated he sees public input as important and every planning
action is different. Chambers said that over the years, he feels the Commission has
developed a good process. He agreed with Bailey, however, the Commission should be
more cognizant of the time.
Lewis added it is important to advise the Planning Commission and make recommendations.
The Historic Commission needs to have good credibility. He also noted the criteria for the
Historic Commission is more subjective than objective.
Anderson said he is also interested in everyone having a say, but not dual conversations.
It is also important not to lose track of time. He would like a recommendation on how long
the Commission should spend on discussion after public testimony has been closed. Lewis
said he is willing to have a guideline set. Chambers said he feels the Commission takes the
amount of time it feels is necessary for each action and that Lewis could call for a motion
if he feels it is time. Lewis commented that oftentimes old and new business get short
changed and they are important parts of the agenda also.
Ashland Historic Commission
Minutes
June 4, 1997
Page 6
Anderson moved to have the Commission come up with some recommendations on how
long certain agenda items take, depending on the importance to the community. The
motion died for lack of a second.
Abrahamson said this is a creative process with the need to guide the energy and educate.
When actual issues have been dealt with, it is time to move on. Lewis stated the members
should feel free to remind him to move on if necessary.
On the issue of who should start the discussions, Cardinale suggested whoever is ready
should begin, then move around the table until all members have spoken. Lewis added
everyone should wait for a turn if they want to rebut or debate. Chambers said he would
worry about the loss of spontaneity if all discussions rotate around the table.
At 10:15 Skibby moved to extend the meeting until 10:30. There was no second.
There was no further discussion
ADJOURNMENT
It was the unanimous decision of the Commission to adjourn the meeting at 10:15 p.m.
Ashland Historic Commission
Minutes
June 4, 1997
Page 7
ASHLAND HISTORIC COMMISSION
Agenda
June 4, 1997
Ie
He
III.
IV.
CALL TO ORDER: 7:30 p.m. - ASHLAND COMMUNITY CENTER
59 Winburn Way
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: May 7, 1997
STAFF REPORTS:
PLANNING ACTION 9%046 is a request for a Conditional Use Permit to transfer
ownership of a traveller's accommodation located at 11 ! Third Street Comprehensive
Plan Designation: Multi-Family Residential; Zoning: R-2; Assessor's Map #: 39
1E 09 BA; Tax Lot: 8800.
APPLICANT: Rosemary A. Silva
PLANNING ACTION 9%048 is a request for a Conditional Use Permit for a
temporary use to operate a food service cart at 275 Lithia Way. Comprehensive Plan
Designation: Commercial; Zoning: C-I; Assessor's Map#: 39 1E09 BA; Tax
Lot: 9800.
APPLICANT: KC Railroad Sausage Company
PL NING ACTION 97-053 is a request for a Site Review to construct a two-story
mixed use (office/residential), 3900 square foot building located at 565 "A" Street.
Comprehensive Plan Designation: Employment; Zoning: E-l; Assessor's Map#:
39 1E 04 CC; Tax Lot: 1900.
APPLICANT: Shostrom Brothers, Ltd.
OLD BUSINESS:
A. Review Board >> appointments/volunteers
B. Project Assignments for each Planning Action
C. Review of National Historic Preservation Week
D. Other
V. NEW BUSINESS
A. Update of Review Board Meetings Regarding 62-66 East Main Street
and 249 "A" Street
B. Brief Discussion on the Role of the Historic Commissioner
C. Other
VI. ADJOURNMENT