HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-12-06 Historic MINASHLAND HISTORIC COMMISSION
Minutes
December 6, 1995
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Jim Lewis at 7:40 p.m. Members present
were Terry Skibby, Jim Lewis, Keith Chambers, Bill Harriff, Casey Mitchell, Larry
Cardinale, Bill Emerson, and Cliff Llewellyn. Also present were City Council Liaison Steve
Hauck, Associate Planner Mark Knox, and Secretary Sonja Akerman. No members were
absent. Fredricka Weishahn resigned.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Chambers moved and Cardinale seconded to approve the Minutes of the November 8, 1995
meeting as submitted. The motion was unanimously passed.
STAFF REPORTS
PA 95-120
Site Review
665 and 685 "A" Street
Patricia Murphy
Lewis turned the meeting over to Vice Chair Skibby and sat in the audience because he
owns the property directly across the street.
Knox explained this proposal is for a mixed use two-story building housing a health spa and
three residential units. The spa will include hot tubs/jacuzzis, saunas, steam baths,
therapeutic massage rooms, showers and associated dressing rooms. A lounge and juice bar
will look over a centralized courtyard. A multi-purpose room will also be on the ground
floor which will be used for classes, events and parties. The three apartment units will be
on the second floor. Off-street parking is proposed for the adjoining lot. Access will be
from the rear 20 foot wide public alley and "A" Street. A public sidewalk will be installed
along the frontage and a three foot tall decorative wall will be constructed to screen the
parking lot from the street.
Knox said Staff has a major problem with the location of the proposed parking lot. While
Staff is supportive of the design, it cannot support the large parking area relative to "A"
Street because it is a deviation not only from the Site Design and Use Standards, but also
the common vision of the "A" Street commercial corridor. The plan is very different than
what was presented at the pre-application conference and to the Historic Commission
Review Board. The initial site plan consisted of a single story building with head-in parking
provided off the rear alley, with the adjoining lot remaining mostly undeveloped. The
proposed design also includes a new curb cut off "A" Street.
Knox went on to say when the Railroad Subdivision was approved, the grid street pattern
of the Railroad District was extended in the form of an east/west and north/south public
alley system to allow new commercial buildings to be situated along "A" Street, with head-in
parking located off the rear and side alleys. This type of development has already been
incorporated with the Ashland Insurance and JEGA Gallery buildings, with the structures
located near the sidewalk and a pedestrian environment created along the street. Staff feels
strongly this design theme should be continued by all the new commercial projects along "A"
Street. The proposed plan would sever this continuity.
Knox then referred to the Site Design and Use Standards, noting parking in the rear is
always encouraged, and on the side only if necessary. Locating a parking lot adjacent to "A"
Street is contrary to the implied purpose behind the Detail Site Review Zone, of which the
"A" Street commercial corridor is a part. Staff believes the parking area will be disruptive
to the pedestrian environment. By locating the parking in the rear, it will be more
compatible with the historic development pattern of the area. The public alley system
allows parking areas to be accessed from the alley and cars to be directed to existing
intersections without introducing additional curb openings along "A" Street, which would also
represent a point of conflict between motorists and pedestrians or bicyclists. Adequate
access is already provided from the alleys.
Skibby asked how the buildings would be arranged if the parking were in the rear. Knox
replied this is discussed in the pre-application conference by the planners. Many factors are
involved, and it is up to the applicant to meet the design standards.
Emerson wondered why another pre-application conference was not required with so many
changes. Knox said it got beyond the time notices were mailed out, and added Staff is
requesting a redesign of the project, not a denial.
Cardinale said he was at the initial Review Board meeting and agreed the design had
changed substantially.
Architect Tom Giordano (157 Morninglight Drive) said he would like to clear up the
differences in design from the initial plan submitted. It made more sense to do a full
version of the plan rather than do it in phases. It is also more cost effective to build a two-
story building than an elongated single story structure. Because the square footage
increased with the new plan, additional parking is now required. His client's desire is to
have a courtyard, as she feels it important to have the activities working off this area. He
also explained he attended two Review Board meetings, and came up with the final version
with the Craftsman look as a result.
Patricia Murphy, owner of the property, said the plans have already changed three times.
She agreed it started out small then lot larger because she is now in a better position to get
a loan, primarily because of the addition of the apartments on the upper floor. She also
agreed it is more cost effective to go with the larger plan. She then explained her vision for
the multi-purpose room, which could be used similar to another community type center. She
Ashland Historic Commission
Minutes
December 6, 1995
Page 2
also stated she wanted to take advantage of the views of the new park and the mountains.
Giordano related Ashland has had a long tradition of spas and therapeutic work, specifically
noting Lithia water. Murphy stated she will also have mineral baths.
Harriff asked how many people the building will accommodate on a busy day, including
clients and employees. After Murphy gave a quick run-down of the activities, it was decided
70-80 people could be there at one time.
Giordano commented on the fact the actual footprint had not changed from the pre-
application.
Chambers asked if Giordano and Murphy were caught by surprise regarding the parking
concerns. Giordano answered it was a surprise; however, because the square footage of the
building changed, additional parking spaces were needed. Chambers then asked if he were
sensitive to Staff concerns, as he was going against Ashland standards with such a significant
change. Giordano responded he was very sensitive to the concerns, but said he was coming
from a different viewpoint. He feels it does work -- it is just a different concept. The
purpose of placing the parking lot on the adjacent lot is to provide a pause in the transition
area since it is between the park and other commercial buildings. It was also to protect the
view of the mountains. He passed around photos that Murphy had taken that day, noting
their proposal was no different than the alley between Ashland Insurance and the JEGA
Gallery, with parking on both sides of the alley. His project has more ins and outs, with
landscaping providing places to sit, thereby being more pedestrian oriented. If the parking
were to be in the rear, it would change the building by elongating it and the courtyard would
not work with a different shape. He also maintained he had worked hard to use the Site
Design criteria. The courtyard is critical to the design and it is a great pedestrian space.
Llewellyn suggested a higher wall and one way access (entrance off "A" Street and exit from
the alley) since the lot seems to be the biggest objective.
Murphy then read a statement she had prepared, recognizing the fact she feels strongly
about having the driveway off "A" Street, especially since women would feel more
comfortable having easier access to a lighted parking lot close to the entrance of the
building. She just found out last week the driveway was an issue, and had until then,
assumed she would have access to the parking lot off "A" Street. She added it would be
confusing routing traffic exclusively off the alley. She will also be relying on tourism, and
is afraid people won't stop if the parking is not easily designated. The lot will be
surrounded by a rock wall and will easily be seen off the street. In addition, she noted she
has made many modifications over the past few months. The style looks more like a
residence than a business and she would like a business look. She also said she does not
want to be the only business without access to parking adjacent to the building.
Philip Lang, 758 "B" Street, said "A" Street is dangerous. The proposed layout is perfect for
a shopping center. Here we have the romance of the car versus preserving the Historic
Ashland Historic Commission
Minutes
December 6, 1995
Page 3
District. He does not support commercial businesses that are vehicular dependent. In
looking at the demographics, 1) the project is inappropriate for the district because of the
size and scale of the project, as it has nothing to do with the historic character of the
neighborhood; 2) traffic safety is a concern, as "A" and "B" Streets are dangerous now and
this is the worst possible choice for traffic congestion; and 3) to approve this would be to
continue with the errors of the past in that the Planning Department always insists this area
should be commercial while it has always been primarily residential.
Lewis commented from the audience the sidewalk in front should be five feet, not the
proposed four feet. He also said he agrees with Staff there should not be another curb cut
created because that would create more problems, especially with regard to pedestrians. On
a personal note, he said the parking lot does not bother him because it preserves his view.
If the design were elongated, there would probably be no courtyard, and he likes the
landscaping. He also noted with the recent infill in the Railroad District, the proposed
design is unique and no two buildings are alike.
Knox stated the Traffic Safety Commission has directed the City to not allow parking along
the north side of "A" Street. Therefore, no on-street parking credits will be granted.
Giordano rebutted this plan meets the zoning and parking requirements, and is a permitted
use.
Skibby closed the meeting to public comment, then asserted the full plan should have been
presented to Staff prior to final submittal. He also said he does not like the extra curb cut
on "A" Street.
Cardinale asked if the arbor and/or wall were to be continued along "A" Street without
changing the parking, would the lot be OK. Knox said it would not.
Chambers said the Commission has a responsibility to keep in mind what the Historic
Commission, Planning Commission, and City Council have been working toward all these
years, historically and aesthetically. If the City is striving to maintain the standards, he said
he doesn't think the City should let these standards slip. He advocated listening to Staff
without undermining the integrity of the structure, as he feels the design is marvelous.
Mitchell stated she thinks the project would be an asset and that the applicant has already
done a huge job to make everyone happy. Ashland needs the community space, and the spa
would provide a service the City doesn't currently have. After seeing the picture of the large
alleyway between Ashland Insurance and JEGA, she said she felt much better about the
parking lot adjacent to the proposed spa. She suggested making the lot more parklike with
perhaps a pergola. She then said she thinks the City should compromise on this concern.
Knox countered the City should not compromise. The Site Design and Use Standards have
been passed by the Historic Commission, Planning Commission and City Council. He said
Ashland Historic Commission
Minutes
December 6, 1995
Page 4
the same effect can be fulfilled by relocating the multi-purpose room and designing a
building that is not quite as high.
Chambers asked Giordano if a redesign was required, would the project still move forward.
He said it would be up to his client, but noted the central focus of the project has been the
courtyard, and they would not want a bowling alley shaped courtyard if the building
footprint were to change into a more elongated form. He feels it would not work by
changing the building geometry.
Cardinale said he likes the courtyard aspect and the idea of common space, but feels the
project has grown and does not fit the area. He also noted there should have been the
opportunity to comment along the way before the final plan was submitted.
Harriff said he likes the project and said he would find it more objectionable if it were
spread out. He also commented about the problem of traffic flow brought up by Lang,
stating the City has done nothing about it. The zoning can guarantee traffic will get out of
hand. Although Lang raises good objections, Harriff said he feels the City ought to be
required to come up with the solution, not the applicant.
Chambers maintained the parking lot will be a parking lot no matter what landscaping is
done. He said the applicant should be asked to make a good faith effort to come up with
a worthy alternate design without the parking lot.
Emerson said he feels a five foot wall will take care of that, but doesn't want to see a curb
cut. He commended Giordano on the design and said he would rather see more buildings
like this than what has already been built on "A" Street. He also suggested some
landscaping should be narrowed in the rear and brought to the front between the five foot
wall and sidewalk, but to leave it open and take advantage of the viewscape. Also, he
recommended the landscape depth be increased on both sides of the parking lot.
Emerson then moved to recommend approval of this application with the following
conditions: 1) there be no parking spaces along the curb (not allowed on that side of the
street anyway); 2) the sidewalk be five feet wide; 3) there be no curb cut off "A" Street; 4)
landscape to be narrowed in the rear to accommodate more landscape between the wall and
the sidewalk, with the addition of a few more trees; and 5) the wall be increased to five feet.
Harriff seconded the motion.
Discussion followed, with Chambers asking if the Commission was recommending to
override the Staff Report. Emerson said the parking lot is different. The problem is that
it is visible, but it is still creating a view. Llewellyn maintained it might be a mistake to
totally eliminate access from "A" Street because more people will try to use the street for
parking. Chambers said there would be an advantage to delay the action in order to have
the option to see what can be done with a creative redesign. On voice vote, the motion
carried, with Mitchell, Emerson, Harriff and Llewellyn voting aye; Chambers, Skibby and
Cardinale voting nay; and Lewis abstaining.
Ashland Historic Commission
Minutes
December 6, 1995
P~e5
Lewis then resumed Chairmanship.
BUILDING PERMITS
Permits reviewed by members of the Historic Commission and issued during the month of
November follow:
248 Third Street
136 Fork Street
885 Siskiyou Boulevard
250 Oak Street
123 Central Avenue
548-564 N. Main Street
163 High Street
281 Oak Street
125 Nutley Street
264 East Main Street
33 North First Street
250 Oak Street #1
John Seligman
Ken Frantz
Ashland School District
Lance Pugh
Mark/Joan Swisher
Ashland Comm Hosp Foundation
John/Betty McClendon
Brad Roupp
Amy Krichman
Travel Essentials
Re/Max Realty Group
Sun Systems
Foundation
Porch
Interior Remodel
Trash Cont. Area
Remodel*
Retirement Residences
Addendum/Acce~ Unit
Replace Foundation
Re model / Addition
Sign
Sign
Sign
* Disapproved
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:
December 7
December 14
December 21
December 28
Emerson, Skibby and Lewis
Chambers, Skibby and Llewellyn
Mitchell, Skibby and Cardinale
Cardinale, Skibby and Lewis
OLD BUSINESS
Street Naming Committee
Emerson said the location is very important to the naming of the new street, and he feels
the list should be categorized into regions. Lewis reported that is what will happen once
the list is finalized and sub-groups are formed.
Hauck noted it will work well to have the list available with a commentary about each
name, as it is a Public Works requirement to summarize the historical significance of the
name.
Ashland Historic Commission
Minutes
December 6, 1995
Page 6
Skibby related the next meeting will be Wednesday, December 20th from 4:00-6:00 p.m. in
the Gresham Room at the Library.
Golden Spike Marker
Lewis stated he and Skibby had met in order to make a decision about the best location for
the placement of the marker. They had also consulted with Emerson. Lewis conveyed they
felt the best place would be on the corner of Fifth and "A" Streets on City property just
behind the three foot sidewalk strip by the depot. If the Commission agrees, he would like
to have it moved by December 17th because there will be an open house at the depot on
that date, and he would like to commemorate the driving of the spike on December 17,
1887.
Emerson moved and Mitchell seconded to direct the City to move the Golden Spike marker
from the city yard to the above mentioned corner. The motion was unanimously passed.
Ashland Location of Southern Oregon Historical Society
Hauck mentioned he had a message on his answering machine from Southern Oregon
Historical Society regarding the placement of an exhibit in Ashland, so it looks as though
we will have something as soon as a location is established.
NEW BUSINESS
Plaza Kiosk
Emerson reported he had talked with Brian Almquist about the results of the kiosk
expansion and if the alternate plan would be considered. Almquist said he would not
pursue this further. Emerson said he would like to review the Commission meeting where
this was discussed, and asked for input on what transpired during the hearing because
Almquist had made a comment about the way he was treated at that meeting. The
Commission agreed that although not everyone agreed with Almquist, he was not treated
in a discourteous manner.
ADJOURNMENT
With a motion by Emerson and second by Mitchell, it was the unanimous decision of the
Commission to adjourn the meeting at 10:10 p.m.
Ashland Historic Commission
Minutes
December 6, 1995
Page 7
ASHLAND HISTORIC COMMISSION
AGENDA
December 6, 1995
L
CALL TO ORDER: 7:30 p.m. -ASHLAND COMMUNITY CENTER
59 Winburn Way
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: November 8, 1995
III. STAFF REPORTS:
PLANNING ACTION 95-131 is a request for a Site Review to construct a health spa
(first floor 4,692 square feet) and residential units (second floor 1,688 square feeO
located at 665 and 685 "A" Street. Comprehensive Plan Designation: Employment;
Zoning: E-I; Assessor's Map #: 9AB; Tax Lots 6507 and 6508.
APPLICANT: Patricia Murphy
IV. OLD BUSINESS:
A. Review Board ~ Appointments/Volunteers
B. Street Naming Committee Meeting Update
C. Placement of Golden Spike Marker ~ Update
D. Other
V. NEW BUSINESS
VI. ADJOURNMENT