Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993-11-03 Historic MINASHLAND HISTORIC COMMISSION Minutes November 3, 1993 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Jim Lewis at 7:30 p.m. Members present were Jim Lewis, Terry Skibby, H.L. Wood, Steve Ennis, Keith Chambers, Dana Johnson, Chloe Winston, Casey Mitchell and Le Hook. Staff members present were Bill Molnar, Mark Knox and Secretary Nancy Slocum. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Ennis moved to approve the October 6, 1993 Minutes, Wood seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. STAFF REPORTS PA 93-119 Site Review 233 Fourth Street Tom Frantz Molnar explained that this proposal was continued from last month. The commission's main concern and the applicant's redesign concentrated on relocating the exterior stairway on the rear side of the building rather than the south side and modification of the windows on the side. The main planning issue dealt with improvement of the alley. The increased use of the alley may necessitate the use of a surface more durable than granite. Staff recommended, in Condition 3, that the property owner work with the owner of Peerless Rooms to consider other types of paving surface such as interlocking pavers, brick or stamped concrete. Staff's opinion was that the parking variance request should not be approved at this time as the applicant's specific use for the downstairs was uncertain. Skibby wanted to know how non-approval of the parking variance would effect the design. Molnar stated that the effect would be only in the number of restaurant spaces allowed on the bottom floor. The applicant had credit for six parking spaces which allows for a 16 seat restaurant. If the restaurant was considered a daytime use, the ordinance allows for the two resident spaces to be used for the restaurant. Applicant Frantz had a three dimensional model of the new design which showed the rear window exchange, roof line change, east elevation front window height, line on the tops of windows, the move of exterior stairs from side to rear, the added deck upstairs, two added cupolas and an overall simpler design. Ennis liked the new design and asked about the vertical siding. Frantz explained that the vertical siding would be in the gable area with horizontal siding elsewhere. Ennis asked whether the siding would be painted the same color. Frantz stated it would be all be painted the same. Hook liked the new design, especially the south and west elevations. Lewis asked if denying the 'variance would be a problem for Frantz. Frantz answered no. They would live in the back. The variance would be helpful, but although they have inquires from possible tenants for the business, nothing is settled. He was looking into possibilities for a theaters actors group or a railroad interpretive center. Ennis wanted more information about the woodstove upstairs. Frantz stated that they woul. d use a fireplace insert instead of a forced-air unit. Most of the mechanical venting would be on the Bunini side, but one flue would face north towards Peerless Rooms. Applicant stated his concern for the Peerless Rooms' view. Ennis thought a metal roof with a metal flue would look fine. Hook liked the staff's alternative for paving the alley. Skibby moved and Hook seconded to recommend approval of the Site Review to the Planning Commission. The motion passed unanimously. Winston moved and Hook seconded to recommend denial of the parking variance. Motion carried unanimously. PA 93-133 Conditional Use Permit 126 Bush Street Bill Emerson Molnar explained that the existing single car garage is nonconforming due to its four foot rear set back. Normally a three foot setback with ten feet between structures would be allowed, but in this case the distance is less than ten feet. It is in a R-1 zone on a lot of Ashland Historic Commission Minutes November 3, 1993 Page 2 approximately 6000 square feet. The garage is not visible from the street. The ordinance allows for a detached bedroom without a kitchen. Staff, as a condition of approval, would require the applicant to sign an agreement to not add a kitchen or use the bedroom as a separate rental unit. Staff recommended approval. Applicant plans on remodeling the existing garage. A demolition of the garage would require a modification of a CUP. Molnar stated that the applicant's sons would use the remodeled garage which would consist of a bedroom, closet and bathroom. Skibby thought this proposal would be a definite improvement to the neighborhood. Chambers wondered how the staff would handle enforcement of the "no kitchen" agreement. Molnar explained that the agreement would be recorded on the deed which would make it easy to impose. In reality, only a complaint would alert the planning department of non compliance. The applicant would have difficulty ever getting approval for a second residential unit as the zoning requires lots to be 7500 square feet and that this particular lot is only 5600 square feet. Chambers moved to recommend approval of this application to the Planning Commission, Johnson seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Mitchell didn't believe the cyclone fence in the front of the house fit in with the neighborhood and wanted to know if there were any fence restrictions. Molnar explained that the fence ordinance restricted height, but not material. The cyclone fence was not compatible, but allowed. Lewis recommended looking into an ordinance restricting cyclone fences in the historic interest area. PA 93-132 Conditional Use Permit 156 Sixth Street Bob Meiser Ennis had initially seen this proposal at the Review Board and thought this revised application was an improvement to the neighborhood. Skibby commented about the spacing between the windows in the addition and the ones in the original structure. He felt that the porch proposed was typical of that type of house and the expansion would be an improvement to the house. Ashland Historic Commission Minutes November 3, 1993 Page 3 Molnar stated that the staff encourages porches for new construction. Ennis made that motion to recommend approval of this application to the Planning Commission. Wood made the second and the motion was carried unanimously. PA 93-134 Conditional Use Permit 407 Scenic Drive Richard Wagner and Joyce Ward Molnar reported that this historic home was known as the Pedigrift House. The home had gone through a remodel two or three years ago. This request is for a four-unit traveller's accommodation and the remodel/expansion of the existing garage into an owner's unit. It also includes the construction of a new one-car garage. Staff believed this was good use for this property and, although zoned Multi-Family, he doubted this house would ever be converted to a four-plex. The site plan showed one parking space in the front of the house and staff had recommended relocating all parking spaces to the rear and side. The applicant complied. As a minimum, space 5 would be a grass paver to visually buffer it from the street. The applicant is considering using a grass paver for all the parking spaces. Ennis wondered why the applicant chose the proposed location for the garage. Molnar explained that the applicant was attempting to screen the parking spaces from the street. He also said this application was unusual in that it was a request for a CUP only. The Site Review, which would include type of material, siding, windows, landscape, etc., would be sought by the applicant at a later time. Skibby, who had seen the pre-application, felt this revised plan showed an even larger massing. Hook did not like the replication of the bay windows and felt the detailing was "too cutesy." Mitchell, Winston, and Skibby agreed with Hook. Lewis noted that SHPO would have input on this project. The square detail on the bay windows is unique around town. Chambers felt that the detailing on the proposed owner's unit was superb. He did not agree that it was imitative. Hook also felt the detailing was not a duplication, but believed the new structure had too much detailing in too little an area. Ashland Historic Commission Minutes November 3, 1993 Page 4 Skibby agreed that the detail conflicts with the main house. He felt the detailing on the Winchester house worked. The bay window features are unique. Chambers wondered if the three windows could be cut down to two. Skibby recommended the applicant talk to the Review Board before the future Site Review. He commented that the Montery Cypress was quite special. Lewis said that removing the half circles in the gables might reduce some of the imitation. Ennis commented on Condition 7. He felt that this four-unit traveller's accommodation would be exempt from ADA requirements. Knox believed that Chapter 31 of the Oregon Structural Specialty Code went beyond the federal requirements and required compliance for even one unit. Ennis thought that maybe a house on the historic register would be exempt. Molnar remembered that the new interpretation would require that all bathrooms be accessible and one unit be equipped with handicapped apparatuses (visual aids, etc.). Lewis stated he had no prOblem with the application's main use. Hook said he would vote against the project because he felt there were already too many traveller's accommodations. Molnar said, that for traveller's accommodations, staff would prefer a location within walking distance of downtown. CUP criteria considers alternative modes of transportation as beneficial. Ron Thurner (audience member) wondered what limits site design for CUPs. He felt Condition 1 was too general and that the future Site Review design may be substantially different than what was proposed here. Molnar stated that issues like the elevations would have to be the same. Staff could reword Condition 1, but this type of case where the CUP and Site Review are processed separately is rare. The staff's decision on compliance of Condition 1 is discretionary. Lewis added that the submitted drawings would be a baseline and that SHPO still had to make its comments. Molnar knew the architects were aware of this house being on the Historic Register. For a Type I Site Review, staff only requires applicant to notify SHPO. Skibby felt a CUP was approval of conceptual design whereas a Site Review was more specific. Ashland Historic Commission Minutes November 3, 1993 Page 5 Molnar wanted the Historic Commission to be comfortable with the proposed plan (i.e., roof pitch, windows, landscape, etc.) Skibby wondered how the approval process would be effective if SHPO did not approve of the design changes. Molnar reiterated that staff only requires notification of SHPO. Skibby was impressed with 'the changes since the pre-application proposal. Ennis moved to recommend approval with the comment that the east elevation of owner's unit appears to replicate design and detailing of house too closely. Hook seconded motion. Hook stated that the design was "too cutesy" and objects to the number of traveller's accommodations in town. Motion passed with Hook voting no. Molnar reminded the commission that they will get to review this again at the Site Review stage. BUILDING PERMITS Permits reviewed by members of the Historic Commission and issued during the month of October follow: 233 Fourth Street 936 Blaine Street 275 East Main Street 58 Fourth Street 47 North Main Street 90 North Pioneer Street 237 First Street Tom Frantz Robertson/McKinley Bob Wright Martha McIntyre Plaza Cafe Trapeze Ashland Community Food Store Demolition Bay Windows Re-roof Garage Sign Sign Sign REVIEW BOARD Following is the schedule (until the next meeting) for the Review Board, which meets every Thursday at least from 3:00 to 3:30 p.m. in the Planning Department: November 4 November 10 November 18 November 24 December 2 Lewis, Wood and Skibby Ennis, Winston and Mitchell Hook, Skibby, Johnson and Wood Skibby, Chambers and Mitchell Winston, Skibby and Mitchell Ashland Historic Commission Minutes November 3, 1993 Page 6 OLD BUSINESS Proposed Community Development Move Molnar reported that the Site Review for the new City Hall was appealed to the City Council (by the City Council) and will be heard November 16, 1993. A CUP was not required because the E-1 zoning ordinance changed last year and the new building is now a permitted use. Skibby wondered if he would be permitted to speak before the council giving the Historic Commission viewpoint. Molnar remarked that one could speak as an individual or as a representative of the commission. Skibby stated that Wood was the liaison to the council and suggested that he read the previously submitted letter from the commission into the record at the council meeting. Wood said he would be there. Lewis said he would be there as a private citizen. Molnar reminded the commission that their letter would appear in the council packets. He said the council may structure the meeting as a discussion of policy decision (to move part of city hall) and may not even get to the appeal of the planning action. Lewis wondered if, since the council called it up, a private citizen could appeal afterwards. Thurner discussed the philosophy of land use appeals. He wondered when the E-1 zoning ordinance had been rewritten. Molnar answered that the new E-1 ordinance was adopted in October, 1992. In 1982 the city warehouse in that area had approval for a CUP. Skibby questioned policy in the Comprehensive Plan Goals. He asked that Wood read the letter and urged individuals to come to the meeting and write letters for the file. Applegate Trail Plague Skibby reported that Dick Akerman had delivered the plaque to the Chamber of Commerce. He picked up the plaque that day and felt that the wording had been improved. Lewis suggested a subcommittee be formed to take care of the placement of the plaque. He suggested the RR Park as a possible location. Ashland Historic Commission Minutes November 3, 1993 Page 7 Skibby said that perhaps a map of the trail along with the plaque would help as the wording of the plaque was difficult. He was disappointed the groups mentioned on the plaque were not local. Lewis thought maybe the review board could act as the subcommittee and come up with alternatives. Skibby said the official placement of the plaque could tie in with the Oregon Trail event this spring. NEW BUSINESS Report on Study Session Lewis reported that many citizens felt the study session was a closed meeting and therefore didn't attend. Only one of the four topics discussed concerned the commission. He appreciated John McLaughlin's, Planning Director, comments describing the RR District as a "model" neighborhood. Lewis had recently met with McLaughlin and got the go ahead to have neighborhood meetings. They talked about a park issues meeting and a neighborhood plan meeting. A goal was set to fix the "model" with zoning overlays, S.P. plans and tie these in with the neighborhood. All agreed it was a good meeting. Skibby stressed a goal of the district as being pedestrian friendly. Lewis wrapped up by stating the Railroad District is a city within a city. It is an indication of how new developments could be designed. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 9:20 p.m. Ashland Historic Commission Minutes November 3, 1993 Page 8