Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-07-11 Planning MIN ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JULY 11, 2000 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chair Mike Gardiner at 7:05 p.m. Other Commissioners present were Russ Chapman, Kerry KenCairn, Ray Kistler, Mike Morris, Marilyn Briggs, Chris Hearn, John Fields, and Alex Amarotico. There were no absent members. Staff present were John McLaughlin, Bill Molnar, Mark Knox and Sue Yates. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES AND FINDINGS The minutes of the June 13, 2000 Regular Meeting were approved. The findings of the June 13, 2000 meeting were approved. PUBLIC FORUM - No one came forth to speak. TYPE II PUBLIC HEARING PLANNING ACTION 2000-074 REQUEST FOR A SITE REVIEW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW THEATER AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ENABLE THE THEATER FLY TOWER TO EXCEED A HEIGHT OF 40 FEET ABOVE THE ESTABLISHED MEAN GRADE (APPROXIMATELY 45 FEET IS PROPOSED). THE PROPOSAL IS LOCATED NORTH OF HARGADINE STREET AND EAST OF SOUTH PIONEER STREET AND INCLUDES THE CONSTRUCTION OF A MULTI-LEVEL PARKING STRUCTURE. APPLICANT: OREGON SHAKESPEARE FESTIVAL Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts All Commissioners made a site visit. In addition, KenCairn had a discussion with the Tree Commission, and Kistler had a discussion with the architect. Last summer Briggs attended two of the focus group meetings when they were thinking of removing Carpenter Hall. STAFF REPORT The application is subject to Site Review approval (Chapter 18.72 of AMC) as well as Conditional Use Permit criteria (Chapter 18.104 of AMC). Molnar reported the project area is approximately 1.5 acres and is largely situated in the existing city surface parking lot. The proposal is to construct a 33,000 square foot performing arts theater. The footprint is around 13,000 square feet and the building itself will take up about 50 percent of the existing surface parking lot and the remaining portion of the parking lot is where the multi-three level parking structure will be constructed. The main entrance lobby orients toward South Pioneer. Entrance to the theater is through a brick courtyard to the ground level. An elevator goes to the main floor where there will be a 344-seat theater. There will be an upper level, primarily for mechanical equipment. There is a significant grade change from the street level and Hargadine (approx. 18 feet of drop) to the northern section of the project area. The new theater is being dug into the hillside to reduce the massing of the structure. On the south of the theater building between the street and the building facade, is a large landscaped courtyard with a shaded grove of trees, benches, and walkways. At the front of the building is another public plaza. To the north, between the building and south of the buildings along Main Street, is another concrete plaza area with trees, low level lighting, and bench seating. 1 ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JULY 11, 2000 Just off Hargadine, is the three level parking structure. The first level is the entrance and exit at street grade. The two lower levels are accessed from the existing public alley, running between the Mark Antony property and the City property. There are presently approximately 84 parking spaces in the city parking lot. The multi-level structure will provide around 140 spaces. The applicants are requesting a Conditional Use Permit to allow a fly tower. It is a narrow section at the back of the building which is approximately 45 feet in height. Staff did not feel the additional height of the fly tower would have a negligible affect on the neighborhood because the narrow dimension is facing the residential area. Due to the grade and topography of the site, that southern portion of the building is being dug into the hill so the fly tower is about 27 to 28 feet above the sidewalk level along Hargadine Street. The application includes a handful of exceptions to the City’s Design Standards. Those are due primarily to the location of the building. It is not sited along Main Street. And, the function of the building requires acoustic and light enclosure that limits the ability to have windows along the perimeter of the structure. In order to mitigate, the applicant has created “people” areas on three sides of the building. Other exceptions involve landscaping requirements for the parking structure. When the landscaping standards were conceived, they were probably thought to be for a traditional surface parking lot and did not anticipate a multi-level parking structure. The applicants are requesting some exceptions for tree planting within the middle of the structure. Instead, they have noted planting areas along the street as well as a low level wall with steel railing and also a five foot planting strip. On the north and east sides of the building, they have made accommodations for vines to be grown up the sides of the structure to soften the parking structure. The Historic and Tree Commissions have reviewed the applications at public meetings. The Commissioners have a list of six items they have recommended. Overall, Staff feels the application is consistent with the city’s design standards and is recommending approval with the Conditions noted in the Staff Report. McLaughlin said the parking structure would ultimately be owned by the City and maintained by the City. Briggs asked for an explanation of allowing the necking down of the public roadway in the middle of the block. McLaughlin said the ordinances are flexible for street design, especially in the downtown. This is not necessarily the final plan before the Commission. Final approval of the street design would be up to Public Works and Traffic Safety. The design idea would be to slow down traffic and encourage pedestrians as outlined in the Transportation Element. PUBLIC HEARING CRAIG STONE stated he is appearing on behalf of the Oregon Shakespeare Festival. Also appearing on behalf of OSF is RICHARD HAY. The applicant’s architect TOM HACKER and his associate, PAMELA BROWN will be testifying this evening. JOHN HASSEN is the OSF attorney. STONE said Paul Nicholson, Director of OSF, is unable to attend tonight’s meeting. Stone asked that the bound document be entered into the record. Condition 3 asks for screening of the refuse areas. As explained in the Findings, there will be no bulk refuse areas on the outside of the building. There will be garbage receptacles for the general public but no dumpsters. Condition 11 deals with a different light fixture. The applicants agree to that Condition and all other Conditions. The Historic Commission made five recommendations. With regard to the cables and steel mesh, which are incorporated into the facade of the parking structure, Stone believes there was a misunderstanding on the part of the Historic Commission and what they are for. The cables are not simply a handrail; they are to accommodate vine-like shrubbery that is to be planted along the wall so vegetation will grow along the steel trellis and along the cable. Hacker prepared a drawing that shows what the vegetative facade will look like. The applicants are asking that recommendation be disregarded. 2 ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JULY 11, 2000 Walker-Macy, the landscape architects, has prepared a memo specifying different plant materials in response to the Tree Commission’s comments. The memo was entered into the record. The landscape architect feels it is infeasible to plant trees on the upper deck of the parking lot because of long-term maintenance and lack of drainage. There would end up being a trade-off for parking spaces. The Tree Commission also asked for more planters along Hargadine Street. If that means more sidewalk cut-outs along the curbline, then a couple more trees can probably be squeezed in. If, however, they were suggesting widening the planter along the Hargadine frontage (three feet), the trade-off would be to lose parking spaces in the parking structure. Stone addressed the exceptions. The standards do not contemplate parking structures. The City’s site design standards focus upon buildings within Ashland’s Main Street. THOMAS HACKER, the applicant’s architect, said he tried to accomplish a site and context that not only accommodate the things around it but also enhance the existing space in the area now. They wanted exceptional technical response to a very sophisticated theater program. This will be a world class experimental theater. They wanted to make an image that conveys a sense of fit and compatibility with the surroundings but an image of the leading edge character of theater. By saving Carpenter Hall, it takes the pressure off the new building. It allows the theater to become more of a background building. This is ideally an alley theater. It allowed us to take the biggest volume of theater and move it off the street in both directions to the back corner of the site. The volume is moved away and pushed down. Hacker gave a detailed explanation of the design elements of the project. The image of the entrance is to be the full width of the courtyard space between the wall of Carpenter Hall and the wall of the new building. The intention is there would be a lot of people moving in and out of the theater and courtyard area. The underside of the horizontal trellis is completely open glass. The Historic Commission asked it be clear glass. That is Hacker’s intention. Hacker believes the screens are critically important to the success of this project. It is a west facing facade that has a very strong heat gain during the afternoon and evening hours in the summer and the screens will reduce the loads on the air conditioning and use of energy and long-term cost for the Festival. The screens soften the light because there is a need to have people’s eyes get used to the darkness when they will go into in the theater. The trellis and entrance canopy shades the entrance. The screens are movable so they can be closed completely. They can be opened. This is not a ground level opening. It is about 16 feet above the sidewalk level and set very far back from the street. There is a strong entrance below with a big courtyard. The screen above it presents a sense of anticipation and mystery. They are happy to make the walls stucco. There will be brick on the sidewalls of the building. The stucco is a ground face block and the structures in front are Western Red Cedar. Briggs said she attended the Historic Commission meeting on July 5, 2000. Their main concern was the sense of entry. Why enter on the lower level and go upstairs to the theater? She tends to agree with the Historic Commission on how the module that represents the entry does not fit. When you look at it straight on, she sees the grid, but she sees it as prison bars; it is off-putting. The entry on the lower level squashed down by the trellis. It is not welcoming and opening. It feels pushed in. These are things that are not working. She referenced her handout of things that might be done to improve the entry. Hacker said the model is very different from the drawings. He would like to rely on the model as a more accurate representation of the intention. Hacker reiterated the entrance is really the space of the courtyard between Carpenter Hall and the new building. It has a very inviting and comfortable scale. The intention of the design is not that the doorway is the entrance into the lower lobby space, but rather the whole of the courtyard as it faces Pioneer Street. He felt the characterization of the screens as jail bars is unfair. They are made of wood and much more like garden screens. There are horizontal bands of wood behind them. They slide by each other so there is a constantly changing sense of pattern and light moving through them. He does not believe buildings should mimic historic buildings. KenCairn was with the Tree Commission at their meeting. They are not committed to putting trees on the structure. They are committed to stay in line what the Site Design Standards are about which is shading the parking and 3 ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JULY 11, 2000 cooling and softening the edges. There are ways to create vertical elements on a parking structure that are vegetative and don’t require huge amounts of soil. Some things that were talked about such as fake trees or vertical screening with a horizontal element can provide some shade from the west and the south. They might consider losing four spaces to get some shading. In the future, if we have more parking structures, we don’t want to say, “We can’t get one tree per seven spaces, so let’s not do anything”. Hacker said there are now 20 foot square earth bays that are made to be completely filled with plants. There will be a whole pattern of greenery on the sides of the parking structure that will grow up. He is concerned about cost and maintenance. He is concerned about plantings in the center of the garage or when plantings start to go out horizontally over the cars. KenCairn said she was not talking about the center but on the east and south. There are already some, but is there a way to do some more? She does not think a ten foot wall of green is the answer. Briggs asked about the trees shown over the mechanical room. PAM BROWN, Project Manager, said the plans submitted are correct and trees remain in the project. Kistler wondered if the roof material is their choice. Hacker thought it was best material for the project. The finer scale breaks up the roof. A metal roof could cause a huge noise problem. DAN THORNDIKE, 369 Granite Street, Ashland, Vice President of the Board of Directors of OSF, stated the parking structure belongs to the City. The theater is on leased land. Carpenter Hall is and will remain Festival property. There is some language in the lease about development of the space above the parking structure. Thorndike wanted to stress that the Board is made up of half local members and half out-of-town members. There has been a lot of discussion about the design and location. There has been a collaborative effort on this project. The end result reflects that in a positive way. MICHAEL DONOVAN, 110 Westwood, supports the Festival’s application. The discussion by the community and the willingness of the Festival to listen to discussions has been the most rewarding for Donovan. PAUL MENSCH, 451 N. Main Street, favors the project. He referred to the Downtown Plan. OSF is a business and needs to grow and improve their product. With regard to the entry, he believes if you asked ten different people what “sense of entry” means, you’d get 15 opinions. Maybe it doesn’t need to be inviting to the people that are going there—they know why they are going. He approves of the wood screens because of the energy cost saving. LE HOOK, 393 Oxford, mentioned he worked on the Downtown Design Standards. The section referring to exceptions refers specifically to exceptions that would occur because of the site as well as the use of the building. Because of the location of this OSF site and its use, it does fit the Design Standards. Hook is a theater professional who has built over 200 productions at OSF and the fly tower is very important. The Bowmer Theater has a fly space of seven feet, nine inches. BILL PATTON, 110 Terrace Street, Executive Director Emeritus of OSF, fully supports the project. Planning for this project as taken place over years. They have never built anything that did not clearly demonstrate a need. The Black Swan was a temporary plan. They are delighted with the multi-level parking structure that does not rise above Hargadine. The courtyard ties together the three theaters. JED MEESE, 88 Granite Street, Board Member of OSF, Chair of the Building Committee and Co-Chair of Fundraising, noted the involvement of the Festival staff and architects and the community. Approval of this action will allow the Festival to continue to be premier theater in America, if not the world. They are attempting to raise $20 million for the theater. The enthusiasm from the community is so great they are willing to give seven to ten times what they have given in the past for building. RICK NAGEL, 290 North Main Street, Suite A, Ashland, is currently President of the Ashland Chamber of Commerce said he strongly supports the theater and believes it will fit in nicely. He is pleased the Festival is working with Doug Neuman, Ashland Springs Hotel, on parking. This theater will be an economic benefit to our 4 ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JULY 11, 2000 community. DOUG MITCHELL, 1255 Greenmeadows Way, owner of Ashland Camera, said before coming to Ashland he was a professional actor. Up until a couple weeks ago, he had serious doubts about this project. One of his biggest problems was parking. He likes the added parking structure and backing the theater off the street. He is particularly impressed with the inside of the theater. He urged the Commission to accept the plan. TED MULARZ, 793 Elkader Street, architect, said he has extensive background with historic preservation and restoration as it relates to the contemporary buildings. He spoke of buildings not mimicking other buildings but being of their own design. He recently returned from a trip to Montreal and Quebec City. He saw buildings within one square that spanned four centuries of architecture that did not mimic each other and worked successfully. Too often, in Ashland, we are trying to repeat the details of an era that is no longer here. The theater, as designed, is as important to relate to the existing structures as it is to the neighborhood. He encouraged the Commission to approve the theater as designed. JAMES BENSON, 102 South Pioneer, opposes the theater. He lives very close to the Elizabethan Theater. He doesn’t hear a lot of talk about the impact of traffic on Pioneer Street. It is a commercial thoroughfare disguised as an R-1 neighborhood. He would like to see some type of permit given to the residents on Pioneer Street. He is concerned with the livability. He would like the Commission to look at the use of the property on Pioneer. COLIN SWALES, 461 Allison Street, will also be speaking for his wife, Sarah Swales. Swales said he is concerned because there is nothing in the lease that discusses restrictions placed on the use of the old Black Swan Theater. This theater will have 350 seats. The parking will fall on residents surrounding the theater. It seems the parking is still very much in the developmental stages. The taxpayers will have to pick up the tab for additional parking spaces. OSF is taking valuable open space. The backdrop from North Main will now be a wall of brick, concrete block, stucco and a fly tower. He hasn’t seen any plans for the remodeling of New Space that is 3,000 square feet. He sees the building as being ugly and huge. It does not fit into downtown Ashland nor conform with the Design Standards. He would like to see a building that addresses Hargadine. He feels the Black Swan is producing the best theater in Ashland in spite of its limitations. The theater needs to be constrained in terms of the height. He doesn’t believe the fly tower will make it a better theater. He feels the most important thing is the aesthetic experience of everyone that lives in Ashland. SHARON THORMAHLEN, 80 AND 130 Hargadine, entered a written response into the record. There is a problem with the record of materials. The reports and actions of the Historic and Tree Commissions were not available seven days prior to this public hearing and their recommendations were not available for public review in sufficient time to formulate a response. They request the matter be continued for not less than sixty days to allow the examination of any new documents placed in the record. How was the mean base elevation of the structure determined? She would like to see the calculations. There is no traffic or pedestrian analysis. There is no mention of buses, of neighbors concerns about buses, nor mention of a bottleneck on Pioneer. Thormahlen feels this application does not address the true impact area. The impact is strictly observed to the C-1- D zoning but never addressed on the residential property across the street. PHILIP LANG, 758 B Street, will also be speaking for Ruth Miller (same address), said he objects to allowing a Conditional Use Permit for the fly tower and to the design. He did not believe all the issues and questions have been raised. He introduced a handout for the record and read from that handout. There is no need to build this theater on this site. He has environmental concerns and said the City has an infill plan to control sprawl. Staff Response Molnar said he calculated the average grade at the base and center of all walls. He came up with 45 to 46 feet. He is confident there is ample evidence in the record regarding these calculations. McLaughlin explained the process of leaving the record open. A person who participates in the hearing has a right 5 ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JULY 11, 2000 to request that the record remain open. The Staff Report and the applicant’s materials are required to be available at a certain time period ahead of time. This has been met. The other items such as Historic and Tree Commission meetings are part of the local processes and there is not a time limit required to get those materials in. The time period to submit additional written testimony is seven days. McLaughlin recommended the Planning Commission continue with their deliberations, allow for rebuttal, however, they cannot make a final decision tonight. Leave the record open for seven days, allow seven days for the applicant to provide rebuttal, close the record, and convene again next month to make a final decision. Rebuttal Fields asked if there is tinted glass on the first floor. Hacker said the tinted glass would be on the upper floor. Stone said there is evidence about traffic in the record from their civil engineer and Paula Brown, Public Works Director. Both have stated the streets were adequate to accommodate traffic loading. If streets work during peak hours, they will work at other times. Parking is not a requirement in the C-1-D zoning district. Livability applies to the Conditional Use Permit which has to do with five extra feet on a fly tower. He does not believe Mr. Benson’s objections to traffic and noise had anything to do with the height of the fly tower. The street view from Main Street will be a blank wall but the view is extremely narrow up the alleys from Main Street. They have submitted no plans for use of the Black Swan. OSF has no intention to use the Black Swan for any theatrical purpose. Stone said he would postpone any remarks about the substantive issue raised by Thormahlen orally because he has not had a chance to review her written materials. He would recommend they close the public hearing and leave the record open for seven days and then to leave the record open for an additional three days in order for the applicant to review the written testimony and then to provide final written rebuttal. McLaughlin said the next meeting is August 8, 2000 at 7:00 p.m. Stone said since the meeting is not until August 8, they would request the full seven days to provide written rebuttal. Stone said the architect incorporated the building height calculations onto sheet A-1.0. The fly tower is 45.2 feet above mean grade. Fields asked about the movable wooden panels. Hacker said there are four panels that slide within their own frame. He said 50 percent of the glazing could be in view, 75 percent if you deepen the tracks. He said the panels on the inside can be opened to achieve an eight foot clear opening which has a rail in it in the center panel. You can open to see the glazing as well as looking straight into the space. The glass also opens. Hacker said there is a medium bronze tint in the upper portion. The lower portion is much more clear with a lighter coating. Fields asked about the entry roof. Hacker said it is flat with a slight hip for water drainage. Briggs asked where the staging area would be during construction. Brown said no final decision has been made. There is no talk of closing any street. Some of it could be done along the alley. Hearn moved to close the public hearing but leave the record open for seven days. The applicant would have seven days to respond to any written materials received and on August 8, 2000, the Commission would undertake discussion and make a decision. McLaughlin said they could continue tonight with Commissioner discussion. It would be helpful to Staff in trying to give clarity to any issues. Hearn reserved his motion. Gardiner closed the public hearing. Following the recommendation of Hearn, leave the record open for seven days and a seven day rebuttal period after that for any additions to the record. COMMISSIONERS’ DISCUSSION AND MOTION Fields said one of the messiest things is dealing with someone else’s architectural work. He respects the Historic Commission that questioned whether this building works in the context of downtown. He feels the major issue is compatibility and scale. He thinks it is important to discuss this to see where the Commission’s limits are. He would like to see that in the nighttime or winter with regard to the panels, the fenestration exposed. He’d like to be 6 ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JULY 11, 2000 able to see the building. The top line of the roof feels very weak to him. Briggs mentioned the entry. In looking at the rendering, she can picture herself walking up Pioneer and seeing a bulkhead coming out at her. It looks like it wants to swallow up Carpenter Hall. There is a criterion that says we like our windows to be vertical. She would suggest a gable with a hip. That would reduce the size of the entry without affecting what happens on the inside and would make the courtyard look larger. She sees a different reality than the architects. Many people on the Historic Commission feel the same way. The main entrance is the single most important step taken in a building. When the vegetation comes down beside the new space, you will see a very dull building. She doesn’t see rain protection for 350 people along the trellis. The columns (the things holding up the trellis) are another concern for her. She read an explanation from “A Pattern Language”. She was hoping something in the way of staircases could be incorporated into the courtyard. This would be perfectly appropriate to a theater. Staircases can be a stage. It can provide a place to sit, a place to people watch and a place for people to speak. The design needs to better honor the space. KenCairn spoke about the parking lot issue and how it is a precedent setting issue. She knows it creates more expense and can potentially be a maintenance problem, but it is important to get greenery and shading on any upper deck of any parking lot. It should also have some element that is horizontal so they are pushing out into that space and creating an extended shade. Perhaps instead of the required one tree per seven spaces, smaller trees could be used. Maybe we can get some proposals from the landscape architects. With regard to the Tree Commission’s comments about vegetation along Hargadine, it is an opportunity to go vertical there and not make it a wider planter than it currently is but go up on that edge. With a three-foot wide planter, it is an opportunity to go vertical above grade with vines. That is one the best shading opportunities and one of the places it is needed the most. She hoped they could look at what the ordinance is trying to accomplish and duplicate that in some other form. Gardiner asked the Commissioners if they wanted to do any redesign. Chapman sees what Briggs is saying. As far as the whole entrance, if you get too grand with that entrance, aren’t we taking something away from Carpenter Hall? However, he thinks a compromise has already been struck. KenCairn said a lot of design work has gone on with this project. She can see redesigning things for specific issues such as environmental concerns but for the Commissioners to apply their taste or aesthetics to someone else’s design irks her. She does not believe bulk is a problem. Kistler feels he is here to interpret the ordinances and the design guidelines. He does not want to play architect. To start with changing the roof is not good. Morris agreed with Kistler and he is not comfortable redesigning. He likes the different buildings that are around there. He does not like stairs for stairs sake. They are hard to navigate for some. Hearn said if they all begin to foist their opinions on the architects, based on their subjective opinion, that is a recipe for disaster. Fields said these are subjective things about scale, bulk and coverage. He does not believe the horizontal windows, because of the way they daylight the interior, detract from the building. Gardiner took a straw vote to see how many wanted to redesign aspects of the building. No one wanted to redesign with the exception of Briggs who wanted to see some change and Fields who feels strongly about the window tinting. The glass is fairly dark and you won’t be able to see in. Gardiner wondered how to approach the vegetation on the parking structure. McLaughlin said the standards have been designed for surface parking. KenCairn felt some kind of coverage was necessary. McLaughlin said if you are not using trees, you are asking for an exception to the standards. It was moved and seconded to extend the meeting to 10:30 p.m. 7 ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JULY 11, 2000 Gardiner said the record will be kept open. Commissioner discussion will continue at the August 8, 2000 meeting. He asked for discussion of any changes to the Conditions. Briggs wondered about changing the light fixtures. Gardiner said he would let Staff clarify which light standards are to be used. Staff will strike Condition 3 regarding refuse screening. Fields wondered if there would be tree grates around the tree well. Molnar thought they were proposed at grade. He also mentioned there is bike parking on the north plaza. McLaughlin said there would likely be Findings prepared for the next meeting. The Commissioners expressed a desire to have the information delivered to them sooner than their regular packet. KenCairn asked if the Commission would be asking them to explore the shading issue. Gardiner did not think we were asking them to respond. It would have to be written as a Condition. McLaughlin said it would not be a problem if KenCairn wanted to draft a specific Condition to be added. McLaughlin said the record is open for others to provide information. If there are no major points for redesign, he would recommend they not ask for a redesign or any other points from the applicant, but just go for specific Conditions to be added. ADJOURNMENT - The meeting was adjourned at 10:15 p.m. 8 ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JULY 11, 2000