Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-11-10 Hearings Board MIN ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION HEARINGS BOARD MINUTES NOVEMBER 10, 1998 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Vice Chair Anna Howe at 1:30 p.m. Other Commissioners present were Mike Morris and Chris Hearn. There were no absent members. Staff present were Bill Molnar, Maria Harris and Susan Yates. APPROVAL OF MINUTES AND FINDINGS The Minutes and Findings of the October 13, 1998 Hearings Board cannot be approved as there are not enough voting members present. TYPE II PUBLIC HEARINGS PLANNING ACTION 98-094 REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND SITE REVIEW FOR THE EXPANSION OF NON- CONFORMING STRUCTURE AS WELL AS A 150 SQ. FT. EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING MEDICAL OFFICE 521 NORTH MAIN STREET APPLICATION: SCOTT YOUNG, MD STAFF REPORT Harris said the hearing was originally scheduled for the October Hearings Board as a Type I but was called up by a neighbor for a public hearing. A Conditional Use Permit is required because the applicant is requesting that the front yard setback be non-conforming and because it is an expansion of a medical office that was previously approved as a Conditional Use Permit. A Site Review is required because they are proposing to add onto a commercial building. The history of the application is included in the Staff Report. The request for the addition is being made in order to expand the surgical theater and create additional storage space. CUP Requirements - When North Main was re-done a few years ago by the Oregon Dept. of Transportation, they took some of the applicant’s front yard along North Main, thus reducing the front yard setback to six and one-half feet. The new addition will reduce the front yard setback to five feet. Since the addition is toward the North Main side of the property, it is Staff’s opinion this will be a minimum impact in terms of building structure. Site Design Requirements - Before the Historic Commission reviewed the application, it was Staff’s opinion, though the information was limited, the proposed addition met the Site Design requirements. The Historic Commission reviewed it and concurred but asked a condition be added about the foundation. They want the corner to wrap around so when looking at the front of the building, it would give the appearance there is a continuous foundation. The applicant did not address the two locust trees near the vicinity of the proposed addition. The Staff report is asking that every effort be made to save as many healthy existing trees and shrubs as possible. The applicant can further clarify this issue today. CUP Expansion of the Medical Office Use - Harris referred to Criteria 3, comparing the adverse material impacts of the proposed use compared to the target use of the zone. The target use of the property is two multi-family units. The office was approved previously so the use itself is not in question. The question is the impact of the 150 square foot addition. Staff believes the primary impact is the traffic impact. Medical offices have a much higher trip per day than do multi-family units. The only indication in the applicant’s findings regarding this impact is that there would be no additional employees. The addition seems small physically, but one question Staff has raised is: Will the expansion facilitate more client trips? It is not clear in the expansion of the surgical theater if there will be more tables now or if the tables will be spread out to facilitate easier maneuvering. Would that mean more people coming into the office on a daily basis? Will there be more employee hours with a higher amount of time spent by the physicians using this office or a higher rotation? These items have not been clearly addressed in the application. Howe entered the letter from Mr. and Mrs. Evans into the record. Included are the comments from the applicant’s pre-application conference. Howe said the pre-app conference takes a very strong view from Staff it is improper to expand the CUP because the handicap parking is a major issue along with some other negative comments, yet the final Staff Report has a completely different slant. Harris responded that the pre-app conference is an informal meeting. The Staff comments looked at the site in total. The City Attorney said the Hearings Board is limited to looking at the impact of the expansion but he said it does not have to be looked at in a vacuum and ignore any problems existing on the site today. Some of the comments in the pre-app were directed toward the code compliance issues. If there are code compliance issues, they need to be dealt with in a separate way. Molnar recalled there was an issue with the apartment approved with the initial application. Was it being used as an apartment or was it being used as part of the medical building as either a conference room or as an accessory medical use? As of this date, while the residential use might be limited, it is Staff’s interpretation that it is being used as a residential use and not as part of the medical facility. If indeed the apartment was being used for medical, then the impact would be far beyond the 150 square foot expansion. Molnar remembered at some point in the process, either Engineering or Traffic Safety approved marking the handicap space at curbside (just up from the intersection). Some of the neighbors have said that has caused more curbside parking further up into the neighborhood that might have been a couple spaces closer to the intersection had the handicap space been marked on the applicant’s property. Molnar said there is excess parking in the lot to go back to potentially putting the space back in the parking lot and freeing up the curbside parking for overflow parking resulting from the medical office. Molnar read the City Attorney’s interpretation from an e-mail. PUBLIC HEARING RICHARD STEVENS, 363 W. Sixth Street, Medford, said he is representing the property owner and applicant. He is aware of the pre-app comments and Evans’ letter which is based on the pre-app conference and done without the advantage of a formal application and findings of fact which have been prepared and submitted in support of the application addressing the applicable criteria. The pre-app comments give the Hearings Board a limited view and they should take a limited examination of those comments. Stevens said they concur with the Staff Report. He believes they have met the criteria. The non- conforming status of the property was not created by the property owner but is a result of a public works project making the property and the structure non-conforming. The Historic Commission has reviewed the application and their added condition is agreeable to the applicant. No tree loss will be experienced as a result of this application and the locust trees will be maintained. The purpose of the expansion is to enlarge the surgical theater and that purpose is to allow Dr. Young to use modern technology in a room that is now too cramped and too small. Secondly, Dr. Young needs ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 2 HEARINGS BOARD NOVEMBER 10, 1998 MINUTES additional storage for the equipment. He would like to get the laundry facilities out of the break room and better utilize the space. They are not expanding the physical operation at the present time. There will be no larger patient load. The doctor’s procedures will expand in length and result in fewer patients on a daily basis. The employee hours are fairly set and should not change. They do not see any need to expand the parking facilities. Evans has raised issues with the criteria, items C, #’s 2, 5 and 7. Those relate to the criteria addressed by the applicant in their findings of fact. Number 2 deals with generation of traffic and affects on the surrounding street. The 150 square foot expansion will not generate any additional traffic for this operation. It is simply to allow more convenient use of the surgical theater and introduce new technologies to accommodate the patients coming to the facility at the present time. There will be no additional traffic, parking, pedestrians or employees. Stevens addressed criteria C 5 (generation of noise, light and glare). There should be no change of the present exterior lighting, glare, noise level, or traffic. Evans will not see the expansion of the structure from his residence. Criteria C 7, Stevens noted, need additional standards articulated in order to answer. DARRELL BOLDT and SCOTT YOUNG were available for questions. Morris asked how many patients are seen a day. Young said on a surgery day it might only be two patients but on a maximum day about 30 patients, sometimes a few more. Boldt said he met with Knox during the pre-app and he was asking for a review of several things. The actual application has been scaled down since the pre-app. Howe asked how many doctors use the office. Young said there have been two, it is now one but could be two again. Howe asked the patient load with two doctors. Young said it could have been up to 60 patients per day though that would be a heavy day.. Howe wondered how close are the locust trees to the new addition. Young said the addition is designed not to harm the locust trees. The addition is about three to four feet away after construction. Boldt submitted some photos. Howe said the applicant is asking to exacerbate the non-conformity by going into the setback another foot. We have heard that in the past there is handicap parking on the street and not as close to the office and more difficult for people on a slope to get out of their car. Young responded that the wheelchair request was made because that is the easiest way for a disabled person to get out of a vehicle. Coolidge is angled up and the parking lot is angled sideways. It is safer on the street. There have been no complaints from patients. JACK EVANS, P. O. BOX 1293, Ashland, stated he and his wife own 70 Coolidge Street which is directly across from the building in question. Evans said the pre-app was done in March which stated all the problems with the application. He said if you look at the traffic figures, it is an increase of 672 percent. The parking lot has some slow days but there are a lot of heavy days with the parking lot completely full. Cars are parked on both sides of the street and beyond Rock Street. He asked the Hearings Board to remember not to make their decision in a vacuum. He is skeptical of the applicant saying there would be no more traffic impact. He would like to see this application stopped. PATTY BRUNO, 521 North Main, Office Coordinator, stated she works 40 hours a week and does not plan on increasing her hours worked. The are running out of space for charts. The paperwork has increased ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 3 HEARINGS BOARD NOVEMBER 10, 1998 MINUTES because of managed care requirements. They are required to keep two years of files in their office and all records have to be kept for a minimum of ten years. They need added storage space for equipment. She does not see there will be any increase in the number of patients or amount of traffic. BILL SAVARO, RN, 521 North Main, said he works for Dr. Young and his major objective is to increase his efficiency in patient care. Having an increase in the operating room space directly relates to that. Rebuttal Stevens responded that he is a consultant, not an attorney. The parking requirements of the code have been met - one parking space required for 350 square feet of medical space. He does not know where the 672 percent increase came from. Howe said it is included in Evans’ letter and Harris said he is referring to traffic counts. Stevens said the street has a capacity for 6 to 8,000 trips per day. In addition, the whole area needs to be viewed because other medical offices will influence expansion of traffic. No new noise levels will be created with this application. The upstairs has never been used for Dr. Young’s practice. It is not part of the application. Staff Comments Harris read the Historic Commission’s condition. “That a foundation of the new addition shall have a corner return of 32 inches to 48 inches to provide the appearance of a continuous foundation.” Harris explained Staff did not in fact recommend approval of the application but has left it up to the Hearings Board. She added that the applicant is required to have eight spaces and they currently have nine. COMMISSIONERS’ MOTION AND DISCUSSION Hearn moved to approve subject to the conditions along with the new condition of approval. Strike Condition 2 and use Harris’ wording from above. Strike #2 and use her specific one. Morris seconded the motion. After reviewing the criteria, Hearn said this is a review of an expansion and he believes the traffic concerns have been answered. He does not see how enlarging the operating room will generate more traffic. He believes the application meets the criteria. The motion carried unanimously. TYPE I PLANNING ACTIONS PLANNING ACTION 98-107 REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP OF A FOUR-UNIT TRAVELER’S ACCOMMODATION PLUS OWNER’S QUARTERS. 570 SISKIYOU BOULEVARD APPLICANT: BARBARA SIMARD This action was approved. PLANNING ACTION 98-113 REQUEST FOR FINAL PLAN APPROVAL OF A 24-LOT, 24-UNIT MULTI-FAMILY SUBDIVISION UNDER THE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OPTION FOR THE PROPERTY ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 4 HEARINGS BOARD NOVEMBER 10, 1998 MINUTES 458 AND 460 CLAY STREET APPLICANT: GREGG ADAMS This action was approved. ADJOURNMENT - The meeting was adjourned at 2:45 p.m. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 5 HEARINGS BOARD NOVEMBER 10, 1998 MINUTES