Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-02-13 Planning MIN ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING FEBRUARY 13, 2001 MINUTES CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:10 p.m. by Chair Mike Gardiner. Other commissioners present were Marilyn Briggs, Ray Kistler, Mike Morris, Alex Amarotico, Chris Hearn, John Fields, Russ Chapman, and Kerry KenCairn. There were no absent members. Staff present were John McLaughlin, Bill Molnar, Mark Knox and Sue Yates. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Hearn moved to approve the Minutes of the January 9, 2001 meeting. Ken Cairn seconded the motion and the Minutes were approved. The Minutes of the December 12, 2000 Hearings Board were approved. APPROVAL OF FINDINGS Chapman moved to approve the Findings for PA 2000-126, Hearn seconded the motion and the Findings were approved. PUBLIC FORUM - No one came forth to speak. TYPE III PUBLIC HEARING PLANNING ACTION 2000-124 REQUEST FOR A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AMENDMENT, ZONE CHANGE (R-1-7.5 TO C-1-D) AND SITE DESIGN AND USE REVIEW TO ALLOW FOR THE RENOVATION AND CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION TO THE BUILDING LOCATED AT 51 WINBURN WAY (I.E. HILLAH TEMPLE BUILDING) FOR USE AS CITY OFFICE SPACE. ALSO A REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCES TO FOUR OF THE DOWNTOWN DESIGN STANDARDS, SECTION VI, OF THE SITE DESIGN AND USE STANDARDS. APPLICANT: CITY OF ASHLAND STAFF REPORT Molnar reported this action was reviewed last month and continued to this month’s meeting. It appeared, through an informal poll of Commissioners that the zone change request was justified. The main issues surrounded the details of the design. Additional details have been provided on a revised set of drawings, showing specific details of the building materials which give depth and texture to the building. Color and brick samples have been provided as well. Staff feels that with last month’s information and the additional materials and comments provided by the applicant, they are still recommending approval. The overall site plan improvements proposed for the building are in context with the downtown and represent a substantial improvement to the property. This action was presented to the Historic Commission. A written memo has been provided this evening by the Historic Commission. They felt it was a well-designed project and historically compatible. They raised some issues regarding the entrance pavilion because it felt too contemporary. They were pushing for changes to the entry that would reflect a more traditional design as seen on the schematic in the packet that shows the entry gable with an extended eave. The gable is solid and the columns to either side are brick. Staff suggests that the Historic Commission members be allowed to speak before anyone else speaks so others can comment. PUBLIC HEARING DALE SHOSTROM, 1240 Tolman Creek Rd and member of the Historic Commission and GARY FOLL, 925 B Street, member of the Historic Commission spoke. Foll said their purpose tonight is to represent the Historic Commission and read into the record the memo they wrote concerning the Hillah Temple. Shostrom read the memo into the record outlining their concerns. Briggs said the Historic Commission touched on the same things she had. Would the Historic Commission think it would add to the civic appearance of the building to have a clock? Shostrom and Foll said the Historic Commission did not discuss this, but they felt it would perhaps add civic character to the building. GREG SCOLES, City Administrator and MARSHALL BALFE, architect, represented the applicant. Scoles said they were responsive to the Commission’s concerns, and the staff report outlines the materials they have provided this time. They have provided larger scale drawings and more details. The comments made by the Historic Commission are legitimate regarding the entry of the building. As they move into the development phase, Scoles wants to take into consideration their comments. He hopes there will be some flexibility with the ability to incorporate some of the Historic Commission’s ideas. The Commission could word a Condition so the Staff Advisor and Historic Commission could have input. Scoles said the proposed Conditions are acceptable. Balfe said specifically the changes they made were to incorporate the pavilion into the existing structure. In order to do this, they had to raise the ridge. They also incorporated the strong horizontal band under the windows. They went from two skylights to three smaller skylights and made some changes to provide some backlighting for the clear story windows in the front. Balfe showed the concrete and brick samples and paint color and fascia samples. There is an awning over the entry and the thought is to do the fascia in copper and let it darken to match the roof. Scoles said there is an existing tree not shown on the plan that will be retained. There was discussion about flipping the parking at the meeting. They looked at that and it does make some changes to the building that are relatively unacceptable. Some utilities would have to be moved, the existing planter area and drive approach and trees would have to be removed. They also looked at putting a planter alongside the sidewalk. Scoles said there is only about 18 inches to do that. They did not feel it would be a useful planting area if cars are parked all the over it. Fields wondered if there would be any kind of delineation of the walkway through the parking lot from the Alice Peil walkway. Scoles said they talked about that but there is no traffic in there. They are planning on doing an extension of the concrete treatment now seen around the Winburn Way Bridge. Fields wondered if there would be any kind of a raised walk or something that would protect cars from running into the building (bumpers, tire stops). Balfe said they have bollards along the corners of the buildings. Briggs said she respects the Historic Commission’s suggestions regarding the façade and she is pleased they are going to go along with that. She wondered if the concrete to the left and right of the door could go all the way up? If it could do so, it would give a real sense of power. Marshall said they would try to do that. Briggs discussed the parking again. She made a sketch after the last meeting showing the parking up against the building so the entry to the park would not be a parking lot. We are a City entity and so is the Parks Department, both having to deal with sense of entry. By putting this parking area at the very beginning of the Guanajuato Way entry we are diminishing the sense of entry to the park. She is begging them to look at this again so the park can have its strip of green as an entry instead of a car park. McLaughlin added a Condition 9 that would contain wording to do certain things to be reviewed by the Historic Commission and Staff Advisor. Briggs asked for a straw vote from the other members about parking. Some members felt there was not a good option. The space is tight and they wished for a better a solution. Some preferred the landscaping against the building. Gardiner wanted to make sure everyone had read Brent Thompson’s letter contained in the packet. Thompson suggested we should be looking at a second story on this building. At the last meeting it was explained that the foundation of the existing building was inadequate to support a second story and would be an added expense. Fields said there is resource efficiency in salvaging the building. The building would have to be demolished to build a second story but in this case, it is a good re-use of the building. Briggs said she found that September 7, 1999, the City Council determined that they wanted to pursue the single story design. She believes that Thompson has the right idea but will not apply to this. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 2 REGULAR MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 13, 2001 COMMISSIONERS’ DISCUSSION AND MOTION Fields moved to approve PA2000-124 with the eight Conditions and the suggested added Condition 9. Hearn seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. Molnar asked if the Commission wanted to consider adopting the Findings with the added Condition 9 and voting after the break. PLANNING ACTION 2001-007 REQUEST FOR OUTLINE PLAN APPROVAL FOR A 25-LOT SUBDIVISION UNDER THE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OPTION FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 641 TOLMAN CREEK ROAD. APPLICANT: SUNCREST HOMES, LLC Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts – Site visits were made by all. STAFF REPORT Knox reported this is a request for Outline Plan approval for a 27-lot subdivision. The property is located on the west side of Tolman Creek Road and the south side of the railroad tracks. Twenty-four new houses are proposed. There is an existing single family residence on Lot 12. Two lots are in open space to be owned by the homeowner’s association. This project is Phase II of the Clay Creek Gardens that was approved two years ago. This proposal has a street pattern connecting directly into the Phase I subdivision. Takelma runs all the way through the subdivision and connects with Tolman Creek Road. The base density is 23.89 units. The applicants are proposing the conservation density housing bonus and the open space density bonus. The applicants could develop the property at 29 units but are proposing 25. Services are available to the property. There is adequate transportation for the internal part of the development. Tolman Creek Road, however, has little to no facilities for safe pedestrian travel. There is a narrow bike lane with no shoulder for pedestrian refuge. There were some issues raised by Staff that have been discussed with the applicant. The first involves parkrows. There is an area with a three foot parkrow. The standard parkrow width is seven feet. The applicants have agreed to extend the street over four feet in order to obtain the seven feet. The applicants have also agreed to extend the bike path which starts off Jaquelyn Street to the central bike path consisting of a six foot surface within a ten foot pedestrian easement. The applicants have not shown sidewalk or parkrow improvements in front of Lot 1 or along Lot 2. Staff was concerned that if they were going to have an alley, it really needed an outlet. The outlet caused these lots to get shrunk so it took the opportunity for a parkrow and sidewalk off this area. Staff is somewhat agreeable to having a sidewalk only on the one side. It is much more beneficial to the long-range aspects of the project to have the alleyway. Knox said Lot 19 is the other issue. The applicants do not show any improvements and Staff believes it is an oversight and have asked that the applicants provide a parkrow and sidewalk. It will probably not be that easy to provide it so there will be something like a bump-out for Lot 19. The applicants have agreed to research that and do the engineering. However, there might be such a change to Lot 19 that it might affect the validity of that lot or it might affect the lot lines from Lots 19 through 13. Knox said there is a situation where a street block is the maximum length permitted. There are some exceptions in the City Street Standards. It discusses mid-block connections. Staff is agreeable to that. Knox said the applicants have shown setbacks that are not standard. Under the Performance Standards Option it is acceptable to have reduced setbacks but with the expectation that they are truly mitigated with design. The applicants proposed to add some design elements to their houses similar to Phase I. The specific conditions ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 3 REGULAR MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 13, 2001 proposed by the applicant are shown on Page 9 of the Staff Report and are acceptable to Staff with the exception of item #3. It is much more mandatory. The applicants have agreed, therefore, to have six foot porch. Knox said there are two major concerns regarding Tolman Creek Road. One is from the subdivision going south and the other is with the subdivision going north. Staff is concerned about the impact 24 new homes will have, specifically, with children walking to the destination south, primarily Bellview School and a park facility. The applicants have explained in their findings that there is an alternative opportunity from using Tolman Creek. The route would be up Jaquelyn through the street grid, to Barbara and over to Tolman Creek, getting children much closer to Bellview. Staff is accepting of that idea, however, considering the fact we are about two years away from construction on Tolman Creek, Staff feels the applicant should pay an up-front cost of $4000 per lot plus the annual increase that has been adopted by the City Council in 1999. That amount could be working for the improvement district up-front. With regard to the northbound route on Tolman Creek, there is an open storm drain and a narrow bike path. This really is the only access from the subdivision to the shopping centers. There is also a barrier on the other side of the tracks which is very, very narrow between the travel lane and the barrier. Staff believes this is unsafe. It is a primary route for a lot of these residents to walk or bike to the YMCA, Bi-Mart and other services. Staff believes there needs to be an improvement now rather than later. A Condition has been added to improve that section of Tolman Creek. Twenty-one Conditions have been added. Because of the numerous changes, Staff would recommend to the Planning Commission that this hearing be continued so the applicants can come back next month, making these changes so we can see how all of this will work out. If the Commission wishes to approve this action tonight, there are 21 attached Conditions that reflect Staff’s concerns. Chapman wondered if any efforts had been made to improve a way for people to cross Ashland Street from Faith. McLaughlin said there are efforts going on currently with ODOT. Gardiner asked if the applicant has agreed to the 21 Conditions. Knox said there is a minor addition to Condition 11. Add at the end.”…this amount shall be increased to account for inflation since February 3, 1999 as noted in the City Council Resolution 99-09”. Knox added the applicants have agreed to all the Conditions except 11 and 12. Fields would like the opportunity to see their revised plan and get a better idea of what is going on and would be open to a continuance. PUBLIC HEARING CHARLIE HAMILTON 2277 Suncrest Road, Talent, owner of Suncrest Homes is involved in Clay Creek Gardens I. Hamilton explained they have tried to provide a neighborhood with different house styles. They want to continue this in Phase II. The setbacks have helped them get more variety. They are looking for a little flexibility. They are agreeable to all but a couple of Conditions. Hamilton noted Condition 15 which refers to a seven foot parkrow. He explained Mickelson Street is to continue through to Phase II and there is a parkow and a sidewalk on one side. It will allow them to fit Lots 2 through 11 and be able to incorporate an alley. The extra 13 feet allows them to have the alley and that is an important component to the project. It buffers the homes from the railroad. The sidewalk and parkrow would really go nowhere. However, if you cross the street and continue, there is one straight line all the way down Jaquelyn, through Lots 20, 25, 2, and 1. Placing the pathway there allows for a couple other alternatives. It allows pedestrian and bike traffic to come up and not go to Tolman. It gives options for pedestrians and bicyclists in the meantime. There are a couple of different options available to them regarding pedestrian traffic. Of the 20 homes sold, only three have been to families with children. The first pedestrian option is to walk up Jaquelyn to Barbara. From Barbara there are pathways and connections all the way to the school. The second option would be to walk on Takelma through Clay Creek Gardens Phase I over to Clay Street which has pathways and sidewalks all the way across. Then, students can pick up bus service on Clay Street. The third option would be school bus transportation that can be provided temporarily. Hamilton has checked and there are school district funds available. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 4 REGULAR MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 13, 2001 Hamilton said they want to pay their fair share. However, they are being asked to do their improvements, do additional improvements, and then even more. He feels Conditions 11 and 12 are beyond proportion to the impact they are creating. CLARK STEVENS, The Richards Stevens Company, 211 Genessee Street, Medford, reiterated Conditions 11 and 12 appear to be a triple dip into an unequitable status for the subject site. In Dolan vs. the City of Tigrad there was a “takings” issue similar to this situation. There was a proportionality that needed to be examined. What is an equitable cost and benefit for the subject property? With the $4,000 maximum charge, additional inflation, plus off- site improvements, frontage improvements, no nexus has been made as to how Staff came up with Conditions 11 and 12. Stevens believes he can offer several options to come up with a nexus of where they can agree as to what would be a fair and equitable cost to the subject site. They would like to open the floor for discussion. He entered into the record the Tolman Creek Road improvement between Siskiyou Boulevard and the Union Pacific Railroad. The second page reflects the abutting properties onto Tolman Creek Road. He again said the applicant would agree to pay a proportionate share for the cost of local improvement district improvements. Gardiner explained to Stevens that the local improvement district information is not really a matter for the Planning Commission to decide. He suggested they work with Staff on this. Gardiner asked if Hamilton was saying the pedestrian traffic would be better served by going through the neighborhood as opposed to using Tolman Creek. Hamilton said there are three options. Knox said Condition 15 should read “west side” not “east side”. Hamilton agrees with that Condition. McLaughlin said another option that may be considered is a curbside sidewalk along Lot 2 that would connect up across Lot 1. Hamilton agreed to continue the hearing. Kistler wondered instead of reducing the setbacks to four feet, to reduce them to three feet where there is a garage and keep them at six feet where there is no garage. Hamilton thought they could possibly work that out on Lots 3 and 5. The hearing will be continued for 30 days. McLaughlin said there are two main issues. The first is the criteria for a subdivision of adequate transportation. They are asking for 25 new homes and there will be people walking to commercial uses. What is there now is not adequate and does not even remotely meet the standard. There has to be some facility. The applicant’s findings do not address adequate pedestrian facilities to the north. The Planning Commission has to make a finding that there are adequate facilities to accommodate people walking to Bi-Mart, etc. Staff’s recommendation is that these improvements be done to a full City standard on Tolman Creek Road and across the tracks. Without it, pedestrians are not going to have ability to cross the tracks in an adequate manner. He directed the Commissioners to look at the pictures at the bottom of Page 5 of the Staff Report. McLaughlin said the other issue is the LID. Staff’s recommendation comes from the adoption of a resolution on LID’s. Part of it says if there is not a design completed, then the development will pay $4000 per lot with that amount adjusted annually if they wish to move ahead at this time. The $4000 removes their obligation for any future LID. The hearing will be continued and re-noticed. APPROVAL OF FINDINGS: KenCairn moved to approve the Findings for PA2000-124 (City of Ashland) with the addition of Condition 9. Amarotico seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. PLANNING ACTION 2001-012 REQUEST FOR SITE REVIEW APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A 3,240 SQUARE FOOT COMBINATION KFC/A&W RESTAURANT LOCATED ALONG CLOVER LANE, JUST NORTH OF THE MASONIC TEMPLE BUIDLING. APPLICANT: WILLIAM H. THOMPSON Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts - Site visits were made by all. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 5 REGULAR MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 13, 2001 STAFF REPORT Molnar said this is a proposal for a Site Review to construct a 60 seat KFC/A&W restaurant that will include a covered area for ordering from the car. There was a similar proposal that involved annexation of a 1.2 acre parcel at the south end of Clover Lane. The Site Review and Partition aspect of the proposal was denied by the application. An appeal has been filed to the City Council. The driveway goes around the building entering one way and exiting on the southerly portion of the site. There are about 16 parking spaces situated around the perimeter of the building. There is a covered ordering area on the south side of the building. The Staff Report and application refer to a phase 2 of the project involving construction of a multi-story office building at the back of the property. Parking and landscaping associated with that building would be installed at a later time. The Staff Report has raised some of the issues that came up during the annexation request. The primary issue dealt with traffic and the impacts of this facility and trips generated on the intersection of Clover Lane and Highway 66. Two traffic studies had been prepared by Hardey Engineering looking at the full build-out of the Clover Lane area and projected trip generation to 2020. The conclusion of the Hardey study stated that it felt the intersection would operate at an acceptable level of service through the year 2020. They did propose a separate right-hand turn lane be designed on Highway 66 proceeding east. ODOT evaluated the study and raised some concerns about safety and sight distance for cars exiting Clover Lane. ODOT asked for additional information. There are some additional addendums to the original study that look at sight distance and how many accidents have been registered (six) over a ten year period. ODOT has stuck by their previous recommendations requiring the applicant to make certain improvements for them to endorse the application. They are in agreement with Hardey that a separate right-hand turn lane be constructed onto Clover Lane. They are asking for an actual curb radius to be constructed (at 76 Station). ODOT, in order to improve sight distance looking toward Ashland Hills, will restrict parking in front of the Chevron Station. They have also suggested a deferred improvement agreement be required as a condition of approval, stating at a later date there could be some other modifications needed at that intersection to restrict turning movements onto Clover Lane—either a right-hand turn out of Clover Lane and a right-hand turn into Clover—meaning no left hand turn into Clover Lane or out of Clover Lane. ODOT is asking for a deferred improvement agreement saying that at a later date if ODOT so chooses, the applicant would be required to design and install those improvements. ODOT has amended their recommendation as amended in the file. There was an issue regarding a turnaround area. If cars or autos are forced to take a right-hand turn out of Clover Lane, where would they turn around? ODOT has agreed that before they require any other additional intersection improvements such as a median to restrict turning, that ODOT would have to come up with a turnaround area location. The construction would be done by ODOT and not the responsibility of the developer. Molnar said there are three items highlighted in the Staff Report that deal with the Site Review. The floor area ratio standard is .35. Given the size of the lot, the applicant does not meet the standard with just building the KFC/A&W. There are showing they will comply with it in phase 2. In order to access these types of restaurants and the covered parking area, it necessitates a lot of circulation around the building and a lot of asphalt. Behind both sets of parking spaces, there is anywhere from 32 to 42 feet of backup space so in order to mitigate the early phase of development, Staff has suggested a condition to move these spaces away from the building to have the minimum back-up space, allowing the outdoor plaza area to either be expanded or incorporate some additional landscaping and not have such a wide back-up area. In conjunction with this, in the outdoor seating area, it is suggested the applicant consider some type of overhead shade structure such as a lattice facility. It allows for the outdoor seating area to be more viable. The last item focuses on colors. There is a standard in the Detailed Site Review Zone that bright or neon paint colors used too extensively attract attention to the building or use are prohibited. When this standard was adopted it was to keep the focus on business identification on signage rather than creating a lot of contrasting or bright colors to attract attention to the building. Staff’s concern with the design as proposed is primarily the checkerboard pattern in a red and gold and the metal roof section with its alternating red and white stripes. That color scheme is inconsistent with the standard and is specifically there to draw attention to the building and the corporate image. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 6 REGULAR MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 13, 2001 Staff has suggested the checkerboard and alternating striping go away and a more singular, muted color scheme be considered. This standard has been applied in similar applications over the years. Molnar said the current traffic study appears to show there is an acceptable level of service for the intersection if the improvements, as suggested by ODOT, are incorporated. The applicant provided some additional traffic generation figures based on gross sales of similar restaurants and have come in with a much lower generation figure than what the Institute for Traffic Engineers shows. Molnar said if the Commission should choose to approve the project, there are 16 attached Conditions. Condition 2 outlines ODOT’s improvements. Staff is evaluating, as part of the approval for the 65 unit hotel across from the Masonic Hotel, one of the Conditions is that the hotel had to finish the sidewalk on Clover Lane all the way up to the intersection of Highway 66 and Clover Lane. Staff is looking at the preliminary designs for that sidewalk and at this point they have not been supplied with any information on how wide the right-of-way is for Highway 66 at that point. Staff is not certain that some of the improvements that ODOT has suggested (specifically, the right-hand turn lane and increasing the radius) have right-of-way available for the improvements. Molnar said they are thinking about modifying Condition 2 to say “…those plans shall identify that adequate right-of-way width is available to construct these improvements”. PUBLIC HEARING WILLIAM THOMPSON, 1075 Benson Way, said he does not see any difficulties with using this site for a restaurant. DAVE RICHARDSON, Architect, 1105 Siskiyou Blvd., did meet with Dave Fletcher from ODOT and went over some of the items. ODOT has the information on the right-of-way but have not had time to send a crew out to check everything. It appears there is enough right-of-way. He has not seen plans for the sidewalk. The E-1 zoning allows for a restaurant outright. The floor-area ratio has been met. The function of the intersection is adequate. The only thing would be ODOT's concerns about safety. The applicant is agreeable to putting in a right-hand turn lane. Richardson still believes there needs to be a study done as to the necessity of a median strip. They don’t have a problem with any of the items in the Staff Report. They will pull the cars out as far as they can and still be safe. He is a little relieved about the colors. They are in agreement with a free-standing shade structure or additional trees. Kistler asked for the size of the building. Richardson said it is 3240 square feet. McLaughlin said the traffic study s based on square footage. It is based on 716 trips per 1000 square feet. If the Hardey report substituted a 3200 square foot building for the 2600, it increases the average daily trips by about 400 per day—from 1887 to 2291. Thompson did not think they would generate that much business. KFC has fewer customers but bigger ticket averages. Molnar said Condition 3 refers to the deferred improvements and is worded in such a way to allow for flexibility and leave options open. There might be some alternatives to allow for both turning movements at Clover Lane. BOB ROBERTSON, represents Pacific Western who owns the land, said they presented a traffic study that indicated with full build-out of Clover Lane there would be adequate capacity on the street and at the intersection even with the additional land at the end of Clover Lane to be considered. If the developer is asked to do the intersectional changes at Clover Lane, and already approximately $750,000 have been paid by other developers on Clover Lane in Systems Development Charges, why couldn’t some of those funds be used to do some improvements on Clover Lane? Robertson noted the approval of a five-lot subdivision on Clover Lane in 1997 with E-1 zoning. The Staff Report, at that time, had taken into consideration traffic generation. He reminded the Commission the road was planned to connect Spring Creek Drive. He asked that the Commission approve this application. Robertson said he does not object to the Conditions except he asked they not impose a Condition they cannot do like the turning radius. McLaughlin said if we don’t have the right-of-way and ODOT says that is necessary for the turning radius to accommodate the traffic, does Robertson see the difficulty in approving the project if they can’t get the requisite turning radius in? Does Robertson see the conflict with that? McLaughlin said if the right-of-way is not obtainable, a building permit could not be issued until that is clarified. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 7 REGULAR MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 13, 2001 AL VERONE, Master of Lodge 23, Clover Lane, mentioned the letters submitted to the Planning Department earlier. Their main concern is the possible bottleneck on Highway 66 and Clover Lane. Currently, there is very little room with cars parked on both sides of Clover. The second concern is the elevation of the building next to them. Is there enough room for a turnaround? Will deliveries be a problem? They have a lot of trash in the neighborhood from Denny’s and that is a sit-down restaurant. He would like to see an eight foot wall between their business and their building. He feels the colors are questionable. He is concerned about parking. Denny’s is using the gravel lot next to them for cars visiting their restaurant. What will happen when that lot is developed? DEBBIE MILLER, 160 Normal Avenue, said she was walking through the area recently and believes the whole area needs to be looked at as far as traffic. Staff Response Molnar responded to Verone’s testimony. There is a lot of construction activity right now. The final design for the initial part of Clover Lane is 22 to 25 feet curb to curb to Denny’s and posted on the both sides “No Parking”. The street then goes to 36 feet with parking on both sides with two travel lanes. Molnar said the site plan shows a truck route so the restaurant will come in the north side, circle around the back and proceed back towards the intersection. As part of the planning action in 1997, there was a mutual driveway easement granted between Masonic and this property that is currently around 18 feet wide. It is being widened to 28 feet to allow for the one- way movement out and still the in and out of the Masonic. Molnar explained the Commission would be approving a particular building for a restaurant. Another restaurant could move in if it did not expand and have a similar operation. It would require a building permit for tenant improvements. The issue of the right turn only lane has not yet been resolved. Before KFC can open their doors, the way the Condition is written now, they would have to have the turn lanes and turning radius in. Fields wondered if Staff concurs with Hardey Engineering’s conclusion when this area is completely developed in 15 to 20 years. McLaughlin said there is no information to conflict with the report. Rebuttal Richardson believes Molnar adequately answered the questions. The driveway has been widened toward the KFC/A&W so a larger truck can get out. Thompson said they were going to put some additional buffer on the side of the Masonic Lodge to help the noise situation. His contractual agreement with KFC states that if a franchise fails, major modifications would be required to the building. Robertson said the traffic study talked about the right-hand turn lane but it said nothing about the radius. He asked if they could figure out the radius as soon as possible. He asked the Commission not Condition approval on the radius change. If the city does not have right-of-way and has to go through condemnation, he does not want to be held up. With regard to Condition 3, Molnar said the worst case would obligate this owner to bear the cost of designing and constructing a median to restrict turning movements. An acceptable alternative design could occur that would be equal to or lesser in cost and be a better solution. McLaughlin stated he respectfully disagrees with Robertson with regard to the turning radius. ODOT specifically is requesting the radius be addressed. He understands the difficulty that raises for the applicant, however, it is a way identified by ODOT as a way of accommodating this use and this amount of traffic. Without it, we do not anything to show that everything is okay. COMMISSIONERS’ DISCUSSION AND MOTION Amarotico read the purpose of the E-1 zone. He is not confident this type of use provides an aesthetic environment with minimum impact. Gardiner noted it is a permitted use for that zone. Amarotico said a take-out restaurant does not make an eating, drinking, entertainment establishment. Staff interprets this use is a restaurant and an allowed use in the zone. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 8 REGULAR MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 13, 2001 Gardiner is torn as he feels like they should approve this project but he has a concern with Highway 66. They have a study in front of them. There is going to a lot of pressure from the businesses on that street trying to turn left and then move to the freeway. He believes sooner than later ODOT is going to have to come up with a plan. He believes the Conditions of this application address the responsibilities of this applicant when this happens. He believes the application meets the criteria. Fields said we are skipping over the right turn from Clover onto Highway 66. A truck will turn right and then make a U-turn someplace to get back on the freeway. That is the inadequacy of the report and he does not see the solution. The solution we have is unacceptable. McLaughlin doesn’t know what the timetable is on an overpass either. Gardiner moved to approve PA2001-012 with the attached Condition. KenCairn seconded the motion and it carried with Fields and Amarotico voting “no”. OTHER March Meetings The March 13, 2001 Regular Meeting will be rescheduled for March 27, 2001 at 7:00 p.m. The Hearings Board will still convene on March 13, 2001 at 1:30 p.m. ADJOURNMENT – The meeting adjourned at 10:30 P.M. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 9 REGULAR MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 13, 2001