HomeMy WebLinkAboutPA#2009-01292 Exhibits Submitted
.
Page 1 00
-.
April Lucas - For the Record - Croman Mill Master Plan
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
CC:
Colin Swales <colinswales@gmail.com>
Barbara christensen <christeb@ashland.or.us>
4/6/20107:22 AM
For the Record - Croman Mill Master Plan
April Lucas <lucasa@ashland,or,us>
Ii City of AshlaiOd
I' Pianning Exhibit
. Exhitit# 20\0 -0 I
.PAI'ZOOcr.OI,Z z.
: Dnil!J 10 Staff ik.....
._~-
Barbara,
(cc April)
I will be unable to attend the Council meeting in person tonight due to a prior engagement.
Please could you ask the Mayor to read the following into the Record during the Public Hearing tonight
- Agenda item VIII
thanks.
Mayor and Council,
Having read the Economic Opportunities Analysis - EOA (extracted below), I am forced to come to the
opinion that the Croman Plan, as presented, does not fulfill the city's industrial employment needs as
outlined therein.
The City, under similar "pressure from developers to converi the land to residential uses'~ now has a .
major retirement center on the very outskirts of town (North Mountain) and permission has been granted,
and land swapped, for a so-called "zero net energy" housing development (Verde Village) - also on the
very outskirts, (The latter is, as yet, still unbuilt.) Neither of these dreams take into account the pressing
need for adequate public transportation to serve the aging population of our town. This is almost
impossible to provide to such outliers. .
I would prefer the city instead focus it's attention on discussing one day the Railroad Property Draft
.Master Plan 2001, The Downtown Draft Plan IT 2001 and the Draft Infill Study 1995 rather than
upzone this Mill Site at the City's southerly limit for such "mixed uses".
Such central locations would more easily provide the opportunities for easily-serviced office and retail
uses in close proximity to established residential neighborhoods where transit is either near, or not needed
due to already being within a short walking distance of existing amenities.
respectfully
Colin Swales
'--
The Economic Opportunities Analysis
ht1I1://www.ashland.or.us/files/ Ashland%20EOA %2006 27 07,I1df
Page 6 .
...The presence of the Croman Mill site will adequately meet the industrial site needs of the community
for the 20-year planning period. The remainder of site needs can be met through redevelopment and
employment that does not require vacant land....
...Demandfor industrial land. The EOA clearly demonstrates a needfor industrial land in the community,
This is an identified change from past trends, but a logical one that takes advantage of a key community
resource: the Croman Mill site. ECO recommends that Ashland retain the Croman Mill site in an
file://C:\Documents and Settings\lucasa\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4BBAEI46AshDo... 4/6/2010
Page 2 of3
,-
industrial designation. if this site is converted to other uses, the City will no longer have an industrial
land base. Adding new industrial land will be challenging.
Plan for industrial uses that are compatible with the City's economic development objectives. The
Croman site is presently zone M-l; the M-l zone permits a broad range of industrial activities-some of
which, in, our opinion, are not compatible with the site and surrounding uses. The City should consider
prep.iJr!,ng a mas,ter p?anfor the site that evaluates appropriate uses and incorporates sustainable
developmf!rif concepts; .one option is to develop an "eco-industrial park. "l
. Page 9
...For example, in 2006, the City of Ashland adopted a goal to prepare master plan for the Croman Mill
site-----a site that represents the majority of the City's industrial land base. The City was getting pressure
from developers to convert the land to residential uses. Given the limited employment land base in the
City, the conversion of the Croman site represents a major policy decision that has long-term
implications. This document, the Ashland Economic Opportunities Analysis (EOA), is intended to update
the Economic Element of the Ashland Comprehensive Plan, to respond to the requirements of Goal 9 and
OAR 660-009, and to help inform policy decisions such as the Croman Mill site...
Page 24
... The map shows that all of the industrial land is in the Croman Mill Site. The City has three main areas
of Employment land: areas on the northwest fringe, the railroad site, and areas north of the Croman Mill
site.
'Page 29
... The Croman Mill site is the City's only major industrial site. While it is technically available in the
short-term, because it is a redevelopment site, it may take more than one year for the site to be ready for
development.
Page 42
The City should designate at least one site for a master planned industrial park. The Croman.Mill Site is
the largest industrial site in Ashland. The site is largely vacant and is getting pressure for housing and
associated retail uses. The employment forecast, however, is for 600 to 700 industrial jobs. Most of these
will be in specialty manufacturing and other light industries. Ashland will have difficulty accommodating
this employment if it does not have an industrial land base. The Croman site is approximately 70 acres; it
is unlikely that any individual user would require more than jive acres. Many will need less than one
acre.
~.
Page 46
The presence of the Croman Mill site will adequately meet the industrial site needs of the community for
the 20-year planning period. The remainder of site needs can be met through redevelopment and
employment/hat does not require vacant land. The data also suggest that Ashland couldjustify a small
UGB expansion. to add employment land if that is a desired policy direction.
Demandfor industrial land. The EOA clearly demonstrates a needfor industrial land in the community.
This is an identified change from past trends, but a logical one that takes advantage of a key community
resource: the Croman Mill site. ECO recommends that Ashland retain the Croman Mill site in an
industrial designation. If this site is converted to other uses, the City will no longer have an industrial
land base. Adding new industrial land will be challenging.
Planfor industrial uses that are compatible with the City's economic development objectives. The
Croman site is presently zone M-l; the M-l zone permits a broad range of industrial activities-some of
file://C:\Documents and Settings\lucasa\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4BBAEI46AshDo... 4/6/2010
.
Page 3 of3
which, in our opinion, are not compatible with the site and surrounding uses. The City should consider
preparing a master plan for the site that evaluates appropriate uses and incorporates sustainable
development concepts. One option is to develop an "eco-industrial park. "
This probably underestimates overall employment capacity in the city for two reasons: (1) it does not
consider capacity added through redevelopment; and (2) it does not address the fact that the City has
considerable employment that is located in residential areas. Based on these considerations, the City has
capacity for 700-800 additional employees on lands identified as redevelopable in the 2005 inventory
update.
file:/ /C:\Documents arid Settings\lucasa\Local Settings\ Temp\XPgrpwise\4 BBAE 146AshDo... 4/6/2010
From: "Marilyn Briggs" <marllvnlbriaaslOlvahoo,com>
To: tidinaSODinionlOldallvtJdinos.com
Cc: iohnlOlcouncll,ashland.or,us
Sent: Thursday, April 1, 20103:08:45 PM
Subject: Guest editorial Croman Property
~---~--- ,._-.~
j City of Ashia~c' ~
I Fiannine Exhibit .
Exhitit# "ZotO-o2
IPAP......~7-aFl
DaftJp-'iQ..Staff &<..
~,' l
Croman Property: Why CHOOSE a seriously flawed propDsal?
The Irreversible consequences of approving the proposed Croman Property as mixed use is absolutely
contrary to all aspects of sustainability, the watchword of our current Mayor, City Council; and'
Planning Commission, Furthermore, the attempt tD scuttle the Minority Opinion and Report written by
Planning Commissioners, Michael Dawkins and Melanie Mindlin, is irresponsible and smacks of
collusiDn. The minDrity report comprehensively targets the faults of the existing proposal, Specifically,
the mlnDrity report states that the proposal promotes "competition with downtown land uses and
[provides] insufficient land for 'edge of town' activities requiring outdoor operations and larger parcels
with less onerous development standards."
This proposal allows for ONLY 22% for light industrial uses, while plentiful existing commercial,
residential and park uses fill. out the acreage, The propDsal IGNORES the state regulation to maintain a
20 years' supply of each zone type within the urban growth boundary. Furthermore, it defies common
sense In that it promotes sprawl and dismisses infill pDlicies of big picture planning.
Planning Commissioner Chairman, Pam Marsh, stated it was nDt the Planning CDmmissiDn's
responsibility to address the big picture, The contrary is true when it CDmes tD designing a Master
Plan! If any administrator instructed otherwise, it is a distortion of purpose, Unfortunately, the big
picture is the missing crux of this sD-called Master Plan. The proposal is a top-down plan from the
inception of the grant, from the Southern Oregon Department of Land Conservation and
Development, to hiring the Portland architects, Crandall Arambula, Throughout the two-year planning
process, a consistent dismissal of fundamental site specific questions and suggestions by the public
have been ignored,
The appearance of sham hearings resembies "the erosion of transparency and accountabilitY"
addressed in the TIME magazine article, March 22nd 2010. The article highlights the absDlute need tD
"marshal public cDnsensus," that "institutions of all kinds need input from beIDw," and specifically that
"it's the job of citizens to save elites from themselves," This ties in with the minority report's last
sentence that the proposed Croman master pian "is uitimately seif-defeating because It erodes
community trust."
The minority report Inciuded an artlcie from the Planning Commissioners Journal, (#77, Winter 2010);
herein are three quotes which address this proposal:
"When soiutions are 'pre-cooked' and then pushed through an approval process... they usually fail."
(...) "The temptation to rely heavily upon paid outside consultants, who often use a... one-size-fits-all
approach, should be resisted." (...) "Except in the case of purely technical issues, it is a majDr mistake
to turn a planning project over to a consultant in its entirety. Not only dDes this add tremendous cost,
it alsD reduces the likelihood of community support."
City Council is scheduled to decide this issue on Tuesday, April 6th. Please attend this meeting or write
letters for the public record tD address your concerns, We are on the cusp of a colossally catastrophic
decision, The Croman Property Proposal must be denied!
Respectfully submitted,
Marilyn Briggs, 590 Glenview Drive, Ashland, 541-482-0903
. ;~;
.'
T
f 6ity~iA~hja"d _~Af
I P!annlng Exhibit
",; C I T Y 0 F ,.., Exhltit# 20{0-03
..."" 'i", ,PA' ~-tJj;?f!l
,~,,-i)it!' ' ;""'~1i "... - --____
'.;!il.!;;"'~ AS H LAN D '\j;'h:ij 1~7io Staff IK...
;,i ~l ,;-l;:~r:~ :rti.,",;J';!~N:i~'j :~l ~j:'J,~ !,,,,. .,:iWi '~'''''-'', - 1;
'. ..',.'B(9:RT"&fIi,;IeN'€6MMISSION
. .. "'''''''''!i1/j,~''' "~''''"''''~'' '~\~"-''''''''''''''''''J''I~'''''N''"''''''''''''F''~~''''
l""::.~.,s"J Yi':: >:.. 'f 11 . ""', ._71' r I "'.'f~~'i';'r ,~~.:--.. n ~
T~u :'Ua, :ilJanua"t>2jJF~i20;lv,~
~~~~A~?:ri~W tl .'~!lt~'~l'~":~1-~'tLl~'-'!,f,~*, rt:p.~''<~'-a
"cil~@Hainl)ers 1175.East.Main Street
-~u-"""~'~\~!r1/P'~':li!!.f!tlr],!.-':O';"""!':J,."""'~q,q~;:'(}~-1'
Minutes
Attendees: Tom Burnham, John Gaffey, Steve Hauck, Eric Heesacker, Julia Sommer, Colin Swales
(Chair), Brent Thompson, Matt Warshawsky, David Young
Absent: None,
Ex Officio Members: David Chapman, Brandon Goldman, Larry .Blake, Kat Smith, Steve MacLennan
Staff Present: Mike Faught, Jim Olson, Nancy Slocum .
I. CALL TO ORDER: 6:00 PM
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Minutes of December 21, 2009 were approved as presented.
ID. PUBLIC FORUM:
Egan Dubois questioned the roll of the Transportation Commission Subcommittee and how
meetings were publicized. Swales directed Dubois to the Transportation Commission formation
. ordinance (Ordinance No. 2975). The subcommittee meetings were open to the public, The agenda
was set by both the Public Works Director and the Chair of the Commission. Slocum was directed
to publicize subcommittee meetings by sending agenda to the Daily Tidings and posting it on the
website. Dubois thought there should be another mouthpiece for the public as two commissioners
were combined into one.
IV. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE AGENDA:
. RVTD report was moved to follow Commission training so Smith did not have to wait until the
end of the meeting. Setting a date for the Commission goal setting retreat was also added as well
as a Transportation System Plan (TSP) update,
V. ACTION ITEMS:
A. Commission Training bv Barbara Christensen. City Recorder
Christensen's position as City Recorder was guided by Oregon state law. She reminded
Commissioners that as volunteers they represented all citizens and not a single point of view.
Meetings could be held electronically, but they must meet public meeting law i.e. they must be
noticed, have written minutes, be accessible as a public venue and be ADA accessible. With email
the length oftime between responses became a defacto chat room. She recommended against it
and using a list serve, but ultimately it would be a Council decision, The public had the right to
examine all public records and even notes were subject to a three year retention rule. Law
violations void any decisions made and are subject to a $5,000 fine, removal from post and a $500
City fiDe.
.B. RVTD Briefmg
Kat Smith would be replacing Nathan Broom as the Ex-Officio member for RVTD. She
summarized the December, 2009 Monthly Ridership Report. Ashland was down 13.6% over last
C:\DOCUME-l\0IsonjIWCALS-1\TemplXPgrpwise\1211O TC Minutes.doc
Page 1 of3
",
'.
.' . year at the same time while countywide was down 12.1 %. The Commission wondered how the
,', county number would appear without Ashland. They would like to see a three year analysis.
-." .. ~l
C. Croman Master Plan Update
Commission discussed the need to review the plan. Swales reminded them that the Planning
Commission purposely left transportation issues out of their discussion so the Transportation
Commission could discuss it. Goldman said that since the last meeting he made revisions to the
amendment process (Section 18.53), Bike lanes and sidewalk widths would now be minor
amendments. There was also an east / west solar orientation change~ Phase I leaves Croman Road
in place and adds Central Avenue. In Phase II, there would be a need to acquire ODOT property,
vacate city-owned property and realign Tolman Creek Road. As long as the right-of-way was.
locked in place, bike lanes could be reconfigured, but not eliminated.
Thompson was in favor of the plan revisions: Any applicant applying for a site review would have
enough time for staff to interface with Transportation Commission before the Planning
Commission made its fmal decision, Swales wondered who paid for infrastructure. Faught was
drafting an Advanced Financing Ordinance for the City Council's review. The proposed ordinance
was a financial mechanism to reimburse publicly or privately funded public improvement projects
that have direct benefit to other property owners. It was similar to an LID as it distributed the cost
of public improvement projects based on benefited use; the difference between the two was that
Advanced Financing was due when the property owner ties into the pubic improvement. In
addition, the City received a TGM grant to assist in the plan.
Faught reviewed the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) that showed three land use alternatives plus a
"no build" option and their projected effect on transportation circulation especially Highway 66
(Ashland Street), Highway 99 (Siskiyou Boulevard), Tolman Creek Road and Mistletoe Road.
Any needed mitigation would be paid for by the developer. TIA looked only at vehicle mitigation,
not multi-modal mitigation.
Warshawsky was fine with the revised plan as long as it was amendable in the future. Goldman
noted that plan language was also revised so that no access would be allowed on Central Avenue.
This would reduce the number of vehicle I bicycle or pedestrian conflicts. He thought public
discussion was needed on the pros and cons of separated bike lanes. Faught added that minor
amendments could also be made through the TSP update. Burnham was concerned that the printed
maps and standards, although alterable, would be construed as having been approved by the
Commission. .
Motion:
Thompson moved to recommend that staff pursue at, above andlor below grade railroad crossing
easements for all forms of transportation. Motion died for lack of a second.
Warshawsky moved that the Commission recommend to the Planning Commission and the City
Council that the final design of Central Boulevard be reviewed' by the Transportation Commission
before it is finalized and constructed, Hauck seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.
D, Transportation Commission Goal Setting Retreat
Commission discussed whether or not to set goals at a separate meeting and how time sensitive the
issue was. The Commission asked staff to chose several dates and email Commissioners. Burnham
suggested using Traffic Safety Commission and Bicycle & Pedestrian Commission goals as a
template.
'j
C:\DOCUME-l\olsonj\LQCALS-l\Temp\XPgrpwise\121 10 TC Minutes.doc
Page 2 of3
jv"
.
E. TSP Update
Faught reported that Kittleson & Associates won the TSP Update contract in the amount of
$416,000. The contract provided for an optional cost savings clause of $40,000 which would only
be put into action upon approval of the Commission. Council approved the contract in a three to
two vote. There would be a kick-off meeting with the consultants in mid March. He reminded the
Commission that a TGM grant was awarded in the amount of$125,000 with another $66,000'
possible this year.
Thompson thought System Development Charge money should only be used for physical
improvements.
VI. NON ACTION ITEMS
A. Planning Commission Update
No discussion on this item.
B. SOU Master Plan Update
Item tabled until March meeting.
VII. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS & COMMISSIONER COMMENTS:
Commission, by consensus, agreed to have RVTD communicate to the Commission via
memorandum in the monthly packet in order to save time at the meeting. This policy would be for
non-routine issues such as the monthly ridership report,
vm. ADJOURN: 8:10PM
Respectfully submitted,
Nancy Slocum, Accounting Clerk I
C:\DOCUM&-1I0Isonj\WCALS-IITemplXPgIpwise\1211O TC Minutes.doc
Page 3 of3
SOUTHERN OREGON UNIVERSITY
ACADEMIC
AFFAIRS
April 6, 2010
ICC~fAShla1d 'I
Pianning Exhibit
Exhitit# "/PIO -oj
'P~i~g:j- oil.
D Staff~
'-"
Honorable Ashland Mayor and City Council Members
c/o Ashland Council Chambers at the Civic Center
1175 E. Main Street
Ashland OR 97S20
Ashland Mayor and City Council Members,
My name is Jim Klein, and I am the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs at Southern
Oregon University. I am also a member ofthe Ashland Economic Development Policy
Committee. In my absence I have asked our Associate Provost, Paul Steinle, to read my
statement.
At Southern Oregon University we are very supportive of economic develDpment initiatives that
expand and diversify the employment opportunities in Ashland and southern Oregon. Upon
graduation, many of our students must leave the area in order to pursue their careers. A
variety Df employers who offer well-paying jobs can provide more options for our graduates
and ensure the future well-being of our communities.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Jim Klein
12S0 Siskiyou Boulevard . Ashland, Oregon 97520-S03 I
TELS41-SS2-6114 . FAX541-SS2-6115