Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-0503 Planning Exhibits #2010-01239 , CC~~1r Shannon & Jacques Deckwar 343 Neil Creek Rd. Ashland, OR 97520 May 3, 2011 i.'-'-'--.;::-o..~-€_- ~ ,: City of Ashla~'c' J' I,. Planning Exhibit Exhibil#~ DO ,_ ~PA~ lLl.-OI ,_~ Oat ,. Staff --- -~ (Please read aloud at City Council public hearing) To the City Council City of Ashland 20 E. Main St. Ashland, Oregon (\ RE: 85 Winburn Way (Planning Action 2010- 01239) ",,'-) Dear City Council: Jacques and I. as past owners and operators of the cafe at 85 Winburn Way, so wanted to be present and speak out on our strong support of the Storyville project, but we have been out of town these past two Council meetings. My hope is that this can be read aloud and that all the right emotions and beliefs can be conveyed. We are 30 year residents of Ashland, Both coming to attend SOC in the late 70's and working in many of the fine restaurants and dinner houses in Ashland Oregon. In 1997. with all of our savings and more loans from both our parents, we finally bought our dream across from Lithia Park's playground and opened up Perozzis Cafe. We ran it ourselves for a few years and then leased it for 2 more to BZ McMillan. During that time we made numerous attempts to make some minor and a few more elaborate changes to the building and grounds which we felt necessary in our attempt to make a living, But. with it's zoning and the boatload of money it would have required. we felt our hands tied. Banks did not give us Page 1 of 3 " the loans and we were unable to ever see a profit. The history of the place, as the creamery, with it's sloped floors, funky heating and small, crowded kitchen were a challenge to work with. We thought to expand the kitchen, to add a bbq, bar and rooftop dining but always came to roadblocks. Bank financing for upgrades & improvements was impossible with it's conditional use zoning, which was all wrong for it's commercial use, Even BZ McMillan, who has had so many successes in our town, came up empty-handed with his attempt and called it quits after 2 years. That "residential zoning", corrected through the good work of our Planning Commission, allows for viable commercial enterprises to succeed there. We now may avoid a dilapidated white elephant on Winburn with this fantastic gift of the Storyville project. Just look whqt is there now - an eye sore to say the least, I do believe if you build it, theY will come, I also know that we never expect to go out to any restaurant or shop in I Ashland and expect to park directly in front, We welcome the walk our town allows. To simply drop-off and catch up to our elderly or those unable to walk is something we gladly offer, and our offer is gratefully accepted by our guests. Any "parking problem" seems a sign of a vibrant economy to me, If additional parking is needed maybe the city can take the vacant land at Copeland's lot and build a downtown, tasteful, many-storied parking structure there? But, if we refuse this addition - due to parking - I feel we miss a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. And let's remember that we're not only offered this new and beautiful glass topped building with observation deck at 85 Winburn Way, but also the enhanced improvements to our Ice Rink and Community Center that they offer as part of the deal. That this gift should come to us during a down economy and would create Page 2 of 3 .; needed jobs for many, and enhance our entrance to Lithia Park at the same time, is only more Win, Win, Win. Our kids, our parents, and our circle of friends all support this. Feels like a heaven sent, once-in-a-lifetime opportunity that we would be crazy to deny. Thank you for your time. Shannon Deckwar 343 Neil Creek Rd. Ashland, OR 97520 Page 3 of 3 " -,' December 10, 2010 fc~- ~-'. ~ . , Ity of ASh:a''if - ~ I P!a./lning EXhibit. ~' Ex/,ith # ()O Z I PA ~-ifi:!--- . I")'t t-._..::Q/L:. .' -'. f!JJ S ~ '~.._. taff .--.,.---- , . - i I I Bill Molnar Planning Director City Ashland Dear Bill: I understand therecord has been kept open for the pending Planning Matter # 2010- 01239, relating to the Zone Change Request for a proposed restaurant on Winburn Way. If I have an incorrect planning action number, please submit this letter using the correct number. Please consider this e-mail as additional testimony in this matter, and please make certain it is entered into the Public Record, I address the request for zone change and site review for the restaurant building only, and have no objection to the rezoning of the other contiguous properties. My objection in large part relates to parking and traffic issues. Specifically, proposing a project of this size, without providing parking or mitigating the parking and traffic impact on the downtown and Lithia Park parking on Winburn Way, is unacceptable. The addition ofa restaurant, which will seat 150-180 people, will have a major impact on the traffic. and parking situation downtown. I believe the downtown parking inventory is already insufficient, probably by 300-400 spaces. We already experience a major problem with downtown employees of the City, Shakespeare and merchants using the . majority of spaces in adjacent residential areas. Streets such as Granity, B, Water and many others are filled with downtown employees' cars. I know many complaints about this fact ha:,e been received by the City over .theyears. We have implemented parking mitigation measures, including imposing substantial TInes, for repeat parkIDg offenders, We monitor the downtown parking to limit parking times, And now, you have a request to impose an increase and substantial burden on the downtown parking inventory. This proposal to add a restaurant of 150-180 seats, and at . least 10,15 employees to service a restaurant of that size, without adding parking is totally unacceptable. I believe it would be negligent on the part of the City to approve the applicant's request without requiring a complete parking and traffic study to determine the impact on the downtown in general, and Winburn Way in specific, by adding a building of this size without providing parking. If the applicant provides parking as part of the project or mitigation of parking issues as a condition of this request, then I would have a different view on the proposal. Whether the applicant constructs a parking lot over the ice skating area to provide parking, or creates an underground parking garage under hisbnilding and the ice rink; then at least parking would be addressed. . Or, the applicant could procure easements from other downtown properties to use their lots for parking, If there are parking easements from downtown churches, the old . Cantwell's market or other properties that have parking lots and are zoned C-I-D, then that is a different story. Lastly, if a precedent is set to incorporate new property into the C-I-D zone and exacerbates the downtown parking problem, the floodgates will be thrown open and you will have requests from those of us who own property on Water Street, Lithia Way and other streets that abut the C-I-D zone, request rezoning of our properties without providing parking or mitigation of the parking problem. Do we really want that gate to be opened? - In su=ation, I believe this proposal is ill conceived and will adversely impact the downtown parking inventory and traffic pattern on Winburn Way. It would be negligent or reckless on the part of the City to exacerbate the downtown parking problem by adding a 150-180 seai restaurant, witJi attendant employees, to the downtown without a requirement of adding parking or mitigating the adverse impact by procuring parking easements from other property owners. Think you for your consideration of this testimony. J?est regards, Lloyd Haines 96 North Main Street #202 AsWand, OR 97520 . DowntoWn Property OWner 1 \. MEMBER OF THE OREGON AND CALIFORNIA BAR LLOYD MATIHEW HAmES ATTORNEY AT LAW TEL, (541) 482.9300 FAX, (541) 482.9334 Emel!: Iloydmhoines@ yahoo. com . 96 N. MAIN STREET, SUITE 202 ASHLAND, OREGON, 97520 February 10, 2011 .........~. "-' i City of A'Sh;R'''' --~-; 11 F!al:n.in~ Ex hibli w' Exhlt,,# cQ3 ,~AII 2o!Q::p[- '::~~8taff~- , """""'-.~=--.: The Honorable Mayor . Members of the City Council City of Ashland 20 E Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 Re: Opposition to Planning Action #2010-01239 Ladies and Gentlemen: Please consider this as public testimony in the above-referenced Planning Action. I, Lloyd M. Haines, have my business office at Q6 N Main Street, Ashland and I am a downtown property owner. I strongly oppo'se this Planning Request to rezone thesubjectpropertytoC-1-D. I . . I Proiect: The proposed project is to construct a 10,632 square foot building that will contain a 189-seat restaurant on the site of an eXisting fast food, take out business. The 1 89-seat restaurant will be the LARGEST restaurant in town. The proposal will provide no off-street parking, and in fact, will remove seven (7) existing off-street parking spaces that were required under the Con,ditional Use approval of the existing use. . Mv Obiection: In principle, I do not object to converting the property to C-1 zoning, that will acknowledge the years of commercial use of the property, if, and only if, parking is provided to meet the demands of such a large colIll:i:1ercial venture. "The Honorable Mayor, Members of the' City Council January 10, 2011 Page 2 Downtown Parking Issues: Our downtown parking inventory is already inadequate to acco=odate the needs of the City during our busy months. I believe our inventory of parking spaces is at least 250 below what is needed. From May through September, downtown parking is problematic. The City receives constant complaints from residents of downtown streets adjacent to Main Street and Lithia Way about cars owned by downtown employees and visitors parking all day on their streets, thus preventing residents from having any parking available for their own use. The problem exists on Granite, Church, Pioneer and B Streets, to name a few, The City employs the services of an outside contractor to monitor the two-hour parking restrictions in the downtown area. Additionally, the Council had adopted new and punitive measure to keep cars from parking for extended periods, including "repeat violator" tickets of.$25 to $50. These actions acknowledge that downtown parking issues are real. The long-term solution to the problem is to create more off-street parking, by either creating new parking lots, possibly on Water Street at the old SOS site, or create more spaces in existing City lots by putting decks over the existing parking. In any event, something must be done BEFORE increasing the downtown parking demand with a new, I 89-seat restaurant. . Parking Issues Associated with the Planning Proposal: As stated above, the impact ofa co=ercial restaurant of this size will be dramatic. Apparently, the applicant prepared an '''informal parking study" without providing any real assurance that the project will not substantially exacerbate the downtown parking situation. A full and detailed PARKING STUDY, by a reputable professional should be prepared to assess the downtown parking situation and the impact the project will have before the project is approved. Approving the zone change without this information would, in my opinion, be negligent on the part of the City. . Winburn Way is already a traffic and parking nightmare during the high season. Cars are constantly searching for parking space~ adjacent to the park. Traffic is ; , The Honorable Mayor, Members of the City Council January 10, 2011 Page 3 constantly stopping to accommodate cars pulling in and out of spaces. With the creation of another I 89-seat restaurant at this site, that will require I 0-20 employees to operate, the traffic/parking problem will increase from difficult to impossible. Applicant proposes to alleviate/mitigate the parking issues by urging employees and customer to use "non-automotive transportation (bikes, free bus passes and walking)". On it's face, this proposal is woefully inadequate, if not humorous, when talking of a project of this size and scope. Code Requirement- TheZoning Code Change Requires a Public Need: In order to Amend the Zoning Map, the applicant must show "the change implements a public need", or "circumstances relating to the general welfare exist and require such an action" or a "substantial change in circumstances has occurred... necessitating the need to adjust to changed circumstances..." None of these requirements can be met in this application. In fact, all we have before the Council is a proposal to cram a large building onto a small lot, without parking and without consideration for the traffic pattern disruptions that will occur. The Planning Commission found the "potential negative impacts. . . weighed against the benefits.... by improving the streetscape... ice rink facilities... Pioneer Hall courtyard..." make the project worthwhile and deserving of a zone change. I absolutely disagree. , If such criteria are sufficient for zone changes, any future development proposals that offer the City attractive improvements will be approved despite being problematic. \ I would suggest that this project is better suited for another location. There is sufficient, appropriately zoned land downtown to create this project. The old North Light project land is presently in the hands of a bank, is zoned commercial and has off-street parking. There is no need to create more C-I-D land to accommodate this new project. . "t. The Honorable Mayor, Members of the City Council January 10, 2011 Page 4 A Bad Precedent: Permitting a Zone Change in a situation such as this will open the floodgates for additional requests to enlarge the C-I- D district without addressing the downtown parking issues. Lithia Way, Water Street, Pioneer and Oak Streets all have C-I zoning that will desire similar treatment to that being requested in this application. . Why should Lithia Way, which is C-I on one side of the street and C-I-D on the other side, not be rezoned entirely to C-l- D and ,therefore, have consistent and logical zoning on this major downtown artery? Why should the North Light land not be rezoned to C-I-D, and eliminate parking requirements in exchange for deeding the City one of the lots to be used for th~ "public good?" Aooropriate Zoning ofthe Subiect Parcel: . In my opinion, the appropriate zoning of the subject parcel should be C- L The project, as designed, could be developed on the site and provide off-street parking and therefore, avoid the parking and traffic issues discussed above. By adding one more "benefit to the City" in addition to what th~ developer is presently offering, to wit, build a lid on top of the existing adjacent City parking lot (skating rink) that will become a parking deck, the problem is solved. The downtown gets additional parking and the developer gets his building and meets parking requirements. Conclusion: I respectfully request this application for Zone change be denied. I suggest the City procure information/input from reliable consultants to determine the actual downtown parking needs for 2011 and for the next 20 years. I suggest we determine the best way to address downtown parking needs and not exacerbate the parking problem by adding another 189-seat restaurant to downtown without parking. Respectful ~. aines 96 North Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 _.;...."""_~. ~_~'J' """.1 , , ; City of Ash:R'-'! " I F-iai1n:n~ Exhib.t ~ Exlliti'.# oo'f . PAil zo'o~Z3 t~~:~Slaff~ ~ I The City Council has decided to open re-open comments on this project and limited discussion to two issues. 1. Parking 2, Future use. To: Planning Department Re: Winburn Way Planning Action #2010-01239 . I will address the Parking issue only and will limit my comments to my own experience with Planning Commission decisions regarding parking variances and the impact on businesses. On October 14, 2008 the Ashland Planning Commission unanimously approved a parking variance from 5 to 12 spaces for Noble Coffee at 281 Fourth Street (Planning Action #2008-01526). This huge variance more than doubled what was available and allowed the project to proceed despite objections. In effect the Planning commission simply ignored its own zoning standards, Instead of being called a "variance" it should have been called "re-20ning by stealth". The argument put forward by the owners consultant Mark Knox was that the coffee shop would be primarily a "neighborhood" shop with most patrons arriving by FOOT or BICYCLE. This "fact" was accepted without debate, and as the meeting minutes indicate, the biggest concern was whether an inside bike rack would be able to take the place of an outside bike rack. The parking issue was simply ignored. The variance was approved unanimously and the coffee shop opened in 2009. (By the way, the issue was not whether a coffee shop should be allowed as a business, but whether the SIZE of the coffee shop with the resulting occupancy and therefore the number of parking spaces that would be needed was acceptable), Noble Coffee has now been opened for a year, 50 how has this decision worked out? From my location at the corner of Fourth and A Streets I have a clear view of Fourth Street all the way up to East Main Street and down A Street to both 5th Street and 3" Street. I can count at least 20 t030 cars parked by employees, and patrons of the coffee shop on a continuous basis during my peak business hours from 10 am to 1 pm daily, seven days a week, (and this is in the winter time), They park on both sides of Fourth Street between A a,nd B Streets, on the Fourth Street extension across A Street, and on both sides of A Street for half a block between Third Street and Fifth Streets. A substantial number of clients of the coffee shop bring laptops and stay for hours "working", sometimes all day, The patrons are not just neighborhood residents. I personally know many people who frequent the coffee shop and they live in Medford, Talent and Phoenix, There are 5 parking spaces in front of the Noble Coffee shop. Here are the names of the other businesses where you will find cars parked by coffee shop patrons, sometimes all day: IIlahe Gallery, Peerless Hotel, Peerless Restaurant, Deluxe Awning, Gallery Koron, Chris Briscoe Photography, Ashland Yoga Center, Davis and Cline Gallery, A Street Financial Services, Coquina Restaurant, Foundry, Fourth Corner Quilts, Rogue Book Shop, Aura Clinic, Siskiyou Massage, and the 4th Street Guest Lodgings and the apartment building on the corner of Fourth and B Street. This does not count residents and businesses who occupy suites above these street level businesses and who also need parking. The Planning Commission decision to completely ignore the requirements of an E-1 District amounts to re-20ning by proxy. In the case of the Winburn Way project, which appears to be based on the hopes for a worl~ of human powered transportation, the decision is almost laughable. I don't know whether the \Nirib'u-r~ project )^fill be an economic boom or bust. Alii know is that in order to get approval, the Planning comrn~ssi~n was asked to overlook existing guidelines and voted S-l to approve the project pending re-20ning. If the problems created by the si2e of this project are properly addressed it may well worthwhile, I really don't know. But from what I see, the approval of this project was not about investment or fixing 20ning problems, but about changing our city's transportation paradigm. According to an article in th7 Daily Tidings, "The commission considers the development a test case in a push to encourage car-free transportation, said Chairwoman Pam Marsh, "If we're depending onthe personal automobile and parking to solve the way we move people around, we're never going to get out of this mire," she said. "We have to begin to try something else, So it's a test case." So, the idea is to intentionally create a serious parking problem as a "test" to see if people will abandon their cars and start using their bikes? Is this really a good way to test something? What if things don't go as planned? Sorry downtown, the "test" just didn't work out, 50 deal with it. If the Planning Commission is really interested in a test, why not take a lookat another Planning Commission decision related to parking (#2008-01S26) and see how that worked out? It's right here for all to see. Let's hope that the City Council can do a better job than the Planning Commission and really think this thing through. Respectfully, John Davis Davis and Cline Gallery S25 A Street, Suite 1 Ashland, OR 97520 Zimbra Zimbra Page 1 seversod@ashland.or.UI .:t. Font size: Fwd: 2 Letters re: Planning Action #2010-01239 From: Derek Severson <seversod@ashland.or.us> Subject: Fwd: 2 Letters re: Planning Action #2010-01239 To : derek severson <derek.severson@ashland.or.us> From: 1I0yd haines [mallto:lloydmhalnes@yahoo,comj Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2011 S:37 PM To: christeb@ashland.or,us Subject: Fw: 2 Letters re: Planning Action #2010-01239 HI Barbara, I would appreciate greatly If this e-mail be forwarded to the Coundl, Mayor and any other relevant parties Involved In the above-referenced Planning m",tter, Thanks Honorable Coundl and Mayor City of Ashiand Re: Planning Matter 2010-01239 I am Uoyd Matthew Haines, my business office Is located at 96 North Main Street #202, Ashland, and this e-mail Is being presented as my public testimony to be entered Into the record at the upcoming May 3rd, 2011 Coundl meeting. . ' Please consider this testimony as strong opposition to the Appeal before you. Attached to this e-mail are two previousiy submitted letters(as . testimony), both before the Planning Commission and the Coundl. I resubmit those letters as testimony for this hearing and will not reiterate much of the material contained In those communications. . I am a business owner and the owner of a number of commerdal property located In downtown Ashland. I have developed downtown commerdal properties, both In the C-l and C-l-0 zones, My buildings contain restaurants, offices and other retail uses. My opposition to this planning action DOES NOT RELATE TO COMPETITION, but In fact RELATES EXCLUSIVELY to what I believe Is POOR PLANNING, This project, which proposes the largest restaurant In town(189 seats), requests a re-zone to eliminate all parking requirements, Additionally, it wiil eliminate parking spaces already existing on the site. This Is a bad Idea. At your last hearing, you received testimony from a retired transportation engineer who estimated at least 100 car trips a day would be generated by the restaurant. He testified, in his professional opinion, a . parking/traffic study should be a requirement to determine the Impact of the project. He testified that without the study, you would have no Idea of the problems that may be created by the project, I totally agree with http://zimbra.asWand.or.us/zimbra/h/printmessage?id=C:41 095 Frl, Apr 29, 2011 09:42 AM ) ""'."'-'''-'' . City -., r".. OfA"h~ ." 'al!nfn~'J "'!i.~ ~ !/~Xh;b It ~Xhibi( r ;.".<14' .. ;--".QO S' ~ ..-''!t~(~~ "~~ 4/29/2011 Zimbra his testimony. In my previous testimony, I asserted that approval, without requiring a parking/traffic study to determine the Impact of the project, would be negligent or reckless on the part of the Council, I still believe this statement to be absoluteiy true. Creating the Increased traffic on Winburn Way by adding a 189 seat restaurant, not providing any additional parking and not having professional input to assess the actual traffic/parking Impact, Is unacceptable. Within the recent past, I was Involved In a Planning Action In Jackson County to create two 500 sq, foot buildings to house dogs and cats. These building were to be constructed at Sanctuary One, an animal rescue In the Applegate Valley. The project was approved SUBJECT to the applicant proOJring a professionally prepared traffic/parking study to determine the number of trips the facilities wouid generate, the number of parking spaces required for staff and visitors and the appropriateness of the site for the project, The study was prepared, the project was approved and the buildings were constructed. Have we come to the point where Jackson County Is more cautious, meticulous and thorough than Ashland? When did that happen?, . , , . .~, ,Now, before you,: you have a 10,632 sq. foot building, with 189 restaurant sea\" and are you are being asked to approve the project based upon an "INFORMAL PARKING STUDY" done, not by a professional, but by the applicant. This Is totally unacceptable and you are playing with fire If you do not require a complete and professional study to determine the traffic and parking Impact on this part of town. In my eariler testimony, I suggested re-zoning the property C-l and requiring applicant provide adequate parking for the proposed facility. I suggested possibly constructing a parking deck on top of the Ice skating rink to provide parking(the aty could provide an easement to the . Developer), I also suggested a parking facility could be developed on Water street(at the old SOS site) for additionai downtown parking, Now I learn another option exists, The present owner of the old natural gas transfer station at Water and B, has offered the property for sale or lease. Here Is another potential site. . These are merely suggestion of how to mitigate the parking problems the new building will create. The developer should, as a conditional of approval, contrlbute to creating parking spaces needed for his project, AFTER a professional study has determined the Impact of the project on Winburn Way and the downtown parking space Inventory. I respectfully request you deny the zone change and the project, I suggest this be done without prejudice for the Developer to resubmit a request to rezone the property C -1, and provide appropriate professional Input as to what parking the proJect will require and what Impact it will have on the traffic patterns on Winburn way and the surrounding streets and If the Impact Is an acceptable risk for the City In approving the project, Respectfully submitted, Lloyd Matthew Haines Lloyd M, Haines 96 North Main #202 Ashland, OR, 97520 Office-541-482-9300 Fax-541-482-9334 http://zimbra.ashland.or. us/zimbralhlprintmessage?id=C :41 095 Page 2 \ 4/29/2011 -Oregon John A. Kitzhaber, MD, Governor o Department of Transportation city ~;' ' Rogue Valley Office ;"7n' As~.. 100 Antelope Rd '"'''~~l ""',"O",OR "'",."" 'I '. ~~ (541) 774-6299 ~3.Q./~__ FAX (541) 774-6349 7:& ~......,O, , ~.~! ~7 RECEIVED, April 20, 2011 APR 22 /;1 City of Ashland Planning Departrnent Alln: Derek Severson 51 Winburn Way Ashland, OR 97520 City of Ashland Field__Office___CoLlniy_ Re: Request for a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Zone Change from Single Family Residential (R-1-7.5) to Commercial Downtown (C-1-D) (File No. PA- 2010-01239). Dear Mr. Severson, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on a request for a Cornprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Zone Change from Single Family Residential (R-1-7.5) to Cornmercial Downtown (C-1-D), Physical and Environmental Constraints to allow less than 300 square feet of disturbance on hillside land with severe constraints, a Tree Rernoval Permit to rernove five trees, Site Review approval to construct a new 10,632 square foot cafe/restaurant, and a Developrnent Agreement for the development of properties at 85 Winburn Way and a portion of the adjacent Ice Rink lot. ODOT has reviewed the proposal in its entirety ar;Jd deterrnined this proposal will not adversely impact the state's transportation facility; therefore, these proposed land use actions do not trigger ODOT's review under the Transportation Planning Rule (OAR 660- 012-0000), or Access Management Rule under (OAR 734-051-0000). We have no further comments on the proposed project. I I Please enter this letter into the public record for the proposed project and send me a copy of the City's final decision. Please feel free!o contact me at (541) 774-6399 if you have additional comments or concerns. _ I I Respectfully, L~ Ian K. Horlacher Development Review Planner co: RVDRT @ Zimbra Page 1 of 1 Zimbra seversod@ashland,or,uf .:t Font size: .:) Fwd: 85 Winburn Way;' , . .. " , From: John Stromberg <john@coundl.ashland,or,us> Subject: Fwd: 85 Winburn Way To : seversod@zimbra.ashland.or.us Sat, Apr 30,2011 05:41 PM Hi, Derek This was sent to me but I haven't read it. Please let me know how you deal with it. Thanks, John Stromberg Mayor 5415522104 (direct) 5414886002 (secretary) -~-~ Forwarded Message --- From: "Shelley" <shelley@mind.net> To: john@council.ashland.or.us Seot: Saturday, April 30, 20112:10:03 PM Subject 85 Winburn Way Dear Mayor Stromberg: Upon walking downtown today past the vicinity of the 10,600 square foot restaurant proposed on Winburn Way, I was struck by how completely out of scale that project is for the location, Further, a big event, the Taste of Ashland, 15 occuning this week-end, the Saturday Market 15 starting, and the parking on Winburn Way as weil as the nearby downtown area was completely fiiled up, with many cars waiting in line for avaliable spaces to open, How could constructing this huge bulidlng, and not factoring in the Impact of ail the additional parking, be seriously considered? I would think a smailer project would be so much more appropriate for this town and should have to inciude some parking capability as weil, Though people who live in the downtown area could walk to the restaurant, the vast majority of Individuals wlil be driving there. I cant figure out where they can reasonably be expected to park. People already temporarily double park at the base of Granite St. to iet older or disabled people out at the restaurants there, and cars have to squeeze around them to get by, I am certain that would happen at this place as well, adding to the congestion in the area. When you think of the numbers of people the restaurant would need to serve to be profitable, it seems unlikely they wiil be able to draw this amount If you look at the restaurants nearby which struggle to survive, I'm unclear If they would then be ailowed to open the venue to others events, such as parties, weddings, etc., and again would then ask where these folks will be parking. If the project takes a year or 1YIo to complete, I also wonder how many parking spaces will be taken up during that entire time by the construction effort until it's completed. And finaily I'd again like to bring to your attention to the parking problem that already exists In the neighboring streets above the park, specifically Granite and Nutley, when there are major events in the park area. It seems so short-sighted to allow this project to move on as currently configured, and I would ask that you and the Council members gIve very serious consideration to all of the project's short and long-term Implications. . Thank you all for your sincere efforts. Sheiley Busby 64 Nutiey St. Ashland http://zimbra.ashland.or.uslzimbralhlprintmessage?id=41183 4/30/2011 t~~-...-........ ~ I CIty of Ash:R''o{! --~ i, , p,ann. ing Exhiolt- { , Exilic!> # 00 / I jPA#: ,~~~~tZaC; !_~:.~~B- StaffE, Ashland City Council (to be read at meeting please) - To " ht you are expected to finally decide on the restaurant in e park oject. You're going to make this decision with the ba ing and su ort of virtually everyone in town, including appro als from the Tree mmission, Planning Commission and Histor" .~ \.... ~ !y Commissio Unfortunately, there appears to be a las minute effort \\J\~.tJ',J~ ,by a couple 0 local merchants tainting the Council' opinion out of ri (,:Jfear of competl . n - including the Mayor's who a eady publicly \ ~\)p announced his fe on the subject. .~ .-L\vV I guess these individ Is do not realize is t t competition is ~ critically important in 0 economy and t t its here to stay. In fact, / / "it's rumored that if Counc" imposes ex ssive fees or punitive I~ )\]'\~estrictions, the business "I simply ove to a site along Main W. treet where only an annual 5 b iness license will be required. If this is the case, competition (; tor is not going away and in fact, it's going to get even more c tra . Guess what also remains? The same parking impact, a dil idated ilding, porta-potties and _ temporary trailers which re embarras ents for locals. Guess what goes? A few hundred j s for sure, a ha million or so in City fees, another half-million i ice rink improvemen ,a healthier and diverse winter business s son, recreational amenitl and a beautiful and diverse building (W~ttW! W f~lo.fz" May 3, 2011 Really? Eve fter the applicants have put forth sue a thorough and neighborly- pplication, the Council could still reverse I of the previou tJecisions or place excessive demands on a pro osal they know ill be the end of the application for the benefit of thr mer ants who have contributed nothing to this town besides de elop in floodplains and provide limited quality and service t y (; mily and visiting friends? No wonder they don't want competitio .! T- Let's get the facts straight. The loudest opponent happens to own 11 V restaurants in the Downtown area and NOT A ONE was required to provide parking. This particular opponent has converted or built multiple new buildings in the last 15 years that have directly added to the parking issues and has NEVER completed a parking study for his developments and has NEVER participated in any forum or financial participation to solve "his" parking issues. Instead, he's t- added intense uses and now expects others to pay for it. . ering the light of this individuals true intentions, I ag . would apprecia e Mayor clarify two questions. First, is it correct th . this same business move north (new City Hall site Sesame restaurant cation) they would only have to pay $75 a year I es and then would not be any public involvement or debate about pa/j ~~ I:'JJ \~\R; <\V' L- tt~ U\U ~ \ -t~~ / ~ p~ -z,o{Z-- Second, is it correct the bu. ngs where Li . Assets is located, the entire block as w s 4 other buildings in th owntown area (C1 D?), owne a single person, has never comp/~ed..!!. parking stu is developments or paid a nickel for parking? ~ Respectfully s itted, . . tv; Mike Walker, Oak Street, Ashland Ashland City Council I ,__ I ,~~~ I hCitY~;-A' h'.' -... P' s ,~...... ., 'lanOinh r- .h'... ! , o'r;;X Ib'" E:Xhiti, # 0 .r I) f 'PA~. ~ fa - -,<L'?..:E I~ ~ a _._ '-'_ Staff~ -.......::::::: 5-3-2011 I grew up in Ashland, small sleepy, hippy little Ashland. I remember swimming in Twin Plunges, you know, the swimming pools that are underneath the parking lot of the Ashland Food Co-op. I wonder what the Council and the community would say about removing a community swimming pool and replacing it with a 15,735 sf grocery store. It would likely be denied.... And what about the parking for such a large store? Well, guess what. The Ashland Food Co-op is an integral part of our community and yes, the parking is herendous, but you know what?,... it works. This building at 85 Winburn Way, if approved, will become part of the community, the parking will be herendous, but you know what?... it will work. The owners of this project are providing an estimated $400,000 in City Improvements, improvements that quite frankly need to be made. To ask for In Lieu of parking fees for the same amount is like double dipping. Let's be fair, the City Council should require the same in Lieu of fees that it imposed on the City when it re20ned and built the Com/Dev building,.., I think that was a grand total of nothing, I have seen a great deal of change in Ashland over the years, and this project is good change, Sincerely, T