Governor Brown is requiring masks to be worn in public indoor and outdoor settings statewide to help stop the spread of the Delta variant. The Governor is also encouraging everyone to get vaccinated. Find out how to get vaccinated locally at Jackson County Health and Human Services website

Agendas and Minutes

Historic Commission (View All)

Regular Monthly Meeting

Wednesday, October 08, 2003

October 8, 2003



At 7:05 p.m., Chairperson Dale Shostrom called the meeting to order in the Siskiyou Room, located in the Community Development/Engineering Services Building at 51 Winburn Way. In addition to Shostrom, members present were Alex Krach, Jay Leighton, Tom Giordano, Joanne Krippaehne, Robert Saladoff, Terry Skibby and Sam Whitford. Also present were Associate Planner Mark Knox, Council Liaison John Morrison and Secretary Sonja Akerman. Member Keith Chambers is on sabbatical.


Whitford stated he had a correction on page 5 (under Carnegie Library Restoration) of the September 3, 2003 minutes. He is on the Jackson County Library Foundation, not the Library Board. Leighton then moved to approve the September 3, 2003 minutes as corrected and the September 17, 2003 minutes as submitted. The motion passed with a unanimous vote.


City of Ashland Management Analyst Ann Seltzer met with the Commission to discuss articles she is seeking for the monthly City Source publication. She began by quoting from City Council Goal 10, which is entitled Historical Sites and Structures and states "Ashland seeks to preserve its rich history through the preservation of its historical buildings and places." Seltzer explained the Council sets goals and that staff, with the help of the commissions, committees and boards, implements them. She informed the members she would like articles (approximately 250 words) relating to historic preservation in Ashland that she can use as space allows. She made it clear that she would most likely have to edit the articles in order to make them fit. Although these articles would not be published every month, Seltzer said she would like a variety. She also stated that she would make every effort to print articles that are timely and if the members want something specifically printed, they should speak with Knox about it.


Planning Action 2003-110
Modification of Previously Approved Site Review and Variance
230 and 232 Van Ness Avenue
Serin Eggling

Knox explained the Historic Commission heard this proposal at the September 3rd meeting. Since it was a Type I action and the neighbor called it up for a public hearing last month, it had to be re-noticed as a Type II action for this month. The neighbor who called it up was not present and Knox stated the issues were more of a Planning Commission nature than Historic Commission. Basically, the applicant is asking for a modification of a previously approved proposal because the parking arrangement of sharing a driveway with the neighbor to the west has changed. The neighbor who was going to give the applicant an easement decided against that so the applicant is asking for a Variance in order to use a 20-foot wide access on the property to the east to get another on-street parking credit.

Shostrom opened the public hearing.

Whitford asked if the agreement had actually been signed. Doyle Brightenburg (designer for the project) replied it was never signed. Giordano asked if there had been any changes since last month and Brightenburg replied nothing has changed except that he now has support from the City's Engineering Department.

Since there was no one else in the audience to speak on this application, Shostrom closed the public hearing.

Giordano moved to recommend approval of this proposal to the Planning Commission and Whitford seconded the motion. It was passed with a unanimous vote.

Planning Action 2003-122
Conditional Use Permit and Site Review
249 "A" Street
John Fields

Whitford noted he had visited the site, talked with the owners and was shown the front porch area that is proposed to be enclosed with black iron railings.

Knox explained this application encompasses two components. The first is the enclosure of the front porch with a wrought iron fence. This area will be used to create a secure display area for garden and outdoor products. It won't be used for storage. The second component will create an outside covered area in the rear of the building that will be used for storage. It will still provide a drive-up loading area. The roof material will be galvanized metal. No new additional walls will be added in the front or the back. Knox added the roof over the storage area in the rear will not be visible form "A" Street. The merchandise behind the iron railing in the front will be visible.

Shostrom opened the public hearing.

Giordano asked if the new storage area in the rear would still accommodate bike parking. Knox said he would make sure it would still be provided.

Since there was no one in the audience to speak either for against the application, Shostrom closed the public hearing.

Whitford moved to recommend approval of this application. With a second by Giordano, the motion was unanimously approved.

Planning Action 2003-127
Land Partition, Site Review, Variance, and Administrative Variance and Exception
212 East Main Street
Ed and Tanya Bemis

Knox reported this application is a big project for Ashland due to the grade, complexities of the project, oddity of spaces, multiple levels, floor plan requirement and various mixed uses (parking, commercial/retail and residential). It consists of a partition to divide the property between the existing Ashland Springs Hotel and the parking lot in the rear, which will accommodate the new development. The new development will consist of four and one-half levels. Enclosed parking will inhabit the lower two and one-half levels. Commercial and residential units will be located on top of that. The entry to the parking structure will be on the First Street side and alley side. The project also consists of a plaza area facing the Ashland Springs Hotel and will link with the New Theatre at the other end of the block on Pioneer Street. Overall, Staff believes the applicants have done a great job so far; however, not enough detail has been submitted. Therefore, Staff is recommending a continuance in order to give the applicants time to turn in more information.

Knox further explained Variances and Exceptions to the Site Design and Use Standards are being requested relating to the separation between buildings and to allow balconies on the street facing elevations. In addition, a Variance to allow less than 65% of the total gross floor area of the ground floor to be occupied by a permitted or special permitted use. Staff does not feel the separation issue is a problem in the downtown area because structures can be built up to the property line. He noted that this condition would be for buildings on the same tax lot. He stated balconies are rare downtown, however, considering they will be facing Hargadine Street (which is residential on the south side) and the fact that they are on a side street, they may be appropriate. He noted the City is encouraging living in the downtown area. Nevertheless, he noted that additional detail is needed in order to evaluate the significance of the Variance request.

Shostrom opened the public hearing.

Applicant Ed Bemis introduced himself and his wife, Tanya, to the Commission. He stated that he has lived in Ashland a long time and he and his wife have finally found the ideal place to live - in one of the residential units of the proposed development. He stressed the necessity of keeping the project moving.

Architect Ken Ogden said he agrees with Knox this is a big project. He related those involved with the development want to improve what is on the site now - a parking surface with no landscaping. The design was kept low out of respect for the Hargadine neighbors across the street. Maximum height is not an issue, as they are well below the limit. He said he is perplexed about Staff wanting a continuance because the design of the building is compatible with the Downtown core and it is also conducive to living in the building. He related they took some of the elements found in downtown buildings and introduced these features into the proposed building. He also explained where the vehicle entrance points are located off First Street. Concerning the building separation, Ogden said they are getting separation of the mass by the vertical lines.

Ogden then turned the meeting over to his associate, David Wilkerson, who said this building makes great strides in improving the downtown residential living. In order to make the building work, it must replace the parking capacity that currently exists for Ashland Springs Hotel plus provide parking for the uses in the building. Since the proposed building is large and the elevations that were submitted are small, Wilkerson used a 3-D computer modeling program show a portion of the structure. He proceeded to demonstrate and explain the image on the screen. The arcade, or plaza area, has an arch at each end and is an open canopy. Railings on the balconies will be wrought iron. The projecting balconies are on the corner, which diminishes the bulk of the building and creates a vertical orientation.

Giordano asked how much higher the new building will be than the existing parking garage. Ogden responded it will be two levels higher. Wilkerson reminded the Commission it is the City's desire to accommodate residential living in the Downtown area. Krach inquired about the height of the Cabaret Theater and Wilkerson said he didn't know the exact height but that the new building will be lower. He also maintained the vertical lines break up the mass.

Bemis said the architects were careful not to copy the architecture of the hotel, but the architecture of buildings in the downtown area was utilized in the design of the new building.

Saladoff asked about the materials and Wilkerson replied stucco pilasters, brick and granite will be used, which will balance the amount of glazing that was scaled back to comply with the Standards. Giordano commented the portion of the building on the computer helps and he feels the project is heading in the right direction. Knox agreed the applicants have taken great strides to comply with the ordinances.

Ogden and Wilkerson stated they could use the computer to show more detail when more information is entered. Bemis added he would like to work to NOT continue the hearing. For the Planning Commission meeting, they will have a more powerful computer for the program and can print large 3-D drawings. At this point, not all the information has been entered into the computer, thus only a portion of the building can be seen. Ogden then stated the basic materials have been identified. Knox asked what type of block, finish, and window style and transparency will be used. He said it is necessary to know how the material will be used together. Cross sections of specific areas would help in the evaluation.

Saladoff stated the project can be examined at several different levels, but it is difficult to grasp the whole project. He agreed this is a great beginning. He would like to know what design elements were taken from the neighborhood. If approval is granted, he said it would be necessary to see more detail as they go along. Giordano added that he feels the applicants should get support on the Variances and that they are proceeding in the right direction. However, he also feels that more detailing is necessary. A portion of the building should be blown up to show the details. Photos of buildings used in the design would help. He also said he thinks a project of this proportion takes time to evaluate and shouldn't be rushed. He would like to see more and have more information.

Leighton stated the project needs to be looked at as a concept using the entire block and more detail is needed. She also noted the colored drawing has a different roofline than the computer rendering. Ogden explained the colored drawing takes precedence. Wilkerson stated he will take the articulation of the colored drawing and relate it to the 3-D computer program. Leighton questioned the large mass in the middle of the building and Ogden said it was the elevator shaft. He also said that where the railings are drawn, the balconies are located. Knox said there is nothing to indicate the depth or projection of the balconies. Wilkerson stated the structure will be pre-cast concrete with a stone veneer on the base.

Bemis again stated he would like to move ahead with this project and that with all due respect, the plans had been submitted a month prior and they just found out Staff is asking for a continuance. Knox countered this is a huge project for the City and Staff does not want to rush this through without knowing or understanding the design components. Also, this is the first time all of the members of the Historic Commission had seen the design of the building. Wilkerson interjected there is only a small window for construction here. Tanya Bemis added the parking portion of the building needs to be completed by next June for the hotel. Furthermore, Wilkerson said they have been working on this project for the past six months and they are just now getting to the point to where they could bring it to the Historic Commission. They have been taking a little at a time and fine tuning the many components.

Krippaehne said she personally feels she is getting a lot of information and that she thinks it is premature to ask people to come in with cross sections at this time. She sees the concept with what was submitted. Knox explained the ordinance does not say anything about conceptual approval. With the drawings that were submitted, it is difficult to pick up what is recessing or projecting, where the entrances are, and overall, if the design meets the required standards. Krippaehne argued that to expect a cross section from top to bottom and details at this point is premature. Saladoff stated that even if the Commission were to say the applicants are going in the right direction, it seems to be counter to the Planning Commission because there is not enough detail. Knox agreed and said this project is of such magnitude given the size and variances being requested, that if Staff doesn't have a good feel or understanding that the proposal meets the criteria, then what about the Planning Commission?

Ogden argued that details are never defined at this stage no matter what size the project. Also, many details won't be known until the structural details are worked out. Knox asked where the doors would be located, noting he can't see how the project meets the design standard for "sense of entry". Ogden stated they would like to get approval and keep the Historic Commission involved at each stage because the design has to evolve through a sense of discovery.

Skibby declared approval would be premature at this point because more details are needed in order to make a decision. Wilkerson said that no where in the Standards does it call for such details. The plans will be about 200 sheets of drawings anyway. It is premature to provide such details that might change. Knox related that every project that comes in almost always ends up having some changes, especially with those of this magnitude. For those minor design changes, the process is to come back to the Historic Commission. The question is what percentage of change should be allowed? Bemis maintained they need to be able to go to the next stage. He would like conceptual approval, but would come back for final approval. Ogden agreed that they would come back with each stage.

Saladoff explained that the Commission has been deceived in the past because the design that gets approval is not what is built. Ogden said they would like to get Historic Commission endorsements before they go on to each stage. Wilkerson added their goal is to win several design awards so they would be willing to agree to whatever it takes, and it behooves everyone to get approval before they go on.

Ogden stated that when the Bemises first came to his office, they conveyed their respect of the downtown and their desire to live on this site in a first rate quality building. They are totally willing to come back several times. They now have the opportunity take a derelict parking lot and turn it into a jewel. This is a win/win situation. He assured the Commission they would get its approval before they go on and they will work until everyone is on board with this.

Knox stated that to be fair to the Historic Commission and the public, there are design issues that need to be addressed prior to granting approval. Shostrom added that other major projects have come to the full Commission very early in the process to get direction, including the applicant and the architect. Construction of this magnitude is a long process and there is plenty of work to do in the meantime if there is a continuance. He said that typically, architects would have come before the full Historic Commission prior to this point.

Wilkerson said he would like the Commission to separate the Variances with the design issues. He again stressed the necessity of breaking ground in November to be finished by April.

Knox stated that with a Type II planning action, the Planning Commission makes a decision one month, the Findings of Approval document is adopted the following month and then there is a 15-day appeal period. This process typically takes 45 days. He stated the Planning Department could possibly work with the applicants in adopting the Findings at a study session meeting to knock a couple weeks off the time period if the continuance is agreed upon.

Saladoff repeated the applicants and architects need to give more information to the Commission prior to a recommendation for approval.

Bemis asked the Commission to seriously look at the project and give enough input so they could still go before the Planning Commission next week and then get final approval later.

Ogden talked about the massing of the building, stating they wanted to create a strong base. Because the gradient is so steep, the base is brought into two levels and will be made with a stone veneer. Color tones for the base will be deeper than the rest of the building. More glazing was integrated to meet the Standards for commercial buildings. The floor entrances will be located where the sidewalks meet the grade, and will be more typical of materials found in commercial buildings. Materials will be more residential for the upper levels, using exterior pilasters and various depths. There are no details for the railings yet. Because the upper levels will be residential, lighter materials such as wood or metal will be used. The base is heavier. Steel windows with divided light will be used because they are more powerful than wood. Ogden offered to bring in samples to have the Historic Commission look at before going ahead with their usage. Light fixtures are unknown at this time, but would get input as details are discovered.

Ogden then said similar details in the headers and cornice moldings were repeated (not directly copied) of the historic building across the street (Citizen's Banking & Trust) and Ashland Springs Hotel in the design of the new building. He pointed out the actual details were not mimicked or replicated. Since the proposed building will begin in 2003, it needs a little venue of its own but it will be done in such a way to respect the flavor of the Downtown area.

Shostrom stated he generally likes the proposed design. He questions the amount of glazing, however on the First Street side. Also, floor plans would help to see how deep the balconies are. If more details of the building were submitted, it would help in making a decision. It is also difficult to tell what the exposed stairway on the Hargadine Street side of the building will look like.

Ogden explained the stairway will create more of a defined level and the stairs will be an architectural feature that is repeated in the canopies. It will be a sense of entry to the residential units. Shostrom said it would be nice to have a drawing of how it will tie in to with the building.

Ogden and Wilkerson also explained the canopy from the new building to the hotel and marquees, which will be over the entrances, including the vehicle entrances and the elevator. Wilkerson also clarified the grillage in the parking structure will only be seen from the alleyway and existing parking garage.

Shostrom asked if there would be retail units on the Hargadine Street side. Knox answered there will be commercial and residential condominiums. Wilkerson said they are not sure if the commercial units would be retail or office space at this time. They will be designed with a flexibility that could change with time. Ogden added the architects are not defining the usage. Knox said if the units turn into residential condos, Planning would have to notice them as such because 65% of the ground floor has to be in commercial usage. Wilkerson said that they are currently proposing 58% to be commercial, thus the Variance request.

Krippaehne asked about using access for parking from the alley between the existing parking garage and the proposed building. Ogden responded they would like to keep the pedestrian flow through that area so access will be off First Street and the alley between the building and the existing parking garage. This should also reduce the vehicular trips on Hargadine Street.

Saladoff noted the architects have talked a lot about the heavy base. He stated the hotel has a base, middle and top. The proposed building has a base and middle but does not seem to have a defined top. Ogden stated the tops along East Main Street are treated with cornices. Wilkerson added they picked up lines from the surrounding neighborhoods and tried to mix it up a bit by using cornices, sections, etc. Saladoff said he would like to see the top finished in a nice way.

Ogden agreed with the Commission in that they want to do the building right. They want to be proud of it and want the community to be proud of it also. They are not proponents of the Historic Commission desires. They have clients who want to do the right thing also.

Knox said there are traditional widths in the facades found in the Downtown and asked if additional vertical elements creating the sense of traditional widths could be incorporated.

Skibby stated that it sounds like the design could change quite a bit but Wilkerson countered that no drastic changes would take place.

Shostrom commented the amount of glazing proposed for the new building makes it feel a little transparent. Krach mentioned he had recently had the opportunity to visit the UCLA campus and go through the new UCLA Medical Center, which is still under construction. The building, which was designed by modernist architect I.M. Pei, backs up against a corridor that leads to the historic core of the UCLA campus, which has some very famous Romanesque buildings dating back to the early 1920s. The transition between the historic buildings and the new building was defined by using aspects of both. Krach asked about the dialogue of the original hotel with the proposed new building. He wanted to know how they are integrated. Ogden replied with the replication of the base and color compatibility, the two buildings will not scream opposition. Textures and colors will also speak with each other. The vertical elements defined within the tower on the hotel are used along with the clear baselines that stop at the street. They have also created a horizontal rhythm and patterning. The clear base is a repetition of forms. It was not appropriate to replicate the arches, but the reminiscence of the arches is used in creating the separations in the new building. Krach expressed his wish that they will always keep in mind that they must retain a connection between the two buildings.

Ogden said he prides himself in listening to his clients and also taking input from the Historic Commission, which will be integrated in the design. Wilkerson added that even though there will be separate ownership in the hotel and the new building, the garage will be used by all. They wanted to develop something that would provide a high caliber and feel for the hotel also because the building will also be used by the hotel guests for parking.

Giordano stated the concept is going in the right direction. There is an opportunity in the architecture to make a good transition between the two buildings. He said the base is not a true base. There is a lot of glass, but to introduce less, would create more mass.

Ogden assured the Commission he heard the concerns and will integrate them into the design of the proposed building.

Leighton commented the Hargadine Street and plaza area sides both work as articulation of space. The other sides repeat this. Having a heavier base than what is shown on the plans will create a stronger block between the units. She wouldn't want to see a checkerboard effect. Shostrom commented there is a lot of grill work.

Giordano left at this time due to illness (9:15).

Shostrom closed the public hearing.

Shostrom asked if the Commission were willing to move this project forward with what has been presented. He stated this is a high-end project so it seems contrary to fast track it at this point. Since the Commission would normally see projects of this size at least a couple times prior to this point and since this is the first the full Commission had the opportunity to see the plans and talk with the architect and owner, he feels the drawings are still in a conceptual stage and not ready for approval. Skibby agreed. Krach also stated that is a very cogent point, and although the architects and owners swear to come before the Commission at various stages, he said he feels it would be forsaking the Historic Commission's fiduciary to the public to do the very best in making decisions to recommend approval at this point. He said there are strong points on both sides and the decision will be tough.

Saladoff would like to figure out a way to say the applicants and architects are going in the right direction with conditions following up this review with several reviews, but he is concerned about the process. There seems to be a need to see the process go through before winter and that any delay would cause the project to come to a halt.

Knox stated that legally, the Planning Commission may not be able to defer its decision to another body nor defer to another body to make sure the Findings are met. The Historic Commission needs to feel comfortable with the decision as to if the design standards have been met - not will they be met. The Planning Commission has to make the same findings. The decision the Planning Commission makes is challengeable, which would mean even longer delays. It is important to process this application as a whole. The Commission needs to be comfortable with the level of details. The Commission has heard a lot of things tonight and there may be times that the client won't agree with the Historic Commission.

Saladoff said the applicants are going in the right direction, but he wants to see more detail. Obviously, the Commission is concerned. Skibby agreed and repeated there really isn't enough detail to make a decision because no one knows what the final design will look like. Everything seems too "iffy". In order to make a decision, it is necessary to look at what has been presented.

Krippaehne disagreed and said she could personally make a judgement if the applicants are meeting the intent of the Standards with concerns that have been heard.

Shostrom said that when he thinks of other projects of this magnitude, details are totally lacking with this. If the architects take all the input received, the building would look totally different.

Krippaehne asked if buildings should be designed from the outside in or from function. She feels the design should develop more organically.

Shostrom maintained this project should be looked at in comparison with other projects. What has been submitted at this point to the Historic Commission feels more like a pre-application.

Leighton stated the time element is not the fault of the Historic Commission and it should not have to worry about when the applicant is ready to break ground. It is not the responsibility of the Historic Commission to worry about the time schedule.

Whitford said that a couple months ago a completely different design was presented for the pre-application conference. At that time, Historic Commission concerns were noted and changes were made. He said he personally likes the changes that were made, but he knows the Commission is not seeing what will eventually get built. Before he makes a final decision, he said he needs to see more of the final design.

Leighton questioned if two motions could be made regarding this application, one denying it as submitted and one accepting the concept with a huge list of conditions. Knox believed it would be fine.

Leighton moved to recommend denial of Planning Action 2003-127 as presented. Skibby seconded the motion and it was unanimously approved.

Leighton then moved and Whitford seconded to recommend conceptual acceptance of Planning Action 2003-127, with the need for the applicants to provide more specific details to the full Commission based on the input and considerations expressed by the members tonight. The motion was unanimously approved.

For clarification purposes, the Historic Commission would like to see plans incorporating the following details next month:

  • Elevations with a much larger scale
  • Basic floor plans in order to see the size/depths of the balconies
  • Cornice details
  • Cross sections that show the relationship of the glass and the doorways
  • Stairwell details
  • Enlarged plans showing depth and shadowing
  • Plans that depict the size of the proposed building in relation to the surrounding area.

Saladoff commented that next month won't be the last time the Commission will see the project, as he would expect to see it throughout the process.

Krach added that he wanted the applicants to know the Commission strongly supports the development of the site and that the members would like to help make the project go forward.


Review Board - Following is the October schedule for the Review Board, which meets every Thursday from 3:00 to at least 3:30 p.m. in the Planning Department:

October 9th

Skibby and Shostrom

October 16th

Skibby, Saladoff and Krippaehne

October 23rd

Skibby, Leighton, Whitford and Shostrom

October 30th

Skibby, Krach and Giordano


Project Assignments for Planning Actions

PA #2000-120

485 "A" Street (Steve Hoxmeier)


PA #2002-100

142 East Main Street (Earthly Goods)


PA #2002-125

44 North Second Street (Trinity Episcopal Church)


PA #2002-127

NW Corner North Main & Maple Streets Intersection (ACHF)


PA #2003-005

35 S. Second Street (Winchester Inn)


PA #2003-035

665 East Main Street (Kirk McAllister)


PA #2003-045/110/122

230/232 VanNess Avenue (Serin Eggling/Sherri Morgan)


PA #2003-090

125 North Main Street (Lynn Thompson)


PA #2003-094

45 Wimer Street (Paul Crafft)


PA #2003-108

115 Church Street (Nancy Seward and Tim Bond)


PA #2003-092

124 Alida Street (Kirt Meyer and Vadim Agakhanov)


Possible National Register Nomination for Lithia Springs Property - There has been no change on this as there is no longer an intern available to work on it. Knox will keep the Commission informed on the status.

Carnegie Library Restoration - Skibby reported Mayor Alan DeBoer had called him regarding the historic Mickelson Chapman Fountain in front of the library. He would like to see the sidewalk behind the statue removed and replaced with landscaping. Also, he is asking the Public Arts Commission to spend money to restore the fountain, which has not worked for many years. DeBoer wanted input from the Historic Commission regarding these items. The Commission had no problem with the sidewalk removal and landscaping since that portion of the sidewalk was not originally there. The members also commented they were pleased the fountain would be restored. Furthermore, Skibby said the Mayor wanted the Commission to know he is still pursuing the restoration of the cornices in the rear of the Carnegie Library. The original bid was too high so he is looking for better pricing on the project. Shostrom stated it is important that the materials of what is existing be copied rather than substitute other materials. Skibby said he would call DeBoer back to make sure he understands.


It was the unanimous decision of the Commission to extend the meeting past 10:00.

Election of Officers - Officers will be as follows: Shostrom will remain Chairperson, Vice-Chair will be Skibby, and Krach and Saladoff will share Planning Commission Liaison and Council Liaison.


Krach asked the members how they would feel about having links to historic preservation sites incorporated with the Historic Commission information on the City's website. All agreed the links would be good educational tools. This will be discussed in more detail at the November meeting.


The Commission was reminded there will be a meeting at 5:30 p.m. on October 21st for open discussions on design aspects and styles within the community (including form, function and exterior design), points of view, bases used in making decisions, controversial structures/planning actions, etc.


With a motion by Skibby and second by Leighton, it was the unanimous decision of the Commission to adjourn the meeting at 10:30 p.m.

Online City Services

Customer Central Online Payment Center
Connect to
Ashland Fiber Network
Request Conservation
Proposals, Bids
& Notifications
Request Building
Building Permit
Apply for Other
Permits & Licenses
Register for
Recreation Programs

©2021 City of Ashland, OR | Site Handcrafted in Ashland, Oregon by Project A




twitter facebook Email Share
back to top