At 7:07 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, Joanne Krippaehne, Robert Saladoff, Terry Skibby, Tom Giordano and Keith Swink. Also present were Associate Planner Mark Knox, City Council Liaison John Morrison (who left shortly after the meeting started) and Secretary Sonja Akerman. Members Jay Leighton and Sam Whitford were unable to attend the meeting. There are no youth liaisons assigned to the Historic Commission.

Krippaehne noted she had not received her packet for the meeting.

PUBLIC HEARINGS

Site visits were made by Krach, Skibby, Shostrom and Giordano.

Knox explained the applicant is proposing to demolish an existing shed and in its place construct a second dwelling unit (357 square feet) over a new single car garage. The project complies with the maximum house size ordinance. In addition, the applicants intend to eventually restore the existing house and replace its metal roof in order to upgrade the entire site.

Shostrom asked if the square footage would be counted on the detached building for the maximum house size and Knox said it would, however, only the habitable space would count, not the garage.

Skibby stated that designer Mark Reitinger had come to the Review Board and mentioned work that was planned on the existing house. He requested clarification on the scope of this application. Knox responded this only entails the new structure; however, the applicant's findings indicate the metal roof will be replaced with composition roofing material. In addition, Knox stated any building permits taken out for the existing home will go before the Review Board.

Discussion ensued regarding maximum square footage. Knox clarified this is an R-2 zone and the habitable square footage of the second unit counts in overall square footage.

Skibby noted that the existing shed is not special and the new structure will look nice. Giordano agreed and said he likes small separate spaces such as this and it will be appropriate for the neighborhood.

While Shostrom felt the size of the proposed building is good, he was bothered by the fact that there is no sense of entry on the south elevation. Giordano agreed and also noted the door with sidelights seemed large and out of proportion. Shostrom suggested removing the sidelights adjacent to the glazed door and adding windows on either side of the door.

Skibby moved and Giordano seconded to recommend approval of this application with the conditions that a covered entry be added to the south elevation in order to create a sense of entry, and the door area be reduced by at least one sidelight (option would be a single door with side windows). Also requested is that the applicant and/or designer come to the Review Board to discuss the size of the door, the windows and the covered entry. Krippaehne asked about the history of why the Commission recommends against using metal roofs. Skibby stated it is generally a roofing material that was rare in Ashland on residential structures. It was more prevalent on industrial buildings. Shostrom added that standing seam metal roofs seem dramatically contemporary for him. Corrugated metal roofs were more typical, as Skibby noted, on industrial or commercial buildings. Giordano noted that corrugated roofs work in certain cases, for example on the Ashland Food Co-op. The motion passed with a unanimous voice vote.

Giordano cited a conflict of interest because he has been involved with the adjacent property and neighborhood meetings that include this project. At this time, he left for the evening. All remaining Commissioners reported site visits except Krippaehne.

Knox explained this project is a 13-unit Planned Unit Development, which involves the construction of three two-story buildings, each housing four units. Each building will comprise a one-bedroom and a two-bedroom unit in each story and each building will be on a separate lot. The one-half acre lot has an existing home that will also be on a separate tax lot. The house is in the process of being restored. Because this is an odd shaped parcel, it has been a difficult site to plan. By working with Staff and neighbors, however, the developers have come up with a good plan. Parking will be off the driveway that will connect "B" Street with Eureka Street and also be used by the adjacent property when it is developed. The new buildings will all have the same designed but will have different orientations. Knox stated since this application is for Outline Plan Approval, more detail on roof pitch, materials, etc. will be forthcoming during the Final Plan Approval stage.

Saladoff asked if there will be common space for the buildings even though there will be four different ownerships. Knox replied there will technically be five lots - the existing house, the three new buildings and the open space. Each building will be built to the lot line, thus the term "zero lot line". He also noted three out of the four units in each building will be rentals.

Skibby asked how the buildings would be oriented on the property. Swink stated that even though the rooflines of the buildings are the same, they will appear to be different because each will have a different orientation.

Evan Archerd/120 North Second Street stated this is a good example of a collaborative effort involving the developers, Planning Department and neighbors. One of their main objectives was to create rental housing. The existing house is in the process of being restored. All non-appropriate additions were removed and a master bedroom and bathroom have been added to the rear of the home. The small four-plexes will look like houses. Window trim, roof details and siding will all mimic the existing house. He noted the existing house will have a little more yard, but the rest of the units will all have common yards that will be managed by a homeowner's association. Archerd maintained they have ended up with a better project because of the efforts of all involved.

Shostrom asked about the computerized drawing elevations and was told by Archerd they did not depict what would be built. The hand drawn rendering, however, is very close to how the buildings will look. Archerd also stated that although he doesn't know what the exact product will be yet, they will be using lap siding. In addition, his intention is to match all the trim detail, which will be crown molding with a tail protruding under the sill.

Shostrom then asked if the pitch of the roofline could be steeper but Archerd cited there might be solar problems. He would, nonetheless, like to make the pitch as steep as possible. He will use 40-year architectural roof shingles and either single or double hung windows. Shostrom commended Archerd for the work he is doing on the existing house.

Krippaehne said she agrees with Shostrom's comment about the roof pitch. She asked Knox if a Solar Waiver would be possible and he replied it could be possible, perhaps with more separation between the buildings. Archerd responded there would be difficulties with separating the buildings even more. As it is, this project has been a balancing act. Given the ordinances that apply today, solar issues apply differently to PUDs. Knox added that in some cases, people are encouraged to ask for waivers in order to make a more compatible design work. If the applicant chooses to request a waiver, it can be processed during the Final Plan Approval.

Shostrom related that while the building elevations look good, there is not much natural light in three out of the four units in the living/dining areas. He suggested changing the floor plans and moving the stairwell to the middle of the buildings in order to give more light to the units. This would not only hide the stairwells, but also give a more historic look to the buildings. Archerd agreed the units should have more natural light and said this will be worked out as the actual floor plans develop.

Amy Korth stated she is the daughter of Sally Crumme, who owns the adjacent property and has been working with Giordano on plans for developing her site. Korth said she looks forward to the changes on both properties.

Skibby noted this design is better than what was originally presented to the Review Board. It is a good-sized lot and the buildings will be spread out. Since more details will be presented during the next phase, he feels comfortable with the project thus far.

Krippaehne conveyed she also likes the site plan. The developers are putting a lot on the site but it doesn't feel crowded. In addition, there will be plenty of parking on the east side of the property, leaving more area for the amenity of open space.

Swink agreed with Shostrom about bringing the stairs more to the center, which will also further break up the design and roofline of the buildings. He conveyed he was impressed with the homes on Ninth Street Alley and appreciated the various rooflines and individuality of the homes, allowing them to fit in more with the neighborhood. This concept will be achieved on the proposed buildings by breaking them up and orienting them differently. He also stated the value of rental units.

Saladoff agreed with Shostrom that the living room spaces need more light. Moving the stairwell to the center is a great way to open up additional facades for more windows. It would also interrupt the horizontal band to break up the surface rather than have all four sides the same. Shostrom added that paint colors can also be used effectively in breaking up the surfaces.

 ITEMS NOT ON AGENDA

Changes to 180 Lithia Way - Architect Jerome White handed out elevations that highlighted changes being proposed for the new building under construction. The first change would be to use a stone veneer rather than a pre-cast base for the building. The second change would be to use picture windows with sliders above instead of double hung windows side by side. The reason the window change is being requested is to differentiate between the commercial and residential stories of the building. White presented a sample of the stone veneer and three bricks ranging in color from light to a darker color of mauve. The proposal is to use a random mix of the three brick colors on the building. The same hues that are in the bricks are in the stone veneer. The rest of the building will be stucco as originally proposed. The horizontal bands of bricks will be one color.

Shostrom expressed his hesitancy in using the random mix and suggested putting up a 6' x 6' area to see what it would look like before committing to the mix.

Krippaehne asked how the stone veneer would be treated at the corners. White said they would probably be mitered in order to give the appearance of real stone. Archerd added the mortar joints would probably be one-half inch. Shostrom stated he was nervous that the veneer would not give the feel of a strong enough base. Archerd said he would have the stone cut as large as possible so the base would be architecturally heavy enough. A clear consensus was not reached on the bricks and the base. Archerd will put up the bricks in a test area that will be at least six feet by six feet.

When asked what type of windows would be used, White stated the front and side ones would be wood clad. The windows in the back will be vinyl, matching the colors as closely as possible.

Archerd and White then presented elevations of the proposed building for Phase 2. It will be built to the west of the building currently being constructed and will be set back 12 feet. The 12-foot setback will provide a plaza area in front of the building that will have a small amount of landscaping. White said this is in the pre-application stage so they just wanted feedback on the direction the design should go. They would like to tie in some elements of the main building but not make it identical. Archerd explained the windows are different because the uses are different. The top two floors on the Phase 2 building will be residential. Shostrom first suggested making the smaller building look similar enough that it resembles a wing of the main building. However, after discussing this, he suggested and others agreed the building would look better if the design was totally different, including the base. White confirmed the building currently under construction is 68 feet and the new one will be 44 feet.

Change to 142 East Main Street - Because of a building code issue, Knox stated the architect is recommending to change the windows from two double hung side-by-side windows to four fixed windows on the proposed building to the rear of Earthly Goods. This is fine with the Commission.

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

Carnegie Library Restoration - There was nothing new to report.

Krippaehne stated this will be an opportunity to float new ideas to get out on peoples' radar screens. She mentioned more attention is now being paid to historic landscapes (Lithia Springs property, for example), and disaster planning and management (which could be tied into historic renovations and seismic upgrades).

Possible National Register Nomination for Lithia Springs Property - Jim Lewis, Ashland Parks Commission, reported the Ashland Gun Club has requested an extension be granted on its lease until 2029. Lewis invited the members to offer input at the February 23, 2004 meeting. Several members voiced concern and stated they would attend the meeting. Staff will make sure the necessary information regarding the property is included in the Parks Commission packets.

Knox passed around a letter from Management Analyst Ann Seltzer apologizing for not getting input from the Commission prior to ordering new awnings for the City Hall. He also showed them a sample of the color that she had chosen.

Knox announced the Oregon Heritage Commission will be holding its conference May 6^th through 8^th in Ashland this year. Many of the events can be tied into National Historic Preservation Week. He urged all to attend some of the sessions.

It was the unanimous decision of the Commission to adjourn the meeting at 10:20 p.m.