ASHLAND HISTORIC COMMISSION

Minutes

November 2, 2005

Community Development/Engineering Services Building – 51 Winburn Way – Siskiyou Room

Historic Commissioners Present: Keith Swink, Sam Whitford, Rob Saladoff, Terry Skibby, Jay Leighton, Allen Crutcher, Tom Giordano, and Henry Baker
Absent Members:  Dale Shostrom

Council Liaison: Jack Hardesty - Absent

High School Liaison: None Appointed
SOU Liaison: None Appointed
Staff Present: Maria Harris, Senior Planner, Billie Boswell, Administration

CALL TO ORDER – REGULAR MEETING

At 7:05, due to the absence of Chairman Dale Shostrom, Vice Chairman Terry Skibby called the regular meeting to order.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Ms. Leighton requested that under New Business, the phrase “who were original owners of several restaurants” be stricken since the information was incorrect.  Mr. Saladoff pointed out that Mr. Crutcher’s misspelled name be corrected.  A couple of typos were also corrected.  Ms. Leighton made a motion to approve as amended and was seconded by Mr. Baker.  The motion was passed unanimously with Mr. Giordano abstaining due to his absence.

PUBLIC FORUM:

Colin Swales, 461 Allison Street, recommended the Historic Commission encourage public spaces be included in commercial set back areas.  He shared an article from the Web “Historic Downtown Main Streets – Strategies for Compatible Streetscape Design”. (www.oregon.gov/odot/hwy/geoenvironmental/docs/cultural/mainstreet.pdf)

Bill Emerson stated that he was responsible for the design of the Railroad Park.  He had plans for a Golden Spike presentation but funding was currently not available.

DISCUSSION ITEM:

Melissa Markell and Jennifer Longshore of the Ashland Public Arts Commission presented plans to install the McGee-Neill Memorial Sculpture at Lithia and Pioneer streets in front of Naturals, commissioned by artist Lonnie Feather.  The theme is “Nourishing our Community” and is funded by the McGee and Neill families of Ashland.  The proposed artwork is composed of three basalt columns standing four to eight feet high imbedded with various natural materials and lettering conveying a message of our origins and our place of community.  Mr. Giordano made a motion to recommend the City Council approve the public art piece.  Mr. Whitford seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.  Ms. Markell thanked Ms. Leighton for her role on the selection committee and the Historic Commission for their support of the project.

PUBLIC HEARING

Planning Action 2005-01674

Site Review - Reconsideration

Ron & Carrie Yamaoka

11 First Street

Mr. Giordano recused himself and left the room since he worked on the project.

Ms. Harris explained to the Commission that the project was approved at the October 11, 2005 Planning Commission meeting but the City Attorney’s office determined an interpretation of the Vision Clearance standard (Chapter 18.72.120) was incorrect. The setbacks for Vision Clearance should be measured from the property line rather than the street curb.  The applicants requested a reconsideration of the decision by the Planning Commission.  A redesign of the building was required to angle back the affected corner façade to provide the required clearance from the property line.  This resulted in a redesign of some of the window and trim details and it was felt the Historic Commission needed to review the changes.

Ms. Leighton questioned why several other buildings in the downtown area weren’t challenged when built using the curb line interpretation.  She felt this was inconsistent and confusing.  Ms. Harris said the challenge was raised on this specific project and, in researching the code, the Legal department felt it clearly identified the property line as the measuring point.

There were no further questions of staff.

The applicant, Bill Emerson, reviewed the design changes to the windows, the window arches, the columns and the planter box.  He said the window on the ground floor in the angled panel changed in size and to two windows.  Previously it was four, casement type windows.  Additionally, the arch had to be eliminated because it was distorted by the increase in the length of the run.  The archways on the Will Dodge Way elevations have also been eliminated.  Emerson said the planter had been lowered and follows the natural slope to meet the vision clearance requirements.  He stated this was necessary when taking into account the additional height of the plants.  The recessed panels on the columns were eliminated as well as simulated stone scoring in archways on First St. and Will Dodge Way elevations.  Emerson said this was in response to a suggestion the Historic Commission made at the October meeting.  He said the rear and south elevations are unchanged.

Ms. Leighton asked if the vision clearance standards could be applied to the first story only.  Mr. Emerson said it wouldn’t work because of the strong column design.  Vice Chair Skibby questioned why the arches were eliminated on some but not all of the windows.  Mr. Emerson explained the angled wall was longer and the arches wouldn’t match.

Since there were no further questions of the applicant, the public meeting was opened.

Colin Swales, 461 Allison Street, voiced concerns over the 40-foot height of the proposed building.  He felt three stories were excessive and the caused the structure to be incompatible with the existing structures on the street. Limiting the building to two stories would eliminate the need for an elevator and minimize the impact to pedestrians on the alley and street.  Mr. Swales also commented on the loss of another “contributing structure” in the downtown area. 

The public meeting was closed.

Ms. Harris read a faxed statement from Chairman Shostrom who found the slanted front façade unacceptable.  He questioned the “missing” arch detail above the windows on three bays. He also was concerned about the use of “thin” bricks on the façade.

In rebuttal, Mr. Emerson explained that although the “thin” brick is more expensive, it adheres better to the ICF insulated walls that are proposed.  Use of brick veneer would require concrete block walls.  He said the he hasn’t decided between using thin brick and real brick, and would like to leave this determination open.

Mr. Saladoff reminded Mr. Emerson that the Historic Commission had requested a “new brick” look, not an old, weathered look as represented in one of the samples Mr. Emerson shared with the Commissioners.

Mr. Saladoff agreed with Chairman Shostrom’s faxed statements.  Mr. Whitford and several other commissioners concurred that the angled front façade was not appropriate on the narrow, traditionally designed building.  Mr. Terry pointed out that angled corners are historically found on buildings situated on street corners but not on alleys. 

Mr. Crutcher felt the windows and bays on the east elevation should be conforming.

Mr. Swink addressed Mr. Swale’s concern of height by noting that historically, the original downtown buildings were two and three stories high.  He added that his understanding is that there were in fact more three story buildings and even higher including the hotel where Wells Fargo is now located.  This building would be within that context and would not be out of scale.

Discussions followed regarding various redesign options.

Mr. Whitford motioned to recommend retaining approval of the original, beautifully designed and historically compatible three-story building.  If the Planning Commission decides to reconsider the October 11, 2005 decision, then the Historic Commission recommends denial of the revised design.  The Historic Commission would recommend a redesign of the building with the following considerations (in no particular order):

·         Pushing back entire front façade (all three stories) to meet vision setback requirements

·         Pushing back one or both bays in front façade seems more appropriate because an angled façade is not compatible with traditional building design.

·         Making alley elevation consistent; the alley corner is not significant enough of a street  corner to wrap the building around

·         Cantilevering second and third stories

·         Switching front door to north bay/panel

Mr. Swink seconded the motion and it was approved unanimously.

DISCUSSION ITEMS

145 East Main Street

SERA Architects – Greg Flenders and Mark Knox

Pre-Application comments on proposal for a Mixed-Use Development

Mr. Knox and Mr. Flenders reviewed design changes incorporated as a result of suggestions made by the Commissioners at the Historic Review Board meeting on October 27, 2005. Ms. Harris read faxed comments sent by Chairman Shostrom. The Commissioners made the following additional comments and suggestions:

·         Of the two front façade elevations presented, the majority of the Commissioners preferred the cast concrete base as opposed to the cast stone option.  Steel channeling and brick, or all brick for 2^nd & 3^rd stories is preferred.

·         Suggested using something to break up the blank cement plaster wall on the elevator shaft off Will Dodge Way

·         Use of a coarser, higher gauge wire mesh for panels or use of a unique, unusual mesh to avoid a “chicken wire” look.  Provide structural design elements such as railings, supports, etc.

·         Find a way to carry some simplified version of the design elements from the front façade to the rear such as double channel across top.

·         Give the rear façade a more substantial base

·         Develop a sketched or photomontage streetscape and alleyscape to show scale of building to the existing structures.

Mr. Saladoff said he would attend the Planning Commission meeting as a representative of the Historic Commission.

OLD BUSINESS

A. Review Board – Following is the month’s schedule for the Review Board, which meets every Thursday from 3:00 to at least 3:30 p.m. in the Planning Department:

B.  Project Assignments for Planning Actions

C.     Co-Sponsorship with Conservation Commission for Fall Workshop – Rob will follow up with Joanne Krippaehne 

D.     Lithia Springs National Register Nomination – No Report

E.     Multiple Listing Survey for National Register of Historic Places – No report

F.      Single Family Residential Design Standards – No report

G.     Brown Bag Meeting – Need to identify meeting topic(s) and respond to City of Jacksonville

NEW BUSINESS –

Mr. Swink described a documentary film “Blue Vinyl” and it was suggested the film be shown during Historic Preservation Week.  Mr. Swink said he would pursue.

Vice Chair Skibby reviewed the Ashland Heritage Committee and recommended the Commissioners renew their memberships.  There was consensus to renew the $50 membership.

Ms. Harris shared that the Northlight project (Copeland Lumber site) had requested a reconsideration of the denial decision made by the Planning Commission.  The project was not brought back to the Historic Commission because there were no design changes proposed.

Mr. Giordano discussed with the Commissioners his desire for the Historic Commission or a new, separate Commission be formed to do “architectural review” on commercial and, possibly, all multi-family projects throughout the City in order to promote designs that are consistent and compatible with the historic nature of the City of Ashland.  Ms. Leighton asked Mr. Saladoff to draft a letter to the Council that could be reviewed at the next Historic Commission meeting.  Mr. Saladoff agreed to assist.

ANNOUNCEMENTS

The next Historic Commission meeting will be on December 7, 2005 at 7:00 pm in the Siskiyou Room.

ADJOURNMENT

With a motion by Giordano and a second by Whitford, it was the unanimous decision of the Commission to adjourn the meeting at 10:05 p.m.