ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
CALL TO ORDER
November 13, 2018
Chair Roger Pearce called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street.
|Troy Brown, Jr.
|Bill Molnar, Community Development Director
Derek Severson, Senior Planner
Dana Smith, Executive Assistant
||Dennis Slattery, absent
Community Development Director Bill Molnar explained the City Council would resume the public hearing for the Transit Triangle Overlay at their meeting November 20, 2018. The Oregon Department of Transportation reviewed the traffic analysis and determined it would have no significant impact on the state highway system. They supported the Transit Triangle Overlay. The Planning Commission would provide the annual commission report to the City Council at their meeting December 4, 2018. City Council would hear the 880 Park Street appeal that night as well. The Commission would not have a study session in December.
AD-HOC COMMITTEE UPDATES
A. Approval of Minute
1. September 11, 2018 Regular Meeting
2. September 25, 2018 Study Session
Commissioners Thompson/Dawkins m/s to approve the Consent Agenda. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed 7-0.
Spoke on reducing fossil fuels and mandating wiring for electric vehicle charging.
A. Approval of Findings for PA-T2-2018-00003, 188 Garfield Street.
The Commission had no ex parte on the matter. The Commission made the following changes to the Findings:
Commissioners Brown/Thompson m/s to approve the Findings for PA-T2-2018-00003, 188 Garfield Street as amended with staff’s suggested language to Condition 5 on land value not counting. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed 7-0.
B. Approval of Findings for PA-T2-2018-00004, 1661 Ashland Street.
- Page 4, delete the second paragraph under 2.2
- Page 5, second paragraph fourth sentence, change “building” to “build”
- Page 9, add more language on allowing the applicant to use the existing curb cut
- Add language to Condition 5 on the land value not counting
- Remove language that adopts the applicant’s Findings as the City’s Findings
- Change language “The Commission finds that the application further explains,” or similar verbiage with, “The Planning Commission finds…”
- Add more detail on how the conservation housing and outdoor recreation bonuses were met
- Add language to Condition 5.0 that the final project valuation complied with the definitions
The Commission had no ex parte on the matter. Commissioner Thompson made the following changes to the Findings:
Commissioners Thompson/Norton m/s to approve the Findings for PA-T2-2018-00004, 1661 Ashland Street with the modifications made by Commissioner Thompson. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed 7-0.
TYPE II PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. PLANNING ACTION: PA-T2-2018-00005
- Page 6, delete the second paragraph that adopted the proposed Findings by reference
- Page 6, Section 2.3 second paragraph last sentence, “The application concludes…,” change to “The Planning Commission finds…” and same paragraph second sentence, delete “The application notes that…” and start the sentence at, “In addition…”
- Page 6, Section 2.3 third paragraph under third sentence, change, “The application emphasizes…” with “The Planning Commission finds…”
- Page 6, Section 2.3 fifth paragraph second sentence change, “The application notes…” with, “The Planning Commission finds…”
- Page 6-7, last paragraph last sentence, delete “The application materials note that…” and start the sentence at “The property…” and same paragraph second sentence, change “The application further explains that...” to “The Planning Commission finds…”
- Page 7, second paragraph second sentence, delete “The application explains that…” and start the sentence at “A 20-foot wide…” and same paragraph last sentence, change “The applicants further assert…” to “The Planning Commission finds…”
- Page 7, third paragraph second sentence, change “The application asserts…” to “The Planning Commission finds…” and same paragraph, last sentence, change “The application further notes…” to “The Planning Commission finds…”
- Page 7, fifth paragraph second sentence, change “The application asserts...” to “The Planning Commission finds…”
SUBJECT PROPERTY: Kestrel ParkwayAPPLICANT/OWNER: KDA Homes, LLC/ Jacob Robert Ayala
DESCRIPTION: A request for Outline Plan approval for a 17-lot Performance Standards Options subdivision, a Major Amendment to the North Mountain Neighborhood Plan, a Physical & Environmental Constraints Review Permit for improvements within the floodplain corridor, a Limited Use/Activity Permit for activities within a wetland, and Tree Removal Permits to remove 15 trees for the three vacant parcels located south of the end of Kestrel Parkway. The subdivision plan includes the dedication of 5.99 acres of floodplain corridor land to the City of Ashland as park land as required in the North Mountain Neighborhood Plan (NMNP). (Development of the multi-family zoned portions of the property would occur in a later phase and would require Final Plan and Site Design Review approvals prior to development.) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION/ZONING: North Mountain Single Family (NM-R-1.7.5), North Mountain Multi-Family (NM-MF), and North Mountain Greenway (NM-G); ZONING: NM-R-1-7.5; NM-MF; and NM-G; ASSESSOR’S MAP & TAX LOTS: 39 1E 04AC 900, 39 1E 04AD 8600, and 39 1E 04DB 2000.
Chair Pearce read aloud the public hearing procedures for land use hearings.
Ex Parte Contact
Commissioners Harper and Thompson declared no ex parte. Commissioner Dawkins had an extensive site visit and ran into the applicants the week before but did not discuss the matter. Commissioners Brown and Mindlin had no ex parte and one site visit. Commissioner Norton had one site visit and two encounters with people who spoke to the issue. Neither encounter created a conflict. Chair Pearce had no ex parte but was familiar with the site.
Senior Planner Derek Severson provided a presentation on the project. He described the major modifications and amendments. Staff recommended the following Conditions:
Questions of Staff
- An LID for the Nevada Street Bridge
- Require a minimum 22-foot width on Zare Way to accommodate fire apparatus access
- Create a fire truck turn-around where the streets that will ultimately continue temporarily terminate
Staff clarified density transfers in the North Mountain Neighborhood Plan (NMNP). Mr. Severson confirmed the location of the hammerhead and that it would work in that location.
The definition of open space was different from multi-family open space and could be used to preserve natural features. The flood plain corridor was approximately 50% of the site and the wetland was another half-acre. The open space in the center was not intended to be usable.
The narrative did not speak to Street Exceptions, but some areas in the plan may need them.
Mark Knox/KDA Homes/Ashland/
Spoke to the project. The proposal followed the North Mountain Master Plan. Over time, changes were made to the NMNP.The applicants had no issues with the recommendations and Conditions from the Tree Commission or staff.The application was for fifteen single family homes. The project was laid out to be consistent with the pattern of the adjacent neighborhood.
Distribution calculations were on page 2 of the applicants Findings.The maximum units for single family were eleven.Transferring density to the flatlands made it too tight due to the flood plain, the alley and the existing street above the area.
Mr. Knox liked the idea of placing benches around the outside of the wetland area and 50-foot protection buffer.He would incorporate it into the plan.There was already a well-groomed park next to the site.Having another park would add unnecessary costs to the Home Owners Association.The applicants decided to keep the open space in a natural state.Eventually, a bike path would extend through the property.They would remove blackberry bushes and willows from the wetland and replace them with appropriate plants.They would also remove sediment from the 1997 flood that was stored in that location.
Questions of the Applicant
Infrastructure would determine the sections and areas of lots 3 through seven that would get built. Mr. Knox had concerns with the NMNP allowing multi-family on the steepest parts of the area.The applicants would most likely ask for the minimum density and possibly an Exception for the density.The slopes were steep, 22-feet wide and no more than 800 square feet.They were looking into multiple shared vehicles for parking.The applicants would at least meet minimum density.There was a possibility they would have to mass the garages.
Four single family homes would go in a multi-family area that normally would accommodate twelve units.The lots were on 25%-30% slopes directly facing other houses.It would be a challenge to get two units on each lot. However, accessory residential units could go on the lots.Street and alley patterns dictated the lots.
The applicants resolved the location of Kestrel Way by moving it five feet out of the flood plain area during the pre-application process.A section of the sidewalk was two feet into the flood plain.They were asking for a Condition to move the sidewalk.It would still be in the flood plain but just outside of the water resource protection zone.
They followed the standards in the NMNP for the fire truck turnaround.The alley would function as a hammer head turnaround.Alley standards in the NMNP had shoulders 2-feet wider than the City standards.It also had a 20-foot width right of way instead of the standard 16-feet.They could ask for an Exception at the final plan stage.
Was the Chair for the Mountain Meadows Emergency Preparedness and Safety Group. As North Mountain expanded, the evacuation route needed to be considered.Initially the emergency plan included the Nevada Street Bridge.It was not in place at this time and was critical for evacuation.He referred to a letter in the record from Lee Bowman.
Rebuttal by Applicant
Mr. Knox agreed with Mr. Holeman that the Nevada Street Bridge was key for emergency evacuation.The City Council had made Findings the bridge was not appropriate at this time.He was not sure how to solve it since it was a City Council decision.
Deliberations & Decision
Mr. Severson explained the application was proposed under the Proposed Performance Standards Options Chapter and described the two tier processes.
Commission comment was concerned the area was zoned for so much density. It didn’t make sense to require that high of density for such a steep slope. Other concerns were parking.
Commissioners Brown/Dawkins m/s to approve Planning Action PA-T2-2018-00005, Kestrel Parkway with street width hammer heads and all of the staff Conditions and recommendations.
Commissioner Brown explained the project met the criteria before them tonight. The staff recommendations were in conjunction with the master plan and the City. Roll Call Vote: Commissioners Thompson, Pearce, Dawkins, Brown, Harper, Mindlin, and Norton, YES. Motion Passed 7-0.
Meeting adjourned at 8:46 p.m.
Dana Smith, Executive Assistant