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 Terry Skibby, Keith Chambers, Alex Krach and Sam Whitford. Also present were Associate Planner Mark Knox, Council Liaison John Morrison and Secretary Sonja Akerman. Members Jay Leighton, Tom Giordano, Joanne Krippaehne and Rob Saladoff were unable to attend.

Knox introduced new members Alex Krach and Sam Whitford to the Commission.

Chambers moved and Skibby seconded to approve the April 2, 2003 minutes as submitted. The motion passed with a unanimous vote.

PUBLIC HEARING

Knox reported the applicants are proposing to build a third residential unit that will be attached to the existing duplex. The new unit will replace the existing garage/storage building and will be built on the same footprint with an additional 34 square feet. It will be connected to the existing duplex by a roof. The existing house was built in 1948 and will not be altered. The parking area that will be paved was a concern for Staff because of the potential impact the paving would have on the historic resources of the area. However, a reciprocal easement with the adjacent neighbor was granted to allow common use access since the driveways are contiguous. This will cut down on the amount of paving required while also allowing adequate parking on the site. In Staff's opinion, the application is acceptable

Shostrom opened the public hearing and it was noted there was no one in the audience to speak on behalf of the applicants.

The Commission remarked the north elevation of the existing house was not drawn accurately. Shostrom stated the elevations of the existing house and the proposed unit depict similar siding. In reality, the existing building is block. He also wondered why a more similar design to the existing house was not chosen. The existing house has a gable roof and the proposed unit has a hipped roof. He also said he would rather see a design for the new unit that mimics what is already existing rather than introduce another style for the cottage.

Whitford asked if it is typical for the applicant or owner to come to the meetings. He was told the applicants and designers/architects are made aware the planning actions before the Historic Commission meetings are considered to be public hearings. Most often someone will attend the meeting to represent the applicant(s).

Chambers moved to recommend the Hearings Board call this action up for a public hearing based on the following: (1) There were not enough details submitted for the proposed unit; (2) The Historic Commission would like to talk to the applicants about the design of the proposed unit; (3) There are concerns about the compatibility of the proposed unit with the existing building; (4) The drawings that were submitted are not accurate and specific materials were not stated; (5) There was not a clear sense of what is being proposed for the existing house; and (6) The roof style proposed for the new unit is not compatible with the roof style of the existing house- the Commission would like to see a more similar style. In discussing this motion, all the members felt the above concerns could best be addressed through a public hearing. Skibby seconded the motion and it passed with a unanimous vote.

For the benefit of the new members, Knox reviewed the reasons for requesting this proposal be called up for a public hearing last month. The Hearings Board agreed with the Historic Commission; therefore it will be heard again by the Historic Commission and will then go before the Planning Commission. Knox also stated the applicant was not present last month, but has since done quite a lot of research and met with the Review Board.

Applicant Kirk McAllister stated he had met with Brad Roupp, a local contractor who has restored and moved several structures in Ashland. He has also viewed old Sanborn maps to ascertain when the abutment was added to the original outbuilding. Additionally, he conducted a research and concluded the market for renting out a single room was not as high as he had originally thought. McAllister said that for now, he is changing his application in order to get approval for a one-unit traveler's accommodation with a garage. He will leave the outbuilding as it is with the exception of removing the abutment (which was added some time after 1928) and it will serve as the garage. Also, by removing the abutment, it will allow for another parking space. Although this will decrease the size of the building to less than 500 square feet, McAllister assured the Commission it is not his intention to demolish it. The side of the outbuilding with the currently existing abutment will be re-sided once the abutment is removed. Other than that, he will leave the building as it is for the time being.

Whitford asked if there will be exterior changes to the existing house and McAllister responded a bathroom will be added within the interior, but no exterior changes are planned.

Skibby asked if the alley would need to be paved. Knox replied it is the policy of Staff and the City Council to require that certain alleys be paved, including those where residential and commercial areas abut.

Shostrom said he was still concerned with the removal of the abutment and asked if it was necessary. Knox stated a five-foot buffer is required between all parking facilities and the adjacent property in a commercial zone. Therefore, it will be necessary to remove it. Shostrom asked what type of siding will be used on the area left after the abutment is removed and McAllister responded he will remove the siding from the abutment with care and possibly be able to use that, although it is slightly different than the original building. Shostrom stated there are also ways to age new siding that could work for him.

McAllister stated there is a possibility that the building will be remodeled in the future. It was the consensus of the members that by completely remodeling the interior, it could be a nice addition to his traveler's accommodation. Shostrom added the Historic Commission promotes the art of preservation and realizes it will cost more overall than starting from scratch, so the members greatly appreciate the efforts McAllister is making to retain the building. McAllister said he is unsure how rentable the building would be as another unit if it looks like an old outbuilding on the outside. The Commission felt that if the outbuilding were to be upgraded and used as another unit, it could be very charming, but agreed it would be best to make sure photos of the inside be used in all marketing.

Knox informed the Commission that if the applicant does decide to demolish the building (even though it will be less than 500 square feet), the applicant would have to come back before the Historic and Planning Commissions because he would be modifying the site. He also noted that Building Official Mike Broomfield has agreed to run all demolition applications that look historic by the Commission.

Knox then asked the members about the prospect of paint for the building and the consensus was to keep it rustic to retain its charm. It should be protected, but not with paint.

Skibby moved to recommend approval of the application to the Hearings Board based on the following: (1) The one-unit traveler's accommodation will be located in the existing house; (2) The small outbuilding will be retained except for the small abutment on the west side; (3) The siding on the outbuilding be retained in its natural condition; (4) The replacement siding on the west side of the outbuilding match the existing siding as close as possible; and (5) The alley not be paved. Whitford seconded the motion and it passed with a unanimous vote.

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

 National Historic Preservation Week (May 5-12) - Everyone was reminded to make a special effort to attend the award ceremony on May 9.

Carnegie Library Restoration - In the viewpoint of the Historic Commission, the Carnegie Library will not be completed until the fascia and cornice work are finished to match the other three sides. Morrison offered to look into a contingency fund to find out if any county funds could be allocated to this project. Whitford stated he is on a committee for the county libraries and knows that no money will be let go until all the libraries have been completed.

House Size Limitation - Knox reported this subject is still alive. Common numbers are being compiled for new homes and additions in the historic districts. It should be on the agenda for the Planning Commission Study Session on May 27.

Modification of Approved Plans for 542 "A" Street - Architect Jerome White stated he was soliciting feedback as a favor to a friend who is considering buying 542 "A" Street. (He noted he will not be the architect involved with this project.) Plans were approved by the Planning Commission last year to renovate and add on to the building. Since that time, the building has been put up for sale. White said the front would be renovated as was already approved. The rear, however, would have some revisions. The existing porch on the building would be enclosed and used as a bathroom. The catwalk would not be built, as the existing shed would remain one story and be moved back to maintain the look of a shed and become a storage area for wine. This will also allow for more of a courtyard behind the building. The Commission agreed the changes would be positive and suggested White encourage his friend to buy the property.

Knox related that Dave Skilton, Tax Incentives Coordinator for the State Historic Preservation Office, would like to hold a June workshop in Ashland on restoration, rehabilitation and maintenance. A tentative date has been set for June 20. This would be in lieu of the upcoming bi-monthly brown bag workshop sponsored by the Historic Commissions of Ashland and Jacksonville.

With a motion by Skibby and second by Chambers, it was the unanimous decision of the Commission to adjourn the meeting at 9:00 p.m.