City of Ashland - Home
Home Mayor & Council Departments Commissions & Committees Contact


 
LINE

 
LINE
 
LINE
 
LINE
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
*
*
 
LINE
 
LINE
 
LINE
 
LINE

Notify me by Email
 

City of Ashland, Oregon / City Recorder / City Council Information / Packet Archives / Year 2003 / 05/07 / Big Box

Big Box

Council Communication
Title: Study Session - Discussion of Big Box Ordinance Amendments
Dept: Department of Community Development
Date: May 7, 2003
Submitted By: John McLaughlin, Director of Community Development
Approved By:
...........................
Gino Grimaldi, City Administrator

Synopsis: In 1992, the City adopted new Commercial Development Standards including specific limitations on the size of the buildings in the Detail Site Review zone. A limitation of 45,000 sq. ft. was imposed. These standards were developed through an intense and highly publicized public process.

In 2000, the City Council approved an application by the Oregon Shakespeare Festival that ended up interpreting the 45,000 sq. ft. limit of the ordinance as applying only to the footprint of a structure, and not to the gross floor area square footage.

After that decision, the City Council directed staff to modify the ordinance language to clearly reflect their interpretation.

A hearing was held in front of the Planning Commission on August 14, 2001 at which time revised language was presented regarding the 45,000 sq. ft. footprint, that the measurements were made inside the exterior walls, and that the size limitations did not apply to the Downtown Design Standards overlay zone. The Planning Commission recommended adoption of the changes, based on the direction from the City Council.

On September 4, 2001, a hearing was held in front of the City Council where the proposed changes as recommended by the Planning Commission were presented. The Council, after taking public testimony, determined that additional review and public comment was necessary.

After difficulty in finding a suitable date for a study session, one was finally scheduled for June 25, 2002. At that meeting, the Council directed staff to prepare ordinance amendments addressing the following items:

1. Clarification as to how to measure the 45,000 sq. ft. limit referenced by the ordinance.

2. How to clarify the definition of a contiguous building.

3. How the ordinance amendments would be applied and impact the downtown commercial area.

Another study session was held with Planning Commission on August 27, 2002 at which time proposed ordinance amendments were presented. An option for larger buildings if affordable housing was provided was also included. These amendments were generally well received, with recommendations to clarify some of the language.

A final study session was held on September 24, 2002 to bring back the final versions of the ordinance based on the input from the August meeting.

A public hearing was scheduled with the Planning Commission for review of the ordinance amendments on January 14, 2003. However, due to a full agenda, the item was continued to the February 11, 2003 meeting.

At the February meeting, the Planning Commission took testimony on the proposed amendments and ended up recommending that no amendments to the ordinance be adopted. Further, they recommended that the Council change their interpretation regarding the 45,000 sq. ft. limit from applying to footprint. Rather, they recommended that the Council re-interpret the ordinance such that the 45,000 sq. ft. applies to the gross floor area of the entire structure. (Minutes of 2/11 meeting attached)

Discussion: The Planning Commission's recommendation provides direction for how the 45,000 sq. ft. limit should be applied. However, it fails to address the other issues requested by the Council. Specifically, issues related to contiguous buildings remains unclear, and how the size limits relate to downtown. Further, other issues related to site design associated with the detail site review zone also came up during this process and were not addressed as well.

Staff is looking for direction from the City Council as to how best to address the initial issues raised by the Council, while also bringing forward the recommendation of the Planning Commission regarding the 45,000 sq. ft. limit.

Recommendation: While Staff is looking for direction, we believe that from the past meetings and discussions, we can provide some recommendations:

The ordinance still needs to be modified to clarify existing language. Merely interpreting the ordinance as requested by the Planning Commission is only part of the answer.

It appears that the proposal for buildings larger than 45,000 sq. ft. if affordable housing was provided was not necessarily well received by the public or the commission. Therefore, we recommend that the conditional use process proposed to allow buildings up to 75,000 sq. ft. be scrapped.

However, without changes to the ordinance, confusion regarding application of the ordinance is still likely. Given that the Commission recommended that the limit be 45,000 sq. ft of gross floor area, we believe the ordinance should be specifically modified to clarify that limit.

We would recommend the following language addressing contiguous buildings, and the downtown design standards overlay zone:

18.72.050.C. (proposed replacement for existing section)

1. Outside the Downtown Design Standards Zone, new buildings or expansions of existing buildings in the Detail Site Review Zone shall conform with the following standards:

a. Buildings sharing a common wall or having walls touching at or above grade shall be considered as one building.

b. Buildings shall not exceed a building footprint area of 45,000 square feet as measured outside the exterior walls.

c. Buildings shall not exceed a gross floor area of 45,000 square feet, including all interior floor space and outdoor retail and storage areas, with the following exception:

Automobile parking areas located within the building footprint, such as rooftop parking and under-structure parking, shall not count toward the total gross floor area.

d. Buildings shall not exceed a combined contiguous building length of 300 feet.

e. Any building or contiguous groups of buildings which exceed these limitations, which were in existence in 1992, may expand up to 15% in area or length beyond their 1992 area or length. The building footprint area, gross floor area, or combined contiguous building length as set forth in this section shall not be subject to any variance authorized in the Land Use Ordinance.

2. Inside the Downtown Design Standards Zone, new buildings or expansions of existing buildings shall not exceed a building footprint area of 45,000 sq. ft. or a gross floor area of 45,000 sq. ft., with the following exceptions:

a. Gross floor area associated with non-ground level residential uses shall not count toward the total gross floor area.

b. Automobile parking areas located within the building footprint, such as rooftop parking and under-structure parking, shall not count toward the total gross floor area.

These changes address the specific concerns raised by the Council, plus also address the issues raised by the Planning Commission regarding setting the maximum building size at 45,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area.

In addition, the following site design standards regarding Orientation and Scale are recommended as well:

Section II-C-1a) Orientation and Scale

1) Buildings shall have their primary orientation toward the street rather than the parking area. Building entrances shall be oriented toward the street and shall be accessed from a public sidewalk. Where buildings are located on a corner lot, the entrance shall be oriented toward the higher order street or to the lot corner at the intersection of the streets. Public sidewalks shall be provided adjacent to a public street along the street frontage. Buildings shall be located as close to the intersection corner as practicable.

2) Building entrances shall be located within 10 feet of the public right of way to which they are required to be oriented. Exceptions may be granted for topographic constraints, lot configuration, designs where a greater setback results in an improved access or for sites with multiple buildings, such as shopping centers, where this standard is met by other buildings. Buildings that are within 30 feet of the street shall have an entrance for pedestrians directly from the street to the building interior. This entrance shall be designed to be clearly visible, attractive and functional, and shall be open to the public during all business hours.

II-C-2b) Streetscape

2) A building shall be setback not more than 20 feet from a public sidewalk unless the area is used for pedestrian activities such as plazas or outside eating areas. This standard shall apply to both street frontages on corner lots. If more than one structure is proposed for a site, at least 25% 65% of the aggregate building frontage shall be within 20 feet of the sidewalk.

These modifications are intended to ensure that new buildings on corner lots are oriented towards the street on both frontages, and that an entrance is oriented to the major street or to the intersection..

Conclusion: The proposed amendments specifically addresses the maximum size of buildings (45,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area), addresses the provision of housing in the downtown, and underground or rooftop parking. Specifically, if the 45,000 sq. ft. standard is applied without consideration of housing, there will be no opportunity for an additional level of housing on the existing parking structure downtown. This should be carefully considered by the Council.

Some discussion has been raised about reducing the maximum size (45,000 sq. ft.), especially in the downtown. Given the existing development patterns, currently adopted design standards, we believe that the downtown is adequately covered by regulations. Further, no variances are allowed for any structures larger than 45,000 sq. ft. If a smaller size is considered, there will likely be instances where a larger building is warranted. The most recent example outside of the downtown was the YMCA expansion.

Staff looks forward to the Council's comments.

Supporting documents are available in PDF format. To view these documents on your computer, please click on the link below:




Download File
SS_Agenda_Packet.pdf

(2691.4KB)
 

Get Acrobat Reader The above document(s) are Adobe® Acrobat® PDF files and may be viewed using the free Adobe® Acrobat® Reader™. Most newer web browsers already contain the Adobe® Acrobat® Reader™ plug-in. However, if you need it, click on the "Get Acrobat® Reader™" icon to download it now.

 

printer friendly version Printer friendly version

If you have questions regarding the site, please contact the webmaster.
Terms of Use | Built using Project A's Site-in-a-Box ©2012

View Mobile Site

News Calendar Agendas NewsCalendarAgendasFacebook Twitter