CONTINUATION OF THE JUNE 14, 2005 REGULAR MEETING
JUNE 28, 2005
CALL TO ORDER
Chair John Fields called the Ashland Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. on June 28, 2005 at the Civic Center Council Chambers,
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: John Fields, Chair
ABSENT MEMBERS: None
COUNCIL LIAISON: Jack Hardesty, present
STAFF PRESENT: John McLaughlin, Planning Director
Bill Molnar, Planning Manager
Sue Yates, Executive Secretary
TYPE II PUBLIC HEARING – Continuation of June 14, 2005 Hearing
PLANNING ACTION 2005-00858
IS A REQUEST FOR OUTLINE AND FINAL PLAN APPROVAL FOR A THREE-LOT SUBDIVISION UNDER THE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OPTIONS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT
APPLICANT: GREG WHITE
Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts
Stromberg had a site visit and noticed several things he thought could possibly influence his decision on this action. He saw how the neighboring property needs to be taken into consideration. The trees are a mess and he thought they should be taken out. The other property is down and set back. He wants the parking explained to him. He agreed the streets need to be completed or a bond posted.
KenCairn stepped down and left the room as she has worked on this project.
Molnar recapped from the last meeting. There is a standard in the
Molnar said Staff is still holding firm to Condition 16 regarding paving. The only discussion they’ve had since the last meeting is with the Fire Department. They require at a minimum before a building permit is issued and before any combustible materials are used for this project, a suitable compacted surface for holding a fire truck at the project location and hydrant placement. Staff is not sure of total timeline on the larger project and when the street will be paved. As part of any development, there is a requirement for paved access. Dust control has been an issue on the previous two applications. If the applicant wants to defer paving, they could consider posting a bond that would cover paved access to the site.
Tom Giordano and Greg White came forward to complete their testimony from the June 14, 2005 meeting.
Giordano said they will turn the end unit 180 degrees. They will move it off the property line another two feet and change the elevation two feet.
White has been in touch with Tom Marr, his neighbor. Marr agreed the stairs should be moved to the other side. White likes the idea of reducing all the garages, getting some smaller square footages, and pulling them away from Marr’s property. .
With regard to Condition 16, their concern is that the large development around them was supposed to be paved a few months ago and it still isn’t. Since there is an existing house already served by this road, they are requesting the Planning Commission allow them to at least be allowed to build on one of the lots if the pavement is not yet in. They are willing to bond for the improvements if the paving does not occur. White said they do not want to be held up another six to eight months while waiting for the neighboring property owner to pave. The hydrants, curbs and gutters are there. There is compacted gravel there now.
Dotterrer asked about Condition 12. Giordano said there is no common open space for parking. There are separate lots and parking is provided for each lot. He does not see the need for a parking agreement because they are not planning on a homeowner’s association.
White said he spoke with Marr about dust control. White would not be going by Marr’s property, so it should not be a problem.
MAT MARR, 955 North Mountain Avenue, stated he and Tom Marr are happy to support this project. He gave some background to the development of the
There was no rebuttal and no Staff response.
COMMISSIONERS’ DISCUSSION AND MOTION
Fields wondered with regard to Conditional 16 if the alley on the adjoining property has been deeded to the city. If the developer goes under and their project never gets completed, the City will never will get dedication and White will never have access to this site. McLaughlin wondered if there could be an agreement granting White access in the interim. White will have to provide evidence of access rights across the alley. The current owner would have to grant an easement to allow creation of White’s lots. The easement would have to be granted and recorded prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Molnar proposed keeping the wording as is for Condition 23 but adding the sentence: That a six foot side yard be maintained along the north boundary of the project between the garage and the accessory unit.
Molnar suggested wording for Condition 16: That all streets and alleys leading to the project shall be surfaced to accommodate fire apparatus prior to the issuance of a building permit for one of the three lots and the streets and alleys leading to the project leading to the project be dedicated as rights-of –way or an access be granted prior to an issuance of a building permit or bond for the paving. That all streets and alleys leading to the project shall be surfaced prior to the issuance of the second and third building permit.
Dotterrer asked to have the CC&R’s removed from Condition 11 as some kind of agreement will need to made for designating who will maintain the landscaping.
Delete the first sentence of Condition 12. Molnar explained the garage is to be used for parking, not storage. The area in the driveway is not a legal space.
Dotterrer/Dawkins m/s to approve PA2005-00858 with the above changes to Conditions 11, 12 and 16 as read by Molnar and with the added sentence to Condition 23. Roll Call: Unanimous approval.
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 8:00 p.m.