Agendas and Minutes

Planning Commission (View All)

Planning Commission Mtg

Tuesday, February 11, 2020

February 11, 2020
I.          CALL TO ORDER:
Chair Roger Pearce called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street.
Commissioners Present:   Staff Present:
Troy Brown, Jr.
Michael Dawkins
Alan Harper
Haywood Norton
Roger Pearce

  Bill Molnar, Community Development Director
Maria Harris, Planning Manager
Brandon Goldman, Senior Planner
Derek Severson, Senior Planner
Dana Smith, Executive Assistant

Absent Members:   Council Liaison:
Lynn Thompson   Stefani Seffinger, absent
Community Development Director Bill Molnar announced that Kerry KenCairn was the new Planning commissioner.  Staff was looking at scheduling a site visit to the new cottage housing development at 476 North Laurel Street in place of the March study session.  The annexation proposal for 1511 Hwy 99 was delayed until possibly April.
A.  Approval of Minutes
1.  January 14, 2020 Regular Meeting
Commissioner Brown/Dawkins m/s to approve the minutes of January 14, 2020.  Voice Vote: all AYES.  Motion passed. 
Huelz Gutcheon/Ashland/Spoke on electric vehicles and the counting carbons requirements in the CEAP.
A.  Approval of Findings for PA-APPEAL-2019-00010, 145 North Main Street.
The Commission declared no ex parte contact regarding the matter.
Commissioner Dawkins/Brown m/s to approve the Findings for PA-APPEAL-2019-00010, 145 North Main Street.  Voice Vote: all AYES.  Motion passed. 
B.  Approval of Findings for PA-T2-2019-00012, 945 Tolman Creek Road.
The Commission declared no ex parte contact regarding the matter.
Commissioner Brown/Norton m/s to approve the Findings for PA-T2-2019-00012, 945 Tolman Creek Road.  Voice Vote: all AYES.  Motion passed. 
A.  PLANNING ACTION: PA-T2-2020-00016
DESCRIPTION: A request for Outline Plan subdivision approval and Site Design Review approval for the Kestrel Park Cottages, a 16-lot/15-unit subdivision of Area 3, one of the areas reserved for future development in the recently approved Kestrel Park Subdivision. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION/ZONING: North Mountain Single Family (NM-R-1.7.5) and North Mountain Multi-Family (NM-MF); ZONING: NM-R-1-7.5; and NM-MF; ASSESSOR’S MAP & TAX LOTS: 39 1E 04AC 900, 39 1E 04AD 8600, and 39 1E 04DB 2000.
Chair Pearce read the rules of the Public Hearing.
Ex Parte Contact
Commissioner Harper, Brown and Pearce declared no ex parte contact and no site visit.  Commissioner Norton and Dawkins had no ex parte contact and one site visit.
Staff Report
Senior Planner Derek Severson provided a presentation (see attached) on the Kestrel Park Cottages proposal for Area 3:
•  Project Description
•  Aerial Photo of proposed area
•  Subdivision Area 3 Phase II Plan
•  Photos of the area
•  Vicinity Map and Cottage Layout
•  Density
•Solar Access Performance Standard
•  Open Space Treatment (
•  Traffic
•  Parking, Access & Circulation (AMC 18.4.3)
•  Shared Electric Vehicle Parking
•  Parking Demand Analysis (AMC
Staff supported the application with conditions recommended in packet.
Questions of Staff
Commissioner Dawkins asked about the recommendation for open space.   Mr. Severson explained staff was looking at a condition where the applicant showed 3,882 square feet (sq. ft.) surfaced with materials suitable for human use.  It would be a revised plan at the final plan review. 
Chair Pearce thought the cottage housing and on-street parking credits in the report were confusing.  They did not apply to the application.  He suggested removing the language from the Findings.
Applicant’s Presentation
Mark Knox/KDA Homes LLC/Explained the electric car would be a Nissan LEAF.  He agreed there was confusion regarding the terminology using cottage housing.  He addressed the density transfer.  There were four lots in the multi-family section.  They were not looking at high end density.  Areas 4, 5 and 6 were only big enough for two units due to the slope.  It meant they had to spread seven units in the other blocks.  They put the density in the flat piece of land in Area 3 where it would meet the overall density lacking in the other areas.
He disagreed with the landscaping conditions.  They wanted a grass area surrounded by flowers and shrubs.  He thought that flowers and plants were suitable for human use. They would enlarge the area if needed.
 Questions of the Applicant
Mr. Knox clarified they were not asking for an exception to the open space.
Commissioner Brown noted (j) on page 17 of the draft Findings defined what staff had recommended as landscape materials suitable for recreational use.
Public Testimony
Richard Kinsinger/Ashland/Expressed concern regarding traffic flow on Plum Ridge Drive if that was the only exit out of the development.  Plum Ridge Drive was narrow with parking on both sides.
Richard Bee/Ashland/Agreed with Mr. Kinsinger.  He was concerned the lowest density was at the bottom of the hill and the highest density was at the top.  The street plan was not complete so it appeared they would add houses that lacked access.
Carol Bee/Ashland/Was concerned how the added density would impact evacuation routes during a major emergency event.
Rebuttal by Applicant
Mr. Knox explained it would take years to complete the full development.  He doubted there would be a significant increase in trip generation on any of the streets.  Kestrel Parkway would be open so traffic could go up Fair Oaks Avenue and Nevada Street.  Stoneridge would also be built allowing ingress and egress.  Over time the roads would be developed and connect to upper Nandina Street that connected to Plum Ridge Drive.  It would also connect to Patton Lane. 
For emergency evacuation, the bridge crossing at Nevada Street was still in the Transportation System Plan (TSP).  City Council had pulled budget money away from the project but it was still in the TSP.
Mr. Knox was willing to stay after the meeting and talk with the neighbors or they could call him.
Chair Pearce closed the record and the hearing.
Deliberations & Decision
Chair Pearce explained the area was part of the North Mountain Master Plan approved by the City. That included the streets.  The Transportation Commission could eliminate parking on one side if needed.
Commissioner Brown noted page 16 of the draft Findings, (d)(ii) spoke to providing one to three areas with a bench, tree or educational display.  He suggested requiring three instead of having a range.
The Commission discussed the requirement for open and recreational space. 
Commissioner Norton clarified the proposal was not cottage housing and thought any reference to cottage housing should be removed.  The master plan did not include cottage housing for that area.  The proposal should be based on the approved zoning.   If the applicant needed a change to the parking, they could ask for an exception. 
Chair Pearce agreed the references to cottages was confusing. In terms of the parking, density transfers were allowed.  The applicant did a parking management strategy to reduce parking spaces from 26 to 24.  Mr. Severson clarified although cottage housing was not a permitted use in the zone, it could have a similar set up.  In the R-1.75 zone, the density could be doubled by making smaller units.  For this project, there was already density in the multifamily portion at 12 units per acre.  Cottage housing was referenced in the presentation but the findings and staff report were written for multifamily development.
The Commission discussed suitable surface for recreational use. 
Commissioner Brown/Harper m/s to approve PA-T2-2020-00016 with modifications to Section 3. Decision (7)(d)(ii) changing it to three areas instead of one to three and leaving item (7)(j) in the same section as is by staff.  Roll Call Vote:  Commissioner Pearce, Harper, Norton, Brown, and Dawkins, YES.  Motion passed.
A.  PLANNING ACTION:  PA-L-2019-00007
SUBJECT PROPERTY:  Ashland Downtown Design Standards Overlay and C-1-D Zone
OWNER/APPLICANT:   City of Ashland
DESCRIPTION:  A request for Planning Commission review and recommendation relating to an ordinance amending the site design and use standards for large scale projects to address plaza space requirements within the C-1-D zone and Downtown Design Standards overlay.  COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION:  Downtown, Commercial; ZONING: C-1 and C-1-D, Downtown Design Standards Overlay.
Chair Pearce explained this was a legislative public hearing that would result in a recommendation to the City Council.
Staff Report
Community Development Director Bill Molnar explained the standards would remove the plaza space requirement for development in the downtown area greater than 10,000 square feet (sq. ft.).  He described the legislative history.
Senior Planner Brandon Golden provided a presentation on Plaza Space Standards (see attached):
•  Legislative History
•  Plaza Space Standards  
•  Detail Site Review Overlay
•  Downton Applicability
•  Discussion Items
•  Existing Plaza Space Standards
•  Proposed Amendment within the
•  Public Open Space & the downtown   central Plaza   
•  Downtown Design Standards &         Regulations
•  Historic Commission Recommendation
•  Timelines for Public Hearings (2020)
•  Historic Commission Recommendation

Questions of Staff 
Commissioner Dawkins, Chair Pearce and Mr. Goldman discussed a potential conflict in the code regarding width and plaza space. 
Commissioner Brown asked if the other areas with a similar type of development problem would be addressed in the near future.  Mr. Molnar thought it would happen later.
Public Testimony
Phil Thompson/Ashland/Thought the changes should include all properties in the C-1 zone instead of just the C-1-D.  He spoke to inadequate parking at the Grizzly Peak Shopping Center and other areas.  He was concerned with the speed limit by the shopping center and wanted the speed reduced from 35 mph to 25 mph.
Jim Falkenstein/Ashland/Was in an HOA and explained their CC&Rs were really in place for non-reasonable people.  He spoke to unintended regulations.  He thought the plaza amendments should have language that would mitigate a non-reasonable person from building something “maniacal.”
Chair Pearce closed the public hearing.
Deliberations & Decision
Chair Pearce liked the findings and suggested it emphasize the change was consistent with the downtown design standards and the historic development downtown.
Commissioner Dawkins/Harper m/s to recommend that the City Council approve the proposed amendments to Chapter 18.4.2 of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance.  This motion is based on findings and conclusions in the staff report, and findings in support of the application made during deliberations on this matter.  Roll Call Vote:  Commissioner Norton, Dawkins, Brown, Pearce and Harper, YES.  Motion passed.
Commissioner Brown explained the Commission had participated in two prior meetings regarding the topic.  What Mr. Goldman presented at this meeting were the changes and modifications that had resulted from those meetings.
Meeting adjourned 8:37 p.m.
Submitted by,
Dana Smith, Executive Assistant

Online City Services

Pay Your Utility Bill
Connect to
Ashland Fiber Network
Request Conservation
Proposals, Bids
& Notifications
Request Building
Building Permit
Apply for Other
Permits & Licenses
Register for
Recreation Programs

©2023 City of Ashland, OR | Site Handcrafted in Ashland, Oregon by Project A




twitter facebook Email Share
back to top