This action was approved.

This action was approved.

This action was approved.

Knox said the applicants are asking for a Site Review approval and an exception to the Downtown Design Standards to allow for a recessed balcony.

Knox reported that this site is adjacent to the City parking lot and the Kelso building. The first floor is proposed at 4,512 square feet (office retail) and the second floor is 4,512 (three offices and an apartment) and the third floor is 3,856 square feet (three offices and an apartment).

The design of the building is traditional architecture with a contemporary theme. The front facade has large windows on the first floor for viewing of merchandise. The vertical elements that help define the building are pillars with a traditional cornice on top. Everything this symmetrically balanced. The proposal calls for demolition of the existing building, historically known as the Nininger Building. The building will be encapsulated with the new one. The only remaining exterior portion of the original building will be the pilasters on the side facing the City parking lot. The existing building was built in 1945 and is considered a primary resource on the National Register of Historic Places. On the City’s 1988 Cultural Resource Inventory, it is considered compatible. The National Register Inventory bases the primary ranking on when the building was built. From a historical or architectural standpoint, the building doesn’t really have a primary category it should fit into. The Historic Commission has agreed and believes that under the circumstances, it is acceptable to build around this building. The Historic Commission agrees the demolition is also acceptable.

Knox said the applicants are proposing a number of changes to the site plan and have presented a landscaping plan. They are installing a mid-block connection, via sidewalk from Lithia Way, across the alley, and up by Key Bank. That connection will include a pedestrian plaza area with a bench seat.

The exception the applicants are requesting is the setback of the front area. It sets back about 12 feet from the front. In this situation, there is an opportunity to meet the intent of the Downtown Design Standards by having a limited amount of building recess. Staff believes it is in keeping with the downtown. Lithia Way has single and two-story buildings. The recessed area makes the building seem less tall. The applicants discuss the importance the balcony area, providing for a better residency.

Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts - Site visits were made by both.

EVAN ARCHERED, 120 N. Second Street, stated that part of the project will be to improve the new City parking lot by adding a plaza seating area as well as public art.

Amarotico asked if the balcony was for one unit. Archerd said Jerome White, their architect, said each of the two residential units will have a balcony. That area is not included in the floor area calculation.

COLIN SWALES, 461 Allison Street, said he is generally in favor of the project. With regard to the requested exception to the Downtown Design Standards, he is concerned that the building be built as proposed. He would like assurance from the applicant that the historic nature of the building will be retained. Swales said the demolition ordinance has a lot of loopholes about what can be demolished. He doesn’t want it to be like Hillah Temple where once construction starts, the whole building is pulled down.

Knox said Condition 2 states that at the time the building permit is submitted that the design of the building is in substantial conformance to what the Hearings Board is reviewing today.

JEROME WHITE, 545 A Street, said their intent is to keep not just the west wall, but the entire concrete wall. The concrete wall will become a veneer. They found recently there is no foundation under the concrete.

ARCHERD said they have every intention of building the building the Hearings Board is looking at today.

Knox asked if the engineer says because there are no footings and the wall needs to come down, what then? Archerd said the intent is to build the walls inside the existing walls for structural support and build new footings under those various points. White said they still have to apply for a demolition permit.

Amarotico asked the implications if they have to remove everything. Knox said they would have to come back for approval.

Morris moved to approve PA2002-117. Amarotico seconded the motion and it carried.

Knox said that from all indications, the road was elevated at some time after the house was constructed. The area is heavily wooded. There is a carport pad right off the street. The prior property owner applied for a Variance for the carport pad. The carport is exposed on all sides with some railing detail. The existing stairwell will remain. The Variance is for an 18-foot encroachment into the front yard. The carport will sit back approximately eight feet from the curb line, or two feet from the property line. There is a six-foot area along the frontage in the event there is ever a need for a sidewalk. The other options for locating a carport or garage would require the removal of multiple trees. The trees are significant in size and their removal would be devastating to the front. Staff has recommended approval with the attached two conditions.

ROB SALADOFF, 545 A Street, architect for the applicant, said they explored all the options. The option they have chosen appears to have the least impact on the property. The existing concrete pad is already there and because it is an open structure, it is not that much higher than the top of the existing house. The views will be maintained. They believe this is the preferable option.

Staff Response - Knox added that along with the other options came some risks. The driveway dropped off and there would be a very steep grade for the driveway. It could be a vision clearance issue.

Morris moved to approve PA2002-129. Amarotico seconded the motion and it carried.

Knox reported the site is located between Fleck’s Automotive and the coffeehouse. The lot area is 8,000 square feet and zoned Employment. The site includes a residence that sits in the middle of the lot. That site, as well as all the others along Siskiyou Boulevard, use the right-of-way for parking. Under the City’s Design Standards, parking is supposed to be located in the rear or along the side. The applicant purchased the property long distance and was assured there was plenty of parking available. There is, but not under the Design Standards. Therefore, the applicant did not think there was any parking issue. Fortunately, the City is in the middle of discussing the Tolman Creek Road Local Improvement District. The master plan shows improvements wrapping around Siskiyou Boulevard. It is not likely the LID will include those improvements, however, there is a slim chance. Staff felt, because of this slim chance, the application is justifiable. It becomes justifiable because the applicant is proposing to complete the parking in the back and the temporary handicap space for one year in the front. Within a year’s time or perhaps with one extension, the front parking space would be re-located to the back and the back parking area will be paved. The applicant is trying to mitigate the request by doing some gravel work in the backyard. As the frontage improvements (LID) play out, it is likely the handicap space would be one of the spaces and it might not be necessary to have one extra space in the rear. That would allow the applicant to keep some her rear yard. Condition 9 refers to the timing of the LID.

BECKY MEADOWS, 2455 Siskiyou Boulevard, said most of the classes are in the evening so Fleck’s Automotive will be closed. It complements a lot of the other business hours. Parking is a problem for everyone along Siskiyou. It would be nice to clean up the intersection and include the businesses in the LID.

Amarotico read comments from Richard A. Jensen, 645 Ashland Street.

Knox suggested an added Condition 10: That prior to operation of the business, the walnut tree in the front yard adjacent to the driveway be removed and a new driveway created and graded.

Morris moved to approve PA2002-131 with the attached ten Conditions. Amarotico seconded the motion and it carried.