COVID-19: City Hall and Lausmann Annex are closed November 18 through December 2.
Please note: Municipal Court is conducting business by phone. Please call 541-774-2040.
Click here for more information.


Agenda & Minutes

When available, the full agenda packet may be viewed as a PDF file by clicking the "Attachments" button and selecting the file you want to view.

Agendas are posted until the meeting date takes place.  Minutes are posted once they have been approved.

Planning Commission (View All)

Planning Commission Agenda and Minutes

Thursday, March 10, 2016

The regular meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 5:32 PM in the City Hall Council Chambers on the above date with the following members and staff in attendance:
Commissioners Present
Patrick Miranda, Chair
David McFadden, Vice Chair
Tim D’Alessandro
David Culbertson
Joe Foley
Bill Mansfield    
Staff Present
Jim Huber, Planning Director
Kelly Akin, Principal Planner
Kevin McConnell, Deputy City Attorney
Alex Georgevitch, City Engineer
Greg Kleinberg, Fire Marshal
Terri Rozzana, Recording Secretary
Commissioners Absent
Mark McKechnie, Excused Absence       
Jared Pulver, Excused Absence
Norman Fincher, Excused Absence         
10.          Roll Call
20.          Consent Calendar/Written Communications. 
20.1        LDS-15-141 / E-15-142 Final Order for a proposed tentative plat for Panther Landing Subdivision, a seven lot residential subdivision, with an exception to reduce the street dedication requirement for South Columbus Avenue and an exception to the number of units allowed to take access off a minimum access easement, for an 0.86 acre parcel located on the east side of South Columbus Avenue, approximately 120 feet north of Garfield Street, within a SFR-10 (Single Family Residential – 10 dwelling units per gross acre) zoning district (1579 S. Columbus Avenue – 372W36CA2200). (Tommy Malot, Applicant/Agent)
Motion: Adopt the consent calendar.
Moved by: Vice Chair McFadden                              Seconded by: Commissioner Culbertson
Voice Vote: Motion passed, 6–0.
30.          Minutes
30.1.      The minutes for February 25, 2016, were approved as submitted.
40.          Oral and Written Requests and Communications. None.
Kevin McConnell, Deputy City Attorney, read the Quasi-Judicial Statement.
50.          Public Hearings – New Business
50.1 LDS-15-167 Consideration of a request for tentative plat approval for The Ridge at the Highlands Phases 2 – 10, a 67 lot subdivision on approximately 37.34 acres located at the northerly termini of Cherry Lane, Bermuda Drive and Stardust Way and approximately 100 feet north of Cloudcrest Drive, within the SFR-4/PD (Single Family Residential, four dwelling units per gross acre/Planned Development Overlay) zoning district. (Ayala Properties, LLC, Applicant; Urban Development Services, LLC, Agent)
Chair Miranda inquired whether any Commissioners have a conflict of interest or ex parte communication they would like to disclose. None were disclosed.
Chair Miranda inquired whether anyone in attendance wishes to question the Commission as to conflicts of interest or ex-parte contacts. None were disclosed.
Kelly Akin, Principal Planner, read the land division criteria and gave a staff report.
Vice Chair McFadden asked with the elimination of several streets what can Ms. Akin tell the Planning Commission about the proposed design the block lengths?  Ms. Akin reported that the applicant provided findings for the block length ordinance.  The circulation plan is relatively fixed.  Because of the sloped areas staff feels that the Planning Commission could approve the elimination of those connections.
Vice Chair McFadden asked if the block lengths are acceptable or not has provisions been made to provide pedestrian walkways through the design?  Ms. Akin replied the trail system provided an overall connection.
Vice Chair McFadden asked how will the City access the storm water detention system for maintenance?  Ms. Akin replied that the southerly maintenance road shall be privately maintained by the Home Owner’s Association.  These private roads are required for City service vehicles to access the proposed underground facilities. These roads shall be located within common tracts of land and shall be constructed as all-weather access a minimum of 12-feet wide.  Where road grades exceed 11-percent, these roads shall be paved.
Commissioner Foley asked if there was sufficient parking with the proposed design?  Ms. Akin stated that these are single family detached units as they were planned previously.
Commissioner Foley asked when the other phases are constructed is the street classification going to remain the same or is going to have more traffic causing it to be more problematic?  Ms. Akin reported that she does not know that it would be more problematic than any other standard residential road in the City.
Vice Chair McFadden asked if the original design called for narrower streets and has the street width been widen with the proposed plan to accommodate more on-street parking?  Ms. Akin replied no.  Cherry Lane has always been planned as a standard street section.  The street sections were approved with the Planned Unit Development.  The sections have not been proposed to change.
The Public Hearing was opened.
a. Mark Knox, Urban Development Services, LLC, 132 W. Main Street, Suite 202, Medford, Oregon, 97501.  Mr. Knox stated that after reviewing the original plan there were excessive disturbance areas.  There were ninety-degree roads going into a 35% sloped area.  When those are cut down to a reasonable level to drive on the fanning of the earth has to happen.  What could be done to mitigate that?  Instead of 19 homes attached in threes and fours, spread them out using angled driveways.  Also by reducing the lots in the north area of the plan it eliminated the public drive accessing from Stardust Way.  Dwelling units were reduced from 83 to 67.  The applicant is proposing more phases.  He does not want to get into a situation where there is an excessive amount of product on the market.  The pedestrian circulation plan is connecting to the pedestrian plan from phase 1 for a full loop circulation.  Some portions share with the access roads but go back to a trail.  The full loop is almost one mile.  The applicant intends to install markers and benches.  They have no issues with any of the City’s conditions. 
Vice Chair McFadden expressed some concern with the long route from Cherry Lane to Stardust Way for pedestrians.  Mr. Knox stated that this is still a work in progress, especially those types of items.
b. Phil Elston, 326 Cliffwood Court, Medford, Oregon, 97504.  Mr. Elston addressed the trail plan by stating that his background is 38 years in law enforcement.  He had 10 years with the Phoenix Police Department and 28 years in federal service.  He cannot speak for the trail in the middle of the proposed plan.  The trail at the bottom right of the plan has some very serious issues.  There is a water tower located there with nothing around it.  To have a trail there is a burglar’s paradise.  To have a 12 foot road there that leads into the cul-de-sac is absolutely dangerous.
c. Paul Suppo, 4680 Cloudcrest, Medford, Oregon, 97504.  Mr. Suppo likes this new revision as far as Bermuda Court goes for engineering and traffic control.  He has several concerns.  One is that Bermuda Court is very small and with that number of units coming out at Cloudcrest, he is concerned about the traffic.  He recommended that there be a stop sign at Bermuda Court and Cloudcrest.  A big concern of his is site.  As one is coming onto Cloudcrest both houses have fairly steep yards.  He does not think there is enough visual openness there.  Another concern is rain water.  There are no catch bin systems on Bermuda Court.  There are no open drainage systems to catch water either direction on Cloudcrest.  He is concerned that all the water will be pouring down onto Cloudcrest creating issues.  He asked the developer to help with erosion control when construction is going on.
Alex Georgevitch, City Engineer, addressed the intersection at Bermuda Court and Cloudcrest stating it is a T-intersection that under state law qualifies for a stop control.
The Engineering Department requires erosion and sediment control through the entire construction project and after construction until plans are established for this subdivision.
Vice Chair McFadden asked if Cloudcrest has curb, gutter and drainage system?  Mr. Georgevitch stated that he cannot speak for this exact location but a portion to the west has curb and gutter.  A lot of these roads were County roads that were widened.  Some of them may or may not have curb and gutter.  It may have roadside ditches.  This development will be required to capture all water from this development and put it in a controlled public facility.  Water should not be coming down Bermuda Court.
Vice Chair McFadden asked if the water tower access was through its own driveway off Cherry Lane or will it take access of the trail?  Mr. Georgevitch deferred the question to the applicant.  Mr. Knox stated there are two water towers.  The one on the southeast corner has an existing 5 foot easement that was required in anticipation of the phase 2 connection.
Mr. Knox reported that he appreciates the concerns of the gentleman that was in law enforcement that testified.  Mr. Knox asked the Planning Commission to keep the trail plan trying it out for several years.  If there is a problem then eliminating then.
Mr. Knox addressed the curb and gutter on Cloudcrest stating they were fully improved.
The public hearing was closed.
Motion: The Planning Commission adopts the findings as recommended by staff and directs staff to prepare a Final Order for approval of LDS-15-167 per the staff report dated March 3, 2016, including Exhibits A through N.
Moved by: Vice Chair McFadden              Seconded by: Commissioner D’Alessandro
Voice Vote: Motion passed, 6-0.
60.  Reports
60.1        Site Plan and Architectural Commission.
Commissioner D’Alessandro reported that the Site Plan and Architectural Commission met on Friday, March 4, 2016.  The Site Plan and Architectural Commission reviewed a three sided storage area for Pape.  That item was approved.  The Site Plan and Architectural Commission had a good discussion regarding the multi-family design standards that the Planning Commission discussed several weeks ago.
60.2        Report of the Joint Transportation Subcommittee. None.
60.3        Planning Department
Kelly Akin, Principal Planner, reported that the Planning Commission’s next study session is scheduled for Monday, March 14, 2016. The discussion will be on the initiation of a text amendment request for craft distilleries.
There is business scheduled for the Planning Commission on Thursday, March 24, 2016 and Thursday, April 14, 2016.
Last week the City Council adopted the Airport Master Plan related text amendment so that buildings inside the security fence are no longer subject to Site Plan and Architectural review.  The Planning Commission had recommended approval of an alley vacation north of Dakota between Oakdale and Park Avenue.  The City Council denied that request.
Next week the City Council will consider the Corona and Covina General Land Use Plan Map amendment that the Planning Commission heard at their last meeting.
The Planning Staff had a study session with the City Council on Thursday, February 25, 2016 regarding the Urban Growth Boundary.  Staff recommended three alternatives and then there was a fourth from concerned parties.  The City Council requested that be put on their agenda for Thursday, March 17, 2016.
Vice Chair McFadden asked at the last Planning Commission meeting if there were funds for a Planning Commissioner to attend the American Planning Association conference in Phoenix, Arizona this year.  Staff apologies but there are no funds this year.
Commissioner D’Alessandro asked what were the City Councils concerns were with the alley vacation?  Jim Huber, Planning Director reported that Vice Chair McFadden, as an employee of Avista, had submitted testimony that if the alley was to be vacated and an easement that there be no obstructions including a fence.  Some of the property owners felt that if they could not fence it then it was not much value to them.  There was the issue of protecting the gas line and some low lying cable lines with utility poles in the alley. Several of the neighbors use the alley as public right-of-way to get to the backs of their lots to trim trees.  Again, if it was fenced they could not get to it.  The City Council concluded that it still had public value so it should not be vacated.
70.          Messages and Papers from the Chair.  None.
80.          Remarks from the City Attorney.  None.
90.          Propositions and Remarks from the Commission.  None.
100.        Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 6:27 p.m. The proceedings of this meeting were digitally recorded and are filed in the City Recorder’s office.
Submitted by:
Terri L. Rozzana                                                                
Recording Secretary
Patrick Miranda
Planning Commission Chair
Approved: March 24, 2016


© 2020 City Of Medford  •  Site Handcrafted in Ashland, Oregon by Project A


Share This Page

Back to Top