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

Minutes
Thursday, January 11, 2018

The regular meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 5:30 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
David Culbertson
Joe Foley
Bill Mansfield
Mark McKechnie
Alex Poythress
 
Commissioners Absent
Jared Pulver, Excused Absence
E.J. McManus, Excused Absence             
 
Staff Present
Matt Brinkley, Planning Director
Kelly Akin, Assistant Planning Director
Eric Mitton, Deputy City Attorney
Alex Georgevitch, City Engineer
Greg Kleinberg, Fire Marshal
Terri Rozzana, Recording Secretary
Dustin Severs, Planner III
Steffen Roennfeldt, Planner III
Liz Conner, Planner II
 
10.          Roll Call
 
20.          Consent Calendar/Written Communications. None.
 
30.          Minutes
30.1        The minutes for December 28, 2017, were approved as submitted.
 
40.          Oral and Written Requests and Communications. 
40.1 Gary Shaff, 516 Herbert Street, Ashland, Oregon, 97520.  Mr. Shaff reported that the Medford Transportation System Plan should have as one of its goals is the development of a safe and convenient bicycle transportation system that will serve the needs of youth, adult senior cyclists, persons with disabilities and families.  Mr. Shaff had a brochure from the National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) that lays out how the City could achieve NACTO’s suggested goal.  NACTO’s document can serve to revolutionize the transportation system and, if implemented, cause a dramatic increase in bike use by all ages, and reduce congestion by ten percent or more.
 
Eric Mitton, Deputy City Attorney, read the Quasi-Judicial Statement.
 
50.          Public Hearings – Old Business
50.1        CUP-17-116 Consideration of a request for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for a proposed Bed & Breakfast to be located at 15 Geneva Street in the SFR-6 (Single-Family Residential – 6 dwelling units per gross acre) zoning district, and within the Historic Preservation Overlay District (371W30AB TL 16400). (Gloria Thomas & Cecil de Hass, Applicants; Julie Krason, Agent; Dustin Severs, Planner). 
 
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.
 
Dustin Severs, Planner III, stated that the conditional use permit criteria can be found in the Medford Land Development Code Sections 10.248 and 10.249.  The applicable criteria were included in the staff report, property owner notices and hard copies are available at the entrance of Council Chambers for those in attendance.  Mr. Severs gave a staff report.
 
Commissioner Culbertson asked, if the applicants are allowed the additional parking spaces would that comply with the Medford code in regards to five bedrooms with ten guests or would they have to come back to the Planning Commission?  Mr. Severs responded that the applicants would have to come back to the Planning Commission to revise their conditional use permit.   
 
Commissioner McKechnie asked, if the driveway is owned by the neighbor?  Mr. Severs deferred the question to the applicants. 
 
The Public Hearing was opened.
 
a. Julie Krason, 335 Jackson Creek Drive, Jacksonville, Oregon, 97530.  Ms. Krason reported that she would like to hear testimony from the neighbors first and Gloria Thomas one of the applicants has given her some bullet points to address.  
 
b. Cecil de Hass, 15 Geneva Street, Medford, Oregon, 97504.  Ms. Thomas reported that when Ms. Krason is finished with her comments he would like to add some comments.
 
c. Fran Wolf, 836 Minnesota Avenue, Medford, Oregon, 97504.  Ms. Wolf included her concerns in the agenda packet.  She asked, what is the definition owner/occupied? The percent of time that the owners are expected to be on the premises.  Is that listed in the code?  Mr. Mitton will look up language that gives more specific insight.  Ms. Wolf can proceed with her concerns and he will get back with her. 
 
Another concern is that the property is not approved as a bed and breakfast and the owner choses to operate as an airbnb.  Since there is no current airbnb code does the City have a time table as to when they might address the codes for airbnbs?  Mr. Mitton replied that airbnbs are treated like any other lodging house.  Staff is looking at more specific airbnb related regulations.  He does not have a specific time table but staff is actively working on it.
 
Several years ago the neighborhood had presented information to the City Council as well as the Planning Department and Jim Huber, Planning Director at the time, commented that their historical neighborhood should be protected via new zoning codes.  Mr. Huber indicated that the Planning Department was hiring a consultant to address the new codes.  Has anything been done with regards to zoning codes in historical neighborhoods and if not will this issue be addressed?  Kelly Akin, Assistant Planning Director, reported that a consultant drafted some code language that the Historic Commission was working on.  There has been department staff changes so that has been temporarily tabled.
 
Commissioner Mansfield wanted to know if Ms. Wolf was opposed, neutral or favor the project.  Ms. Wolf is fine with it being a bed and breakfast and since they reduced it to two rooms.  She has an issue if it becomes an airbnb which means there will potentially be five rooms that will be rented out on a rotating basis.  The streets are narrow and she is concerned that recreational vehicles will be parked there.
 
Mr. Mitton addressed the owner/occupied question.  It is not explicitly defined in the code but in Oregon law owner/occupied refers to individuals primary residence.             
 
d. Connie Sedon, 940 Village Circle, Medford, Oregon, 97504.  Ms. Sedon is the previous property owner of 15 Geneva Street.  The home was built as a wedding present for the people that live next door which is now a dentist office.  That is why the parking is so crazy there.  The property line is the center of the driveway.  She is shocked that the neighbors are upset with the project.
 
Commissioner McKechnie asked, is the gravel area primarily parking for the dentist office?  Ms. Sedon replied that it is.      
 
e. Barbara Budge Griffin, 832 Minnesota Avenue is opposed to the project.  She submitted her testimony into the record.
 
Commissioner Mansfield disclosed that Ms. Griffin and he are personal friends but has not discussed this matter with her.
 
Ms. Wolf presented a copy of the original easement between the two properties from 1919.  The driveway was split with half belonging to the dentist office and half belongs to 15 Geneva Street.  Are the applicants using parking space that does not belong to them along the side of their home?  Mr. Mitton reported that he is not a surveyor in terms of reading dimensions and what belongs exactly to who.  He is not qualified.  He can weigh in as to what terms may help to the Planning Commission.
 
Commissioner Mansfield stated that it appears this matter needs to be studied by staff.  He is capable of determining this but not in this short notice.  Between the City Attorney’s office and Engineering staff given time they could come back with a report. 
 
Ms. Akin inquired if the Planning Commission wanted to continue with the hearing?  Chair Miranda replied yes.     
 
f. Delores Houston, 819 Minnesota Avenue, Medford, Oregon, 97504.  Ms. Houston reported that previous owners had problems with the dentist office of the driveway being half and half and access to the parking area.   
 
g. Tammy Holt, 101 Geneva Street, Medford, Oregon, 97504.  Ms. Holt is not opposed to it being a bed and breakfast with two rooms.  She is opposed to airbnbs and would like to see regulations.  
 
h. Marie Vasey, 16 Geneva Street, Medford, Oregon, 97504.  She is concerned of what a bed and breakfast will do to their neighborhood.  It could elevate the neighborhood.  She too is concerned about airbnbs in the City of Medford.  
 
Ms. Krason stated that next to the dentist office is a row of trees then the parking area.  There is an easement for the driveway.  With the trees separating the area there is ample parking on the left of the trees and on the right side hardly anyone parks there. 
 
Ms. Thomas and Mr. de Hass will be living on the premises full time.  When they found out they could not do the five bedrooms they went to two.  People had suggested to them to do an airbnb due to no regulations.  If they decide to do an airbnb they will still live in the home the entire time running it.
 
The sign is not going to be neon.  It is an elegant sign hanging from the front by the front door.  It will not be noticeable unless one drives by and looks at the house. 
 
If they do an airbnb because there are no regulations there is nothing to stop them from having five people stay.  Is that correct?  Mr. Mitton reported that is not correct.  There are regulations involving lodging houses.  As he has stated before the City does not have separate regulations for airbnbs.  The City of Medford does have code dealing with the number of rooms that can be rented as a lodging house.  Those would still apply whether people are coming through airbnb or elsewhere.
 
Ms. Krason asked, is that for parking also?  Mr. Mitton reported that in terms of lodging houses and rented rooms there are specific rules on how many rooms can be rented in zoning areas.  There are also Fire Department rules in terms of maximum occupancy.  All public safety rules apply.    
 
Mr. de Hass gave a history on himself and Ms. Thomas.  Airbnb guests are not different than bed and breakfast guests.  It’s not the guests it is the host.  They plan to permanently live in the house. 
 
Commissioner McKechnie asked Mr. de Hass if he was opposed to the discretionary condition of breakfast and lodging with no parties.  Mr. de Hass replied that it is not that he is opposed but the parties would be an extra.  If it is not allowed then it is not allowed. 
 
Ms. Akin reported that she consulted with Alex Georgevitch, City Engineer, and based what is before them tonight they are unable to make a determination on what easements are in place or not.  
 
Commissioner Mansfield stated that after closing the public hearing he would move to postpone this matter until staff is able to make that determination.  It is a fact the Commission needs to have before they make an intelligent determination.  If the Commission has different views he would like to hear them.
 
Ms. Akin requested that the agent or applicant give a date certain to continue this item.
   
i. Carol Sosa, 546 Blue Moon Drive, Central Point, Oregon, 97503.  Ms. Thomas and Mr. de Hass are family to Ms. Sosa.  The applicants would love to take this home to bring people in and show them the areas around Medford.  That is why the want to run the bed and breakfast.       
 
Commissioner Mansfield asked, could the Planning Commission could get a specification from the applicant as to whether or not they agree to a postponement of this matter so they can proceed to make a motion to postpone this proceeding to the next hearing?
 
Ms. Krason requested continuation of this item to the February 8, 2018, Planning Commission meeting.
 
Motion:  The Planning Commission continued CUP-17-116 and the public record remain open, per the applicant’s request, to the Thursday, February 8, 2018, Planning Commission meeting. 
 
Moved by: Commissioner Mansfield                       Seconded by: Commissioner McKechnie
 
Roll Call Vote:  Motion passed, 7-0.
 
The Planning Commission took a five minute recess and reconvened at 6:47
 
New Business
50.2 SV-17-106 Consideration of a request for the vacation of an approximate 50-foot wide strip of public right-of-way being a portion of Evergreen Street, running roughly north-south from West Third Street to West Fourth Street, 300 feet in length within the C-H, Heavy Commercial, zoning district. (Linda Donovan, Applicant; Steffen Roennfeldt, Planner).  
 
Chair Miranda inquired whether any Commissioners have a conflict of interest or ex-parte communication they would like to disclose.  Vice Chair McFadden does not have a conflict of interest or ex-parte communication but the Commissioners will find on their desk a letter that he wrote to Planning staff expressing his concern about this application.  He recused himself.     
               
Chair Miranda inquired whether anyone in attendance wishes to question the Commission as to conflicts of interest or ex-parte contacts. None were disclosed.
 
Steffen Roennfeldt, Planner III, stated that Vice Chair McFadden’s letter will be entered into the record as Exhibit M.  The street vacation criteria can be found in the Medford Land Development Code Sections 10.202.  The applicable criteria were included in the staff report, property owner notices and hard copies are available at the entrance of Council Chambers for those in attendance.  Mr. Roennfeldt gave a staff report.  In the staff report he stated that criterion 1. Compliance with the Public Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan, including the Transportation System Plan was “Satisfied”.  It should have read “Not Applicable”.  He will make that change in the Planning Commission Report.
 
Commissioner McKechnie is the street owned by the Medford Urban Renewal Agency (MURA) public or privately owned?  Mr. Roennfeldt reported it is privately owned.
 
Commissioner McKechnie asked, is the block to the north public right-of-way?  Mr. Roennfeldt stated it is.  Commissioner McKechnie assumes there are no improvements on this side of the railroad tracks.  Mr. Roennfeldt reported that the property to the north is fenced off.  Commissioner McKechnie is more concerned if there is public right-of-way on the block from Third to wherever the platted Evergreen Street goes.  Mr. Roennfeldt stated that it goes to Main Street.     
 
Commissioner Mansfield asked if there was a question about the subject property being public right-of-way.  Mr. Roennfeldt reported there is no question about that.   
 
Commissioner Foley asked, the Medford Urban Renewal Agency requested some parking spaces, did he not include that in the criteria?  Mr. Roennfeldt responded that is not a land use dedication.  It is a private agreement between the property owners.  
 
Commissioner Mansfield commented that if this application is passed and the public right of way is vacated then it is no longer the City’s business.  It belongs to the adjoining property owners. 
 
The Public Hearing was opened.
 
The applicant and agent were not present.
 
The Public Hearing was closed.
 
Motion:  The Planning Commission, based on the findings and conclusions that all of the approval criteria are met or are not applicable, forwards a favorable recommendation to the City Council for approval of SV-17-106 per the staff report dated January 4, 2018, including Exhibits A through M.
 
Moved by: Commissioner Mansfield                       Seconded by: Commissioner McKechnie
 
Roll Call Vote:  Motion failed, 3-3-1, with Commissioner Mansfield, Commissioner McKechnie and Chair Miranda voting no.  Vice Chair McFadden recused himself.
 
50.3 LDP-17-133 Consideration of a request for a partition to create three lots on a 6.36 parcel located on the west side of N Ross Lane approximately 430 feet south of West McAndrews Road within the MFR-20 (Multiple-Family, 20 dwelling units per gross acre) zoning district. (Housing Authority of Jackson County, Applicant; Scott Sinner Consulting, Inc., Agent; Liz Conner, Planner).
 
Chair Miranda inquired whether any Commissioners have a conflict of interest or ex-parte communication they would like to disclose.  Commissioner McKechnie disclosed that Scott Sinner is his neighbor but it would not affect his review of this case.  Also, he is not associated with this project but the Housing Authority of Jackson County has been a client of his company in the past. 
               
Chair Miranda inquired whether anyone in attendance wishes to question the Commission as to conflicts of interest or ex-parte contacts. None were disclosed.
 
Liz Conner, Planner II, reported the land division criteria can be found in the Medford Land Development Code Section 10.270.  The applicable criteria were included in the staff report, property owner notices and hard copies are available at the entrance of Council Chambers for those in attendance.  Ms. Conner gave a staff report.
 
Vice Chair McFadden stated there is a planned street parallel to West Main Street.  West of the subject location that runs parallel to Main Street from West Side school toward McAndrews there is not a circulation plan.  There was talk on a project west that has a north/south street from Finley or north of Finley.  Are there plans for any other roadway other than what the applicant is presenting?  Has staff found any design that was considered?  Ms. Conner deferred the question to the City Engineer.  
 
Alex Georgevitch, City Engineer, reported that north of this project in the northwest corner there was a development planned for a street to cut through.  That development has expired so the project on the subject site is planning a north/south street on the northwest side and another north/south street in the middle of the subject site to serve north to West McAndrews. The east/west street will run along the northerly urban growth boundary line west of the development.  There is reserved public right-of-way with a pond.  There are a lot of challenges in that area.  There is no circulation plan but there is a block length ordinance that the applicant is trying to meet. 
 
The Public Hearing was opened.
 
a. Scott Sinner, Scott Sinner Consulting, Inc., 4401 San Juan Drive, Suite G, Medford, Oregon, 97504-9343.  Mr. Sinner reported that the applicant is providing a street connection that will continue a circulation plan running east/west from Ross Lane.  This plan meets all approval criteria.  There is an approved site plan on this project.  They have gone through Site Plan and Architectural Commission and the main body of the project already has an approved site plan.    
 
Commissioner McKechnie stated that the driveway on Ross Lane and access to the Albertson’s runs through someone else’s parcel.  Mr. Sinner reported that the owner of that parcel has consented to provide that property for dedication and the applicant will be improving that property with the bonding and development of parcel 3.  There is a part that is a civil process where there is consideration for parcel 1 for the dedication right-of-way.     
 
Mr. Sinner reserved rebuttal time.
 
The Public Hearing was closed.
 
Motion:  The Planning Commission adopts the findings as recommended by staff and directed staff to prepare the Final Order for approval of LDP-17-133 per the staff report dated January 4, 2018, including Exhibits A through N.
 
Moved by: Vice Chair McFadden                              Seconded by: Commissioner Foley
 
Roll Call Vote:  Motion passed, 7-0.
 
50.4 LDS-17-139 / CUP-17-140 / ZC-17-141 Consideration of a Zone Change from SFR-00/SE (Single Family Residential - one dwelling unit per existing lot/Southeast Overlay) to SFR-4/SE (Single Family Residential - 4 dwelling units per gross acre/Southeast overlay); Horse Arena Subdivision, a 44 lot residential subdivision; and a Conditional Use Permit to allow a pedestrian path, bike path and storm water facilities within the greenway on 15.15 acres located on the north side of Coal Mine Road approximately 900 feet east of North Phoenix Road. (371W34 TL 2300, 2400, 2401). (Dan Mahar, Applicant; Neathamer Surveying, Inc., Agent; Liz Conner, Planner).
 
Chair Miranda inquired whether any Commissioners have a conflict of interest or ex-parte communication they would like to disclose. Commissioner Poythress disclosed that Neathamer Surveying, Inc. is a client of one of his companies for marketing and consulting.  There is no conflict.  
               
Chair Miranda inquired whether anyone in attendance wishes to question the Commission as to conflicts of interest or ex-parte contacts. None were disclosed.
 
Liz Conner, Planner II, stated that the zone change criteria can be found in the Medford Land Development Code Section 10.227.  The conditional use permit criteria can be found in the Medford Land Development Code Section 10.248 and 10.249.  The land division criteria can be found in the Medford Land Development Code Section 10.270.  The applicable criteria were included in the staff report, property owner notices and hard copies are available at the entrance of Council Chambers for those in attendance.
 
Ms. Conner reported staff received an email from a concerned citizen regarding this project.  The email was emailed to the Planning Commissioners earlier this week and will be entered into the record as Exhibit X. Condition number 9 under the heading Code Required Conditions in Exhibit A makes reference to Phase 21.  That should state Phase 2.  That will be corrected and Exhibited as A-1 in the Planning Commission Report.  
 
In Exhibit X the citizen asked questions regarding the ownership and maintenance as well as the timeline for construction of the multi-use paths within Stonegate Subdivision located north of the property.  They also asked about limiting construction traffic to Coal Mine Road for this project away from Creek View.  The project is in phases.  Larson Creek transects the property in the east/west direction breaking up the phases.  Phase 1 only has access through Creek View.  Phase 2 will only be able to access off Coal Mine Road.  Staff does not feel they should include conditions on this project because it does not relate to this project.  Access is sorted out by the way Larson Creek transects the property. 
     
Ms. Conner gave a staff report.
 
Commissioner McKechnie stated there was a comment in the email that stated the creek crossing for another phase was not done.  Does Ms. Conner have comments on that?  There is a creek crossing in this phase.  Is some of this development phased or do the entire development at once?  When does the multi-use path get constructed?  Ms. Conner deferred the question of the timing of the phasing and the construction of the path to the applicant.  The other paths throughout the area staff did not look into other crossings that the email talked about because it did not apply to this project specifically.  Commissioner McKechnie asked, then we do not know at this point if they lived up to their previous agreements?  Ms. Conner replied not at this time.  Commissioner McKechnie asked, is there someone on staff that is responsible for doing things like that?
 
Ms. Akin reported that the person behind the email lives in Stonegate which is adjacent to the north.  She is referring to the north side of Creek View which has been problematic for some time.  When the Southeast Plan was adopted staff was working through that at the same time that Stonegate Planned Unit Development was approved.  The timing of the construction of the pathways and when they were to be dedicated is not made clear as part of that decision.  When they revised Phase 2 it was clarified that the pathways would be accepted by the Parks Department when they were all completed.  When that work is done and Parks is satisfied with the facilities then the City will accept them as a whole.  What is expected for the Greenway on the north side of Creek View, Parks will want it to be repaired and brought to standard before accepting it into the City’s system.           
 
The Public Hearing was opened.
 
a. Bob Neathamer, Neathamer Surveying, Inc., 3126 State Street, Suite 203, Medford, Oregon, 97504.  Mr. Neathamer addressed the question of the pathway stating the intent is to build the pathway with Phase 2 as most of it is on that site of the project.  They plan to construct Phase 1 first then Phase 2.  This project has no relationship with Stonegate.  The applicant has worked with the Fire Marshal to provide a better secondary fire access than the current one that serves the developments for Phases 2 and 3 of Stonegate.  With the conditions of approval and the application the applicant has met the approval criteria.  
 
Commissioner McKechnie asked, the plan before the Commission for this particular subdivision does not have any phasing but is one side of the creek one phase and the other side is another?  Mr. Neathamer reported that it is phased.  Phase 1 is north of the creek and Phase 2 is south of the creek.
 
Commissioner McKechnie asked, is the applicant changing Coal Mine Road?  Does it dead in at Juanipero?  Mr. Neathamer reported that in the Southeast Plan Juanipero has always been planned to come across and join at Coal Mine Road.  Where they join together in the future when Juanipero is completed with the project of Stonegate 5 which is under construction now Coal Mine Road will be closed at North Phoenix Road.  Mr. Neathamer’s client is not creating the dead end it is being created by the Southeast Plan.   
 
Mr. Neathamer reserved rebuttal time.
 
The Public Hearing was closed. 
 
Motion:  The Planning Commission adopts the findings as recommended by staff directs staff to prepare  Final Orders for approval for LDS-17-139, CUP-17-140 and ZC-17-141 per the staff report dated January 4, 2018, including Exhibits A through X and replacing Exhibit A with Exhibit A-1. 
 
Moved by: Vice Chair McFadden                              Seconded by: Commissioner McKechnie
 
Roll Call Vote:  Motion passed, 7-0.
 
60.  Reports
60.1            Site Plan and Architectural Commission.
Commissioner Culbertson reported that the Site Plan and Architectural Commission met since Friday, January 5, 2018.  They had a continuance request and for new business they considered a 6,286 square foot professional office building to be located within Phase II of the Crater Lake Business Center located at the intersection of Excel Drive and Aero Way.
 
60.2        Report of the Joint Transportation Subcommittee.
Chair Miranda reported that the Joint Transportation Subcommittee, also known as the Super Citizen Advisory Committee has not met since the last Planning Commission meeting. 
 
60.3        Planning Department.
Kelly Akin, Assistant Planning Director, reported that during 2017 the Planning Commission made 10 recommendations on legislative items to the City Council; approved 37 land use decisions with various application types; approved 325 single family residential lots; and 132 new attached units. 
 
The Site Plan and Architectural Commission in 2017 approved over 226,000 square feet of commercial and office space; 76,000 square feet of industrial space; 228 new dwelling units; 93 hotel rooms; and 92 beds in assisted living and memory care.
 
Staff had a Transportation System Plan ward 1 meeting Tuesday, January 9, 2018 at North High School.  Approximately 25 people signed in but double attended.  On Wednesday, January 17, 2018, ward 4 will be held at the Smullin Center Room 106.  Ward 2 will be held Tuesday, January 23, 2018, in the Library downtown. Ward 3 will meet on Wednesday, January 24, 2018, at the Santo Center.  All meetings are from 5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m.  It was encouraged that if any Commissioners were available to attend to do so. 
 
The Boards and Commissions luncheon is scheduled for Friday, February 9, 2018, at noon.  
 
The Planning Commission’s next study session is scheduled for Monday, January 22, 2018.  Discussion will be on the Parks zoning amendment.  
 
There is no business scheduled for the Planning Commission on Thursday, January 25, 2018 but they will meet to consider consent calendar items.  There is business scheduled for Thursday, February 8, 2018, Thursday, February 22, 2018 and Thursday, March 8, 2018.
 
Last week the City Council set hearings for the vacation that the Planning Commission recommended this evening and an annexation on Vilas Road.
 
Commissioner Foley and Vice Chair McFadden were reappointed for another four years on the Planning Commission.  Thank you for your service.
 
Next week the City Council will hear the public utility easement vacation for People’s Bank on Biddle Road and Progress.   
 
70.          Messages and Papers from the Chair. 
70.1        Chair Miranda reported that elections and appointments or reappointments will be held on Thursday, February 8, 2018.  If any Commissioner is interested in being Chair please voice their interest for consideration.    
 
80.          Remarks from the City Attorney. None.
 
90.          Propositions and Remarks from the Commission.
90.1        Commissioner Foley asked Terri Rozzana, Recording Secretary, if she posted the Planning Departments commission calendar in order to download to their iPad.  She reported that it should be but if not she would attend to his request. 
 
100.        Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 7:40 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: January 25, 2018
 
 

© 2019 City Of Medford  •  Site Handcrafted in Ashland, Oregon by Project A

Quicklinks

Select Language

Share This Page

Back to Top