by Christy Solo – Editor
The Feb. 26 Shady Cove Planning Commission meeting was brief, just two agenda items. One of which added at the start of the meeting by Planning Chair John Edwards.
The first topic was approval for the redesign of the city’s new welcome sign.
Planning liaison Councilor Steve Mitchell gave background on the need for a second round of approval because he has been in charge of the entire project.
Mitchell said that the original “final” size for the sign was four by six feet. However council had decided a larger size would be needed so the wording would be easily readable, thus upped the area to five by ten feet.
Mitchell noted that the base and frame sizes – thus overall footprint of the sign – remained the same.
Additionally, the sign material was changed from metal to a composite with a “wood grain look.” Due to these changes the wind load calculations had to be redone (AKA “will the sign stay in place under gale force winds” – it will).
Planning was aware of the changes but had not been asked to give a formal second approval and one is needed before Jackson County can do their final inspection and approval.
The motion to approve the changes to the size and material of the sign as well as the new wind calculation study carried 3/0.
Next Edwards shared an email from Dick Converse of the Rogue Valley Council of Governments. The email advised that RVCOG and the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development finally had all the Ts crossed and Is dotted and Shady Cove will now officially begin working with RVCOG on updating the city’s planning ordinances.
Converse wrote that he would soon be sending a list of action items and a schedule.
Edwards said that planning will “have some work to do” but that “it will be good work.”
Both Commissioners Cheryl Singleton and Samuel Clark said they were looking forward to finally getting the project started. All commissioners also mentioned that there are still two open seats on the commission and encouraged citizens to fill out applications to volunteer.
Jeannine Curry’s staff report noted that most of the current applications are for encroachments, and they are all from Hunter Communications relating to them laying in fiber optic lines.
However, she was very happy to announce that there is “finally” an application for a rebuild on Yew Wood Dr.
Edwards explained further, for those not up to date on the property. The house on the property being discussed burned down three years ago and nothing has been done to clean up the property or rebuild.
The property was recently sold via auction, and the new owner has advised they want to rebuild on the existing foundation.
Here Mitchell stepped into the conversation saying that if a house is rebuilt using “just one wall” – the wall containing the main electric components – from a burned or otherwise demolished home the house can be rebuilt to the codes/standards which applied to the original construction.
The one wall (and foundation) keeps the build in the “remodel” category vs. “new build” and generally saves the homeowner money.
During public comment an attendee asked if all the materials commissioners reviewed during the meeting were available to the public. He said he’d like to look at the RVCOG/DLCD correspondences so he can “keep up on the discussion” during the next meeting.
Edwards advised “yes” they are all public documents and Curry said she would get the citizen’s email from him after the meeting and they could get a public records request going.
Commissioners encouraged him to read up and to consider applying for one of the open positions.
